In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Katrina back in 2005, five former New Orleans police officers were sentenced to six to 65 years in prison in connection to on-the-job deadly shootings of unarmed civilians. But recently, these five officers had their convictions set aside by a federal appeals court. Why? Federal prosecutors' anonymous online comments posted underneath local news accounts of the officers' ongoing 2011 trial "contributed to the mob mentality potentially inherent in instantaneous, unbridled, passionate online discourse," the court said. In light of that, the appellate court found a fair trial wasn't possible.

The New Orleans-based 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last week (PDF) that the prosecutors' behavior, unearthed by the same forensic expert who helped identify the Unabomber, created an "air of bullying" that federal prosecutors were "sworn to respect."

"Just as a mob protesting outside the courthouse has the potential to intimidate parties and witnesses, so do streams of adverse online comments," the court ruled 2-1. "The online anonymous postings, whether the product of lone wolf commenters or an informal propaganda campaign, gave the prosecution a tool for public castigation of the defendants that it could not have used against them otherwise, and in so doing deprived them of a fair trial."

In 2011, USA Today described the jury's verdicts that were soon set aside by the appeals court.

Three officers and one former officer were convicted of civil rights violations in the shootings that killed two people and wounded four others on the Danziger Bridge less than a week after the storm. All four and a retired police sergeant were convicted of engaging in a brazen cover-up that included a planted gun, fabricated witnesses, and falsified reports. The five men were convicted of all 25 counts they faced.

Federal prosecutors were mulling whether they would retry the officers in a prosecution that has meandered through the state and federal courts for nearly a decade. Originally, a jury convicted officers Kenneth Bowen, Robert Gisevius, Robert Faulcon, and Anthony Villavaso of shooting at unarmed pedestrians on the bridge six days after 2005's Hurricane Katrina. Teenager James Brissette and 40-year-old Ronald Madison were killed. Four others were wounded. Investigators tried to cover up the shootings, and Sgt. Arthur Kaufman was also convicted for his part in the cover-up.

The appellate court's recent decision upholds a lower court ruling that said that the three high-ranking federal prosecutors who posted anonymous comments on the New Orleans Times Picayune site created an "online 21st century carnival atmosphere." One of a slew of comments came from then-Senior Trial Counsel Sal Perricone. Like other online comments, he castigated the defendants, their lawyers, and the New Orleans Police Department as "rotten from the head down."

In a footnote to the recent decision, the court said old-fashioned forensics unmasked Perricone and others:

"Perricone’s and later First United States Attorney and Chief of the Office’s Criminal Division Jan Mann’s identities were uncovered by forensic comparison of their characteristic writing styles in the online comments and in court filings. The forensic expert in question had previously assisted the FBI in identifying the Unabomber."

In light of the incident, US Attorney Jim Letten resigned, as did Mann, another prosecutor, and Perricone. The court said they left "with their panoply of federal benefits intact."

Listing image by vaXzine