Why Mary Moriarty's win is a victory for justice

Mary Moriarty brings a much-needed approach to public safety. For too long, the Hennepin County Attorney's Office (HCAO) has relied on leveraging systemic advantages rather than ensuring fair process and just results. Moriarty's perspective and experience will enhance the HCAO's efforts to provide fairness, justice and safety to the community.

My personal experience suggests that change is greatly needed at the HCAO and that Moriarty is positioned to deliver it. One case, in particular, demonstrates why a new approach is needed.

I was the defense attorney for Jaleel Stallings, who was prosecuted by the HCAO. Stallings was a military veteran who protested after the murder of George Floyd. On May 30, 2020, Stallings was in a parking lot when an unmarked van came by and fired two shots toward Stallings' group.

One round hit Stallings in the chest. Fearing for his life, Stallings used his gun, which he legally carried for protection, to fire toward the van while he got into cover behind his truck. Once in cover, he learned that the people in the van were Minneapolis police officers, and he immediately surrendered. He learned after the incident that he had been struck with less-lethal rounds, which can be confused with live ammunition.

Evidence obtained in my investigation suggested that Stallings didn't know why he was being shot or who was shooting at him. Evidence also supported a claim of self-defense. Despite this evidence, Stallings was prosecuted aggressively by the HCAO.

For more than a year, I pleaded with the prosecutor to credit Stallings' defenses and mitigating factors. However, I achieved little success.

During the prosecution, I learned that officers conducted a flawed investigation, provided misleading accounts and omitted important information that supported Stallings' innocence. The HCAO failed to recognize or correct these issues and, in many circumstances, opposed my efforts to vindicate Stallings.

After the trial, I also learned that prior discipline of an involved officer was not produced to me despite my explicit requests for such information.

My experience showed me the failings of the HCAO's approach. The HCAO overlooked misleading reports by officers and instead relied on those accounts to try to convict Stallings. The HCAO relied on an incomplete investigation that omitted evidence that Stallings acted in self-defense. The HCAO failed to thoroughly investigate disciplinary records and exculpatory evidence to ensure a fair trial. After these issues came to light, the HCAO offered no comment or correction.

These issues raise significant public safety concerns:

First, they undermine the reliability of the criminal justice process. If investigators are biased and evidence is withheld, the public cannot trust that a prosecution is fair and based on reliable evidence.

Second, misconduct can cause dismissal of charges, even against those who have committed criminal activity.

Stallings was lucky that we were able to obtain the evidence to secure his acquittal. But, had the HCAO achieved its goal, Stallings would be serving more than a decade in prison.

Moriarty offers a fresh approach to prosecution and public safety. She brings a focus on fair process and justice that will enhance public safety. She will encourage impartial and reliable investigations and prosecutions based on evidence, rather than use systemic advantages to obtain unjust convictions.

With Moriarty, the public can be more confident that the HCAO's prosecutions are fair and reliable. With better oversight, fewer prosecutions should be dismissed due to misconduct. Finally, Moriarty will use all of the tools available to ensure a just outcome, including rehabilitation rather than purely punitive outcomes for those accused.