Michael Morton was wrongfully convicted of murdering his wife in 1987, based on a letter he wrote to her just before her murder. The letter was used to establish motive, and exculpatory evidence was kept from the jury. DNA evidence later fully exonerated Morton of the crime.
One critical takeaway of Morton’s wrongful conviction comes down to the fact that perceived motive can never be enough to establish guilt. This is especially vital in a time when many argue that “hate speech” laws have a role in establishing guilt. Such laws will only increase wrongful convictions, and can act as a substitute for empirical evidence. Morton’s prosecutor (Ken Anderson) was at least partly responsible for a later murder committed by the real murderer (Mark Alan Norwood), because the focus on Morton was so intense that other suspects were disregarded. Anderson eventually lost his license to practice law, was fined, and jailed.
The Michael Morton Act (2013) was passed in Texas in order to prevent this situation from happening again; among other things, by making it easier for exculpatory evidence to come forward in court, and facilitate a more open discovery process.
This law should become federal if not a constitutional amendment.