tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post2338392449446859895..comments2024-01-25T14:51:13.377-05:00Comments on Gamso - For the Defense: BECAUSE THEY REALLY DON'T GIVE A SHIT - Ohio Prosecutors EditionJeff Gamsohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09869425697771419546noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-10513530857986519342012-12-18T16:30:27.404-05:002012-12-18T16:30:27.404-05:00I think we should be even more efficient in protec...I think we should be even more efficient in protecting witnesses, why not have a secret trial closed to the public with just the prosecutor, the jury, and anonymous witnesses wearing ski masks and using those voice scramblers. That way our innocent witnesses and preciously fragile justice system can operate with the utmost efficiency and safety. We can just hold the accused in prison during the secret trial and let him know how it went when its all over, that way nobody gets hurt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-39456366333359866672010-08-13T18:54:32.800-04:002010-08-13T18:54:32.800-04:00Well, like I say, the rules have changed, and the ...Well, like I say, the rules have changed, and the new ones are pretty good. The question is how the prosecutors will act. Ultimately, it rests on good faith - or courts that will really enforce. Since we often don't have the latter, we're going to need a lot of the former.Jeff Gamsohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09869425697771419546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-43431930977693692192010-08-13T16:35:15.399-04:002010-08-13T16:35:15.399-04:00While reading the part about Ohio's criminal d...While reading the part about Ohio's criminal discovery rules, I had to do a double-take on the date, actually the year, of the post. <br /><br />We have our discovery battles here in California, but compared to what you face in Ohio (and our brothers and sisters face in Texas) it's a miracle you get anything accomplished resembling justice.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02538519295576961524noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-7179249115492997562010-08-11T19:55:50.871-04:002010-08-11T19:55:50.871-04:00Prosecutors, I guess, forget they are supposed to ...Prosecutors, I guess, forget they are supposed to be fighting for truth and justice not numbers in their "win column". <br /><br />Below is one prosecutor's response to the DNA letter:<br /><br />excerpts from Ashland Times-Gazette:<br /><br />County Prosecutor Ramona Francesconi-Rogers said Wednesday that she's willing to talk with the state attorney general about releasing possible DNA evidence in a decade-old robbery case -- if he agrees to look at the big picture.<br /><br />At issue is a cigarette butt collected as evidence from a farm in Clear Creek Township where Arthur L. Swanson committed a strong-arm robbery against an Amish man in 1998. Swanson, a Mansfield resident who was 54 years old at the time, took the family's egg money.<br /><br /><br />The cigarette butt was never presented as evidence during trial. Nor was it mentioned in testimony. Yet, it has become a focal point, both as a basis for unsuccessful appeals and what Francesconi-Rogers characterized as "political maneuvering" on the part of Ohio Attorney General Richard Cordray and Gov. Ted Strickland.<br /><br />Democrats Cordray and Strickland are running for re-election in November.<br /><br />The issue came to the fore this week in Columbus, where the Dispatch spotlighted Swanson's case. The article was a follow-up of a weeklong series the Dispatch published in 2008 with the assistance of the Cincinnati-based Innocence Project. The series explored the potential for using DNA testing to overturn wrongful convictions.<br /><br /><br />Francesconi-Rogers indicated her response would be "a conditional no."<br /><br />"If Cordray will read the trial transcript and read the court of appeals' briefs and decisions, then come down to my office and tell me that the cigarette butt would have changed the jury's mind, then we'll have further discussion," she said.<br /><br />She acknowledged Wednesday that the cigarette butt might very well not have Swanson's DNA on it. It had been collected by investigators at the scene as potential evidence. The defense attorney was given that information during the pretrial discovery process.<br /><br />Francesconi-Rogers' concern is that the DNA evidence is being framed as conclusive. She's worried people might get the impression that, if Swanson's DNA is not found on it, he is automatically innocent.<br /><br />There is always the danger of a civil suit against the state or county. An attorney representing Swanson's mother requested the cigarette butt in 2007 pursuant to a possible civil action for wrongful imprisonment. Francesconi-Rogers refused to release the cigarette butt. Marc Dann, the state attorney general at the time, ruled that she was not obligated to turn over the evidence.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com