Disclaimer

Disclaimer: I am providing the content on this blog solely for the reader's general information. This blog contains my personal commentary on issues that interest me. Unless otherwise stated, the views expressed on this blog are mine alone, and not the views of any law firm with which I am in any way associated or any other member of any such law firm. Nothing on this blog is intended to be a solicitation of, or the provision of, legal advice, nor to create an attorney-client relationship with me or any law firm. Please view my "Full Disclaimer" statement at the bottom of the page for additonal information..

Thursday, September 12, 2013

Bail Granted for Debra Milke, Formerly on Death Row for Murder of Son



A Maricopa County, Arizona (Phoenix) Superior Court Judge granted a $250,000 bail to Debra Milke, whose conviction for murdering her then 5 year-old son 22 years ago was overturned by the Ninth Circuit (and just upheld by the Supreme Court).  Milke is expected to make bail and live in a house purchased by her supporters.  The case is bizarre and one of the most shocking cases of prosecutorial abuse in recent memory.  Full story. 

  

Twenty-two years ago, Milke, then an insurance clerk, was arrested and convicted of participating in the killing of her son, allegedly for a $5,000 insurance policy. Prosecutors claimed that she dressed him up, told him he was going to see Santa, then handed him off to two men, who then killed him. 

The two men are on death row for the murder.  Their participation in the killing is not in dispute.  Milke’s has been in dispute for two decades. 

The only evidence that the prosecution had against her was from a police detective who testified that Milke had confessed to him in a closed interrogation room, with no recording device.  Milke disputed this at trial, but the jury believed the detective.  The jury was not told, nor was the defense at the time, about all the lies that the detective was known to have told before.

Armando Saldate, Jr., the detective, had a history of lying; all spelled out in the recent Ninth Circuit opinion:


This history includes a five-day suspension for taking “liberties” with a female motorist and then lying about it to his supervisors; four court cases where judges tossed out confessions or indictments because Saldate lied under oath; and four cases where judges suppressed confessions or vacated convictions because Saldate had violated the Fifth Amendment or the Fourth Amendment in the course of interrogations. And it is far from clear that this reflects a full account of Saldate’s misconduct as a police officer. All of this information should have been disclosed to Milke and the jury, but the state remained unconstitutionally silent.

The opinion (highlights at Above the Law) took shots at every judge in Arizona that had touched the case and upheld the conviction and the prosecutor’s office. All of the shots were deserved. 

The Maricopa County District Attorney’s office is planning to retry Milke.  This looks like vindictiveness combined with attempted butt-covering.  It should fail.  The defense has a motion, set for hearing, to exclude the original confession during retrial.  That is set for September 23.  Whether that is granted or not, the defense will be able to tell the new jury about the sorry history of Armando Saldate, Jr., who should be in jail.  That should be enough.

No comments:

Post a Comment