Corruption cases against cops call 1,000 convictions into doubt

[Galileo]

Corruption cases against cops call 1,000 convictions into doubt

By Robert Patrick

ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH

02/23/2009

ST. LOUIS — The criminal corruption cases against two St. Louis police officers have thrown more than 1,000 criminal convictions into doubt, state and federal prosecutors say.

The cases against Bobby Lee Garrett, 48, and Vincent T. Carr, 46, have already caused the St. Louis circuit attorney's office to drop 47 pending cases, including 41 felonies, Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce told the Post-Dispatch.

Joyce's office will review 986 convictions to see whether Garrett and Carr played a significant role, and the U.S. attorney's office has identified 45 to 50 more cases to look at.

"Needless to say, I'm outraged by the conduct of these officers," Joyce said.
Because federal prosecutors were involved in the investigation into Garrett and Carr, they "put the brakes" on three cases before charges were filed, U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway said.

Prisoners whose cases involved the officers should not necessarily think it means a release from jail.

That issue is complex, and prosecutors caution they have only just begun the review.

THE REVIEW PROCESS

The FBI arrested Garrett and Carr in December on a 10-count indictment.

Carr pleaded guilty on Feb. 13 to obstruction of justice and two counts each of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and making false statements, saying he and Garrett had stolen thousands from a drug dealer, planted money, drugs and a gun, and covered it up.

Garrett has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges. His lawyer, Chet Pleban, has said that Garrett is innocent and will go to trial.

Prosecutors would not comment on whether Carr is cooperating, and his plea agreement is sealed. But his testimony in just about any case is now worthless to prosecutors because of the questions that defense lawyers could raise.

Joyce's office compiled its list of 986 Garrett and Carr cases mainly through a search of the computer system that lists every officer involved in a criminal case.

Joyce said she is also open to adding names from defense lawyers, defendants and their families.

Hanaway's office can search its database only by the case agent or officer's name. Its list is from prosecutors who recall Garrett and Carr being involved, and cases referred by Joyce's office, judges, lawyers, defendants and their family members.

"If anyone brings it to our attention, we're going to take a look at it," Hanaway said.

Joyce and Hanaway said the cases will get an initial look to see whether Carr or Garrett had a significant role. If they were just present during a search warrant and had no significant role, for example, the case may go no further.

In one case, Carr simply testified that a defendant had a prior conviction, Hanaway said.

That case won't be overturned.

The cases then go to senior staff for a more thorough review.

In deciding whether to drop pending cases, Joyce said the deciding factor was whether prosecutors "could not proceed" without testimony of Garrett or Carr.

Hanaway cautioned that the process is in the early stages but vowed to review every case.

"Before we conclude that Carr or Garrett did not alter the outcome of the case, as long as I'm here, I will personally review all those."

At least one local defense lawyer is doing the same.

Scott Rosenblum, who said his office has fielded complaints about Garrett and Carr for years, said he has been contacted by a handful of clients and will pass some names to prosecutors.

"It really depends on whether these guys were the sole movers and shakers on the case," he said.

SEEKING A REVIEW

One of the cases that will be reviewed involves Stephen Jones, 34.

In 1998, Jones went to trial on a crack cocaine distribution charge. He had already been convicted of drug charges in state court in the mid-1990s.

At trial, Carr and his partner for five years (not Garrett) testified that they saw Jones drop a baggie containing crack cocaine. Carr's partner told jurors that it was Carr's investigation — Carr talked to the confidential informer, Carr was first through the door, Carr was the designated seizing officer, and Carr wrote the police report.

The other officer also said he briefly lost sight of Jones but only after spotting the bag in his hand.

There were no prints on the bag.

Jones' lawyer claimed that police found the crack in a dresser and planted it on Jones.

Jones was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison. His appeals were turned down. He and his family have been seeking a review of the case ever since.

After the indictment of Carr and Garrett, Jones sent a letter to the judge who handled his case, who then forwarded the letter to Hanaway's office and to Jones' former lawyer.

The Jones family also contacted Rosenblum. In an interview Friday, he said the conviction should be overturned.

Presented with the Jones scenario, Washington University law professor Peter Joy said it illustrates the obstacles facing those convicted in cases involving Carr. You might have Carr saying one thing and another officer saying something else, he said. "Then it's the word of Carr, who has admitted to lying, against the word of another officer."

[Rolf's comment - if so, then you have reasonable doubt]

Prosecutors would not comment on specific cases, but Hanaway did not shut the door on cases in which Carr and another officer who was not indicted provided the only evidence.

"We're looking for patterns of who else might be involved," she said.

"Obviously, right now, we haven't brought charges against anyone else, and I'm not implicating anyone else," she said, adding "but we're not turning a blind eye."

Both Hanaway and Joyce said that they don't doubt that many of the defendants were drug dealers.

"I want to protect the community from drug dealers, but I also want to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system," Joyce said.

In a phone interview Friday from federal prison in Yazoo City, Miss., Jones said, "I just got to be grateful that somebody is listening."

[email protected] | 314-621-5154
Write a letter to the editors | Subscribe to a newsletter | Subscribe to the newspaper
Read the latest news stories | View all P-D stories from the last 7 days

reader comments

COMMENTING RULES: We encourage an open exchange of ideas in the STLtoday community, but we ask you to follow our guidelines. Basically, be civil, smart, on-topic and free from profanity. Don't say anything you wouldn't want your mother to read! And remember: We may miss some, so we need your help to police these comments. Please identify the comment, the story and why you think it's objectionable. Read the commenting guidelines
.
(47) Comments
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/new...F?OpenDo ent

[word]

what a shocker...

[Wild Cobra]

No shock. Want to see corrupt police, come to Portland.