May says he will offer more transparency if elected Commonwealth Attorney

Opinion 

As a Member of the Prince William Board of County Supervisors, I have strongly advocated for transparency in our local government.

Any elected official who is given the opportunity to serve holds the position as a public trust on behalf of the citizens who elected him or her. It is accordingly an elected official’s duty to be open when making decisions on behalf of the community and make sure that citizens understand how and why such decisions are being made.

The Board has made some great strides in this area over the past eight years. For example, we have reformed our budget to make it easier for citizens to follow the process and provide feedback. We have amended our local financial disclosure requirements to ensure that not only Supervisors are providing financial disclosures, but also key staff and appointees to Boards, Committees and Commissions who may have financial interest in matters upon which they may exercise influence.

And we have sought to more actively engage the community in the decision-making process through allowing public comment at Citizen’s Time even when such comments can be lengthy and, sometimes, less than flattering to us. Transparency is something we should strive for in all facets of government, and this includes our criminal justice system.

To be sure, there are certain aspects to the system that prevent full transparency. For example, we have to protect the victims and witnesses of crime.

However, we can make needed reforms that continue to protect these individuals while also ensuring fundamental fairness and the safety of our community. First and foremost, we have to be firm and fair in every case and ensure transparency in all criminal prosecutions.

The federal courts recently rebuked the incumbent for withholding evidence of an accused criminal’s innocence – in a capital murder case (death penalty), no less. The case was overturned and now this individual may be released into our community due to the incumbent’s failure to follow the law. In the interest of transparency, you can read the case right here: (https://casetext.com/case/wolfe-v-clarke-2).

This case is not all that surprising when considering the outdated discovery practices that the incumbent routinely employs. In fact, the incumbent was actually warned to be more transparent during the review of his signature case – that of John Allen Muhammad. In that case, the federal court thankfully determined that the lack of transparency did not affect the outcome of the case and upheld his conviction. Yet the Court’s concern about his lack of transparency was evident. You can review this case here: (https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/080013.P.pdf).

As you will see, in questioning the incumbent’s discovery practices, the federal court stated “Let it be clear that we by no means condone the actions of the Commonwealth [Mr. Ebert] in this case. As a matter of practice, the prosecution should err on the side of disclosure, especially when a defendant is facing the specter of execution.”

These warnings have never been heeded and the outdated practices continue to this day. In fact, we have now seen a conviction overturned because of them. In describing the incumbent’s actions in that case, the federal court stated that they were “not only unconstitutional in regards to due process, but abhorrent to the judicial process.”

This behavior does not reflect our community’s values. Yet the incumbent still refuses to change his practices and states that he “respectfully disagrees” with the ruling, even though it was upheld by the Federal Appeals Court. See Appeals Court Ruling: (https://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinions/Published/116.p.pdf).

These are the same federal courts that will be reviewing the next capital conviction. And we will see more convictions overturned if we do not reform the way things are done. The bottom line is that we have to modernize.

A “win at all costs” attitude is dangerous in the modern criminal justice context. We should demand that all of our leaders honor their oath to uphold the Constitution, even in cases where someone is alleged to have done something terrible, like murder. Moreover, as we have seen, the courts who will review these cases favor transparency in the prosecution process anyway, so even if a conviction is secured, it will be short-lived as it must withstand the scrutiny of the appeals process.

In short, hiding evidence to get a conviction is wrong and makes our community less safe. I respect the incumbent Commonwealth’s Attorney. As I have stated publicly, he has done some good things for our community during his 47 years in office and I appreciate his service.

However, our community has changed dramatically during this time – so too have the criminal justice system and the demands of the position. It is time to modernize the Office of Commonwealth’s Attorney and make it more transparent.