MORe Coverage of Brady/Giglio
A former Douglas County Sheriff’s Office deputy has had her law enforcement certification revoked after she was charged in a domestic violence case.
A plea deal Thursday resulted in a Lawrence man being convicted of one misdemeanor, seeing three cases dropped and getting out of jail on time served.
His case was the latest to call attention to an ongoing dispute between the Douglas County sheriff and district attorney.
A judge has ruled that prosecutors did not withhold information that should have been turned over to a defense attorney regarding an ex-deputy accused of violating law and policy. This case, the latest to highlight an ongoing conflict between the DA and the sheriff, leaves some questions lingering.
A former deputy with the Douglas County Sheriff’s Office was granted a diversion this week in connection with a domestic battery charge from Halloween 2020.
A Lawrence defense attorney is arguing that his client’s case should be dismissed because prosecutors failed to disclose Brady/Giglio information, or information that raises questions about an officer’s credibility and character.
A federal civil case against an ex Lawrence police officer, the city, and a former police chief was set to proceed to trial this month, but the parties have reached a settlement.
Internal investigation documents in the case file reveal details that have never been made public about two cases that brought officer integrity issues into the spotlight in Douglas County.
”The Kansas Coalition for Open Government believes that establishing written Brady/Giglio policies is essential to promoting transparency and accountability in law enforcement,” Max Kautsch writes in this Kansas Reflector column.
A former Lawrence police officer’s certification has been revoked after an investigation found that he acted in poor moral character and disproportionately arrested young women.
Douglas County Sheriff Jay Armbrister is “Giglio-impaired” because he mishandled evidence, according to the district attorney’s office. The sheriff disputes the characterization.
Conflict has been worsening between the Douglas County sheriff and district attorney amid an ongoing dispute over what information the sheriff’s office must share with prosecutors regarding employee misconduct.
The writing may be on the wall for a former Douglas County sheriff’s deputy and Lawrence police officer.
Despite numerous complaints and red flags, years passed before Brad Williams’ peace officer certification was challenged.
The Lawrence Community Police Review Board tonight advanced a charter creating a new task force. Members did not raise questions about officer truthfulness policies that have spurred conflict between area law enforcement and the district attorney’s office.
No judge reviewed Douglas County Sheriff Jay Armbrister’s personnel file and cleared him of untruthful behavior, as the sheriff wrote in response to questions last month.
The Douglas County DA’s office has dropped an estimated 50 cases because of officer integrity issues — including one homicide case. And dueling policies about officer truthfulness and bias are straining the relationship between police and prosecutors.
Officers called to testify are subject to scrutiny during court proceedings. Prosecutors need to be aware of any dishonesty or bias in criminal and professional histories, and they have a legal duty to turn that information over to defense attorneys.
Lies from law enforcement can lead to guilty defendants walking free, innocent defendants getting convicted, and crime victims getting no justice or closure.
Policies dealing with officer truthfulness and disclosure of evidence are often called “Brady-Giglio” policies.
Put very simply, Brady v. Maryland and Giglio v. United States were landmark cases in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors must provide to defense attorneys all evidence that could show that a defendant is not guilty. That includes information that could make a jury question a particular witness’s credibility — for instance, if a witness had been granted immunity in exchange for their testimony.
If a law enforcement officer commits a “Brady” violation, that would generally mean they had withheld exculpatory evidence or that they had fabricated evidence; “Giglio” evidence would generally include information showing that an officer had been untruthful, had shown racial bias, had a criminal history or history of professional complaints, and more.
Why does it matter?
All of this information could be critical to a defendant getting a fair trial. When there are violations, it can mean that cases get dismissed or convictions get overturned. That’s a big reason why most prosecutors won’t allow “Brady- or Giglio-impaired” officers to testify in their cases.