In the spring of 2005, the LA Times published a piece by Matt Lait and Scott Glover, in which they pulled apart the pieces of a murder case from 1983 in which a then-17-year old young man named Bruce Lisker was convicted of the beating and stabbing death of his mother, Dorka Lisker, in a bloody scene at the family’s Sherman Oaks home. Lisker was tried and convicted as an adult, and sentenced to life in prison in 1985.
Initial doubts about the case had come to light when an LAPD Internal Affairs sergeant named Jim Gavin responded to an ethics complaint about the main officer on the Lisker case, Det. Andrew Monsue. The more Gavin looked into things, the more he began to believe that what he was looking at was no simple misstatement by an officer, but a rush to judgment in a murder investigation that might have the wrong person in prison.
However, his bosses at IA, then headed by Michael Berkow, thought Gavin was overstepping his bounds and told him to cease and desist.
He mostly did so—but handed over some of what he’d found to Lisker’s lawyer.
By weird coincidence, I talked to Gavin in 2004 during the period he was investigating the Lisker matter. I had called him for an unrelated reason, but he mentioned he had this other case that troubled him. At the time, I was involved in a year long newspaper series and (foolishly) reasoned that I couldn’t take on another big story, so didn’t press him on the Lisker issue.
But Glover and Lait heard about the case through their own sources and did take it on—and they brought it all the way home.
The result was a truly excellent work of reporting and writing accomplished by the team over 7 months. Glover and Lait’s work is a large part of what may allow Bruce Lisker to walk out of prison after 24 years..
Here’s the link to the original story. (It is really, really worth reading.)
And here’s what happened today, as reported by the LA Times.
A federal judge on Friday overturned the conviction of a San Fernando Valley man serving a life prison sentence for the 1983 murder of his mother, ruling that he must either be retried or set free.
U.S. District Judge Virginia A. Phillips concluded that Bruce Lisker, 44, was convicted on “false evidence” and that his attorney — now a court commissioner — failed to adequately represent him.
The judge’s findings mirrored those of a seven-month Times investigation published in 2005, which raised questions about key elements of the prosecution’s case against Lisker and exposed the LAPD’s investigation into the slaying of his 66-year-old mother as sloppy and incomplete.
It is unclear whether or not the district attorney will appeal, refile….or just let it go.
Read the rest here.
Reading the LA Times article (thank for the link) makes you wonder whether Lisker would still be in prison and forgotten but for the excellent work of the Times – and it’s not often that I compliment the Times. I hope the DA decides not to re-try the case, but perhaps it is necessary for Lisker to hear the words “Not Guilty” from a jury in order to clear his name. Real question here, just like with Charlie Samuel (Lily Burke’s killer) is how on earth does a person exit years of prison and integrate into society? Think about it. Lisker has known nothing of ‘normal’ life since he was a young boy. In his teen years he was on a downward spiral. His drug addiction and petty crime lifestyle led to him being a suspect. Since then he’s been in prison where he’s learnt nothing except how to survive amongst the worst of the worse. What will he be like when he gets out, aged 44 and with nothing but an education in crime?
Kelvin, if he is a danger to society because he’s untrained to function in society, due to a lifetime imprisonment, that is not even the fault of his own, then it’s the risk we take as a free republic. The solution is to reform the system that unjustly took him out of society for so long, not to punish him for its failure.
So true. Rob.
Rob/Gava, I don’t disagree. I just raised an issue that is completely ignored – what will be done to help this man adjust to life when he gets out of prison?
What makes you so certain he won’t adjust on his own? Also, your concern for his well being in your recent comment is noted. That being said, however, invoking Lily Burk’s killer in your first comment was extreme, and very harsh considering we’re talking about a man who was convicted for something he didn’t do.
So true, Rob.
Is Lisker really innocent or getting freedom because a bunch of do-gooders are casting doubt years after the verdict based upon the evidence? If he didn’t commit the murder, who did?
Gava Joe posts some very evocitive comments.
Woody is using his old divide and conquer tactics used by many white facist republican racist xenophobes.
Woody, in answer to your questions read the article.
1. The changes are evidence based, and mostly dug up by a cop.
2. There is someone whom they should have looked at all along, to whom the evidence seems to actually point fairly convincingly—and pointed all along. He will not be prosecuted, however, because he killed himself some years back.
It was too much reading, so I scanned it. Why can’t we ever have the Clffnotes version? In viewing the picture of the mom holding Bruce, look at his eyes. They look like those of a born killer to me.
Woody Says:
August 9th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
It was too much reading,
……
Oh, well there you go. Might as well keep Lisker locked away. After all, who has time to read the evidence which proves him innocent?
Rob, I’m not the one charged to decide the case, so it’s not important that I read every appeal. However, the evidence doesn’t “prove” his innocence. It may raise reasonable doubt, and only another trial could sort that out.
As the investigator of this case, and who stood to loose the most other than Bruce Lisker. It was a tremendous burden that I carried (knowing that I held the key to the truth and his freedom). What citizen’s don’t realize is that the management of the LAPD never intended in releasing the information I revealed. Hence, the defense team would not have been able to gain the release of Lisker. Providing this information was out of duty for the concern for the public.
What if it was your son or daughter was in Bruce Likser’s shoes, what would you expect from the person who held the key?
Even though I was going to be arrested and eventually fired for a criminal act (releasing confidential information to the L.A. Times). LAPD management immediately transferred me (45 miles further from home increasing my commute by 2 hours), and a bad rating. Even though I’m still employed by the LAPD-I’m an outcast and been told I’m just an agry man. And all indications; I will never again promote.
What never came out is that my wife of 24 years (also an LAPD Sergeant) was also targeted due to my involvement in the Lisker case. She had nothing to do with this case her only involvement, she was my wife. She was the subject of countless audits of her work, and she too was eventually accused of misconduct. She too was transferred out of Internal Affairs, against her will. Due to a related incident while at her new assignment, my wife is no longer working and has been on disability for more than three years with no pay.
I’ve been asked would you do the same thing if placed in the same position knowing their freedom depends on you: probable not.
My wife is not the same person fearing to go out-side and being around people. My four boys have changed, two with failing grades and they lash out and do not understand why their mother is sleeping 15 hours a day. Can you understand what happens when you speak out against the LAPD.
Jim, I’m very sorry for your situation and for the family problems that resulted.
If the information that you disclosed is correct, then you did the right thing. In that case, the next step is for another person, like you and who is independent, to expose the LADP for its problems and work to correct those. Perhaps the judge who overturned the verdict could help. It’s almost like you are punished for being a whistleblower, for which there are laws protecting you.
However, what I don’t know without more research is whether or not the LAPD considers your information valid and doesn’t care or whether the LAPD sincerely disagrees with your information and figures that you had your say and that should be the end of it.
In any event, a resolution other than the status quo must be reached.
Jim, thanks for sharing some of your story here and for your brave action. Whistle blowers often face all kinds of retribution and I’m sorry you’re suffering through that. If you’re interested in telling more of your story, perhaps Celeste will give you a forum for that. Can’t hurt to ask her. Good luck.
I salute people like Mr Jim Gavin. He has done a good job for humanity by helping Bruce. American Government should have rewarded him for doin good for the Americans. His last sentence in comment above states that truth has no value but only evil. American Government should take neccessary steps to clear the rot. I being an Indian always thought that justice is done in USA. But Bruce’s case has shown the the world the ugly picture of justice in USA. I request the Obama Administration to take neccessary steps to prove my feeling for the American system. BAck in India my parents-in-laws had to suffer the agony of the same kind. % people were charged for a murder which was a natural death. They had to spend 3 months in jail. I thought that there is no justice in India. But now I wonder, there is no justice in America as well. Thanks
Sukhvinder
Correction please. Five people were charged. % has been typed by mistake instead of 5.
Apologies for the mistake
Mr. Jim Gavin I am very saddened to hear about the enormous burden this has caused you and your family. Bruce is extremely grateful to you for your courage and honesty. Your testimony in Judge Ralph Zarefsky’s court that day was powerful and mind blowing. I was honored to be able to thank you in the hallway that day. If Bruce was given the opportunity to speak with your boys he would tell them what a courageous man their father is. You are a true man of valor and honor.
I am the private investigator that worked on this case. I started on it in February 1999. I have worked this case longer than anyone. I am the one that picked Bruce up from prison and drove him back to Southern California. I am a former police officer and not a do gooder trying to empty the prisons. I am a professional private investigator that relies on evidence, not inuendo and speculation.
First and foremost, I worked with Jim Gavin on this matter and know him to be as honest a police officer as you will ever meet. His integrity is beyond reproach. LAPD needs 10,000 cops just like him.
After two evedentiary hearings in federal court, which was in front of a magistrate judge and then a district court judge reviewed his findings that Lisker is acutally innocent, to say Lisker is “getting freedom because a bunch of do-gooders are casting doubt years after the verdict based upon the evidence, is uninformed and without merit.
Both judges noted that Lisker’s defense “effectively dismantled every piece of evidence used to convict him.” This was an “actual innocence” petition under the “Schlup” decision. The burden on the defense to prevail is much higher than that of a jury trial, where only reasonable doubt is needed.
The court further ruled that Lisker was convicted on “false evidence,” and “with the evidence that we know today no reasonable juror would convict Lisker.”
The “Schlup” decision is actually referred to as the “actual innocence rule.” Does everyone understand that, “actually innocent.” Because Lisker’s petition was not timely filed the only “gateway” for the court to even hear the case was for Lisker to prove “actual innocence.”
The bottom line, Lisker was not released because of some technicallity. The court order his convictio to be overturned for several reasons, but the most compelling is that he was convicted on “false evidence; and not just a couple of items, everything that the prosecution presented to the jury.
By the way, the real killer is John Michael Ryan. The court made comment on that too in that the police didn’t fully investigate that.
I learned of Bruce Lisker for the first time yesterday, while watching the news. I have since, read up on the crime and my heart breaks for this man whom I completely believe was wrongfully accused. I cannot imagine what it must be like losing so many years of his life for a crime he did not commit. Our justice system failed this man!
From what I have read about Bruce Lisker, and the video interviews I have seen, I believe he will do very well readjusting to society. He appears to be bright, well spoken, and to have an amazingly forgiving heart.
I just wanted to say that I support him and pray that he is not re-tried. He has already been through enough. He deserves to move forward and live his life freely.
Good luck Bruce!!!! You look great and I am so happy that you are free!!!
I was recently introduced to Mr. And Mrs.Gavin. I mention this because without Jim Gavin, along with the detective mentioned above and the LA times, Lisker’s innocence would not have been accomplished. It was also brought to my attention that Mr. Gavin let the news out at the risk of losing his job and possible criminal charges. He and his wife both suffered retaliation from other officers almost immediately , because the LAPD wanted to keep the new Lisker findings under wrap. To this day, the Gavins are feeling the pressure, from trying to do what was right. Which was to free an innocent man. What kind of justice is this I ask? The same kind of justice that put an innocent man in jail.
Something needs to be done about this behavior. Is it not the responsibility of the LAPD to uphold the law? I guess we will just have to settle and live in a world where innocent people, like Lisker and the Gavins, continue to suffer from the inadequacies of the LAPD. By the way, Mr. and Mrs. Gavin are two of the most upstanding people I have ever met. My heart goes out to them and there children, during these trying times.
It is unreal that after all this time that this unjustic is still on this mans shoulders and the crooked police gets away once again and the one good cop Mr.Gavin by telling the truth going against the code of blue has to go through so much just like Mr.lisker when will the unjust get a break and one wonders why there is ni respect for law enfourcement.I don’t trust them at all no matter whhat state they are in.
Just watched 48 Hrs.
Thank God there are still good people in the world
like Paul Ingels, Jim Gavin, Scott Glover, Matt
Lait and last, but not least, Bruce Lisker.
Of course, the one that had the most to lose, besides
Bruce Lisker, was Jim Gavin and I am so sorry to hear
about all he and his family have been and are still
going through because he did the right thing. “No
good deed goes unpunished” should not be the way
things turn out but, unfortunately, it is in so many
cases. Can’t Scott Glover and Matt Lait of the L.A.
Times investigate what is being done to the Gavins and
report openly on that? Maybe that could be the first
step in stopping the LAPD and others from punishing
people for trying to do the right thing.
I really never take the time to leave comments on any page, this is probably my second comment ever. I just mostly read and mumble my disgust aloud. (But let me just say to Woody that I do read before I mumble..lol). But I just had to let Jim Gavin know how sorry I am that his family has been put through this because of him coming forward and doing the right thing. It sickens me to not only see how corrupt our government, politicians, and the people who “serve and protect” are, but there complete disregard to the “law” to cover up and retaliate, and then be allowed to resign and collect a pension. Jim what can we do as voting citizens?
IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE THAT CAN TELL ME HOW TO REACH PAUL INGELS. I HAVE A VERY CLOSE FRIEND THAT HAS BEEN SITTING IN JAIL FOR OVER TWELVE YEARS, WITHOUT EVEN HAVING A TRIAL. I HAVE WRITTEN TO MAYORS, GOVENORS, ACLU—ETC, ON AND ON. I NEED ADVICE AND WANTED TO TALK TO PAUL INGELS. IF ANYONE HAS A CONTACT EMAIL FOR HIM PLEASE SEND IT TO ME AT ZANSPEC@COMCAST.NET
I watch a lot of id channel and I learn a lot by there evidences wiether people are guilty and in ur case I knew u was not guilty I am happy for u that u are free and can enjoy life what the lapd did was wrong and god will make them pay just be happy and enjoy life.
[…] (Back story here.) […]
[…] the LA District Attorney’s office will retry Bruce Lisker for the 1983 murder of his mother. (Here’s the back story.) Lisker, now 44, has been released on bail after U.S. District Judge Virginia A. Phillips concluded […]
[…] last month, U.S. District Judge Virginia A. Phillips overturned Lisker’s conviction stating that Lisker […]