What an embarrassment!

Nearly 15 years after Anthony Porter walked off Illinois' death row in one of the state's most pivotal wrongful convictions, Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez has decided to reopen the entire case, launching an investigation into whether Porter was actually innocent or the man whose stunning videotaped confession led to Porter's release is indeed guilty.

Alvarez's decision came after attorneys for Alstory Simon, whose confession to a double murder led to Porter's release from prison, called on her earlier this month to re-examine the case.

No other criminal case has been more emblematic of the state's long struggle with the death penalty and its eventual abolition in March 2011. It was the sight of Porter, the state's 10th exoneration, walking free after he had once come within 48 hours of execution by chemical injection that so moved then-Gov. George Ryan and others that efforts to address flaws in the death penalty system took on new urgency.

Ryan eventually declared a moratorium on executions, while the state legislature and the Illinois Supreme Court enacted a series of reforms of the criminal justice system.

Now the claims of Simon's attorneys raise the prospect — one that is fiercely disputed and may never be satisfactorily resolved — that a sound conviction was improperly discredited and that a truly guilty man was freed and an innocent one imprisoned.

Why Alvarez has decided to review the long-controversial case now is unclear. A spokeswoman for Alvarez confirmed that an investigation has been launched but declined further comment.

Alvarez's Conviction Integrity Unit will examine the work of former Northwestern University journalism professor David Protess, who led the investigation into Porter's case with the help of students and a private investigator.

Alvarez's office has clashed in the past with Protess' methods, particularly over his team's claim that prosecutors had wrongly convicted Anthony McKinney of another murder.

Central to Alvarez's review will be the decision by Richard Devine, her predecessor as the county's top prosecutor and her former boss, to release Porter and charge Simon.

Simon, meantime, is represented by attorneys Terry Ekl, once a state prosecutor, and James Sotos, who has defended police officers accused of misconduct, including disgraced former Chicago police Cmdr. Jon Burge, who is in federal prison for lying about torturing suspects.

Porter, now 58, was sentenced to death for the August 1982 murders of Marilyn Green and Jerry Hillard, both of whom were gunned down early one muggy morning at Washington Park on the South Side. He was implicated in the crime by witnesses but never confessed. He was within two days of his execution when he received a stay after lawyers raised questions about his mental competency.

Protess, his students and Paul Ciolino, a Chicago-based private investigator, took up the case. They obtained statements from key witnesses who recanted their testimony against Porter and implicated Simon — including Simon's estranged wife, Inez. The most crucial piece of evidence, however, was the short videotaped confession Ciolino obtained from Simon, who was a laborer living in Milwaukee.

That video prompted Devine to seek to dismiss Porter's conviction and set him free just days after Protess brought the evidence to him, a stunning turnabout. Prosecutors often oppose such efforts and conduct lengthy re-investigations before seeking to dismiss an inmate's conviction — especially a conviction for murder that sent the inmate to death row.

But on Tuesday Devine said Simon's videotaped confession, along with the recantations, was proof enough to release Porter.

"I told our people to address it promptly," he said. "You can't sit there and wait six months or a year with someone in prison."

Seven months later, Simon pleaded guilty to the murders and apologized as part of his deal for a 37-year prison term.

"I didn't mean to hurt her," a tearful Simon said of Green as he admitted to the shootings in court.

"It was an accident and she got in the way. When the shots started, she was coming past me. ... By the time I saw her, it was too late, and I had already squeezed the trigger," he said.

For the past decade, Simon has disavowed his confession and guilty plea, saying both were part of a scheme to get a shorter prison term and a book or movie deal — a fact Ekl and Sotos said in their letter to Alvarez should be cause enough for an inquiry. Judges and appeals courts have turned aside Simon's appeals, saying he pleaded guilty willingly.

Ekl and Sotos first raised their concerns about the case with Protess in a letter in 2005. Protess said he met with the pair, considered the evidence and even re-investigated the case with his students. He remains convinced that Porter is innocent and Simon guilty.

"Anthony Porter did not commit the double homicide that landed him on death row. I'm 100 percent certain of that. And I'm 100 percent certain Alstory Simon is guilty," Protess said in a telephone interview Tuesday. "I came to the conclusion a second time that there was no doubt that Simon was guilty."

But Ekl and Sotos point to a number of facts they say prove Simon's innocence and Porter's guilt, as well as what they consider misconduct by Ciolino and Protess, and questionable judgment by Devine. They noted in their letter to Alvarez that no physical evidence linked Simon to the crime, though none tied Porter to the murders either. And they accused Ciolino of coercing Simon's confession.

Ciolino, in an interview Tuesday, acknowledged he showed Simon a videotape in which one of the investigator's employees posed as a witness and identified Simon as the triggerman. But Ciolino insisted such tactics were not illegal and said Simon saw through them. He said he never promised Simon anything.

"Alstory is nobody to trifle with. He doesn't just confess to anything," Ciolino said. "And he admitted about 10 times to doing this."

Ekl and Sotos also criticized attorney Jack Rimland for his representation of Simon, saying he had a conflict of interest. Rimland was a friend of Ciolino's and at one point represented him in a court matter. Ekl and Sotos said Rimland failed to vigorously represent Simon's interests and instead greased the way for Simon to plead guilty.

Ciolino said Rimland was one of three attorneys whose names he gave Simon when Simon confessed, and he and Protess both asserted that Rimland's legal efforts resulted in Simon getting a good plea deal, especially considering that the crime had landed Porter on death row.

"He ought to be writing thank-you notes to Rimland," Protess said of Simon.

Rimland declined comment.

Ekl and Sotos also criticized Devine for moving so quickly and not being more skeptical of the evidence against Simon. They said Devine ignored the advice of at least one high-ranking prosecutor in his office who was not convinced of Porter's innocence and Simon's guilt.

"If he didn't want to plead guilty," Devine said of Simon, "there was no reason for him to plead guilty."

What's more, Ekl and Sotos said key witnesses have for years implicated Porter, not Simon.

"It is high time," they wrote Alvarez, "that individuals in positions of authority take the time to critically assess the evidence in this case. Our client has been robbed of his freedom for 15 years as a result of Northwestern's unbridled fabrication of false evidence against him."

Ekl and Sotos declined comment Tuesday.

Alvarez, who also declined comment, will be faced with unraveling a double murder that is nearly 32 years old and in which at least one witness has died while others have changed their statements. That will be the job for her Conviction Integrity Unit, which is headed by an attorney who was among the prosecutors who opposed Simon's appeals in court.

Despite his earlier dispute with the state's attorney's office — ultimately resulting in his leaving Northwestern University after complaints that he didn't turn over certain evidence to prosecutors — Protess said he does not question Alvarez's motives in reopening the Porter case and is willing to cooperate with the inquiry.

"I don't have a problem with her looking into this. And if they wanted me to come in and talk with them, I would certainly do that," Protess said. "I have nothing to hide."

smmills@tribune.com