Let’s Rethink Absolute Immunity


Most of us have heard about the Michael Morton case where Morton was convicted of brutally murdering his wife in 1987. Morton was exonerated for killing his wife and released 25 years later. I believe Michael Morton collected around 2 million dollars as compensations for his 25 year “Vacation”.

The intriguing legal part of Morton’s conviction is that Morton’s prosecutors in 1987 operated under the principle of absolute immunity. What does absolute immunity mean? Absolute immunity means that the prosecutors do not have to worry about being sued or having any legal action brought against them for errors they may have committed while prosecuting Morton back in 1987.

There are some that believe that Morton’s prosecutor,┬áKen Anderson now a state district Judge, suppressed or hid evidence that would have kept Morton out of the slammer! Anderson appears to have been a District Attorney who was more interested in winning than locking up an innocent man.

Ken Anderson was quoted as saying “I know in my heart I acted correctly”. Hmmmmmmm……. I can just hear Michael Morton pleading “I know in my heart that I am innocent”. ┬áMaybe it is Ken Anderson’s turn to get incarcerated for a quarter of a century!

“I did not do this,” Michael Morton said as he was led away in handcuffs, convicted of brutally murdering his wife in 1987. Hardly anyone believed him. Now, after twenty five years in prison, Morton has been proven right and freed based on DNA tests. Morton and his lawyers say they recently discovered something astonishing: sitting in his prosecutor’s file all those years was evidence that could have established Morton’s innocence during his trial.


0 comments on “Let’s Rethink Absolute ImmunityAdd yours →

Leave a Reply