PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The lawsuit goes on to describe a series of missteps by police, including “suggestive lineups,” where investigators showed the officers who responded to the shooting potential suspects in a way that nudged them toward misidentifying Peets as the shooter. The suit accuses police of sharing a made-up narrative with the DA’s office to secure criminal charges against Peets. It also states that an NYPD analyst bleached the blood off the bullet fragment, so it couldn’t be tested for DNA, and that the department later lost the bullet altogether. Peets, 26 at the time with two young children, remained in jail while awaiting trial, because he couldn’t post bail. One officer allegedly threatened him and told others to spit on him, because he “likes to shoot police,” according to the lawsuit. When the trial finally began in April 1998, Peets had a mental breakdown in the courthouse and the judge had to declare a mistrial, according to court papers. He was then committed to a psychiatric institution."
—————————————————————————————————
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Innocence Project takes on the case: Decades into that sentence, the Innocence Project agreed to review Peets’ case. An attorney the organization hired re-interviewed witnesses. A doctor went to Sing Sing prison to evaluate Peets and concluded that he had never been shot. While the bullet fragment from the scene wasn’t available for testing, the Innocence Project was able to track down a baseball cap that allegedly belonged to the shooter. A DNA analysis of the hat determined that Peets had not worn it."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: Man freed after 26 years behind bars sues NYPD officers who helped send him to prison," by Reporter Samantha Max, published by The Gothamist, on August 15, 2023.
GIST: "A man who spent 26 years in prison for a Bronx shooting he has always maintained he didn’t commit is suing the NYPD officers whose investigation put him away.
In a lawsuit filed last week, Norberto Peets accused police of framing him, hiding exculpatory evidence from the grand jury and losing a key piece of physical evidence that could have cleared him of wrongdoing.
“Mr. Peets suffered severe emotional and mental anguish and pain as a result of being punished for crimes he did not commit,” the lawsuit states. Peets’ attorney, Gabriel Harvis, declined to comment on the lawsuit or to make his client available for an interview while the litigation is pending.
The NYPD declined to speak about pending litigation, and the city’s legal department did not respond to a request for comment.
The lead officers named in the complaint, Claude Staten and William Fullam, and a spokesperson for the Police Benevolent Association also could not be reached for comment.
Staten is still an officer in the 46th precinct in the Bronx, according to department records, while Fullam is no longer with the NYPD.
The case joins a growing group of lawsuits filed against NYPD officers involved in wrongful conviction cases from the 1990s, when a mayoral commission uncovered rampant corruption and misconduct within the NYPD as crime reached record levels in the city.
Last year, three of the four most expensive payouts for NYPD-related lawsuits — totaling $35.5 million — went to men who spent decades in prison for convictions from the 1990s that were later vacated.
Peets’ lawsuit paints a similar picture of officers who his lawsuit claims used shoddy tactics to solve an attempted murder of police and civilians, even if it meant convicting the wrong person.
It also criticizes the department’s evidence preservation practices, which recently came under scrutiny after a fire severely damaged a department’s warehouse, destroying scores of materials that experts worry could make it harder to reexamine other potentially wrongful convictions.
A shooting over a $20 bill
The case started with an argument near the 183rd Street and Jerome Avenue subway station in the Bronx, according to Peets’ lawsuit.
It was about 2:30 a.m. on September 29, 1996, and a Latino man had just accused a Black man of stealing $20 from him inside a nearby Kennedy Fried Chicken.
The lawsuit states that a “racially charged” fight broke out between the men and others in the area. Someone pistol whipped one person and fired into the crowd, shooting two people.
Police pulled up and exchanged gunfire with the shooter as he fled, according to court papers. The man fell to the ground, yelled, “the cops shot me,” and then managed to get away. None of the gunshots that night were fatal.
After the fight, police collected a bloody bullet fragment where the shooter had fallen and interviewed victims and witnesses. Several described the shooter as a Black man wearing a red jacket, according to the lawsuit. Witnesses even identified a likely suspect.
But instead of arresting that man, officers arrested Peets, a Dominican man, who they passed on the street several days later while he was walking home from a party at his mother’s house. He had no criminal record at the time, according to the lawsuit.
It’s unclear why the NYPD pursued him, instead of the other suspect, who matched the witnesses’ descriptions.
Peets’ lawsuit claims police recognized him from an unrelated incident about a year earlier, when he had a breakdown related to a recent “emotional trauma” and had to be hospitalized.
The lawsuit states that the officers who identified him as a suspect in the shooting had spent hours with him on that other day.
The lawsuit goes on to describe a series of missteps by police, including “suggestive lineups,” where investigators showed the officers who responded to the shooting potential suspects in a way that nudged them toward misidentifying Peets as the shooter.
The suit accuses police of sharing a made-up narrative with the DA’s office to secure criminal charges against Peets.
It also states that an NYPD analyst bleached the blood off the bullet fragment, so it couldn’t be tested for DNA, and that the department later lost the bullet altogether.
Peets, 26 at the time with two young children, remained in jail while awaiting trial, because he couldn’t post bail.
One officer allegedly threatened him and told others to spit on him, because he “likes to shoot police,” according to the lawsuit.
When the trial finally began in April 1998, Peets had a mental breakdown in the courthouse and the judge had to declare a mistrial, according to court papers.
He was then committed to a psychiatric institution.
“This period was particularly traumatic for Mr. Peets, who was isolated from his close-knit family and forced — in an overmedicated state — to confront the twin terrors of psychiatric commitment and the maddening prospect of spending life in prison as an innocent man,” the lawsuit says.
Peets was retried about a year later, and a jury convicted him on all charges, including attempted murder, according to the lawsuit. He was sentenced to 30 years to life.
Innocence Project takes on the case
Decades into that sentence, the Innocence Project agreed to review Peets’ case.
An attorney the organization hired re-interviewed witnesses.
A doctor went to Sing Sing prison to evaluate Peets and concluded that he had never been shot.
While the bullet fragment from the scene wasn’t available for testing, the Innocence Project was able to track down a baseball cap that allegedly belonged to the shooter.
A DNA analysis of the hat determined that Peets had not worn it.
The Conviction Integrity Bureau in the Bronx DA’s Office conducted its own review and moved last September to toss Peets’ conviction and indictment, citing “ineffective defense counsel” and “questionable eyewitness identification.”
After months of flip-flopping, as first reported by the nonprofit newsroom THE CITY, a judge agreed in May.
“Norberto Peets has served 26 years in prison, after being found guilty in a trial where his lawyer overlooked key evidence that could have led to acquittal,” Bronx DA Darcel Clark said in a press release at the time.
“My Office’s Conviction Integrity Bureau has helped bring him some semblance of justice by investigating his claims and joining the Innocence Project to have the charges dismissed and clear his name. Hopefully it will help him as he puts his life back together.”
After more than a quarter of a century behind bars, Peets was released.
The civil complaint describes the “severe emotional and mental anguish” he suffered “as a result of being punished for crimes he did not commit.”
While incarcerated, Peets’ missed the childhoods of his two kids. He lost his father and his grandmother. The lawsuit also states that Peets now fears police and struggles to go about everyday activities.
“Plaintiff has been publicly shamed, disgraced, ridiculed and humiliated. He was a figure of outrage and disdain as the convicted attempted murderer of police for events in which he had no part,” the lawsuit states. “Nothing can undo the damage he has sustained.”
The entire story can be read at:
https://gothamist.com/news/man-freed-after-26-years-behind-bars-sues-nypd-officers-who-helped-send-him-to-prison
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. 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;
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/47049136857587929
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;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------------------------
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater’s attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.”
https://deadline.com/2021/11/alice-sebold-lucky-rape-conviction-overturned-anthony-broadwater-1234880143/
------------------------------------------------
