KCK murder suspect goes free because he didn't get a speedy trial

From Bob Cronkleton:

The Kansas Supreme Court ruled today that a murder charge against a Kansas City, Kan., man be dismissed because his rights to a speedy trial were violated.

The Supreme Court found that the case against Mario Larenzo Mitchell, 21, must be dismissed and that he is free from further prosecution relating to the murder.

Mitchell was awaiting trial in Wyandotte County District Court regarding the murder of Keith Watson, 19.

Mitchell allegedly shot Watson to death about 2:20 a.m. Jan. 8, 2005, at a gas station at 4701 Parallel Parkway. Mitchell allegedly walked up and fired at Watson several times while he was sitting in a vehicle at a gas pump.

Mitchell’s first trial ended in mistrial in September 2005. He was shot that same day and waived his right to a speedy trial.

Jury selection for his new trial began March 26, 2007. The next day prosecutors appealed a district court ruling regarding Mitchell’s prior juvenile record.

The court then suspended the proceedings pending the appeal. Mitchell objected to the appeal and reasserted his rights to a speedy trial.

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Mitchell.

Comments

[kbp]

One has to wonder WTH happened that let this slip by. Did the prosecutor take a leave of absence or what?

[Grammarian]

This might be one of the most poorly written articles I've seen in a long time? This couldn't have made it through an editor.

[Herbert Spencer]

The Kansas Supreme Court is one of the worst pack of idiots in the country. It may even give the 9th Circuit a run for its money.

This same court that is let a murderer go because the trial wasn't fast enough has repeatedly drug it's own feet when it has come to the prosecution of George Tiller. Sleepy McFarland has stalled and stalled and stalled while she and the rest of her Star Chamber have held one secret hearing after another.

The entire legal system needs radical reform. How unfortunate that we can no longer take a collection of white trash like the Supremes and run them out of town on a rail as we did when this country actually had the spine to stand up to both criminals and sleazy shysters like McFarland and Co.

[mikeinmo65]

Grammarian, you pretty clearly do not have a clue as to what you are talking about. The Kansas Supreme Court is one of the more conservative courts in the country.

You want to be angry, be angry with the judge and the prosecutor. The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental Constitutional Right (well unless you are held on American contolled land as an enemy combatant, a term created for the sole purpose of circumenting the law) The defendent invoked his right. The Distract Attorney and the trial judge disagreed with the interpretation of the Speedy Trial Right. They were wrong. We are not talking about some esoteric technicality here, we are talking about the District Attorney and the trial court to get a Constitutional protection wrong.

There is simply no doubt that the Supreme Court did everything it could to interpret the trial judge's decision in a manner that would not have had this result. That simply tells you how wrong the DA and the judge had it. The Supreme Court did Kansas a favor by ruling in the manner in which it did. Had they not done so, a Federal Court would have overturned it. Who do you think would have paid those litigation costs?

By the way, Chief Justice McFarlane has a medical condition which is beyond her control That you would belittle that very serious problem tells me a lot about you.

Hopefully for your sake, the next time you write something as stupid as comparing a conservative State Court to the 9th Circuit, your stupidity won't be read by someone who clerked for that Court, particularly by someone who left that position early because while I was there, they went out of their way to protect DA's and judges, our Constitutional Rights be damned.

[Barber of Seville]

"The Supreme Court did Kansas a favor by ruling in the manner in which it did. Had they not done so, a Federal Court would have overturned it. Who do you think would have paid those litigation costs?"

The court system, be it local, state, or Federal, didn't do this guy's next victim (there will be one, you can bet your life on that) any favor.

[PTT]

Wha are Judges and DA's given immunity when they flagrantly and intentionally screwup? It only gives them the free reign to do it consisantly! Put them under a performance contract and make them accountable for their actions with jail time as punishment. I'll just bet you there wouldn't be many if any flub ups if he idiots had to do the time they should be sentencing and don't! Once again it's Judges/Lawyers covering Judges/Lawyers backs and the beat goes on. There's nothing more dangerous than an appointed DA or Judge who owes somebody for their position. In many ways they are and can be worse than the criminals.

[me]

you people are sleepy. Wake up and talk tomorrow******jppppdn blip

hee hee

[ms]

First, I agree with Mikeinmo's posting. Right to a Speedy Trial is fundamental. It's not the Supreme's fault that it was denied below.

SECOND - The writing on this blog is not only lazy, but a slap in the face to the memory of Greg Reeves. Most articles are a one line link to another story somewhere else. If the Star isn't interested in putting someone that cares about this blog in charge of writing it, then pull the blog off the site. I, personally, am done with this blog if the quality does not improve to something resembling authorship.

[mikeinmo65]

I certainly agree that the victim and the family did not benefit from the actions of this murderer. However, every American benefits when any court correctly protects our Constitutional Rights. Sadly, those rights have been slowly etched away. Many times that happens in situations like this where no one really wants this jerk to go free. As it has long been said, hard cases make bad law.

Although I stand by my post regarding which lawyers blew it, and of those involved in this case, it was the DA and trial judge, not the Supreme Court, I may have been too harsh. Unfortunately, DA's and trial judges are under tremendous pressure to get a conviction. Voters elect DA's and the judiciary is subject to retention votes as well. In addition to significant pressure to "get the bastard," no one wants a murderer to go free. My guess is, if you had an honest private conversation with this guy's defense attorney, he or she would tell you that they hated that fact too. Some people simply believe that our civil rights are more important than any one crime.

Ummm, putting them in jail for being wrong? The Duke LaCrosse case shows that there are checks and balances to protect us from truly bad prosecutors. We also have the ballot. People are not generally imprisoned for making an honest mistake, so why that would be appropriate here is beyond me.

Personally, I am amazed that there are good DA's or even police at all. I have to tell you, if my job was to simply deal with criminals all day every day, I do not have the discipline to deal with that professionally. Who would want to spend their days listening to some idiot who did something they undoubtedly knew was illegal, then they spend all kinds of energy lying about it and trying to prove their lie, and they rarely simply take responsibility for their behavior. If I did that every day, I would be violating people's rights on a daily basis. Its an impossible job and I am simply thankful it is done as well as it is.

[Herbert Spencer]

Mike:

You picked on Grammarian for what I said, and I stand by it. Oh were the Seven Dwarves decisions on abortion and second amendment issues as they were lenient towards murderers.

And they certainly had no qualms with constitutional principles when the decided how much money should go to the school system, nor ethics when one of the judges who was formerly an attorney for the plaintiffs ruled on the case while another held an ex parte meeting with friendly legislators.

The only part of your tirade that's problematic is that there is a record of most of their decisions, although they've been holding a lot of sessions in secret lately trying to help their pal Tiller, and that record doesn't correlate to your description.

Indeed, the fact you quit early because you thought this pack of corrupt left-wing loons was too conservative only indicates just how far out there you are.

Finally, amazing isn't it that McFarland's "medical condition" only seems to strike when there's something she doesn't want to listen to. If this is,in fact, a real condition then, in the interests of justice, the old crone needs to step down.

We need radical reform of this system and maybe, just maybe, a little vigilante action against the criminals on both sides of the bench.

Again, poor judgement by judges! Our laws suck, in spades!!

[Big Sam]

People should note a few things from the article.

First, the defendant waived his right to a speedy trial after his first mistrial.

Second, the defendant later reasserted said right.

That begs the question, was the initial waiver considered in the process in how they determined the speedy trial status (when the clock began to tick). The article doesn't explain the basis in this regard, so we can't surmise how legitimate or note the decision was.

As to the Kansas Supreme Court, those that claim it is one of the most conservative in the state have not been paying attention. It's history of key rulings show this not to be the case (and in addition, my contact with a few members also calls the belief that it is highly conservative into question).

Sam S.

[DK1220]

Mikeinmo, you cannot be serious! Forget conservative or liberal, the Kansas Supreme Court is just bizarre. This is the court that in about 1998 decided our death penalty law was unconstitutional as written, so they rewrote it themselves. (Never mind how questionable that move is.) Then about five years later they threw their own amendment out as unconstitutional! (See the Marsh debacle.)

This is also the same court that decided a prosecutor who challenges the credibility of a defendant commits reversible misconduct. (As if jurors are so stupid that they didn't know the prosecutor must disbelieve the defendant, since he's obviously continuing the prosecution.) I fail to see how that move was to protect the prosecutor.

It's a good thing you left and presumably got a real job. I'd hate to have too much of my career tied to the nonsense that flows from that court.

[Justice delayed but not denied.]

Way to go Mitchell!

[What A Country!]

Grammarian,

I was reading this article, and I could not for the life of me figure out what in the world the writer was talking about.

I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking it didn't make sense.

[GWallce]

I was totally shocked reading this article: “KCK murder suspect goes free because he didn’t get a speedy trial” not because the suspect was released, but because as a family member and the one that Keith Watson (victim) lived with at the time of his death, just learn about this decision while reading this article this morning. This is just a fraction of what the family has had to endure during this legal process.

In September of 2005 Mitchell first trial ended in a mistrial due to violation of a motion filed to suppress the suspect’s past criminal history. Which can be understandable, however, if the suspect’s attorney filed the motion and then turn around and submit the evidence himself, should it be a mistrial? This is where I agree with Barber of Seville “Judges/Lawyers covering Judges/Lawyers backs and the beat go on.”

Mario Mitchell was first arrested with a $250,000 bond, which was reduced to $100,000 than to $50,000 until it totally disappeared. Explanation given, Mitchell has medical’s issues that were costly to the county. I take it that it is better for a murderer to be among society than for the state to foot his medical bills, after all it is Wyandotte County.

I believe the Supreme Court decision is just another technicality used to cover up the fact that we had to wait for a court date with the Supreme Court, which was on December 4, 2007 and than wait for a decision that was not given until March of 2008. Where is the Justice for Keith Watson? Why DIDN’T the DA office notify the family of Keith Watson of this decision? Keith’s family has had to relocate due to safety issue coming from Mitchell? Let’s face it; after all Keith Watson was no Ali Kempt or Kelsey Smith, he was just another young black male living in Wyandotte County. How important was his life?

[READERSUE]

I cannot believe our Supreme Court in the great state of Kansas would even entertain the notion of hearing this case. Apparently, this murderer was injured at trial time and then got his doctors to say he wasn't healthy enough to stand trial for all that time. Sounds to me like he didn't want to go to court, and we granted his wish--for a while. Then when he was healthy enough to stand trial, he was convicted. Now he doesn't want to pay for the crime he committed, so he dreamed up this stunt. He wanted his own life back, even though he took the precious life of another. What a piece of work.

[mikedunalewicz]

I apologize to Gramarian, the posting of names with comments is odd and I did not pick up on that until you pointed it out to me.

Herbert, your comments on the Chief Justice's medical condition really does ruin any potential credibility you would otherwise have.

Before I say anything else, I should be clear that there is no doubt at all that the victim's family was victimized a second time by our court system. Whether he is a white JOCO kid, a black WYCO kid or someone who had no family at all, a terrible injustice was done to him and his family. My only point was that it was not the fault of the Supreme Court.

That they had to become involved in the school system is not a comment on the job they do, rather it was a comment on the job the legislature did. I would point out that the KCMO school district was under control by the Federal Courts here. From what I can see of KCMO schools, the Judge, regardless of whether his heart was in the right place, is not a whole lot better at running the system than the legislature was. I would bet he would agree with that assessment.

I actually agree with your assessment that the courts have gotten the abortion decision wrong. If I were king, abortion would be legal if the physical long term well being of the mother was at risk or in the first trimester in the case of incest. That decision, in my rarely to be humble opinion, had done more to ruin our country than any other event ever. If you can destroy a fetus that has a heartbeat in its first six weeks of development, then what decision do you have to take responsibility for?

While I intend to change that this November, I have never voted for a Democrat. Lots of Libertarians, and an occasional Republican, but never a Democrat.

The problem is that the United States Supreme Court disagrees and has for thirty plus years now. And since all other courts must defer to their decisions, with respect to the Constitution, making it illegal is a waste of money in litigation costs and violates one of the tenants of our judicial system.

The Constitution, and the rights it provides, are hardly technicalities. Without them, perhaps Americans would be cell mates with Afghanis in Cuba. If the current administration is any indication, those rights are as important now as they ever were. Other than in times of war, I cannot recall a time in our history when our government was so willing to infringe upon the rights of it's citizens.

I feel badly for righting this if the family or friends of the victim are hurt by my words. Again, this was a failure of the judicial system. Just not a failure of the Kansas Supreme Court.

[Kristin]

"Pain and foolishness lead to great bliss and complete knowledge, for Eternal Wisdom created nothing under the sun in vain."

Kahlil Gibran

[Sisterofthevictum]

It breaks my heart to find out that after all this time that justice for my brother's(Keith Watson)death will never avail. I guess this is another plan to just let society take matters into their own hands. I don't want anyone to feel sorry for my family, but feel sorry for yours. You have just set a murderer free. Will it be your family member next. Will you have to burry your son, daughter, mother, father,etc because you just let a murderer run the streets. Until this happens to you, you will never care.

[GWallace]

Clarification, yes this article was not clear on what happen that lead to the violation of the suspect speedy trial rights. After the mistrial, the state (DA) has to re-file the charges against the suspect to bring him back to court, which means the process starts all over again. Because the suspect was shot the day of the mistrial and due to his injuries, the state would and did not re-file the charges until the suspect was declared competed. The suspect was declared competent in December of 2006 and a new trial was scheduled March 26, 2007. However, I was not aware that a defendant could waive his right to a speedy trial and then later reassert than if the state decided to do appeal. This information was not disclosed to the family, alone with the chances of causing another mistrial due this the state filing appeal with the Supreme Court. Again keep in mind that the Supreme Court did not set a trial date to hear the appeal until December of 2007 and did not return a decision until March of 2008. Yes, I blame the DA and the Supreme Court. If this is the case I do believe there should be and would be a lot more motions filed in Wyandotte County to reassert inmates’ speedy trial rights.

[Herbert Spencer]

Mike:

If McFarland's habit of dozing off during arguments is a real condition I will gladly apologize right after she resigns.

Gang members.. who cares. They all need to die

Yeah, he just goes up to some random stranger and shoots him. Agree that this is a gang related shooting.

[Lance Weber]

I agree with Grammarian that the story was poorly written.

I also agree with Mike. You can't blame the KS Supreme Court for this result. The law is the law. Maybe the DA and the trial Judge erred in this case, but look at the big picture: only the Kansas legislature can fix the problem. KSA 22-3402 sets the time for trial to no longer than 90 or 180 days after arraignment unless defendant affirmatively waives the right.

Missouri uses a flexible standard that allows the judges to consider the circumstances of each case before deciding how long of a delay is too long. There are other differences on this issue between the states but that is the big one. I don't think that the MO law is perfect but I do think that the rigid time limit in KS needs attention.

The victim's family is in a terrible position and the system has failed them. I work in the system. I see how much time and effort go into prosecuting any given case. When you stop and think about it, every single case represents a very expensive governmental project. Why do we waste our resources prosecuting so many things that shouldn't really be crimes in the first place?

Unjust results like what happened in this case occur because everyone on the prosecutorial and judicial sides of the system is overburdened with caseloads full of victimless crimes. We should focus our energy for these projects on crimes that really matter to people.

Just imagine how much more time everyone in law enforcement would have to focus on bringing violent criminals to justice if we weren't trying to police non-violent, non-fraudulent behavior like prostitution, gambling and drugs. How about property crimes? Ever have a cop laugh at you when you ask about the chances of recovering something that has been stolen?

Society is what it is. If we are to change it for the better it won't be by the use of force. Let's redirect the focus of our government's police powers to keeping our lives and our property safe from the bad guys.

Whoever said vigilantism was a good idea is either on his way to prison or is a provocateur. Comments like that don't go unnoticed especially when they are made with reference to certain officials, like judges!

[E.P]

Listen folks, everyone has something to say but you have to believe me. This is what liberalism is all about. I GUARENTEE you that the judge is a Democrat. I know I use to be one myself. As long as we have Dems making decisions like this we will continue to have our fellow citizens, friends, and neighbors, MURDERED on our streets. My heart goes out to the victims family. How are the Dems going to make this green or will they blame it on the global warming lies. Yes they will say it has something to do with it. This violence MUST stop now. God Bless.

[mikedunalewicz]

Lance, I think your point was valid with respect to doing what makes sense, I am pragmatic. However, it seems to me the Kansas statutes are preferable in thta the line is clear. As we all know, the term "reasonable" has made lawyers rich. It also leads to either an unpredictability or ignorning civil rights to come to the "right" result.

However, I completely agree with your assessment of one of the effects of laws governing, what is at some level, morality. I do not agree with your assessment that drug crimes are victimless crimes, we have all seen what drugs have done to society. The problem is that this country spends a ridiculous amount of resources prosecuting the "drug war," when that approach to the situation will not work. My thought is that we could probably spend 10% of what we spend on enforcment, on education and treatment instead, and we would have far fewer people ruining their lives with all drugs, including alcohol. If our goal is minimizing the harmful effects of drugs on society, my preference is to do something that works. Anyone who wants treatment, should be able to get it at no cost. C. Everett Koop made a conscious effort to reduce cigarette smoking. He did so through massive education. The results were significant. Not only would that be more effective than prison, it would cost a fraction of current expenditures. Instead of knee jerk reactions based upon virtually meaningless labels, lets try something that works instead. In addition to helping the problem and saving countless hundreds of billions of dollars, maybe we could change the fact we have more people in prison than any other country. It should be an embarrassment to all Americans that a country like China, with four or fives times our population has fewer people in prison than we do.

[Herbert Spencer]

The Seven Dwarves of the Kansas Star Chamberare all liberals. They are one of the most unrepresentative bodies in the world.

[I Know]

Hmm, for his crime, the man should be incarcerated for life, or probably sentenced to death. But the ever faithful KS Supreme Court thinks he waited too long for a fair trial.

Unbelievable. Only in America can we find people that make our society live by such ridiculous rules.

YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING, AND CAN'T POSSIBLY BE FOR REAL. You are concerned about how poorly an article is written when the content of the article reveals that Kansas screwed up big time, and now we have another murderer on the street due to their absolute incompetence. Where in the hell are you coming from? If you meet up with this murderer, and he pulls a gun on you, the last thing you would be worried about is HOW this article was written. You would be nothing but angry (any normal person would be) that he had been allowed back out on the street to kill again!! Governor Sebellius you must, once again, be real proud of your mess in Kansas. PAUL MORRISON WHERE ARE YOU???? I GUARANTEE YOU THAT MR. MORRISON WOULD HAVE "NEVER" LET THIS HAPPEN IN JOHNSON COUNTY AS LONG AS HE WAS THE PROSECUTOR. Another fine example of great bureaucracy, and great politics in the state of Kansas. By the way aren't you glad that Sebellius got rid of the "True Crimminal" Paul Morrison, and she is going to see to it that he gets his "prosecution." WOW all of you Kansan's must be real proud!!

[??]

YOU DO THE CRIME THEN YOU NEED TO TIME!!!!!!!!TODAY WE SUFFER BECAUSE OF THE LOSE OF A LOVE ONE AND A MURDERER WALK FREE THAT NOT COOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[dbaby]

i feel for the family,its not right.you kill some one you need to do the time.or an eye for an eye.this mother has suffered enough, so has the family.we might need to have a bit of street justice, but that would not solve a thing.to the family keep youre heads up.its not over till god says.

I know I won't have the popular opinion but this really was the right decision.