Date of Offense
Reporting Authority
Supporting Document(s)
Statement
The prosecutor in this matter demonstrated a deliberate failure to investigate, gather, and disclose known, high-value evidence directly relevant to officer misconduct. This refusal to act constitutes a breach of constitutional and ethical duties under Brady v. Maryland and Giglio v. United States.
By withholding material evidence, the prosecutor engaged in:
Failure to Disclose Brady/Giglio Material – depriving the defense of evidence critical to impeaching officer credibility and establishing a fair trial record.
Attorney Misconduct – violating professional responsibility standards and the Rules of Professional Conduct. Specifically, this conduct contravenes RPC 3.4: Fairness to Opposing Party and Counsel, which prohibits unlawfully obstructing access to evidence, falsifying evidence, or failing to make reasonably diligent efforts to comply with discovery obligations, and RPC 3.8: Special Responsibilities of a Prosecutor, which requires prosecutors to disclose exculpatory and impeachment evidence.
Bias – protecting law enforcement interests at the expense of justice.
Cooperative Misconduct – colluding with law enforcement to suppress misconduct evidence.
Coercive Plea Bargaining – leveraging undisclosed evidence to force pleas under false pretenses.
Destruction of Evidence – effectively erasing or obstructing access to exculpatory and impeachment evidence.
Obstruction of Justice – impeding the court’s ability to ensure fair adjudication.
The prosecutor’s refusal to honor both constitutional mandates and ethical obligations under RPC 3.4 and RPC 3.8 not only undermines the defense’s right to a fair trial, but also corrodes public trust in the justice system. This pattern of concealment constitutes systemic misconduct and warrants formal public disclosure.
