September 8, 2010
One way or another, the legal apparatus of California seems determined to get Bruce Lisker. The pursuit continues despite the fact that his murder conviction — for which he spent 26 years in prison — was overturned last year when a federal judge concluded that the original case against him was based on sloppy police work, incompetent representation by his attorney and "false evidence. " Ordinarily, defendants are convicted and imprisoned based on strong evidence and solid facts that lead to a determination of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 3, 2010 |
A spokesman for California Atty. General Jerry Brown said Thursday that his office was reconsidering a move to have a man whose murder conviction was overturned last year sent back to prison on procedural grounds. The announcement came about 24 hours after state lawyers had asked a judge to reverse her decision to overturn the murder conviction of Bruce Lisker. That ruling set Lisker free after he had served 26 years behind bars. The state attorneys had argued that Lisker, convicted of killing his mother in 1985, should be sent back to prison because the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in July in another case that inmates cannot file "untimely" petitions for release even if they can prove they are innocent.
September 2, 2010 |
Bruce Lisker was 17 in 1983 when he was charged with the murder of his mother, Dorka.State lawyers have asked a judge to reverse her decision to overturn the murder conviction of a man who was set free last year after serving 26 years in prison. Bruce Lisker, who was accused of killing his mother in 1985, should be sent back to prison because the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in another case that inmates should not be allowed to file late petitions for release even if they can prove they are innocent, according to the attorney general's motion filed late Wednesday.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 23, 2009 |
A man wrongfully convicted of killing his mother and freed after serving 26 years in prison filed a lawsuit Tuesday accusing Los Angeles police detectives of framing him. Bruce Lisker, 44, contends his civil rights were violated by the city of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles Police Department and the former detectives who investigated his mother's March 10, 1983, slaying, according to the suit filed in U.S. District Court. "It wasn't an innocent mistake, and those responsible should be held accountable," said attorney William Genego, who represents Lisker.
September 27, 2009
Re "Lisker's 26-year legal odyssey comes to an end," Sept. 22 Congratulations to The Times for its excellent investigative journalism in the Bruce Lisker case. It was very satisfying to read that he is finally free and will not be retried, for now at least. Even if the district attorney's office still had all the evidence and witnesses it had in 1983, it would still be very unlikely that Lisker would be convicted because he is innocent, as your reporting clearly showed. The party in this matter that should be prosecuted is the LAPD, for depriving Lisker of 26 years of his life.
September 23, 2009
Bruce Lisker, who served 26 years in prison for the murder of his mother, was released last month when a federal judge overturned his conviction. On Tuesday, his legal odyssey came to an end when the Los Angeles district attorney's office announced that it would not retry him for the 1983 slaying. These extraordinary events did not occur out of the blue, of course; they followed, among other things, a 2005 Times investigation by Scott Glover and Matt Lait that raised questions about key elements of the prosecution; a report suggesting that the confessions Lisker made were merely "self-serving" attempts to reach a plea-bargain deal; and a declaration by an expert that a bloody print in the bathroom was, in fact, not made by his shoes.