I came across a long writeup on the murder conviction of Michael Morton[1] which relied heavily on withholding evidence from the defence, and lying about it und

I came across a long writeup on the murder conviction of Michael Morton[1] which relied heavily on withholding evidence from the defence, and lying about it under oath. Upon his exoneration (after serving ~25 years), an inquiry was held, and the prosecutor is currently facing criminal charges[2] In what might be the most offensive part, his defense appears to be immunity under the Statute of Limitations, since it was back in 1986. Quite a risky defense, I imagine, given (AIUI) the exemption for "Fraud upon the Court", and the perverse incentive to ensure the wrongly imprisoned stay there long enough that you are immune to criminal charges. Civil redress is presumably available, but I can't imagine what 10-20 years of wrongful imprisonment is worth[3] that doesn't lead to immediate bankruptcy. [1] Note: LONG. http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/innocent-man-part-one?fullpage=1 http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/innocent-man-part-one?full... & http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/innocent-man-part-two http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/innocent-man-part-two [2] http://m.statesman.com/news/news/local/ken-anderson-court-of-inquiry-resumes/nXRLm/ http://m.statesman.com/news/news/local/ken-anderson-court-of... [3] $80k/year for Texas, according to the end of article in [1], but presumably from the state itself, rather than the individuals involved.