The Department of Justice Sometimes Gets It Wrong

The judicial system often extends considerable trust to prosecutors, assuming their charges are substantiated and thoroughly investigated. However, the case of United States v. Creaghan Harry illustrates that this assumption can sometimes be misplaced.

Creaghan Harry was arrested on April 9, 2019, for allegedly violating the Anti-Kickback Statute through his telemedicine company’s payment process. This law prohibits certain financial arrangements in medical businesses, specifically concerning government insurance programs like Medicare and Medicaid, while exempting private insurance. The nuanced application of this statute has led to significant confusion and legal challenges, particularly in emerging industries such as telemedicine.

Despite maintaining his innocence for over five years, Harry has faced significant legal and personal hardships. Mr. Harry had provided access to his cellphone, attorney communications, and other exculpatory evidence. Nevertheless, Harry was subjected to pretrial incarceration for over 5 years, until his recent release on bail on May 30, 2024. During this pre-trial incarceration period, the government provided data drives with over 54 billion documents on 40 trillion bytes of data by the prosecution—a tactic known as “voluminous discovery,” which aims to create a “needle in the haystack” and make it nearly impossible to set a trial date.

This case exemplifies a troubling trend within the Department of Justice. As noted by former U.S. Attorney General Robert H. Jackson, “The prosecutor has more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America.” Yet, the drive for career advancement among federal prosecutors for judgeships, political office and lucrative private practice often overshadow the pursuit of justice.

When it became evident that the evidence against Harry was lacking, the DOJ’s strategy appeared to shift towards prolonging his pretrial detention in hopes of coercing a plea. This tactic, colloquially referred to within the DOJ as “marinating,” is reminiscent of 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 approaches its seventh year in April 2025, the call for justice grows louder. He remains steadfast in his resolve to clear his name, asserting 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 prioritizes truth and fairness over career ambitions and win-loss records.

The United States justice system must strive to uphold the principles of due process and equal protection under the law. As former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once remarked, “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 be the ultimate goal.  Visit www.RacialJusticeReform.com to sign Congressional Petition in support of Judicial and Racial Equity. 

For further information on the Harry case, please contact: Isaac Wright Jr. Esq., Hunt, Hamlin & Ridley – (973) 242-4471 or Michael Robertson Esq., O’Toole Scrivo – (973) 239-5700