Prosecutors

Controversial Arizona Prosecutor Juan Martinez May Finally Get a Taste of Justice

Martinez faces allegations of courtroom shenanigans, leaking confidential information, and sexual harassment.

|

POOL/REUTERS/Newscom

To the limited extent he's known outside Arizona, Maricopa County prosecutor Juan Martinez is associated with the high-profile and lurid case of Jodi Arias, who was convicted in 2013 of murdering Travis Alexander. Within the state, though, Martinez evokes tales of courtroom theatrics and allegations of leaking confidential information, tampering with evidence, lying to investigators, and sexual harassment. And while that's not uncommon behavior for prosecutors anywhere in the country, what is notable here is that after surviving several attempts to hold him to account, Martinez's luck may finally be running out.

Maybe.

"Juan is a victory-at-any-cost prosecutor driven by his own ego," Mel McDonald, a onetime judge and former U.S. Attorney for the District of Arizona told the Phoenix New Times in 2015. "He lies easily and he always overreaches, always plays to the mob mentality."

State officials seemed to agree. In 2016, several years after Arizona Supreme Court justices called out Martinez's conduct in open court, the court's Attorney Discipline Probable Cause Committee recommended that Martinez be placed on probation for a year for his unprofessional behavior. But Martinez dodged that bullet when a three-judge panel dismissed the case after less than a minute of deliberations.

"This is the fifth ethics case against Martinez to be dismissed since the Arias trial," Law & Crime reported at the time. "He still has one more pending, in which he's accused of giving information about the Arias case to a blogger."

Martinez was disciplined in 2018 by the Maricopa County Attorney's Office for unspecified professional standards violations. County Attorney Bill Montgomery "described both the offense and the punishment without really explaining either," the Arizona Republic noted last December. At the same time, more than 800 documents relating to investigations of Martinez's conduct by the state bar association were sealed at the county attorney's request.

While neither the disciplinary committee nor the county attorney were forthcoming about the nature of Martinez's misconduct, more details emerged over the years about allegations against him and many have come out as the latest formal complaint against him goes to the Arizona Supreme Court.

Martinez has been accused of leaking the name of Juror 17 in the Arias case, who held out against the death penalty, to a blogger with whom Martinez was sexually involved. Juror 17's identity was subsequently spread through social media and she then received death threats.

Martinez is also accused of improperly communicating with Juror 3, who had been dismissed from the Arias case, to measure the mood of the still-sitting jury.

He is then accused of lying to investigators about his conduct regarding both jurors.

Martinez has also been accused of knowingly introducing an altered audio recording into the trial of a man convicted of murdering a police officer. If proven, Martinez could be guilty of felonies.

Martinez is also accused of sexually harassing his subordinates. According to the complaint filed with the state bar, he told one law clerk that he "wanted to climb her like a statue," and another that wanted to put "a hit on her boyfriend so he could have [her] to himself." (This is apparently the conduct that got him disciplined at work.)

Evidence seems to be piling up against Martinez, but he's survived repeated investigations. He also works in a state that tolerates a lot of its prosecutors.

"Juan Martinez's behavior is not uncommon in the Maricopa County Attorney's Office," the ACLU of Arizona announced as it filed an amicus brief in the case against Martinez. "It is indicative of a decades-long culture of misconduct that flows from the top down, one that prioritizes winning convictions over pursuing fairness and executing justice."

That's true—but not much of a distinction. Prosecutors don't behave well anywhere in the United States.

Corey Williams was released from prison in Louisiana and his murder conviction vacated after prosecutors were found to have withheld "staggering" evidence that pointed to other suspects.

Terry Williams (no apparent relation to Corey) suffered for 30 years on death row after Philadelphia prosecutors withheld critical evidence in the 1986 murder case against him. Federal prosecutors "concealed documents that would have helped the late Stevens, a longtime Republican senator from Alaska, defend himself against false-statements charges in 2008," NPR noted in 2012.

Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance spent about $250,000 in asset forfeiture funds on high living, including a $2,800 per-night Parisian hotel. He remained unapologetic after the story broke last week and may legitimately be surprised at the objection, given how common such shenanigans are among his peers.

Revealing just how common such stories are, in 2013, Alex Kozinski, then chief judge of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, referred to an "epidemic" of prosecutorial misconduct.

"Each year, thousands, or tens of thousands, of innocent Americans are branded as criminals and sent to prison for an offense they did not commit" and 43 percent "of wrongful convictions are attributable to official misconduct," concluded a 2013 report from the Center for Prosecutor Integrity.

That's the problem. And as the saga of Juan Martinez demonstrates, a solution is hard to come by.

Voters have a role to play. Many top prosecutors are chosen at the polls, and while they've traditionally been indulged by an electorate more afraid of crime than protective of due process and basic decency, that may be changing. In recent years, reformers have won campaigns for district attorney's offices in races around the country by promising to rein-in excesses.

But voters are fickle and could easily return to their preference for law-and-order-at-all-costs prosecutors. More than faith in the electorate is needed to control abusive prosecutors. They need some skin in the game.

"Prosecutors who intentionally withhold exculpatory evidence resulting in a wrongful conviction should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice," argues Frederic Bloc, a federal district judge. He adds that prosecutors must be policed and disciplined by the bar and courts (the approach taken—so far unsuccessfully—against Martinez). He also says that prosecutors should be stripped of the absolute immunity that shields them from lawsuits for unethical behavior.

For now, prosecutors continue to enjoy immunity and rarely face criminal charges no matter what they do. Whether the existing apparatus is up to the task of imposing any sort of discipline will be tested as Juan Martinez is, yet again, asked to account for his conduct.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

18 responses to “Controversial Arizona Prosecutor Juan Martinez May Finally Get a Taste of Justice

  1. But voters are fickle and could easily return to their preference for law-and-order-at-all-costs prosecutors. More than faith in the electorate is needed to control abusive prosecutors. They need some skin in the game.

    The thing is that voters actually have skin in the game. Any one of us could be railroaded by a careless or vindictive or ambition prosecutor.

    But, yes, the prosecutors themselves enjoy far too much protection from colleagues to be incentivized to change their ways. Again, voters need to insist on more accountability from those with so much currently unchecked power to ruin lives.

    1. Most people simply don’t pay attention to law enforcement elections, and the only people who do tend to be related to people in the prosecutor/law enforcement field. General elections for president and congress are the least important elections in the country, but they get all the attention. Primaries are far more important than general elections, and local elections are far more important than national ones.

    2. This is very Amazing when i saw in my Acount 8000$ par month .Just do work online at home on laptop with my best freinds . So u can always make Dollar Easily at home on laptop ,,
      Check For info Here,
      CLICK HERE???????? http://xurl.es/m7biw

  2. Too bad he isnt vocally anti trump or he would have gotten. 100 appearances on CNN.

    1. Maricopa County – he’s probably besties with Joe Arpaio.

      1. Youd probably be shocked how many pockets of liberal assholes are in Maricopa.

        1. “Pockets” is almost surely an understatement.

  3. Martinez has been accused of leaking the name of Juror 17 in the Arias case, who held out against the death penalty, to a blogger with whom Martinez was sexually involved.

    He should be disbarred at least. That is an attack on a fundamental aspect of our legal system. Fuck him.

  4. Prosecutorial immunity, bitches!

  5. Not only should he be required to change careers (is Starbucks hiring?), is it possible to reserve a prison cell for him?

    1. (Especially since I wouldn’t trust him to get my coffee right)

      1. He’d say you asked for Emu piss, and produce the document you signed (even though you didn’t) asking for it.

        1. I hear that Emu piss is deep black, like a dark roast.

  6. “Prosecutors who intentionally withhold exculpatory evidence resulting in a wrongful conviction should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice,”

    Prosecutors who intentionally withheld exculpatory evidence should goddamned well be prosecuted for wrongful imprisonment (say, kidnapping, if the ‘wrongful imprisonment’ charge doesn’t fit) and in capitol cases with Conspiracy to Commit Murder.

    1. Actually, the more I think about this, the more I agree with you. If a prosecutor intentionally withholds exculpatory evidence in a death penalty case, he is at least guilty of obstruction of justice, which I believe is a felony. So the attempted act of causing someone’s death during the commission of a felony would be attempted 1st degree murder. Never mind that simply withholding the evidence (for a death penalty case) should be prima facia evidence of intent to commit murder in and of itself.

  7. Fuck obstruction, prosecutors who withhold or engage in any other sort of criminal conduct that results in wrongful convictions should be convicted of the same exact crime. If death penalties are supposed to deter the most heinous crimes, they should apply to the attorneys as well.

  8. I am getting $100 to $130 consistently by wearing down facebook. i was jobless 2 years earlier , however now i have a really extraordinary occupation with which i make my own specific pay and that is adequate for me to meet my expences. I am really appreciative to God and my director. In case you have to make your life straightforward with this pay like me , you just mark on facebook and Click on big button thank you?

    c?h?e?c?k t?h?i?s l?i?n-k >>>>>>>>>> http://www.Geosalary.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.