What others say: Fairbanks Four controversey won’t die anytime soon

  • Tuesday, December 15, 2015 6:38pm
  • Opinion

It seems somehow fitting that a proposed settlement between the state and the four men convicted of John Hartman’s 1997 murder has been — at least for the moment — derailed by questions over what is permissible under the law. After all, the case of the men who have come to be known as the Fairbanks Four has never been clean, easy or straightforward. While supporters of the men would likely have cheered their release under any circumstances, Judge Paul Lyle was right to throw on the brakes. Proceeding on an uncertain legal footing would only have muddied the water further, leaving the door open for potential relitigation, challenges and more court battles.

The deal worked out between the state and the four men was simple on its face: immediate release from prison, with the state maintaining its position that the four were guilty of the murder and other crimes and the four withdrawing their claim of actual innocence and forfeiting any right to seek remuneration for what they saw as prosecutorial misconduct. It would have spelled the end of the case for good — by releasing the state, city and any other potential figures in the case from liability, there would be no potential for a civil suit related to the manner in which the case was investigated and prosecuted.

But that resolution would be too clean in a case with so many twists and turns already. Upon reviewing it, Judge Lyle rightly saw the biggest question it raises: If the four men were originally convicted, the state was maintaining their guilt and the men were waiving their claim of innocence, under what legal grounds could they be released? Furthermore, part of the agreement would be that the state could retry the men if new evidence arose indicating their guilt — how would that not violate prohibitions against double jeopardy?

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

It’s easy to see why such a deal would be attractive to both sides in the case. An early release from prison would be a big symbolic victory for the four, as even though the state would have maintained their guilt, it would indicate that enough was wrong with the case that authorities saw fit to set the men free. And every day not spent in prison would be one the men could use getting back to as close to a normal life as possible, attempting to move on from the episode that defined two decades of their lives. For the state, it would be a huge relief to not have to worry about the potential for a massive civil judgment if the men ultimately proved successful in seeking a declaration of actual innocence.

For all its perks, however, the deal also makes both sides look a bit worse: The four would be giving up their claim to actual innocence, which has long been the cornerstone their supporters have rallied around. Relinquishing that claim would look to some like an acknowledgement that the men’s hands were not as clean as they and their supporters had maintained. And as for the state, while its attorneys could claim to still be assured of the men’s guilt, the fact they were willing to strike a deal granting early release for the men seems a tacit admission that there were major problems with the case’s investigation and prosecution that create serious worries of a civil jury awarding the men damages for their incarceration or treatment by the judicial system.

There may yet be precedent that would allow the deal to go forward. But no one should labor under the misapprehension that even if it does, it will remove the cloud hanging over both the men and the state’s prosecution of the case. At this point, no settlement can resolve the questions about both sides of the case lingering in the minds of many Alaskans — and that suggests any healing and regaining of trust in the justice system may be a long time coming.

— Fairbanks Daily News-Miner,

Dec. 13

More in Opinion

Deena Bishop, commissioner of the Department of Education and Early Development, discusses the status of school districts’ finances during a press conference with Gov. Mike Dunleavy at the Alaska State Capitol on Thursday, April 17, 2025. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire)
Opinion: The fight to improve public education has just begun

We owe our children more than what the system is currently offering

President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin of Russia at a joint news conference in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018. (Doug Mills/The New York Times file photo)
Opinion: Mistaking flattery for respect

Flattery played a role in Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill.

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Life is harder when you outlive your support group

Long-time friends are more important than ever to help us cope, to remind us we are not alone and that others feel the same way.

Deven Mitchell is the executive director and chief executive officer of the Alaska Permanent Fund Corp. (Photo courtesy of the Alaska Permanent Fund Corp.)
Opinion: The key to a stronger fund: Diversification

Diversification is a means of stabilizing returns and mitigating risk.

A silver salmon is weighed at Three Bears in Kenai, Alaska. Evelyn McCoy, customer service PIC at Three Bears, looks on. (Photo by Jeff Helminiak/Peninsula Clarion)
Opinion: Will coho salmon be the next to disappear in the Kenai River?

Did we not learn anything from the disappearance of the kings from the Kenai River?

Jonathan Flora is a lifelong commercial fisherman and dockworker from Homer, Alaska.
Point of View: Not fishing for favors — Alaskans need basic health care access

We ask our elected officials to oppose this bill that puts our health and livelihoods in danger.

Alex Koplin. (courtesy photo)
Opinion: Public schools do much more than just teach the three Rs

Isn’t it worth spending the money to provide a quality education for each student that enters our schools?

Gov. Mike Dunleavy speaks to reporters at the Alaska State Capitol on Thursday, April 17, 2025. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire file photo)
Letter to the Editor: Law enforcement officers helped ensure smooth, secure energy conference

Their visible commitment to public safety allowed attendees to focus fully on collaboration, learning, and the important conversations shaping our path forward.

Laurie Craig / Juneau Empire file photo
The present-day KTOO public broadcasting building, built in 1959 for the U.S. Army’s Alaska Communications System Signal Corps, is located on filled tidelands near Juneau’s subport. Today vehicles on Egan Drive pass by the concrete structure with satellite dishes on the roof that receive signals from NPR, PBS and other sources.
My Turn: Stand for the community radio, not culture war optics

Alaskans are different and we pride ourselves on that. If my vehicle… Continue reading

U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) delivers his annual speech to the Alaska Legislature on Thursday, March 20, 2025. (Jasz Garrett / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: Sullivan, Trump and the rule of lawlessness

In September 2023, U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan established his own Alaska Federal… Continue reading

UAA Provost Denise Runge photographed outside the Administration and Humanities Building at the University of Alaskas Anchorage. (courtesy photo)
Opinion: UAA’s College of Health — Empowering Alaska’s future, one nurse at a time

At the University of Alaska Anchorage, we understand the health of our… Continue reading

U.S. Rep. Nick Begich III, R-Alaska, address a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Thursday, Feb. 20, 2025. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire file photo)
Opinion: A noncongressman for Alaska?

It’s right to ask whether Nick Begich is a noncongressman for Alaska.… Continue reading

You're browsing in private mode.
Please sign in or subscribe to continue reading articles in this mode.

Peninsula Clarion relies on subscription revenue to provide local content for our readers.

Subscribe

Already a subscriber? Please sign in