Yet Another Sign of Needed Reform to New York's Criminal Justice System by Eric Schneiderman
July 14th, 2008
The case of Marty Tankleff should convince even the most hard-hearted conservatives of the need for fundamental reform in our criminal justice system. In 1988, then-17-year-old Marty was convicted of murdering his parents and sentenced to fifty years in prison. His conviction was based almost entirely on a "confession" that was obtained after hours of hostile interrogation in which police falsely told a confused, traumatized teenager that his father had lived long enough to identify him as the attacker. In fact, the interrogating officer wrote the alleged confession, which Marty eventually recanted.
After serving 18 years, Marty's conviction was vacated on December 12, 2007, and on Monday, June 30, his indictment was finally lifted after a special investigation into his case by Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.
Marty's case is a stark-but not unique-example of a disturbing fact about New York's criminal justice system: we sometimes convict innocent people. This spring, the New York State Senate Democratic Task force on Criminal Justice Reform, which I chair, began a comprehensive inquiry into the critical issue of wrongful convictions.
The taskforce is conducting a series of public hearings around the state to highlight cases like Marty's, to develop legislative remedies for the most pervasive causes of wrongful convictions, and, most importantly, to build support for an independent "Innocence Commission" in our state.
An Innocence Commission would review all cases of exoneration-by DNA or other unassailable evidence-to determine what reforms are needed to prevent wrongful convictions. Commissions in several states have already begun to recommend and help implement improvements in investigations, lab operations, prosecution and judicial review.
The most reliable way for judges and juries to know whether a confession is genuine is to require the videotaping of all custodial interrogations. Video evidence will then protect both the accused from abuse and the authorities from false accusations of improper conduct.
We also must explore ways to reduce the number of false eyewitness identifications. Eyewitness testimony can be powerfully persuasive to a jury, but it is subject to suggestion and manipulation. Nearly 60 percent of wrongful convictions involve erroneous eyewitness testimony.
Simple reforms can minimize false eyewitness identification. Lineups should be conducted by an officer who does not know the suspect. A suspect should not stand out in a lineup as the only person with key characteristics, such as race or facial hair. Witnesses should be instructed that the perpetrator may not be in the lineup, and that the investigation will continue regardless of whom they pick, or if they pick no one at all. And witnesses should be asked to state how confident they are in any identification they provide.
Finally, for those who have already been wrongfully convicted, preservation and cataloguing of DNA evidence, and access to post-conviction DNA testing, are critical to their chances of exoneration. Shockingly, evidence that can decisively influence appeals based on innocence is often lost or destroyed. In some cases, access to post-conviction DNA testing is denied if a suspect pled guilty, in spite of what is now known about the prevalence of false confessions.
The New York State Bar Association has already begun work on a private "Innocence Commission" to examine these issues. The state should examine that process, and either supplement it with a public commission or simply endorse and adopt its findings. Either way, it is urgent that we fully investigate the causes of wrongful convictions before we convict anyone who is truly innocent.
Eric Schneiderman, a Democrat, represents parts of Manhattan and the Bronx in the State Senate.
After serving 18 years, Marty's conviction was vacated on December 12, 2007, and on Monday, June 30, his indictment was finally lifted after a special investigation into his case by Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.
Marty's case is a stark-but not unique-example of a disturbing fact about New York's criminal justice system: we sometimes convict innocent people. This spring, the New York State Senate Democratic Task force on Criminal Justice Reform, which I chair, began a comprehensive inquiry into the critical issue of wrongful convictions.
The taskforce is conducting a series of public hearings around the state to highlight cases like Marty's, to develop legislative remedies for the most pervasive causes of wrongful convictions, and, most importantly, to build support for an independent "Innocence Commission" in our state.
An Innocence Commission would review all cases of exoneration-by DNA or other unassailable evidence-to determine what reforms are needed to prevent wrongful convictions. Commissions in several states have already begun to recommend and help implement improvements in investigations, lab operations, prosecution and judicial review.
The most reliable way for judges and juries to know whether a confession is genuine is to require the videotaping of all custodial interrogations. Video evidence will then protect both the accused from abuse and the authorities from false accusations of improper conduct.
We also must explore ways to reduce the number of false eyewitness identifications. Eyewitness testimony can be powerfully persuasive to a jury, but it is subject to suggestion and manipulation. Nearly 60 percent of wrongful convictions involve erroneous eyewitness testimony.
Simple reforms can minimize false eyewitness identification. Lineups should be conducted by an officer who does not know the suspect. A suspect should not stand out in a lineup as the only person with key characteristics, such as race or facial hair. Witnesses should be instructed that the perpetrator may not be in the lineup, and that the investigation will continue regardless of whom they pick, or if they pick no one at all. And witnesses should be asked to state how confident they are in any identification they provide.
Finally, for those who have already been wrongfully convicted, preservation and cataloguing of DNA evidence, and access to post-conviction DNA testing, are critical to their chances of exoneration. Shockingly, evidence that can decisively influence appeals based on innocence is often lost or destroyed. In some cases, access to post-conviction DNA testing is denied if a suspect pled guilty, in spite of what is now known about the prevalence of false confessions.
The New York State Bar Association has already begun work on a private "Innocence Commission" to examine these issues. The state should examine that process, and either supplement it with a public commission or simply endorse and adopt its findings. Either way, it is urgent that we fully investigate the causes of wrongful convictions before we convict anyone who is truly innocent.
Eric Schneiderman, a Democrat, represents parts of Manhattan and the Bronx in the State Senate.
