At Northwestern University, the Innocence Project has submitted evidence, including videotapes of witnesses’ testimony, exonerating Anthony McKinney, who has been in prison since his conviction in 1978. This evidence was obtained by various students in the Innocence Project over a three-year period. The issue of McKinney’s innocence is being considered by a judge.
We know that investigators can affect evidence, including witness testimony, in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. On that theory, the prosecutors have subpoenaed the students’ investigative memoranda, e-mail messages, notes of interviews with witnesses, and the students’ class grades. The prosecutors’ suspect that the students received better grades for obtaining exonerating information, and that the students therefore had an incentive to skew the evidence. Accordingly, the information that the prosecutors seek should be made available to the court.
I’m inclined to think that the prosecutors have a point. They know, better than most people, how arrest quotas, clearance rates, and convictions can affect the careers of police and prosecutors, providing an incentive to influence evidence supporting convictions. A decision supporting the subpoenas in this case, therefore, could be an important precedent on behalf of defendants in criminal cases.