PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Buying a witnesses testimony (a form of police/ prosecutorial corruption), as allegedly happened in the Laforest Johnson Alabama case, where $5,000 was said to have been paid to a woman who approached tee police in response to the offer of a reward, is another one of the techniques police use where they do not have DNA or other physical evidence to use against the suspect, such as obtaining false confessions and rigging identification procedures to point to - guess who! In the Brooklyn David Ranta case, followed by this Blog, - a Louis Scarcella case - the Conviction Integrity Unit’s investigation found that one witness had been told to pick Ranta in a lineup, and that two prosecution witnesses—both convicted felons—were allowed to leave jail, smoke crack and have sex with prostitutes in return for implicating Ranta. In March 2013, Ranta’s conviction was vacated, the charge was dismissed and he was released from prison. A few months later. Buying witness testimony is hardly an unusual practice. However, it does not often come to light, as in these cases.
QUOTE OF THE DAY: (D.A)Carr said his office took no position on Johnson’s guilt or innocence, but Johnson’s defense team welcomed the brief. “It’s really significant because we asked District Attorney Carr to seriously look at the evidence in the case, and he did,” said Ty Alper, an attorney for Johnson, on Friday. “He spent almost a year thoroughly reviewing the case. We’re grateful for the time he took and the seriousness with which he approached this case.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Alabama death row inmate to get new hearing on challenge to witness," by reporter Brian Liman, published by The Montgomery Advertiser on June 12, 2020.
GIST: "The Jefferson County District Attorney on Friday said a death row inmate should get a new trial amid questions about testimony that led to his conviction.
In an amicus brief filed in Jefferson County Circuit Court on Friday, Jefferson County District Attorney Danny Carr cited issues with witnesses in the 1996 trial of Toforest Johnson, convicted of the murder of Jefferson County Deputy Sheriff William Hardy.
“A prosecutor’s duty is not merely to secure convictions, but to seek justice,” the brief said. “After reviewing the circumstances of Mr. Johnson’s conviction and his subsequent Brady claim, the District Attorney has determined that its duty to seek justice requires intervention in this case based on a couple of factors.”
Carr said his office took no position on Johnson’s guilt or innocence, but Johnson’s defense team welcomed the brief.
“It’s really significant because we asked District Attorney Carr to seriously look at the evidence in the case, and he did,” said Ty Alper, an attorney for Johnson, on Friday. “He spent almost a year thoroughly reviewing the case. We’re grateful for the time he took and the seriousness with which he approached this case.”
Messages seeking comment were left with Carr and the Alabama attorney general’s office on Friday.
Hardy was shot and killed while working as a private security guard at a Birmingham hotel on the morning of July 19, 1995. Police arrested Johnson, who maintains his innocence, a few hours later.
No physical evidence linked Johnson to the murder. A jury was unable to reach a verdict in a first trial, but a jury convicted Johnson in a second in 1998.
After the conviction, Johnson’s attorneys learned after the trial that a witness for the prosecution named Violet Ellison was paid $5,000 by the state after approaching the police in response to a reward offered.
The defense filed a motion known as a Brady claim; a 1963 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that held that prosecutors cannot withhold evidence that might exonerate the defendant. The attorneys argued that they could have raised major questions about Ellison’s credibility had they known about her actions. State courts upheld the conviction, but the U.S. Supreme Court in 2017 ordered new hearings to take place on the Brady claim.
Jefferson County Circuit Judge Teresa T. Pulliam denied Johnson’s Brady claim in March, ruling that Johnson had not established “by a preponderance of the evidence” that Ellison “either came forward or gave testimony out of a ‘hope of reward,’ or that the state had knowledge of such motivation at or before the time of the trial.” The case is before the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.
Carr in his brief cited concerns about the reliability of witnesses at Johnson’s trial, as well as the payment of money to the witness. “The District Attorney prior to the filing of this brief met with the original lead prosecutor in this case,” Carr wrote. “He expressed concerns about this case and supports this request as well.”
Johnson, now 47, has raised other issues about his conviction in federal court, though those are currently on hold:."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------------------------
