New at Reason
Radley Balko interviews Dallas County D.A. Craig Watkins, a district attorney with a keen eye for unjust prosecutions.
Comments to "New at Reason":
J sub D | April 7, 2008, 5:42pm | #
We convict the guilty, and we free the innocent. I’d hope that that’s what people would ask from a district attorney, and from a fair criminal justice systemI'm impressed. I take back half of the bad things I've ever said about Texas. He knows it's not a game, it's peoples lives.
Finally! One of the good guys. Does he have a friend in Chesapeake? Or would that be asking too much?
ChicagoTom | April 7, 2008, 6:23pm | #
Does Mr. Watkins hold an elected or an appointed position?Watkins just about makes me want to move to Dallas and apply for an assistant prosecutor position.
Travis | April 7, 2008, 6:33pm | #
A politician with a conscience? Well guess there had to be one somewhere.Bingo | April 7, 2008, 6:46pm | #
What the hell, an article by Radley Balko that actually restores my faith in humanity??Douglas Gray | April 7, 2008, 6:54pm | #
Good guy! Maybe if Obama gets in, he can make him Attorney General. Wonder how he would handle the kangaroo court of Guantanamo?zoltan | April 7, 2008, 6:56pm | #
shrike:One better: he's got TAX PROBLEMS!!! Looks like he's had some trouble with the IRS. Some cool guy at the Dallas Observer thought this was a bad thing. I say it only makes me want to like him more; too bad I'm a few hundred miles south.
buddyw | April 7, 2008, 7:03pm | #
I am totally voting for this guy when he is up for reelection.As a retired Texas criminal defense attorney, I can say that Mr. Watkins' election and his implementation of his philosophy in the Dallas D.A.'s Office is a 180 degree change of direction for Texas prosecutors. I hope that he succeeds and is re-elected for many years and that his projects in the area of "justice, not convictions" as the goal of every District Attorney's Office are adopted and sincerely applied across the state of Texas and the nation. If he succeeds and his ideas take root and spread, he will have started something that will restore the faith of the everyday people of America in the judicial system. It'll be interesting to see how he deals with the Kountry Klub Kids - the children of the rich and influential politicians and lawyers who commit vicious and brutal crimes. Good luck, Mr. Watkins!
bagehot | April 7, 2008, 7:31pm | #
Hats off! Why every prosecutor in America isn'tfollowing Watkins's lead is beyond me. And it
doesn't end there: medical examiners, judges,
and, obviously enough, law enforcement has to be subject to the harshest, most thorough review. Just hope the system doesn't turn him.
Liberty? | April 7, 2008, 7:58pm | #
Texans got this one right! You have my blessings Mr. Watkins! You are what other attorneys should aspire to be.Texans, I apologize about my prior stereotyping. This one's a keeper!
John C. Randolph | April 7, 2008, 10:29pm | #
Rather refreshing to read about a true officer of the court who understands his duty.-jcr
Aresen | April 7, 2008, 11:39pm | #
Mr. Watkins is an example of what every politician, prosecutor, law enforcement officer, judge, congressman, legislator or elected official should be: A man who is aware that his duty is to uphold justice and to protect the innocent.I wish him luck.
Heinrick | April 8, 2008, 1:02am | #
Is today April first?Bill Newmiller | April 8, 2008, 7:22am | #
As the father of son wrongly convicted of murder in Colorado, I've become disillusioned with our justice system, despite a career that has included 23 years as a military pilot, time as a member of the FBI, and many years as a college professor. I can only hope that more DA's come to so recognize their duty to truth and justice. For more information about my son's case, which is on appeal, see http://bearingfalsewitness.com.One of the reasons that Watkins is encountering resistance to reversing bad convictions is that for most people, an accusation is enough. That is, they believe that anyone accused of a crime must be guilty of something.
Michael Ejercito | April 8, 2008, 10:58am | #
One of the reasons that Watkins is encountering resistance to reversing bad convictions is that for most people, an accusation is enough. That is, they believe that anyone accused of a crime must be guilty of something.Who are these people?
former Dallas prosecutor | April 8, 2008, 11:37am | #
It is interesting to note that Mr. Watkins says this of the Conviction Integrity Unit: "We immediately staffed it with two attorneys and two investigators, and told them to look at 400-some-odd cases for which there was DNA available to test."I was involved in responding to the first 150 post-conviction DNA testing requests filed by defendants convicted in Dallas County. Of those 150 cases, more than half did not have evidence containing DNA and had NEVER had any evidence containing DNA. For that reason, the majority of DNA-testing requests filed were entirely frivolous.
Regardless, prosecutors and the evidence storage lab spent many hours verifying there was no such evidence, to "ensure that justice is done," as is ethically required of all Texas prosecutors. This is directly at odds with Mr. Watkins's statement that each of the 400 DNA testing request cases actually had evidence containing DNA. While the stated purpose of reviewing old convictions is ethically admirable, his comment makes me concerned that Mr. Watkins may be "fudging" the numbers for political pruposes, or to create and fund jobs for friends.
Jake Boone | April 8, 2008, 8:06pm | #
former Dallas prosecutor,By my reading, Watkins is saying that there were 400-some-odd cases in which DNA existed, not that there were 400 requests total.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you (my knowledge of case reviews, etc. is woefully limited); are you saying there were fewer than 400 cases with extant DNA evidence?
former Dallas prosecutor | April 9, 2008, 9:55pm | #
Yes, Jake, as of 2008 there have been a little over 400 requests for post-conviction DNA testing made in Dallas County since April 2001. Of those, more than half NEVER had any evidence containing biological material for DNA testing. Example: ex-husband has sex with ex-wife; she says it was rape, he says it was consentual. No evidence ("rape kit") is taken because it is undisputed by ex-husband that sex occurred; consent is the only issue. Therefore, no DNA evidence ever existed. Nevertheless, the ex-husband files a request for post-conviction DNA testing, and the DA's Office checked to be sure there was no evidence. Now, the CIU is doing it again.sv | April 10, 2008, 12:18pm | #
it's really encouraging that he is reforming the attitude of the DA's office, and unfortunate that something relatively unequivocal like DNA evidence doesn't always exist in cases, isn't always pertinent, or(especially) isn't always stored.That having been said, careful Balko! Stay objective, the guy is still a politician, and 'former Dallas prosecutor' alleges possible unethical behavior within the context of the reviews. Obviously this reform is a political winner, given the publicity the exonorations garnered and the shifting political climate in the US (away from 'tough on crime' trumping fairness and sometimes efficacy, etc), despite Watkins' transparent 'aw shucks' answer when Balko asked him about re-election. We wouldn't want to distort our view with hero-worship, although Balko-worship doesn't seem to have had any negative effect on his work so far.
All that said, for now I see no reason not to wholeheartedly support Watkins in the direction he's leading the Dallas DA's office. Thanks and good luck to him.