Nifong Clone Campaigns To Be Montana Chief Justice

Following last week’s trial of Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong on ethics charges brought by the North Carolina State Bar, it would be absurd to envision the disgraced prosecutor seeking to become the Chief Justice of the NC Supreme Court. In announcing the disbarment ruling of the Disciplinary Hearing Committee, Chair F. Lane Williamson cited Mr. Nifong’s refusal to acknowledge the factual innocence of his wronged victims as evidence of the DA’s lapse in character, fueled by "self deception arising out of self interest." The description of Mr. Nifong offered by DHC Chair Williamson is diametrically opposed to what one would expect from a candidate for any state's most esteemed judicial position.

.

While in the case of newly disbarred D.A. Mike Nifong, the suggestion of election to Supreme Court Chief Justice is ludicrous, the State of Montana is faced with the prospect that a prosecutor, who has exhibited some of the same flawed characteristics denounced by Chair Williamson, may soon sit in judgment over the State’s most critical cases. Despite demonstrating a Nifongesque inability to maintain consistency in character while avoiding self deception and selfish motives, Montana Attorney General Mike McGrath recently announced his intention to become the Chief Justice of the Montana Supreme Court. McGrath recently offered an alarming sworn deposition in response to a lawsuit from an innocent man wrongfully convicted by the State of Montana. In it, A.G. McGrath attested to his continued belief in the guilt of the wrongly convicted man, who was finally exonerated when DNA evidence unequivocally demonstrated his factual innocence.

.

The Chicago Tribune addressed McGrath’s high court ambitions and Nifong-like tendencies in a recent article.

Exonerated by DNA, guilty in official's eyes

High court hopeful's view troubles critics

In the fall of 2002, DNA tests exonerated Jimmy Ray Bromgard in the 1987 rape of an 8-year-old girl in Billings, Mont. His case was dismissed and he was freed from prison."

.

Mr. Bromgard has spent 15 years in prison for a crime that the state is now convinced beyond a reasonable doubt he did not commit," Yellowstone County Atty. Dennis Paxinos declared. "The DNA from the room where the attack took place simply does not match his. He simply could not have committed this crime."

.

Nearly five years later, Montana Atty. Gen. Mike McGrath -- a recently announced candidate for chief justice of the state's Supreme Court -- has stated under oath that he still believes Bromgard is guilty.

.

In most of the cases where prosecutors have refused to believe in an exoneration, they have cited evidence that more than one person was involved in the crime to argue that the DNA was left by a second, unidentified offender. It is rare for a prosecutor to dispute a DNA exoneration when there is no evidence -- as in Bromgard's case -- that more than one person committed the crime.

.

McGrath, testifying in a deposition taken in a lawsuit brought by Bromgard, cited several possibilities, including that the victim was sexually active with someone else or that her 11-year-old sister was sexually active while wearing her younger sister's underwear.

.

The veteran prosecutor also suggested that the DNA could have been from the child's father and that the girl's parents had sex on their daughter's bed and left DNA, or that the father assaulted the girl.

.

A question of 'far-fetched'

.

"In my experience as a prosecutor, none of those theories is far-fetched," said McGrath, who has spent 25 years in the criminal justice system in Montana. "All of those are possible."

.

Paxinos, informed of McGrath's views, said, "I had [Bromgard] cut loose because his DNA did not match the DNA in the case. He could not be the perpetrator unless you believed the 8-year-old was having sex with multiple men. That would be far-fetched."

.

The DNA from the case did not match any of the victim's family. It was run through the FBI's database of convicted felons without finding a match.

.

Edward Blake, a top DNA scientist who performed the testing that freed Bromgard, said, "Any college-educated individual who has had a high school biology class should be able to look at my report and see ... that it is scientifically not possible for that sperm to be from the father of that girl."

.

That a prosecutor would believe a defendant guilty despite DNA evidence is not unusual. What makes McGrath's position unusual is his bid to become chief justice of the Montana Supreme Court, where he would sit in judgment over many criminal cases.

.

Steven Lubet, professor of law at Northwestern University and an expert on judicial ethics, called McGrath's testimony "a hyperextreme form of advocacy that would be inconsistent with the obligations of a judge once someone was on the bench."

.

Peter Neufeld, a lawyer for Bromgard who questioned McGrath at the deposition, characterized McGrath's answers as "the most remote, absurd, speculative theories to explain evidence that otherwise ... exonerates Mr. Bromgard."…

.

The victim's father, whose identity is being withheld to protect the identity of the victim, accused McGrath of making "reckless statements that will cause more harm to the victim and her family. ... Needless to say, we are deeply offended by his remarks. Deeply offended."

Ronald Singer, director of the Tarrant County, Texas, medical examiner's crime lab and former president of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences, said, "To even insinuate that an 8-year-old is sexually active is kind of extreme. ... I find it amazing."

.

Chuck Watson, a criminal defense lawyer from Bozeman, Mont., and head of the Montana state bar association's criminal section, said McGrath's testimony is "troubling because it suggests something as compelling as DNA should be disregarded in favor of mere possibilities."

DHC Chair Williamson offered some advice aimed at preventing future prosecutorial "fiascos" like those overseen by Mr. Nifong and championed by Mr. McGrath. The citizens of Montana might keep his words in mind when evaluating Mr. McGrath's candidacy, in light of his continued belief in an innocent man's guilt despite clear evidence to the contrary:

"You have to carefully consider the facts and the evidence before you make a conclusion about something and not just trust someone who tells you it is so because that is someone who's in a position 'to know.'"

Click here to read the deposition of Montana Attorney General, and Supreme Court Chief Justice hopeful, Mike McGrath: Deposition.

Click here to view McGrath’s election website: Mike McGrath for Supreme Court Chief Justice.

Click below to submit letters to Montana newspapers expressing your opinion on the candidacy of a Nifong clone for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:

• Billings Gazette.
• Missoulian
• Great Falls Tribune
• Helena Independent Record
  

Craig Watkins - The Anti-Nifong

On January 1, 2007, Dallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins took office after campaigning on a pledge to be “Smart on Crime.” Watkins billed his election bid as a challenge to defeat not only his opponent, career prosecutor Toby Shook, but also “the system that has failed us.” A little more than three months after taking office, D.A. Watkins has proven that his words were more than mere campaign rhetoric for Dallas County’s first black prosecutor.

Prior to the election, the Dallas Morning News described Watkin’s campaign bid as a “classic insider-outsider” battle.

“Even without a sitting district attorney on the ballot, the campaigns of Republican Toby Shook and Democrat Craig Watkins have shaped up along classic insider-outsider themes.

“On the campaign trial, Mr. Watkins, a defense attorney who has never prosecuted a felony case, wears his relative lack of prosecutorial experience as a badge of honor. He promises to shake up the office with progressive criminal justice ideas.

“The difference between the two of us is, not only am I running against the guy standing next to me, but I’m running against the system that has failed us,” he said in a fall campaign appearance.

“Mr. Watkins’ “Smart on Crime” message includes a promise to give low-level offenders second chances to avoid prison through diversion programs. He also would lobby for better education funding and rehabilitation for convicts.

“Our role is more than just prosecuting criminals,” he said. “Our role should also be prevention and addressing why people commit crime. I will not just sit back and wait for someone to commit a crime.”

In an interview with Michael Cottman of BlackAmericaWeb.com shortly after taking office, District Attorney Watkins described his progressive ideas and the precedent set by his election.

“Since he was 16 years old, Craig Watkins dreamed of becoming the district attorney of Dallas, the city's top prosecutor. Last month, after two decades of legal preparation, his dream became a reality.

“On January 1, one month ago, Watkins, a native of Dallas, took over as his hometown's first black district attorney, with a progressive philosophy for overhauling the city's criminal justice system at a time when Dallas leads the nation in crime.

“Moreover, Watkins is the first black D.A. in Texas' history.

"It's exciting to be Dallas' first black D.A., but it's also disappointing that in 2007, there is still room for firsts," Watkins told BlackAmericaWeb.com. "This position was coveted for certain people for a long time."

“Watkins, 39, wants to shake up the Dallas criminal justice system. He's a young lawyer with a fresh ideology that will likely raise some eyebrows among the conservative base in the Dallas community.

“For starters, Watkins wants to analyze the underlying causes of crime, provide educational resources while inmates are incarcerated and provide them with knowledge to become successful citizens once they re-enter society. He also wants to diversify his staff of more than 200 prosecutors.

"While we have their attention, we want to give them resources to help them get back on their feet," Watkins said. "We want to help them use their time wisely, not sit back and hope they have a come-to-Jesus moment on their own. We don't want to send folks to prison to teach them to be a better criminals."

“Watkins said that in the past, Dallas prosecutors had "a lock' em up and throw away the key mentality" where inmates are "warehoused" and essentially ignored. He said he wants to change the old-style thinking and offer inmates a different path for life.

“He took over an office this month where a prosecutor once produced written guidelines for keeping minorities off juries, and 12 inmates last year were exonerated for crimes they didn't commit. And today, Dallas has the nation's highest crime rate.

"We're not going to have a rush to judgement," Watkins said. "The whole criminal justice system in Dallas is on trial while sending innocent people to jail."

While the precedent set by Watkins’ election is noteworthy in terms of race and interesting with regard to his progressive ideology on education and rehabilitation, what caught our attention is his determination to ensure that justice is served by his office. Perhaps the best definition of Mr. Watkins as the antithesis to Durham County D.A. Mike Nifong is his resolve to ensure that innocents are not prosecuted and that those who have been are exonerated.

The Washington Post’s Sylvia Moreno in a recent article detailed a February conversation with D.A. Watkins about his progressive ideas, characterized by his opponents as “Hug-A-Thug” programs, and his aversion to the Nifongian “conviction at all costs” mentality.

“In November, Watkins, 39, was elected as part of a Democratic sweep in Dallas in which the party took 42 judgeships and six other countywide offices. He is the first Democratic district attorney in 20 years. During the campaign he promised to be "smart on crime," not just tough on crime; to ask for the death penalty when appropriate but also to advocate for better rehabilitation programs and post-release support services for ex-convicts.

"You know what people call it? 'Hug-a-thug,' " said Watkins, imposing at 6 feet 5 yet soft-spoken, as he sat in his office after his latest "guest of honor" appearance, at a local high school's Black History Month assembly. "People say I'll coddle these criminals. But it's not about coddling criminals; it's about being smart."

“That, he believes, means ensuring that the right people are behind bars.

“Post-conviction DNA analysis in certain cases has been allowed in Texas since 2001. Since then, 354 people convicted in Dallas County -- most were in prison, but some were on parole or probation or were done with their sentences -- have asked for the DNA testing. The Dallas district attorney's office agreed to 19 requests; trial judges, who reviewed the district attorney's recommendations, ultimately granted the requests of 34 people.

“That, said Watkins, tells him a "get a conviction at all costs" approach "utterly failed us."

"The question becomes: Do you stand in the way of justice or do you be the wind behind it to make sure that justice gets done?" Watkins said. "We're not being soft on crime. We're being sure we get the right person going to jail."

Yesterday’s exoneration of James Giles, a man wrongfully convicted of rape in 1982 after investigators ignored evidence that another James Giles living across the street from the victim committed the crime, represents the third such exoneration in Watkins’ young term as D.A. and the thirteenth for Dallas County in recent years.

“James Curtis Giles spent 10 years in prison for a gang rape he has long said he did not commit. On Monday, more than a decade after his release, a prosecutor told the court that his arrest had been a case of mistaken identity, and the judge recommended he be exonerated.

“If the appeals court formally approves State District Judge Robert Francis' recommendation as expected, Giles, now 53, will become the 13th Dallas County man to be exonerated since 2001 with the help of DNA evidence.

“The Dallas County District Attorney's office and Giles' Innocence Project lawyer, Vanessa Potkin, both said they had evidence showing Giles was innocent of the 1982 gang rape of a Dallas woman.

“A man who pleaded guilty to the gang rape, Stanley Bryant, implicated two other men in the crime: a James Giles and a Michael Brown. DNA evidence linked Brown and Bryant to the crime, Smith and Potkin said. Brown was never tried and died in prison after being convicted of another gang rape.

“Police eventually arrested James Curtis Giles, who lived 25 miles away and did not match the description of the attacker given by the rape victim, Potkin said. Giles was about 10 years older and had gold teeth. He also had an alibi; he and his wife told police he was asleep in bed.

“Investigators ignored another man with a similar name: James Earl Giles. That Giles lived across the street from the victim and had previously been arrested with Brown on other charges, the attorneys said. He died in prison in 2000 while serving time for robbery and assault.

“…A witness recently identified the other man, James Earl Giles, in a photo lineup, Smith said…

“He is scheduled to appear Tuesday at the state Capitol in Austin with Barry Scheck, the co-director of the Innocence Project, a New York-based legal center that specializes in overturning wrongful convictions. They are scheduled to speak at Senate hearings regarding three reform bills designed to reduce wrongful convictions in Texas, said Eric Ferrero, a spokesman for the Innocence Project.

“Giles, who is black, would be the 13th Dallas County man since 2001 exonerated by DNA evidence, the most of any county in the nation. It would be the third exoneration since District Attorney Craig Watkins took office on Jan. 1 pledging to free anyone wrongfully convicted.

“Watkins, the state's first black district attorney, took over an office with a history of racial discrimination, including a staff manual for prosecutors that described how to keep minorities off juries.”

In an unprecedented move in the right direction, District Attorney Watkins has opened his office’s files to the Innocence Project in an effort to identify other cases of wrongful convictions that offer the opportunity for exoneration by DNA evidence.

"We had to make this move. We're going to do things right in Dallas County and right some wrongs that have been done in the past."

“…in an unprecedented act for any jurisdiction in the nation, he announced he would allow the Texas affiliate of the Innocence Project to review hundreds of Dallas County cases dating back to 1970 to decide whether DNA tests should be conducted to validate past convictions. At 12 in the past five years, Dallas has more post-conviction DNA exonerations than any county in the nation and more than at least two states. A 13th exoneration, of a Dallas County man, is expected to be announced within days…

“Most of the exonerations date to cases tried in the 1980s under Dallas's legendary law-and-order district attorney, Henry Wade. Attempts to reach Watkins's predecessor, Bill Hill, were unsuccessful.

“This time, the screenings of cases to determine whether they are eligible for post-conviction DNA testing will be done by Texas Weslayan University School of Law students. They will work under Mike Ware, an adjunct law professor and board member of the Innocence Project of Texas, who believes that prosecutors and judges may have previously taken an overly stringent view of the Texas statute and denied testing that might have led to exoneration.

"I have to respect [Watkins's] willingness to certainly take his oath of office to heart and be dedicated to true justice, which is what his oath of office requires," Ware said.

Nifonged in Nicaragua: Soul Mates

Nicaraguan Judge Ivette Toruño Blanco - District Attorney/Defendant Mike Nifong

"She [Dr. Arcia] also states that the victim defended herself by scratching the attacker. Eric Volz presents severe scratch marks on his back. He claims that he injured himself while carrying the coffin but such marks will in no way be caused by a coffin. The scratches are both parallel and vertical and begin in the right shoulder." -- Blanco

"But let me point out that the evidence that she would present with respect to that particular situation is that she was grabbed from behind. Somebody had an arm around her like this, which she then had to struggle with in order to be able to breathe, and it was in the course of that struggle that the fingernails—the artificial fingernails broke off. Now as you can see from my arm, if I were wearing a shirt, a long-sleeved shirt or a Jacket of some sort, even if there were enough force used to press down, to break my skin through the clothing, there might not be any way that anything from my arm could get on to those fingernails. So again, whether or not there would be any evidence would depend on exactly the situation. Were the fingernails actually in contact with the skin or were they in contact with clothing? ” -- Nifong