Well, it’s finally over, and if you didn’t look too closely, you’d think the good guys had won. Today at a pre-trial hearing in Smith County, six of the seven so-called Mineola Swingers Club defendants—accused of unbelievable acts of child sexual abuse—pled guilty to “injury to a child” (a felony) in exchange for their freedom. They’ve all been in jail or prison since 2007, though two had their sentences overturned. The remaining defendant—whose conviction is still intact—will remain in prison.The story provides an excellent, if angering explanation of why innocent people may plead guilty in cases such as this:
I’ve rarely seen the wheels of justice grind up so many innocent people—and I’m not just talking about these seven defendants. I’m also talking about the children who became witnesses against them, plus the family members of everyone involved in this sordid mess. As long-time Tyler attorney Bobby Mims, who is also a vice-president of the Texas Criminal Defense Lawyers Association, told me in my first story on the cases, “In my thirty years of practice, I’ve never seen anything like it—an absolute, honest-to-God frame-up.”
Why would they do this if they aren’t guilty? Well, innocent people plead guilty all the time. They confess to crimes they didn’t commit (about a quarter of the DNA exonerations involve some form of false confession) and they plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit. They especially do it when they are certain they will be found guilty, no matter what they do or how good their attorneys are. In these cases we’ve already seen four different juries vote guilty—in the time it takes to watch a movie. These defendants know the realities. They can go to prison for life—or they can go home. They don’t have a whole lot to lose by pleading guilty. Their lives have already been ruined—they’ll always be known for these allegations anyway.There's little doubt more than a few innocent people enter into plea deals for exactly those reasons: The (il)logic of the plea bargain system all but demands it. Even if you're innocent, would you risk a life sentence if you could plea guilty and go home by the end of the week?
Ultimately, says Hall, "There was no crime. There was no sex kindergarten and there were no child-sex shows at a swinger’s club. Ultimately, I can’t help but believe that [Smith County DA Matt] Bingham knows this. Let’s put it this way: If he really believed these people put on live sex shows with children, would he really be setting them free now?" Exactly.
.jpg)
29 comments:
Is there any kind of evidence that is considered reliable anymore other than DNA? We can no longer depend on eyewitness testimony, accomplice witness testimony, jailhouse snitch testimony, hair comparisons, ballistic and metal comparisons, dental comparisons, fingerprint analysis, child victim testimony, testimony of undercover officers, confessions and, now, even guilty pleas. Kind of begs the question, doesn't it: Is there really even crime in our society? Or is it all just a big conspiracy by the government like the Apollo moon landing or the killing of Osama Bin Laden? Since there is no longer any type of evidence deemed reliable enough to justify convicting and punishing someone, perhaps we could save a lot of tax dollars by just defunding law enforcement, prosecution and the courts. There is no need for any government sponsored criminal justice system since any type of government obtained proof of guilt is inherently unreliable. Just think of the money we could save! To the extent there are any inadvertent "unintentional" murders, robberies, rapes, child abuse, etc., in our othwerise pristine, Utopian society, ... well, perhaps we can just resort to vigilante justice to deal with that.
8:31, As for guilty pleas, 25% of DNA exonerees nationally pled gulity - often to avoid the death penalty. Those folks were actually innocent, whether or not you're willing to acknowledge that reality, and they represent just a small subset of those railroaded into pleaing to something they didn't do.
Critiquing bite mark evidence or testimony of jailhouse snitches (read: criminals) is hardly the equivalent of denying the moon landing! Since I consider the National Academy of Sciences more credible than anonymous, hyperbolic blog commenters, I'll take their word for it that un-scientific forensics based on subjective comparisons like bite marks aren't as accurate as forensics based on actual science like DNA testing.
E.g., if the DNA in the Lake Waco murders comes back and inculpates the subject, fine, there was no harm in checking. But if those guys were really innocent, do you really want to defend unreliable investigative techniques just out of ideological zeal? After all, it would mean the real killer(s) are still out there. Who benefits from that?
Bottom line, nobody says the types of evidence you mention don't have a role, but they're not as reliable as prosecutors often pretend before juries and need greater corroboration than is usually provided. That's the lesson of all these DNA exonerations, not that any and all evidence is unreliable.
BTW, the 14th Court of Appeals in overturning two of these cases said “The record is rife with error … the trial court adopted ad hoc evidentiary rules that operated to assist the State in proving its case, while impeding appellant’s ability to defend himself.”
These defendants were railroaded, flat out.
I am not a fan of anonymous posts, but for now I must remain so. I am very familiar with these cases. What I believe about the merits of the case is not important. The impoertant thing is that true or not, it seems almost inhumane to force the kids to testify for a 5th time to acts they believe occurred. I applaud DA Bingham for truly putting the "victims" first and agreeing to these plea bargains, even at the risk of taking a pr pummelling. The defendants may be getting out of jail soon, but the kids can now get on with life. Kudos to Mr. Bingham and his office for seeing the big picture.
I think it was the 14th Court of Appeals that saw "the big picture."
Grits is talking about people railroaded into entering a plea....
How can one be railroaded when they have an attorney to represent them?
If that is the case then that would mean that their attorney is in on the scam.....and then I guess we should do away with all attorneys.
Does anyone know why attorneys were neckties?
It is to hold the foreskin back.....just a little attorney humor.
My point is this.... If these poor poor people have been railroaded then it would have to include the very people that are there to protect thei intrest....their attorney, whether it is one that they hired or one appointed to them.
Either way it is hard to imagine a conspiracy that would include this many different people with different agendas.....
Come on now Grits.....
Mr. Grits, sarcasm doesn't become you. Perhaps one day I will fully explain my comments to which you made your snarky reply, but for now I cannot. I genuinely enjoy your blog. You do a tremendous job covering many issues. I read your posts as part of my morning routine. Keep up the good work.
It wasn't really sarcasm, 9:27, I really do think the quote from the 14th Court captures "the big picture." Bingham was just cutting his losses after a brutal bench slapping; I see nothing noble in what he's done here. I'll look forward to the day when you can explain to me why you think that view is misguided.
As for 9:25 asking, "How can one be railroaded when they have an attorney to represent them?," the answer is when the judge behaves as part of the prosecution team instead of as a neutral arbiter, which is routinely the case with Jack Skeen in Tyler.
". . . which is routinely the case with Jack Skeen in Tyler."
And also with Ed Self in Plainview and Tulia.
How can one be railroaded when they have an attorney to represent them?
I've had to pea guilty in a case I was innocent of. It only involved a speeding in a school zone ticket but still I was innocent. I was poor enough at the time being a college student that I was able to get public representation. The attorney, and they are all scamming, pushed me to plead guilty $220 fine and six week end community service. The alternative was a trial a much bigger fine and possible jail time.
I did what I had to do. The atorney obviously was in a hurry (probably forced to do pro bono work). I knew he wouldnt put real effort into it, I didnt have the $150 and hour even mediocre justice costs.
It can happen in a justice system so crooked.
8:31 AM - hell yes there is it's called an investigation moron
9:25 AM - from one coward to another coward I'm not sure if your are a frigin ding dong, a goofball, a jerk or just plain ol stupid? Who knows why you enjoy jerking Grit's chain?
Even those with half a brain have no problem understanding how the plea bargain process is abused on a daily basis. Of course it goes without saying that everyone is in on it or it couldn't happen.
There is no way in hell that a good criminal defense attorney worth his salt would plea out an innocent client. But here in the great state of confusion aka: Texas, courts allow Divorce & Estate specialist, Slip & Fall PI wusses to be interviewed & retained or appointed to represent clients in felony jury trials. The ADAs eat their butts alive thus plea bargain abuses are the end product.
And still A-Holes like you both can't believe that everyone's in on it or think that your goofy comments is the cure.
"How can one be railroaded when they have an attorney to represent them?"
Imagine your own self spending 3-4 years in jail and prison, away from family and friends, away from the freedom to have privacy, away from all the things that you do on a daily basis. Then, one day, the DA offers all that back to you, would you not accept it? The defense attorneys can only tell you the pros and cons and advise you what to choose, but ultimately, you have to choose, not your attorney.
Many of the comments are clearly written by non-lawyers and/or the naive. As a criminal defense lawyer who regularly tries cases and wins, sometimes clients are scared and take bad deals to quit have to keep coming to court; get out of jail; or avoid risk of more time after a trial. It's their decision. I've seem clients take advice and ignore it. I've seen innocent clients convicted who may wish they'd taken an offer they turned down.
Whew.....a raw nerve has been stricken apparently when one mentions an attorney....
So is it that everyone who claims to be not guilty, and has a attorney appointed to represent them railroaded?
Or is it that everyone who can afford an attorney, pleads not guilty, and is still convicted a victim of some horrendous conspiracy?
As to the person who stated that some clients make bad decisions....well that is something that has nothing to do with being railroaded.
It is the attorney's responsibility to make sure that their client understands the issue.... not the court.
I know personally the dishonesty Matt Bingham and those in his office and know what its like to be put in the position of having to plead to something you didn't do. About 4 years ago I was assaulted by an investigator, Fabio Martinez, in the Smith County DA's office. I had exercised my free speech right to criticize Mr. Bingham and was assaulted and arrested for doing so. At the time I was told I was being arrested for disorderly conduct. Of course Bingham immediately realized I would have a solid Section 1983 claim for violation of my free speech rights, unlawful arrest, and excessive force. So, they had to concoct a story to justify what they did. And, it worked. I was faced with the prospect of going to trial on a felony, knowinng that Martinez wouldn't hesistate to lie to convict me. He had already ocmmitted perjury by filing a false affidavit. A fact, I'm sure of which Bingham was aware (hell, it was probalby his idea). I finally hired an attorney that they were afraid of and they offered a deal to let me plead to a misdemeanor and deferred adjudication. You weigh the option...plead guilty to a misdemeanor with ultimately no conviction or go to trial, almost certainly be convicted and go to prison? What would you do? I took the deal and have regretted it every since. I know I did the smart thing but its a hard thing to live with.
As far as the person giving Bingham credit for sparing the kids having to testify again....believe me, that had nothing to do with his decision. His decision was simply the best way he saw out of an embarassing situation. He knew if he went to trial again on this case he'd suffer an embarassing defeat. I supsect he knows these people were innocent. Bingham is nothing but a lying scumbag. Skeen too.
09:27 A "snarky reply" comes from those who know they are right. Try as they may, they have trouble respecting those who have a different opinion.
The frequent problem I have with those outside the system taking pot shots at those working within it is highlighted here: you have plenty to say about how bad it is, but what can you offer?
What I'm asking is this: if the plea bargain system sucks, what would you do instead? Serious question, I want to know.
Well 4:52, I think you need to start by getting rid of dishonest prosecutors and judges like Matt Bingham and Jack Skeen. No matter what changes you make to the system as long as there are people like that running the system it will be corrupt. So, its in the hands of the voters. Voters need to wake up and start paying attention to what is going on. Its not secret that Jack Skeen has been sleazy for decades. Multiple media articles have been written about his sleazy practices (although not by the Tyler media). Yet the voters of Smith County keep electing him. So, I guess you need to start with informed voters and clean house to get rid of all the vermin in the system. Removing absolute prosecutorial immunity would also be a good step.
Furthermore, the problem in this case has little to do with the plea bargaining system. If this case were properly investigated from the start it wouldn't have been brought. It was rejected by Wood County when a very experienced investigator there determined it was bogus. A Texas Ranger (former speeding ticket writer) with no experience or training in complex child abuse investigation bungled this case and then committed perjury. Had proper protocols been followed in this investigation, the whole mess could have been avoided. Its very likely that these kids were abused sometime by some one but because of this bungling Ranger and the bunglins Smith County DA's office we will probably never know the truth.
So, again we need to start with replacing dishonest prosecutors, judges and law enforcement officers with honest ones. And, when an officer lies in court he needs to be prosecuted for perjury.
04:52 Can I give you a hint? Do you really think it's about the issues? Do you think these are "reformers" who believe the system is legitimate but needs some tinkering?
Or, maybe the issues don't really matter all that much. Could it be that the issues merely provide the opportunity to constantly discredit and undermine the system? What vision do these progressive really have?
Sure, some reformers are caught up, but aren't they being taken for a ride?
You guys dont have to use your real name or post as anonymous. Just make up something different. The conversation is interesting but almost impossible to follow as anonymous has said everything.
"Could it be that the issues merely provide the opportunity to constantly discredit and undermine the system?"
Or we could just bury our heads in the sand and remain blisfully in denial, like you.
I'm sorry but anyone who thinks the system is working just fine....well.....I just don't know what to say about you. D - E - N - I- A- L.
There will come a day when people like Bingham and Skeen have to stand before God and answer for what they've done. I wouldn't want to be in their shoes on that day. Those of you that enable and support these types may also have some splainin to do.
Smith County Justice strikes again.
This type of courtroom behavior is normal for Smith Co.
Why does almost everyone on this issue, reply anonymously! What are they afraid of? A lot of them don't really understand the criminal justice system very well.
No, most of us are lazy and don't set up the accounts, or remember our passwords.
Yours truly,
I.M. Liaisy
You are 100% correct when you say that innocent people do plead guilty, quite often. Before anyone labels me a "crazy", let me say that I have represented several hundred accused criminals over the years.
The problem, as I see it, is the range of punishment in the penal code. When an offense carries 5-99 years, and the DA is offering 10, and the defendant is only 25 or 30 years old, is it any surprise that an innocent man (or woman) would plead guilty?
Our prisons are filled with political prisoners.
As far as anonymous posting, many folks live up in Smith County where the police love Skeen and Bingham and would not hesitate to to suppress any person who publically critisized them. Beyond that Skeen and Bingham wouldn't hesitate to economically or politically harm their critics. It's a small town. If you speak out lawyers will come whisper in your ear that they agree with you, and you are right, but they won't say anything themselves. They all make a living out of the courthouse and know better than to stir the snakes nest of the DA and Skeen.
U think u all have it bad mount Pleasant texas titus county from judges corny da's court appointed attirneys unbelievable these crooks put their hand on a bible the worst part is that they dont have no remorse no nothing just their job title. My family. And i fear being killed or framed these guys live to get people who speak up and out.
Post a Comment