Report Rips Fake-Drug Prosecutors

Missed Red Flags, Other Errors Cited in Scandal; DA: Fault Is With Police

Drug prosecutors were too cushy with police and had an
"us-against-them" relationship with defense attorneys, causing them to
fail to spot red flags from the 2001 fake-drug scandal, according to a
special prosecutor's report released Monday.

Deputy special prosecutor Jack Zimmermann, who presented the 50-page
report at a news conference, said he found serious lapses in judgment
and missteps by prosecutors, but added that the investigation
uncovered no evidence that the actions were intentional or that any
crimes were committed. "Individual prosecutors made mistakes," he
said. "There clearly were red flags." Mr. Hill said Monday that he has
long acknowledged that his office did not act quickly enough on the
problem cases, in which about two dozen people, mostly illegal
immigrants, were wrongfully jailed when paid police informants planted
fake drugs on them.

Mr. Hill said blame for the scandal still rests squarely with former Dallas
narcotics Detective Mark Delapaz, who was convicted last month of lying to a
judge to secure a search warrant. Mr. Delapaz repeatedly lied to prosecutors
when questions began rising about the fraudulent cases, he said.
"We were dealing with lying cops, and that's where the blame should lie,"
Mr. Hill said. "If I hadn't opened up this investigation, Mark Delapaz would
still be working for the Dallas Police Department, and so would those other
cops.

"You don't believe that they would lie to you," he said. "As Delapaz's trial
unfolded you saw repeated intentional deception on his part to keep this
going."

Mr. Zimmermann called the behavior of some defense attorneys "reprehensible"
because he said they did not adequately represent their clients.

"I think some defense lawyers made some drastic errors, but it was an error
in judgment and not an intent to commit a crime," he said.

Among Mr. Zimmermann's findings: Workloads of 150 to 200 cases per
drug prosecutor caused "inexcusable neglect." In one case, prosecutor
Vanita Budhrani White received a lab report indicating a drug seizure
did not contain real drugs, but she filed the report without reading
it. A defense attorney later reported that Ms. White erroneously told
her that the drugs in the case had been real. Mr. Zimmermann said he
believes the action was a mistake, but said it was "questionable at
best" why Ms. White was not disciplined. The case was not noted in Ms.
White's annual review, and she was later promoted to a supervisory
position.

Mr. Hill said he still does not believe the mistake warrants
discipline. He said he has repeatedly asked for more prosecutors and
acknowledges the heavy workload. Drug court prosecutors became too
complacent working with the same police detectives, causing them to be
reluctant to spot red flags or view the officers' reports
objectively.

"Many prosecutors came to view all defendants accused of drug offenses
as being guilty," Mr. Zimmermann said. "The prosecutors were skeptical
of any claim of innocence or police wrongdoing."

Mr. Hill implemented a policy in January 2002 requiring prosecutors to
be rotated in and out of the drug courts.

The report was critical of Mr. Hill's earlier disciplinary action
related to the scandal. Two supervisory-level prosecutors - former
prosecutor George West and prosecutor Gregg Long - were moved into
different jobs, but others were not. Mr. Long was demoted in 2002 from
being the district attorney's chief of the drug courts to overseer of
just one court. More recently he was transferred to the office's civil
division.

Mr. West, who was Mr. Long's supervisor, was transferred laterally to
a special assignment in 2002. He later resigned.

At the time of each job change, Mr. Hill declined to say why it took
place. Mr. Hill said he did not disclose the reasons for his actions
at the time under the advice of his civil attorneys. On Monday, he
said they were related to the scandal.

The report noted that both men failed to "connect the dots" and spot
problems in the cases, and that Mr. Long lacked a "sense of urgency"
when concerns developed.

Reached Monday, Mr. West maintained that his lateral transfer out of
the drug courts was not any form of punishment. Mr. Long said he had
not seen the report and could not comment.

Criticism of Defense

Some defense attorneys were also singled out in
the report for providing "extremely inadequate representation" for
their clients. In the most egregious cases, prosecutors informed two
attorneys that substances seized from their already-convicted clients
had been found not to be real drugs. The attorneys - public defender
Rick Magnis and attorney Roberto Dueno - were advised that the
district attorney's office would not contest a legal motion to have
the men freed, yet Mr. Zimmermann said they did not promptly complete
the paperwork.

Mr. Dueno and Mr. Magnis could not be reached for comment Monday. In
another case, an attorney allowed his client to plead guilty to a
felony charge in hopes of lenience. In that case, the woman was a
longtime drug user who thought she had been set up but had no reason
to think the drugs were fake. She didn't think a jury would believe
her story against the testimony of a police officer so she pleaded
guilty in hopes of lenience. The woman had served nearly two years of
a 15-year prison sentence before the drugs were tested and found to be
fake. Mr. Zimmermann said the woman should have pleaded no contest to
the charge rather than guilty. Mr. Hill appointed Dallas attorney Dan
Hagood as special prosecutor to investigate the scandal in December
2003 after Mr. Delapaz was acquitted of federal civil rights charges
related to the fraudulent arrests. Mr. Hagood led the investigation
that resulted in Mr. Delapaz's conviction last month and pending
indictments against three other officers and six police informants. He
asked Mr. Zimmermann - who has no ties to Dallas legal circles - to
investigate the roles of prosecutors, attorneys, judges and crime-lab
workers.

Mr. Hill also requested an FBI investigation into the matter in 2002.
That investigation remains officially open, but no new work is
believed to have been carried out since Mr. Delapaz's federal
acquittal.

Lessons Learned

The district attorney's response to the
scandal and his staff's failure to spot the problem cases sooner have
been the source of the most heated criticism of his two-term tenure.

He has expressed regret for upsetting many in the Hispanic community
with an early public statement about the cases, in which he questioned
whether all of those arrested in the scheme were innocent. Dallas
attorney William Nellis, who is representing two of the police
informants who took part in the scheme, said criticism of the district
attorney's office is warranted. He called the scandal a matter that
has "shaken the foundations of the courthouse."

"I think the responsibility on this absolutely falls on the shoulders
of the district attorney's office and the assistant district attorneys
who handled these cases," he said.

Defense attorneys have also learned lessons, Mr. Nellis said. "We've
learned something that we've known all along - we must not take
anything at face value that's presented to us by prosecutors and
investigators."

Mr. Hill expressed frustration Monday that his critics don't credit
him for keeping the investigation active three years later and for
funding the special prosecution that released the critical report. He
vowed to renew his efforts to get increased funding from county
commissioners to hire more prosecutors, noting that requests for
additional prosecutors have been declined or pared down every year
since 2000. He also pledged to move forward with the prosecutions of
the other three former officers indicted as a result of Mr. Hagood's
investigation. Mr. Delapaz, who faces numerous other felony charges,
will probably be tried on those as well, he said. Mr. Delapaz remains
free while his conviction is under appeal.

"He's not going to get off with just one conviction," Mr. Hill said.
"Those others better strap their helmets on, too, because they're
going to go to trial as well."