HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017328.jpg

4.2.12 WC: 191694 As one juror subsequently put it: "She was very, very credible [at the trial], but now she's not credible at all. Right now, I wouldn't believe anything she said. I would sign an affidavit that if we had known about the money, I couldn't have voted to convict him. Mike Tyson deserves a new trial." In light of the numerous errors made by Judge Gifford at the trial, this should have been the easiest appeal I ever argued. The law, the new evidence and the judicial and prosecutorial errors made at trial, clearly required a reversal of the conviction and a new trial. Legal experts who read our brief and heard the oral argument concluded that we should win the appeal. The law was on our side. The facts were on our side. And our briefs and arguments were much stronger than those of our opponents. As the legal expert who reported on the trial and appeal for USA Today put it after watching the appellate argument: “Ex-heavyweight boxing champion Mike Tyson had his best day in court Monday. As Tyson completed day 328 of his six-year prison term for rape, famed appellate lawyer Alan Dershowitz vigorously attacked: Tyson’s accuser, Desiree Washington; trial judge Patricia Gifford; and the Marion County (Ind.) prosecutor’s office. In spite of a trial record filled with mistakes, omissions and elementary errors by the fighter’s ex-defense team, Dershowitz and colleagues argued that Tyson’s conviction must be set aside... The major arguments cited by Mike Tyson’s attorneys Monday in appeal of his rape conviction [were the following]: -Trial judge Patricia J. Gifford erred by blocking testimony from witnesses who might’ve challenged the credibility of accuser Desiree Washington -Gifford’s refusal to allow the jury to hear an instruction regarding “mistake of fact, or “reasonable belief” concerning whether Tyson believed Washington wanted to have sex with him. -Gifford should have prevented jurors from listening to Washington’s call to 911 reporting the alleged attack. Defense claims Washington invited the attack to sue Tyson, and that the call might have been part of the scheme. -The prosecution committed misconduct by concealing from the defense an attorney-fee agreement for book and film rights to Washington’s story. -Prosecutors manipulated court selection procedure to pick a supposedly sympathetic judge. -The judge should have stopped prosecutors from arguing before the jury that the defense is not obligated to tell the truth. “Tyson got his money’s worth Monday...Reversal of a criminal conviction by a jury is rare, but Tyson’s attorneys might have successfully pinpointed the crucial issues that will free him.” 241 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017328