The United States Supreme court in Connick v. Thompson2 faced with a particularly egregious case of deliberate misconduct by a prosecutor found that existing oversight systems are adequate to respond to and prevent future prosecutorial error and misconduct in overturning an award of monetary damages that the wrongly convicted man received for the misconduct that nearly led

to his execution. What explains this contradiction? Did the court get it wrong? Why did these systems fail to hold any of these prosecutors accountable despite clear evidence of misconduct and such significant harm?

This report is the culmination of an inquiry into these questions—whether existing oversight systems are adequate to respond to and prevent prosecutorial error
and misconduct—and concludes that the court was wrong.