ap

Skip to content
PUBLISHED:
Getting your player ready...

Protecting witnesses in criminal cases is crucial to the integrity of our system of justice.

That’s why we were taken aback by revelations that Colorado’s witness protection program is a scattershot effort that is little known and poorly funded. In fact, 16 witnesses or associates have been murdered since Colorado began its witness protection fund 12 years ago.

It’s time for Gov. Bill Ritter to appoint a task force to investigate how witness protection is funded, what constitutes adequate funding, the best way to tell witnesses that protection is available, and to examine the efficacy of the current program’s structure.

A three-day series by Denver Post reporter David Olinger pointed out many flaws in the system and detailed how witnesses were left to devise ways of protecting themselves.

Colorado’s program has a $50,000 budget this year and has expended, on average, $43,000 a year. The relatively small expenditures might lead one to conclude the state doesn’t have a problem with violence against or intimidation of witnesses. But it does.

A computer analysis by The Post showed that since 1998, Colorado prosecutors have filed more than 2,000 felony cases of crimes against witnesses.

The 2005 murders of Javad Marshall-Fields and his fiancée, Vivian Wolfe, were a chilling wakeup call about what some see as a serious problem of retribution against witnesses. Marshall-Fields saw a friend gunned down at a Fourth of July concert and was set to testify against the shooter. Men implicated in the murder stalked and threatened Marshall-Fields. At least one of them was a drug dealer with ties to a dangerous Chicago gang. Then, authorities say, they killed the couple. Marshall-

Fields’ mother said her son was never offered protection.

There are many issues for a state task force on witness protection to take on. These should be among the items on the agenda:

  •  Witness notification. State lawmakers last year passed a measure requiring law enforcement personnel be informed of the witness protection fund. But that law didn’t include witness notification. It should.
  •  Adequacy of funding. After the murders of Marshall-Fields and his fiancée, Arapahoe County began relocating witnesses and exhausted the state fund. A task force should explore what is a reasonable level of funding.
  •  Distribution of funds. Now, district attorneys spend money out of their own budgets for witness protection and then ask for reimbursement. The task force should look at whether this is the best way to handle funding.
  •  Clearer structure. The Post reported the extensive haggling that one of the relocated witnesses in the Marshall-Fields case had to go through to procure basic necessities, including an air mattress for her son to sleep on. Allowable expenses should be clearly delineated.

    We hope the state will respond to the situation with well-researched suggestions to make Colorado’s witness protection program meaningful. Our judicial system depends upon it.

  • RevContent Feed

    More in ap