John Thompson: A Lousy Court Decision
Published in Ta Nea
(Greece) on 6 April 2011
by Giwrgos Aggelopoulos (link to original)
(Greece) on 6 April 2011
by Giwrgos Aggelopoulos (link to original)
Translated from
by Peter Savvidis.
Edited by Heidi Kaufmann.
He spent 18 years in prison, 14 of which were on death row, and his execution was scheduled seven times before his innocence was proved. Therefore, the U.S. Supreme Court, voting 5 to 4, rejected the jury’s decision that adjudicated John Thompson with a compensation of $14 million. The decision of the conservative majority of the court, after a motion by Justice Clarence Thomas, was characterized in Slate by Dahlia Lithwick as “one of the meanest Supreme Court decisions ever.” Being more moderate, Andrew Cohen writes at The Atlantic that the decision “reveals outright hostility to the rights of the wrongfully convicted to compensation” for the injustice that was done against them. “You would think such redress would be the least the law could do for men like Thompson,” he adds.
The Supreme Court pronounced that Thompson did not prove that the New Orleans district attorney’s office — that had brought the prosecution and was headed at that time by Harry Connick (father of the famous singer) — strategically did not reveal evidence in favor of the accused. So intentional indifference was not proved and Thompson’s case was an “isolated” mistake; that is why the defendant does not deserve any compensation.... Thompson, who was 24 years old when he was incarcerated and has written a book about his lost years in prison (his story is likely to become a movie), was convicted in 1985 for stealing a car. The prosecutor had used that conviction to also ensure his conviction for the murder, one year earlier, of the son of a rich, white hotel owner. He was sentenced to death, and the date of his execution was scheduled (for the seventh time) in 2000 when, a few weeks earlier, private investigators discovered a blood test that had taken place in relation to the car-stealing case that proved Thompson could not have committed the crime. This test was not used as evidence in court!
This discovery led to a new trial in which new evidence was presented, and in 35 minutes the jury acquitted Thompson of both charges. As followed, the court demanded that the New Orleans district attorney’s office award the wrongfully convicted a compensation of $14 million — a demand that was upheld on appeal. But the conservative majority of the Supreme Court decided to protect the prosecutors from lawsuits, even when they entrap an innocent man intentionally! “If prosecutors’ offices cannot be held accountable under the facts of this case, it is difficult to imagine when they would be accountable,” Thompson’s lawyers commented.
The Supreme Court pronounced that Thompson did not prove that the New Orleans district attorney’s office — that had brought the prosecution and was headed at that time by Harry Connick (father of the famous singer) — strategically did not reveal evidence in favor of the accused. So intentional indifference was not proved and Thompson’s case was an “isolated” mistake; that is why the defendant does not deserve any compensation.... Thompson, who was 24 years old when he was incarcerated and has written a book about his lost years in prison (his story is likely to become a movie), was convicted in 1985 for stealing a car. The prosecutor had used that conviction to also ensure his conviction for the murder, one year earlier, of the son of a rich, white hotel owner. He was sentenced to death, and the date of his execution was scheduled (for the seventh time) in 2000 when, a few weeks earlier, private investigators discovered a blood test that had taken place in relation to the car-stealing case that proved Thompson could not have committed the crime. This test was not used as evidence in court!
This discovery led to a new trial in which new evidence was presented, and in 35 minutes the jury acquitted Thompson of both charges. As followed, the court demanded that the New Orleans district attorney’s office award the wrongfully convicted a compensation of $14 million — a demand that was upheld on appeal. But the conservative majority of the Supreme Court decided to protect the prosecutors from lawsuits, even when they entrap an innocent man intentionally! “If prosecutors’ offices cannot be held accountable under the facts of this case, it is difficult to imagine when they would be accountable,” Thompson’s lawyers commented.
Next article![]( "Has Obama Run Away?")
