Articles

I Didn't Do It

You are driving within the speed limit in rainy conditions. You slam on your breaks, but your car does not stop in time. You hit the pedestrian. A policeman who happens to be nearby immediately takes control of the crime scene. Over your protest, he measures long skid marks which were not left by your car. You are subsequently charged with speeding and reckless driving, and the police advise you that if the pedestrian dies you will be charged with negligent homicide.

Years ago I had a case very similar to this one. I immediately had an investigator go to the scene, take photographs, measure skid marks and interview witnesses. Luckily, the pedestrian was not seriously injured. As soon as we provided the prosecutor with the investigator's excellent and well-documented report, these charges were dropped.

It might be everyone's worst nightmare - to be falsely accused of a serious crime. It is entirely possible to be wrongly accused of a crime due to sloppy investigation or an overzealous policeman. It is also possible to be the victim of an overly ambitious prosecutor. I remember my shock when, as a much younger lawyer, I congratulated an experienced prosecutor after he won a lengthy and very difficult criminal trial. He laughed and said, "that was nothing. The defendant was guilty. A really good prosecutor can convict the innocent." I took this comment with a grain of salt, but still came away with the feeling that some prosecutors sometimes go too far.

Our civil court system does provide a remedy for false arrest which compensates innocent people for their financial and emotional loss. The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that even a prosecutor can now be found liable for swearing out a false affidavit which leads to the arrest of an innocent person. However, a mere mistake by the police or prosecutor is insufficient to require compensation to the accused. Recently in the news, there have been a number of lawsuits filed by people who were wrongfully accused of crimes. Perhaps the most spectacular of all of these cases is the Wenatchee child abuse case which is currently unfolding in Federal Court in Seattle.

Civil cases for damages caused by false arrest are difficult to prove and often unsuccessful. One example is the recent case where a state liquor agent was mistakenly arrested outside a Federal Way night spot. Although he was innocent of any crime, a Federal Court jury rejected his civil rights claim. As a general rule, the law recognizes that the police are justified in making arrests based on "probable cause" even if they are later proven to be wrong.

People who are innocent but are charged with a crime have special problems unique to them. Defendants who are innocent often feel unduly pressured to plead guilty to a lesser charge when they feel they have not committed any crime at all. The criminal justice system creates a tremendous financial strain and takes a huge emotional toll on those who insist on going to trial. Passing a polygraph test may sometimes lead to dismissal of criminal charges, but prosecutors will not necessarily drop charges solely on the basis of a polygraph. Most legal experts agree that polygraphs are unreliable, and that innocent people sometimes fail a polygraph examination, and the guilty sometimes pass it.

Another frustration of being innocent in the criminal justice system is that the defense attorney sometimes does not focus on the issue of innocence. Criminal lawyers do, in fact, often concentrate more on such technical issues as the failure to properly advise the client of his rights, or deficiencies in a search warrant. Sometimes, criminal defense attorneys intentionally avoid asking their clients about the particulars of their case, choosing instead to focus on uncovering or developing facts which would prevent proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. To the lawyer, this makes sense because attorneys are ethically barred from arguing that a client is innocent if in fact the attorney knows that his client is guilty. If the lawyer never asks his client if he actually did what he is accused of, the attorney can ethically argue his innocence to a jury no matter how strong his personal reservations might be.

To an innocent person, however, it may be very frustrating if the attorney focuses only on the technicalities of the case. Those who are falsely accused want to focus on their innocence. They want to have their names cleared, not just beat the wrap.