Bradley contended that Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project, one of Morton's lawyers, had drafted the affidavit he signed in 2011. The words in the affidavit, Bradley said, were Scheck's, not his. And Bradley said the statements in the affidavit were "true and correct" but not "true and accurate.""True and correct" but not "true and accurate"? Is there truth that is correct but inaccurate?
"I didn’t have a lot of control over this," said Bradley, the longtime DA and former Texas Forensic Science Commission chairman known for his hard-nosed approach. "It was going to be his statement not mine."
And do we believe John Bradley was just Barry Scheck's pawn? That the sitting DA was powerless to author his own affidavit and was serving as the puppet of a slick New York lawyer? That's quite an admission.
How far the mighty have fallen.
.jpg)
16 comments:
I liked the line where Bradley said Anderson's actions were always ethical. Considering Bradley's warped sense of ethics, who would rely on his opinion as to whether someone else's actions were ethical?
Can I write his next affidavit?? Please, oh please!
Best part of Bradley's testimony was at the end when Bradley, obviously frazzled, said to Hardin, "If you are implying that I am lying under oath, it is out of line."
Hardin did seem to be implying just that, but responded by saying, "No further questions."
It made up for having to listen to Bradley say several times while he was under oath that his office had an open file policy.
You surely didn't expect ole weasel d**k to roll over and play dead did you?
When Bradley drew the distinction between "true and correct" versus "accurate", Hardin then proceeded to walk Bradley through his entire affidavit, line by line, asking Bradley, "is this true and correct?", "is it accurate?"
Painful. And quite telling.
What was clear to the most casual observer is this: John Bradley sang one tune when he thought he might win re-election and avoid an inquiry himself.
When he explained how he interpreted the original trial transcript and boldly suggested that the Brady material was "never discussed" until August 2011, Hardin took Bradley back to the 1992 pro se motion, and read aloud to the court the entire description, including the request for the missing reports. Bradley continued to stonewall on the issue, but Hardin made his point to everyone in the room, including the judge.
At this point I left the court room, amazed at the strategy Bradley used, and wondering how many cases will be reopened in Williamson County.
The real question is "how many lives have been ruined with this pattern of behavior?"
Does anyone really expect any changes for Williamson County with the new DA or will it be business as usual?
On Thursday Bradley said Anderson was ethical and tried to integrate his Christian beliefs into his work. Today Anderson bragged about all of his good works.
I couldn't help but think of the individuals that have been wrongfully prosecuted in WilCo. I have thought about the ones that I know who were maliciously prosecuted by Bradley and prosecuted/sentenced by Anderson (and others). Most of the individuals and their families have been financially depleted in their pursuit for true justice. There are some who have unnecessarily lost many years of their lives because of the excessive sentences resulting from the misdeeds of these men. And, there are quite a few still in bondage that should be home. I keep thinking of Bradley's claim of having an open file policy while the lawyers who have handled cases in WilCo say otherwise.
I have thought for a very long time how some like to play Church and be seen at Church. It is a politically sound practice when holding public office especially in a very conservative county.
Tonight I keep thinking of Matthew 23 and how it seems now, in the wake of the WilCo Boys' destruction, that anything good they may have done, they did for men to see. And, they may practice some of Christ teachings but it does seem that they have neglected the meatier matters of the law such as justice, mercy and faithfulness.
Christ also taught that it is easy to i.d. a tree by its fruits.
Someone signs a statement that isn't the truth in Texas? Goodness, whatever next!
[/sarcasm]
I wish I were in Texas right now and could attend those hearings. I am closely watching the proceedings, very interesting.
In my humble opinion, John Bradley and Ken Anderson should both be on death row. They conspired to commit murder, we all know they did , they know they did , but yet here we stand hoping to embarrass this idiot when he should be on trial for his life. These men are dangerous criminals and everyone knows it and they walk around espousing each others "Christian Values"? I apologize to my God for those words even being uttered on this planet. Lord, "they know not what they do"
Grits does a great job of reporting on this inquiry, and is always appreciated- I am struck by the question, as I read of the procedings, how many others like Morton are there-that were not fortunate enough to catch someone's attention? he surely cannot be the only one- Anderson's mea culpa was that of a child who has been caught stealing something-sorry for getting caught, not for what he did- the argument that it is bad public policy to hold procecutors liable for Brady and other violations is specious at best - knowing they are liable might just focus them on their true duty- to seek justice- and moderate the concept of revenge and retribution that defines the criminal justice system
I sat through every minute of this court. There were many hours of mind-numbing tedium, but also times of passion, anger, and grace. As to the fact of this court having been ordered at all, the evidence of misconduct, and the possible outcome, everything has pretty much been said.
I sat directly behind Mike during Anderson's performance Friday- and that is exactly what it was, a performance. He has never apologized, never admitted that mistakes were made that sent Mike into the hell of Texas prisons. Hearing him whine about his troubles and the expense almost caused me to break with my vows of non-violence. I just wanted to smack the man for Mike, since he couldn't- and wouldn't.
The question about other victims of Wilco "justice" begs an answer. I know the real killer was left on the streets and killed again- Debra Masters Baker, Jan 13, 1988. (OK, "allegedly killed) Does anybody really think the "monster" just stopped killing in 1988? I have been writing law enforcement in each of the places Norwood lived since 1988, begging them to take a fresh look at past cases- not just cold cases, but convictions as well. There is a clear pattern to this killer's work,a notable modus operandus. So far not one agency has bothered to even answer. Knowing the reflexive institutional denial of DA offices, few would be willing to look for such cases and then have to admit mistakes were made. Oh yes, they WILL leave an innocent man in prison rather than admit a mistake. So now I'm writing again, this time to media in each area. Thus far I know of at least one case that strongly resembles the 2 known cases.
My anger at Anderson and Bradley makes me want to see both suffer for their crimes, but Mike's humbling example of grace leads me to emulate him in this. It is so very hard. I have no idea how he does it, but I want to learn.
Mr. Baker, you raise some interesting points. I grew up in Northeast Texas and there are two unsolved cases that have always bugged me. One, oddly, shares the same last name as the person who killed both yours and Morton's wives. Kimberly Norwood disappeared from the Hallsville area in 1989. Kelly Wilson disappeared from the Gilmer area in 1992. It might be worth finding out if Mr. Norwood was in Northeast Texas during those periods. You would think that law enforcement in those areas would look at every possible suspect so that maybe one day their families can know what happened to them.
Philip Baker, if you think you may have any information regarding a possible wrongful conviction then I suggest you add the Innocence Project of Texas to your list of next contacts.
Thanks to people's varying perspectives and rampant sophism, people's "truth" can sometimes be simultaneously accurate and incorrect. They may know a true fact but ascribe to it incorrect meanings. But John Bradley's reversed construction is an epistemological fallacy: truth cannot be both "correct" and inaccurate.
What a sad emasculated version of a man Mr. Bradley has become.
Hey Grits & all, we Texans' call this type of topic deflection
"Talkin-out-the-side-of-his-neck" Inwhich always is followed by a long drawn out - WTF?
Welcome to Texas folks, aka: "The Great State of Confusion & Loopholes". Will interpertraite for food.
---------------------------------
Regarding the Art of bible thumpin & hangin out in church parkinglots with a pocket full of cards.
*When I confronted Mr. Casey J. O'Brien aka: jigmeister, aka: "The King of Nolo Contendere" & part weessel in the Simple Justice Comment section of a post entitled - "Plea Bargaining 201" about his documented role in the framing of an innocent probationer (myself) he feinged ignorance of the facts. He refused to acknowledge my offer to supply him with copies of the proof of police, prosecutorial, defense & the bench's criminal misconduct and closed with saying that the Judge was one of the best Christians he ever knew. He never returned to S. J. again. He was last seen passing out bidness cards in the N.W. section of a church parkinglot (the other sections were taken by divorce & estate specialist).
So, in closing, when a criminal pulls the Christian Card out of his hiney and throws it in your face - you can bet that he knows damn well what he's doing. Thanks.
Can I get a AWEMAN?
Post a Comment