MISTAKEN EYEWITNESS ID KEPT INNOCENT MAN IN PRISON 24 YEARS

Robert Clark Jr., 45, was released from a Georgia state prison after serving 24 years for a crime he did not commit. In prison since 1982, Mr. Clark was released December 8, 2005 after DNA testing initiated by the Innocence Project proved he was innocent. Go here for the Innocence Project story: http://www.innocenceproject.org/case/display_profile.php?id=167


Mr. Clark was charged with rape and kidnapping. He was arrested driving the vehicle of the victim, who, although she told the police her attacker was 5’7”, and Mr. Clark is 6’1, identified Mr. Clark in court at the trial. Other irregularities in the identification procedure are listed in the Innocence Project story.

The car Mr. Clark was driving did not have the steering wheel broken or any other indication that it was stolen. Mr. Clark had gotten the car from his friend, Floyd Antonio Arnold, but the Detective who investigated the case never bothered to check out Mr. Arnold because Mr. Clark had initially lied to the police about where he obtained the vehicle.

The DNA sample that exonerated Mr. Clark was sent to a State database for a check against felons. The DNA sample was a positive match for: you guessed it- Mr. Floyd Arnold, who is currently in prison with a sentence set to expire in January 2006.

The NY Times reported that when Clark was sentenced he told the Judge: “Your Honor, they had Tony right here, I can’t put him on the stand. He’ll tell you I didn’t do nothing but drive the car two weeks later.” The Judge replied: “Mr. Clark you have had your trial. Just remain silent.”

Mr. Clark ignored that command, and told everyone and anyone he could reach over the next quarter century that he was innocent. At the time Mr. Clark was wrongfully convicted, he was the single parent of a 5 year old boy. The justice system didn’t just rob Mr. Clark of his life, it stole the childhood and a father from a young innocent boy as well.

There are two lessons to be learned here: 1) EYEWITNESS IDENTIFICATIONS ARE INHERENTLY UNRELIABLE. Study after study shows that they are the worst piece of evidence. Judges, lawyers, and police officers all need to stop relying on the identification of an eyewitness. Read “The Seven Sins of Memory” for a thorough and scientific analysis of why memory and eyewitness identifications are unreliable. Go to Amazon here to order this book that no defense attorney should be without:


The second lesson is for prosecutors.

We know that as criminal defense attorneys we sometimes piss you off. You get frustrated as you see the justice system let go or go lightly on defendants for a variety of reasons. You have to let the anger or frustration or disappointment go with the end of each case. If you carry a grudge, if you think everyone in custody sitting in the box is guilty, you will eventually contribute to a tragedy. Question all the evidence. Push your detectives to do a perfect job every time. Demand perfection and thoroughness. Always keep an open mind even when an attorney you don’t like approaches you with a story that needs to be checked out. Never forget that your first job, as Janet Reno used to say over and over again, is to make sure the innocent are not prosecuted. Your second job, is to prosecute the guilty. Don’t ever mix up the two, or you will end up prosecuting an innocent man or woman.

As a prosecutor, you are the gate keeper of the system. If a criminal defense attorney is the last line of defense, the prosecutor is the first line of defense against convicting the innocent. Just because a defendant lies to a cop when he’s stopped or in the police station does not mean he or she is guilty. Just because a detective or a victim believes a defendant is guilty does not mean it is so. If that detective in Georgia had bothered to check out Mr. Clark’s “friend” he would have seen a man that perfectly matched the victim’s description of her assailant. But the detective didn’t feel the need to do that. He had a man in custody who lied to him, who was identified, and who was driving the victim’s car. Case Closed. Except for two small facts: Clark was innocent and a rapist remained at large for many years thereafter.

It’s a big joke in Miami about “dropsy” cases, or police officers who write in A-Forms that the Defendant dropped the drugs when the officer approached the suspect. You know what that is? It’s a police officer who is frustrated. He or she can’t build a legitimate case against a local drug dealer, so they shake them down, do a bad search, find drugs, or worse, don’t find drugs but say they do.

The officer thinks “what’s the big deal? It’s not like the guy’s innocent.”

That type of thinking is the thin edge of a large wedge. Do we really want a justice system where cops make the call on the scene? “This guy’s guilty so lets write a good a-form, throw in a spontaneous admission, and make sure we don’t lose in court.”

Of course this doesn’t happen all the time. But it happens enough and Judges and Prosecutors look the other way.

Someone looked the other way in Mr. Clark’s case, and in the blink of an eye, an innocent man lost 25 years. He lost the ability to raise his son. He lost the ability to take care of his mother.

It’s amazing, after reading the story, that Mr. Clark did not lose hope or his soul.

See you in court.