Last month, a Maryland judge declared a mistrial in the case of Charles Smith, who was charged in connection with a 2023 mass shooting in Annapolis. The judge found that Assistant District Attorney Anne Colt Leitess mischaracterized evidence and blatantly disregarded the rules of evidence during the high-profile trial. Whether this was a deliberate choice or the byproduct of deficient trial skills—exacerbated by a culture of plea-driven mass adjudication that has almost completely displaced constitutionally prescribed jury trials—the result revealed an intolerable lack of due process for the defendant.
Thanks to prosecutorial misconduct, jurors’ time was wasted, justice for the victims and their families was put on hold, and the accused was denied his rights under our Constitution. What’s unusual about this case isn’t the prosecutorial misconduct itself, but that the trial judge stepped up to protect the rights of the accused.
Prosecutors are the most powerful—and least accountable—actors in our criminal justice system. In 1976, the Supreme Court, absent any legitimate authority, invented the doctrine of absolute prosecutorial immunity out of whole cloth. Absolute prosecutorial immunity ensures that prosecutors are never held liable when exercising their prosecutorial functions. This persistent lack of accountability has perpetuated injustice. It has denied victims and their families closure and undermined the rights of the accused, all while allowing violent offenders to walk scot-free.
“…this was a deliberate choice or the byproduct of deficient trial skills…”
Can’t tell the difference? Deliberate choices, indistinguishable from deficiencies in skills? Thus a prosecutor could disguise deliberate actions, as honest mistakes?
Also, I must presume that the idea that there are prosecutors representing “The People” who’s skills are deficient enough to create this outcome, is plausible.
How can we continue to support a system where these things can, and do, happen, but that only come to light if the wrongly convicted can prove that they did? Also, a prosecutor can avoid all consequences for deliberate action just by disguising their corruption as mistakes. Last, but certainly not least, if there are deficiently skilled prosecutors, how can we believe any result any of them produce?
How can we be certain that any of the results they have produced did not include misrepresentation of facts, as a result of deliberate choice or incompetence? Eliminating prosecutorial immunity would, at least eventually, eliminate the corrupt leaving just the errors of the incompetent to deal with.
Ah yes, just presume everybody is guilty of something, so all convictions are “just” under any and all circumstances, even if the convicted happens to not have done what they got convicted for. Thus, it doesn’t matter what they are convicted of, or how that conviction was achieved, so long at they get convicted of something!
How common is it for the defense attorney to take a persons family to the prosecutor so they can pressure the defendant to take a plea? I asked because thats exactly what happened to me. I didnt even know what I was really facing until my family came to me crying, saying the prosecutor said he was going to give me some crazy time if I didn’t plea.
Much like the Feres Doctrine, which was a byproduct of the court and not any Congressional movement where it should have come from initially, the court did the same thing here by making something happen that is outside the bounds of their legitimate power when Congress needs to do this. That in its own right needs to strike down anything related to immunity for these individuals who wield this power until Congress put something on paper and it is signed into law.
Bravo to the judge who put the brakes on this.
Prosecutors are the most powerful and less held accountable ” actors” in our criminal justice system.
Need to start accounting for court given power, status, and special tests such as immunity and Feres Doctrine that were not provided by Congress as should’ve been before the court decided to implement them. I have to think there are quite a few we need to address with Congress.