Sweet Revenge

The Michigan Grievance Administrator has filed charges alleging that an attorney made false or misleading statements to a court concerning why a subpoenaed witness was not present to testify.

Notably, the attorney was elected to the position of county prosecutor after the events described below.

Republican Deborah Davis bested her former boss, and another former county prosecutor, in her bid for that position. Davis worked for the current prosecutor, David Marvin. But Marvin fired Davis earlier this year, accusing her of making false statements under oath. Davis says her termination was unjust and points out that she has not been formally reprimanded or sanctioned.

“I think the people can see what happened and that it wasn’t right, the way I was treated and the way I was terminated,” said Davis. “I’m looking forward to getting past that and getting the cases moving again.”

WWMT reported on the allegations that had led to her dismissal as an assistant prosecutor

A look into an ethics violation investigation in St. Joseph County unravels details into the firing of assistant prosecuting attorney Deborah Davis.

The investigation completed by prosecutor David Marvin alleged Davis lied or made misleading statements to a judge at least eight times.

In an exclusive interview with News Channel 3, Davis said she was never interviewed for the investigation and never got to give her side.

On Friday, she said she stands by her actions in court during a preliminary examination for an aggravated stalking case on Jan. 16, 2024.

During the hearing, the victim never showed up.

Judge Jeffrey Middleton pressed Davis for a reason why.

Middleton asks if the victim was “here pursuant to the subpoena?”

Davis replied, “She was here pursuant to the subpoena. I don’t know if she’s still here or not.”

Prosecutor Marvin listed this in his investigation as a “false statement,” adding that Davis didn’t tell the judge that she had released the victim from her subpoena and dismissed the case.

Davis told News Channel 3 she did release the victim from the subpoena, but then saw the defendant and victim speaking in the parking lot, which violated a bond condition and personal protection order.

“The things that transpired after that obviously had a substantial impact on my decision and the choice to go forward with the preliminary exam,” Davis said.

She decided to go forward with the case, telling the judge her client’s absence was “because she was angry and had had contact with Mr. Hewitt.”

When asked why she didn’t explain what happened prior to the hearing to the judge, Davis said she was concerned for the victim.

“This victim in particular has had so many issues with this relationship with this individual. My feeling was that if [the defendant] were aware that I was going to dismiss it before I found out about this contact that he would then ramp up his efforts to continue harassing her, intimidating her or potentially hurting her,” Davis said.

She continued, “What I do know is he that he has violated his bonds, not only in the case that was there for that day, but the other two cases that were still pending upstairs and violating a PPO. So, in my mind he was not entitled to know that I was going to dismiss, that he had done enough damage to the witness in her willingness to cooperate that it was working. I didn’t want to tip him off.”

In the hearing, she asked Judge Middleton to cancel the defendant’s bond for violating it.

“The issue is, he’s going to sit in jail if you get what you ask for,” Middleton said. “I’m troubled that [the victim] was never going to testify today regardless of what happened because she had already been released or I’m not sure. But she was leaving. She wasn’t going to come in here, and I wasn’t going to have an opportunity to speak to her.”

Davis said the real problem is that prosecutor Marvin’s investigation wasn’t complete. She said she filed a complaint, and the investigation is now being looked into.

“If I go down for protecting a victim that I truly believed deserved to be protected, so be it and I will take my punishment whatever that might be. But I truly feel that what I did was appropriate. It was ethical. It was the right thing to do in that situation. And I stand by my decision,” Davis said.

Judge Middleton did end up canceling the defendant’s bond and he went to jail.

Marvin’s investigation reported that the judge said, “I would not have canceled the defendant’s bond if I knew the whole story.”

Prosecutor Marvin dismissed the case after Davis’ firing on Jan. 24, 2024 and the defendant was released from jail.

Marvin declined to comment on the investigation other than to say he did not interview Davis because “the recorded court hearing speaks for itself.

(Mike Frisch)