TheAgitator.com
This Week in Innocence
Saturday, September 12th, 2009There are so many things wrong with this story, it’s hard to know where to begin.
Woods was arrested in 2006 on child molestation charges, his case put off nine times ultimately never making it to trial. Eventually, attorney Jennifer Hinkebein Culotta got the case last year, visited Woods in the Clark County jail and she had a lot of questions about the allegations.
“They alleged somebody had placed a 4-foot long weed-eater wire into the penis of a child,” said Culotta, of Culotta and Cullota LLP in Jeffersonville, Indiana…
Woods spent two years in jail before he met with a single defense attorney.
“I just thought medically that cannot be physically possible that a weed-eater wire that’s not sterilized would stay in a body eight years without any possible medical repercussions,” Culotta said of reviewing the case.
After she petitioned for the child’s medical reports last year, Culotta discovered an important piece of evidence that occurred one year before Woods was arrested. “In the medical reports, one year prior there had been a CT scan of the pelvis and it’s apparent that there was no weed-eater wire there,” Culotta said of the findings.
The news was enough to get Woods out of jail just in time for last Christmas. Still the case isn’t over yet.
“In this situation we had police officers, prosecuting officers, we had the court system we had defense attorneys, if all those people are not actively investigating the case and working the case properly then you end up like we have with Donald Woods,” Culotta said. “An innocent person sitting in jail for two plus years.”
Woods is suing.
Woods is suing.
I should fucking hope so, but who? Don’t all these assholes have qualified immunity?
We need a new category of liability; say “conspicuous incompetence in office”. Losers pay economic compensation AND officers of the court hold their arms while the complaining party strikes them briskly in the crotch with an aluminum baseball bat …. until he or she gets tired.
Jesus Wept!
If you wish to make headway against these outrages, then get rid of immunity, period. Don’t tell me that these liars and criminals (cops and prosecutors) need immunity so they can “do their job.” Instead, they need immunity so that they can “do the job” on the rest of us!
Qualified immunity is for when they’re doing their job. I actually agree with qualified immunity.
Unfortunately, their job isn’t to lock people up for two years for a non-existent crime, so qualified immunity shouldn’t kick in.
I agree with Bill. Our ancestors cut the head off a King who claimed to be above the law. Also, we rejected the idea of even “qualified immunity” in the Nuremberg trials. Then we failed to apply both historical lessons to ourselves.
My first thought was WTF? A 4 foot section of weed eater line was discovered in a kid, and the best suspect is someone who hasn’t seen him in 8 freakin’ years? That can’t be right.
Oh! But it is!
http://www.news-tribune.net/local/local_story_247191336.html
This is incompetent investigation at it’s pinnacle. EVERY person involved in this case should be fired. The woman who claimed the charges, despite the fact that she knew full well they were false, should be incarcerated. Police investigators everywhere should be hanging their heads in shame for allowing such incompetence.
But that won’t happen, because hey! They did their jobs! They arrested someone! Woo woo! Fucking cops.
Micheal Chaney:
“Unfortunately, their job isn’t to lock people up for two years for a non-existent crime, so qualified immunity shouldn’t kick in.”
Oh, a crime did occur, that 4 foot piece of weed eater line was in fact discovered in the bladder of said 13 year old kid.
http://www.news-tribune.net/local/local_story_247191336.html
It got there somehow… Just not now the mother claimed (She was lying) The cops, in a blazing display of incompetence, just went with her lies as if they were gospel.
Someone should do an investigative piece on the state of investigator competence in America’s Police Forces.
Usually qualified immunity is only a bar to a plaintiff recovering for negligence caused by state officers working in their typical duties for the state. Qualified immunity doesn’t protect state officers in situations where there is gross negligence (something I think this easily rises to) or in the event of intentional torts (say it comes out that a prosecutor or police officer was in the know about this and intentionally covered it up). Though I’m not sure about Kentucky, a lot of states also say qualified immunity does not attach even to negligent actions if the actions resulted in a due process violation. This is usually based on a state constitutional amendment that has a comparable effect to the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. Point being I don’t think qualified immunity is going to offer much protection here. Or at least I hope it doesn’t.
IANAL, so can someone please explain to me why someone* can spend two years in jail without going to trial?
I thought that we had the guarantee of a speedy trial per the 6th Amendment?
* (this does not apply to brown foreigners accused of terrorism related crimes, obvs. Well, mostly foreign anyway.)
Thanks to Bob’s link I see why now:
(Bolding is mine)
I’ll make an uneducated guess that the Clark County (or Indiana) Public Defenders’ Office is not drowning in money, staffed with crackerjack attorneys, or has a sustainable case load.
All of which does not excuse the fact that the man was arrested anyway.
Thanks for that link, Bob.
It’s an outrage that Woods was ever even charged in this case. The evidence against him was that his ex-wife said that Woods “must have” put the wire into the kid – not that she witnessed it, not that Woods told her that he did it, not that the child stated that he did it. Give me a fucking break. I seriously don’t see how a prosecutor could ever think he could go to trial when his best evidence was speculation from an ex-wife about something that she thought happened eight years previously.
And, the public defenders deserve a kick in the crotch for this, too. I know PDs are poorly paid and swamped with cases, but how could any attorney not hear this case and not think it was an easy win? According to the story, they are responsible for 7 of the 9 continuances that kept this from going to trial. There should have been a single motion to dismiss for lack of evidence and that should have been the end of it.
Are there transcripts from a preliminary hearing or anything from this case? I would love to see them. Hell, I would love to see the arrest report.
You’ve been here as long as me and you still don’t see how a prosecutor could do that? Let me explain.
They’re known as jail house snitches…
Michael Chaney: Heh, yeah, you got me. I should have said, “I seriously don’t see how an honest prosecutor could…” I totally agree that anyone dumb (deliberately dishonest) enough to build a case solely around the testimony of jailhouse snitches is a prime candidate to build a case solely around the testimony of an ex-wife.
But, you have to admit, this is even weaker than many of those snitch cases. At least there, they can bribe or strong-arm the snitch into saying he actually heard the suspect admit to the crime. Here, according to the report, the ex-wife isn’t even saying that; she just inferred (with no direct evidence) that he “must have” done it eight years ago and the prosecutor took her non-expert speculation as though it were a smoking gun.
I thought that I would share that I work in hotel convention services, and this weekend the hotel that I work at is hosting a convention of an organization dedicated to preventing abuse of women and children and aiding those who have been abused.
It is a very emotional subject, and I was moved to tears twice in the last 12 hours, first last night by a documentary video of three cases of human sex slavery and then this morning by the personal story told to me face-to-face by a woman whose 12-year-old son was abducted some time ago and has never been found. She did have 12 photos of him in his kidnapped state, bound and gagged and contorted, these were delivered to her doorstep presumably by the kidnappers. Her words were, “You cannot possibly believe the things that go on in this world.” I am in no position to object.
I am at a loss to contribute anything meaningful to this discussion. There does not appear to be a solution to the societal problem of child abuse, but some thoughts have been stewing around in my head and here goes:
Narrow your sense of caring and commitment as much as possible, primarily to yourself first, then your immediate family next, expanding it outward only as far as you can meaningfully contribute to others’ lives. One can do the most good by shielding the fewest number of people possible focusing one’s energy as concentrated as possible.
Not to diminish the work Radley Balko does in exposing injustice and cruelty in a national and global way, but apart from heightened awareness of societal problems, the scope of the disaster renders the individual impotent in its face and unable to meaningfully contribute. This is my general feeling on reading story after story of hopelessness and cruelty. I feel it is better to concentrate one’s energy on shielding oneself and one’s immediate family.
Of course, there are families that are completely dysfunctional with parents who are cruel to their children, spouses who are cruel to each other, etc. I don’t have the answer for this, except that I find it remote in the extreme that even such a family would be out of contact with at least ONE person who could either intervene or raise the alarm. It seems this is the key — individuals interacting with each other without passing the buck along to the State, which makes everything worse by simply getting involved.
It is clear that such cruelty is statistically guaranteed by human nature — for every “saint” there is a “demon,” with a whole lot of moderate imperfection rounding out the bell curve.
Again, I think the work that Radley does is top-notch, with a few personal qualifiers that I have repeated ad nauseum and will not rehash here. But instead of getting worked up and emotional about distant events, channel that energy into being ever-vigilant with the people you truly care about and make sure they don’t fall victim to any criminals, whether public or private. Fight them with everything you’ve got, and the cowardly criminals will move on to easier prey. We’re only human, and there’s only so much we can do, but if we each take care of our own houses, things will improve.
Thanks for your honest and heartfelt thoughts on these tragedies, Cynical. I witness man’s cruelty to man on a regular basis, and I know that it does lead one’s mind to some dark places. You and I would disagree on some of the specific ways to fight crime, but I won’t re-hash those disagreements here. But, I agree with much of your argument.
After several years of working in protective services, my advice to people is to recognize that they and their families represent the first line of defense against crime and safety hazards. Their friends, neighbors, co-workers, classmates, etc. represent the second line of defense. Local police, fire, and others in protective services professions should represent, at best, the third line of defense. It then follows that federal entities would have little to do with most common criminal problems or disasters.
If people take this to heart, and begin to look out for themselves, use basic common sense (ie. don’t leave valuables unattended or cars running and unlocked, take it easy on the drinking and drugging, ensure proper lighting at home and lock your doors, etc.), and stop looking for a policeman to hold their hand and guide them through all life’s trials, then maybe we can become a safer and freer society.
Thanks again, Cynical.
You answered your own question; this never went to trial because a) Woods must not have yelled enough or wasn’t aware he had a right to a fair trial, and b) the prosecutor knew he would lose the trial. I speculate that Woods was thrown into jail anyway and kept there because the cops/prosecutors/judges KNOW they are virtually immune to prosecution for their actions, and thus can simply let things “fall through the cracks” and come up with a lie that sounds like it came from a 5 year old. And they will get away with it.
I noticed there were several thousand liberty loving folks marching in Washington today and not a word from a self-proclaimed libertarian. What gives? Oh wait, I forgot this is the “libertarian left”, and the libertarian left needs government funds to feed it just like the old left. So I’ll keep checking back until the boys over at The Atlantic give the okay to make fun of Beck and the rest of the peasants who happen to be taxed to death to pay for big government think-tanks!
#17 Pat Rotundo: “liberty loving folks marching in Washington today”
Right, Pat. “Liberty loving” people who lined up to cradle Bush and Cheney’s balls for eight years! “Liberty loving” people who care more about aborted zygotes than brown people being tortured and people languishing in prison’s for non-violent drug offenses. Sheeeeeiiiitttt.
Ah, the 9-12 movement: Let’s continue to live like we just suffered an atrocity, because a nation living in fear looks good to the GOP at election time!
#9, short form:
you have the right to a speedy trial and a fair trial, if reasonable delays are needed to ensure a fair trial then there will be reasonable delays and it is not considered a violation of the right to a speedy trial. Absent a delay for cause the longest one can be held in jail without a trial in the US is 180 days. In this case there were 9 delays (for cause?) — 1 requested by judge , 1 requested by the state and 7 requested by the man’s defense attorneys (unable to find the reasons or duration of these delays, just the number of them). I have no idea why the defense attorneys who never saw the man and didn’t do basic investigation of the evidence against him requested the delays, but when the defense requests a delay it is not usually considered a violation of the right to a speedy trial. In this case, if defense attorneys requested delays without consulting with their client (as alleged) there may be a legitimate cause for a violation of the right to a speedy trial but I am unaware of any case which has hinged on this issue before. I caution however that the information publicly available is limited and there is too little to make an informed decision on the question of whether the right to a speedy trial was violated.
“Liberty loving” people who lined up to cradle Bush and Cheney’s balls for eight years! “Liberty loving” people who care more about aborted zygotes than brown people being tortured..”
Thanks Helmut! You make my point, that is the same drivel found at sights like The Atlantic, Daily COS, and HuffPost. All 3 would like to see as many abortions as possible, outlaw guns, and close churches. Hardly libertarian!
#4 | Michael Chaney |
“Unfortunately, their job isn’t to lock people up for two years for a non-existent crime, so qualified immunity shouldn’t kick in.”
Ya sure that isn’t their job?
Nice finding common ground with you Helmut. Keep you and yours safe.
Everything flows from the individual — take care of yourself, take care of your family, take care of your friends, associates, neighbors … this is the true path.
Citations, please, Pat Rotundo.
#19 max,
Thanks for the backgrounder!
I refer you to a blog post by a local talk show host, she is a “TEA Partier” and she wrote a letter to our elected “reps” in DC, which she also used as a speech at the We the People event held Friday night (9/11/09) at a local theater and posted it to her blog at the station’s website. Here is the url:
http://patti.kgmi.com/
I copied her letter to my “reps” in DC, via their webforms, and told them I agreed with her completely. The letter is a bit long but worth the time to read, I’m sure it speaks for many others, too.
This excerpt tells you what kind of people are in the majority of those who attended the TEA Parties and the March on DC:
“I’m a home grown American citizen, 53, registered Democrat all my life. Before the last presidential election, I registered as a Republican because I no longer felt the Democratic Party represented my views nor worked to pursue issues important to me. Now, I no longer feel the Republican Party represents my views or works to pursue issues important to me. The fact is, I no longer feel any political party or representative in Washington represents my views or works to pursue the issues important to me. There must be someone who can represent me. Please tell me who you are. Tell me you are there and you’re willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would feel so horribly disenfranchised by both major political parties.
Briefly, these are my views and issues for which I seek representation:
snip”
Windy, that’s awesome! What city is that “station” in?
“There must be someone who can represent me. Please tell me who you are. Tell me you are there and you’re willing to fight for our Constitution as it was written. Please stand up now. You might ask yourself what my views and issues are that I would feel so horribly disenfranchised by both major political parties.”
Yes there is someone who can represent you.
Look in the fucking mirror.
Pat Rotundo: “Thanks Helmut! You make my point, that is the same drivel found at sights like The Atlantic, Daily COS, and HuffPost. All 3 would like to see as many abortions as possible, outlaw guns, and close churches. Hardly libertarian!”
And your screed looks like Free Republic material to me, so what’s your point? And the rest of your nonsense about more abortions, outlawing guns and closing churches is typical reactionary-Right rhetoric. For the record, Mr. Rotundo:
1.) I don’t want to see more abortions. I just don’t think we should use the force of government to stop the procedure. Women and doctors should make this decision, not clerics. I’m not a Bill Clinton fan, but I think the “safe, legal and rare” standard would be best.
2.) I have never advocated banning guns, and I doubt the effectiveness of most gun control legislation. I may advocate more restrictions than many on this site, but I would never, ever, call for a ban. I don’t choose to ignore the 2nd Amendment like some Progressives.
3.) Closing churches? WTF, man. I would never advocate stopping someone from worshiping as they please, as long as they are not hurting others or interfering with the rights of others. If churches to start to close, most of them have only themselves to blame. If your congregation shuns anyone that doesn’t adhere to a rigid dogma better suited to the middle ages, then fewer people will want to be a part of the church.
4.) “Hardly libertarian.” What would you know about that, Pat. I don’t call myself a libertarian, but based upon the tone of your comments, I think I am probably a more consistent advocate for limited government and individual autonomy than you ever will be.
**Oh, is Pat Rotundo a pseudonym for Eric Dondero by any chance?
@ #14 – Cynical in CA:
The woman with whom you talked about her missing son, abducted at 12, was probably Noreen Gosch. What happened to her is horrific — her son Johnny was a paperboy, who disappeared in 1982 without a trace. Sadly, Noreen Gosch has become totally uncorked through the trauma. She believes that Johnny visited her in 1997, 15 years after his abduction, that he told her he was a sex slave in the totally fabricated Franklin Credit Union scandal here in Omaha, and the photos that she believes depict her son were actually taken in Florida in the late 1970s, well before Johnny Gosch’s disappearance in 1982.
I hate to piss in your punchbowl like that, but I just want you to know that anything Noreen Gosch says must be taken with the entire Bonneville Salt Flats.
Helmut, glenn Beck claims to be a libertarian, and all I see on this site is him being made fun of. No, you and Mr. Balko are both liberals, be proud!
“Oh wait, I forgot this is the “libertarian left”, and the libertarian left needs government funds to feed it just like the old left.”
Will someone (besides Rotundo) please explain to me what the “libertarian left” is?
Rightshu, you are spot-on, it was Noreen Gosch. I had no knowlege of the case. Our meeting was very brief, less than a minute, and she showed me the photos. I was in no position to debate her, and frankly, I was paralyzed by the horror of what she told me. All in all, an awkward way to meet someone.
After checking out the wikipedia entry, I see what you mean about the doubts in the case. I agree that skepticism is warranted. But I think the moral of the story is unaffected by the truth or falsehood of her claims — this is a very real problem and very daunting by the sheer cruelty of it.
As long as no innocents get caught up in the case (McMartin preschool), whether she is unhinged or not, I think she is doing a positive thing for society by bringing attention to the issue of child sex slavery.
And I am very impressed by how you identified Gosch from the scant clues I provided.