Jailhouse Snitches

Statistics

Expert Testimony

Juan Melendez

Jury Instructions

• 45.9% of documented wrongful capital convictions have been traced to false informant testimony

• In more than 15% of wrongful conviction cases overturned through DNA testing, an informant testified against the defendant at the original trial.

• A jailhouse informant contributed to a wrongful sexual assault conviction in 16% of the 244 post-conviction DNA exonerations in the United States

• 20% of all California wrongful convictions, capital or otherwise, result from false snitch testimony.

• According to the National Registry of Exonerations, a total of 804 people have been wrongly convicted with perjury or false accusations being one of the factors.

• (1) Expert Testimony
• A study utilizing mock jurors to test the impact of informants found no difference in the number of guilty verdicts rendered when comparing the experimental (expert witness) and control (no expert witness) conditions

Why do it?

(2) Jury Instructions

• A meta-analysis of 48 studies examining judicial instructions to ignore inadmissible evidence in juror verdict decisions found that juror verdicts did not vary with the presence of cautionary instructions, deeming such instructions ineffective

• Extra Privileges in Jail
• Paid to Testify
• Shorter Sentence
• Get out of jail

They're all guilty anyways

Fearsome Cross-Examination

Section 5 of the Statute

(3) Fearsome Cross-Examination

• At that time, it was thought that if the jury were made explicitly aware of a cooperating witness' incentive to testify (leniency or reward) or testimony history, then the jury would be more likely to discount testimony (most oftentimes secondary confessions_ provided by that witness.

• However, Neuschatz et. al. (2008) as well as Neuschatz et al. (2012) provided evidence suggesting that neither incentive nor testimony history have a significant impact on juror verdict decisions.

Massachusetts Laws:

258D Compensation Statute

• Outlines the factors the court of jury must consider in determining damages
• The court or jury shall consider, but not be limited to, the consideration of:
• the income the claimant would have earned, but for his incarceration
• the particular circumstances of the claimant’s trial and other proceedings
• the length and conditions under which the claimant was incarcerated and
• any other factors deemed appropriate under the circumstances in order to fairly and reasonably compensate the claimant.
• Total damages in a 258D claim cannot exceed $500,000.00.
• The damages can include 50% discounted tuition at any state or community college in Massachusetts.

Discussion Questions

• Massachusetts has a compensation statute for individuals who were convicted of crimes they did not commit, and have been subsequently exonerated (MASS GEN. LAWS ch. 258D, (2014)).
• Passed in 2004, the statute allows anyone who was incarcerated because of an erroneous felony conviction to bring a civil claim against the Commonwealth for damages.
• These claims can be tried in front of a jury or a judge; the statute guarantees claimants the right to a jury trial if they want one.
• To be eligible to recover damages, claimants must meet the requirements imposed by Section 1 of the statute.
• They must prove that, among other things, they are innocent of the crime for which they were convicted. It is not enough to show that their conviction was overturned because of procedural, evidentiary, or other reasons.

Leslie Vernon White

Section 8 of the Statute

• Requires that 258D claims be brought within 2 years of a conviction being overturned

• Any claims not brought within the time limit will be “forever barred from consideration by the courts of the commonwealth."

How do you solve a problem like jailhouse informants?

• America's most infamous snitch
• Career criminal
• 1989: 60 minutes tell-all
• Admitted to lying in dozens of cases
• Would impersonate law enforcement to gain information
• A grand jury later found widespread problems with the use of snitches and complicity by police and prosecutors.

How can we change the system to get more reliable jailhouse information from inmates?

Can you think of any possible Constitutional issues with law enforcement using jailhouse informants to gain information?

How do they do it?

Trial lawyers have come up with several different techniques to counter the appeal of a jailhouse informant and the defendant’s alleged confession:

(1) expert testimony

(2) creating cleverly crafted jury instructions and

(3) fearsome cross-examination

• Pick a hot case
• Take a ride on the "freeway"
• "Booking"
• Incriminating admissions first inmate claims to hear from target
• Recruit someone to back up story
• Allows them to "get in the car"
• Research to "corroborate" story
• Trade information with police
• Testify for the incentives

Jailhouse

Snitches