Debra Milke is a survivor of domestic violence against her son and herself, she was wrongly convicted of the murder of her own son.
Once evidence illegally manufactured by serial liar/abuser Saldate is excluded, there is no case.
Which is more likely : Saldate is a corrupt cop or Debra is a “witch” – contrary to every precedent in the history of crime, a woman who murders her own child for no good reason?
“Saldate .. a police officer with a long history of misconduct that includes lying under oath as well as accepting sexual favors in exchange for leniency and lying about it.” according to the appeal ruling reversing Debra Milke’s conviction.
It is known that Saldate was a corrupt cop. The alternative is completely implausible. Debra had no record of violence, and she loved her son. She would never have harmed him. Debra Milke is innocent. For a detailed explanation of how and why Saldate framed Debra see here.
What the appeal court said
“In effect, Saldate turned the interrogation room into a black box, leaving us no objectively verifiable proof as to what happened inside. All we have are the conflicting accounts of a defendant with an obvious reason to lie and a detective whose disdain for lawful process is documented by one instance after another of lying under oath and other misconduct. No civilized system of justice should have to depend on such flimsy evidence, quite possibly tainted by dishonesty or overzealousness, to decide whether to take someone’s life or liberty. The Phoenix Police Department and Saldate’s supervisors there should be ashamed of having given free rein to a lawless cop to misbehave again and again, undermining the integrity of the system of justice they were sworn to uphold. As should the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, which continued to prosecute Saldate’s cases without bothering to disclose his pattern of misconduct.”
“Indeed, given Saldate’s long history of trampling the rights of suspects, one wonders how Saldate came to interrogate a suspect
in a high-profile murder case by himself, without a tape recorder or a witness. And how could an interrogation be concluded, and a confession extracted, without a signed Miranda waiver? In a quarter century on the Ninth Circuit, I can’t remember another case where the confession and Miranda waiver were proven by nothing but the say-so of a single officer. Is this par for the Phoenix Police Department or was Saldate called in on his day off because his supervisors knew he could be counted on to bend the rules, even lie convincingly, if that’s what it took to nail down a conviction in a high-profile case?”
“I would therefore set aside Milke’s conviction on the separate ground that it relied on an illegally-obtained confession that probably never occurred, and bar use of the so-called confession during any retrial of Milke.”
In closing prosecutor Noel Levy argued:
“Now, as she told Detective Saldate, the reason that she decided to have her son killed is for this reason: She didn’t want him to grow up to be like Mark Milke. And it isn’t that she didn’t love the child, it’s that God would take care of the child. She would simply have this child’s life ended, having prejudged him, have him terminated, and then he would go up to heaven and God would take care of him..”
That is not remotely plausible. Fear that your son might grow up to resemble his father is not a motive for murder.
In September 1995, in a Sworn Affidavit Dr. Leonardo Garcia-Bunuel, M.D. stated
“By the time Debra went to trial she had developed a strong faith/belief that she would not be found guilty. In my twenty-one years of dealing with people facing death penalty or life imprisonment sentences, I have not seen a reaction like Debra’s unless the person was convinced they were innocent.”
See More – for more detail on how and why Debra was wrongly convicted.