Protesters call for firing of Jackson County prosecutor in Jungerman murder case
With about 20 protesters standing on the steps of the Jackson County courthouse, organizer Latahra Smith spoke Tuesday into a megaphone and held up an email.
It was sent Oct. 27, 2017, by Chief Deputy Prosecutor Dan Nelson, to detectives investigating the killing of attorney Tom Pickert. The email was sent two days after Pickert was fatally shot at his Brookside home.
“Remember that if any testifying witness emails me anything substantive about the case or a witness, I may have to produce it, so phone is better,” Nelson wrote in part of the email, which was labeled: “Litigation Timeline - Jungerman.”
Months later, prosecutors charged David Jungerman, then 80, with first-degree murder in the killing. They alleged he accidentally recorded himself saying he killed Pickert within weeks of the shooting. The homicide occurred a day after Jungerman was served with property liens to satisfy a $5.75 million civil judgment Pickert won against him.
As she spoke, Smith, an inmate advocate who founded KC Freedom Project, called on Prosecutor Jean Peters Baker to fire Nelson over the email. The protesters held signs that argued Nelson violated Jungerman’s due process rights.
Smith said she believed Nelson tried to circumvent his duty to disclose evidence in the case.
“How many times has he done this?” she asked. “This is how wrongful convictions come about.”
In the email, Nelson also wrote if a homicide squad sergeant wanted him to “lean on any bashful attorneys,” he was willing and probably had contacts in common with them. It’s unclear who Nelson was talking about.
“I can’t promise they’ll listen, but I’m happy to pressure them to give a statement and talk about privilege issues,” he wrote.
In a statement, the Jackson County Prosecutor’s Office said the “inartfully” worded email has “none of the intent that has been ascribed to it by some.” It was turned over to Jungerman’s defense attorneys more than a year ago.
The prosecutor’s office said it could not comment further because the email is part of the pending case. A judge will rule on the matter in the future, the office said.
Jungerman’s attorney, Dan Ross, had no comment.
During a debate earlier this month, Tracey Chappell, the Republican candidate running against Baker for Jackson County prosecutor in November, read part of the email and called it “unethical behavior.”
“When I see this, this No. 2 is telling the detectives really not to put evidence in writing, not to be forthcoming,” Chappell, prosecuting attorney in Blue Springs, said during the debate hosted by the ACLU of Missouri.
In response, Baker said Nelson brought her the email and said “I should not have put this in this email and I’m gonna turn it over to the defense.” He turned over the email, but not because someone asked him to, she said.
Baker also said when she first became the county’s top prosecutor in 2011, the office was “stymied” by court decisions that showed the office did “not always turn over evidence.” She said she ended up firing three assistant prosecutors, something she noted she “paid dearly” for with years of litigation.
“But it really help set the stage early on for the type of office that I wanted to have,” Baker said, “and the type of prosecutor that I wanted to work for that office.”
What legal experts say
Owens Lee Hull, Jr., a retired Platte County judge, said there are Missouri Supreme Court rules that specifically apply to county prosecutors. The rules require prosecutors to make timely disclosure to the defense attorneys of any evidence or information that “could negate guilt or can mitigate the charge.”
“That email on its face, I don’t think violates that Missouri Supreme Court rule that would apply,” said Hull, who also served as former Platte County prosecutor.
Daniel Medwed, a law professor at Northeastern University in Boston, said it struck him as unprofessional that Nelson seemed to be willing to parlay personal relationships into a strategic advantage in a case.
But the part that advised detectives to call him instead of emailing, Medwed said, “may be misconduct.”
It gave him the impression Nelson was advising a way around requirements to disclose statements made by government witnesses.
“Documented cases of misconduct are sort of the tip of the iceberg because there is no way to know how many times things like this happen,” said Medwed, who teaches criminal law and has researched wrongful convictions. “There’s no way to know how many statements are known on phone calls that are never disclosed.”
Bennett L. Gershman, an expert on prosecutorial ethics, however, said he saw no misconduct in the email. Without more context, he said, he does not “see anything really.”
While some might find the language in the email excessive, Gershman said, prosecutors put pressure on witnesses everyday.
Gershman, a former Manhattan, New York, prosecutor who has written books about prosecutorial misconduct, called the claim that Jungerman’s due process rights were violated “nonsense.”
“I don’t know that you can read this email and say, ‘Wow, this is terrible, the prosecutor should be disqualified, he should be punished,’” said Gershman, a professor at Pace Law School in New York. “You can’t do that.”
Ellen Yaroshefsky, a law professor who teaches ethics at Hofstra University, said without more context, it would be difficult to say if Nelson violated any specific rules.
But Yaroshefsky said it appeared Nelson was directing detectives to “hide information.” She said it should be investigated, though she was not sure if a disciplinary committee would take it up without a better understanding of the circumstances.
“I find it ironic, frankly, that he put in writing a directive not to put things in writing,” she said, noting though that “you need more than one email.”
The Star’s Glenn Rice contributed to this report.
This story was originally published July 30, 2020 at 2:16 PM.
