Ex-DA Denies Misconduct in Wrongful Conviction

So it's nice to see that every once and again a DA is asked to face the terrible consequences of withholding Brady material--in this case 25 years in prison for an innocent guy.  But something really struck me about what happened down in texas...

Here's the account from the Times:

"GEOGRETOWN, Texas (AP) — A former Texas district attorney is choking back tears as he recalls a prosecution that wrongfully sent a Texas man to prison for 25 years.  Ken Anderson calls the case of Michael Morton his "worst nightmare."  Morton was convicted in the slaying of his wife Christine in 1987 but exonerated in 2011 following new DNA tests.  Anderson is now a judge in Georgetown near Austin. He is accused of withholding evidence indicating Morton's innocence during the original trial. A special court of inquiry on the matter is in its fifth day Friday.
Anderson says he did nothing wrong. He says the office he "ran was professional, it was competent."  Then, his voice cracking, Anderson added, "We got it right as much as we humanly could."
So his position is:  I did nothing wrong because I tried?  This despite the evidence that he deliberately withheld evidence.  And this guy is a judge.  Presumably one of those judges, whom, like all the other's I've appeared before, nails guys at sentencing for "failing to show remorse or "accept responsibility."   You know those guys right?  The judges who, no matter how much your client cries, or apologizes, is never satisfied, and smugly dismisses it as either insincere or insufficient?
Seems like if this guy had half a ball, he'd stand up, say "I screwed up.  I deserve to be punished, and I'd like do anything I can to make it right."  Instead, and undoubtably with no sense of the irony involved, this guy is doing precisely what I imagine he's been decrying from the bench all this time.
I wonder if it'll give him some sense of humility or compassion for the frailty of the human condition.
Wouldn't it be pretty to think so?

No comments: