Wednesday, January 12, 2011

SBI agent Duane Deaver is fired

North Carolina SBI agent Duane Deaver, who testified on behalf of Wake County District Attorney Colon Willoughby and prosecutor Tom Ford against Gregory F. Taylor’s bid for freedom after 17 years of wrongful incarceration, was fired on January 7, 2011. Before the three judge panel of the Innocence Commission which heard the appeal, Deaver testified about the SBI lab and its long-standing policy of withholding and/or skewing data and lab results from a criminal investigation which might be beneficial to defendants. Such was the case in Gregory Taylor’s case, as Deaver stated the SBI lab, according to policy, allowed the jury hearing Taylor’s case to be misled into believing that blood was on the bumper of Taylor’s vehicle (which prosecutor Tom Ford maintained came from a murder victim Jacquetta Thomas). Fact was that although a presumptive test was positive a confirmatory test for human blood was not. Deaver’s testimony under questioning by defense attorney Mike Klinkosum exposed how the SBI lab purposely and systematically tilted the playing field against defendants in hundreds of cases. This revelation, in part, no doubt played a role in Greg Taylor’s subsequent exoneration.

Christine Mumma, executive director of the NC Center on Actual Innocence, who also represented Taylor, aptly referred to Deaver’s termination as the SBI’s “throwing the employee under the bus while those responsible for giving the employee direction and approving his work walk away unscathed.” Her assessment is right on the money. Deaver, the good soldier who was following orders to help prosecutors with their weak cases by providing hocus-pocus lab results and misleading testimony on the stand, was given the shaft by the very people who had earlier depended upon and lauded his devious work. His firing, however is cold comfort for the many innocents who have spent years wrongfully behind bars, dependent mainly on their Class and Color.

The fortuitous exposure and downward spiral of the reliability in the SBI’s past prejudicial lab work on criminal evidence was a self-inflicted wound. Hubris of Taylor’s original prosecutor Tom Ford enabled him and the Wake County district attorney to fight the overwhelming evidence which strongly supported Greg Taylor’s innocence. According to the January 11, 2011 article in The News & Observer, which per PAPEN (Protect All Prosecutors Except Nifong) Policy did not mention Tom Ford’s name, Deaver plans to appeal his firing. This is a good thing… not so much in that it could possibly lead to Deaver’s reinstatement, but rather for the light it will shed on the conduct, attitudes, and culture of prosecutors statewide.

As I have religiously maintained, the prosecutors (such as Tom Ford, Bill Wolfe, and others) are at the crux of the injustice that has been meted out by the North Carolina justice system. For the most part they are intelligent, diabolical, and cunning, and have no qualms about orchestrating lab techs and agents in order to obtain convictions in weak cases without credible evidence. To suggest that prosecutor Tom Ford was unaware of the underlying deceit in Deaver’s testimony in the case against Taylor is not credulous. Ford knew that the SBI lab’s statements about alleged blood on the bumper of Taylor’s SUV was as credible as the plea deals he brokered to acquire false testimony against Taylor in retaliation for Taylor’s refusal to implicate a black man, Johnny Beck, who he knew to be innocent of a murder.

The solution to North Carolina state’s woeful justice system is to institute a policy following the principle of “equal justice for all” and to abandon its current tenet of “selective justice based on Class and Color.” A tall order indeed. Prosecutors need to become something that few of them have ever been… Ministers of Justice. As was clearly evident in the Duke Lacrosse case, however, doing so can be hazardous to one’s professional and private lives. Former Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong was honorably executing his prosecutorial duties in that case and was exemplifying the very concept of “Minister of Justice.” As a result, he was disbarred, tossed in jail, deprived of professional immunity, denied representation before the State Bar, and crucified in the media – both locally and nationally.

Until the North Carolina State Bar unilaterally and unconditionally reinstate Mr. Nifong’s license to practice law in the state without restrictions, the state’s system of justice will never take a step on the road to recovery.


14 comments:

Anonymous said...

"the prosecutors (such as Tom Ford, Bill Wolfe, and others) are at the crux of the injustice that has been meted out by the North Carolina justice system. For the most part they are intelligent, diabolical, and cunning, and have no qualms about orchestrating lab techs and agents in order to obtain convictions in weak cases without credible evidence"

All very true -- what is also true is that Nifong's name should be listed here along with Ford and Wolfe. How you manage to see otherwise is truly incredible.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"'the prosecutors (such as Tom Ford, Bill Wolfe, and others) are at the crux of the injustice that has been meted out by the North Carolina justice system. For the most part they are intelligent, diabolical, and cunning, and have no qualms about orchestrating lab techs and agents in order to obtain convictions in weak cases without credible evidence'

All very true -- what is also true is that Nifong's name should be listed here along with Ford and Wolfe. How you manage to see otherwise is truly incredible."


I couldn't disagree with you more. Mr. Nifong acted honorably and in good faith in his prosecution of the Duke Lacrosse case. Tom Ford on the other hand obtained perjured testimony in exchange for plea deals and used what he knew was hocus-pocus forensics in convicting Greg Taylor. Bill Wolfe, again, with no credible evidence after his sole witness recanted, continued to hold James Arthur Johnson in custody. Then he manufactured two so-called "eyewitnesses" who just happened to have ties with the Wilson Police Department. He would've used them to win a conviction against Johnson had not Rev. Barber and the NAACP gotten involved, bringing with them scrutiny of the media.

Anonymous said...

So, your definitions of honor and good faith includes:

1) Improper pretrial public statements and misrepresentations

2) Withholding or failing to provide potentially exculpatory DNA evidence

3) Misrepresentation and false statements to court and opposing counsel.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"So, your definitions of honor and good faith includes:

1) Improper pretrial public statements and misrepresentations

2) Withholding or failing to provide potentially exculpatory DNA evidence

3) Misrepresentation and false statements to court and opposing counsel."


First of all, Mr. Nifong did not withhold any evidence. If you'll study the case closely, you will not that the prosecution claimed that he did not present it quick enough to suit them. The fact of the matter is that thousands of pages of documents of discovery were given to three sets of defense attorneys, while, I might add, the defense refused to reciprocate. If some document was inadvertently not included, Mr. Nifong could not be assumed to be held liable. Without a trial date even being set, Mr. Nifong turned over all evidence to the three defense teams.

With regard to improper pretrial public statements could you be more specific. Most all of the statements Mr. Nifong made were before indictments were even handed down, and as he has explained, any statements that he made were for the purpose of encouraging witnesses to come forward and cooperate with the police investigation.

With regards to false statements to the court that is a bunch of crock. Surely F. Lane Williamson and Osmond Smith III are not mind readers and cannot decipher what particular point Mr. Nifong was addressing when he made statements to the court. Can you specifically state what Mr. Nifong said that could be labeled as a lie? ... I didn't think so.


Due to scheduling conflicts, Part 3 of "The MisAdventures of Super-Duper Cooper" Episode V, is now posted, a day early. Like the other two parts, commentary, insight, and analysis si posted afterwards... it does require audio. A link is provided below.

LINK: http://justice4nifong.com/direc/sdcDirec/sdcEpv/sdc109.htm

Anonymous said...

Those are the charges from Nifong's ethics complaint. You know, the one that got him disbarred. The one he's on record as stating that disbarment was an appropriate punishment.

Anonymous said...

"Can you specifically state what Mr. Nifong said that could be labeled as a lie?..."
These lies are specified in articles 279 - 291 of "North Carolina State Bar v. Michael B. Nifong"

So, there you go.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"'Can you specifically state what Mr. Nifong said that could be labeled as a lie?...'
These lies are specified in articles 279 - 291 of 'North Carolina State Bar v. Michael B. Nifong'

So, there you go."


See. You couldn't even specifically state what lies Mr. Nifong allegedly made. Instead you refer me to a piece of fiction by F. Lane Williamson.

Anonymous said...

Calling it a "work of fiction" does not make it so.

Nifong waived all right of appeal from the disbarment proceedings. If this was a "work of fiction" why would he do so?

Answer -- he wouldn't.

Oh - and the "You couldn't even specifically state what lies Mr. Nifong allegedly made" comment is simply childish. The lies are well documented. I gave you (and any lurkers who happen to be reading) the source so that you could judge them on their own and not have to rely on my interpretation of them. You can choose to read them or not.

Choosing not to read them does not change what they are -- true and accurate descriptions of Nifong failing to meet the ethical standards of the position to which he was elected.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"Calling it a 'work of fiction' does not make it so.

Nifong waived all right of appeal from the disbarment proceedings. If this was a 'work of fiction' why would he do so?

Answer -- he wouldn't.

Oh - and the 'You couldn't even specifically state what lies Mr. Nifong allegedly made' comment is simply childish. The lies are well documented. I gave you (and any lurkers who happen to be reading) the source so that you could judge them on their own and not have to rely on my interpretation of them. You can choose to read them or not.

Choosing not to read them does not change what they are -- true and accurate descriptions of Nifong failing to meet the ethical standards of the position to which he was elected.


Mr. Nifong used common sense and good judgment in refusing to waste his time, energy, and efforts going to an appeals process after having been disbarred through a kangaroo court farce. Why should Mr. Nifong give the unregulated State Bar the satisfaction of turning down his appeal? Why allow Mr. Williamson and his followers to pour sodium chloride into Mr. Nifong's wounds. He's best rid of them.

With regards to Mr. Nifong, you still have not been able to give me not one example of a lie he told to the court. Instead you want me to waste my time going to a transcript and interpret a bunch of legalese mumbo-jumbo. Mr. Nifong no more lied to the court than he withheld evidence from the defense... another myth promoted by the biased media.

Anonymous said...

No, I want you to read what the court disbarred Nifong for.

Obviously, you're afraid to read it, since it disproves your silly arguments.

"...you still have not been able to give me not one example of a lie he told to the court."

You are correct.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"No, I want you to read what the court disbarred Nifong for.

Obviously, you're afraid to read it, since it disproves your silly arguments.

'...you still have not been able to give me not one example of a lie he told to the court.'

You are correct."


I have devoted the entire blog posted today, January 20, 2011 in response to your inability to give an example of Mr. Nifong's alleged falsehood to the court.

It will be posted shortly.

Anonymous said...

Sid -- Read your sentence again, carefully -- I'll help you "...you still HAVE NOT been able to give me NOT ONE example of a lie he told to the court"

Nifong's lies are well documented, so there is no need to repeat them here. Look them up on your own. You don't even have to leave your own blog.

Ignorant and apathetic ("I don't know and I don't care") is no way to go through life.

Nifong Supporter said...


Anonymous said...
"Sid -- Read your sentence again, carefully -- I'll help you '...you still HAVE NOT been able to give me NOT ONE example of a lie he told to the court'

Nifong's lies are well documented, so there is no need to repeat them here. Look them up on your own. You don't even have to leave your own blog.

Ignorant and apathetic ('I don't know and I don't care') is no way to go through life."


Regarding your last paragraph, I couldn't agree with you more. That is why I spend so much time trying to educate and inform the public about injustice in the justice system and biased media reporting.

Anonymous said...

Riiiight....You need to spend less time "trying to educate and inform the public" and more time educating and informing yourself.