Tuesday, October 7, 2008

Durham Prosecutor Mitch Garrell – No “Minister of Justice”

[Note: Part 2 of Episode I’s “MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper” is now posted on the “Justice 4 Nifong” web site: www.geocities.com/justice4nifong .]

Under the North Carolina State Bar’s “Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor,” it states: “A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply an advocate; the prosecutor’s duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict.”

Durham County Prosecutor Mitch Garrell obviously shirked his responsibility as a minister of justice three years ago when he offered the recently released Erick Daniels the following plea deal: He would be released from jail upon the following conditions - (1) Daniels would deny involvement in the crime but acknowledge the existence of incriminating evidence in exchange for time served; and (2) he would be branded a felon. What a deal!! Thank goodness he was being represented by defense attorney Carlos Mahoney.

It was obvious not only to Independent Weekly reporter Mosi Secret and lay people familiar with the case by following it in the media that the armed robbery charge against the15 year defendant was bogus, but also to Superior Court Judge Orlando Hudson. After seven years of incarceration, during a hearing Judge Hudson dropped the charges against Daniels and refused to allow a re-trial.

With such a case against Erick Daniels, that is all but non-existent, Prosecutor Garrell’s plead deal was designed to inflict a lifetime of pain, stigma, and discrimination against a young man who he knew (or should have known) was innocent of the crime for which he had already spent four years behind bars. In other words, to compound injustice (years of wrongful incarceration) upon injustice (being forever unjustly labeled a felon). The first part of the plea deal (to deny involvement in the crime but acknowledge the existence of incriminating evidence) is blatantly false and a travesty. What incriminating evidence?? The only purpose for such an admission by the defendant would be to provide protection and cover for a flimsy case that was pursued without probable cause.

Due to North Carolina justice’s tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color,” the outrageously unjust events that have befallen young Erick Daniels are not of concern to North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper (he has not proclaimed Erick Daniels “innocent”), Governor Mike Easley (he has not proclaimed him innocent as a step towards the measly compensation he is due for his wrongful incarceration), or even the media in general (the News & Observer editorial of September 27, 2008, states that after seven years of wrongful incarceration during the prime years of his life, that his release from jail and dropped charges is evidence that “an appalling mistake has finally been corrected”). Far from it!

Erick Daniels at least deserves a public proclamation of his innocence (akin to what defendants from families of wealth, power, and prestige receive), and he deserves the paltry financial compensation ($20,000.00/year) from the state for wrongful incarceration. Personally, I believe the state owes him tuition paid higher education or job training, in addition.

Durham Prosecutor Freda Black prosecuted this merit-less case, and with the aid of an inadequate defense was able to win a conviction. Durham Prosecutor Mitch Garrell, with his pitiful plea deal, involved himself in the case as being an antithesis of a “Minister of Justice” (along with Black). Where is the media outrage against these prosecutors? I hear no calls for them to be brought before the State Bar. This reinforces the sad commentary on North Carolina’s justice system. It is a system wherein the only prosecutor in the state’s history to be disbarred is former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong. It is evident that Mr. Nifong was prosecuted and persecuted because he followed the principle of “equal justice for all” instead of openly supporting and promoting the State’s tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.”


unbekannte said...

So how did "decent, honorable" Nifong act as a minister of justice when he knowingly prosecuted three innocent men who were falsely accused of rape?

Or, are all three of you something-happened-in-there fanatics who believe CGM was raped. If she was raped, how do you account for the DNA, no match with any of the accused individuals but matches with multiple other males. Do you call that fact a matter of minimal importance because it exonerates the accused?

I say again, "decent, honorable" Nifong went public before there was any evidence of a crime, proclaimed that a vicious, brutal gang rape had happened, that Lacrosse players were the perpetrators, and the crime was racially motivated. Most of the black political leaders supported Nifong after this. People like Justice4Nifong fanatic Victoria Peterson, the North Carolina NAACP, black Duke faculty members like Houston Baker and Carla Holloway, the New Black Panthers all very loudly and very unjustly proclaimed the defendants prior to trial. Maybe Roy Cooper made the proclomation of innocence because so many African American racists and because "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Mike Nifong had publicly proclaimed them guilty at the outset.

As bad as Erick Daniels situation was, no one tried to take his case public the way "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Mike Nifong did in the Lacrosse case. No one tried to whip up so much hostility and prejudice and hatred against Erick Daniels.

Erick Daniels does deserve compensation. I feel he should sue Durham, the DA's office, the prosecutors for as much as he can get. That kind of action would do more to prevent Prosecutorial abuse than reinstating "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Mike Nifong.

You still have not mentioned Frankie Delano Washington, African American Male falsely accused, incarcerated for almost five tears awaiting trial, who was subjected to prosecutorial abuse. The abusing prosecutor was African Anerican Tracy Cline, who was set to play a big role in the Lacrosse case if it had gone to trial. Do you ignore the case because the prosecutor is African American? Do you ignore it because Mr. Washington's exoneration was based on DNA evidence? If you mentioned Mr. Washington's case, you might have to explain why exculpatory DNA evidence is significant in one case and of little relevance in another.

The Durham DA's office was an equal opportunity prosecutorial abuser. It was judged in an open procedure that Nifong's abuse was rather egregious and severe. If you have evidence to the contrary, go to court and make your case. Make a federal case out of it, so the state of North Carolina can't influence the process.

Nifong sure does not want to present his case in open court. He is very pitifully trying to avoid having to defend his actions in FEDERAL court.

Meanwhile, keep up your blog and your web site. You are only showing the world that you are foolish, blind to the facts, vicious, vindictive and racist. And I can continue to have fun posting comments which you will not challenge.

unbekannte said...

From the most recent post:

"Prosecutor Garrell’s plead deal was designed to inflict a lifetime of pain, stigma, and discrimination against a young man who he knew (or should have known) was innocent..."

What in the name of heaven do you think "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong was designing when he knowingly charged three innocent men with committing a crime Nifong knew had never happened? What do you think "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong was designing when he knowingly concealed evidence from the defendants which he knew would exonerate them, and then lied to the court about the existence of that evidence? What do you think he was designing when he intimidated witnesses whose testimony would exonerate the defendants. What do you think he was designing when he threatened to file criminal charges against Lacrosse team members who would not incriminate the defendants?(he was trying to suborn perjury, in my opinion).

Roy Cooper's exoneration of the Lacrosse defendants had nothing to do with race or class. Roy Cooper protected innocent victims against a rogue prosecutor who tried to perpetrate one of the grossest acts of prosecutorial misconduct in US history.

That you would put such a disgrace to the legal profession back into the practice of law, that you would describe him as decent and honorable shows only your own rather racist view of what constitutes prosecutorian misconduct.

unbekannte said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
unbekannte said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
unbekannte said...

"Under the North Carolina State Bar’s 'Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor,' it states: 'A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply an advocate; the prosecutor’s duty is to seek justice, not merely to convict.'"

Does anyone appreciate the hypocrisy of the Justice4Nifong gang of 3 invoking this rule of the North Carolina State Bar?

Where were the Justice4Nifong gang of 3 when "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong was trampling all over this rule as well as the Constitutional rights of the accused. I think it is well documented in the media that Justice4Nifong gang member Victoria Peterson was supporting him in his knowing prosecution of three innocent men for a crime that never happened.

The irony is, there would be no Justice4Nifong blog, no Justice4Nifong web site, if "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong had complied with "North Carolina State Bar’s Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor" and told the racist black leadership of the Durham black electorate, There was no crime. Instead, he caved in to that racist leadership who de facto told him, we don't want you to comply with "North Carolina State Bar’s 'Rule 3.8 Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor", we don't want you to seek justice, we want you to convict, otherwise we will not deliver any support or votes to you. As a result, Nifong perpetrated one of the most egregious acts of prosecutorial misconduct in US History.

I say again, Roy Cooper had nothing to do with the ethics charges, which were filed before Roy Cooper got involved, which were a cause of Roy Cooper getting involved and which resulted in Nifong's disbarment after a fair trial in open court.

Nifong made the rope with which he was hanged. And a fair trial in open court was something neither Nifong nor his supporters were willing to give the Duke defendants.

unbekannte said...

Have any of the justice4nifong gang of three ever heard of legal "dirty hands".

Let me give an example. you assault someone, punch him in the face. That person hits you back. You try to sue the person for assault and battery. You would lose your case - your hands are dirty - you can not sue for assault and battery when you assaulted and batteried yourself - when you hit first.

You express outrage over Mitch Garrell's supposed violation of Rule 3.8. If Erick Daniels had already been convicted, he had already been "branded a felon". If Mitchn Morrell believed in good faith that he was offering Erick Daniels lieniency, he was not violating Rule 3.8. As a point in contrast, I say Victoria Peterson and a lot of Durham and North Carolina racists(e.g. the NC NCAAP's list of offenses and torts) were branding the Lacrosse defendants as felons without even the benefit of a trial.

"Decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong ran roughshod over rule 3.8. I say, it is a matter of public record that Justice4Nifong gang leader Victoria Peterson cheered him on. There was no good faith on the part of "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong. He knowingly tried to convict three innocent men of a crime which never happened. I say, justice4Nifong gang leader Victoria Peterson, as well as many other Durham and North Carolina racists, have continued to brand them felons even though there was no conviction, they had been exonerated, even though Nifong's ethics trial showed Nifong had run roughshod over more than Rule 3.8.

Your hands are not merely dirty. Your hands are dripping some very filthy slime.

unbekannte said...

To my last post I add, "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong was trying to brand Duke Lacrosse players as felons without benefit of a trial. Do you really think that is less severe than offering an already convicted individual a plea deal. I do admit Erick Daniels was wrongly convicted. At his contempt trial, Nifong said that the rape must have been a non-ejaculatory event, a rather lame attempt to trivialize the DNA evidence. After the defendants' exoneration, after exposure of his misconduct, Nifong was still trying to label the Duke Lacrosse players as felons.

In case you haven't heard, CGM is supposedly publishing a memoir - I say supposedly because its release date has been published and delayed a number of times. She gave an interview at North Carolina A&T about her book. She stated there that she had been raped at the Lacrosse Party by three white men. This story, incidentally, was different from other accounts she gave of the assault. CGM is still branding three innocent men as felons.

Is either Mitch Garrell or Freda Black or any one else connected with the Durham DA office trying to brand Erick Daniels a felon now that he has been exonerated? Answer that if you dare.

I notice again, you do not mention Tracy Cline, in spite of her seeming lack of regard for Rule 3.8 in the Frankie Washington prosecution. Again, Tracy Cline is African American and Tracy Cline was involved in prosecuting the innocent Duke Lacrosse players.

You are awfully SELECTIVE in deciding who should be cited for violation of Rule 3.8. I say your selectivity is based on issues of race and class. Your hands are dirtier than I initially believed.

unbekannte said...

"I went to the DA forum last night and they didn't have time for submitted questions from the audience.
It was clear there were questions about Cline's competence PRECISELY in handling a large case load, PRECISELY about her "justice for all." Just go to news.google.com and search on "Cline dismissed charges" and you can read the archives how SHE wrote the wrong case number on a dismissal form resulting in severe molestation charges being dropped. The "excuse"? Large case load.
Ask Hon. Orlando Hudson about how he felt Cline was wasting court time and resources trying to bring murder charges against a man who had a deal with the police to cooperate that forbid those charges.

Ask Leon Brown, a Black man Cline prosecuted for a rape the victim said (and DNA said!) that a white man committed, or ask the jury foreman in that case who took the rare step of publicly stating after the verdict, "They had no evidence, none. This was a complete waste of our time."
Cline's problem is general incompetence and dishonesty. It's not the lacrosse case, but that is a symptom.
by MikeKell • Durham • 23 Apr 2008, 10:03am"

This comes from a comment to the Independent Weekly's endorsement of Tracy Cline for District Attorney. I do not think this indicates that Tracy Cline pays very much attention to Rule 3.8

Why have you not cited Mr. Leon Brown as an example of a wrongfully prosecuted man? Is it because Tracy Cline prosecuted him? Is it because the DNA evidence showed he did not do it?

Why have you not included Tracy Cline in your list of prosecutors who have committed misconduct?

I think people are waiting for your answers.

unbekannte said...

More about Tracy Cline, whom you have not mentioned as a prosecutor who should have been investigated for misconduct. This comes from the CRYSTAL MESS blog, the date being September 30, 2006

"9.20.02 - Ok, you tell me if this doesn't sound weird: There's a trial going on right now in Durham, according to the Herald-Sun, in which DNA samples taken from a man accused of rape don't match DNA samples taken from inside the victim. This unusual fact has not stopped the Durham District Attorney's office (note : Hardin was DA then) from prosecuting the man, whose name is Leon Brown. Brown's defense lawyer, Douglas Simons, claimed in his opening statement that there was incriminating evidence against someone else - the victim's cousin:

[Simons] told jurors that Brown voluntarily gave DNA samples that did not match samples from the victim. Nor did pubic hairs surrendered by Brown match...In addition, the victim initially told authorities that she thought her white cousin was the intruder, according to Simons. When the cousin was arrested, duct tape and other incriminating items were found in his car and on his property...District Attorney Jim Hardin Jr. gave the cousin "complete immunity" to testify against Brown, Simons told jurors. "He wanted a deal," Simons said of the cousin. "He got it."

"Defense attorneys say all kinds of things, of course - only some of them true - so we have to be careful here. But let's see if we have this right: The white cousin who was initially fingered by the rape victim strikes a deal for immunity with the D.A. in order to testify against a black guy whose DNA doesn't match the DNA found inside the victim? Is that really what this article is telling us? It's difficult to understand why the guy being charged with rape is apparently not the one whose semen was found inside the victim. PROSECUTOR TRACY CLINE TOLD THE JURY THAT HER EVIDENCE WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO CONVINCE THEM THAT BROWN WAS THE RAPIST(emphasis added)".

Why has Tracy Cline's conduct not attracted your notice? Counting Frankie Washington, Tracy Cline has wrongfully prosecuted at least two AFRICAN AMERICAN men.

unbekannte said...

More on "decent, honorable...minister of justice(!)" Nifong.

"A day following the disclosure of the destruction of police department audio tapes relevant to this hoax, and fully one week before today's N&O Nifongery, Liestoppers poster, "Quasimodo", reported that the Durham County District Attorney's Office has a custom and practice, apparently, of pursuing rape charges against innocent men dating back to 2002, when Jim Hardin headed up the cesspool. He's now a judge." This passage from the September 30, 2006 CRYSTAL MESS blog deals with Nifong's prosecution of Timothy Lloyd for rape. More from CRYSTAL MESS, this from an August 11, 2008 entry;

"Ron Stephens was Durham County District Attorney in 1993-94 when his subordinates, Mike Nifong and Mary Winstead, sought to convict Timothy Malloy of bogus rape charges after Winstead "accidentally" altered and erased portions of not one, but two (2!), audio cassette tapes crucial to the defendant's case. Winstead now works with Hoke and Graves. Tim Malloy is still a nobody. Mike Nifong thought he could impose Durham Justice on Somebodies. Bad thought. He's going to jail tomorrow and is going to pay for the sins of his mentors for the rest of his miserable life. Ronnie Stephens? He's now a judge."

Nifong failed to convict Timothy Malloy. A woman who had consensual sex with him falsely accused him of rape. Here is a rather poignant comparison between Timothy Lloyd and the Duke defendants:

"Why didn't the N&O truthfully report that the persecution of The Duke Three is even weaker than the persecution of Malloy? At least in that matter both the complainant and defendant admitted that sex occurred. Here, in the DUKE HOAX, the players not only vociferously deny that no sex of any kind transpired, at all, but there isn't a scintilla of scientific, forensic, or witness evidence to hint that it did. Well, I mean as between Crystal and any one of The Duke Three."

Add to this some information from Liestoppers which I included in a comment on a previous post. During Nifong's tenure, 52% of all rape complaints were dismissed, a higher percentage than any other DA'S office in North Carolina. I say again, Nifong was not very concerned about justice for victims of sexual assault until CGM falsely accused the Duke Lacrosse players.

That is not a good track record for your hero, "dectnt, honorable...minister of justice(!) Mike Nifong.

Any comments?

unbekannte said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
unbekannte said...

In response to your claims regarding Roy Cooper's intervention in the Duke case:

"On January 13, 2007, Attorney General Roy Cooper accepted the request of the Durham District Attorney to take over cases involving three individuals who were accused of sexually assaulting a woman at a party in March 2006."


"From the outset, all three of the named defendants strenuously maintained their innocence. In the ensuing months, numerous court proceedings were held regarding motions filed by defense counsel. In late December of 2006, Durham District Attorney Michael B. Nifong dismissed the charges of rape against all three defendants.

The same month, the North Carolina State Bar notified the Durham District Attorney that it was initiating a disciplinary hearing into his conduct related to certain aspects of his handling of these cases. As a result, on January 12, 2007, District Attorney Nifong requested the Attorney General’s Office to take responsibility for the prosecution of all pending matters pursuant to the North Carolina General Statutes."

These come from the AG's report on the investigation of the Duke case(you can't call it a rape case because no rape happened). If you check other resources on the web, you will find the time line of events given in the report is correct.

The Duke case actually started in March/April of 2006, about 8 to 9 months before Roy Cooper got involved at the request of Mike Nifong. If this is what you call springing into action, I would hate to see what you call dragging your feet.

Any comments?

JSwift said...

Nifong Supporter clearly is confused.


The NC Bar did not charge Nifong with ethics violations based on his decision to prosecute a case that had no merit. The NC Bar did not charge Mike Nifong with ethics violations because he conspired with others to frame three young men.

The NC Bar charged Mike Nifong with ethics violations based on his conduct during that case, not simply on the decision to prosecute.

The NC Bar charged Mike Nifong with ethics violations based on his highly inflammatory and false statements beginning on March 27. He was found guilty of many of these charges.

The NC Bar also charged Mike Nifong with ethics violations based on his agreement with Brian Meehan to exclude evidence from the DNASI report, his failure to comply with valid discovery requests, his failure to provide evidence on a timely basis, his lies to the court and to defense attorneys and his lies to the Bar. He was found guilty of many of these charges.

The Bar has demonstrated that they are reluctant to second guess District Attorneys merely for their decisions to prosecute certain cases. Neither Nifong nor any of the DAs cited by Nfong Supporter haved charges for decisions to prosecute cases with weak or nonexistent evidence. We may question whether this approach is correct. However, Mike Nifong, as well as the others, benefitted from this reluctance.

Thus, I repeat:


The NC Bar disbarred Nifong for his other misconduct.

Nifong Supporter asks why other prosecutors have not been charged with ethics violations for their decisions to prosecute weak cases. He asks why they were not charges for the same offenses for which Mike Nifong was NOT charged.

Nifong Supporter must review the facts. He should read the Bar's conclusion.

I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt: he has simply made erroneous claims because he does not know the facts. However, if he repeats this false claim in the future, we must conclude that he is deliberately misstating the facts.

Justice4Jack said...

The fact that anybody would protect Nifong simply boggles my mind, and yes, it angers me that you have used my brother's name, and churned it into the same man who upheld the lies to conceal his MURDER! So, it is Justice4Jack, NOT Nifong, and this is a point of many I want to make loud and clear!

To babble on about money of taxpayers, and race injustice is just more fodder in the mix. It doesn't! The STATE of NC is guilty in multiple areas of such abject corruption where almost EVERY individual in position of rank and authority in various offices have not just abused their rights, but have personal knowledge of the guilt and innocence of CITIZENS, and used them for their own AGENDAS?!

It is repulsive to compare the very lives of people, to a spit in our face "one day sentence?!" The man turned in his license chewed by his dog as if to make some sort of statement about how he valued his "profession." I found it quite fitting, and cries about his stupid guitars while we cry for the LIVES lost that will NEVER be regained, and to place a price of what our government SHOULD be doing, and are FAILING to do in the same category makes me want to vomit!

Educate yourself Ms Peterson, and the rest of you who read this to the FACT that Nifong was NOT the only "rogue" villain to this charade, the fact is there should have been numerous people prosecuted for serious crimes in office, and Nifong was served as a scapegoat for the coven!

Look into the corruption at every level, it is FAR more nefarious than what has been told, and all of the media have swept worse crimes under the rug, and are only cronies of the "system." IMO, the only TRUE journalism to exist these days is through the Internet, so that people like me can have the freedom of speech to voice our concerns and issues, and not paint a picture!

I AM going to the media here in Cleveland in the next week with the EVIDENCE that has taken me 4 hellish years to accumulate, to expose the entire State of NC with failure to adhere to any protocol, and to conspire to hide a murder, that was staged to look like a suicide of my dearest, beloved brother!

I have not only crime scene photos and video, I have reports from the sheriff, police, medical examiner, all of them full of misconduct, and 4 years and 4 DA's later, FINALLY have enough documentation to insure THIS time, many officials will be held accountable, and look forward to facing each and every one of them in the eye and pray the jury holds them to the highest penalty of law that they took oaths to protect, and not just abused, but used at the cost of LIVES of which no amount of money can replace!

JUSTICE?! I suggest you look at this link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice)and learn the meaning before you attach it to the likes of a wasted being such as Nifong! You are taking a stand for a man who used your race and people much like the slave owners of not too long ago did, and still do! Even you yourself cannot deny the facts you yourself have stated, yet you brush over each name caring more about the people behind their demise?! You have allowed yourself to be conned as a "sheeple" and Nifong is laughing to his colleagues and self, while comparing himself to be like Martin Luther King?!

To me, he is more like the Pied Piper Of Hamlin, only in this story the rats haven't gone anywhere, and instead rule the city! So, let me say that my next statements will be to the "mass" media, and cannot find proper words to express just how deep the corruption flows, it is a political quicksand of evils that have been avoided far too long!

There have been people who have followed me in my quest heckling my efforts to obtain "JUSTICE" every step of the way, and to you I say be prepared for a very gruesome awakening! My goal is to have laws changed, and lives saved, and you should be ashamed for turning against an innocent victim that truly cares for more than just her family, but for all of us who have not had the money to "buy" our "JUSTICE" for our loved ones?!

If you want to make a stand for somebody Ms Peterson, may I suggest you could better spend your time at PMRC, or MADD, than to join hands with the devil! Not that Nifong is anywhere near as brilliant at hiding his evil as Satan, more like a far lesser demon, with un-natural affiliation with "guitars!" HA!

Rhonda Fleming
Cleveland, Ohio
Sister Of Allen Jackson Croft Jr,
Murdered May 11, 2005 In Durham NC