Wrongful Convictions : Wrongly Jailed, 2 Clear Last Hurdle Before Freedom

On the day when freedom was supposed to belong to Anthony Faison and Charles Shepherd, when they were supposed to walk quickly out of a Brooklyn courtroom and return to their lives after 14 years in prison, the men found themselves sitting before a judge for nearly an hour before being released. For them, it was justice's final delay.

Mr. Faison, 35, and Mr. Shepherd, 38, were convicted in 1987 in the murder of Jean Ulysses, a Haitian livery driver in Brooklyn. Their conviction hinged on the testimony of a witness who later admitted she had lied to collect a $1,000 reward. On Friday, the police arrested the man they now say was responsible for the killing, Arlet Cheston. Mr. Cheston has confessed to the crime, the authorities said.

So yesterday, the families of Mr. Faison and Mr. Shepherd gathered in the courtroom for a hearing that they were told would be just a formality. They wept and shouted "It's about time" as the men were led into the courtroom.

And then they gasped, as the freedom that had seemed so near appeared in jeopardy. Justice Robert S. Kreindler of State Supreme Court, the same judge who presided over the men's trial, began to question prosecutors over and over again as to whether they were certain Mr. Faison and Mr. Shepherd should be exonerated.

"I presided at the trial back in '87 and, very frankly, after hearing the testimony I was pretty well convinced both defendants were guilty," Justice Kreindler said.

Prosecutors from the Brooklyn district attorney's office spent nearly an hour assuring the judge by recounting new evidence provided by the police, as well as from Ronald L. Kuby, the lawyer for the men, and Michael S. Race, a private investigator. Mr. Race had spent years investigating the case at the request of Mr. Faison.

The new evidence included an affidavit from a woman who said she had received a letter from an ex- boyfriend bragging about there being two men behind bars for a crime he had committed. The letter writer was Mr. Cheston, lawyers said.

Justice Kreindler did not appear convinced. He asked a barrage of questions, sending some family members storming from the courtroom.

"It's hard to believe that a person for a rather small reward would name two innocent people as murderers," the judge said.

Family members said they were outraged.
"If he had taken that much time 14 years ago to check the evidence, we wouldn't be here," said Mr. Shepherd's younger brother, Richard, who left the courtroom in disgust. "They shouldn't have to go through this today."

Mitch Benson, an assistant district attorney, tried to bring the hearing to an end by explaining how Mr. Cheston's fingerprints had been found in the car where Mr. Ulysses was shot in the head. The witness who initially identified Mr. Faison and Mr. Shepherd as the robbers, Carolyn Van Buren, had testified that she saw them standing outside the cab, with Mr. Faison firing the fatal shot.

"No fingerprints connected Mr. Faison and Mr. Shepherd to the case," Mr. Benson told the judge. "But when we specifically compared Arlet Cheston's fingerprints to this case, two of fingerprints from his left hand matched the glass partition inside the cab."

Justice Kreindler eventually ended his inquiry and offered an apology.
[...more...] [Need the full story? Read this]

Commentary:
This report illustrates to sorry state of America's so-called ''justice system,'' and provides a convincing argument against the death penalty.

We have long known that racism, corruption, poverty, incompetence and plain old human fallibility make it possible, even likely, that an innocent man will die at the hands of the state. That fact has given many death-penalty supporters doubts.

So why is McVeigh a tipping point? I can't say for sure, but there's something about the psychology of this case that magnifies the FBI's relatively insignificant error. If they screw up even with McVeigh . . .

That sets a hairline crack in the foundation of our justice system, one that collapses the rock-solid faith in it one must have if one is to support state-sanctioned killing.

In the end, McVeigh will probably be executed, and justice will have been done. On that day, I won't feel any compassion for the guy, but I will feel terrible for those unknown innocents yet to be executed so we could be free to whack Tim McVeigh.

Think of men like Anthony Faison and Charles Shepard, who were freed from prison yesterday after someone else confessed to a 1987 murder that sent them up the river - and a key state witness admitted to lying on the stand.

Had they been convicted in a death-penalty state, which New York was not at the time, they might be dead today.

Book Recommendation:
Actual Innocence : Five Days to Execution and Other Dispatches from the Wrongly Convicted

by Jim Dwyer, Peter Neufeld, Barry Scheck

Amazon.com:
The Innocence Project is a pro bono civil rights organization that helps innocent people who have been unjustly imprisoned win their freedom through DNA testing. Run by Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld (known for their roles in the O.J. Simpson murder trial), the project has thus far managed to free 43 wrongly convicted people and has taken on the cases of over 200 more. In Actual Innocence, Scheck, Neufeld, and Pulitzer-winning columnist Jim Dwyer tell the stories of 10 of the men they have helped. How did these men wind up in prison--some on death row--for rapes and murders they didn't commit? The causes range from mistaken identification by the victims to sloppy police work--and, in some cases, outright dereliction of duty or fabrication of evidence. Far too often, cops lock on to their suspect early and decide that their instincts can't possibly be wrong--an attitude that can persist even after the falsely accused has been exonerated. ''If he is innocent,'' says one investigator of a man who spent seven years in prison, ''I wish him a good life, but I will have no remorse for him. I have no remorse for anyone that I have ever arrested.''
[...more...]

George F. Will, Washington Post, April 6, 2000:
It should change the argument about capital punishment...You will not soon read a more frightening book... Heartbreaking and infuriating.
[...more...]