I thought reporters who cover the courts for big city newspapers were supposed to understand how America’s justice system works. Apparently not, based on my reading of the Republic’s Michael Kiefer article, Debra Milke’s new world after a half-life on death row.

Here’s Kiefer’s bio:

Advertisement

Michael Kiefer is a senior reporter who has covered courts, justice and Maricopa County government issues for The Arizona Republic since 2003.

And here’s the reporting on Debra Milke’s recent release from prison by the senior reporter who has been covering the courts for over a decade:

Milke denied that she had any part in the murder, but a jury thought otherwise. She was sent to death row in 1991 and languished there until March 2013, when a federal appeals court threw out her conviction and her death sentence — not because she was exonerated, but because her constitutional rights had been violated. The prosecution and police had refused to turn over the spotty personnel record of a Phoenix police detective who claimed Milke had confessed to the arranged murder. There were no recordings or witnesses to prove the confession took place. [emphasis mine]

Spotty personnel record? To be more precise, the detective had lied in other cases and invoked his 5th amendment rights when asked to testify against Milke again. Oh those pesky details. But that’s almost besides the point, specifically: How does a reporter who supposedly understands our system of justice separate “exoneration” from the violation of constitutional rights? After all, the violation of Milke’s constitutional rights is what rendered the evidence presented against her unreliable, thereby exonerating her, as the County had failed to prove its case.

Here’s how: He doesn’t understand one of the most fundamental precepts of the system:

She still professes her innocence. Milke claims that she had nothing to do with her son’s murder. But there is no evidence to show she was not involved. [emphasis mine]

There you have it. In this reporter’s world, criminal defendants are guilty unless they can prove their innocence.

Seems like a high-school kid who earned a passing grade in Government could have done a better job. Just sayin’

Advertisement