Overturned Verdicts
* Re “Rampart Verdicts Voided,” Dec. 23: For 32 years, I tried hundreds of jury trials as a deputy district attorney--many of them being high profile, such as William Bonin, the freeway killer.
The evidence produced in the courtroom in the Rampart case was insufficient to ever base a conviction on. It is indeed insufficient for a district attorney even to go forward with a criminal prosecution.
The judge should have dismissed the case before it ever went to the jury. All the legal commentators before the verdict believed there was going to be an acquittal, not because they wanted that but from an experienced judgment on the evidence.
Judgment from the district attorney’s office led us to the disgrace of the O.J. Simpson, McMartin and many other cases, and we now can add Rampart to that list.
STERLING NORRIS
Northridge
*
When you want to know why people avoid jury duty, you need to look no further than L.A. Superior Court Judge Jacqueline Connor. Why did she wait until the jury had rendered a verdict before she found something improper? Was this a case of seeking the good graces of the LAPD? Was this a case where you wait to see what the jury will say and if it’s not the justice you want then you overturn it? Smells like the U.S. Supreme Court to me!
JOHN WRIGHT
Pasadena
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
