I had a friend who was in jail for 6 months for a couple of felonies he did not commit. A gas station was robbed at gun point and he was walking down the street when it happened. The cops picked him up and the women identified my friend as the one who committed the robbery. However, the video cameras in the store showed that the man who robbed the gas station had tattoos along his chest and stomach (the man wasn’t wearing a shirt at the time). My friend has very distinct tattoos on his body but non on his stomach or chest. The cops found no gun, or any of the money that was supposedly taken. He was then incarcerated for about 6 months. During that time he wrote letters to his lawyer (public defender) and to the sheriffs office stating his case. He told them that there video tapes that would prove his innocence. He had to write 4 letters to the public defender before any response had come. After 6 months of sitting in a cell the court finally looked at the video tapes and declared him innocent. Why did this take so long to happen?? And why was he sitting in a jail cell for 6 months if our countries justice system is based off of innocent until proven guilty? Also can he sue the state for neglecting evidence?
(He was never convicted he sat in jail awaiting trial.)
If you can’t afford bail can you sue the state if you end up being innocent?
03
Jun
ServantofGod
June 3, 2010 at 7:47 pm
yes you can. Good luck with it though. Get lots of media attention.
Cindy B
June 3, 2010 at 7:48 pm
No, the police and the District Attorney are protected by law from lawsuits for trying to do their jobs. It dose seem that they should have been able to eliminate him as a suspect pretty early on, if they had bothered to try.
Where was your friend’s lawyer during the 6 months, he might have been able to point out the inconsistency to the DA, if the DA had provided him with the videotape of the robbery.
This is why there should be open discovery in criminal cases, rather than the DA trying to hide evidence and go to trial and spring it on the defendant. If the tape had shown that it was him then the defendant could have saved the state time and money with a plea of guilty, but since it was not him, they could have saved themselves time and money by sharing the tape with the defense attorney.
Sorry that happened to him, but he is not the first to have it happen, and won’t be the last.
In Texas there is money to pay those who are convicted and then later found to have been innocent, but the max they can get is $50,000.00. There is not fund for those who are acquitted at trial.
Just remember his facts if you are ever chosen for a jury duty.
Good Luck
elysialaw
June 3, 2010 at 8:00 pm
You can sue anyone for anything. Winning is another story.
The prosecution and the police were acting on a witness identification. They did not fabricate evidence or arrest him without any evidence.
Your friend must have not been a first time offender, or he would have been released on his own recognizance or with a surety. They likely wouldn’t have required bail. NOR is it the police or prosecutors fault that he did not have the bail money.
Also, it takes about 6 months just to compile evidence, never mind the prosecutor and public defender to review it.
Also, the only way for the court to “declare him innocent” would be through a trial, which would have been much longer than 6 months in custody. The prosecutor likely reviewed the evidence and determined there wasn’t sufficent evidence to proceed to trial.