Investigate the Prosecutorial Misconduct in Ivan Eberhart's case
This petition had 231 supporters
1. Ivan Eberhart is a father of five who was gainfully employed, active in his church, did not smoke, never used drugs, and had no criminal record, when he was falsely accused by Charles Bolden of selling drugs to Bolden.
2. Agents say Ivan confessed. But why would he confess to something he never did? He wouldn't and he didn't. There was no written or recorded confession and the agents claimed they lost their notes. Five witnesses, including 2 police officers came to trial and testified that Ivan was home the entire day dealing with a burglary at his mothers house, and was not out delivering drugs. The jury found him not guilty of delivering drugs.
3. The prosecutor also charged him with a conspiracy, although they had no proof of a conspiracy and in fact, the prosecutor sent a letter to the trial attorney (which the trial attorney withheld until after the conviction) admitting as much.
4. . It was only in closing arguments that the prosecutor first mentioned a conspiracy and asked the jury to convict, without presenting any evidence or witnesses. The jury convicted, but seemed confused during deliberations and asked the judge twice what a conspiracy was.
5. Three months after his conviction in 2002, Ivan Eberhart learned that a superseding indictment had been issued for Charles Bolden in 1999, which removed the name of Ivan Eberhart as Bolden's co-conspirator. Therefore, Ivan Eberhart should never have been tried on that charge.
Today: Emma is counting on you
Emma Young needs your help with “Investigate the Prosecutorial Misconduct in Ivan Eberhart's case”. Join Emma and 230 supporters today.