Last Updated on June 21, 2024
Police often rely on outside tips to solve crimes. Occasionally, they even incentivize people who have been accused of crimes to share information they have about other criminals. While the theory is that those in the criminal underworld are likely to get closer to other criminals and, thus, have more information about their illegal acts, in practice, offering someone a more lenient sentence in exchange for providing information about other criminals often leads to false testimonies. This is why it is so important that criminal defense lawyers challenge any testimony from confidential or jailhouse informants.
Challenging Informant Tips
In order for a judge to issue a warrant based on information from a confidential informer, the information must be deemed to be “reliable.” This typically means that it must be corroborated in some way by another source, whether this means a witness, physical evidence, etc. If there is insufficient corroboration of the facts, your attorney may be able to challenge the validity of the warrant and have any resulting evidence withheld from the trial -which could potentially be enough to have the case against you dismissed.
When it comes to fighting testimony from a jailhouse or confidential informant, the prosecutor is not required to reveal the identity of the source if it is determined that this information could put the informant at risk. Similarly, the informant may testify in disguise if it believed that no doing so could put him at risk. That being said, in order to use information obtained from these types of informants in a criminal case, the prosecution must disclose what benefits the informer received in exchange for his testimony -and this is where your defense attorney has the biggest advantage in fighting information from an informant.
Sometimes police reports don’t even disclose they have used confidential informants or other secret information in making an arrest. A good clue that this information was left out is when the police report contains significant redacted or blacked out material, which is often a sign the prosecution does not want certain information disclosed to the defense. Challenging the practice of redacted material may result in a favorable resolution of the case because the prosecution desires to protect its sources.
When a seedy, criminal-type provides testimony against someone in exchange for a lighter sentence or even immunity from prosecution for his crimes, it is easy to get the jury to question whether the informer was telling the truth or just trying to avoid prison. Alternatively, if the informant’s identity is revealed, this can sometimes offer another way to challenge his testimony, particularly if he has a reason to benefit by the defendant being sent to prison -if they are business rivals, for example. When tips come from anonymous sources, it is also worth questioning whether or not the tipster could have been someone who has a grudge against the defendant, rather than a genuine interest in stopping a crime.
It’s important for lawyers to question this information not just for the benefits of their clients, but for the victims as well, since a wrongful conviction denies them the justice they seek against the person who actually harmed them. In fact, jailhouse informers are responsible for one in five cases that are later exonerated due to DNA evidence.
An Egregious Example of Informants Giving False Confessions
One of the biggest risks associated with using criminal informants is that the informer is likely to feed police false evidence in exchange for cash, reduced sentencing or other benefits. This is why it’s so important that the evidence be corroborated in some other manner before a warrant is issued or an arrest is made.
A recent news story in Philadelphia shows exactly how out of hand things can get when informers are rewarded for providing damning information. As it turns out, detectives in Philadelphia during the 1980s were not just offering informants lighter sentencing -but the opportunity for inmates to have sex with their girlfriends or prostitutes, who would also bring the informants drugs and money. To make matters worse, the detectives weren’t just giving the informers a sweet (but highly illegal and unethical) deal if they snitched, but also telling them what “information” they were supposed to provide.
In other words, if the informants pointed their fingers at the right guys and helped the detectives lock up innocent men, they would be rewarded with lighter sentences, sex, drugs and money -a deal few men facing lengthy prison sentences would quickly turn down. Many informants even claim the prosecutors were in on the deal too.
Sadly, most of the men who were convicted as a result of the scheme, as well as many of the men who say they participated in the scheme, are either dead or still in prison. Despite over a dozen men coming forward and saying they were part of the scheme over the last 40 years, the last person to be released as a result of these confessions was exonerated all the way back in 1990. One victim of the corrupt testimonies has only now obtained a hearing on the matter after fighting against his charges for years.
Your Choice of Attorney Matters
Remember, if you are accused of a crime, your lawyer needs to look into all evidence against you in order to protect your rights and help you fight the charges. This includes information provided through anonymous tips, confidential informers or jailhouse informants.
If you have been accused of a crime, Peter M. Liss can help you fight the charges in many ways, including challenging any information provided by informers. Please call (760) 643-4050 to schedule a free initial consultation.
