The U.S. judicial system often extends considerable trust to prosecutors, assuming their charges are well-founded and thoroughly vetted. However, the case of United States v. Creaghan Harry reveals how this trust can sometimes be misplaced.
On April 9, 2019, Creaghan Harry was arrested under allegations of violating the Anti-Kickback Statute through his telemedicine company’s payment practices. This statute, which governs financial arrangements involving government insurance programs like Medicare and Medicaid, does not apply to private insurance. The complex and often ambiguous application of this statute has led to confusion and legal challenges, particularly in emerging fields such as telemedicine.
Despite consistently asserting his innocence, Harry has faced significant legal and personal obstacles. He provided access to his cellphone, attorney communications, and other exculpatory evidence. Yet, he was detained pretrial for over five years before being released on bail on May 30, 2024. During this prolonged pretrial period, the government’s strategy included providing voluminous discovery—data drives containing over 54 billion documents, totaling 40 trillion bytes. This overwhelming amount of information, often referred to as “voluminous discovery,” is intended to make it nearly impossible to prepare for trial.
Harry’s case illustrates a troubling trend within the Department of Justice. As former U.S. Attorney General Robert H. Jackson noted, “The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America.” However, the drive for career advancement among federal prosecutors—whether for judicial appointments, political office, or lucrative private practice—can sometimes overshadow the pursuit of justice.
When it became apparent that the evidence against Harry was insufficient, the DOJ’s tactics seemed to shift toward extending his pretrial detention, potentially to coerce a plea deal. This approach, sometimes referred to as “marinating,” reflects Jackson’s concern that “the citizen’s safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth and not victims, who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.”
As Harry’s case approaches its seventh year in April 2025, the call for justice continues to grow. He remains steadfast in his fight to clear his name and assert his right to a fair and speedy trial, as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. His case highlights the urgent need for a judicial system that prioritizes fairness and truth over career ambitions and conviction rates.
The justice system must uphold the principles of due process and equal protection under the law. As former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis aptly stated, “If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.” The case of Creaghan Harry serves as a poignant reminder that the pursuit of justice must always be the ultimate goal.
To support efforts for judicial and racial equity, visit www.RacialJusticeReform.com and sign the Congressional Petition.
Comments
0 comment