Defending People

the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering

Prosecutor Exceptionalism

Rob Kep­ple giv­ing a pep talk, under the guise of “ethics,” to the Har­ris County DA’s Office:

Now let’s go back to my orig­i­nal anal­ogy because I really want to wrap this up and bring it around, because I really do think that it shows the dif­fer­ence between what we do every day as a pros­e­cu­tor and what every­body else does and what every­body else thinks, and that’s kind of what makes you all so spe­cial. Pros­e­cu­tor excep­tion­al­ism really does mean some­thing to me, and it is dif­fer­ent and it takes edu­ca­tion because a lot of peo­ple just think you’re a lawyer out there try­ing to win cases. They really don’t under­stand, and largely because they’ve been taught that if you can get away with it you’re sup­posed to. That’s kind of our cul­ture. If you can get away with it you’re sup­posed to and that’s kind of what every­body thinks every­body else does and that’s the prob­lem you face as a pros­e­cu­tor because you know that’s not it.

Pros­e­cu­tor excep­tion­al­ism really does mean some­thing to me.”

Yeah, accord­ing to Wikipedia that’s about right.

But isn’t that the prob­lem that keeps putting inno­cent peo­ple in prison? That pros­e­cu­tors think they are “super­heroes” (Kepple’s word) who don’t need to con­form to nor­mal rules or gen­eral principles?

(The full tran­script, pro­duced by HCCLA from video pub­lished by Big Jolly, is here. Why is a 30-page text-only PDF so large? Mur­ray New­man and Paul Kennedy com­ment on the video.)

Share

About The Author

Mark Bennett got his letter of marque from the Supreme Court of Texas in May 1995. He is famous for having no sense of humor when it comes to totalitarianism.

Comments

7 Responses to “Prosecutor Exceptionalism”

  1. Robert Fickman says:

    Mark — The speech deliv­ered by Rob Kep­ple is both reveal­ing and disgusting.

    These Har­ris County Pros­e­cu­tors Appar­ently are indoc­tri­nated to believe;
    – they rep­re­sent a supe­rior group;
    – their adver­saries are ver­min;
    – their adver­saries are immoral;
    – they must take very strong steps
    Against their adver­saries to main­tain
    Order.
    – those who crit­i­cize them are bad;
    – they are on some sort of crusade.

    The entire affair, reminded of me of a goot olt fash­ion Beer Hall Meet­ing! I half expected for the whole group to jump up and start singing Germsn March­ing Songs!
    – Not one per­son, among all those lawyers ques­tioned that the out­landish state­ments
    – Not one per­son, among all thes lawyers
    Ques­tioned the despi­ca­ble claim that Bradley had
    Done noth­ing wrong!
    – Appar­en­tky in the DAOs it’s ok to obstruct DNA test­ing and delay thereby delay the release of an inno­cent man.

    Those pros­e­cu­tors are all scared out of their wits about loos­ing their jobs. I smelled an atmos­phere of lock step. This does not bode well.

    If Mike Ander­son wants to main­tain eth­i­cal cred­i­bil­ity he will send a Memo out cor­rect­ing the
    Uneth­i­cal state­ments & innu­endo. If he lets those state­ments stand, that will be unfor­tu­nate for all of us.

    Robert Fick­man

  2. Mike Paar says:

    Odd, I never not even for a sec­ond thought Ander­son would be any dif­fer­ent than what he is prov­ing him­self to be. He believes his own press that he’s a big, bad, Texas Law­man. To me he epit­o­mizes every­thing that is wrong with crim­i­nal jus­tice. Not an ounce of empa­thy in his soul­less body, thinks every­one but him­self and his col­leagues and pals are crim­i­nals yet excuses his own crim­i­nal behav­ior like he’s on a mis­sion from God. Truly a sick, sick, sad individual.

  3. Might prove to be some nice voir dire fodder.

  4. John Regan says:

    The crim­i­nal defense bar should rou­tinely attend pros­e­cu­tor gabfests, I think, pre­cisely because they are so reveal­ing of the pros­e­cu­tor mind­set. This par­tic­u­lar exam­ple was remark­ably dys­func­tional and delusional.

    Some ideas are dif­fi­cult to grasp because they are an intel­lec­tual chal­lenge. But some pros­e­cu­tor thought processes are dif­fi­cult to grasp because they are so crude and intel­lec­tu­ally impov­er­ished that it’s hard to believe a mem­ber of the same species “thinks” that way.

  5. bryan simmons says:

    That’s a sick group pathol­ogy on dis­play there. Author­i­tar­ian para­noiacs. They would have been model stu­dents of the likes of Himm­ler and Goer­ing in 1936 Ger­many. Just a hop over that line of right and wrong –it’s kind of ironic just how rel­a­tivist many of them are when it comes to things like ethics, moral­ity and fair play. But yet har­bor a strong-self right­eous judg­men­tal­ism of the others–meaning all the rest of us. Fuck­ing sociopaths.

Leave a non-anonymous Reply