John Durham, the Groton-raised U.S. prosecutor who still maintains a home here in Mumford Cove, was esteemed throughout a long and successful career for his professionalism, integrity and even political independence.

But like so many other prominent, establishment Republicans, Durham has thrown all that away in his engagement with Trump world and its twisted approach to the truth.

Durham, in his turn as special prosecutor in search of malfeasance in the conduct of the Trump-Russia investigation, spending three years and millions of dollars, has come up largely empty-handed, just one guilty plea that resulted in a suspended sentence.

The recent acquittal in the first trial to result from his investigation was humiliating.

In much less time spent on his own investigation, Robert Mueller's Russia probe netted indictments, guilty pleas or convictions from 34 people and three companies, including top advisers to Trump and Russian spies. He put criminals in jail.

In some public comments after the innocent verdict in the Durham probe, the jury foreman actually said the whole thing was a waste of time.

Even the charge was pathetic and obscure, an alleged lie to the FBI as to whether a lawyer working for the Hillary Clinton campaign identified his client when reporting what he thought was a troubling link between Trump and a Russian bank.

I was counting on Durham's history of independence when he was first tapped by Trump's Attorney General William Barr to investigate the FBI over its decision to probe ties between Russia and the Trump campaign.

It also looked like he might have refused being drawn fully into the Trump swamp, when right up to the 2020 election, he resisted pressure to issue a vote-influencing report on the Russia-Trump investigation.

"I look forward to Bull Durham's report — that's the one I look forward to," Trump said while campaigning in 2020, referring to Durham by his nickname.

Attorney General Barr also teased in media interviews that Durham might issue a critical report before the election on the conception of the Russia probe, even though the Justice Department's independent inspector general already had concluded that the FBI was justified in opening the Russia investigation.

But it seemed, despite the lack of a pre-election bombshell from the prosecutor, that Durham was indeed intent on doing Trump's bidding. Apparently, try as he might, he came up short of anything that could pass as an October surprise.

Nora Dannehy, the former Connecticut associate of Durham's recruited to help him in the investigation of the origins of the Russia probe, ended up resigning as pressure from Trump to produce a damning pre-election report grew stronger.

Dannehy told colleagues at the time that she quit because of the pressure to report before the election, the Hartford Courant reported at the time.

Dannehy, having cleverly stepped off the Durham train to humiliation just in time, ended up as counsel to Gov. Ned Lamont, in charge of trying to whack-a-mole the corruption scandals plaguing the governor. We've yet to see how that works out for her.

The blowback for Durham's embarrassing showing in the first trial of his long and expensive investigation, one launched to make a political point, has been loud and devastating.

Perhaps most damning have been the legal assessments of the way in which Durham used the process to inject political smears and innuendo into the media coverage, including extraneous and even misleading material in indictments.

This is where the once respected prosecutor has lost a reputation as a straight shooter, one earned over a long and distinguished career.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder wisely predicted this Trump world besmirching of Durham in an op-ed he wrote in the Washington Post in December 2019.

"I've been proud to know John for at least a decade, but I was troubled by his unusual statement disputing the inspector general's findings (about the appropriate FBI start of the Russia probe)," Holder wrote. "Good reputations are hard-won in the legal profession, but they are fragile."

"Anyone in Durham's shoes would do well to remember that, in dealing with (the Trump) administration, many reputations have been irrevocably lost."

How right he was, in that warning to a respected colleague about the corrosive influence of Trump.

This is the opinion of David Collins.

d.collins@theday.com