Convictions May Be Challenged Over Expert’s Allegedly False Degree Claim

Defense attorneys are reviewing their past cases where Tara Reade served as a domestic abuse expert witness against their clients after allegations surfaced that she falsely claimed to have a bachelor's degree from Antioch University, The New York Times has reported. CNN originally broke the story after Reade claimed to them that she had graduated from Antioch. Reade has previously accused presidential candidate Joe Biden of sexually assaulting her.

Reade told CNN that she graduated under a “protected program” to hide her identity and that she also had been a visiting professor at the school. An Antioch University spokesperson told CNN that Reade did not graduate from the university nor was she ever a faculty member.

Making false claims to reporters is barely newsworthy, but it raised suspicions. If Reade falsified her credentials to reporters, she might have done so when testifying as an expert witness. In December 2018 and January 2019, Reade testified in sexual abuse trials that she graduated from Antioch. If that statement was false, those who were convicted at trials where Reade acted as an expert will have a strong argument to have their cases reopened. The Monterey County chief assistant district attorney, Berkley Brannon, told the Times that if the allegations hold true his office would notify all defense attorneys who had cases where Reade served as an expert for the County.

Reade's attorney, Doug Wigdor, defended his client to CNN, saying that some in the media have given presidential candidate Joe Biden “a complete pass” while at the same time subjecting Reade to “hypocrisy and double standard.” Three days later, Wigdor dropped Reade as a client, although he stated that he still believed in the truthfulness of Reade's claims.

Arguments have been made that Reade's undergraduate degree is irrelevent because she later graduated from Seattle University School of Law. That might hold for the general public, but not the courts. While submitting false credentials is unlikely to get an expert witness prosecuted for perjury, it has resulted in cases being overturned and defendants released from jail.

For just one example, in Drake v. Portuondo, U.S. 2d Cir. (06-1365-pr., Jan. 23, 2009), a U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a district court which had convicted Robie J. Drake of two counts of second degree murder because the psychologist, “Dr. Richard D. Walter,” who testified against Drake had misrepresented his credentials. The New York State Supreme Court, Niagra County, had refused to vacate Drake's conviction because Drake could not show that the prosecution knew, or should have known, that the psychologist had misrepresented his credentials.

It was undisputed that Drake, a high school student at the time, had shot and killed two other students, but Drake claimed that he had been shooting at cars in a junkyard for target practice and unintentionally killed the two students. The prosecution argued that it was a sex-crime, having evidence of post-mortem bite marks on the breasts of one of the victims. To further support its sex-crime theory, the prosecution retained “Dr. Walter,” except that Walter did not have a PhD, and falsely testified to his extensive work experience. The appellate court reversed the state Supreme Court and ordered Drake released.

If Reade exaggerated her credentials, that does not mean that her accusations and testimony are false, but it could have lead to innocent defendants being convicted, and now lead to the guilty prisoners being freed.

Pinocchio lied and had a happy ending; it was a fairy tale.