KY-Two cops uncover an innocent person in prison. Get fired, demoted.

[Anti Federalist]

Not intentionally malevolent.


Louisville officers fired/demoted for exposing a wrongful conviction

Integrity on the police force was met with hostility from police brass.

Posted on April 17, 2014 by PSUSA in News

http://www.policestateusa.com/2014/l...ul-conviction/

Detective Baron Morgan discovered an innocent woman behind bars. (Source: WLKY)

LOUISVILLE, KY — When an esteemed police detective discovered that an innocent woman had spent years in prison for a murder she didn’t commit, he notified his supervisors and tried to make the tragic error known. Instead of seeing that the new evidence came to light, police brass demoted the whistleblower and kicked out of his unit. Another veteran officer stood up for the whistleblower, earning him termination from the department after decades of service. The Louisville Metropolitan Police Department has taken nefarious steps to hide a dark secret.

Detective Baron Morgan of the LMPD stumbled upon the wrongful conviction during a routine interview with a suspect in 2012. During that interview, the suspect confessed to a shooting a man and dumping his body into the Kentucky River in 1998.

This posed a big problem, since the person sitting in prison for that murder was a woman named Susan Jean King.

Susan King had been arrested for the crime in 2007, after the murder case had gone unsolved for 8 years. The victim, Kyle Breedon, was King’s ex-boyfriend. When prosecutors threatened her with life in prison due to circumstantial evidence, she entered an “Alford Plea” on a lesser charge. A defendant who gives this type of plea does not admit guilt of the crime, but accepts the consequences, since battling the prosecution would likely lead to worse results. As such, King accepted a 10-year sentence for manslaughter to avoid the prosecutors’ threats of life in prison. But all along, they had been threatening the wrong person.

The King conviction had already been under scrutiny by the Innocence Project when they learned that King was only 97-lbs and had only one leg. It would have been physically impossible for her to have launched Kyle Breedon’s body over the bridge into the river.

Detective Morgan was an 18-year veteran of the force. When he found out that Susan King was innocent, he spoke out as any moral person would. He notified his supervisors and contacted the Innocence Project of the new confession. The suspect, Richard Thomas Jarrell Jr., had revealed all sorts of intimate details about the murder, and revealed that he pulled the trigger just to feel what it was like to kill a man.

LMPD brass evidently didn’t appreciate the embarrassment of having a wrongful conviction exposed, so they punished Morgan, stripped him of his Detective rank, and removed him from his unit. He was placed back at the bottom of the department — patrolling the street, working the third shift. The ranking members of LMPD did not act on Morgan’s evidence regarding Susan King’s wrongful conviction. Morgan’s integrity was unwelcome as a detective.

Things got more scandalous when another officer stood up for Morgan, and received punishment as well. Lieutenant Rich Pearson had over 20 years of experience as an officer, but when he stuck his neck out for Detective Morgan and Susan King, he was nailed by Police Chief Steve Conrad with trumped up allegations of misconduct and fired.

“The actions the chief has taken against him are nothing short of appalling,” said attorney Thomas Clay, who represents both Morgan and Pearson in court. Both men filed lawsuits over their mistreatment, which Mr. Clay characterized as a violation of the state’s law protecting whisleblowers.

“This was something that pretty much dropped into Baron Morgan’s lap. He wasn’t out there looking for anything that would cause embarrassment to the Kentucky State Police,” said Mr. Clay to WLKY. “I really can’t explain the hostility that was displayed to Baron Morgan from his own department as a result of doing the right thing.”

Justice Served?

When the Innocence Project entered a motion for a new trial for Susan King, the judge denied it, saying she entered her Alford Plea voluntarily and was not owed a further trial. She was finally released — not based on the exculpatory evidence, but her eventual parole.

Baron Morgan’s case almost went to trial, but the Louisville Metro Government instead opted to give the detective a settlement of $450,000 at the last minute. The government insisted that the settlement was not an admission of culpability. Rich Pearson’s lawsuit remains pending.

While taxpayers have given reparations to Mr. Morgan, a great injustice was done to Susan King which has never been officially recognized. Furthermore, those responsible for of the aforementioned acts have been allowed to remain in positions of power over the citizens of Kentucky. Has justice been served?

[aGameOfThrones]

Justice? Ain't nobody got time for that...

[VoluntaryAmerican]

Stories like this really make you question the big man upstairs.

[otherone]

When the Innocence Project entered a motion for a new trial for Susan King, the judge denied it, saying she entered her Alford Plea voluntarily and was not owed a further trial.

DER DER DER DER DER DER

[otherone]

Justice? Ain't nobody got time for that...

JUSTICE IS SERVED:

[Christopher A. Brown]

Pearson’s lawsuit remains pending.

While taxpayers have given reparations to Mr. Morgan, a great injustice was done to Susan King which has never been officially recognized. Furthermore, those responsible for of the aforementioned acts have been allowed to remain in positions of power over the citizens of Kentucky. Has justice been served?

According to your overall position, bitching about a lack of justice in another state has no standing at all.

Your desire is there be no overarching standard of justice enforceable by the federal government, even for the people after the fact that must suffer control over despotic, unaccountable legal systems.

From your perspective, forget uniformity and equality of rights.

From mine I say NO! Justice has not been served.

And I say that this as a solution and have been saying it for awhile now.

I know most have seen this before, but with consideration of the above, attempt some comprehensive critical thinking and consider abandoning definition of problem on a trial basis just to see what happens, then contemplate the factors of solution.

We need to exercise our first constitutional right, to "alter or abolish". First action, clean up states.

http://algoxy.com/poly/principal_party.html

A step by step process in a forum which stands un opposed because it is fully lawful and logical.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5433668

By ending the abridging of free speech an appropriate majority will be appraised of information and perhaps with preliminary use of direct democracy determine what is real and what is not.

[Anti Federalist]

What are you on about?

Other than following me around, spamming that incomprehensible website of yours.

According to your overall position, bitching about a lack of justice in another state has no standing at all.

Your desire is there be no overarching standard of justice enforceable by the federal government, even for the people after the fact that must suffer control over despotic, unaccountable legal systems.

From your perspective, forget uniformity and equality of rights.

From mine I say NO! Justice has not been served.

And I say that this as a solution and have been saying it for awhile now.

I know most have seen this before, but with consideration of the above, attempt some comprehensive critical thinking and consider abandoning definition of problem on a trial basis just to see what happens, then contemplate the factors of solution.

We need to exercise our first constitutional right, to "alter or abolish". First action, clean up states.

http://algoxy.com/poly/principal_party.html

A step by step process in a forum which stands un opposed because it is fully lawful and logical.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...=1#post5433668

By ending the abridging of free speech an appropriate majority will be appraised of information and perhaps with preliminary use of direct democracy determine what is real and what is not.

[Christopher A. Brown]

It figures. You don't know what you are doing and cannot understand what needs to be done.

Or perhaps that is what you are pretending.

[Anti Federalist]

It figures. You don't know what you are doing and cannot understand what needs to be done.

Or perhaps that is what you are pretending.

Never claimed to have all the answers, not by a long shot.

I do know that unleashing this current mob of Americans on the Bill of Rights under an Article V Con-Con would be a disaster of biblical proportions.

That is what you are suggesting, if I am understanding you properly (no small feat, that) and if that is the case, you're nuts and your course of action should be rejected for the lunacy it is.

Now, if I'm misunderstanding that, then explain, in clear, concise language what you are proposing.

[Origanalist]

What are you on about?

Other than following me around, spamming that incomprehensible website of yours.

You have a stalker AF. It comes with being famous.

[DevilsAdvocate]

When the Innocence Project entered a motion for a new trial for Susan King, the judge denied it, saying she entered her Alford Plea voluntarily and was not owed a further trial.

How is it that there are so many people without common sense, all associated with the legal system? I don't want to offend anybody here, but the judge's reasoning here is what could be considered "retard level".

[squarepusher]

The King conviction had already been under scrutiny by the Innocence Project when they learned that King was only 97-lbs and had only one leg. It would have been physically impossible for her to have launched Kyle Breedon’s body over the bridge into the river.

what the actual $#@!?

[Henry Rogue]

How is it that there are so many people without common sense, all associated with the legal system? I don't want to offend anybody here, but the judge's reasoning here is what could be considered "retard level".

Your view presupposes, the people in control care about Justice or Rights or ethics. Those aren't their incentives. Maintaining control is their incentive. Keeping their job and covering their ass is their incentive. That requires that class of people to "watch each others back". If one wants to be protected, he must protect the rest in kind.

[tod evans]

Prosecutors track records are far more important than one broads life....

[LibForestPaul]

How is it that there are so many people without common sense, all associated with the legal system? I don't want to offend anybody here, but the judge's reasoning here is what could be considered "retard level".

His reasoning is he wants his pension, and his going to do what the men with gold tell him to do. His reasoning is sound, his verdict is just.

[Henry Rogue]

Prosecutors track records are far more important than one broads life....

It's a game played with lives and they don't want points taken off the scoreboard.

[tod evans]

It's a game played with lives and they don't want points taken off the scoreboard.

It's long past time to level the playing field...

[nobody's_hero]

You have a stalker AF. It comes with being famous.

I lolololololol'd. And all AF ever wanted was to live in the woods far away from an uncivilized civilization and yell at peeps for stepping on his lawn.

[Occam's Banana]

From the Wikipedia article "Actual innocence": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_innocence

Because most forms of post-conviction collateral relief are limited to procedural or Constitutional flaws in the trial itself, claims of "actual innocence" generally are recognized only in those states which have adopted specific "actual innocence" statutes. Otherwise, in order to obtain post-conviction collateral relief, a defendant must often plead a specific statutory grounds for relief, i.e., that the conviction was obtained in violation of the Constitution of the United States. In jurisdictions that restrict a court's power to hear a post-conviction petition to a time period defined by statute, the court cannot grant post-conviction relief upon expiration of the time period regardless of the discovery of proof of "actual innocence" of the crime for which he was convicted. The jurisdictional bar is often rationalized by citing the requirement of finality of the judicial process in order to maintain the integrity of the system.

"Integrity of the system" my aching ass ...

[Anti Federalist]

I lolololololol'd. And all AF ever wanted was to live in the woods far away from an uncivilized civilization and yell at peeps for stepping on his lawn.

No. $#@!ing. $#@!.

[pcosmar]

What are you on about?
.

Gobbledegook

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gobbledegook

[oyarde]

what the actual $#@!?

I agree.

[ClydeCoulter]

From the Wikipedia article "Actual innocence": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actual_innocence


"Integrity of the system" my aching ass ...

So, they actually admit that innocence has nothing to do with it? SMH!

[Occam's Banana]

So, they actually admit that innocence has nothing to do with it? SMH!

Yep. After having been "fairly" convicted in a jurisdiction that has no "actual innocence" rule on the books, the subsequent discovery or production of absolute & "iron clad" proof of innocence is irrelevant to and worthless for overturning the conviction. Because, you know, the "integrity of the system" is more important than justice ...

[ClydeCoulter]

Yep. After having been "fairly" convicted in a jurisdiction that has no "actual innocence" rule on the books, the subsequent discovery or production of absolute & "iron clad" proof of innocence is irrelevant to and worthless for overturning the conviction. Because, you know, the "integrity of the justice system" is more important than justice ...

FIFY

[Anti Federalist]

Yep. After having been "fairly" convicted in a jurisdiction that has no "actual innocence" rule on the books, the subsequent discovery or production of absolute & "iron clad" proof of innocence is irrelevant to and worthless for overturning the conviction. Because, you know, the "integrity of the system" is more important than justice ...

Not intentionally malevolent.