Post #3: Advocacy, Part I

WHO KILLED SCOTT MACKLEM?
Author’s Note: Every wrongful conviction causes dual torment: the torment of the innocent yet imprisoned individual, and the social torment that the actual perpetrator remains free. This blog focuses primarily on the latter, in the hope that we will gain more knowledge about the murderer of Scott Macklem.

Post #3: Advocacy, Part I
Date: 04/20/17

As an attorney, I find it repugnant that the defense attorney appointed to represent the accused person in the murder of Scott Macklem didn’t work harder to assure an acquittal. Scott was 20 years old when he was found shot to death in a parking lot at St. Clair County Community College on November 5, 1986. After one interview with Scott’s pregnant fiancée, the police focused on one individual and one only - the wrong person.

You might believe that the failure of the accused’s attorney to search for the truth was an injustice only to the accused. That is inaccurate. A criminal defense attorney, just like any other attorney is bound by an ethical duty. The Michigan Rules of Professional Conduct provide “[A] lawyer is a representative of clients, an officer of the legal system and a public citizen having special responsibility for the quality of justice.” The quality of justice depends inexorably on truth. The defense attorney in this case ignored the truth, allowing an innocent man to be convicted and just as importantly, he allowed a murderer to avoid any suspicion of culpability.

Lawyers in general have a tainted reputation. When it comes to criminal defense attorneys, many people, including some lawyers, feel a certain amount of disgust at the idea that someone could advocate for a criminal. Television shows and movies often portray criminal defense attorneys as “sleezy.” Of course, those entertainment media also portray the accused as undoubtedly guilty, as we sit in anticipation of the announcement of conviction from the jury.

I have no particular opinion about criminal defense attorneys in general. I respect our Constitution which guarantees that the accused are innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I respect that the Constitution provides that the accused are entitled to representation. These protections are intended to assure the quality of justice.

Read more: Post #3: Advocacy, Part I

Post #2: Reputations

SERIES: WHO KILLED SCOTT MACKLEM?
Author’s Note:  Every wrongful conviction causes dual torment:  the torment of the innocent yet imprisoned individual, and the social torment that the actual perpetrator remains free.  This blog focuses primarily on the latter, in the hope that we will gain more knowledge about the murderer of Scott Macklem.

Post #2:  Reputations
Date:  02/22/17
macklem
You may wonder how the investigation of the murder of Scott Macklem resulted in a wrongful conviction.  Scott was 20 years old when he was found shot to death in a parking lot at St. Clair County Community College on November 5, 1986.  Scott grew up in Croswell, Michigan.  His father was elected Mayor of Croswell in 1982, while Scott was attending Croswell-Lexington High School.  Scott’s father also owned an insurance agency in Croswell.  He was an influential member of the community.

Read more: Post #2: Reputations

Post #1: Misdirection

SERIES: WHO KILLED SCOTT MACKLEM?
Author’s Note: Every wrongful conviction causes dual torment: the torment of the innocent yet imprisoned individual, and the social torment that the actual perpetrator remains free. This blog focuses primarily on the latter, in the hope that we will gain more knowledge about the murderer of Scott Macklem.

Post #1: Misdirection
02/08/07
Scott Macklem was 20 years old when he was found shot to death in a parking lot at St. Clair County Community College on November 5, 1986. The man convicted in his murder did not have an opportunity or the means to carry out this crime. He was convicted based on what I am loathe to describe as circumstantial evidence, since it was actually hypothetical evidence, manufactured evidence, wild speculation, and copious references to the accused’s “bad character.” In fact, there is more than copious, actual evidence that this was a wrongful conviction. The wrongful conviction is another crime, which will be addressed in later posts. Suffice it to say, I’m convinced as is every legal scholar, independent law enforcement consultant and investigator who has looked at this case, that the person who killed Scott Macklem is still at large.

Scott was a 1984 graduate of Croswell-Lexington High School. He was popular, and a star athlete on the baseball and golf teams. At the time of his murder, he was taking general business courses at St. Clair County Community College. He missed his 8:00 a.m. gym class that morning. That wasn’t particularly unusual, since his attendance at college had been irregular. What was unusual was when Scott was found, his gym bag lay next to his body. Why did Scott have a gym bag outside his car when he didn’t go to his gym class?

Click here for the complete article: Post #1: Misdirection

Why I Believe in the Reality of False Confessions - Part 1

“You’ve got to be kidding me! Why would anyone confess to something they didn’t do? I can’t believe that.” If I’ve heard it once, I’ve heard it one hundred times. When I first got involved with wrongful convictions, I had no problem believing false confessions occur. For me, they were commonplace. That’s right. Commonplace. So common that it took me a while to understand why other people have such a difficult time accepting that it really happens and it can destroy someone's life. Let me explain.

My Experience as a child
I always thought my two sisters and I were fairly “normal” growing up. Later, I found that in order to dispel such a myth, all I had to do was to get married. A spouse, coming from an entirely different family system, will be very quick to point out your idiosyncrasies and the weird ways of your family! So, it’s important to understand how different “normal” may be from family to family.

Read more: Why I Believe in the Reality of False Confessions - Part 1

Going Beyond Swain - actual innocence in procedural matters

At the very end of the hearing, there was an important exchange that might have gone unnoticed by a person focusing only on Lorinda's future, but which represents a titanic shift in how Michigan law might some day be interpreted. Justice Markman asked Moran a broader question about the argument of innocence being in the background of these hypothetical and theoretic discussions about 'what is a Brady violation?' and 'does this meet the Cress standard?'. In an informed, articulate and confident tone, Moran states,

I certainly accept and promote the idea that there is a background principle that actual innocence matters. And that actual innocence should inform the way this court interprets these various provisions, just as the Federal Courts do, in the habeas analogy, that actual innocence gets you past procedural problems of all sorts, the statute of limitations, procedural default, that you otherwise could not get through without a strong showing of actual innocence.

What the average person on the street thinks every time they hear about such a case is this: "If the person is truly innocence, why should procedure get in the way? If a person is truly innocent, is justice done when the person is kept in prison for the rest of their life? Yes, we need the law, but whatever happened to justice, mercy and Truth?"

Reflecting on Temujin's lawsuit against the MDOC

Far too often with terrible consistency I have witnessed, albeit second-hand, how little justice there is in our penal system. Though there are policies in place that are supposed to protect prisoners from abuse, when a guard or staff takes a disliking toward a prisoner, they can make that prisoner's life a living hell. They will not be called on the carpet by their superiors; often they are encouraged.

Michigan Dept of Corrections LogoTemujin is a solitary prisoner fighting against the Michigan Department of Corrections, usually without a ghost of a chance to prevail. But this was a civil case; not criminal. It was before a group of 8 jurists from all walks of life; not before a panel of judges. Temujin has suffered greatly in his incarceration. One of the reasons he suffers so much is that he has learned to stand up for what he believes is right, and doesn't back down. (His fight has not been just for himself, but also for many fellow prisoners he and his late wife, Amiko, have helped in the past, helping them to file legal papers and give them some sense of hope.) This time Temujin was able to bring the issue out into the open before people who have not experienced what he has, but who know what is right and what isn't; most of all, people from outside the system.

Temujin, as usual, was armed with notebook after notebook of facts at his disposal.

More about Temujin's CaseReflecting on Temujin's lawsuit against the MDOC

2015: Year of the Video Recordings

2015 saw the greatest increase in general awareness of wrongful convictions in recent memory. You can read the attached article by the National Registry of Exonerations for how this furthers our understanding of the changing landscape.

But I think 2015 is the year of something much bigger. 2015 was the year of the body and dash cams. Add to that the steady proliferation of videocams now in everyone's phones. Together they may do more to prevent wrongful convictions than we will ever know. We won't be able to count the times a prosecutor, who may have pursued a case otherwise, chooses not to because she\he can see what actually happened and who actually did the crime.

Having said that, there will still be those prosecutors with a "win at all cost" mentality, who will continue to unscrupulously find ways to explain away the evidence. A common tactic today is one is that when DNA is analysed and does not belong to the convicted person, prosecutors create wild scenarios introducing the idea of there being two perpetrators. Never mind that it is an entirely different scenario than the one they presented to convict the person! These prosecutors present this without embarrassment, without any sign of having reevaluated their original conclusions because the DNA excludes the person. It is hard to believe how they can explain away a video recording, but I'm sure they will come up with something.