Monday, February 9, 2015

Leo Ackley: Michigan; Innocence Project persuades Michigan Supreme Court to hear verbal arguments; New lawyer claims previous defence counsel failed to call experts to establish that 3-year-old toddler died from an accidental fall. Innocence Project contends that experts in the case gave incorrect testimony, which would have been rebutted by others and that doctors testified falsely that a fall could not have caused Baylee's injuries. News Channel Three.

STORY:  "Michigan Supreme Court agrees to hear verbal arguments in Leo Ackley case," published by News Channel 3 on January 29, 2015.

GIST: "A powerful group that tries to prove the innocence of people who they feel have been wrongfully convicted is going to bat for a convicted murderer accused of killing a West Michigan toddler, and now the Michigan Supreme Court is stepping in as well. The case surrounds the death of 3-year-old Baylee Stenman, who was killed four years ago. A jury says her mother's boyfriend, Leo Ackley was behind the act. But now, there's a strong push for a new trial. "I love Baylee very much," Ackley said. "I'm innocent. I'll prove I'm innocent." The Michigan Supreme Court has agreed to hear oral arguments in March in Ackley's case. His new lawyer, Andrew Rodenhouse, claims his trial attorney was ineffective, failing to call experts on the theory that Baylee died from an accidental fall. "Trial counsel never contacted any of these people; I mean, he was given specific names on who to call. He never called. I mean, he never picked up the phone," said Rodenhouse. Ackley says Baylee fell out of bed, but doctors say she took a blow to the head that was much more severe. Now, the Innocence Project, based in Ann Arbor, has filed a brief on behalf of Ackley. According to the group, which carries great weight in the court system, state experts in the case gave incorrect testimony, which would have been rebutted by others. They also contend that doctors testified that a fall could not have caused Baylee's injuries. The group claims that is false."

The entire story can be found at:

See related Battlecreek Inquirer story: "Attorney Andrew Rodenhouse, representing Ackley, said the court will first have to agree to hear arguments on the facts of the case, but if justices do, he will argue that Ackley's trial attorney did not do enough to find experts who would contradict the prosecution case.
"This is controversial medical science," Rodenhouse said Friday. "Some say you can't die from short-fall injuries and another camp says children can die from short-fall injuries." Rodenhouse said he will argue that the trial attorney did not do enough to present experts who say short falls can cause death. He said the Michigan Innocence Clinic at the University of Michigan Law School has joined in the appeal."


Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following this case.
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.

The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
I look forward to hearing from readers at:
Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;