Annie Dookhan was supposed to be an independent witness, a state chemist coolly analyzing drug evidence for the court. But her e-mails over the last nine years, obtained by the Globe, vividly detail her close relationship with prosecutors, including a man to whom she poured her heart out, and her strong desire to put suspects behind bars.
Dookhan, arraigned Thursday on 15 counts of altering drug evidence and obstructing justice, viewed herself as part of the prosecution team, the e-mails show. She coached assistant district attorneys on trial strategy and told one that her goal was “getting [drug dealers] off the streets.” When Dookhan told a prosecutor that she could not testify in her case, the woman replied with an anguished: “No no no!!! I need you!!!”
Comments
As few things to note: as in the private sector, being the most productive, having the warmest relationships, providing the results that management wants, often gets you relaxed supervision and special perks. In other words, it''s not about the quality of the work. Often, supervisors and managers have done the same as they worked their ways up in the organization. This is of inappropriate, especially when the "product" results in criminal prosecution.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
The emails clearly show the need for double blind analysis. Analysts should not know anything about the case or the prosecutors. The test should be tracked by a randomly assigned number, there should be 2 tests of every sample, neither tester should know who the other tester will be (ideally it is done at another facility). if the results come back and do not match there should be a 3rd annonomous test and the reason for the discrepancy determined.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
In conclusion, clearly, "good relationships" are a double edged sword. Double blind testing is needed. Management "enabled" the situation, knew about it for quite some time, and should be prosecuted -- they are even MORE responsible than Ms. Dookhan because THEY are the ones who were charged with the quality of the results and THEY are the ones who have destroyed lives.
Clearly this "Labgate" requires an investigation of procsecutors, independent of the attorney general's office. It is the appearance of impropriety within the offices of district attorneys, more than the criminal actions of a rogue chemist, that should shock a democracy that relies on due process to keep it civil and just. In the meantime, the commonwealth needs to take swift and prudent steps to avoid the outrageous expense of revisiting and retrying tainted prosecutions. Retry NO CASE in wich Ms. Dookhan provided assistance. Focus, instead, on ancillary damages to defendants, such as lost wages, unjust incarceration, lost child custody, and the like. Such a stance would not put criminals back into the community, it would begin to put confidence back into a state crininal justice system that is nearly destroyed. Don't we value the integrity and process of our courts more than our mistakes?
Good Post, I agree.
Those working at the State Police Crime Lab almost always view themselves as members of the law enforcement team. While Dookhan may have gone further than most to assist prosecutors by doctoring evidence, she was simply not alone in her desire to please Assistant District Attorneys. In a murder case I handled, the State Crime Lab withheld lab tests that exonerated my client -- who had been wrongly convicted of murder. The public is only now becoming aware of the inherent problems with the Crime Lab that have existed for decades.
Yes, the one doing the testing should know only a number and nothing about the case. The dealth penalty is cleary insane given the liklihood of collusion or mistake given the testing methodology -- Mass right to not have it. Much additional can and must be done to ensure justice is done.
Some of those prosecuters need some jail time
An obvious thought, but human beings will be human beings and human nature will not be repealed -- we are all just another species of animal in the jungle. So, checks and balances need to correct for that. Prosecuters are human too. I hope they don't mind me calling them that, but, you see they are subject to human nature, too (prosecuters are people too!). It's likely the process here and not the people...
No one mentions who hired her. Maybe not politically correct to mention. but was it part of affirmative action and the desire for "diversity".
The only people who've even mentioned her hiring are those who are bad at arithmetic and want to blame Deval Patrick. Also, until it all came apart she appeared to be exactly the opposite of what critics of affirmative action like to point to.
The correspondence also raises questions about what role prosecutors may have played in encouraging Dookhan’s alleged misconduct.
“Glad we are on the same team,” he once wrote Dookhan — including one day in May 2010 when he told her he needed a marijuana sample to weigh at least 50 pounds so that he could charge the owners with drug trafficking.
Two hours later, Dookhan responded: “OK . . . definitely Trafficking, over 80 lbs.” Papachristos thanked her profusely.
No comment necessary.
I think it's disgusting that prosecutors act this way! Please Gov fire them all!!! What a double standard: they can break rules/laws but they're holding the defendant accountable for any laws he/she might break?