John Bradley: "Revealing Their Underwear"

script>

John Bradley posted the following on the TDCAA blog during his 6 year battle against testing DNA evidence and keeping other evidence concealed that ultimately freed Michael Morton. Bradley shows his disdain by posting the line “revealing their underwear" In an apparent attempt to disparage folks fighting wrongful convictions, Bradley, who self admittedly spends much of his day blogging, again shows his true philosophy of "justice". This "election year transformation" is debunked by a post only published a few months ago. The three posts range from Dec 2005 to Oct 2011. "JB" is Bradley’s screen name on the TDCAA blog.

 

 

JB
Member

posted 12-20-05  


Revealing their underwear


I don't think any prosecutor disagrees with the fundamental concept that the innocent should be released from any wrongful conviction. However, I do not believe that is the underlying motive of those who create and push an "Innocence" project. (Would defense attorneys and law professors feel comfortable if we called our successful prosecutions "Guilt" Projects?)

The true motives are revealed in their comments that seek to belittle everyone but themselves, portraying the government as some uncaring, monolithic giant of injustice. Exaggeration seems to be the only common factor among the projects. Exaggerate the problem to tear down the opposition and to create a hysterical claim for funds.

It would be interesting to see if any other organization would stand up to such a ridiculous standard. First, you have to operate in the realm of perfection. No mistakes are tolerated; any mistakes are an indication of a broken, corrupt system. (I imagine that same standard does not apply to their own projects, which undoubtedly make claims of innocence by the hundreds that prove to be false. Hmm, wonder if the projects would be willing to disclose their "wrongful" claims of innocence and study them as failures.)

I also am irritated by the notion that only some new, nongovernmental entity can study and identify innocence. Prosecutors and grand juries, as a matter of fact and law, conduct such a study every single day. They regularly identify and refuse to prosecute, dismiss or no bill such cases. Perhaps we simply need to remind the public and such projects of our governmental function and ethical obligation to do such studies.

Finally, these projects also have an underlying motive to abolish the death penalty. Having recognized that sheer opposition on principled, moral grounds won't do (as the public simply doesn't agree with that position), they have adopted the forumula of proving a mistake that then, ipso facto, means the death penalty can't be used as a punishment.

Again, no human organization would stand up to such a formula. You couldn't drive a car, take a flu shot, fly in a plane, work in a building, live by a beach, go to New Orleans or do the millions of other human activities that involve risk of death.

Now, having said all that, I do believe there are some very good, balanced people working on these projects. I have found them to be sincerely interested in allowing prosecutors, at their request, to study a case and come to a rational decision about innocence. Unfortunately, that is the minority and will continue to be so until the public and prosecutors take control of the system they were elected to run.

Bexar County DA Susan Reed is doing a great job for prosecutors in San Antonio with the claim in the Cantu case. She has shown how an elected DA should not simply allow a project to dictate the method or outcome for such a claim.


Posts: 7532 | From: Williamson County, Texas | Registered: 01-25-01



Bradley continues his rant a few years later stating:


JB
Member

posted 08-10-08  


And does anyone believe that an Innocence Project will look upon this and say, "We have to do more to make sure we are not just pawns of guilty people seeking to manipulate the criminal justice system. While there are innocent people, there are also very guilty people who will use their lawyers to present falsehoods."

If we are honest about wanting to making sure of the integrity of convictions, doesn't that include acknowledging and exposing falsehoods and mistakes by the defense? I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for Barry Scheck to announce his position on this.

I've always wondered why the Innocence Projects don't publish the lies they expose when screening a case for their support. Why isn't that process subject to some sort of public scrutiny, just as a conviction is subject to public scrutiny? Is it because they fear that the negative publicity would destroy the public support, just as they have used that same negative publicity to degrade public opinion for prosecution of a case?


Posts: 7532 | From: Williamson County, Texas | Registered: 01-25-01


The most telling post comes even after the election year “transformation". Even after an innocent man who he kept in prison was exonerated.  Even after Bradley fought until the Travis County DA provided evidence that was so overwhelming, Bradley still fought. Then, and only then, Judge Harle made it clear the gig was up and Bradley had to concede.

Michael Morton stated "I thank God this wasn't a capital case". Given John Bradley's attitude in his writings, even after his so called "transformation" based on the post below, Morton's statement is now more than ever paramount. Based on his own words, John Bradley would have obviously, based on his own words, fought to the death of Michael Morton.



JB
Member

posted 10-08-11  


Shaken Secretary Of Transportation Reduces Speed Limit To 5 MPH After Witnessing Accident

Link to article.

[This article provides a good example of how some people respond to the argument of anti-DP proponents who justify the abolition of the DP by arguing that punishment can't be handled perfectly every time. Do we seek to abolish other human endeavors that involve even more risk than is associated with the DP? Or, do we, as a democratic society, allow our legislative branch to reflect the will of the people, while providing as many protections from harm as is reasonably available?]


Posts: 7531 | From: Williamson County, Texas | Registered: 01-25-01



The posts which span over a period of 5 years show Bradley's true philosophy of how he views "justice". He says one thing  the voting public will see and another in the privacy of the TDCAA blog most never will. A source close to Bradley who has known him for many years stated Bradley is "desperate" and resorting to tactics of  "whatever it takes" in his re-election bid. The Bradley lies of late are becoming more and more apparent given his own public writings. John Raley's interview with the Texas Tribune and his own "camp" stating he is "toast" and has "very little support" are adding to his desperation. There really is nothing more to say. John Bradley says it all in his 7,532 published posts that are now coming back to haunt him.


 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments

  • 1/16/2012 1:41 PM JBbegone wrote:
    These are quite illuminating, showing a facet I hadn't considered; John Bradley was not only defending Anderson's prosecution of Morton, and the resulting guilty verdict, he was also on some sort of ego-trip about Scheck and the Innocence Project.

    It almost reads like he felt his prosecutorial "essence" could not be valid unless Scheck and the Innocence Project were shredded.

    He lost.
    Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 1:45 PM Chris P. wrote:
    He sure knows how to insert both feet in his mouth doesn't he? Cracks me up how he probably never dreamed this stuff would ever bite him in the backside. Of course he is John Bradley "Gods gift to us all". Couldn't even get his own party to vote him a confirmation. I think that says it all when so many Republican Senators went against him.
    Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 2:12 PM Concerned Citizen wrote:
    Love this article.

    Something that occurred to me: can he go back and edit/delete or have someone else edit/delete his past posts? Has someone got screen shots?
    Reply to this
    1. 1/16/2012 3:17 PM Wilco Watchdog wrote:
      He has made it habit to delete posts that have been made public and are "controversial". We have taken screen shots of the posts.
      Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 3:28 PM Sun City Tx wrote:
    One of John Bradley's "employees" just knocked on my door in Sun City. I told him no way I would support John Bradley. The only decision of John Bradley I will support is that if he resigned. I am spreading the word in Sun City. John Bradley must go!
    Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 3:30 PM Wilco Voter wrote:
    This is plain amazing. I love how you just showed Bradley's "underwear". How sickening to know Bradley acts like this where he won't think it will get out and then says a completely different thing in public.
    Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 3:43 PM Ryan P wrote:
    He's not wrong in that there shouldn't be a need for an innocence project. District Attorneys and judges should be willing to vet past cases and uncover where an injustice occurred.

    But John Bradley wasn't willing to even take a half-step toward being that kind of DA. He vigorously opposed DNA testing at every avenue and tried to paint the DNA as irrelevant even after the results came back. This is a man who'd rather spend millions in taxpayer dollars defending a conviction than simply saying, "OK" and getting free DNA testing to find out if the wrong person was in prison.

    Certainly there are bogus claims of innocence. That's going to happen. But when there is available evidence that can potentially solve the question once and for all, why fight knowing the truth?

    Also, it seems strange that a DA would rail against the DA, the police and the courts having to follow the law in their pursuit of getting other people to follow the law.
    Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 3:46 PM LM wrote:
    You have to break some eggs to make an omelet. Michael Morton is just a "casualty of war" for the greater good of keeping us safe. I support John Bradley.
    Reply to this
    1. 1/16/2012 4:03 PM Gtown Voter wrote:
      I know that did NOT just come out of your mouth! "Casualty of war"? Are you KIDDING ME?!?!

      I bet if Michael Morton were you or YOUR son you'd be singing a different tune. It's people like you who should have the voter card revoked.
      Reply to this
    2. 1/16/2012 4:53 PM Concerned Citizen wrote:
      JUST a "casualty of war"? How uncaring are you trying to seem?
      Reply to this
    3. 1/16/2012 6:36 PM Steve wrote:
      Hello LM. You have got to be kidding! That is the most insane thing we've seen on here in awhile. Go directly to Shoal Creek and check yourself in.
      Reply to this
    4. 1/16/2012 10:50 PM Susan wrote:
      Michael Morton was an innocent person who lost 25 years of his life. His son, Eric, grew up without either parent. Had Ken Anderson done his job Debra Baker would probably still be alive today since she was killed by the same psychopath. Was Debra Baker another "casualty of war"? LM, you obviously don't know the facts about this case or you would not have made such an idiotic statement.
      Ken Anderson was the prosecutor who put an innocent man in jail. John Bradley was the DA who knowingly kept an innocent man in jail. Why support John Bradley? LM, you are a moron.
      Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 6:03 PM Leonard Martinez wrote:
    It seems Ms. Duty will have plenty of amunition against Bradley by just quoting Bradley.
    Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 7:12 PM Tawanda wrote:
    Watchdog, thank you. Over the last several months you have pretty well proven who the true "Fruit of the Loom" lawyers are, and they are not from New York.

    I've heard of jb's postings on the TDCAA. The one that really gets me is regarding the Midland Police and the Twin Peaks incident that occurred in Round Rock. From his post:
    "ALL UNITS, BE ADVISED: WE HAVE A 36DD IN PROGRESS"

    Real professional like.
    Reply to this
    1. 1/17/2012 7:41 PM Concerned Citizen wrote:
      I would love to see the entirety of that post.
      Reply to this
  • 1/16/2012 8:47 PM michael wrote:
    JB didn`t just shoot himself in the foot ,, he shoots himself in the head lol. I wouldn`t vote this guy for dog catcher, he`d be trying to discredit the humane society !
    Reply to this
  • 1/17/2012 8:32 AM Sun City TX wrote:
    Whoever the rude big bald guy that came to my door yesterday for John Bradley. Don't come back. You are not welcome. I will not vote for your boss. Neither is any of my neighbors.
    Reply to this
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

 Website

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.