Tim Masters murder case deconstructed. Interesting read

[Diogenes]

Report on a panel discussion of the Tim Masters wrongful murder conviction. Makes an interesting read particularly in regards to prosecutor attitudes of win at any cost rather that to seek justice.


From Fort Collins Now:

This cautionary axiom was the capstone on a long and captivating presentation by Masters’ legal team presented jointly by the Colorado Criminal Defense Bar and the Alternate Defense Counsel. It was the first time the story of Masters’ wrongful murder conviction and eventual release from prison after nine and a half years was told by his team of attorneys, investigators and experts in one sitting rather than scattered throughout months of courtroom testimony.

AND

Another told of how the phrase “pulling a Masters” has entered the legal lexicon in reference to prosecutors who are suspected of withholding information from the defense.

But in response to a question about how to change the mindset of prosecutors determined to preserve a wrongful conviction regardless of the time, money or cost to justice, Nieslanik suggested hitting them not in the courtroom, but in the pocketbook.

“You sue them,” she said.

http://www.fortcollinsnow.com/articl...NEWS/152653823

[lrock]

It is a terrible injustice that a psychologist would have been allowed to testify in the Tim Masters case without ever interviewing him. The judge should have ruled the evidence as inadmissable based on the Daubert decision which stipulates that forensic testimony by an expert should be based on scientific principles and peer reviewed rates of error. Too often psychologists opine based on their own flawed theories and people's lives are tragically affected. The A.P.A. should censure him and clarify the rules under which psychologists testify.