WASHINGTON (AP) — A former New Jersey day-care teacher, freed from prison after her child sex abuse convictions were overturned, lost a Supreme Court appeal Tuesday that sought the right to sue those who investigated and prosecuted her.
The court turned down Margaret Kelly Michaels' argument that officials violated her constitutional rights by using unreliable evidence that resulted from improper interviews of the alleged victims.
Michaels had said a federal appeals court ruling that gave the officials immunity from her civil-rights lawsuit "leaves a whole class of wrongfully accused defendants without civil recourse."
Justice Clarence Thomas voted to hear Michaels' appeal, saying the lower court ruling "leaves victims of egregious prosecutorial misconduct without a remedy." He said another federal appeals court was "very likely correct" when it issued a conflicting decision in a separate prosecutorial misconduct case.
Michaels was freed in 1993 after serving five years in prison. She had been convicted in 1988 of 115 counts of sexually abusing children ages 3 to 5 at the Wee Care Day Nursery in Maplewood, N.J.
The New Jersey Supreme Court called the investigation "inept," saying evidence from interrogations likely was unreliable.
In 1996, Michaels sued prosecutor Sara Sencer-McArdle, a state investigator, two Essex County investigators and a psychologist hired by the prosecutor.
U.S. District Judge Maryanne Trump Barry dismissed the civil-rights lawsuit last year, saying the officials were entitled to immunity even though the judge said she was "dismayed" at how the investigation was handled.
"The children were interviewed numerous times, even after initially denying that abuse occurred; the investigators used suggestive and leading questions; and the children were rewarded for 'correct' answers," the judge said.
The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ruling last June. The defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for the way they interviewed the children, and Sencer-McArdle was entitled to full immunity for presenting the testimony at trial, the court said.
"Michaels is correct in noting that such a rule leaves a plaintiff like herself without recourse," the appeals court said. The proper remedy in such cases was dismissal of criminal charges, the court said.
In the appeal acted on Tuesday, Michaels' lawyers said she should be allowed to sue by proving that she would not have been prosecuted except for the alleged wrongful conduct.
The state's lawyers said the judicial process protected Michaels' constitutional rights.
The case is Michaels v. McGrath, 00-361.