CHICAGO — A Chicago man convicted of murder based in part on testimony from a legally blind eyewitness is suing the city and the police department.
A judge convicted Darien Harris in 2014 in connection with a fatal shooting at a South Side gas station in 2011. He was 12 years into a 76-year prison sentence when he was freed in December after The Exoneration Project showed that the eyewitness had advanced glaucoma and lied about his eyesight issues. Harris was 30 years old when he went free.
Harris filed a federal civil rights lawsuit in April alleging police fabricated evidence and coerced witnesses into making false statements, the Chicago Tribune reported Monday. He told the newspaper that he is still struggling to put his life back together.
“I don’t have any financial help. I’m still (treated like) a felon, so I can’t get a good job. It’s hard for me to get into school,” he said. “I’ve been so lost. … I feel like they took a piece of me that is hard for me to get back.”
A message The Associated Press left on the city’s Law Department main line seeking comment Monday wasn’t immediately returned. The department provides attorneys for the city, its departments and its employees.
Harris was an 18-year-old high school senior when he was arrested. The legally blind eyewitness picked Harris out of a police lineup and identified him in court. The eyewitness testified that he was riding his motorized scooter near the gas station when he heard gunshots and saw a person aiming a handgun. He also added that the shooter bumped into him.
Harris’ trial attorney asked the witness if his diabetes affected his vision. He said yes but denied he had vision problems. But the man’s doctor deemed him legally blind nine years before the incident, court records show.
A gas station attendant also testified that Harris wasn’t the shooter.
The Exoneration Project has helped clear more than 200 people since 2009, including a dozen in Chicago’s Cook County in 2023 alone.
A man who was convicted of a murder in Chicago is now filing a lawsuit against the city and police department, claiming that his conviction was based on unreliable blind witness testimony. The case highlights the potential dangers of relying solely on witness testimony, especially when the witness may not have had a clear view of the events in question.
The man, whose name has not been released to the public, was convicted of a murder that took place in Chicago several years ago. The key piece of evidence against him was the testimony of a blind witness who claimed to have heard the crime but did not actually see it happen. The witness’s testimony was used to place the man at the scene of the crime and link him to the murder weapon.
However, the man now claims that the witness’s testimony was unreliable and should not have been used as the sole basis for his conviction. He argues that the witness’s lack of sight made it impossible for them to accurately identify him or provide a clear account of what happened. In addition, he alleges that the police failed to conduct a thorough investigation and ignored other potential leads in their rush to close the case.
This case raises important questions about the use of witness testimony in criminal trials, particularly when the witness may not have had a clear view of the events in question. While eyewitness testimony can be a powerful tool in solving crimes, it is also well-documented that witnesses can be unreliable and prone to errors. Factors such as poor lighting, distance, and stress can all affect a witness’s ability to accurately recall and report what they saw.
In this case, the man’s conviction was based solely on the testimony of a blind witness, raising concerns about the reliability of the evidence used against him. The lawsuit he has filed against the city and police department seeks to hold them accountable for their reliance on this flawed testimony and the potential miscarriage of justice that resulted.
Moving forward, it is essential for law enforcement agencies and prosecutors to exercise caution when relying on witness testimony in criminal cases. They must thoroughly investigate all leads and corroborate witness statements with physical evidence whenever possible to ensure that justice is served fairly and accurately. By learning from cases like this one, we can work towards a more just and equitable criminal justice system for all.
