NY- Simple Complications Of A Wrongful Conviction

9-29-2008 New York:

From time to time over the years, my wife Mary and I would hear stories about total strangers who know about my case and would express dismay about the situation. One of the silver linings of this dark cloud we live is that we have been lucky enough to form friendships with many of those “strangers.” It is always comforting to hear of people who take the time to research my case and then form their opinion.

While at work recently, our daughter-in-law met a young woman who is currently studying law at a local college. During their conversation, the student offered that she is studying the convictions of innocent people and has an interest in defense work because of what she has learned. She went on to tell our daughter-in-law that she was currently studying the case of a local man by the name of Jack Carroll. News of such a coincidence might cause a cynical person to doubt its occurrence. After all, what are the odds?

Thinking about this interesting encounter triggered a view of the “big” picture. I wondered, as I often have, how had things gotten so complicated? How could something that started as a dream by a young girl end up causing so much destruction? How could it be that in this day and age of high tech everything, could lies and deceit about something so serious oppress the truth for so long?

In 1997, this all began so very simply. My ex-wife’s daughter had a dream that a boy was touching her. My ex then took the child to Troy Police Detective Stephen Weber, claiming that I was touching the girl.

In spite of the insistence of the girl that is was just a dream; Weber took her to his girlfriend (now wife), Nurse Practitioner Jane Szary, for an examination. Despite Szary’s negative findings- she found only a yeast infection- she nonetheless produced a sworn affidavit to the contrary. Oh, and by the way- she never mentioned the yeast infection in the affidavit. Everything else spun from Jane Szary’s bogus affidavit.

From the beginning of this fight, through the many years of battle and right through till today, the sole argument has been simple. I am innocent. I never, ever, ever did anything inappropriate to my former stepdaughter. I know that and she knows that. Nevertheless, as time passed, this lie took on a life of it’s own. While the war itself has not changed, the battles have become more and more complicated.

After our many efforts to prove my innocence failed, I was running out of options. Along came Troy powerhouse attorney, E. Stewart Jones, whose integrity and commitment to justice is above reproach. He took my case on pro bono.

Mr. Jones’ argument was simple; I was convicted because of one outstanding issue- the egregious and pervasive trial conduct of former Rensselaer County DA Patricia DeAngelis. He has said often, had it not been for the many instances of misconduct, there would never have been a conviction because there was no evidence. Of course, there cannot be evidence when there is no crime!

In December 1998, nearly one year to the day from my first conviction, my accuser attempted suicide. But, before doing so, she wrote a note. Prior to my second trial, Judge Patrick McGrath granted our request for the girl’s medical records, which included information about the suicide attempt and the note that she wrote. Yet, despite the court order, Ms. DeAngelis withheld the evidence.

Our efforts in the State courts to compel Ms. DeAngelis and Rensselaer County to comply with the court order have repeatedly failed, so we have moved our efforts to the federal courts. In 2007, the feds also denied our requests, saying in effect that we did not try hard enough in the State court. We were directed to go back to the State courts and try again. Three motions have been filed to date, with one denial and two pending decisions.

While all of this activity was occurring, the federal court has also been reviewing my request for habeas corpus relief. During the review, the federal district court judge expressed concern over Ms. DeAngelis’ improper mention of the attempted suicide issue to the jury.

Specifically, that Ms. DeAngelis presented her opinion of the suicide attempt yet withheld from the defense any evidence related to the event. As a result of this, the door has been opened for us to make another application to the federal court for this evidence.

Next is my parole issue. In December 2007, I appeared before my first parole board for parole consideration; I was denied. The parole commission’s reason was two-fold. First, they said that I failed to participate in a sex offender treatment program while incarcerated. Second, they stated that my release would be incompatible with the welfare of society. This was of particular interest to me considering that seven years ago, before my retrial, Ms. DeAngelis offered to release me back into the community with time served as long as I admitted to the crime I was charged with. I did not accept her offer to plead guilty to something I did not do.

I later discovered that the parole decision was also based on the parole board’s review of records from my overturned 1998 conviction that were inappropriately still included in my Corrections file. By law, the reversal of a conviction and/or dismissal of charges means the conviction never occurred. Yet despite the NYS Court of Appeals reversal of my 1998 conviction and dismissal of 3 rape charges against me, the records related to that conviction are still included in my files.

The inclusion of these records in my files gives the appearance that the original conviction was valid. I immediately brought this critical error to the attention of the Department of Parole, Department of Correctional Services, and the courts but so far all that has happened is a lot of finger pointing. To date, my records have still not been corrected and everyone claims it is someone else’s responsibility to do so.

Next, we have the extremely critical pre-sentence investigation report. The law mandates that the report be completed upon a felony conviction. Once a conviction occurs, the trial court orders the county probation dept to do an investigation and report on the defendant before sentencing. The pre-sentence investigation report is the primary document relied upon by the court for sentencing and also follows the defendant throughout his entire time in the prison and parole system. It is used as a tool and guide by anyone who deals with the inmate.

In 2001, after my conviction in the retrial, the court ordered Rensselaer County Probation Supervisor, Jane Hanft to complete a new report. She did not do so. She merely revived the 1998 report and changed the dates. Consequently, for seven years this illegal report has been used against me; including in my parole denial. The report also contained references to my 1998 dismissed conviction. I appealed to the courts to order a new report. Although Rensselaer County Court Judge Patrick McGrath agreed with me, he only ordered half of the report to be updated, leaving me with a pre-sentence report that is still partially incorrect. Presently, this too is in the state court for review.

In the meantime, I will soon be faced with a second hearing before the parole board. Yet, unless my files are corrected, I will likely suffer the same fate as in my first appearance. In order to correct this issue prior to the second hearing, I will spend many hours researching and filing paperwork to parole, DOCS and the courts.

Finally, we have the charges themselves. Due to the fact that they are “sex” charges, the inmate is required to participate in the state run sex offender counseling program (SOCP). However, DOCS has a policy of denying an inmate participation in this program before his minimum release date. They preclude him for participation until just prior to his conditional release date. This practice, in effect, adds months if not years to an inmate’s prison time.

Now, after being denied parole, DOCS is reporting that I need to complete the program before my next parole appearance. The twist is, they are ordering that I take the program in Buffalo, even though there are facilities closer to home that offer the program.

The bright side, if there is any here, is that recently the district court rendered a decision that DOCS can no longer mandate inmates who are convicted of sex crimes to admit to the charges. It seems that for years DOCS has been violating the constitutional rights of those who participated in the program.

Recently, I was called to the facility school to meet with my counselor. While there, I had a brief conversation with an administration staff member who is familiar with my case through the media. He asked me several questions about the current status of the case. At the end of our talk he said, “How could something so simple get so terribly complicated?” The only answer I could give was that it was the simple complications of a wrongful conviction.

EDITOR’S NOTE: John “Jack” Carroll of Troy, is currently incarcerated in the Great Meadow Correctional Facility at Comstock, convicted of sexual abuse as a result of what his attorneys and family members say was prosecutorial misconduct by former Rensselaer County district attorney Patricia DeAngelis.

Carroll, 49, a former salesman, was convicted in December of 1997 for the rape and sexual abuse of his then 13-year-old stepdaughter. On appeal, the New York State Court of Appeals dismissed the rape convictions and ordered a new trial on the sexual abuse counts. He was convicted a second time on the sexual abuse counts in January, 2001. DeAngelis, who was assistant district attorney during the period of Carroll’s two trials, prosecuted both trials.

http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/030206DeAngelisGoesFed.html


Carroll has steadfastly maintained his innocence.

On appeal, Carroll’s attorney argued that the trial court judge had prevented Carroll from introducing an exculpatory tape-recorded phone call and on grounds there was no evidence of rape.

The Appellate Division of the state Supreme Court, Third Department denied the appeal and affirmed the conviction. Carroll appealed to the Court of Appeals and the high court dismissed the three rape charges that “there had been no evidence or testimony of penetration of any instrumentality”.

The court further ordered a new trial for the six sex abuse counts on the grounds the taped phone call should have been admitted at trial. At that time, Carroll had served three years in prison.

On the eve of the new trial, Carroll refused the prosecution’s plea bargain offer to plead to a misdemeanor count of endangering the welfare of a child for which he would be sentenced to time served. He maintained his innocence and opted to go to trial, was reconvicted, and sentenced to 12 to 24 years in prison, a harsher sentence than the original and which he and his attorney say was procured by the prosecutorial misconduct of DeAngelis.

The appellate court has on at least three occasions overturned sex crimes convictions on the grounds that DeAngelis and her office improperly attempted to shift the burden of proof, repeatedly strayed beyond the bounds of permissible conduct and denied defendants a fair trial.

DeAngelis was defeated fall in her bid to become Rensselaer County Court judge by Robert Jacon. She decided not to seek reelection as district attorney last fall. She is currently prosecuting traffic tickets part-time in the Stephentown Town Court.

For more about the Carroll case, see http://www.justicenow4.com/ 9-22-08

..News Source.. by Jack Carroll