TOPEKA — A state official trying prosecutor Jacqie Spradling on ethics charges says her pattern of misleading juries about evidence in high-profile cases warrants the indefinite suspension of her law license.
Spradling now serves as Bourbon County attorney and as Allen County assistant attorney.
The prosecutor’s actions in Dana Chandler’s double murder trial suggest she was either incompetent or intentionally dishonest, said deputy disciplinary administrator Matt Vogelsberg.
Spradling faces potential sanctions for her handling of the 2012 double murder trial of Dana Chandler in Shawnee County, and the 2017 trial of Jacob Ewing for sex crimes in Jackson County. Courts overturned both convictions because of false statements Spradling made to jurors.
“Respondent engaged in a pattern of misconduct in these two complaints,” Vogelsberg said Friday in closing remarks of a five-day disciplinary hearing. “She committed multiple offenses. Respondent engaged in deceptive practices during the disciplinary process. And finally, she has substantial experience in the practice of law.”
LJ Leatherman, a Topeka attorney representing Spradling, said she made unintentional mistakes at trial “in the heat of battle.”
“My client has gone on a four-year journey, and in that four-year journey she has grieved that publicly she has been embarrassed for her mistakes,” Leatherman said. “But make no mistake, that’s exactly what they were — mistakes. And they happen in litigation because that is of the nature of litigation.”
Alma attorney Keen Umbehr filed a complaint against Spradling in 2016 following oral arguments in the Chandler case before the Kansas Supreme Court. Justices grilled Spradling on a number of problems with statements she made to the jury about evidence that didn’t exist.
A prosecutor who initially reviewed the complaint on behalf of the disciplinary administrator’s office concluded Spradling did nothing wrong. The complaint was investigated further after the Supreme Court concluded otherwise.
Law enforcement authorities immediately directed their attention to Chandler following the 2002 murders in Topeka of her ex-husband, Mike Sisco, and his fiancee, Karen Harkness.
Vogelsberg said Spradling knew a “fictitious” protection from abuse order didn’t exist when she asked a Topeka police detective on the stand to confirm otherwise. She then told jurors in closing arguments that they knew Chandler was guilty because Sisco had obtained the order and Chandler violated it.
Spradling also had no basis for telling jurors about the details of a five-minute phone call between Chandler and Sisco shortly before the murders, or that Chandler had returned from Topeka to Denver by way of Nebraska after the murders. Those comments were based on unproven theories by law enforcement that lacked evidence.
The prosecutor also told jurors that Chandler had searched for news stories about how to get away with murder, even though the internet searches for celebrity crime that had been discovered on a computer by law enforcement were made before Chandler had access to the computer.
Vogelsberg said Spradling lied about the internet searches and protection from abuse order in sworn statements to investigators as part of the disciplinary review process.
In the Ewing case, Spradling misstated evidence during closing arguments in an attempt to inflame prejudice and passions of jury members, Vogelsberg said.
