- today
Justice on Trial Season 1 Episode 4
#JusticeonTrial
#JusticeonTrialSeason1
#ShowMoviesTV
🎞 Please join
https://t.me/CinemaSeriesUSFilm
#JusticeonTrial
#JusticeonTrialSeason1
#ShowMoviesTV
🎞 Please join
https://t.me/CinemaSeriesUSFilm
Category
🎥
Short filmTranscript
00:00Last time, on Justice, on Trial.
00:16We like you for the murder of Angela Correa.
00:18I would never touch her.
00:20The primary evidence of the people is the alleged confession Jeffrey Deskovich made to the police.
00:25We can't wait for DNA results.
00:26Don't worry about it. Scott specializes in getting confessions.
00:30Did you attack her?
00:31No.
00:32You picked up this 16-year-old boy.
00:35Did you hit her with a rock?
00:36Took him to another town.
00:38Did you rape Angela Correa?
00:39Interrogated him for seven hours until he's a sobbing mess on the floor in a fetal position.
00:45Did you choke her?
00:47You call that the confession?
00:50The jury finds you guilty as charged in the indictment.
00:53I didn't do anything.
00:55I will be back on appeal.
00:58I will be free.
01:04To whom it may concern.
01:08I'm sure everyone who writes you claims that they are innocent.
01:14But I didn't kill her.
01:16Nobody checked my alibi.
01:21They took my blood but never used it as evidence.
01:26They scared me into a confession.
01:29I was only 15.
01:33Told me I couldn't eat or go home.
01:37Never read me my rights.
01:40Never showed me the lie detector results.
01:43They keep denying my DNA appeals.
01:48I am wasting my life in here.
01:51Please.
01:52You've got to help me.
01:53Sincerely, Jeffrey Deskovic.
02:01I'm Judy Scheindler.
02:02Before I was a judge on TV, I was a judge in New York City for 15 years and a lawyer for 17 years before that.
02:10While serving on both sides of the bench, I learned that justice doesn't always end up feeling just.
02:17Sometimes the impact of one decision by a police officer, a lawyer, or even a judge can change the way justice is delivered.
02:26We're going to demonstrate this by taking landmark cases from actual crimes committed by real people,
02:32and we'll recreate them without trial lawyers and yours truly is the trial judge.
02:37While we're not going to recreate the trials verbatim, all the court's ultimate decisions are accurate.
02:43It will be up to you to decide whether the case was fair and the outcome just.
02:49Real cases.
02:50Actual lawyers.
02:52Surprising verdicts.
02:55Justice on trial.
02:59Jeffrey Deskovic was in jail for 16 years for the murder of his high school classmate, Angela Correa.
03:06It was largely due to what he said was a false confession.
03:09A confession made under pressure from law enforcement when he was only 15 years old.
03:16His sentence was even upheld by an appeals court.
03:19But finally, the Innocence Project, a law firm dedicated to reversing faulty convictions, took up his case.
03:27And what they found was shocking.
03:30The DNA sample from the victim, Angela Correa, matched a convicted killer whose name is Stephen Cunningham.
03:36Cunningham, who was in jail for raping and murdering a teacher, tragically had committed that murder after he had murdered Angela Correa.
03:46Jeffrey Deskovic was finally set free.
03:49He immediately sued Putnam County and the detective who oversaw his false confession for wrongful conviction.
03:56Let's see how that played out in court.
04:01Counsel, note your appearance, please.
04:02Dan Menser for Jeffrey Deskovic. Good morning, Your Honor.
04:06Good morning, Your Honor.
04:07Clary Backman on behalf of Putnam County and defendant Daniel Stevens.
04:13Members of the jury, the plaintiff, Jeffrey Deskovic, was wrongfully convicted of the murder of his 15-year-old schoolmate
04:21and spent 16 years in prison before being exonerated.
04:26In this lawsuit, he seeks damages from the county of Putnam, state of New York, and its agent, Daniel Stevens,
04:33in the amount of $40 million for his wrongful imprisonment, which he alleges was a direct result of illegal, willful police practices,
04:43which led to his conviction and incarceration.
04:46If you find that the police did, in fact, violate Mr. Deskovic's civil rights,
04:54then you must consider the amount of the damages for that violation and his subsequent incarceration.
05:01Mr. Menser, do you wish to open?
05:02I do, Your Honor.
05:0516 years after Jeffrey Deskovic was falsely convicted of the rape and murder of Angela Correa,
05:13the district attorney finally allowed the DNA sample that had been removed from Ms. Correa
05:19to be put into the DNA databank.
05:21When they did, lo and behold, they knew what we already knew, is that it was not Jeffrey Deskovic.
05:27This trial is about holding the people who did this to him responsible.
05:33This trial is about holding the people who robbed this boy of his childhood
05:40by forcing him to spend the best years of his life in jail as a convicted rapist.
05:48How do we put an economic value on it?
05:50We can't.
05:51But that's what your job is going to be,
05:53to decide what economic value you can give this guy for something that you can never replace.
06:00That's 16 years of his life.
06:03Counsel?
06:04Thank you, Your Honor.
06:05This is a simple case.
06:07This case comes down to one thing and one thing only.
06:12Did the police violate approved police investigative procedures?
06:19Did they coerce a false confession from Mr. Deskovic?
06:24And the answer to those questions are no.
06:27Putnam County promulgated proper police policies and procedures.
06:33Detective Stevens, the defendant in this case, followed those policies and procedures.
06:39He did not coerce a false confession.
06:42Now, the plaintiff wants you to believe they can't put an economic number on the damages he suffered as a result of his imprisonment.
06:52The plaintiff in this case is asking for $40 million.
06:56The man has 40 million reasons to lie about the police conduct in this case.
07:05I'm going to be asking you, did they have probable cause to believe that this man was a child killer of Angela Correa?
07:16And the answer to that question is also yes.
07:19And because of that, you should deny this man's claim.
07:26Mr. Mensah, call your first witness, please.
07:28The plaintiff calls, Dr. Carissa Smith.
07:35Kevin, would you swear the witness, please?
07:37Raise your hand, please.
07:38You swear to tell the truth that these matters today?
07:40I do.
07:41Yes, have a seat.
07:44Mr. Mensah, you may inquire.
07:46Thank you, Your Honor.
07:47Good morning, Dr. Smith.
07:48Good morning.
07:49Are you employed?
07:51Yes, I am a board-certified forensic psychologist.
07:54I specialize in the study of convicted defendants who have falsely confessed to committing crimes.
08:02Now, doctor, are you actually telling us that this is a common practice, that people falsely confess to crimes they never commit?
08:08Absolutely.
08:09Now, in these cases where defendants have been found to have been falsely convicted based upon their own confessions,
08:15are there tactics that the police typically use that you've seen in these studies?
08:20Yes.
08:21There will be tactics such as intimidating and befriending.
08:27That would be good cop, bad cop?
08:29Exactly.
08:29And typically, these individuals who falsely confess are young.
08:35Over half of them are under the age of 21.
08:39There will be tactics used such as feeding the suspect details of the crime, which then become embedded in the suspect's mind.
08:47The suspect then repeats these details in their ultimate confession, which fleshes out their confession to be more believable by a jury.
08:56Sounds like you were that kid.
08:58We've been talking about this case for so long, I almost feel like I was.
09:04Hey, does that ever happen to you guys, too?
09:08Yeah.
09:09We usually try to put ourselves in the mind of the killer.
09:13Why don't you try that by sketching out what you think happened?
09:17It would help us a lot.
09:18Yeah, yeah, sure.
09:20And they will take the suspect into an interrogation room, isolated, generally where the suspect is hungry and tired.
09:31And they will proceed to do whatever it takes to get a confession.
09:36Does the interrogator typically offer the suspect a way out of the lengthy interrogation?
09:42Yes, the interrogator will make it clear that there is only one way out, one way to get home, and that is to confess.
09:50Your only hope, and I keep trying to make you understand this, is to tell the truth.
09:57If you confess, then the DA can reduce your sentence, okay?
10:02He might not even prosecute you because you're a 16-year-old kid.
10:05But I didn't do those things.
10:09Again, look at this.
10:11You're lying.
10:13Now, Dr. Smith, I'm going to ask you if you've had the opportunity to review the case file of Jeffrey Deskovic.
10:19I have.
10:19Do you see anything in the interrogation that you've observed that is common to other interrogations where people have falsely confessed?
10:27Yes, I see that the suspect was interrogated for over six hours, that they were kept hungry,
10:34and that the interrogators had decided the suspect was guilty before they began the interrogation.
10:39Do you have an opinion as to whether the tactics used by the police in the Jeffrey Deskovic false confession violated common accepted standards of what an interrogator should do in order to obtain a statement from a witness?
10:55There's no doubt in my mind that they violated the standards.
10:59This is the worst I've seen.
11:00Thank you, doctor.
11:02Now you may inquire, Mr. Beckman.
11:03Thank you, Your Honor.
11:04Let me start out.
11:07First off, doctor, you've been paid by the plaintiff to testify here today?
11:12Correct.
11:12And how much do you charge per hour?
11:15$500 per hour.
11:16And given you have no personal knowledge of how this investigation was conducted at the time,
11:23you're now being paid to tell this jury here that this man was wrongfully convicted, correct?
11:29I'm being paid to give my expert witness opinion.
11:33I have no further questions.
11:34You're excused.
11:36Call your next witness, please, Mr. Mentor.
11:39The plaintiff calls Jeff Stockton.
11:44You may inquire, sir.
11:45Mr. Stockton, could you please tell us what your background is?
11:48I'm an expert in DNA comparison.
11:50Now, Mr. Stockton, I want to draw your attention back to November of 1989.
11:55Were you asked to conduct a profile on a DNA sample that was given to you by the Peekskill Police Department?
12:00I was, yes.
12:01And what type of material were you asked to profile?
12:05It was the semen from the victim's body.
12:07And I want to draw your attention to January 11th of the following year.
12:11Were you asked to profile another DNA sample in the case?
12:16Yes.
12:16It was a blood sample from the suspect, Jeffrey Deskovic.
12:19And were you asked to do anything once you got the profile?
12:22Yes.
12:23I received a written order to compare the DNA profile of Jeffrey Deskovic to the DNA profile of the rapist.
12:29And what did your comparison reveal?
12:32They were not the same person.
12:33That Jeffrey Deskovic was not the source of that semen.
12:36Now, were you also asked to perform a hair analysis examination in this case?
12:41Yes.
12:41I was given six strands of hair from the victim's body, Angela Correa.
12:45And I was given control hairs from Jeffrey Deskovic.
12:48And I was given control hairs from Angela Correa.
12:50Now, were you aware of the race of Jeffrey Deskovic at the time you performed your examination?
12:56Yes, I was.
12:56And what was that race?
12:58He was Caucasian.
12:58And what was the racial makeup of the hairs that you were removing from Angela Correa's body?
13:03Several of the hairs were from a person of African-American origin.
13:08I have no further questions.
13:09Now you may inquire, Mr. Beckman.
13:11Thank you, Your Honor.
13:12So, can you say that the lack of matching on the DNA sample or the lack of the hairs matching Mr. Deskovic,
13:22it doesn't mean that because DNA didn't match, he's not the man who put a ligature around this child and strangled her to death.
13:31Isn't that right, sir?
13:32What you said is correct.
13:33No further questions.
13:35Witness is excused.
13:36Thank you very much.
13:39Next witness.
13:41Your Honor, we call the plaintiff Jeffrey Deskovic.
13:53You may inquire.
13:54Jeffrey, I know this is going to be tough, but I'm going to ask you some questions about November of 1989, all right?
13:59What was your relationship, if any, with Angela Correa?
14:03I didn't know her.
14:04I might have seen her in the hallways once or twice, said hello, but that was about it.
14:08And did you go to her memorial services?
14:10Yes.
14:11Why did you go to the memorial services of someone that you barely know?
14:14I was devastated by what happened.
14:16So was everybody else in school.
14:18I had never known anybody that had been murdered before, and I just wanted to show my respect.
14:22Now, at some point after school on December 12th, were you approached by Peekskill police detectives?
14:29Yes.
14:29They approached me as I was walking in their police vehicle and told me they wanted to talk about the death of Angela.
14:36And what was your response when they told you that?
14:38I was surprised.
14:39I told them I had no idea what happened to Angela.
14:42And did you agree to talk to them on December 12th?
14:45Yes.
14:45They drove me to the police station, yes.
14:48How did the police treat you at the police station?
14:50At first, they were mild and polite and friendly with me.
14:53Did they give you any specific information about the crime itself in discussing it with you?
14:58They did.
14:59Did they actually take you to the crime scene that day?
15:02They did.
15:03And they showed me things at the crime scene, yes.
15:05Did they ask you your theories about the crime at all?
15:08Yeah, they asked me my theories about the case, how the crime was committed, things like that.
15:13Did you believe that they really wanted your help?
15:15At the time, yes.
15:17Now, how did specifically Detective McIntyre treat you?
15:21He seemed to show interest in my opinions about the case.
15:25He wanted my inputs about the case.
15:27We'd eat pizza, drink coffee together.
15:29I mean, I looked up to this detective.
15:31I thought he was in my corner.
15:32So I wanted to do anything I could to please him at the time.
15:35Now, did you actually agree to allow them to remove blood from you to test it against what they found at the crime scene?
15:42Yes.
15:43They told me if I wanted to continue working on the investigation, they would have to rule me out as a suspect.
15:49And you actually agreed to do that to prove to them that you were innocent?
15:53Yes.
15:54I wanted to do anything and everything I could to prove my innocence at the time.
15:57And was part of that agreeing to sit for a polygraph exam?
16:01Yes.
16:02So now I want to ask you some questions about January 25th.
16:05You were on your way into school that morning?
16:07Yes.
16:08I was on my way to school.
16:10It was about 8 a.m.
16:11I asked to go with my friend.
16:13They outed him, told him to get lost, and then drove me in the back of a police car.
16:17And they drove you not to the Peekskill Police Station, did they?
16:20No.
16:21It was about half an hour away, a place I'd never been before.
16:25Introduced me to a person I'd never met before.
16:28When you say introduced you to a person that you'd never met before, do you see that guy in court?
16:33Yes.
16:33Is that him right there?
16:34Yes.
16:35Now, did you go to an office setting or a police department of some sort?
16:40He escorted me into a small room, hooked me up to a machine, and just started asking me questions.
16:45What type of questions?
16:46He asked me if I killed Angela.
16:48I told him I didn't.
16:49And at the end of it, did Detective Stevens say something to you before he left that room?
16:55Yes.
16:55He kept telling me, the machine tells him that I'm guilty, I need to confess.
16:59And did Detective McIntyre come into the interrogation room where you were seated?
17:03He did.
17:04Did he tell you whether you could go home at any point?
17:08Yes.
17:09He told me that I could go home.
17:11However, he said that I would need to confess.
17:14Did you ultimately break down and confess?
17:16I ultimately broke down emotionally.
17:17I ended up lying on the floor in the fetal position.
17:22But he was nice enough to get down on the floor with me and comfort me.
17:26He just told me everything was going to be okay.
17:28And did you eventually give him what he wanted?
17:30I told him what he wanted to hear.
17:31And why did you confess to a crime you didn't commit, Jeffrey?
17:35I didn't think I had a choice at the time.
17:37I had been so bombarded with pressure and questions that I just wanted to go home.
17:42But I thought confessing was the only way I could get out of it.
17:45Jeffrey, as best as you can, could you please describe for us what life was like for a guy to go into prison at age 16?
17:53It was tough.
17:55Let's just put it this way.
17:56Once the other inmates found out that I was a convicted rapist, I was a dead man walking.
18:02Were you ever assaulted in prison?
18:04Many times.
18:05Once I was hit in the back of the head with a 10-pound weight.
18:07How did you feel at age 32 walking into the world as a free man?
18:12The world had passed me by.
18:14Everyone had a cell phone, a computer.
18:16I had to learn all of this from scratch.
18:18I mean, I didn't even know how to drive a car.
18:20Jeffrey, how are you now mentally?
18:22Not good.
18:22I have severe PTSD.
18:26I have trouble sleeping at night.
18:27I have nightmares.
18:29Terrified of police.
18:30Though I'm on the outside now, it was a part of my essence that I really don't think I'll ever see again or find again.
18:42It's gone.
18:44You may inquire.
18:46You've had 16 years in prison to think about this case.
18:51Every single day.
18:53Is that right?
18:54Yes, that's correct.
18:54Putting yourself in the officer's shoes back in the day when you were cooperating with them.
19:01You wanted to be a part of the investigation.
19:04Yes?
19:05Yes.
19:05You were late to school the day after Angela went missing.
19:09Yes?
19:10Yes.
19:10You were at not one, but three different wakes, correct?
19:16Correct.
19:16You barely knew the girl, correct?
19:19Correct.
19:20And then the police focused their suspicion on you.
19:24Yes?
19:25Yes.
19:25And they interviewed you multiple times, correct?
19:28Correct.
19:29And you denied, denied, denied having anything to do with the death of Angela for some two months.
19:37And then lo and behold, you met my client, Detective Stevens.
19:41And you believe he was so coercive with you that that same day you met him, you gave a full confession to Detective McIntyre.
19:53Do I have that right?
19:54Yes.
19:55And not only did you give a confession after denying this, you gave Detective McIntyre the details of how this girl was killed, correct?
20:07I don't remember.
20:08Well, you do remember not just saying I killed her. You went into detail, didn't you?
20:14I never said I killed her because I didn't.
20:16Well, sir, when you were in a fetal position laying on the floor and Detective McIntyre was befriending you, you gave him a confession.
20:25That's what you're suing for.
20:27I'm saying to you that it was 16 years ago.
20:30I might have given a confession, but it was an absolute, complete and utter false confession.
20:35I told him what he wanted to hear. That's all I could think to do at the time.
20:38And you have 40 million reasons today to make that claim, don't you, sir?
20:45Objection.
20:46Sustained.
20:47No further questions.
20:48Witnesses excused. Thank you, Mr. Descovic.
20:55Mr. Mensah?
20:57Plaintiff rests.
21:00Mr. Backman?
21:01Yes, Your Honor. I'd like to call Officer Daniel Stevens to the stand.
21:06Now you may inquire, Mr. Backman.
21:08Thank you, Your Honor.
21:09Detective Stevens, you and I seem to have gone through these questions some 16 years ago.
21:15As I recall, yes.
21:17And why don't you tell this jury what was your profession and occupation?
21:21I was a detective and polygraph investigator for the Putnam County Sheriff's Department.
21:27And did you have occasion to meet the plaintiff at some point in time some 16 years ago?
21:32I did.
21:32And how did that come about, if you could tell this jury, please?
21:36The Peekskill Police Department requested that I come in to assist them in their investigation by giving a polygraph examination.
21:45And the focus of that investigation fell on Mr. Descovic, correct?
21:51That is correct.
21:52And when you used that polygraph upon Mr. Descovic, did you try and obtain a confession from him?
22:01Yes, sir. That was the goal.
22:03And in assisting them, did you do anything illegal?
22:07No, sir.
22:08Did you ever deprive him of food?
22:10No.
22:10Did you ever keep him there involuntarily for the six hours?
22:16Certainly not.
22:17Was there anything that you did during your six hours with this man that, in hindsight, you believe was abusive?
22:27No.
22:27No further questions.
22:30You may inquire.
22:31Thank you, Your Honor.
22:32Detective Stevens, the morning of January 25th, Jeffrey Descovic was brought to your office.
22:39You brought him into the interrogation room and strapped him to the machine, right?
22:43Yes.
22:44For the subject, he can't move without damaging the machine.
22:48Correct.
22:49You left him there for six hours in that condition.
22:52Roughly six hours, yes.
22:53But the American Polygraph Association training says that you're to conduct these examinations for a period no longer than three hours, right?
23:03I believe that's true.
23:04You doubled that with this 16-year-old boy.
23:07Yes.
23:08Now, you're trained on the Arthur method, and the Arthur method is criticized because it starts with the presumption that the subject is guilty, right?
23:16Correct.
23:17And whether or not he's telling the truth didn't matter to you.
23:20That's the Arthur method.
23:21Correct.
23:22The assumption is he's guilty.
23:23Now, this kid, who was strapped to a chair, hooked up to a polygraph machine, facing an interrogation from a guy like you, who has a knack for getting confessions, who consistently said he didn't do it, did it ever dawn on you that maybe he didn't do it?
23:38Again, sir, my job was to get a confession.
23:41This was not my investigation.
23:43This was Detective Levine's and McIntyre's investigation.
23:46Both those detectives came in telling me, this is our guy.
23:49They need a confession.
23:50My job was to get it.
23:51And the only thing you cared about was getting a confession.
23:54I cared about doing my job.
23:56No more questions.
23:57I have a couple of questions.
23:59Now, you had a 16-year-old who you were administering a test to.
24:04And I am correct in your testimony that the defendant each time said, I didn't kill Angela Correa.
24:13Correct.
24:14Didn't you think the machine was being reliable?
24:17I have two detectives who are coming in from Peace Kill who are telling me that they've got their guy.
24:22My job is to get a confession.
24:23So from that perspective, with that particular technique, what the polygraph says or doesn't say is irrelevant.
24:30Correct.
24:31Now you're excused.
24:32Thank you very much.
24:36Any other witnesses, Mr. Backman?
24:39No, Your Honor.
24:39The defense rests.
24:41Okay.
24:41Summations, please.
24:42All right, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, once again, good afternoon.
24:48This is my closing argument in defense of both Putnam County and in defense of Daniel Stevens.
24:54And basically what this case comes down to, folks, is a credibility contest.
25:00The credibility contest is between the plaintiff, Mr. Deskovic, who I pointed out has 40 million reasons to exaggerate, bend the truth or outright lie in order to tell you that his confession, it was all done because of this man here at console table, Detective Stevens.
25:23Nothing could be further from the truth.
25:27Now, 16 years later, the DNA excluded him as being the individual who inseminated the victim.
25:34Nothing more.
25:35They had circumstantial evidence in this case that he was the killer.
25:40Add to that, he confessed with details.
25:43And you have the reason for the arrest and the conviction of this individual.
25:49And I would ask that you rule in favor of the defense and you reject the request for $40 million.
25:57Mr. Mentor.
25:58Thank you, Your Honor.
25:59Why would anyone confess to a crime they didn't commit?
26:02It's a question that baffles us all.
26:04But we know from the testimony of Dr. Smith that it happens, never mind the fact that he never seemed like a likely suspect from the very beginning.
26:14They were so obsessed with getting a confession that they couldn't see that everything that this man did was consistent with an innocent man.
26:23That's tunnel vision.
26:25They keep focused on one guy, exclude any other evidence.
26:29And then finally, then you get the DNA evidence.
26:32Now, DNA evidence where you can prove beyond any doubt, not reasonable doubt, not probable cause, beyond any doubt that he was not the source of the semen recovered from the rape victim's body.
26:47That was not even enough.
26:49They simply marched ahead.
26:51You cannot give him what was taken from him.
26:54You will never give him what he really deserves.
26:57But we feel that he deserves a monetary amount so that people like that pay.
27:05The jury is directed to retire to deliberate the verdict.
27:12Court come to order.
27:13The Honorable Judge Judy Scheiling presiding.
27:16Can I have the verdict, please?
27:17The jury, Mr. Deskovic, finds that the defendants did, in fact, violate your civil rights and are guilty.
27:29The jury further finds damages in your favor in the amount of $41 million.
27:35I thank the jury for its service.
27:38This case is now concluded.
27:39Jeffrey Deskovic was wrongly convicted and spent 16 years in prison for a murder he didn't commit.
27:50He successfully sued for wrongful imprisonment.
27:53But the question remained.
27:55Did the prosecutor who got it wrong just make a mistake?
27:59Or did he actually commit what was called prosecutorial misconduct?
28:02That's when a prosecutor knowingly hides evidence or submits false evidence in order to obtain a conviction.
28:12Jeffrey believed his prosecutor did both.
28:18Counsel, please state your appearances for the record.
28:21For the plaintiff, Jeffrey Deskovic, I'm Dan Menser.
28:24And good afternoon, everyone.
28:25Larry Backman on behalf of the state of New York.
28:28Thank you, counsel.
28:29We will now hear argument on the matter.
28:31Mr. Menser.
28:32Thank you, judge.
28:33We do not accuse the prosecutor in this case of being solely responsible for taking 16 years of that young boy's life.
28:41Indeed, on January 25th, the day that Jeffrey was coerced into falsely confessing,
28:47we know that the prosecutor wasn't even there.
28:50But then Jeffrey was indicted.
28:52And then he came into charge.
28:55And every decision that was made at that point, he made.
28:59Then comes March 2nd.
29:01March 2nd is the day this case should have ended.
29:05March 2nd is the day that he gets back evidence.
29:09Evidence that not just tells him he's got the wrong guy, but it screams to him,
29:14you got the wrong guy, you got the wrong guy, this kid is innocent.
29:19What any reasonable person would do then, anybody who cares about being fair to that boy, is dismiss the case right then.
29:27Anybody except for this prosecutor.
29:30This case is going to hell, gentlemen.
29:33What the hell are you talking about?
29:37We gave you a confession.
29:39Well, here's a news flash.
29:41The DNA results came back.
29:43They don't match your boy.
29:45You're joking.
29:46And I'll tell you something else.
29:48The hair samples recovered from the victim's body.
29:51They come back to an African-American male.
29:54That doesn't mean anything.
29:57The M.E. and the CSI tech, they're both black.
30:00Maybe it comes from one of them.
30:02You know that, and I know that.
30:04But when the defense lawyer finds out, he's going to have a field day.
30:08I've got half of mine to kick this case right now.
30:12Come on, you can't do that.
30:13The only thing I have is a confession which you two geniuses failed to record.
30:20Well, trust me, that's a good thing.
30:22Oh, really?
30:22Listen up, hotshot.
30:24You and I both know we got people out there, and they're screaming for blood.
30:28You're up for re-election.
30:30Grow a pair.
30:31Get out there and do the right thing.
30:33Grow a pair?
30:34Trust me, I'll burn this kid at the stake.
30:37You two clowns better hope he's got a lousy defense lawyer.
30:43The conduct of this prosecutor is outrageous, and it needs to be punished,
30:49and he needs to be held accountable for that boy spending 16 years in a hole fighting for his life,
30:56when he should have been enjoying his life.
30:59Thank you, Mr. Mentzer.
31:01Mr. Backman.
31:02Yes, thank you, Your Honor.
31:03So, 20 years this case is dragged on.
31:08Unfortunately for Mr. Mentzer, the question is one of law for this court.
31:14The question is absolute versus qualified immunity.
31:19And the standard that the court has to ask itself is, as a prosecutor during the initiation of criminal proceedings
31:29and the prosecution of the indictment in this case, was I entitled to absolute immunity?
31:37For courts and prosecutors to be able to function, the laws in most jurisdictions grant them immunity
31:44from being sued by convicted criminals for wrongfully conducting prosecutions.
31:50In New York, if a prosecutor during the investigative phase of the case,
31:56which is prior to the grand jury, withholds or manufactures evidence,
32:02he cannot use the immunity as a shield from civil liability.
32:08However, in what may seem odd to our sense of justice,
32:13if the prosecutor withholds or manufactures evidence after the grand jury,
32:20which is known as the judicial phase,
32:23he is protected from being personally liable in any civil suit.
32:27It may not protect the state from liability for wrongful imprisonment,
32:33but it protects the individual prosecutor.
32:37Judge Domingo.
32:38I'm going to ask Mr. Backman to stand up.
32:41Mr. Backman, I'm going to ask you a number of questions about your behavior,
32:45and I'd like to know whether or not you've engaged in the following behavior.
32:49Did you learn at some point that the victim was not sexually active?
32:53Yes.
32:53Did you also come to learn that the hair and the DNA was not that belonging to Mr. Deskovic?
33:00Yes.
33:01So the only issue that we here have to resolve is that when in point in time did you come to learn this information?
33:08I turned to the plaintiff's pleadings for the answer to that question.
33:13Their own papers, their own concessions tell this court that everything that I learned by way of my investigators
33:22was post-indictment during the judicial phase of this case, thereby allowing me to have absolute immunity.
33:31Okay, you can have a seat.
33:34Judge Levy.
33:35Thank you, Mr. Backman.
33:36And you can step back up, please, sir.
33:39Jeffrey Deskovic spent 16 years in jail for a crime he did not commit, and you prosecuted him for that crime.
33:48You convinced the jury that Mr. Deskovic raped his 15-year-old classmate despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
33:58You created out of thin air false theories to explain away the DNA evidence that exonerated him and as the lead prosecutor in the case, sir.
34:10You were directly responsible for his wrongful conviction.
34:15So why should you avoid being held to account for your conduct?
34:21Well, I'm not clear on what the court means by holding me accountable for my conduct.
34:27You are not going to pay a nickel for the 16 years that that boy spent in jail.
34:33He lost the best years of his life.
34:36True, and that's because the prosecution is covered by absolute immunity in this case,
34:43no matter how despicable you may think that is.
34:48I don't think that's despicable, Mr. Backman.
34:51I think your conduct in this case, sir, was despicable.
34:55How do you defend yourself from the indefensible?
34:59I defend myself by saying the defense attorney fell down on the job.
35:03Always someone else's fault.
35:05Do you have anything to say to Mr. Deskovic now after serving 16 years in jail?
35:11Mr. Backman for a crime he did not commit?
35:14Your Honor, I did my job as a prosecutor to the best of my ability based on the evidence in the moment.
35:20Not 2020, looking backwards.
35:23How about Patricia Morrison?
35:25Patricia Morrison, you should know Mr. Backman, was the victim of the real murderer of Ms. Correa.
35:33In 1993, Stephen Cunningham murdered Patricia Morrison, a mother of three.
35:39It was Stephen Cunningham's DNA inside Ms. Correa.
35:45Had you done your job, sir, and your police agency done their job, sir,
35:52then Patricia Morrison would be alive today because the real murderer would have been found.
36:00What do you have to say to Patricia Morrison's family?
36:03I have nothing to say.
36:05Procedurally, you are asking us to dismiss the case against you before any civil discovery takes place
36:14that could link you with conduct that occurred before probable cause was determined.
36:21There's not a shred of an allegation that I engaged in any misconduct pre-indictment.
36:29That, sir, we will never know about if, in fact, we, as a judicial body,
36:33determine that you are entitled to absolute immunity.
36:36Thank you, Judge Acker.
36:37Thank you, Judge.
36:38Mr. Backman, the conduct that is alleged here is indeed troubling.
36:42And I think that you would admit that it strikes right at the heart of public trust in our court system.
36:48You would acknowledge, sir, that you are, in fact, an officer of the court.
36:52Absolutely.
36:53And you would acknowledge that as an officer of the court, you are obligated to only make representations in court
36:59for which you have a good faith basis.
37:01You know, Judge, we had a 15-year-old child brutally murdered,
37:07and we had a 16-year-old boy who gave us detailed information about the killing in a confession.
37:17That was the good faith belief to prosecute and a good faith belief to believe he was not only the killer,
37:26he was also the rapist, despite the DNA not matching.
37:30I am talking about what you, sir, know to be your responsibilities as an advocate for the people.
37:37I'd just ask if you, Judge Acker, have ever prosecuted a criminal case.
37:42I think, Mr. Backman, that rather than directing questions to the bench,
37:46you should take a good, hard look at your own conduct.
37:49Thank you, sir.
37:50Mr. Mentzer, please.
37:53I think, Mr. Mentzer, that it's very important that we stay squarely focused on what is at issue here.
37:59What we must do is not simply determine whether or not he engaged in something egregious.
38:05The question is the timing of his egregious conduct.
38:09Now, explain to the court why you believe that his conduct was investigatory and not in preparation for trial.
38:16Well, Judge, the reason why he would be protected ordinarily if it comes post-indictment,
38:21because that's part of the judicial phase, is because post-indictment comes generally with probable cause.
38:29Once probable cause is established, then we enter the judicial phase.
38:34In this case, on March 2nd, DNA evidence came back and said he's not the guy.
38:39That eviscerates any probable cause here.
38:43What should happen at that point is that this man should have dismissed the indictment,
38:48continued to investigate, because there is no probable cause once you have that exculpatory evidence.
38:55Hold on, Mr. Mentzer, we also had a confession in this case.
38:59And doesn't that confession establish probable cause for the indictment?
39:03It was a coerced confession.
39:04That's why he needs to be held accountable and only given qualified immunity,
39:09because that March 2nd DNA evidence changes the game.
39:13Thank you, sir.
39:15Gentlemen, we'll now hear closing arguments.
39:17Mr. Mentzer.
39:18When Jeffrey Deskovic was a 16-year-old boy, he should have been going to high school.
39:25He did not.
39:26He was in a maximum security prison, fighting for his life,
39:30against a bunch of inmates who thought that he was a rapist and a murderer.
39:36The people who put him there are all held to account.
39:40The police officers, the detectives who coerced the confession from him, they can be sued.
39:45The polygraph examiner who convinced him that he failed polygraph tests,
39:49which led to his false confession, they can be sued.
39:52Everybody except the guy running the show, is that what he's trying to say?
39:56Everybody except him?
39:58He did this.
39:59This man needs to pay.
40:02This should outrage every one of you.
40:05You can deny his motion to dismiss and force him to do what he forced Jeffrey to do,
40:12and that's get in front of a jury and let them decide.
40:17Thank you, Mr. Mentzer.
40:19Mr. Backman.
40:20So, no matter how loud Mr. Mentzer gets,
40:25it doesn't change the concept of absolute immunity.
40:28And that's what we have here in this case.
40:32His own pleadings failed to state anything that could lead this court into believing that I had
40:41knowledge of what was going on with respect to police misconduct pre-indictment.
40:47I ask this court to dismiss me on the legal basis of absolute immunity.
40:54Submit it.
40:55Thank you, Mr. Backman.
40:57We will now retire to deliberate.
40:59We have reached a unanimous verdict.
41:08When a state prosecuting attorney is acting within the scope of their duties in initiating and
41:15pursuing a criminal prosecution, they are immune from civil liability.
41:19It must be so.
41:20Without this immunity, prosecutors would be afraid to do their jobs.
41:25They'd be afraid of constantly being sued.
41:27Of course, not everything a prosecutor does is absolutely immune just because a prosecutor did it.
41:33Whether or not there is such absolute immunity depends on the conduct in which the prosecutor is engaged.
41:39When engaged in conduct that occurs in the course of their role in the judicial phase of the criminal process, absolute immunity will attach.
41:48When the conduct is associated with the investigative stage of the process, however, only qualified immunity applies.
41:55However objectionable the prosecutor's conduct may have been, protecting the right of prosecutors to exercise their independent judgment so as to keep the public safe is the principle that must guide us.
42:07For that reason, the motion to dismiss the lawsuit against you is granted, Mr. Backman, and you are exempt from any financial liability in this case.
42:27Jeffrey Deskovic is now a lawyer.
42:29He started a foundation to help others who had been wrongfully convicted of crimes and to fight against the abuse of power by law enforcement.
42:38He learned the hard way that the justice system isn't always just.
42:43We need a strong system to enforce our laws and punish the guilty.
42:47But as we've seen in the case of Jeffrey Deskovic, the injustice of a wrongful conviction affects not only those who are convicted, but it can allow a real predator to be free to kill again.
43:00We should be threatened by the federalistскийongeteries or scuenari, but it can allow a realizing of note that strength of the disease is caused by the issue ofjust which is reduced in the same legal case.
43:14www.ajustradius.com
43:18www.ajustradius.com
43:22www.ajustradius.com
43:27www.ajustradius.com
Recommended
41:06
|
Up next
2:04:39
1:06
1:24:59
1:07:11
1:04:24
1:00:50
54:16
1:29:36
1:28:54