Criminal Justice

A Wrongfully Convicted Kansas Man Can Now Sue the Corrupt Cop Who Framed Him

Lamonte McIntyre served 23 years in prison for murders that he did not commit.

|

Kansas man Lamonte McIntyre served 23 years in prison for murders that he did not commit. Last week, a federal judge ruled that McIntyre can proceed with most of the claims in his lawsuit against Wyandotte County, Kansas City, and Roger Golubski, the corrupt police officer who framed him.

McIntyre's wrongful conviction has been extensively covered by The Kansas City Star, Injustice Watch, and The New York Times. McIntyre was also represented by the Midwest Innocence Project, a group that works to exonerate the wrongfully convicted through DNA testing.

On April 15, 1994, Doniel Quinn and Donald Ewing were murdered while they sat in a parked Cadillac in Kansas City. One of the officers who responded to the scene was Roger Golubski. At least two retired officers, former officer Ruby Ellington and former detective Timothy Maskill, attested in separate affidavits that a corrupt Golubski had a thing for sleeping with "black, drug-addicted prostitutes" and other vulnerable black women in the area. Many in the department were well aware of his indiscretions.

Among those solicited by Golubski was Rosie McIntyre, McIntyre's mom. Rosie alleged that Golubski, who had a history of harassing the women who turned him down, retaliated against her rejection by framing her son for murder. After Rosie declined to have a continuous sexual relationship with Golubski, according to her own affidavit, he created false reports to implicate McIntyre.

Despite no DNA tying McIntyre to the scene and despite having no motivation to kill—McIntyre did not even know Quinn and Ewing—he was arrested at age 17 and convicted of homicide.

The state's faulty case was based on two eyewitnesses, both of whom failed to place McIntyre at the scene prior to the trial. One woman later alleged that she not only told the prosecutor McIntyre wasn't the shooter, but that the prosecutor threatened to take her children away if she did not testify in court. Other witnesses similarly denied that McIntyre was the shooter, but this information was never shared with his trial lawyer. The one witness who identified McIntyre later recanted, saying Golubski coerced her.

Golubski, who went on to work for the Edwardsville Police Department, retired in 2016.

There were other missteps. Terra Morehead, then-assistant prosecutor of Wyandotte County had an undisclosed romantic relationship with J. Dexter Burdette, the judge in McIntyre's trial. Advocates for McIntyre later used this relationship to argue bias in his case.

In 2017, advocates presented their case for exoneration before retired Judge Edward Bouker. During the hearing, District Attorney Mark Dupree not only recommended that McIntyre receive a new trial but dismissed the charges against him.

After spending 23 long years in prison, serving two life sentences for murders that he did not commit, McIntyre was finally able to go home in October 2017. Last month, he was awarded $1.5 million in compensation and a certificate of innocence from Shawnee County District Judge Teresa L. Watson.

Last Tuesday, McIntyre was granted the opportunity to pursue further relief.

U.S. District Judge Kathryn H. Vratil allowed most of the claims in McIntyre's civil suit against Wyandotte County, Kansas City, Roger Golubski, and other officers who helped botch the case to stand. The defendants had previously filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

The claims upheld by Vratil's ruling included malicious prosecution, evidence fabrication, and Brady violations, which occurs when a prosecutor suppresses exculpatory evidence. McIntyre will be able to proceed with his suit.

NEXT: Expect 'Very Dramatic' Economic Intervention Due to Coronavirus, Says Trump

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.

  1. So when is Golubski scheduled to go on trial?

    1. Hahahaha! Stop it, man. You’re killing me.

    2. Exactly. Although my preference would be 15 minutes alone in a locked room with Mr McIntyre.

    3. Amusing. On the other hand, Golubski is retired, so maybe the taxpayers won’t have to indemnify him.

  2. Personally, I wouldn’t want to own Wyandotte County. Hope he gets cash.

  3. What about qualified immunity? How could this officer know that it violated the Constitution when he framed this guy?

    1. Police union spokesman Joey Bagadonitz defended Golubski, saying that the Police supervisors and trainers did not properly train their officers not to frame innocent people for murder .

  4. My god what a travesty. It should be life sentence for any officer of the law found guilty of intentionally framing or lying to get someone convicted. Unbelievable.

    1. Better yet, get a woodchipper for him. The tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of patriots, and fertilized with chunks of tyrants.
      (For legal reasons, this is a joke)

      1. Feet first, of course.

      2. Now you sound like a leftist.

    2. This is the part that gets me:

      At least two retired officers, former officer Ruby Ellington and former detective Timothy Maskill, attested in separate affidavits that a corrupt Golubski had a thing for sleeping with “black, drug-addicted prostitutes” and other vulnerable black women in the area. Many in the department were well aware of his indiscretions.

      Every time I hear copsuckers saying there are only a few bad cops, I ask why the alleged good cops don’t turn them in. Here’s a prime example — apparently it was common knowledge, yet no one turned him in, his bosses didn’t stop him, he gets to retire. The entire department is either in on the secret or is too new to have figured it out.

      Where are all those good cops I hear so much about?

      1. They want you to believe that cops who don’t personally engage in corruption, misconduct, and abuse, but look the other way when it happens are good cops.

        They aren’t, but that’s what the copsuckers want you to believe.

      2. “The whole good cop/bad cop question can be disposed of much more decisively. We need not enumerate what proportion of cops appears to be good or listen to someone’s anecdote about his Uncle Charlie, an allegedly good cop. We need only consider the following: (1) a cop’s job is to enforce the laws, all of them; (2) many of the laws are manifestly unjust, and some are even cruel and wicked; (3) therefore every cop has agreed to act as an enforcer for laws that are manifestly unjust or even cruel and wicked. There are no good cops.” ~Robert Higgs

      3. “Where are all those good cops I hear so much about?”

        I used to think that most cops were good and only a small percentage were bad. But then I learned that cops can rob you of your money and it’s all perfectly legal thanks to Civil Forfeiture laws. They can also kill you with impunity.

        Now I realize that they’re hired goons and good cops are the exception.
        More Civil Asset Forfeiture Insanity! https://youtu.be/GLCgf8yN_SE

      4. You’re implying they are all Democrats? Please. smfh

    3. Definitely a keeper in the Old Testament law. If you lied on someone, you received the punishment they would have received. I like it.

  5. 1. Dude looks like Humpty.
    2. They ought to sue the stylist that dyed that woman’s hair.

    1. And now that I’ve read the article, those cops should be headed to criminal court, not civil.

      1. Every officer still on the force who knew and did nothing should be purged.

    2. Pronounced with an -umpty.

      1. i like my oatmeal lumpy

        1. I once got busy in a Burger King bathroom.

          1. Thank you for cleaning the restroom for public use. I’ll put in a good word for you to get a raise. Now, get busy washing your hands.

  6. The prosecutor and judge, on the other hand, get off scott free.

    1. Yes, it’s uncredible that the prosecutors didn’t know about the police corruption. The judge may not have known about the corruption, but the case itself should have been thrown out for crappy evidence.

      1. When all participants of a “system” are feeding from the same nose-bag, free from competition — and are allowed (by your neighbors and friends — hopefully not you) to
        • Make the laws,
        • Enforce the laws,
        • Prosecute the laws,
        • Hire the prosecutors,
        • License the “defense” attorneys,
        • Pay the “judges”,
        • Build the jails,
        • Contract jails out to private entities,
        • Employ and pay the wardens,
        • Employ and pay the guards,
        • Employ and pay the parole officers,
        One can’t honestly call it a “justice” system. It’s a system of abject tyranny.

        1. I detect a hint of cynicism.

  7. Is anyone under the impression that “common sense”, “sensible” gun legislation will be enforced in an even-handed manner?

    1. Are you delusional? First, “common sense”, “sensible” gun legislation would have to be enacted.

      If you think that’s going to happen, please share what you’ve been smoking with the rest of the class.

    2. Absolutely.
      Since you start with an impossible scenario (“common sense” “sensible” gun legislation), the derivative impossibility (“enforced in an even-handed manner”) has the same level of support.

  8. The “Midwest Innocence Project”; these guys are beginning to show up in good places like the Institute for Justice.
    Good on ya; keep it up!

  9. Wyandotte County is one of those places to never be.

    1. It’s okay if you want to spend a day watching NASCAR, but otherwise, yeah.

  10. What is wrong with a jury that would convict someone under those conditions?

    1. They’re “good citizens”.
      “And what is a good citizen? Simply one who never says, does or thinks anything that is unusual. Schools are maintained in order to bring this uniformity up to the highest possible point. A school is a hopper into which children are heaved while they are still young and tender; therein they are pressed into certain standard shapes and covered from head to heels with official rubber-stamps.” ~ H.L. Mencken
      “Wherever is found what is called a paternal government, there is found state education. It has been discovered that the best way to insure implicit obedience is to commence tyranny in the nursery.” ~ Benjamin Disraeli

    2. Perhaps they didn’t have all the relevant information?

      Garbage in, garbage out.

      1. If some of the information they didn’t have was whether or not he was ever at the crime scene, scene with the victims, caught with the murder weapon, seen covered in blood or anything else that might implicate him in the crime, I was always under the impression that led to not convicting.

  11. Golubski needs to be sentence to 23 years in prison, without possibility of parole.

  12. There were other missteps.

    I should fucking say so. One single corrupt cop should not be able to convict an innocent man, and here it seems he didn’t need to do it alone.

    If they’re not going to be charged, at least bankrupt the lot of them.

  13. Every time a defendant is forced into a court room, there is a Brady violation.
    There has never been a prosecutor that could provide evidence that the laws that result from “The Constitution” apply to anyone.

  14. So he gets out of prison, obtains a certificate of innocence which he can frame (get it?), gets some payback from the taxpayers, and a chance to seek civil damages against the cop and maybe others.

    Let’s see, is anything missing? Hmm…how about prison for the false accuser(s)? Or at the very least, how about looking at some of the other cases these false accusers were involved in – did they cut corners in any *other* cases? How can we rely on the convictions they obtained?

    As to the above comment about the jury, obviously the jury didn’t have all the relevant information, but in future, maybe this case and others like it will be a reminder to jurors to be skeptical of the evidence prosecutors bring forward, and not to roll their eyes at “conspiracy theories” about frame-ups?

  15. Civil actions aside, why haven’t criminal charges been lodged against all participants in what was a completely phony prosecution? Have such charges been instituted, will they be instituted, and pushed? If not, why?

  16. Nothing will happen to that cop. Corrupt police, FBI, politicians…these are protected classes…especially if they’re Democrats. But party aside…cops don’t face the law.

  17. I am making 7 to 6 dollar par hour at home on laptop ,, This is make happy But now i am Working 4 hour Dailly and make 40 dollar Easily .. This is enough for me to happy my family..how ?? i am making this so u can do it Easily……. Read more

  18. Sue? How do you properly compensate someone for such a crime committed against him? What is the proper punishment for the officer? Penalties and compensation are both needed but justice can never be done at this point.

  19. It’s disgraceful that a cop who probably took home 6 figures of public money each year will be held accountable for horrific misconduct. Blue lives matter!

  20. They need to review all of his cases. This Man that he framed wasn’t the first and he wasn’t the last. They need to check his co-workers and the Judges as well. They all work together to keep the jails filled with black people. And the State needs to cut him a check. They took his entire life away from him for no other reason than the color of his skin. Now who will make them pay?

Please to post comments