NoCrime Wrongful Convictions

Transcriber: Anna Sobota
Reviewer: Sebastian Betti

Imagine you’re 18 years old.

You’re a single mother
and it’s really hard.

But you´re doing OK.

And you adore your baby boy.

And then, one day,
the unthinkable happens.

Your baby stops breathing.

You do everything you can:

you do CPR and then,
you take your baby to the hospital

where medical personnel do
everything they can to revive him.

But nothing works.

And your baby dies.

Imagine the unspeakable grief,
the choking sorrow.

And then, imagine,
instead of being treated

as the grieving mother you are

the police come
and they bring you to the precinct.

They take you
into an interrogation room.

They question you
and they scream at you.

And they tell you
that your baby died of internal injuries.

[They accuse you of causing]
internal injuries to your baby.

You have no idea
what they’re talking about.

You’re frightened.

You’re scared.

You’re grieving.

You’re alone.

You don’t have a lawyer.

You don’t have a parent present.

And no matter what you say,

the police tell you
that you caused your baby’s death.

Eventually, sick of the entire ordeal,

you sign a statement
because you think it’s the only way

you can get out
of that interrogation room.

And when you get out of the room,
you tell everyone,

“I had nothing to do with this”.

But no one listens.

And you are charged with murder
for your baby’s death.

Not only are you charged with murder,

but you are prosecuted, convicted
and sentenced to die.

Imagine that.

You don’t even get to go
to your baby’s funeral.

Well, that’s what happened
to Sabrina Butler.

She became the only woman
on Mississippi’s death row,

where she sat for five long years,
until she was eventually exonerated.

Because it turns out
that those internal injuries

were caused by Miss Butler
when she tried to do CPR,

and by her neighbors efforts
to help the baby,

and by the medical personnel
at that hospital.

The baby’s death was no murder.

The baby died of
an undiagnosed medical illness.

Miss Butler had been convicted of
a crime that never happened.

Now, how many of you have heard
about wrongful convictions?

And the popular narrative of
a wrongful conviction

is that of an innocent person
who’s convicted of a crime

that was committed by someone else.

But what if I told you

that over one-third of all exonerations

involve innocent people wrongly
convicted of crimes that never happened?

It is one-third.

Now, I’ve been thinking about
the criminal legal system

for over 30 years.

I was a public defender
in New York City for 10 years

where I saw firsthand
just how rigged the system really is

against poor people
and against people of color.

And when I joined
the academic field,

I knew that I would spent
the rest of my career

thinking about, writing and researching
about the criminal legal system

and about wrongful convictions.

And I have to tell you

that there is something
profoundly disturbing about the idea

that people are wrongly convicted
for crimes that just didn’t happen,

because it causes so much harm
for nothing at all.

And that’s what I want
to talk with you about today.

Our criminal legal system
is deeply broken.

And that’s a huge topic.

If you know me,

I could keep you here all afternoon,
but I won’t.

So I just want to talk about a couple of
small aspects in our criminal legal system

that, if we focused on,

might make a big difference
in terms of no crime wrongful convictions.

And I want to start with the idea
of official misconduct.

There is a huge national conversation
happening right now around policing

and that’s an important conversation.

And I bet all of us here
can think of a circumstance

where you’ve heard a story about
a police officer or a police precinct

that is engaged
in such widespread corruption,

outrageous behavior
where cops became robbers with badges

and innocent people suffered,

whether it’s in Brooklyn, Los Angeles,
Dallas or Camden, New Jersey.

We all have heard the stories.

But what I don’t think we’ve spent enough
time really thinking about

is that the very way police
do their policing,

they can cause no crime
wrongful convictions to occur.

Imagine that every time you step out
of your house,

you are stopped.

Not because of anything you’ve done,

but because you’re poor,
or because you live in a poor community,

or because of your skin color.

Well, when I worked in the South Bronx,

which is one of the poorest urban
communities of color in the entire nation,

the police were engaged in what was called
Broken Windows Policing.

The idea was
that they would go into poor communities

to identify broken windows;
“quality of life” offenses;

and to arrest people,

and that was somehow
going to make the community safer.

So what the police would do is
they’d routinely go

into these high-rise buildings,
these low-income housing projects,

and they would basically arrest
everybody in the lobby.

And if you’re visiting
a friend or a relative,

or if you live in the building,
you’re not trespassing

but these folks
would get arrested anyway.

They would be brought to the precinct,

they’d be booked,
they’d be dragged to the courthouse

and then,
because they were often poor as well,

they’d be assigned
a public defender, me.

I would look at the charges
and I would say,

“Oh, please come back to court.

This is not trespass.
Let’s fight this case.

This is ridiculous.”

Now what would you do?

I bet most of you were thinking,
“well, I’d fight that charge,

I’m not going to plead guilty
to something I didn’t do.”

But my clients didn’t have that luxury.

They couldn’t miss a day of work
and risk losing their jobs.

They had childcare issues
or they had transportation issues,

and they needed the case to end.

And so they pled guilty.

Can you imagine a legal system
where it makes more sense

for innocent people to plead guilty
to crimes they didn’t commit;

crimes that didn’t even happen;
rather than fight for justice

because justice cost too much
in every way that matters?

And maybe some of you are thinking,

whatever, it’s just trespass,
it’s just a misdemeanor.

But misdemeanors matter,
they have tremendous consequences.

One man pled guilty to a misdemeanor
and he lost his housing.

Another man pled guilty to a misdemeanor
and he lost his job.

And poor people,
get saddled with fines and fees,

will never be able to afford to pay;

enmeshing them in
the criminal justice system for years

not because of anything they did,
but because they’re too poor to fight.

But let’s not just focus on the police.

I want to turn our attention
to prosecutors.

I don’t think we talk about
prosecutors near enough.

Prosecutors have a lofty title,
they are called Ministers of Justice.

They represent the people;
that’s you and me.

And yet prosecutors routinely
get caught up in a culture

where winning means getting convictions,
not doing justice.

Some prosecutor offices literally
keep a scoreboard like a batting average

about how many convictions they get.

And some prosecutors get so caught up
in their own invincibility

that they forget that an arrest
doesn’t mean you’re guilty.

They assume anyone who’s been brought
into court must have done something,

so they will do whatever it takes.

The ends justify the means.

And so prosecutors will routinely hide
evidence they’re required to turn over,

rubber stamp police arrests
even when there’s no evidence,

lie to defense lawyers,
hide issues from the court

and then,
act like nothing ever happened.

And police and prosecutors do this

because they know
they won’t be held accountable.

There’s a complete lack of accountability.

Now, police have something called
qualified immunity.

How many of you have heard of that?

I love asking this question,

because today so many people
have heard about qualified immunity.

It’s a really high legal standard
and it makes it incredibly hard

to hold police civilly accountable
for their wrongdoing.

But I bet what none of you know,

is that prosecutors have
an absolute immunity

from anything that they’ve done
in their role as prosecutor.

They are absolutely shielded from
intentional and deliberate misconduct,

even if it costs someone
decades of their lives.

Now, the Supreme Court has said,
absolute immunity is fine for prosecutors

because they can be held responsible
by their bar associations.

And that’s true.

But it never happens.

The Innocence Project
and some of its partners did a study.

They looked at five states
over a five-year period,

and they focused in on cases
where the judge actually said,

“Oh, this prosecutor did something wrong”.

They found 660 cases where the court made
that somewhat extraordinary statement.

Out of those 660 cases,
only one involved a prosecutor

who received any kind of sanction
by a bar association at all.

Now, the other way a prosecutor
can be held responsible

is through a criminal prosecution.

Now, in the event

that a prosecutor is going to be
prosecuted by a prosecutor,

things rarely happen.

I want to give you an example,
it’s not a no crime wrongful conviction,

but these cases are so rare
and I think you’ll get the idea.

There was a prosecutor
named Ken Anderson who charged

a man named Michael Morton
with the murder of his wife.

Mr. Morton denied having
anything to do with it.

He was innocent.

He just wanted to get out of jail to
tend to his two-year-old baby,

who had lost a mother and now,
was going to lose a father to jail.

And he was nonetheless charged
by prosecutor Anderson.

They went to trial,

and while Mr. Morton was striving
to prove his innocence,

prosecutor Anderson
had evidence in his file

that showed Mr. Morton was innocent,

but he never turned it over.

Mr. Morton was convicted
and spent the next 25 years in prison.

And while he was in prison,

prosecutor Anderson rose
to become judge Anderson.

Well, Mr. Morton
was eventually exonerated.

DNA showed that he absolutely
had nothing to do with the crime.

And somewhat surprisingly
Anderson was prosecuted.

And you know what?
He was found guilty.

And you know what his sentence was?

Ten days in jail, community service
and a loss of his law license.

And you know how many days
prosecutor Anderson spent in jail?

Five.

He was released for good behavior.

We clearly need better systems
of accountability.

And accountability doesn’t just need
to turn on ideas of immunity.

I mean, we, the civilian population,
can play a role.

We can have community oversight.

We can push for civilian complaint
review boards and independent commissions

that can examine allegations
of official misconduct.

Because the truth is,

we can’t look to the police
to police themselves,

and we can’t look to the prosecutors
to prosecute themselves.

I want to talk about
one more thing briefly.

It is about funding
for defense lawyers.

Because the truth is,
poor people don’t get the same justice

that people with money have.
They just don’t.

And one way we see this most clearly
is in the assignment of counsel.

Sometimes public defenders,

people who represent the poor,
are so overworked

and so under-resourced
that it´s representation in name only.

In Louisiana,

some public defenders are so overwhelmed

that they have seven minutes
to meet a client

and resolve a misdemeanor case.

Seven minutes, from start to finish.

That’s shorter than this talk.

There’s no discussion
about an investigation.

There’s no discussion
about any possible defenses.

There’s barely time
to get through introductions.

And yet that passes as justice.

Can we imagine a world
where we actually dedicate funds

to defense lawyers
at the same level as prosecutors?

Where defense lawyers have access
to investigators and experts?

Because the truth is,

no innocent person should ever
be found guilty

simply because they’re too poor
to mount a defense.

Now, I’ve hit you with a lot of stuff,

and I never like to leave
without some action items.

So a few things you can do:

One, support projects

that advocate for the rights
of the wrongly convicted

or that advocate for the rights
of the poor

who are charged with criminal offenses.

But there’s even
a more simple thing you can do.

And that’s vote.

Vote with an eye to people

who have a progressive criminal
justice reform agenda.

Because it matters.

In New Mexico and Colorado,

they’ve elected legislators
who have passed laws

that change state qualified immunity
standards for police.

They make it easier to now sue the police
for their wrongdoing.

If you live in a jurisdiction
where you elect prosecutors,

elect progressive prosecutors,
like they’ve done in San Francisco,

or Travis County, Texas, or Philadelphia.

Because those prosecutors
are changing justice on the ground.

They know that an arrest
because of a Broken Windows Policy

doesn’t mean that a poor person
has done something wrong.

They don’t equate doing justice
with getting convictions.

Because here’s the thing,

no crime wrongful convictions
are the canary in the coal mine.

They are the absolute worst idea about
what our criminal legal system does.

And we need to do better.

Sabrina Butler should never have been
charged with murdering her child,

let alone convicted
and sentenced to die.

You ever hear the expression,
“where there’s smoke, there must be fire”?

Well, that’s just wrong.

Sometimes, there’s really just smoke.

And that’s the truth and the tragedy
of no crime wrongful convictions.

We spend so much time,
so much money,

so much energy
and human lives chasing smoke,

prosecuting and convicting
and incarcerating people

for crimes that never happened.

We can and we must do better.

Thank you.

抄写员:Anna Sobota
审稿人:Sebastian Betti

想象一下你 18 岁。

你是一个单身母亲
,这真的很难。

但你做得很好。

你喜欢你的男婴。

然后,有一天
,不可思议的事情发生了。

你的宝宝停止呼吸。

你尽你所能:

你做心肺复苏术,然后,
你把你的宝宝带到医院

,那里的医务人员
会竭尽全力让他苏醒。

但没有任何效果。

你的孩子死了。

想象那难以言喻的悲伤
,令人窒息的悲伤。

然后,想象一下,你
不是被

当作悲伤的母亲对待,而是

警察来了
,他们把你带到了辖区。

他们带你
进入审讯室。

他们质疑你
,他们对你尖叫。

他们告诉你
,你的宝宝死于内伤。

[他们指责你
对你的宝宝造成] 内伤。

你不
知道他们在说什么。

你很害怕。

你很害怕。

你在悲伤。

你孤身一人。

你没有律师。

你没有父母在场。

不管你说什么

,警察都会告诉你
是你导致了你的孩子的死亡。

最终,厌倦了整个考验,

你签署了一份声明,
因为你认为这是


离开审讯室的唯一途径。

当你走出房间时,
你告诉所有人,

“我与这无关”。

但没人听。

你被指控
谋杀你的孩子。

你不仅被指控犯有谋杀罪,

而且还被起诉、定罪
并被判处死刑。

想象一下。

你甚至不能去
参加你孩子的葬礼。

好吧,这就是发生
在萨布丽娜巴特勒身上的事情。

她成为
密西西比州死囚牢房中唯一的女性,

她在那里坐了五年之久,
直到最终被无罪释放。

因为事实证明
,这些内伤


巴特勒小姐试图做心肺复苏术时造成的,

也是她邻居
帮助婴儿的努力,

以及
那家医院的医务人员造成的。

婴儿的死不是谋杀。

婴儿死于
未确诊的疾病。

巴特勒小姐
被判犯有从未发生过的罪行。

现在,你们中有多少人听说
过冤假错案?

错误定罪的流行叙述

是无辜的
人因他人犯下的罪行

而被定罪。

但是,如果我告诉你

,超过三分之一的免罪

涉及无辜的人被错误地
判定为从未发生过的罪行呢?

这是三分之一。

现在,我
思考刑事法律

制度已有 30 多年了。


在纽约市担任了 10 年的公设辩护人,在

那里我亲眼
目睹了该系统

对穷人和有色人种的操纵程度。

当我
加入学术领域时,

我知道我将
在余下的职业生涯中

思考、写作和
研究刑事法律制度

和错误定罪。

而且我必须告诉你

人们因没有发生的罪行而被错误地定罪的想法令人深感不安

因为它根本没有造成如此多的
伤害。

这就是我
今天想和你谈谈的。

我们的刑事法律制度
被严重破坏。

这是一个很大的话题。

如果你认识我,

我可以让你整个下午都待在这里,
但我不会。

所以我只想谈谈
我们刑事法律制度中的几个小方面

,如果我们专注于这些方面,

可能会
在无犯罪错误定罪方面产生重大影响。

我想从
官方不当行为的想法开始。

现在围绕警察进行了一场大规模的全国性对话

,这是一次重要的对话。

我敢打赌,在座的所有人都
可以想到这样的情况

,你听说过
一个警察或警察局

参与如此广泛的腐败、

令人发指的行为
,警察变成了带徽章的强盗

,无辜的人遭受了苦难,

无论是 在布鲁克林、洛杉矶
、达拉斯或新泽西州卡姆登。

我们都听过这些故事。

但我认为我们没有花足够的
时间真正考虑的

是,警察执法的方式

本身就不会导致犯罪
错误定罪的发生。

想象一下,每次
你走出家门,

你都被拦住了。

不是因为你做过什么,

而是因为你很穷,
或者因为你生活在一个贫穷的社区,

或者因为你的肤色。

好吧,当我在南布朗克斯工作时,

这是全国最贫穷
的有色人种城市社区之一

,警察正在从事所谓的
破窗治安。 他们

的想法是
,他们将进入贫困社区

,找出破损的窗户;
“生活质量”犯罪;

并逮捕人

,这会以某种方式
使社区更安全。

所以警察会做的是
他们经常

进入这些高层建筑,
这些低收入住房项目

,他们基本上会逮捕
大厅里的每个人。

如果你去
拜访朋友或亲戚,

或者如果你住在大楼里,
你并没有非法侵入,

但这些人
无论如何都会被捕。

他们会被带到分局,

他们会被预定,
他们会被拖到法院

,然后,
因为他们通常也很穷,

他们会被分配
一名公设辩护人,我。

我会查看这些指控
,然后说:

“哦,请回到法庭。

这不是侵入。
让我们来打这场官司。

这是荒唐的。”

现在你会怎么做?

我敢打赌,你们中的大多数人都在想,
“好吧,我会反对这项指控,

我不会
为我没有做过的事情认罪。”

但我的客户没有那么奢侈。

他们不能错过一天的工作
并冒着失去工作的风险。

他们有托儿问题
或交通问题

,他们需要结束此案。

于是他们认罪了。

你能想象一个法律制度

让无辜的人对
他们没有犯下的罪行认罪更有意义吗?

甚至没有发生的罪行;
而不是为正义而战,

因为正义
在每一个重要的方面都付出了太多的代价?

也许你们中的一些人在想,

无论如何,这只是非法侵入,
这只是一种轻罪。

但轻罪很重要,
它们会产生巨大的后果。

一名男子承认犯有轻罪
,他失去了住房。

另一名男子承认犯有轻罪
,他失去了工作。

而穷人
,背负着罚款和费用,

将永远付不起;

多年来将他们卷入
刑事司法系统

不是因为他们做了什么,
而是因为他们太穷而无法抗争。

但是,我们不要只关注警察。

我想把注意力
转向检察官。

我认为我们谈论
检察官的距离不够近。

检察官有一个崇高的头衔,
他们被称为司法部长。

他们代表人民;
那是你和我。

然而,检察官经常
陷入一种文化

,即获胜意味着获得定罪,
而不是伸张正义。

一些检察官办公室实际上
保留了一个记分牌,就像

他们获得多少定罪的击球平均值一样。

一些检察官沉迷
于自己的无敌

,以至于他们忘记了逮捕
并不意味着你有罪。

他们认为任何被
带进法庭的人都一定做了什么,

所以他们会不惜一切代价。

目的证明手段是正当的。

因此,检察官通常会隐藏
他们需要交出

的证据,即使没有证据,警察也会在没有证据的情况下进行逮捕,

对辩护律师撒谎,
向法庭隐瞒问题

,然后
就装作什么都没发生过。

警察和检察官这样做

是因为他们知道
他们不会被追究责任。

完全没有责任感。

现在,警察有一种叫做
合格豁免权的东西。

你们有多少人听说过这个?

我喜欢问这个问题,

因为今天很多
人都听说过合格免疫。

这是一个非常高的法律标准
,这使得

让警察
为他们的不法行为承担民事责任变得非常困难。

但我敢打赌,你们都不知道

,检察官对

他们作为检察官所做的任何事情都有绝对的豁免权

他们绝对不受
蓄意和蓄意的不当行为的影响,

即使这会让某人付出
数十年的生命。

现在,最高法院表示,
绝对豁免权对检察官来说很好,

因为他们的律师协会可以追究他们的责任

这是真的。

但它永远不会发生。

无罪项目
及其一些合作伙伴进行了一项研究。

他们在 5 年的时间里考察了 5 个州

,他们专注于
法官实际上说

“哦,这位检察官做错了什么”的案件。

他们发现了 660 起案件中法院做出
了一些非同寻常的声明。

在这 660 起案件中,
只有一个涉及检察官

,他
受到了律师协会的任何形式的制裁。

现在,可以追究检察官责任的另一种方式

是通过刑事起诉。

现在,

如果检察官要被
检察官起诉,

事情就很少发生了。

我想给你举个例子,
这不是无罪的错误定罪,

但这些案件非常罕见
,我想你会明白的。

有一个
名叫肯安德森的检察官,他指控

一个名叫迈克尔莫顿
的人谋杀了他的妻子。

莫顿先生否认
与此事有任何关系。

他是无辜的。

他只是想
出狱照顾他两岁的婴儿,

他失去了母亲,现在
又将失去父亲入狱。

尽管如此,他还是
被安德森检察官指控。

他们进行了审判

,当莫顿先生
努力证明自己的清白时,

检察官安德森
的档案中有证据

表明莫顿先生是无辜的,

但他从未翻案。

莫顿先生被判有罪,
并在接下来的 25 年里被监禁。

当他在监狱里时,

检察官安德森
升任安德森法官。

好吧,莫顿
先生最终被无罪释放。

DNA显示他
与犯罪毫无关系。

有点令人惊讶的是,
安德森被起诉了。

你知道吗?
他被判有罪。

你知道他的句子是什么吗?

入狱 10 天,从事社区服务
,失去法律执照。

你知道
安德森检察官在监狱里呆了多少天吗?

五。

他因表现良好而被释放。

我们显然需要更好
的问责制。

问责制不仅仅
需要开启豁免权的想法。

我的意思是,我们平民
可以发挥作用。

我们可以进行社区监督。

我们可以推动民事投诉
审查委员会和独立

委员会审查
官方不当行为的指控。

因为事实是,

我们不能指望
警察来监督自己,

也不能指望检察官
来起诉自己。

我想再
简单谈谈一件事。

这是关于
为辩护律师提供资金。

因为事实是,
穷人没有得到

与有钱人相同的正义。
他们只是没有。

我们最清楚地看到这一点的一个方式
是指派律师。

有时,代表穷人的公设辩护人

工作过度

,资源不足
,以至于它只是名义上的代表。

在路易斯安那州,

一些公设辩护人不堪重负

,以至于他们有 7 分钟的时间
与客户会面

并解决轻罪案件。

七分钟,从头到尾。

这比这次谈话要短。

没有关于调查的讨论

没有
讨论任何可能的防御措施。

几乎没有
时间通过介绍。

然而,这作为正义传递。

我们能想象
一个我们实际上将资金用于

与检察官同等级别的辩护律师的世界吗?

辩护律师在哪里可以接触
到调查人员和专家?

因为事实是,

任何无辜的人都不应该

仅仅因为他们太穷而
无法进行辩护而被判有罪。

现在,我已经用很多东西打了你,

而且我从不喜欢在
没有一些行动项目的情况下离开。

所以你可以做几件事:

第一,支持

倡导
被错误定罪

的人的权利或倡导被控刑事犯罪的穷人权利
的项目

但是
你可以做更简单的事情。

这就是投票。

投票给

有进步刑事
司法改革议程的人。

因为这很重要。

在新墨西哥州和科罗拉多州,

他们选出的
立法者通过

了改变州警察合格豁免
标准的法律。

他们现在更容易
就他们的不当行为起诉警方。

如果您居住在您选举检察官的司法管辖区
,请

选举进步的检察官,
就像他们在旧金山

、德克萨斯州特拉维斯县或费城所做的那样。

因为那些检察官
正在改变当地的正义。

他们知道,
因“Broken Windows Policy

”而被捕并不意味着
穷人做错了什么。

他们不把伸张正义等同于
获得定罪。

因为事情是这样的,

没有犯罪错误的定罪
是煤矿中的金丝雀。

对于我们的刑事法律制度所做的事情,它们绝对是最糟糕的想法。

我们需要做得更好。

萨布丽娜巴特勒不应该被
指控谋杀她的孩子,

更不用说被定罪
并判处死刑。

你听说过
“有烟就一定有火”这句话吗?

好吧,那是错误的。

有时,真的只有烟雾。

这就是无罪误判的真相和
悲剧。

我们花了这么多时间、
这么多金钱、

这么多精力
和人的生命去追逐烟雾、

起诉、定罪
和监禁

从未发生过的罪行。

我们可以而且必须做得更好。

谢谢你。