Chemist told Mass. police she 'messed up bad'

MyFoxBoston

Chemists who worked with the woman at the center of a Massachusetts state drug lab scandal told investigators they had concerns about her work for several years, but they either convinced themselves they were invalid or reported them to supervisors who failed to intervene.

Defense attorneys say they're troubled by the latest revelations in the case, contained in a lengthy state police report compiled for the attorney general's office, which is investigating, and obtained by The Associated Press on Wednesday.

Annie Dookhan admitted to investigators that she faked drug sample results for two to three years, forged signatures and skipped proper procedures, according to the report.

Attorney Rosemary Scapicchio, who represents several defendants whose samples Dookhan handled, called for federal officials to take over the probe.

"I can't imagine she could have been this corrupt without someone noticing," she said. "The investigation needs to go deeper than Annie Dookhan to get to the point of 'How did she get away with it?'"

State police say Dookhan tested more than 60,000 drug samples submitted in the cases of about 34,000 defendants during her nine years at the Boston lab. She resigned in March amid an internal investigation by the Department of Public Health. A handful of defendants have already been released or had their sentences suspended, and the state has created a central office to examine cases Dookhan was involved with and figure out how to deal with them.

After state police took over the lab in July as part of a state budget directive, they said they discovered her violations were much more extensive than previously believed and went beyond sloppiness into deliberate evidence mishandling.

Supervisors suspended Dookhan's lab duties in June 2011, when she was caught forging a colleague's initials on paperwork after taking 90 drug samples from evidence, according to police. But she told police later she disobeyed orders and continued to access an evidence database and give law enforcement officials information on their cases.

On Aug. 30, Gov. Deval Patrick ordered state police to close the lab.

That day, a police lieutenant spoke with Dookhan to tell her she should get an attorney because she could face criminal charges.

Dookhan cried on the phone. She said she was involved in a long divorce from her husband, didn't have money and didn't know any lawyers.

Anne Goldbach from Committee for Public Counsel Services, which oversees legal representation for indigents, said the interviews included in the police report show the problems at the now-closed Hinton State Laboratory are more troubling than originally believed. She said it appears there was unsupervised access to the evidence office and safe.

Goldbach said because Dookhan was in charge of quality control equipment, other chemists could have gotten false test results without knowing it.

"It calls into question all the testing done by the lab," she said.

Attorney John T. Martin said Wednesday that he noticed a pattern of suspicious behavior from Dookhan while looking over his clients' cases.

He said in four cases, Dookhan determined the weight of the drug sample was just 1 gram above the amount needed for a more serious penalty even though police reports made the seizure seem smaller.

Concerns from Dookhan's colleagues prompted two supervisors to audit her work in 2010, but they just looked at paperwork and didn't retest drug samples.

Things started to unravel in spring 2011 with the forging incident. A colleague told police it was "almost like Dookhan wanted to get caught."

One lab supervisor told police later that he believed Dookhan had a mental breakdown.

Dookhan told investigators several times in an August interview that she knew she had done wrong.

"I screwed up big time," she said, according to the report from investigators for Attorney General Martha Coakley's office. "I messed up bad. It's my fault. I don't want the lab to get in trouble."

Authorities haven't filed charges against Dookhan or commented on her possible motives as their probe continues. Dookhan hasn't responded to repeated requests for comment.

In the Aug. 28 interview with two investigators at her home, Dookhan first denied doing anything wrong when she analyzed drug samples.

She changed her story after they confronted her with a retest of a suspected cocaine sample that came back negative after Dookhan identified it as the narcotic. Police also told her the number of samples she reported analyzing was too high and she couldn't have completed all the tests.

The report shows Dookhan then admitted identifying drug samples by looking at them instead of testing them, called dry labbing.

She said she tested about five out of 25 samples she got from evidence, after routinely getting a large number of samples from different cases out of the evidence room. She also told investigators that she contaminated samples a few times to get more work finished but that no one asked her to do anything improper.

"I intentionally turned a negative sample into a positive a few times," Dookhan said in a signed statement she gave police.

Dookhan also told investigators she routinely skirted proper procedures by looking up data for assistant district attorneys who called her directly.

Wrongly convicted inmates freed but get little help

USA Today
Brad Heath



Former inmates abruptly freed after spending up to six years in federal prison even though they were "legally innocent" are coming home with less help than the government typically provides the guilty after they are released.

Kim Harris was declared legally innocent and
released from prison with little more than a
bus ticket and the clothes she was wearing.

Most of them have received little more than a bus ticket. Federal law does not require the government to help them search for jobs or find basic necessities such as clothing and a place to live, assistance the guilty routinely receive during their post-prison supervision, partly to keep them from returning to crime.

Judges in North Carolina have so far ordered the government to release at least 17 inmates in one of the largest episodes in recent memory of federal prisoners having their convictions overturned. It follows a USA TODAY investigation this year that identified 60 people incarcerated for gun possession even though a court later determined that they had not committed a federal crime. The U.S. Justice Department had originally argued that they should remain in prison anyway, but reversed its position last month "in the interests of justice," according to court records.

• STORY: Woman fights to start over after conviction overturned

Neither the courts nor the Justice Department could estimate how many more prisoners might ultimately be released. Dozens of other inmates from North Carolina still are waiting for judges to decide whether their convictions should be thrown out, too.

"A lot of people would say they need help finding a job, but it's really they need help finding underwear," said Theresa Newman, who runs a wrongful convictions program at Duke University's law school. "At a minimum, the state and the federal government should help innocent people make the transition out."

The Justice Department would not comment on the record about help for the freed prisoners, saying instead that it is trying to make sure innocent prisoners are freed. Spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle said prosecutors "are working with the court, the probation office and the federal public defenders to ensure that these matters are addressed as effectively and quickly as possible."

At least 10 states provide services such as job training, health care and housing assistance to wrongfully convicted prisoners, according to an Innocence Project study. Most states and the federal government also provide some help in finding social services once someone serves his full prison sentence and is released on parole or supervision, though that help is not available to people whose convictions are overturned.

Compensation for the time they were locked up is even less likely. Federal law permits the government to pay people up to $50,000 for every year they were wrongly imprisoned, but the ex-prisoners -- almost all of whom could have been convicted of state crimes with lesser penalties -- are unlikely to meet its strict eligibility requirements.

"Exonarees fall into this hole where there really isn't a re-entry program for them. Their path to re-entry is often more difficult than someone who has legitimately served time," said Michele Berry, an Ohio lawyer who has handled wrongful conviction cases there. She said that means prisoners freed because they are innocent could have a harder time after they are released than guilty inmates who finish their sentences.

Brookston Cooke, freed in August from a federal prison in Pennsylvania, said he is struggling to find a job and get his license renewed. So far, he's had little success and no real help. "Right now that's my biggest challenge," he said. "Getting back to a normal life."

USA TODAY's investigation found that the Justice Department had done almost nothing to identify prisoners such as Cooke — many of whom did not know they were innocent — and had argued in court that they should remain imprisoned even though its lawyers agreed they had not committed a federal crime.

Federal law bans people from having a gun if they have previously been convicted of a crime that could have put them in prison for more than a year. In North Carolina, however, state law set the maximum punishment for a crime based on the prior record of whoever committed it, meaning two people who committed the same crime could face vastly different maximum sentences.

For years, federal courts there said that didn't matter. If someone with a long record could have gone to prison for more than a year, then all who had committed that crime are felons and cannot legally have a gun, the courts maintained. But last year, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals said judges had been getting the law wrong: Only people who could have faced more than a year in prison for their crimes qualify as felons. Its decision meant thousands of low-level offenders are not committing a federal crime by having a gun.

In addition to the 17 people who have been freed from prison so far, federal courts in North Carolina have overturned 12 more convictions. Most of those people had already served their prison sentences and were on supervised release by the time their convictions were thrown out.

Calls for crime lab to shut down amid more evidence doubts

MPR News
Madeleine Baran

The St. Paul crime lab is housed at the
St. Paul Police Department in St. Paul, Minn.
Wednesday, July 25, 2012.

As questions about the St. Paul police crime lab spread to fingerprint evidence, top defense attorneys say the lab needs to shut down entirely until it can prove that its work is reliable.

The lab already suspended drug testing in July after employees testified they did not follow any written procedures and relied on equipment that may have been clogged with cocaine. The allegations alarmed many in the criminal justice system and threw thousands of drug cases into question in Dakota, Washington, and Ramsey Counties. Police Chief Thomas Smith replaced the lab director and hired two out-of-state companies to conduct an independent review. The Dakota County hearing that exposed the problems in the lab is ongoing.

Despite the damaging allegations, most of the lab is still open. Every day, employees analyze fingerprints and process other evidence from crime scenes. Their findings are used to help convict people of a variety of crimes, including homicide, burglary and rape. That alarms defense attorneys who specialize in forensic science.

"I just can't imagine that there aren't serious, serious questions about what's going on in the other parts of the crime laboratory," said assistant state public defender Pam King. "I don't understand why they have that laboratory open at all."

FINGERPRINT WORK UNDER SCRUTINY

Defense attorneys say they will question any evidence that comes out of the lab. Already, at least one attorney is challenging the lab's fingerprint work. Back in May, two months before the drug testing problems came to light, Washington County public defender Rebecca Waxse asked a judge to decide whether the lab's fingerprint methods were reliable enough to be admitted as evidence in a burglary case.

Her written request contained an alarming accusation. "According to the St. Paul Crime Lab, they do not have standard operating procedures or formal protocols in place to govern the process of fingerprint analysis," she wrote.

Washington County Judge Gregory Galler denied the request. The case is still pending.

Waxse declined to discuss the fingerprint case in any detail or say whether she plans to file a new request based on the recent revelations about the lab's work.

"We need to do more investigation before we can make any true determinations about what we're going to do next," she said.

Video: Unanswered questions. Story continues below.



Washington County Criminal Division Chief Fred Fink, who is prosecuting the case, said he plans to investigate how the lab analyzes fingerprints. He declined to say what he will do if he uncovers any problems.

Washington County arguably has less at stake because, according to Fink, this is the only fingerprint case that was sent to the St. Paul lab. Fink said he's not even sure how it ended up there.

"That was an aberration," Fink said. "Historically, we've only sent drug cases to the St. Paul police lab. Somebody took a wrong turn."

Public defenders in other counties that rely more heavily on the St. Paul crime lab's fingerprint work said they will watch the challenge closely. They said prosecutors should be prepared for more challenges to the lab's fingerprint work.

Feds shut down criminal investigation of Arpaio, Thomas; no charges to be filed

AZCentral
Dennis Wagner, JJ Hensley and Yvonne Wingett Sanchez

Federal prosecutors closed an exhaustive four-year FBI criminal investigation and grand-jury probe targeting Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, former County Attorney Andrew Thomas and their top deputies, saying there will be no indictments.

Ann Birmingham Scheel, acting on behalf of U.S. Attorney John Leonardo, announced the decision in a three-paragraph news release distributed at 5 p.m. Friday. Neither she nor anyone else from the office was available to comment.

However, in a letter to Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery, Scheel listed the allegations that were investigated -- civil-rights violations, misuse of public money, perjury -- and said prosecution was declined because of a lack of evidence or an insurmountable burden of proof.

Arpaio, a Republican who is running for a sixth term in November, said he anticipated the outcome: "I never had any doubt. ... Once again, I send my appreciation to the federal government for their hard work in clearing my office.

"If I did something wrong, there would be indictments floating all over the place," Arpaio said.

Paul Penzone, Arpaio's Democratic challenger, said the outcome is hardly vindication, nor does it exonerate Arpaio for "lost dollars, failed investigations and at best questionable practices."

"This is not something that law enforcement should celebrate, it's something of great concern," said Penzone. "There are obvious failings in the Sheriff's Office. The fact that they did not rise to a level of criminal indictment does not lessen that they are failings."

Thomas, who resigned as county attorney and was later disbarred for ethical misconduct, issued a written statement saying, "The Justice Department acknowledged the obvious: A jury of citizens simply would not indict a prosecutor who had done his job. ... The real losers in the political witch hunt that just ended are the people of Arizona. Prosecutors no longer attempt to fight corruption or illegal immigration in Arizona because they fear being targeted and disbarred."

In her letter to Montgomery, Scheel said the "comprehensive investigation" failed to uncover sufficient evidence for criminal charges, which require a judge or jury to find defendants guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

She emphasized that her inquiry has no bearing on a racial-profiling case filed against the Sheriff's Office in May by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. A verdict in that case, which focuses on alleged discriminatory practices in county jails and in sweeps aimed at undocumented immigrants, would be based on the civil standard, a preponderance of evidence, rather than more rigorous "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard used in criminal cases.

Mitchell Rivard, a DOJ spokesman, echoed that point. "The announcement of the U.S. Attorney of the closure of the criminal case has nothing to do with the civil case that the department has brought," he said.

The federal investigation began in 2008 after former Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon and other local officials expressed concerns about Arpaio abusing his power to the local FBI head. Nearly two years later, the probe expanded when, at the request of Maricopa County Supervisors, the federal agents were cross-deputized to investigate potential state crimes. Among the issues investigated and the prosecutorial conclusions:

Credit cards: County supervisors sought a probe of possible misuse of so-called P Cards used by members of the Sheriff's Office. Scheel said investigators found "no evidence or allegation of MCSO employees stealing county funds," although financial records indicated expenditures were not properly documented.

Jail funds: County supervisors reported evidence that the Sheriff's Office was using up to $84 million earmarked for jails to pay expenses and salaries not related to the detention program. Scheel said because there was no evidence that any sheriff's employee personally profited from the "misspending," prosecutors would not be able to prove criminal intent.

Perjury: Thomas and one of his attorneys, Lisa Aubuchon, were accused of committing perjury when they asked a sheriff's official to swear out a complaint accusing Superior Court Judge Gary Donahoe of hindrance, obstruction and bribery in an attempt to prevent him from holding a hearing tied to the appointment of special prosecutors to work county corruption cases. Though the state Bar disbarred Thomas and Aubuchon, Scheel said federal prosecutors would not be able to prove they knowingly lied in the court papers.

Civil-rights violations: Scheel concluded that it "is not enough to show that Judge Donahoe was subjected to conduct that was abusive or even unconstitutional" because the Justice Department also would have to show beyond reasonable doubt that Thomas and Aubuchon specifically intended to violate his rights.

Scheel said investigators also considered charges against Thomas and Aubuchon for depriving Donahoe of his profession or livelihood, but could not meet "the heavy burden of proof necessary to obtain a criminal conviction."

Moreover, Scheel suggested, civil court and the state Bar are appropriate venues to deal with Thomas' alleged abuse of power for political purposes. "The criminal process is not the proper vehicle to address the conduct that (was) brought to our attention."

Reaction to the decision was swift and furious.

A spokesman for the Arizona Republican Party, on behalf of chairman Tom Morrissey said, "It is good to see this witch hunt has come to an end. I find it bizarre when a man is hounded for doing his job by those who refuse to do theirs."

However Colorado attorney John Gleason, who conducted the ethics investigation of Thomas and Aubuchon for the state Bar, said he was disappointed in federal prosecutors.

"We believe that the work that we did and the testimony that was presented presents a strong case that crimes were committed," he said.

Aubuchon expressed relief that the probe was over: "I'm glad they understand what perjury is -- unlike the Bar witch hunt that ensued -- and that they realized that this was just disagreement about the charges."

Randy Parraz, head of Citizens for a Better Arizona, which launched a "Joe's Got to Go" campaign to defeat Arpaio in November, said he was disappointed in the outcome.

"People's lives have been damaged and hurt and violated by the sheriff, and it is unfortunate that they are going to walk away and not pursue any of these things," he said. "It sends the wrong message that they haven't done anything wrong, which serves him (Arpaio) well in an election year."

In addition to the still outstanding Justice Department civil-rights complaint, the Sheriff's Office faces a lawsuit filed by Manuel de Jesus Ortega Melendres, a Mexican tourist who was arrested and detained for nine hours while visiting the U.S. legally. Melendres' allegation of racial profiling became a class-action lawsuit covering every Latino driver stopped by sheriff's deputies in the past five years. Plaintiffs and defendants submitted closing arguments earlier this month, but U.S. District Judge Murray Snow has not yet reached a verdict.

Arpaio and Thomas also were defendants in 10 federal lawsuits filed by elected county supervisors, county administrators and retired judges, four of which are still pending.

The lawsuits stemmed from so-called government-corruption investigations in 2008 and 2009 by the sheriff and prosecutor, who had filed criminal cases and a federal racketeering lawsuit against the officials. Plaintiffs claim they were wronged by those investigations and charges.

Five plaintiffs obtained settlements ranging from $75,000 and $500,000 each.

A $975,000 settlement for county Supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox remains in dispute and has not yet been paid. If the court approves her settlement amount, the final payment would be well over $1 million with attorney's fees and interest.

Lawsuits filed by Donahoe, Supervisor Don Stapley, Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson and businessman Conley Wolfswinkel remain unresolved.

As of April, Maricopa County had spent at least $3.2 million in litigation costs and settlements relating to these federal lawsuits, according to a Republic analysis of county spending.

Wilcox expressed shock at the U.S. attorney's decision, stammering for words. "I can't believe it. I can't imagine why they would do that, when there's so much evidence there, particularly from the Thomas case," she said. "I just am floored."

Retired Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Barbara Mundell said that a 2009 civil racketeering suit brought against her by Arpaio and Thomas was meant to "intimidate, harass, discredit and humiliate." Mundell, who settled her counter-lawsuit for $500,000 earlier this year, declined comment on the U.S. attorney's decision.

Former Maricopa County Attorney Rick Romley, who came out of retirement briefly to replace Thomas, worked with the U.S. Attorney's Office on the case, providing them records and access to key witnesses.

Romley said he was "truly puzzled" by the decision not to prosecute. "To say there was insufficient evidence, with the amount of information that we sent their way, sends a horrible message."

Susan Schuerman, executive assistant to Maricopa County Supervisor Don Stapley, suggested the decision is an injustice to all who see themselves as victims of an abuse of power by the sheriff.

"Having lived through this and witnessed all of these outrageous behaviors ... I'm shocked that no charges would be brought," she said. "It's all politics. I think this is bigger than they are (the Justice Department). I think the Justice Department was inept in their handling of this, and I have almost no faith left."

Reporters Michael Kiefer and Michelle Ye Hee Lee contributed to this story.

DOJ closes CIA interrogation probes without charges

Politico

Donovan Slack

John Durham

The Department of Justice announced on Thursday that it has closed investigations of CIA interrogations of detainees and will not press criminal charges.

The probe followed the death of two detainees while in U.S. custody overseas, and was spearheaded by Assistant U.S. Attorney John Durham of the District of Connecticut.

"I asked Mr. Durham to conduct this review based on existing information as well as new information and matters presented to me that I believed warranted a thorough examination of the detainee treatment issue," Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement. “I am confident that Mr. Durham’s thorough reviews and determination that the filing of criminal charges would not be appropriate have satisfied that need. Our inquiry was limited to a determination of whether prosecutable offenses were committed and was not intended to, and does not resolve, broader questions regarding the propriety of the examined conduct.”

Holder's decisions in 2009 to renew probes into interrogation techniques authorized under former president George W. Bush had reportedly rankled some members of the intelligence community who feared it would undermine morale, including then-CIA director Leon Panetta. But Holder said in Congressional testimony earlier this year that "There were ....things that were done during the course of those interrogations that are antithetical to American values, that resulted in the deaths of certain people."

Full DOJ statement on the investigations' closure:

Statement of Attorney General Eric Holder on Closure of Investigation into the Interrogation of Certain Detainees 

The Attorney General announced today the closure of the criminal investigations into the death of two individuals while in United States custody at overseas locations.   Below is some background on the investigation and the Attorney General’s statement. 

BACKGROUND ON INVESTIGATION: 

On Jan. 2, 2008, Attorney General Michael Mukasey selected Assistant U.S. Attorney (AUSA) John Durham of the District of Connecticut to conduct a criminal investigation into the destruction of interrogation videotapes by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). 

On Aug. 24, 2009, based on information the Department received pertaining to alleged CIA mistreatment of detainees, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that he had expanded Mr. Durham’s mandate to conduct a preliminary review into whether federal laws were violated in connection with the interrogation of specific detainees at overseas locations.   Attorney General Holder made clear at that time, that the Department would not prosecute anyone who acted in good faith and within the scope of the legal guidance given by the Office of Legal Counsel regarding the interrogation of detainees.  Accordingly, Mr. Durham’s review examined primarily whether any unauthorized interrogation techniques were used by CIA interrogators, and if so, whether such techniques could constitute violations of the torture statute or any other applicable statute. 

In June of last year, the Attorney General announced that Mr. Durham recommended opening full criminal investigations regarding the death of two individuals while in United States custody at overseas locations, and closing the remaining matters.   The Attorney General accepted that recommendation.   Today, the Attorney General announced that those two investigations conducted over the past year have now been closed.  

ATTORNEY GENERAL STATEMENT : 

“AUSA John Durham has now completed his investigations, and the Department has decided not to initiate criminal charges in these matters.    In reaching this determination, Mr. Durham considered all potentially applicable substantive criminal statutes as well as the statutes of limitations and jurisdictional provisions that govern prosecutions under those statutes.    Mr. Durham and his team reviewed a tremendous volume of information pertaining to the detainees. That review included both information and matters that were not examined during the Department’s prior reviews.   Based on the fully developed factual record concerning the two deaths, the Department has declined prosecution because the admissible evidence would not be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt. 

“During the course of his preliminary review and subsequent investigations, Mr. Durham examined any possible CIA involvement with the interrogation and detention of 101 detainees who were alleged to have been in United States custody subsequent to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.  He determined that a number of the detainees were never in CIA custody.  Mr. Durham identified the matters to include within his review by examining various sources including the Office of Professional Responsibility’s report regarding the Office of Legal Counsel memoranda related to enhanced interrogation techniques, the 2004 CIA Inspector General’s report on enhanced interrogations, additional matters investigated by the CIA Office of Inspector General, the February 2007 International Committee of the Red Cross Report on the Treatment of Fourteen ‘High Value Detainees’ in CIA Custody, and public source information. 

“Mr. Durham and his team of agents and prosecutors have worked tirelessly to conduct extraordinarily thorough and complete preliminary reviews and investigations.   I am grateful to his team and to him for their commitment to ensuring that the preliminary review and the subsequent investigations fully examined a broad universe of allegations from multiple sources.   I continue to believe that our Nation will be better for it. 

“I also appreciate and respect the work of and sacrifices made by the men and women in our intelligence community on behalf of this country.   They perform an incredibly important service to our nation, and they often do so under difficult and dangerous circumstances. They deserve our respect and gratitude for the work they do.   I asked Mr. Durham to conduct this review based on existing information as well as new information and matters presented to me that I believed warranted a thorough examination of the detainee treatment issue.  

“I am confident that Mr. Durham’s thorough reviews and determination that the filing of criminal charges would not be appropriate have satisfied that need. Our inquiry was limited to a determination of whether prosecutable offenses were committed and was not intended to, and does not resolve, broader questions regarding the propriety of the examined conduct.”

Governor Perry's Death Mission

Der Spiegel
Marc Pitz

In Texas, Steven Michael Woods is slated for execution on Tuesday, despite considerable doubts about his guilt. The inmate is fighting to have his sentence commuted, but his chances are diminishing. State Governor Rick Perry is considered a champion of the death penalty.

In Texas, Steven Michael Woods is slated for execution on Tuesday, despite considerable doubts about his guilt. The inmate is fighting to have his sentence commuted, but his chances are diminishing. State Governor Rick Perry is considered a champion of the death penalty. 

It's a gruesome record, but Rick Perry is proud of it. "Your state has executed 234 death-row inmates, more than any other governor in modern times," NBC's Brian Williams told the Texas governor during this week's presidential debate. Did he ever struggle to sleep at night, Williams continued, "with the idea that anyone of those might have been innocent"?

Before Williams had finished, the auditorium erupted in cheers, even whistles, as if the spectators welcomed this killer number. Then Perry answered grimly: "No sir, I never struggled with that at all."

Asked what he made of the applause, he said: "I think Americans understand justice."

This bizarre moment was almost lost in the subsequent coverage of the Republican candidates' debate. For one man, however, it was a bad omen: Steven Michael Woods.

Woods, 31, is incarcerated in the Allan B. Polunsky Unit, which houses Texas' death row, a four-hour drive east of the capital Austin. His execution for capital murder is set for Tuesday -- one day after the next Republican debate. It would be the 19th execution this year in Texas alone.

Grave Doubts about Verdict
 
There's more, though: Woods, his lawyers and his friends insist he is innocent.

There are indeed grave doubts about the verdict. Marcus Rhodes, Wood's co-defendant and a former friend, has admitted to the double murder in question and already been sentenced -- but to life in prison. Rhodes' DNA was found on the weapons, but not that of Woods.

Yet all courts so far have rejected Wood's appeals. Even the US Supreme Court refused to take up the case. Alex Calhoun, Wood's defense lawyer, has now filed a clemency petition with Governor Perry and the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole, as a last resort.

New York Attorney General Kicked Off Government Group Leading Foreclosure Probe

Huffington Post
Shahien Nasiripour

WASHINGTON -- New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman on Tuesday was kicked off the committee leading the 50-state task force charged with probing foreclosure abuses and negotiating a possible settlement agreement with the nation's five largest mortgage firms, according to an email reviewed by The Huffington Post.

Schneiderman was one of roughly a dozen state attorneys general leading the talks with the five companies, alongside representatives of the U.S. Department of Justice, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and other federal agencies. The government launched the negotiations in the spring after widespread reports of foreclosure irregularities, such as so-called "robo-signing" and illegal home seizures, emerged.

But state prosecutors and federal officials are pressing to complete a proposed settlement with the five companies even though they've initiated only a limited investigation that hasn't examined the full extent of the alleged wrongdoing, The Huffington Post reported last month. Elizabeth Warren, who until recently was a senior adviser to President Barack Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, told a congressional panel last month that government agencies may not have sufficiently investigated claims that borrowers' homes were illegally seized.

Schneiderman, a Democrat who's in his first term as New York's top law enforcer, has been among a group of state legal officers who has also questioned the desire for a speedy resolution. He's leading his own investigation into mortgage improprieties, subpoenaing documents from the nation's largest financial institutions and reviewing court records for possible illegal home repossessions.

The Obama administration officials -- in particular, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan -- have publicly stated on numerous occasions that they want a quick resolution to the 50-state mortgage probe.

Sources said attorneys general like Schneiderman, along with the top legal officers from Massachusetts, Delaware and Nevada, among others, were complicating that goal by questioning the plan to scuttle the state and federal investigations in exchange for a settlement.

These attorneys general have said they're reluctant to sign on to an agreement that effectively kills their ongoing investigations or prevents new ones from being launched. Beau Biden, Delaware's top law enforcer, remains on the states' executive committee.

In a statement of support for Schneiderman, Biden said that the "events leading up to the mortgage crisis must be fully investigated, including origination and securitization practices, before any broad immunity is granted."

"The American people deserve an investigation," he added.

Top Obama administration officials recently reached out to Schneiderman and his allies, effectively requesting he get in line, people familiar with the discussions said. The New York Times editorial board on Tuesday declared that Schneiderman "should stand his ground in not supporting the deal."

"The administration says that a settlement would quickly deliver much needed relief to hard-pressed borrowers, but it’s doubtful it would provide redress on a par with the banks’ wrongdoing or borrowers’ needs," the board wrote.

The email announcing Schneiderman's dismissal from the states' executive committee was sent just after noon to more than 50 people by Patrick Madigan, a top lawyer in the Iowa Attorney General's Office. It read: "Effective immediately, the New York Attorney General’s Office has been removed from the Executive Committee of the Robosigning multistate."

This month, Schneiderman accused Bank of New York Mellon, the 11th-largest U.S. bank by assets, of "repeated fraud and illegality" when it came to its actions as a trustee for various mortgage securities, and he accused Bank of America of fabricating missing documents when foreclosing on some homeowners who defaulted on their mortgages.

Bank of America's stock price is down more than 55 percent over the past six months. Investors haven't seen a closing price as low as Tuesday's -- $6.30 per share -- since March 2009.

Government cyclops (try to) rule

The Examiner
William Heuisler

Government cameras scan our streets. Meddlesome hooded cyclops spy, indict, summon and extort large amounts of our hard-earned cash with magisterial flashes of light.
But it’s all about our safety, not the cash…right?

Pima County says, “Speeding is a leading cause of urban crashes...” (Pima County, 2011) But the county ignores US Department of Transportation statistics showing “distraction” as a major cause of accidents. (Distraction.gov. 2011)      We have all seen how traffic cameras “distract” so many of our (startled, braking, swerving) fellow Pima County drivers.

Two weeks ago, Bear Canyon homeowners said they should have been advised of those speed camera cyclops newly installed on Tanque Verde between Houghton and Catalina Highway. But Pima County Administrator, L. Funk-houser, said County engineers and Sheriffs decided RTA-widened Tanque Verde would “increase speeders”. And residents weren't told of traffic cameras because, "Based on prior experience with driver behavior, it would be in the interest of public safety to place it (?) where it is". (Casey, 2011)

Bear Canyon neighborhood Association President, Lori Oien disagreed, “We do not have an excessive speeding problem,” and cited zero fatalities in 20 years she lived in the area.

Soon Ms. Orien became aware the government-hired camera company, American Traffic Solutions (ATS), really knows best. When residents complained about the camera flashes at night, ATS imperiously decreed, "We are certainly willing to work with (residents) to minimize the camera's impact…but if neighbors' assertions about the low number of speeders is true, then the number of flashes will be minimal." (Casey, 2011) Take that, taxpayers!

According to a recent Washington Times editorial, local governments around the US are giving law-enforcement responsibilities to companies that exploit “safety” for money. For example, Alexandria, Virginia “deputized” a company, Redflex Traffic Systems, to take pictures and collect big fines for everything, even right-turns on red, or missing a yellow light by a split second. But safety? Similar camera-laws in northern Virginia from 1997 to 2005, resulted in a 29 percent increase in traffic accidents, according to the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). (Washington Times, 2011)
But nonpayment has become a problem for Governments and their camera companies.

Rich Johns' Identities are Shielded in Escort Probe

Detroit News

Escort probe skips 248 area code

Feds will only reveal customers with 313, 734 phone numbers

By Robert Snell

Detroit — Federal prosecutors are refusing to reveal customers from Oakland County and the 248 area code who hired hookers from a high-priced escort service but are willing to out clients from Detroit, according to federal court records.


The legal tactic was unveiled in records filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Detroit involving the Miami Companions escort service.

The U.S. Attorney's Office and FBI busted the international escort service in July, indicted the owners and three employees on prostitution or money-laundering charges and seized a black book bulging with tens of thousands of customer names, job details and contact information.

Paul DeCailly, the attorney for Miami Companions co-owner Greg Carr, flew to Detroit last week to review the black book. He wanted to see the names of clients from Michigan and Ohio, but the U.S. Attorney's Office said he could see only the names from the 313 and 734 area codes, he said.

"There must be something there they don't want anybody to see," DeCailly said Tuesday. "In the 248 area code, a lot of influential people live there: musicians, Detroit's sports elite, politicians. ... It's the center of a lot of activity in the business community."

DeCailly filed a motion Tuesday to compel the government to turn over the entire black book and other records. He had a limited amount of time to review the names of clients from the 313 and 734 area codes and was not allowed to copy the information.


Prosecutors cited privacy concerns in initially refusing to allow DeCailly to copy the list and referenced a federal rule that says defense lawyers are not entitled to the government's witness list. A U.S. Attorney's Office spokeswoman earlier declined to say whether any clients will be called as witnesses during trial.

Prosecutors have said they will use the black book against Carr, a 44-year-old Dearborn Heights native, who they allege co-owned and ran the ring under the nickname "Paul Cutlass."
A U.S. Attorney's Office spokeswoman did not return a call seeking comment Tuesday.
DeCailly said he needs the black book to mount a defense.

"It's not to destroy lives or marriages or anything like that," he said. "I think (the U.S. Attorney's Office) could care less about exposing the list, but they want the push for it to come from me or one of the defendants."

There are other restrictions.

The defense can scan certain documents, but none that contain biographical information such as names, addresses, phone numbers, Social Security numbers, driver's license numbers or other identifying data, Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Blackwell wrote in a Dec. 22 letter to DeCailly.
Investigators already have interviewed some Oakland County residents whose names are in the black book, DeCailly said. He has reviewed copies of some of the interviews.

"The government is knocking down doors and any person it needs to, to do what the pleasure police want to do: basically shut down a legitimate business and prosecute a man who's done nothing wrong," DeCailly said.

Prosecutors' conduct can tip justice scales

USA Today

ORLANDO — The jurors who helped put Nino Lyons in jail for three years had every reason to think that he was a drug trafficker, and, until July, no reason to doubt that justice had been done.

For more than a week in 2001, the jurors listened to one witness after another, almost all of them prison inmates, describe how Lyons had sold them packages of cocaine. One said that Lyons, who ran clothing shops and nightclubs around Orlando, even tried to hire him to kill two drug suppliers.

But the federal prosecutors handling the case did not let the jury hear all the facts.

Instead, the prosecutors covered up evidence that could have discredited many of Lyons' accusers. They never revealed that a convict who claimed to have purchased hundreds of pounds of cocaine from Lyons struggled even to identify his photograph. And they hid the fact that prosecutors had promised to let others out of prison early in exchange for their cooperation.

Federal prosecutors are supposed to seek justice, not merely score convictions. But a USA TODAY investigation found that prosecutors repeatedly have violated that duty in courtrooms across the nation. The abuses have put innocent people in prison, set guilty people free and cost taxpayers millions of dollars in legal fees and sanctions.

Judges have warned for decades that misconduct by prosecutors threatens the Constitution's promise of a fair trial. Congress in 1997 enacted a law aimed at ending such abuses.

Yet USA TODAY documented 201 criminal cases in the years that followed in which judges determined that Justice Department prosecutors — the nation's most elite and powerful law enforcement officials — themselves violated laws or ethics rules.

In case after case during that time, judges blasted prosecutors for "flagrant" or "outrageous" misconduct. They caught some prosecutors hiding evidence, found others lying to judges and juries, and said others had broken plea bargains.

Such abuses, intentional or not, doubtless infect no more than a small fraction of the tens of thousands of criminal cases filed in the nation's federal courts each year. But the transgressions USA TODAY identified were so serious that, in each case, judges threw out charges, overturned convictions or rebuked prosecutors for misconduct. And each has the potential to tarnish the reputation of the prosecutors who do their jobs honorably.

In July, U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell did more than overturn Lyons' conviction: He declared that Lyons was innocent.

Neither the Justice Department nor the lead prosecutor in the Lyons case, Bruce Hinshelwood, would explain the events that cost Lyons his home, his businesses and nearly three years of freedom. The department investigated Hinshelwood but refused to say whether he was punished; records obtained by USA TODAY show that the agency regulating Florida lawyers ordered him to attend a one-day ethics workshop, scheduled for Friday.

Asked about Presnell's ruling exonerating Lyons, Hinshelwood said only, "It is of no concern to me."

The circumstances of Lyons' conviction did trouble Presnell, who oversaw his trial nine years ago. Presnell savaged the Justice Department in a written order for "a concerted campaign of prosecutorial abuse" by attorneys who, he wrote, covered up evidence and let felons lie to the jury.

Records from the Justice Department's internal ethics watchdogs show the agency has investigated a growing number of complaints by judges about misconduct they observed. In 2001, the department investigated 42 such complaints; last year, 61.

The department will not reveal how many of those prosecutors were punished because, it said, doing so would violate their privacy rights. USA TODAY, drawing on state bar records, identified only one federal prosecutor who was barred even temporarily from practicing law for misconduct during the past 12 years.

Even high-profile cases have been affected. Last year, a judge in Washington, D.C. — saying the department could not be trusted to investigate its own prosecutors — launched his own probe of the attorneys who handled the corruption trial of former Alaska senator Ted Stevens. After a jury found Stevens guilty, the department admitted that prosecutors had hidden evidence, then dropped the charges. (Stevens died in an August plane crash.)

Stevens' lawyers question how misconduct could have tainted such a closely watched case — and what that might mean for routine prosecutions. "It's a frightening thought and calls into question the generally accepted belief that our system of justice performs at a high level and yields just results," said Brendan Sullivan, Stevens' attorney.

Full Story