The Bottom Line
A detailed complaint submitted to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission alleges Washtenaw County prosecutor Marieh Tanha committed repeated perjury, concealed overseas real estate income, and violated court orders. Judge Hamood has refused to investigate or refer the matter. The pattern is identical to what a Michigan court insider documented and reported to the state 24 years ago. All claims are allegations; the case has not been adjudicated.
Key Points
- A complaint filed with the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission alleges Washtenaw County prosecutor Marieh Tanha made false statements under oath, concealed overseas real estate holdings and rental income, and violated a court order by diverting payroll deposits. All claims are allegations.
- Judge Hamood has refused to investigate the allegations or refer them to Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit, with no public explanation offered.
- Supporting documentation cited in the complaint includes bank records, tax filings, deposition transcripts, and financial disclosures.
- The pattern mirrors the exact conditions Daniel J. Henry documented in his 2001 whistleblower letter to Attorney General Jennifer Granholm: officials lying under oath, protected by colleagues, with accountability bodies declining to act.
- Michigan’s justice crisis is not a failure of awareness. It is a failure of political will, sustained over decades and across multiple administrations.
Nearly a quarter-century ago, a Michigan court insider blew the whistle on widespread misconduct, perjury, and systemic corruption inside the state’s judicial system. That whistleblower’s warning, ultimately ignored, painted a chilling picture: judges, prosecutors, and county officials routinely protected their own, creating a justice system that functioned more like a shield for insiders than a safeguard for the public.
Today, the same script is playing out again.
The Perjury Allegations No One Wants to Touch
Marieh Tanha
Washtenaw County Prosecutor (Subject of AGC Complaint, 2025)
A detailed complaint submitted to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission outlines extensive alleged misconduct by Tanha, including repeated false statements under oath, hidden overseas assets, concealed rental income, and violations of court orders. All claims are allegations; the case has not been adjudicated.
Allegations (AGC Complaint)
The complaint alleges that Tanha denied receiving profits from a property sale despite documented wire transfers totaling over $34,000; failed to disclose multiple real estate holdings and rental income in Sweden while filing verified financial statements; diverted payroll deposits into joint accounts with family members in direct violation of a court order; and signed a power of attorney enabling her aunt overseas to manage and conceal financial documents and rental proceeds.
Source: Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission complaint, 2025. All claims are allegations; the matter has not been adjudicated.
The evidence cited in the complaint includes bank records, tax filings, deposition transcripts, and financial disclosures. Despite this, Judge Hamood has refused to investigate or even refer the allegations for review by Tanha’s supervisor, Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit. It could be months before the AGC even decides whether to open a formal investigation.
Accountability Failure
There is no other framework that adequately describes Judge Hamood’s inaction: institutional self-preservation. A sitting judge, presented with a detailed complaint about a prosecutor operating in the same court system, declined to take any referral action whatsoever. The oversight mechanism exists. It was simply not used.
A Pattern That Hasn’t Changed in 24 Years
This case is not happening in a vacuum. It is part of a much larger story, one Michigan has been telling for decades.
Twenty-four years ago, Daniel J. Henry, first acting director of Michigan’s Judicial Tenure Commission, exposed how Michigan’s judiciary routinely ignored misconduct, and punished those who spoke out. That warning went unheeded. In recent months, Clutch Justice has examined how judges like Margaret Zuzich Bakker and prosecutors operating in Michigan’s court system continue to function with near-total impunity, shielded by political connections and a system that punishes accountability more harshly than misconduct.
Pattern Analysis
The Tanha allegations follow the same structural template as every prior Michigan judicial accountability failure: credible documentation submitted through official channels, a collegial oversight body that declines to act, no public explanation from the judge or officials involved, and an indefinite wait for a determination from a commission with no mandatory timeline. The architecture is consistent because the incentives are consistent.
The result is predictable. Officials face credible allegations and proceed with confidence that their colleagues and the oversight bodies tasked with regulating them will look the other way. In Washtenaw County, that confidence appears to have been justified.
Accountability Is Optional When You’re Part of the System
For many forced to navigate this process, it feels like a David vs. Goliath battle. Except in this story, Goliath also writes the rules for the battle. Even with documented evidence of alleged perjury and financial concealment, there is no guarantee the AGC will investigate, no timeline for a determination, and no certainty that a finding, if reached, will produce meaningful discipline.
This is the core of Michigan’s justice crisis. Accountability is treated as optional when the accused is a member of the system. When prosecutors lie under oath and face no consequences, the public loses faith not just in a single case, but in the entire legal apparatus. When judges ignore credible allegations because they involve colleagues, the message is unambiguous: justice is conditional on who you are.
Why This Matters for All of Michigan
When decades pass without structural reform, despite whistleblowers, complaints, lawsuits, and investigative reporting, Michigan residents are left to ask whether justice is even the goal of the system claiming to deliver it.
The same rot identified in Henry’s 2001 letter has only deepened. The JTC that was failing families then is still failing them. The prosecutors who lied with impunity then are being replaced by a new generation who have learned from that impunity. And the oversight bodies that were warned have spent twenty-four years demonstrating that the warnings were not enough.
Structural Analysis
Until Michigan stops allowing prosecutors, judges, and county officials to police themselves, cases like this one will continue to unfold. Self-policing structures produce self-protective outcomes. That is not a design flaw. It is the design.
The Tanha allegations, if substantiated, represent exactly the kind of prosecutorial misconduct that corrodes public trust at the institutional level. Whether or not those allegations are ultimately proven, the refusal of the court to even refer the matter for review is itself a data point about how Michigan’s accountability mechanisms operate in practice.
Quick FAQs
What are the allegations against Washtenaw County prosecutor Marieh Tanha?
A complaint submitted to the Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission alleges that Tanha denied receiving profits from a property sale despite documented wire transfers totaling over $34,000, failed to disclose real estate holdings and rental income in Sweden on verified financial statements, diverted payroll deposits into joint family accounts in violation of a court order, and signed a power of attorney enabling her aunt to manage and conceal financial assets overseas. All claims are allegations; the case has not been adjudicated.
Why hasn’t Judge Hamood acted on the allegations against Marieh Tanha?
According to the reporting, Judge Hamood has refused to investigate or refer the allegations to Washtenaw County Prosecutor Eli Savit. No explanation has been offered. The inaction is consistent with what critics describe as a pattern of institutional self-preservation inside Michigan’s judicial system.
How does this case connect to Daniel Henry’s 2001 whistleblower letter?
In 2001, Daniel J. Henry warned that Michigan courts routinely protected their own and ignored misconduct by insiders. The Tanha case follows the same pattern: documented allegations with supporting evidence, an oversight body that has not yet acted, and a judge declining to refer the matter for review. The conditions Henry described have not changed.
What reforms would break the cycle of judicial self-protection in Michigan?
Meaningful reform requires removing self-policing structures so that prosecutorial misconduct is reviewed by an independent body with no collegial relationship to the accused. It requires mandatory referrals when credible evidence of perjury or financial concealment is submitted, transparent timelines for AGC investigations, and real consequences, including removal, for judges and prosecutors who abuse their positions.
Sources
Primary Documents- Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission, formal complaint re: Marieh Tanha (2025). Bank records, tax filings, deposition transcripts, and financial disclosures cited therein.
- Michigan Attorney Grievance Commission — agcmi.com
- Washtenaw County Prosecutor’s Office — washtenaw.org
- Clutch Justice, 24 Years Later, Michigan Still Ignores the Whistleblower Who Tried to Save Family Court (Oct. 13, 2025)
- Clutch Justice, Michigan Judicial Misconduct Database
Cite This Article
Bluebook: Williams, Rita. History Repeating: Michigan Courts Still Covering for Their Own, Clutch Justice (Oct. 20, 2025), https://clutchjustice.com/2025/10/20/michigan-courts-history-repeating/.
APA 7: Williams, R. (2025, October 20). History repeating: Michigan courts still covering for their own. Clutch Justice. https://clutchjustice.com/2025/10/20/michigan-courts-history-repeating/
MLA 9: Williams, Rita. “History Repeating: Michigan Courts Still Covering for Their Own.” Clutch Justice, 20 Oct. 2025, clutchjustice.com/2025/10/20/michigan-courts-history-repeating/.
Chicago: Williams, Rita. “History Repeating: Michigan Courts Still Covering for Their Own.” Clutch Justice, October 20, 2025. https://clutchjustice.com/2025/10/20/michigan-courts-history-repeating/.
Need Help Mapping Prosecutorial Accountability Failures?
I map how institutions hide from accountability. That map is what I sell.
