When a police officer fakes evidence, that’s not trivial

I agreed with most of the points made in a Jan. 13 Reader’s Forum by Steven C. Stone, on the topic of Athens County Sheriff’s environmental deputy Jay Barrett. There was one glaring implication in Stone’s argument, however, that I can’t allow to pass without comment.

The column cited a news story I wrote, recounting how the attorney for a man accused of illegal dumping had challenged Barrett’s right to search his property and collect evidence, based on Barrett’s lack of standing as a state-certified police officer. Barrett lost his right to an officer’s commission when he was convicted of evidence tampering in 2004 – though a recent pardon by outgoing Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland opens the door for him to again obtain one.

Stone’s main point seems to be that the question of whether Barrett is illegally presenting himself as a police officer is trivial, compared to the pressing issue of illegal dumping that Barrett is working to curb in his current job.

“That Barrett is alleged to have ‘overstepped his authority’ is an interesting point to debate, but it serves as a very noisy distraction from a serious problem in our county,” Stone suggested.

He went on to praise Barrett’s work, and to question the wisdom of those who are “wringing their hands over Mr. Barrett’s aggressive pursuit of illegal dumpers.” He concluded, in an apparent reference to Barrett’s history, by observing that “the only people who don’t make mistakes are people who don’t do anything,” and urging county officials to “do whatever is necessary to stop the real felons threatening our personal and environmental health” (italics mine).

Now, I’m more than happy to stipulate that Barrett is doing a great job cracking down on illegal dumpsites. I’ll also readily agree that this problem badly needs fixing, and that it poisons the environment, endangers the health and welfare of county residents, and disfigures the countryside.

Regarding Barrett himself, and his past “mistakes,” all I can say is, he’s expunged his record, and now he’s got a pardon. If he goes on to regain his officer’s commission, more power to him – he has my sincere best wishes and congratulations, for whatever they’re worth. But if Mr. Stone thinks what Barrett did to lose his commission wasn’t a “real” felony, then he and I must define the word “real” in very different ways.

Let’s get something straight here. Barrett was convicted, while serving as a police officer, of faking evidence to use at trial against a criminal defendant. Allow that to sink in for a minute, with all its ramifications for the integrity of our justice system, and the right of every American – including you, me, Barrett and Stone – to receive a fair trial if the state accuses us of a crime.

Now consider: Matthew Kulchar, a former Ohio University student, was convicted in 2009 of the same offense as Barrett – evidence tampering. Kulchar’s crime was to have arranged for disposal of a piece of physical evidence that could have been used against him in his trial for rape and kidnapping – offenses a jury concluded he did not commit.

For getting rid of evidence that may or may not have had some relevance to his own, now officially non-existent crimes, Kulchar will serve three years in prison if he doesn’t win an appeal. For attempting to cook up bogus evidence to help convict someone else of a felony and possibly send that person to prison, Barrett got 500 hours of community service and 18 months probation.

Former Ohio Attorney General Jim Petro and his wife Nancy have just published a book, “False Justice – Eight Myths that Convict the Innocent.” The Columbus Dispatch informs me that in the book, Petro – a Republican once known for his staunch “law and order” stance – now “argues that thousands of people are wrongfully convicted in this country – and that police and prosecutorial misconduct is partly to blame.”

The authors conclude, according to the Dispatch story, that the justice system “convicts innocent persons far more frequently than most imagine…  Although they cite several reasons for this, the Petros found that many times, police and prosecutors ‘lose their way’ because of ‘corruption; unlawful tactics; misplaced motivations; arrogance; and abuses of power.’”

And the Petros don’t just say this, apparently – they cite evidence chapter and verse, culled from hundreds of criminal cases they’ve researched. So maybe, for all our sakes, this problem of doctoring evidence is one we should treat as very “real” indeed.

To reiterate: I have no problem with Barrett making amends, putting his past behind him, and moving forward. But if you think what he did wasn’t at least as serious as burning a few tires, here’s my New Year’s wish for you.

I hope the next time you get stopped for speeding, the officer tosses a nice fat bag of cocaine into your back seat, then charges you with felony drug possession.

I hope you spend the next six months to a year sweating bullets, terrified you’ll be sent to a state prison, with all the concomitant pleasantries I’m told such a visit can entail. Meanwhile, I hope you run through your life savings paying a lawyer to try to avoid this outcome.

But as I’m not by nature a malicious person, I have one final wish for you. I hope your lawyer is as sharp as Mike Westfall. He’s the Public Defender attorney who spotted what Barrett was trying to do to his client, and brought it to light in a courtroom. I covered the story at the time, but I can’t recall whether Westfall did any hand-wringing.