Just as hard cases make for bad law, bad facts make for bad editorials. Such is the case with the Connecticut Law Tribune’s recent editorial, “Jail for Misbehaving Prosecutors Is Not the Answer, But We Must Find One.”
No basis in reality exists to support the editorial board’s statement that Connecticut prosecutors “routinely fail” to comply with the mandate of Brady v. Maryland, or its shamefully misleading suggestion that Connecticut courts have been “inundated” with reports of misconduct of this nature. Any objective person who takes the time to study Connecticut’s reported judicial decisions will reach the same conclusion: Brady failures are extremely rare, and virtually all of those are inadvertent lapses, and not the type of intentional act which the editorial shamefully implies are regular occurrences, deviously designed to “cheat[] and hid[e] evidence to win.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
