Trying to explain the seemingly unexplainable: Apparent wrongful conviction dissected
Many lay readers (and some lawyers without backgrounds in criminal justice) find the concept of repeated wrongful convictions across the nation beyond the realm of their thinking. How could a vaunted criminal justice system–Isn’t the USA best at everything, after all?–malfunction so often? How could all the supposed safeguards represented by police detectives, prosecutors, forensic examiners, judges, defense attorneys and jurors come tumbling down?
Well, Terry Ganey, a superb investigative journalist in mid-Missouri, has recently published an in-depth look at what appears to be the wrongful conviction of Dale Helmig. The story appeared last Saturday (July 10) in the St. Louis Beacon, an online only newspaper.
I have never read any clearer explanation of how much can go wrong during a murder prosecution, and why. (I have investigated the Helmig conviction on my own, although I have never published anything in depth about it. I am 99 percent certain of his innocence, and, assuming Dale Helmig is indeed innocent, I agree with Helmig’s current appellate lawyer about the identity of the most likely actual murderer.
Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
Steve, your link didn’t seem to work for me. Here is a link to that article. I’ll now go back and read it further. Thanks JF.
http://www.stlbeacon.org/content/view/103614/143/
What is hard to understand is how a case can be taken to trial when there is such a lack of forensic evidence; nothing to corroborate the “statements” as admitted by Deputy Fowler that “he had no written record to corroborate his statement.” A prosecutor’s obligation and oath is to seek justice, not just convictions. And when there is a total lack of evidence that links the suspect to the crime, then it should never move forward until something credible is found. But it went forward anyways. A murder case is a big deal, crime wise and politically. They became focused on one suspect and everyone involved in the “so-called” investigation corroborated one another and caused what appears to be another innocent man sent to prison. And although an officer gave false testimony that “caused him considerable consternation for the last several years”, he never came forward to right his wrong. The prosecutor and investigators, knowing their lack of evidence, stood their ground, ignoring their obligation to protect the innocent in their pursuit of justice. Why didn’t a judge recognize the lack of “credible” evidence? Why? The public would be put at ease when a murder is solved and a man is behind bars and circumstantial evidence was just good enough. And taking it to trial was a cake walk since the public has been horrified by this murder and they of course trust their local authorities and believed that they had done everything legally and ethically they could to put a guilty man in front of them, to be judged without prejudice, of a jury of his peers. Think again. If that were true, then why didn’t they recognize the lack of evidence either? I’m willing to bet that they (the jurors) were overwhelmed by emotions about the crime that they never “heard” the real facts about the crime.
Wrongful convictions continue because we continue to trust those who have political and monetary aspirations instead of a passion for justice. The public generally refuses to believe that our trusted officials would lie or bend the facts just to win. Yet, as we continue to examine the many exonerated cases coming to the public’s attention and listen to the thousands of claims of those still incarcerated of maintaining their innocence, one must eventually see and recognize the pattern of this continued abuse of power and authority and put an end to it…soon!
A murder trial is a big deal, so when prosecutors and judges who are supposed to ensure justice fail to do so, the damage done is harmful to the fabric of society.
The repeatedly on-target Joe Friday has raised the overarching issues with admirable insight. What he perhaps does not know inside and out like I do (because I’ve studied the Helmig case in depth) is the shockingly bad performance of Helmig’s trial attorney. The best defense lawyers rarely become involved in wrongful convictions because those lawyers know how to neutralize prosecutors who fail to make justice their primary concern.
In response to another comment. See in context »Two comments:
1) It’s worth mentioning that Hulshoff’s prosecution of Helmig was so egregious that “America’s Most Wanted” aired a show dedicated to Dale’s innocence and finding the real killer on May 30, 2009: http://www.amw.com/features/feature_story_detail.cfm?id=3446
2) This story from 2008 outlines seven of Hulshoff’s questionable prosecutions and is interesting in itself. But it ends with a comment from a local sheriff’s deputy (Tom O’ Sullivan) which perfectly illustrates the prevailing attitude toward this problem in the criminal justice system:
http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2008/06/07/examining-7-questioned-hulshofs-cases/