Texas District Judge Ken Anderson is a Low-life, Lying Scumbag
Ken Anderson - Arrested
Photo Credit: CBSNews
In my article two day ago, Zimmerman on Trial for Shooting a Good Boy, I wrote that "most prosecutors are evidence-tampering, jury-rigging, perjury-suborning, self-serving bastards who have no desire in furthering the interests of justice but only to advancing their careers, no matter what innocent party they have to persecute and prosecute."
Just tonight, 60 Minutes ran a story about one such prosecutor, Ken Anderson, who in 1986 was the Williamson County District Attorney when he improperly withheld exculpatory evidence in a murder case against Michael Morton, an innocent man who was released after spending 25 years in prison. Morton was helped by lawyers Barry Scheck and Nina Morrison of The Innocence Project (1).
One of the key pieces of evidence withheld was the transcript of a police interview revealing that the Mortons’ 3-year-old son, Eric, witnessed the murder and said his father wasn’t home at the time (2).
Ken Anderson, currently a sitting Texas District Judge, is a low-life, lying scumbag, like most prosecutors. I say this after interviewing more than a thousand convicted felons. It is a myth that all convicts say they are innocent. Almost all of those I spoke to admitted they were criminals (there were a number who were in fact innocent); however, almost all also claimed they were not tried fairly, that the police lied, the prosecutors suborned perjury, witnesses fabricated stories (in order to reduce their own sentences), the jury was mostly sleeping, and the judge on the case knew that the entire system was rigged.
ENDNOTES
(1):
www.statesman.com, 19 Apr 2013, Judge finds that Anderson hid evidence in Morton murder trial
Former Williamson County District Attorney Ken Anderson was arrested and booked into jail and then released on bail Friday after a specially convened court found that he intentionally hid evidence to secure Michael Morton’s 1987 conviction for murder.
In a blunt and scathing ruling, District Judge Louis Sturns said Anderson acted to defraud the trial court and Morton’s defense lawyers, resulting in an innocent man serving almost 25 years in prison.
“This court cannot think of a more intentionally harmful act than a prosecutor’s conscious choice to hide mitigating evidence so as to create an uneven playing field for a defendant facing a murder charge and a life sentence,” Sturns said.
Sturns, presiding over a court of inquiry that examined the Morton prosecution, found probable cause to believe that Anderson broke two state laws and committed criminal contempt of court for lying to Morton’s trial judge. He then signed a warrant for Anderson’s arrest as required under state law governing courts of inquiry.
(2):
CBSNews, 23 Jun 2013, Evidence of Innocence: The case of Michael Morton
Lara Logan: That document would've proved what?
John Raley: Would've proved that Michael Morton is innocent.
He's talking about this police report, in which Christine's mother told investigators that her 3-year-old grandson Eric had witnessed the murder and described to her in detail how he saw a "monster" with a "big moustache" kill his mother.
"He hit mommy," Eric says in the report.
"Was daddy there?" His grandmother asks.
"No, mommy and Eric was there."
There was also this report in which a neighbor described seeing a suspicious man "park a green van on the street" and "walk into the wooded area" behind the Morton home. Barry Scheck says this is precisely the kind of information a prosecutor is legally and ethically obligated to disclose.
Barry Scheck: Sitting in the prosecutor's file and sitting in the sheriff's file there was a set of documents which, if they had been revealed, and the defense had seen them, Michael Morton would have been acquitted.
