Prosecutorial misconduct and a history of SCOTUS confirmation hearings.

The Supreme Court Returns to the Scene of a Notorious 1984 Murder

The Supreme Court Returns to the Scene of a Notorious 1984 Murder

Law and the Supreme Court justices who interpret it.
April 1 2017 10:03 AM

Amicus: When Prosecutors Keep Mum

Did eight men spend decades in prison for someone else’s crime? Plus, a history of confirmation hearings.

1400x1400_podcast_amicus_slateplus

Listen to Episode 65 of Slate’s Amicus:

In 1985, eight men were convicted of the grisly murder of a Washington, D.C., woman. After spending decades in prison, they learned from an article in the Washington Post that prosecutors had withheld evidence that could have exculpated them. This week, the Supreme Court delved back into the details of the more-than-30-year-old murder case and considered whether it should be reopened. Former defense lawyer Thomas Dybdahl is writing a book about the murder and its aftermath; he joins us to discuss Turner v. U.S. and Overton v. U.S.

Advertisement

We also speak with legal scholar Lori Ringhand, who literally wrote the book on Supreme Court confirmation hearings. She reflects on some of the ways the process has evolved over the years, whether the so-called Ginsburg rule is appropriately named, and what purpose these hearings actually serve.

Transcripts of Amicus are available to Slate Plus members several days after each episode posts. For a limited time, get 90 days of free access to Slate Plus in the new Slate iOS app. Download it today at slate.com/app.

Please let us know what you think of Amicus. Join the discussion of this episode on Facebook. Our email is amicus@slate.com.

Podcast production by Tony Field. Our intern is Camille Mott.

Dahlia Lithwick writes about the courts and the law for Slate, and hosts the podcast Amicus.