John Bradley reverses course on the road to Damascus

A titillating excerpt from the Tribune's coverage of the Ken Anderson court of inquiry, where former Williamson County DA John Bradley recanted his always-suspect road to Damascus moment from the primary campaign:

Bradley contended that Barry Scheck of the Innocence Project, one of Morton's lawyers, had drafted the affidavit he signed in 2011. The words in the affidavit, Bradley said, were Scheck's, not his. And Bradley said the statements in the affidavit were "true and correct" but not "true and accurate."

"I didn’t have a lot of control over this," said Bradley, the longtime DA and former Texas Forensic Science Commission chairman known for his hard-nosed approach. "It was going to be his statement not mine."

"True and correct" but not "true and accurate"? Is there truth that is correct but inaccurate?

And do we believe John Bradley was just Barry Scheck's pawn? That the sitting DA was powerless to author his own affidavit and was serving as the puppet of a slick New York lawyer? That's quite an admission.

How far the mighty have fallen.