People often ask Pulitzer-winning journalist turned author, Raymond Bonner, if his new book, Anatomy of Injustice: a Murder Case Gone Wrong—which took nearly twelve years to reserch and write—is a labor of love.

“Actually, it’s a labor of outrage,” Bonner said, when he spoke on Sunday afternoon at a LA book party given in his honor.

Outrage is only one of the array of emotions evoked by Bonner’s riveting account of the case of Edward Lee Elmore, a 23-year old, dirt-poor black handyman with an IQ of 61, who was arrested, tried and convicted of killing a 76-year-old white woman, a murder he almost certainly did not commit, then sentenced to death for the crime.

Every form of injustice seems to be present in the true crime tale of Ellmore’s legal railroading: prosecutorial misconduct, racial prejudice, planted and withheld evidence, staggeringly callous and disinterested defense attorneys, a lying jailhouse snitch coached by the prosecution (but who years later suffered an attack of conscience and confessed to his perjury)… and more.

In choosing this particular case to deconstruct, Bonner got a cast of great characters that give the story near-novelistic richness. Most prominent among them is a remarkable heroine in the form of Diana Holt, a law student working as an intern for the South Carolina Death Penalty Resource Center (who had her own traumatic personal story) who took up Elmore’s cause after several failed appeals by other attorneys, and whose obsession with seeing justice done for Elmore never wavered after she passed the bar and became a crack appeals lawyer. It was Holt’s dogged work and determination that eventually got him off death row.

Yet still he remained in prison That took a withering ruling by the 4th circuit court of appeals vacating his conviction, along with the publication of Bonner’s book to finally persuade a prosecutor to cut a deal that allowed Elmore his freedom earlier this month, after 30 years behind bars, most of those years spent fighting the threat of execution.

As the reader follows Elmore’s almost unbearably painful journey through the justice system, Bonner gives us an informative and deeply disturbing look at the issue of capital punishment in general by taking us deep into the workings of the legal machinery to see all the ways matters can and do go awry, then showing us how nearly impossible it is to set things right, once an injustice has been rendered—even in the face of factual innocence.

The event for Bonner was hosted by Laurie Becklund, and her husband Henry Weinstein, both former reporters for the LA Times. (Beckland is now an author and Internet publisher, while Weinstein, who is also an attorney, is teaching at UC Irvine’s law school. )

Guests who had come to meet Bonner included such criminal justice types as Judge Arthur Alarcon, formerly of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, and the co-author of last year’s study looking at the yearly cost of the death penalty in California, and .

There were also two exonerees at the book party, Thomas Goldstein, who served 24 years in prison for a murder he didn’t commit, and Gloria Killian, who served 17 years before her conviction was set aside, and who now runs, The Action Committee for Women in Prison and who has her own book coming out soon.

Other guests included LA Times columnist and editor at large, Jim Newton, and his wife, LA Times legal counsel, Karlene Goller, along with Geneva Overholser, the director of USC’s Annenberg School of Journalism, and actor Mike Farrell who is also president of Death Penalty Focus and his wife, actress, Shelley Fabares.

As luck would have it, on Sunday Bonner’s book was reviewed glowingly on the front page of the New York Times Book Review. Here’s a clip:

This much we know to be true: On a cold winter weekend in early 1982, somebody murdered 76-year-old Dorothy Edwards. Apparently she knew the perpetrator, since she let him into her handsome home on a quiet side street in Greenwood, S.C. The crime itself was horrific. She was beaten with a blunt object, stabbed repeatedly — one ear was almost severed — probably sexually assaulted; her body was stuffed into a bedroom closet, where it was discovered on Monday afternoon, Jan. 18. The next day the police arrested Edward Lee Elmore, a 23-year-old handyman whom Edwards had recently hired to do a few odd jobs around the house. He was formally charged with first-degree murder on Jan. 21, tried in the second week of April, found guilty by a jury that deliberated for two and a half hours, and sentenced to death.

We know this as well: As of this writing, there have been 1,283 executions in the United States since 1976, when the Supreme Court ended its four-year moratorium on capital punishment. There have also been 134 death row exonerations, almost half of them since 1999. In his mesmerizing new book, “Anatomy of Injustice,” Raymond Bonner, a onetime prosecutor and a former investigative reporter and foreign correspondent at The New York Times, makes a persuasive case that Elmore ought to be added to the list of the innocent. Instead, he spent nearly 30 years in the South Carolina state penitentiary, most of that time on death row, trapped by a complex of forces that too often warp the legal process, even when a man’s life hangs in the balance.

I raced through Bonner’s un-put-down-able book about Elmore in less than 48-hours, slowed down only by such pesky needs as working, eating, running with the dog, and sleep.

LATER THIS WEEK I’LL HAVE NEWS ABOUT OTHER MUST-READ BOOK, JUMPED IN BY JORJA LEAP.

Jumped In is part memoir, part an academic researcher’s journey that takes us deep into the causes of—and solutions to—gang violence, with with highly-regarded-researcher and violence reduction expert Leap as our guide.

In the meantime, you can hear Jorja discuss her important new analysis of Los Angeles gang life on Tuesday night 7:30 at Skylight books.

See you there!

PS: All Leap’s proceeds from the book will be donated to Homeboy Industries.

Skylight Books
7:30 pm
1818 N Vermont Ave
Los Angeles, California 90027

PPS: Here’s Leap talking with Larry Mantle at KPPC.

A few days ago, human rights lawyer Bryan Stevensen gave a talk at TED’s yearly spring event in Long Beach.

For those of you not terribly familiar, TED is a nonprofit devoted to “Ideas Worth Spreading.” It started out in 1984 as a conference bringing together people from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design.

Since then it’s expanded to be an international brand for brilliance, innovation and inspiration.

Last week TEDs spring talks took place and Stevensen—who is the founder and executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, a nonprofit organization that litigates on behalf of condemned prisoners, juvenile offenders and others whose trials are marked by racism and misconduct—was one of the much-ballyhooed speakers.

At the end of the his 24-minute talk, Stevensen received what was reportedly one of the longest and loudest ovations from the audience in TEDs history.

And it wasn’t just that they stood and clapped and clapped and clapped. They wouldn’t sit down.

One of the cases that Stevenson’s group, the Equal Justice initiative, is presently representing is that of Anthony Ray Hinton, who has been on death row in Alabama for more than 25 years.

It seems the whole case against Hinton rests on four bullets. No one saw Hinton at the crime scenes, there’s no other evidence linking him, and there is compelling reason to believe he was at work at the time the shootings took place.

The state said the bullets, recovered at the two crime scenes, matched the gun that was recovered at Hinton’s mother’s house. During the appeal, three different forensic experts—including the FBI’s main expert on firearms markings—said that the bullets did NOT come from Hinton’s gun….

Anyway, there’s more on the story plus links to multiple newspaper articles on the case here.

ANOTHER CASE OF INNOCENCE DISREGARDED WITH EDWARD LEE ELMORE…

The case of Edward Lee Elmore, which was hideously mishandled by police, prosecutors, defense attorneys, and the judiciary, is documented with riveting precision in Pulitzer Prize–winner Raymond Bonner’s brand new book, Anatomy of Injustice: A Murder Case Gone Wrong.

Then less than a month after Bonner’s book was published Elmore was released from prison but, as Bonner writes in this NY times op ed, the victory was bittersweet. Here’s how his essay opens:

EDWARD LEE ELMORE turned 53 in January. For more than half his life, the soft-spoken African-American who doesn’t understand the concept of north, south, east and west, or of summer, fall, winter and spring, was in a South Carolina prison, most of it on death row.

On Friday, Mr. Elmore walked out of the courthouse in Greenwood, S.C., a free man, as part of an agreement with the state whereby he denied any involvement in the crime but pleaded guilty in exchange for his freedom. This was his 11,000th day in jail.

Mr. Elmore was convicted in 1982 for the sexual assault and murder of an elderly white widow in Greenwood. His trial lasted only eight days, including two spent picking the jury. The state concealed evidence that strongly pointed to Mr. Elmore’s innocence and introduced damning evidence that appears to have been planted by the police. For three decades lawyers for Mr. Elmore, who were convinced of his innocence, sought to get him a fair trial.

Headlines and news stories about men being released from death row based on DNA testing suggest that this happens often. But it doesn’t. Once a person has been convicted, even on unimaginably shaky grounds, an almost inexorable process — one that can end in execution — is set in motion. On appeal, gone is the presumption of innocence; the presumption is that the defendant had a fair trial. Not even overwhelming evidence that the defendant is innocent is necessarily enough to get a new trial. “Due process does not require that every conceivable step be taken, at whatever cost, to eliminate the possibility of convicting an innocent person,” Justice Byron R. White wrote for the majority in a 1977 case, Patterson v. New York.

In other words, innocence is not enough….

RACIAL DISCREPANCIES FOUND IN SCHOOL DISCIPLINE

According to new data from the Department of Education, black students are far more likely to be disciplined harshly in public schools. Tuesday’s New York Times has the story. Here’s how it opens.

Although black students made up only 18 percent of those enrolled in the schools sampled, they accounted for 35 percent of those suspended once, 46 percent of those suspended more than once and 39 percent of all expulsions, according to the Civil Rights Data Collection’s 2009-10 statistics from 72,000 schools in 7,000 districts, serving about 85 percent of the nation’s students. The data covered students from kindergarten age through high school.

One in five black boys and more than one in 10 black girls received an out-of-school suspension. Over all, black students were three and a half times as likely to be suspended or expelled than their white peers. …

Virginia inmate Thomas Haynesworth joined his family on Monday after 27 years in prison. Monday was his 46th birthday.

Haynesworth’s case is a complicated one as he was convicted of 3 crimes—two rapes and an abduction. DNA testing proved Haynesworth could not have committed one of the assaults, and pointed to another man. The other two crimes involved no biological evidence:

Th AP (via the Wa Po) has more on the story:

Thomas Haynesworth of Richmond was freed on parole and can now turn his attention to clearing his name in two other assaults — a move supported by state Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli and the chief prosecutors in the localities where those crimes occurred 27 years ago. The Virginia Court of Appeals will conduct a hearing on Haynesworth’s exoneration bid March 30. Until then, Haynesworth said, he is just relishing his freedom.

Until then, Haynesworth said, he is just relishing his freedom.

“It’s very joyful to be back with my family. It’s a big day for us,” Haynesworth told reporters minutes after walking out of the Greensville Correctional Facility in Jarratt.

Accompanied by his lawyers, Haynesworth was reunited with his family on the roadside just outside the prison about 60 miles south of Richmond.

It felt good to be hugging him — it felt real good,”’ said his mother, Delores Haynesworth.

Haynesworth was convicted of two rapes and an abduction in 1984. The Virginia Supreme Court exonerated Haynesworth of one rape in 2009 after testing of semen implicated another man, Leon Davis, a serial rapist known as “the Black Ninja.”’ Davis is serving seven life terms for sexual assaults and other crimes…..

Haynesworth was convicted primarily based on witness testimony.

Last spring, Henry “Hank” Skinner came within an hour of being executed by the State of Texas before SCOTUS agreed to take his case and stopped the execution.

On Monday, the Supreme Court agreed that Skinner had the right to sue a prosecutor who refuses to allow for DNA testing that the inmate believes might exonerate him.

David Kravets over at Wired’s Threat Level section has a good write up. Here’s how it begins:

The Supreme Court on Monday said inmates have a right to sue under a federal civil rights law to seek post-conviction DNA testing.

The 6-3 decision concerns condemned Texas inmate Henry Skinner, who was convicted of the 1993 murder of his girlfriend and her two sons. Skinner claimed breaches of his Fourth Amendment due process right and Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment because he hasn’t been allowed a post-conviction test of the DNA found at the crime scene.

The Texas state and federal courts — hearing Skinner’s habeas corpus pleas — refused to allow post-conviction testing of biological evidence, including blood, hair, fingernail clippings and vaginal swabs.

The courts held that, under Texas law, a convict must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that he or she would not have been prosecuted or convicted had DNA testing been performed. To get DNA testing, a Texas inmate must also demonstrate that his failure to seek such testing at trial was not a strategic decision.

With nowhere else to turn, Skinner sued local prosecutors under a federal civil rights statute, and the Supreme Court halted Skinner’s execution last year to determine whether he could attempt to gain DNA access through that legal avenue.

At least 22 states had told the justices that granting Skinner DNA testing through a civil rights suit would undermine their individual statutes, which spell out when an inmate is entitled to it….

The Supremes didn’t guarantee that Skinner could have the DNA testing done. But granting the right to sue for it is an importing step.

Adam Liptak at the New York Times explains further.

ON FEB 4, 2011, THE INNOCENCE PROJECT EXONERATED ITS 250th PERSON THROUGH DNA TESTING

It seems therefore sadly ironic that, in the same month, the Supremes must again look at the confusing welter of laws about DNA testing that vary from state to state, affecting the fates of inmates claiming innocence.

The Washington Post has the story. Here’s how it opens:

The news brings almost routine stories about wrongfully convicted prisoners who are exonerated by DNA testing, but they often have traveled widely divergent paths to freedom.

In some states, only prisoners facing execution have the right to DNA testing to try to prove their innocence. In others, anyone who pleaded guilty is barred from asking for the testing. In the patchwork of legislation passed by Congress and 48 states, even individual prosecutors can carry great weight.

The Supreme Court is again considering the tangled legal questions that accompany the issue in the case of Henry Skinner, who says DNA evidence could settle the question of whether he murdered his girlfriend and her two developmentally disabled adult sons.

Prosecutors in Gray County, Tex., where Skinner was convicted, are convinced that he is guilty and say he passed up a chance to test DNA evidence at his trial 15 years ago. Texas courts said he didn’t meet the requirements of a state law that grants DNA testing to some convicts. Federal courts said they had no proper role in second-guessing Texas.

Skinner came within 45 minutes of being strapped down for lethal injection before the Supreme Court stayed his execution to hear his case. The justices’ decision could come at any time.

The oral arguments in Skinner v. Switzer traversed the legal landscape of habeas corpus reviews and federal civil rights laws,but bypassed the question most nonlawyers would have: Why not just test the evidence?

If Skinner’s crime had occurred in Dallas, instead of 350 miles northwest, the testing probably would have been done by now.

PRESUMED GUILTY

The Witchita Eagle is doing a fascinating series about a man who may be a victim not a murderer.

Ronnie Lee Rhodes was convicted of murder in Wichita in 1981. He has maintained his innocence for three decades. To try to prove his claims, he filed a motion for DNA testing in April 2008, but evidence that once existed now can’t be found. An investigation by The Wichita Eagle and the Washburn School of Law shows the case illustrates flaws in a system that’s supposed to protect the innocent.

Here’s the main part of the story.

And here’s the latest update.

REPUB AZ LAWMAKERS WANT HOSPITALS TO CHECK PATIENTS FOR LEGALITY

Medical professionals are less than pleased about the idea of being asked to do ICE enforcement. AP has the story (via Salon):

Republican lawmakers want to widen Arizona’s illegal immigration crackdown with a proposal to require hospitals to check on whether patients are in the country legally, causing outrage among medical professionals who fear becoming de facto immigration agents under the law.

The medical industry ripped the bill Monday as it was scheduled for a hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Doctors envisioned scenarios in which immigrants with contagious diseases such as tuberculosis would stay home from the clinic or hospital and put themselves and the public at a grave health risk.

“This is making us into a police state that will try to catch people when they are sick,” said George Pauk, a retired doctor with an organization called Physicians for a National Health Program. “Do we want to stop sick people from coming in for health care?”

THE WASHINGTON POST HAS ITS OWN INNOCENCE STORY

In an editorial, the WaPo calls for action in the case of Thomas Haynesworth. Here’s how it opens:

THOMAS HAYNESWORTH has spent the past 27 years behind bars for crimes he probably did not commit.

Mr. Haynesworth was 18 years old and had a clean record when he was charged in Richmond in 1984 with raping or assaulting four women. He pleaded not guilty to all charges but was convicted in three of the four cases and sentenced to some 70 years in prison.

Mr. Haynesworth was offered a glimmer of hope in 2005 when then-Gov. Mark R. Warner (D) ordered a review of thousands of criminal cases after the exoneration of five wrongly convicted men. DNA evidence proved that Mr. Haynesworth was innocent of two rapes – one for which he was convicted and the other where the jury acquitted him based on other evidence. The DNA conclusively pointed the finger at another Virginia man, a serial rapist who came to be known as “the Black Ninja” and who is serving multiple life sentences for other crimes.

We’re surrounded by monsters

What a relief that Obama reneged on his pledge to limit his fall campaign to the paltry sums of public financing. It was a dumb promise when he made it and would have limited his ability for open combat with McCain the Monster. Public financing is a monstrously broken system. Most campaign-finance reform violates the Premier Monster, otherwise known as the First Amendment anyways.
Obama is now a free man and will raise a monstrous $300 million for the fall campaign. That’s nearly four times as much as the fairy-like $84 million he would have received in public money. Those extra bucks will make it easy to weather any public ridicule for breaking his word like someone out to achieve a goal at any cost, financial or moral.
But now that Obama’s shown himself open to reviewing his past words and deeds, he should make nice with Samantha Power and welcome her back in the fold as a foreign policy adviser. He was wrong to force her out and should make room for her and her divergent views.
We need more open debate in this country. Let’s stop penalizing people for speaking their mind, on or off the record, and that includes politicians, entertainers and radio-show hosts. Such debate isn’t easy to tolerate, particularly when it means giving voice to bull-headed forces of evil, which is exactly what the Supremes did in a decision yesterday, handing namby-pamby California unions their ass. I may have more to say about that righteous ruling later, but this post is dedicated to Obama the Money Monster.

On Sunday, on the back of the Week in Review section, the New York Times published something they called The DNA 200. It shows photos of the 200 people convicted in the United States who have been exonerated as a result of DNA testing and the number of years they lost to prison.

It’s a strong visual. And sobering. (For the online version, click here. Then follow the “multimedia” link.)

Although most people were wrongly convicted because of more than one factor, says the Times, analysis shows that the primary factors, repeated in case after case, were inaccurate eyewitness I.D., mistakes or problems with the forensic science, false confessions obtained under duress, and false testimony by police informants.

Last year California passed a collection of reform bills aimed at reducing wrongful convictions by addressing some of the problems listed above.. They were supported by most all the state’s law enforcement agencies including LA Chief of Police Bill Bratton and then Attorney General Bill Lockyer. However, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed them.

New and improved versions of the bills have been introduced this year and, as of last Friday, were beginning to make their way through the state legislature. This group, like last year’s bills, has strong law enforcement approval. And, like last year’s bills, they are expected to pass.

Then it will be up to Schwarzenegger.

(Arnold, honey….We gave you credit for being lots better than Gray Davis on criminal justice issues. Don’t make us take it back.)