Brady Prosecutor’s Duty to Disclose Exculpatory Mitigating Evidence Part 5

Another way that you know that Brady exists in the case, is you know when you have these little tell tales science, it’s when there’s raw and high emotion in the case. And the prosecution’s moving really hastily after just your client and considering nothing else. In the case I just spoke about, the indicted my client for capital murder to seeking death originally, before the medical examiner provided the autopsy. You know there was just this real rush forward. And when you see that kind of sloppy non-deliberative process and you know something else is a foot besides reasonable judgment by the prosecution. It might mean, they need publicity for re-election or there’s some political movement when, in the office or just some goofy person that’s not very professional about their job. But it’s a sure sign that something that is askew; when they’re moving with haste and not being reasonable at all, you’re going to find that there’s Brady evidence that’ll come up with these cases. In the Morton cases I mentioned some of the evidence turned out ultimately to be truly favorable and some was a red hearing nevertheless, I’m making the point again under Brady, its anything favorable.

So the fact that, Christine Morton’s credit card was used in another town 3 days after her death or cash, a check was cashed which was, what looked like a forgery on the back? And a gun was stolen from the home and that there was a man with a van that was casing the home and then there’s DNA and other stuff. And that’s how favorable evidence. You can see its small things that, you know maybe the 3 year old would’ve been permitted to testify and maybe the 3 year old might not have been competent to testify. But this is all favorable information that the court of criminal appeals upheld. Michael Morton’s innocence case based upon these small things.