THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, July 5, 1994 TAG: 9407010034
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A8 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
SOURCE: By CHARLES D. GRIFFITH JR.
LENGTH: Long : 101 lines
Over the past several months your newspaper has printed several articles addressing the prosecution of a few cases that have been handled by the Norfolk commonwealth's attorney's office. I have resisted public comment upon the articles because I choose not to be distracted from my principal task - the effective prosecution of criminals. However, I feel I must now respond.
I learned recently that, Joe Jackson, the reporter who has written most of the stories concerning the men responsible for the execution-style murder of James Harris in October 1992, was awarded $1,000 by the Virginia Trial Lawyers Association, an organization dominated by criminal defense attorneys, for his series of stories about the Brian McCray case. The receipt of such an award raises serious concerns about ``checkbook journalism'' and the reporters' objectivity. Yet, despite receipt of such an award, Mr. Jackson has been permitted to remain involved in the reporting of the cases involving Brian McCray and his co-defendants.
Furthermore, after Brian McCray was acquitted by a second jury, Jackson took every opportunity to state that Larry Edwards, a 12-year-old boy who saw McCray and his co-defendants, Denaldo Hill and Donald Marcus, outside of the Jr. Market on October 31, 1992, when James Harris was murdered, testified falsely. Jackson actually reported that young Larry Edwards was a perjurer.
Perjury is defined as lying under oath and is a serious crime against the administration of justice. Young Larry Edwards has never been charged with perjury. Not once was any judicial finding made that young Larry Edwards perjured himself.
Larry Edwards is a brave young boy who has stood up to the attacks of a number of criminal defense lawyers skilled at crossing people up. He should be held up as an example to some adults who refuse to get involved in the justice system. Instead, he is inaccurately called a perjurer by our local newspaper. Why?
I would also like to point out that, contrary to the repeated claims by this newspaper, Circuit Judge Alfred W. Whitehurst never ruled that my office ``suppressed'' evidence, intentionally or otherwise. In fact, Judge Whitehurst has ruled that my office and I acted in ``good faith'' in addressing the evidentiary issue in Brian McCray's case. After hearing my testimony, Judge Whitehurst even questioned whether he should have granted McCray a new trial.
A second jury acquitted McCray. Although I believe an injustice occurred in that acquittal, I accept that such verdicts occur. However, another jury chose to believe Larry Edwards and convicted Denaldo Hill, one of McCray's co-defendants. We have yet to see what will happen to McCray's other co-defendant, Donald Marcus.
Whatever verdict is reached in Marcus' case, however, it won't mean that young Larry Edwards is a ``perjurer,'' as inaccurately and possibly slanderously reported by this newspaper, any more than it will mean that Brian McCray, Denaldo Hill and Brian McCray was simply not convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the only thing which was established by the second jury verdict in his case.
I have been a prosecutor in Norfolk for 12 years. I have never engaged in any unethical or dishonest conduct. Until I took on the political establishment in Norfolk, I was never accused of any such conduct. I know I am honest and, therefore, I am unconcerned about any grief I take from a newspaper which permits reporters to accept money from special interest groups and then questions my ethical conduct.
I call upon The Virginian-Pilot and The Ledger-Star to end the practice of its reporters accepting cash awards for writing stories that favor a particular interest groups' point of view.
Would the newspaper allow a reporter to accept a cash prize from the Commonwealth's Attorney's Association for favorable stories?
Would the newspaper allow its reporters to accept a cash prize from the National Rifle Association for a pro-gun article?
How about a cash prize from Operation Rescue for a series of pro-life stories?
Where will it end? Does no one at The Virginian-Pilot and The Ledger-Star recognize that the policy of permitting reporters to accept money from special-interest groups is ethically questionable?
I am fully aware that many people in our society think that criminal defendants have too many rights and, to a degree, I sympathize with that view. Our criminal-justice system frequently appears to be preoccupied with technicalities in regard to protecting defendants' rights.
Yet over the course of my career as a prosecutor, I have learned to live with the justice system's emphasis on making sure that criminal defendants have nothing to complain about, while recognizing that criminals will always complain about something, no matter how perfectly prosecutors perform or the justice system operates. Criminals are generally not going to be happy unless they ``get off.''
Criminals in Norfolk will never be happy so long as I am commonwealth's attorney because I believe in aggressive prosecution of people who choose not to obey our laws. I know that the public expects that kind of prosecution, and I intend to deliver it to them, whether the criminals and their attorneys like it or not. Further, efforts by news reporters to make us look bad in order to sell newspapers, get a byline, or earn a cash prize will not change my goal to protect the public.
I invite any citizen who is interested to visit our courthouse any day of the week and see for yourself what the prosecutors who work for you are doing. In fact, I even welcome Brian McCray to spend every day (after he gets out of prison for his robbery conviction) watching what we do in court. At least then we won't have to worry about what he is doing to innocent people on the streets of Norfolk. MEMO: Mr. Griffith is Norfolk commonwealth's attorney. by CNB