[column width=”1/1″ last=”true” title=”” title_type=”single” animation=”none” implicit=”true”]
Criminal cases often take years to come to a complete resolution. The Debra Milke case is an example. MIlke was arrested in 1989, charged with the murder of her 4-year old son. She was convicted, sentenced to death, and has remained in jail, and on death row, for the past 23 years. The conviction and sentence were recently overturned by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and pretrial activity has commenced regarding efforts to have Milke retried.
One of the major pieces of evidence in the case came from the testimony of Phoenix Police Detective Armando Saldate. In fact, according to the concurring opinion in the federal appeals court decision, there was no physical evidence linking Milke to the crime. Saldate’s testimony was that Milke confessed to him when he interviewed her shortly after the murder. Milke denied confessing, and at the trial, the jury sided with Saldate. But a crucial fact, or series of facts, withheld from the defense, was (as stated by the appeals court) Saldate’s “long history of lying under oath and other misconduct.”
In a striking opinion, the Ninth Circuit judges included an appendix that detailed the prior instances of misconduct by Saldate, including:
- Lying to internal affairs investigators about sexual misconduct with a woman wanted for outstanding warrants (1973);
- Lying under oath concerning continued questioning of a suspect after the suspect indicated he did not wish to answer questions (1990);
- False statements to a grand jury to undercut a defendant’s alibi (1989);
- False statement to a grand jury about the number of times a victim had been shot (1986);
- Omitting facts before a grand jury to make the defendant appear more culpable (1989);
- Violating a juvenile’s fourth amendment rights by handcuffing him to a table in an interrogation room without any information linking the juvenile to the crime in question (1990);
- Questioning a defendant who was hospitalized, incoherent and strapped to a bed, and presenting the alleged statements at trial (1984);
- Questioning a defendant in intensive care who was intubated, and who was told he would be denied pain medication until after the questioning was over (1992); and
- Violating the defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights by continuing questioning after invocation of the right to remain silent (1992).
Now that the appeals have been resolved, the next battle will be the defense application to bar any testimony by Saldate in the retrial.
Law Offices of David A. Black
40 North Central Avenue #1850
Phoenix, AZ 85004
(480) 280-8028
[/column]