Keker, who will be overseeing the disclosure process, told SF Weekly this afternoon that not all convictions would have to be revealed. "Things like drunk driving, domestic abuse, depending on the kind of case, they wouldn't be relevant, and they wouldn't need to be disclosed," he said. "A felony conviction is always relevant. A misdemeanor conviction is not always relevant ... there's some fuzziness around the edges."
Adachi disputed this view in a telephone interview, however, saying it underlines the need for an independent judge to review instances of police misconduct. "That's exactly what shouldn't happen," he said. "The issue here is that you need an independent judge to review the evidence on what should be disclosed ... It's not only what the prosecution's theory of the case is, it's what the defense's theory of the case is."
He added, "Here's the problem: Mr. Keker only has access to that which
the district attorney wants him to see, and ultimately his
recommendation is subject to the district attorney's veto."
Harris announced today that she has appointed Keker, the chief prosecutor in the famous 1988 Oliver North/Iran-Contra
trial, to advise her office on which officers' criminal convictions
should be disclosed to defense attorneys. The
San Francisco Chronicle reported earlier this month that
more than 80 police officers who have served as witnessed in trials have
criminal backgrounds, prompting the possibility that convictions based on their
testimony could now be overturned.
