Question of the Day: Who is the Worst District Attorney, Kratz or Nifong?

Who is the worst, District Attorney, Ken Kratz or Mike Nifong?

A couple months a go, the Netflix show, Making a Murderer shocked America with how wrong the justice system can seem to go. Then just a few days ago the ESPN 30 for 30, Fantastic Lies, on the Duke lacrosse scandal came out, and once again America was horrified by how how far awry the justice system can go. What did these two shows have in common? Among other things repulsive District Attorneys who made our skin crawl.

Ken Kratz

Kratz was the District Attorney in Steven Avery’s case, in Making a Murderer.

As egregious as Kratz’s actions in the Avery case, may have been, it was probably the rail roading of Avery’s nephew Brendan Dassey that was was even more disturbing. We may not know if Steven Avery is guilty or not, but one thing that was clear was the events as confessed to by Dassey simply did not occur. It was absolutely heartbreaking to first watch a confession be coerced out of someone intellectually unable to defend themselves, and then to watch Kratz run this false confession all the way to a conviction.

Kratz is also a huge creep, as was evidenced by the sexting scandal, which cost him his District Attorney job in 2010. Where he was found to be sexting domestic violence victims, in the cases he was prosecuting.

I have a $350,000 house, has to be one of the worst lines ever… Also if you aren’t convinced he is a creep check out this interview he did after Making a Murderer.

Mike Nifong

Nifong was the District Attorney in the Duke lacrosse case. At the time the Duke lacrosse rape allegations came around he was badly behind in the polls for his reelection as District Attorney. Then along came the Duke lacrosse accuser and he jumped on the case and in front of every news camera he could, to the tune of 5o to 70 interviews in the first week. Nifong made outlandish, untrue and inflammatory statements, in these interviews which set the narrative for the case.

Nifong then proceeded to never actually interview the accuser, allow the use of photo lineups with only Duke lacrosse team members in them (the players were in a game of Russian roulette they never knew about), and ignored and withheld exculpatory DNA and circumstantial evidence. But he did manage to get himself re-elected. Ruining the lives of a few young men, in the process seemed to be just fine with him.

In the end, Nifong was found to have conspired with the director of the DNA lab to have withheld exculpatory DNA evidence from the report to the defence team. The case was thrown out, Nifong was sentenced to a day in jail and disbarred.

Conclusion

They are both awful human beings who should not have been in the positions they were in, but I am actually going to lean Kratz on this one only because somehow he is still a practing lawyer. If you need an immigration lawyer in Wisconsin give him a call. Even worse, Kratz actually isn’t embarrassed enough to just try and disappear, the guy is still giving interviews.

Two other questions I was left with were:

  1. How does America still think it is a good idea to elect judges and district attorney’s?
  2. When was it that innocent before proven guilty died?

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s