Samuel Bonner freed 37 years after wrongful capital prosecution in Los Angeles

Thirty-sev­en years after his wrong­ful cap­i­tal pros­e­cu­tion and con­vic­tion for a mur­der he did not com­mit, a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge has set Samuel Bonner free. Citing ​“gross pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al mis­con­duct” that he said ​“shocks the con­science,” Judge Daniel J. Lowenthal(pic­tured) on July 11, 2019 ordered Bonner released from California state prison. 

Bonner was cap­i­tal­ly tried for an apart­ment rob­bery and mur­der in 1983 under a law that per­mit­ted defen­dants who nei­ther com­mit­ted a killing nor intend­ed that a mur­der occur to be con­vict­ed of felony mur­der if they took part in a felony in which some­one else com­mit­ted a killing. He has con­tin­u­ous­ly insist­ed that he is innocent. 

Bonner and an acquain­tance, Watson Allison, were con­vict­ed in sep­a­rate tri­als of rob­bing and killing Leonard Polk. Though wit­ness­es saw Allison enter Polk’s apart­ment and make sev­er­al trips in and out with stolen prop­er­ty, no one saw Bonner go inside. The key tes­ti­mo­ny against Bonner was from a pro­lif­ic jail­house infor­mant, Michael Hayes, who claimed that Bonner had con­fessed he shot Polk. Hayes, who was fac­ing his own mur­der charges, tes­ti­fied against mul­ti­ple defen­dants in exchange for a four-year prison term for manslaugh­ter. Despite know­ing that Hayes was lying, pros­e­cu­tor Kurt Seifert sought the death penal­ty against Bonner, argu­ing that Bonner had con­fessed to the shoot­ing. Bonner was rep­re­sent­ed at tri­al by Ron Slick, a defense lawyer deri­sive­ly nick­named ​“Dr. Death” because so many cap­i­tal clients he was appoint­ed to rep­re­sent were sen­tenced to death. Slick refused to per­mit Bonner to tes­ti­fy and pre­sent­ed no wit­ness­es in Bonner’s defense. The jury found that Bonner did not com­mit the killing, but con­vict­ed him of rob­bery and felony mur­der, after which Seifert dropped the death penalty. 

Bonner was able to seek relief when California amend­ed its felony mur­der law. Under the new law, which applies retroac­tive­ly, a per­son can be charged with mur­der only if they actu­al­ly killed or intend­ed to kill. ​“That the death penal­ty was sought against some­one based on tes­ti­mo­ny that was known to be false is hor­ri­fy­ing and shocks the con­science,” Judge Lowenthal said. 

In dis­miss­ing all charges against Bonner, Judge Lowenthal cat­a­logued the numer­ous incon­sis­ten­cies in Hayes’ tes­ti­mo­ny, start­ing with the informant’s own name. He began: ​“His name is Charles Jones. Everything there­after appears to have been a lie as well.” Hayes’ tes­ti­mo­ny described a gun of a dif­fer­ent cal­iber than had been used in the killing and said that Bonner had shot Polk once, though Polk had two gun­shot wounds. Hayes claimed that Bonner had stolen mon­ey from Polk, but no mon­ey had been tak­en from Polk’s apart­ment. He said Bonner told him that he woke Polk before shoot­ing him, but Polk had been seen enter­ing the apart­ment with Allison moments before he was shot. Hayes also claimed Bonner act­ed alone, but Allison’s fin­ger­prints were found inside Polk’s apart­ment and Bonner’s were not. Decades lat­er, Seifert admit­ted in a depo­si­tion that had known Hayes was lying when he men­tioned the wrong gun cal­iber, but he used the testimony anyway. 

Shortly after Bonner’s tri­al, Seifert pre­sent­ed a com­plete­ly dif­fer­ent the­o­ry of the crime at Allison’s tri­al. There, he argued that Allison was the shoot­er and that Bonner had nev­er entered the apart­ment and had played a ​“rel­a­tive­ly minor” role in the crime. Allison was sen­tenced to death. That death sen­tence was lat­er over­turned and, in 2012, Allison was resen­tenced to 25 years to life. 

“It’s axiomat­ic that a prosecutor’s func­tion is not mere­ly to seek con­vic­tions but also to hon­or truth,” Lowenthal said. ​“Here, that did not hap­pen.” He dis­missed both Bonner’s mur­der charge and his rob­bery charge, cit­ing ​“gross pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al mis­con­duct.” According to the Los Angeles Times, Deputy Los Angeles District Attorney Evelis De Garmo object­ed, telling Lowenthal, “[y]ou are con­sid­er­ing releas­ing a con­vict­ed mur­der­er.” ​“Convicted because of pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al mis­con­duct,” the judge respond­ed. When De Garmo insist­ed that “[j]ustice is impor­tant to us, your hon­or,” Lowenthal replied, “[a]pparently not in this case.” A spokesper­son for the Los Angeles District Attorney’s Office sub­se­quent­ly told the Times that the office was look­ing into Bonner’s case and oth­ers involv­ing Hayes’ tes­ti­mo­ny, and that they take alle­ga­tions of pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al mis­con­duct ​“extreme­ly seri­ous­ly no mat­ter how old the case.” 

Bonner expressed his relief at being released after near­ly four decades. ​“I don’t have to wake up to the con­trol of some­body else,” he said. ​“I have more con­trol of my life now, which is a good thing.”