The Case of Creaghan Harry: A Test of Judicial Integrity
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
The judicial system often places significant trust in prosecutors, operating under the assumption that their charges are well-founded and thoroughly investigated. 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 on allegations of violating the Anti-Kickback Statute through his telemedicine company’s payment practices. This statute, which governs financial arrangements in medical businesses involving government insurance programs like Medicare and Medicaid, does not extend to private insurance. The complex application of this statute has resulted in significant legal ambiguity, especially within emerging sectors such as telemedicine.
Despite consistently maintaining his innocence, Harry has endured substantial legal and personal challenges. He provided access to his cellphone, attorney communications, and other exculpatory evidence, yet he remained in pretrial incarceration for over five years. On May 30, 2024, he was released on bail. During his pretrial detention, the prosecution inundated him with data drives containing over 54 billion documents, amounting to 40 trillion bytes of data. This tactic, known as “voluminous discovery,” is designed to create a "needle in the haystack" scenario, making it nearly impossible to set a trial date.
This case highlights a concerning trend within the Department of Justice. As former U.S. Attorney General Robert H. Jackson observed, “The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America.” Yet, the pursuit of career advancement among federal prosecutors—whether for judicial appointments, political office, or lucrative private practice—can overshadow the quest for justice.
When it became apparent that the evidence against Harry was insufficient, the DOJ's strategy appeared to shift towards prolonging his pretrial detention in an attempt to coerce a plea deal. This tactic, often referred to within the DOJ as “marinating,” aligns with Jackson’s warning 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 nears its seventh year in April 2025, calls for justice intensify. He remains resolute in his fight to clear his name and asserts his right to a fair and speedy trial as guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment. His case underscores the urgent need for a judicial system that values truth and fairness over career ambitions and success rates.
The U.S. justice system must adhere to principles of due process and equal protection under the law. As former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wisely said, “If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.” The case of Creaghan Harry is a poignant reminder that justice must always remain the ultimate goal.
To support judicial and racial equity, visit www.RacialJusticeReform.com and sign the Congressional Petition.
For more information on the Harry case, please contact:
- Isaac Wright Jr., Esq., Hunt, Hamlin & Ridley: (973) 242-4471
- Michael Robertson, Esq., O’Toole Scrivo: (973) 239-5700
- Get link
- X
- Other Apps
Comments
Post a Comment