Mark Bradford and Samuel Lockner make up one half of the 2022 Pro Bono Champions of the Year award winners. Along with Megan Christner and Alexandra Olson, Mark and Sam work with GN-IP staff attorney Jim Mayer representing current client, Robert Kaiser. As of this writing, Robert and his team are preparing for an upcoming hearing where a three-judge panel will consider whether or not the uphold a Stearns County judge’s decision to vacate Robert’s earlier wrongful conviction for which he served nearly eight years in prison.
Great North Innocence Project: Tell us about yourself.
Mark Bradford: I’ve been practicing law since 2003. I am currently an appellate lawyer with additional focuses in commercial, insurance coverage, and professional liability litigation at Bassford Remele, P.A. I also serve as chair of Bassford Remele’s Appellate Practice Group. I really love appeals, but I also enjoy the occasional trial.
Samuel Lockner: I am born and raised in Minnesota, originally from Owatonna. I went to undergrad at the University of Minnesota and majored in Genetics and Cell Biology. I completed my law degree at Boston University School of Law. Currently, I work at Carlson Caspers law firm, where I’ve been for the past 15 years, which specializes in intellectual property litigation and monetization. My practice is focused in the life science, bioagricultural, biotechnology, and chemical areas.
GN-IP: Why did you decide to take on pro bono innocence work? Is the Kaiser case the first you’ve worked on? If not, what was your experience in previous cases?
MB: I’ve worked on a many cases with the [Great North] Innocence Project over the years. Before Kaiser, this same group worked on another case with GN-IP, which now is with the Conviction Review Unit. We had the case at the federal level (we petitioned for leave to file a successive habeas petition, we drafted and argued the petition before the Magistrate Judge, and then we took an appeal to the Eighth Circuit).
I also worked with Julie Jonas representing a man convicted of rape in Louisiana. During our investigation, we successfully obtained DNA testing (he was convicted before robust DNA testing was available). Unfortunately the testing proved his guilt, however.
While not in partnership with GN-IP, I most recently I spent a few weeks in Mobile, Alabama, representing a client in a Miller/Montgomery juvenile resentencing hearing. Our client is 50. He committed a murder at the age of 16 while trying to get diaper money for his girlfriend’s baby.
Overall, I really enjoy this work. I tell people all the time how rewarding it is, but that you have to dedicate a substantial amount of time to it. It’s not for the faint of heart.
SL: The idea that innocent people are stuck in jail, convicted of crimes they did not commit, troubles me. I suspect it troubles most attorneys. The loss of freedom and integrity for the individual, coupled with the shame that likely results is unfathomable. I believe it is critical that our justice system gets it right when someone’s freedom and reputation is at stake. So, anytime credible doubts exist on the integrity of a conviction, I’d like to help to test the legitimacy of it.
This is my second innocence case. Like Mark, I previously worked on another case with GN-IP, which now is with the Conviction Review Unit.
GN-IP: Tell us about your experience working on Robert Kaiser’s case, both personally & professionally.
MB: Robert’s case was an interesting one for me. I was already familiar with the team because we worked on the other client’s case together. But this case had SO MUCH medicine. I was overwhelmed, but our post-conviction trial team was amazing. We divided and conquered. And it was so great to have a judge who paid attention to the evidence and who didn’t just write off the petition before hearing the evidence.
SL: I had two major takeaways from working on Robert’s case. The first is that Robert is a remarkable person. His calm demeanor while reliving a horrific personal event (the loss of his child) with his freedom on the line is a testament to what kind of person he is – kind and patient.
The second is the tremendous talent, intelligence, and selflessness of the other attorneys I worked with. Jim, Mark, Alex, Megan, Julie, and others at the [Great North] Innocence Project amaze me. They used their skills and devoted their time to help someone they didn’t know or barely knew because it was the right thing to do. Because they saw injustice. They sacrificed their time and energy without hesitation. It was and is a privilege to work with them. They each represent the best our profession has to offer.
GN-IP: What has been the most challenging part of working on the Kaiser case for you?
MB: The medicine for sure. I don’t handle medical malpractice cases and don’t have a lot of experience with medical experts. So it was a challenge to learn the ins-and-outs of ophthalmology and other specialties.
SL: The most challenging part of Robert’s case, like most innocence cases, is the post-conviction law. The law sets high burdens to vacate or overturn a conviction; too high, in my opinion.
GN-IP: What has been the experience like working with attorneys from other firms on this case?
MB: Our team was so awesome. There was a ton of trust. We just knew each other’s examinations would be great, and they were.
SL: The dynamic of working with this team is seamless and a joy. Each attorney is brilliant in their analysis and skilled in the courtroom. They pay attention to details, while never losing the big picture. Despite incredible stakes, the atmosphere within this team is always positive. I said it before, but it is truly a privilege to work with them—and I hope I get the chance to do so again on another case soon.
GN-IP: What has been rewarding about this work so far?
MB: Both rewarding and emotionally draining at the same time is the magnitude of the result. If you lose, someone loses hope and remains incarcerated. It was so great to give Robert hope.
SL: The reward in this instance is the outcome—seeing Robert vindicated and get a chance to restart his free life. As I mentioned, I worked on a prior case where we did not obtain the same outcome. It is difficult to find moral victories when an innocent person remains in jail. But even then, getting the chance to work with attorneys devoted to right an injustice reminds me of why I originally wanted to attend law school.
GN-IP: We know the story is not over yet. Looking ahead, what do you wish for in this process? What are your hopes for this case, for yourself, and/or for Robert as the story continues to unfold?
MB: We have a battle set up at the Minnesota Court of Appeals. We understand the State is pushing hard to upend the Judge’s decision and we are up for the battle.
SL: What I really want is for this ordeal to be over for Robert, but I will take a fair chance. If the State insists on further pursuing Robert, my wish is simply that he receive a fair trial where all the facts are set forth and presented to the jury. If that happens, I am confident that the right result will take care of itself.
GN-IP: Once the Kaiser case concludes, would you consider working on another innocence case pro bono again?
MB: Yes, for sure. Sign me up for another.
SL: Yes. Working on innocence cases has been some of the most rewarding work in my nearly 20 years of practice. I hope I get the chance to help someone else. It’s an honor to get to represent the [Great North] Innocence Project in court on important matters. And I am grateful for the grace, patience, and kindness Robert showed under us impossible circumstances. To my co-counsel, there are no better attorneys.