Saturday, April 30, 2016

Tammy Marquardt: William Mullins-Johnson: Two of former doctor Charles Smith's victims subject of CBC News on "Justice Denied:" 5 times indigenous people were wrongfully convicted in Canada; The others; Connie Oakes; Donald Marshall Jr; Wilson "Willie" Nepoose; "..."Indigenous people are not only more vulnerable to being wrongfully convicted, but also less likely to get help after they've been wrongfully convicted," said Amanda Carling, who works with the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC) in Toronto. The AIDWYC has helped exonerate 21 innocent people, including high-profile cases involving Steven Truscott, David Milgaard, Kyle Unger, Guy Paul Morin and Thomas Sophonow. According to Carling, the group is currently reviewing the cases of 80 people who claim they have been wrongly convicted. Of those, she said approximately 20 applicants have self-identified as First Nations. Carling — who is Métis — said the reasons Indigenous people are vulnerable to wrongful convictions include language barriers, mistrust of the legal system — which means Indigenous people don't seek help or don't know how — and institutional racism. She also says that alleged offenders with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) might simply confess to a crime without fully understanding what it means, a concern echoed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. "After you've been wrongfully convicted of something, why would you turn to a system that you already don't trust and look for a remedy from that system?" she said. "If in fact you even know that it's possible to get a remedy." (Must Read. HL);


STORY: ""Justice Denied": 5 times indigenous people were wrongfully convicted in Canada;  wrongfully convicted in Canada," by reporter Tim Fontaine, published by CBC News on April 30, 2016.

SUB-HEADING:  "Indigenous people 'less likely to get help after they've been wrongfully convicted,' says lawyer."

SUB-HEADING:  "The Alberta Court of Appeal initially ordered a new trial for Connie Oakes but the Crown has since opted to stay the charges."

GIST:  William Mullins-Johnson;  "William Mullins-Johnson spent 12 years in prison after he was convicted in 1994 on evidence from disgraced pathologist Charles Smith, who suggested he had raped and strangled his niece. Mullins-Johnson was exonerated by the Ontario Court of Appeal  in October 2007 after it was determined the child died from natural causes. Tammy Marquardt: An Ontario court overturned Tammy Marquardt's second-degree murder conviction in the death of her son Kenneth. (CBC) ​Tammy Marquardt spent 13 years in prison after she was convicted of second-degree murder in the death of her two-year-old son Kenneth Wynne in 1995. But the conviction was based on evidence from disgraced pathologist Charles Smith, who has since been stripped of his medical licence for professional misconduct and incompetence. Connie Oakes;  A Cree woman from Alberta is free after a years-long ordeal that saw her tried and convicted of murder, in what the court called a miscarriage of justice.  But the case of Connie Oakes is far from uncommon among Indigenous people, says an advocate for the wrongly accused. "Indigenous people are not only more vulnerable to being wrongfully convicted, but also less likely to get help after they've been wrongfully convicted," said Amanda Carling, who works with the Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC) in Toronto. The AIDWYC has helped exonerate 21 innocent people, including high-profile cases involving Steven Truscott, David Milgaard, Kyle Unger, Guy Paul Morin and Thomas Sophonow. According to Carling, the group is currently reviewing the cases of 80 people who claim they have been wrongly convicted. Of those, she said approximately 20 applicants have self-identified as First Nations.  Carling — who is Métis — said the reasons Indigenous people are vulnerable to wrongful convictions include language barriers, mistrust of the legal system — which means Indigenous people don't seek help or don't know how — and institutional racism. She also says that alleged offenders with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD) might simply confess to a crime without fully understanding what it means, a concern echoed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. "After you've been wrongfully convicted of something, why would you turn to a system that you already don't trust and look for a remedy from that system?" she said. "If in fact you even know that it's possible to get a remedy." Still, while Carling says there are no hard figures for just how many Indigenous people have been wrongfully convicted or charged here are four other cases where the courts got it wrong: Donald Marshall Jr:  A Mi'kmaq man from Nova Scotia, Marshall was at the centre of one of Canada's most high-profile wrongful conviction cases. In 1971, Marshall received a life sentence for a murder that was later determined he had not committed.
He served 11 years in prison before he was exonerated by a royal commission in 1990 that determined systemic racism had contributed to his wrongful imprisonment.  "Wilson "Willie" Nepoose:  A member of the Samson Cree Nation, Alta., Nepoose was convicted of second-degree murder in the death of Rose Marie Desjarlais in 1987. Nepoose spent four years in a federal prison before evidence surfaced that proved he wasn't even in the same city when the murder took place. According to Windspeaker News, Nepoose was found dead in 1998 of an apparent suicide. He was preparing to launch a civil suit against Corrections Canada and the RCMP for his wrongful conviction."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/aboriginal/justice-denied-5-times-indigenous-people-wrongfully-convicted-canada-1.3559644

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Satanic ritual sexual abuse of children prosecutions: Radley Balko links them with a wave of panic over the Dungeons and Dragon's game in the 1980's..."But it was part of a larger fear of and obsession with “Satanism” and the occult that began in the 1970s, then flourished in the 1980s and early 1990s. (This Time cover story from 1972 was one of the earliest and most amusing clips from the media’s contribution to the panic.) That larger trend did have some pretty devastating fallout, particularly within the criminal justice system. It spurred dozens, perhaps hundreds, of wrongful prosecutions of adults for alleged Satanic ritual sex abuse of children that never occurred. (For a relic from that era, check out this incredible Chicago Tribune report.) Fear of the occult was behind the prosecution of the West Memphis Three and played into the death sentence given to Cameron Todd Willingham, a man most now believe was innocent." (Must Read. HL);


POST: The 'D and D' panic, by Radley Balko, published on his website 'The Watch' by the Washington Post, on April 27, 2016. (Radley Balko blogs about criminal justice, the drug war and civil liberties for The Washington Post. He is the author of the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces.")


GIST: "Great short video from Retro Report on the great Dungeons & Dragons panic of the 1980s. The direct consequences of this particular moral panic weren’t as severe as some others. It mostly involved efforts to ban the game and, of course, led to ostracizing the kids who played it. (Not a small thing, given that, as the video points out, these kids tended not to fit in to begin with.) But it was part of a larger fear of and obsession with “Satanism” and the occult that began in the 1970s, then flourished in the 1980s and early 1990s. (This Time cover story from 1972 was one of the earliest and most amusing clips from the media’s contribution to the panic.) That larger trend did have some pretty devastating fallout, particularly within the criminal justice system. It spurred dozens, perhaps hundreds, of wrongful prosecutions of adults for alleged Satanic ritual sex abuse of children that never occurred. (For a relic from that era, check out this incredible Chicago Tribune report.) Fear of the occult was behind the prosecution of the West Memphis Three and played into the death sentence given to Cameron Todd Willingham, a man most now believe was innocent."

 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2016/04/27/the-dd-panic/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Friday, April 29, 2016

Bulletin: Lonnie Franklin Jr. California; Ballistics; Prosecution's bullet matching techniques come under fire by 'grim reaper' defence witness. "The expert said his analysis confirmed that the alleged killer's only verified survivor Enietra Washington had been shot with the same .25 caliber handgun as Wright. But on Tuesday, defense witness David Lamagna said he believed that law enforcement's methods are unreliable. Examiners relied on two-dimensional comparison microscopes to analyze the unique tool marks left on bullets. But Lamagna, a forensic scientist and engineer, said he only trusts advanced technologies like 3-D mapping or electron microscopes that allow examiners to look at objects in finer detail. Amster asked Lamagna if he believed the method used by law enforcement creates conclusions that leave room for doubt. "Yes. I believe it's mostly subjective in nature at this point," Lamagna said. He noted that there had not been enough studies done to test the reliability of the tool-mark analysis and said that a forensic ballistics organization, the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners, has "no mathematical standards" for deciding a match Law enforcement lacks specific protocols, he added. Lamagna said he had traveled to different police departments around the nation and seen varied standards. "I see different examiners doing their own thing."


 "In the trial of the accused Grim Sleeper serial killer, the prosecution has repeatedly pointed jurors to evidence matching bullets in seven victims with the same .25-caliber semiautomatic handgun. But as the case edges closer to a conclusion after beginning more than two months ago, defendant Lonnie Franklin Jr.'s attorney Seymour Amster has cast doubt on the DNA evidence used to charge his client as well as firearm examiners' methods for matching bullets. County prosecutors called several firearms experts to the stand in Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Kathleen Kennedy's courtroom before resting their case in March. LAPD firearms expert Daniel Rubin testified that examiners can match bullets to a gun by analyzing tool marks on a bullet after a round is fired.   Because the machine tools used to manufacture firearms leave unique marks on the barrel, experts can determine if bullets were fired from the same gun, the jury has heard. Rubin told jurors that he matched bullets found in victims Debra Jackson, Henrietta Wright, Barbara Ware, Bernita Sparks, Mary Lowe and Alicia Alexander to the same semiautomatic handgun.  The expert said his analysis confirmed that the alleged killer's only verified survivor Enietra Washington had been shot with the same .25 caliber handgun as Wright. But on Tuesday, defense witness David Lamagna said he believed that law enforcement's methods are unreliable. Examiners relied on two-dimensional comparison microscopes to analyze the unique tool marks left on bullets. But Lamagna, a forensic scientist and engineer, said he only trusts advanced technologies like 3-D mapping or electron microscopes that allow examiners to look at objects in finer detail. Amster asked Lamagna if he believed the method used by law enforcement creates conclusions that leave room for doubt. "Yes. I believe it's mostly subjective in nature at this point," Lamagna said.  He noted that there had not been enough studies done to test the reliability of the tool-mark analysis and said that a forensic ballistics organization, the Association of Firearm and Tool Mark Examiners, has "no mathematical standards" for deciding a match  Law enforcement lacks specific protocols, he added.  Lamagna said he had traveled to different police departments around the nation and seen varied standards. "I see different examiners doing their own thing," Lamagna testified. Lamagna is the owner of American Forensic Technologies, which according to his LinkedIn page provides "forensic review and analysis of evidence in civil and criminal cases" as well as field investigations.  Franklin is accused of killing vulnerable young black women over a period that began in the mid-1980s. His victims were often sex workers, and prosecutors say he prowled the streets during the height of the crack cocaine epidemic — killing seven women during a period that ended in 1988.  Another four murders between 2002 until 2007 have been linked to the Grim Sleeper, who earned the name because of a possible fallow period during the late 1980s and 1990s — though it's believed that the alleged serial killer may have killed many more women." (Thanks to CSIDDS (Forensics in Focus) for bringing this story to our attention.)
 https://csidds.com/2016/04/29/back-and-forth-in-court-about-raising-technical-instrumentation-ballistic-standards/
http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/04/26/grim-sleeper-defense-picks-holes-in-bullet-analysis.htm

Bulletin: Carla Hughes: Mississippi: Discredited forensic pathologist Dr. Steven Hayne; Supporters are rallying behind this ex-teacher convicted of capital murder in the 2006 death of Avis Banks and her unborn child in a highly publicized case. through establishment of a 'GoGetFunding" account; The supporters site the role played in the case by forensic pathologist Dr. Steven Hayne who has fallen into disfavour in recent years. "Hayne, who lacks national board certification in forensic pathology, for many years performed most of the autopsies in the state. He drew criticism for conducting about 1,500 autopsies a year, and in 2008 the state dropped him from its list of recommended pathologists. The Mississippi Supreme Court has overturned convictions or ordered a new trial in some cases in which he testified." The Clarion Ledger;

"A GoGetFunding  account has been established for Carla Hughes, Hughes was sentenced in 2009 in Madison County Circuit Court to life in prison without parole on two counts of capital murder in the Nov. 29, 2006, slaying of Avis Banks, who was pregnant. The case generated national publicity and has been featured on national true crime shows, including "Snapped" and "Fatal Attraction." The trial was also covered by the former CourtTV. Prosecutors say Hughes, now 34, killed Banks so she could have Banks' fiance, Keyon Pittman. Hughes and Pittman were romantically involved while both were teachers at Chastain Middle School in Jackson. Banks was killed in the garage of the Ridgeland home she shared with Pittman after coming home from work. Pittman wasn't charged in the case. The  account has raised $360, so far. It was established by Hughes' mother, Lynda Hughes, who says on the site her daughter was framed, tried and convicted of capital murder. "Carla is also a victim of Dr. Steven Hayne's testimony," the site says. Also, it says Hayne was the subject of The Innocence Project's formal records request "to determine how much Hayne used state labs for autopsy misconduct." Hayne, a forensic pathologist, testified for the prosecution in Hughes' case. Hayne testified Banks was shot four times, including once in her head, and stabbed at least three times, but Hayne said he believes Banks already was dead when she was stabbed. Hayne also testified in the penalty phase of the case to decide if Hughes would get a death sentence or life in prison without parole. During the penalty phase, Hayne testified Banks would have been conscious during at least two gunshot wounds for 15 to 20 minutes, except for the last one when she was shot in the back of the head. He testified she probably was shot in the thigh first, then the left buttocks, the chest and then in the head. He testified she was shot twice when she was already down. Hayne, who lacks national board certification in forensic pathology, for many years performed most of the autopsies in the state. He drew criticism for conducting about 1,500 autopsies a year, and in 2008 the state dropped him from its list of recommended pathologists. The Mississippi Supreme Court has overturned convictions or ordered a new trial in some cases in which he testified."
http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2016/04/27/gofund-account-convicted-ex-teacher-carla-hughes/83589426/

Thursday, April 28, 2016

Bulletin: Kamal Shah: New Jersey: Development: A judge has been assigned all cases involving this state lab technician accused of faking a test. "Shah, who worked at the lab for 10 years, was the primary lab technician in 7,827 drug cases, according to the state Attorney General’s office. He also reviewed nearly 2,600 lab reports prepared by his colleagues. Defense attorneys have argued that Shah’s alleged misconduct casts doubt on all those cases, and have asked courts to revisit the convictions and pending charges against drug defendants."


"The state Supreme Court has assigned a Bergen County Superior Court judge as a special master to handle matters relating to a State Police lab technician who was recently suspended for faking a drug test result. Prosecutors and defense lawyers on Tuesday welcomed the assignment, saying it would help streamline multiple cases and that it underscores the seriousness of the effect of the lab tech’s alleged behavior. Lawyers in Bergen, Passaic and other counties have been filing motions to have charges dismissed or convictions thrown out in cases in which the lab tech, Kamal Shah, conducted the drug tests that led to the criminal conviction of defendants. The April 25 order by the state’s highest court assigns such matters to be heard before Judge Edward Jerejian in Superior Court in Hackensack.........Shah retired from his job in January and lab officials have said he is under a criminal investigation. Shah, who worked as a forensic scientist at the Little Falls lab, was removed from work in December and was later suspended after a colleague observed him “dry-labbing” a drug sample, or writing a test result without actually conducting the test. The state Attorney General’s Office later informed all county prosecutors about Shah’s removal and instructed them to contact all defense attorneys in cases in which Shah’s lab reports were used as evidence. Drug samples seized at crime scenes are submitted to a forensic lab and are tested to make sure that the samples are indeed illegal drugs. Forensic scientists like Shah then prepare lab reports which are later used by prosecutors as evidence against narcotics defendants. A report prepared by a forensic scientist is reviewed and signed off by at least two of his or her colleagues. Shah, who worked at the lab for 10 years, was the primary lab technician in 7,827 drug cases, according to the state Attorney General’s office. He also reviewed nearly 2,600 lab reports prepared by his colleagues. Defense attorneys have argued that Shah’s alleged misconduct casts doubt on all those cases, and have asked courts to revisit the convictions and pending charges against drug defendants."
http://www.northjersey.com/news/bergen-county-judge-assigned-all-cases-involving-state-lab-tech-accused-of-faking-a-test-1.1553034

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Joseph Buffey: West Virginia: New trial date set following withdrawal of guilty pleas related to a sexual assault/ robbery case from 2001 resulting in a sentence to 70 years in prison: " Buffey was allowed to withdraw guilty pleas back in February on two counts of first-degree sexual assault and one count of first-degree robbery after a state Supreme Court ruling. He originally pled guilty to two counts of first-degree sexual assault and one count of first-degree robbery as part of a deal with the state and was sentenced to 70 years in prison, starting in 2002. However, Buffey later learned of DNA evidence —which was later used to convict another man who lived near the elderly victim– was available during the plea bargaining phase but not brought to his attention by the state because they were already in that phase. With help of the the New York-based Innocence Project and Morgantown attorney Al Karlin, Buffey mounted a successful appeal on the grounds his right to exculpatory evidence was violated."

"A new trial date has been tentatively set for Joseph Buffey, the Harrison County man permitted late last year to withdraw guilty pleas related to a sexual assault/ robbery case from 2001. Judge John Lewis Marks, who took over the case last month, scheduled for arguments to begin on October 11.
Attorneys representing Buffey also filed a motion during Tuesday’s status conference requesting modification to the terms of his release on home confinement......... After serving 14 years of his sentence, he was released on bond with the condition of electronically-monitored home confinement. Buffey now faces that charges he withdrew pleas to, plus additional charges related to a separate robbery which were dropped as part of the deal with the state. The next appearance in court for Buffey will be for the pretrial hearing scheduled for July 15 after Judge Marks worked Tuesday morning with attorneys to establish a timeline."
http://wvmetronews.com/2016/04/26/date-set-for-new-trial-of-joseph-buffey/

Bulletin: Trudy Munoz; Virginia: Innocence Project at the University of Virginia has taken on her shaken baby syndrome case: "In 2009, a Virginia woman who operated a daycare center in Fairfax was sent to prison for 12 and a half years. An infant in her care had died, and she was able to revive him, but doctors who examined the child found three things: blood under his skin, bleeding inside the eyes and swelling of the brain. Those symptoms have – for years – prompted a diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome. Now, however, medical experts say those things could also be caused by disease. “Genetic abnormalities, clotting disorders, some of the retinal hemorrhaging is even caused by efforts to resuscitate a child,” says Deirdre Enright, Director of the Innocence Project at the University of Virginia. She fears doctors are often ignoring things that could lead to another diagnosis. “Blood work that looks unusual or the presence of an infection is ignored by doctors in favor of, ‘We have these three things. We’re calling this trauma.’” And she’s working to free Trudy Munoz, the woman who ran the daycare center."


"In 2009, a Virginia woman who operated a daycare center in Fairfax was sent to prison for 12 and a half years.  An infant in her care had died, and she was able to revive him, but doctors who examined the child found three things: blood under his skin, bleeding inside the eyes and swelling of the brain.  Those symptoms have – for years – prompted a diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome. Now, however, medical experts say those things could also be caused by disease. “Genetic abnormalities, clotting disorders, some of the retinal hemorrhaging is even caused by efforts to resuscitate a child,” says  Deirdre Enright, Director of the Innocence Project at the University of Virginia.  She fears doctors are often ignoring things that could lead to another diagnosis.  “Blood work that looks unusual or the presence of an infection is ignored by doctors in favor of, ‘We have these three things.  We’re calling this trauma.’”   And she’s working to free Trudy Munoz, the woman who ran the daycare center. “You know it was licensed, it was meticulous.  The other people who went there, had their children there for years said she was fantastic, very patient, college educated, tiny – there was an expert who testified at her trial that she couldn’t possible have shaken the baby to the extent that would cause these symptoms.”  .........So far, higher courts have refused to hear an appeal, so the Innocence Project will ask the governor for clemency.  In the mean time, it’s hosting a preview of the new film Syndrome – about wrongful convictions based on an erroneous diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome.  The fundraiser takes place April 26th at 6 in UVA Law School’s Caplin Auditorium." (Thanks to the Wrongful Convictions Blog for drawing our attention to this case.)
http://wvtf.org/post/lawyers-challenge-evidence-shaken-baby-syndrome#stream/0

See 'The Evidence Professor Blog': Editor: Colin Miller; Univ. of South Carolina School of Law; (At the link below);  "Defense attorneys had argued that Trudy E. Munoz Rueda had not shaken the baby and that the concept of "shaken baby syndrome" was "junk science" that has not been proven by scientific evidence. The lawyers on both sides of the courtroom launched a battle of national experts on the issue, with the jury taking only five hours to side with those who say it is certainly possible to severely injure an infant merely by shaking the child. But are those experts right? The UVA Innocence Project, which was featured on the Serial Podcast, has taken on the case. “Genetic abnormalities, clotting disorders, some of the retinal hemorrhaging is even caused by efforts to resuscitate a child,” says  Deirdre Enright, Director of the Innocence Project at the University of Virginia.  She fears doctors are often ignoring things that could lead to another diagnosis. “Blood work that looks unusual or the presence of an infection is ignored by doctors in favor of, ‘We have these three things.  We’re calling this trauma.’” Pediatric neuroradiologist Patrick Barnes, who used to testify for the prosecution in baby shaking cases, agrees.  Barnes, a professor at the Stanford University School of Medicine, looked at scans of the baby's head at the request of defense attorneys and came to a different conclusion: The baby had likely suffered from an infection that caused blood clots in the brain, leading to a series of strokes. "All of the treating physicians simply assumed trauma and stopped looking for alternative explanations," Barnes wrote in a 2012 affidavit. "That is not sound science and cannot be the basis of a reliable prosecution."  Barnes is not alone.  Other doctors have also stepped forward to defend parents and caregivers, including George Nichols, the former state medical examiner of Kentucky, who made a surprising offer at a meeting for public defenders shortly after he retired in 1997. "I said if they had a case in which I had testified that somebody had died as a result of Shaken Baby Syndrome alone, that they were to contact me and that I would now testify for a reversal," Nichols said. "Shaken Baby Syndrome is a belief system rather than an exercise in modern-day science.. Muñoz Rueda's fate will soon be in the hands of the Governor of Virginia, with the UVA Innocence Project planning to ask him for clemency."
 tp://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2016/04/the-case-of-tracymu%C3%B1oz-rueda-is-a-tragic-one-no-matter-how-you-slice-it-munoz-ran-a-daycare-in-fairfax-virginia-at-a-wid.html


The Hillsborough Inquest verdict: SB Nation concludes that The Hillsborough inquest verdicts mark the beginning of justice for the 96; " "It's taken the British justice system 27 years, one week and four days to come up with an answer. It's required two inquests, the first hideously botched; a formal inquiry; a number of unsuccessful appeals to various courts; a subsequent Independent Panel; a long-running and remarkable justice campaign; much admirable investigative journalism; and the peeling back of years and years of political and institutional obfuscation and cover up. But the families of those who died at Hillsborough finally know how the 96 lost their lives: They were unlawfully killed by those who were obliged to ensure their safety." SB Nation;


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: A lesson of the first inquest is that  the truth of what  actually occurred -  as contrasted with the fabric of lies woven by police, politicians, some media and others -  was far too  great to be buried by officialdom; Then, when the government had no choice but to hold a second inquest,   the truth - ugly and disturbing as it might be - poured out.  The deceased, their families and the public  deserved nothing less.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

STORY: "The Hillsborough inquest verdicts mark the beginning of justice for the 96," by Andi Thomas, published by SB Nation on April 26, 2016.

SUB-HEADING:  "Hillsborough was a carefully orchestrated cover up, and now the official record reflects that the Liverpool fans who died in the disaster were unlawfully killed. But the families of the victims don't have justice yet."

GIST: "It's taken the British justice system 27 years, one week and four days to come up with an answer. It's required two inquests, the first hideously botched; a formal inquiry; a number of unsuccessful appeals to various courts; a subsequent Independent Panel; a long-running and remarkable justice campaign; much admirable investigative journalism; and the peeling back of years and years of political and institutional obfuscation and cover up. But the families of those who died at Hillsborough finally know how the 96 lost their lives: They were unlawfully killed by those who were obliged to ensure their safety. This finding is not in itself a criminal conviction; inquests determine the legal facts surrounding deaths, but do not determine criminal guilt. But it is an assertion by this jury that they believe beyond all reasonable doubt that the killings amounted to breach of criminal law. In this case, the jury were told that they would have to be "sure that David Duckenfield, the match commander, was responsible for the manslaughter by gross negligence of those 96 people." They were directed to consider his "conduct" as well as his "responsibility." Seven to two, they were sure. The first inquest, consistently criticised by campaigners and journalists, did not consider any evidence beyond a cut-off point of 3:15 p.m. that afternoon, nine minutes after the game was stopped and the fans began to enter the pitch. It was composed of a series of mini-inquests in which police officers read out short accounts and no witnesses were called. And it returned a blanket verdict of "accidental death;" a finding that sat on the books until 2012 despite witness testimony that some victims had been alive and conscious as late as 4 p.m., and despite repeated and consistent complaints that evidence was misrepresented or overlooked. This second inquest has concluded that 95 of the 96 victims died, or could have died, after that 3:15 p.m. cut-off point. It has exposed police officers and other officials to cross-examination, in the course of which Duckenfield accepted responsibility for the deaths, acknowledged that he was inadequately experienced to oversee the operation and admitted that he lied about his decision to open the exit gate and admit hundreds of fans into the already overcrowded central pens of the terrace. And it has replaced that finding of accidental death with this of unlawful killing. This finding is important not just because it finally answers the question of how. It is important because it finally drags the British institutional record into line with what was known by many within and without football at the time and has only become more obvious since. It is another crack in what was for years an almost-united front of dehumanising contempt for ordinary people from the political, judicial and policing institutions of Britain, along with those elements in the media that cravenly backed them. And it forces those who would still deny the obvious to either finally retract, or admit that they don't actually care what happened and they just want to get on with noisily hating one or more of the following: people from Liverpool; people from the North; people from the working class; people who like football; people. It is, also, a demonstration of the power of grass-roots campaigning and persistence and sheer bloody-minded not-backing-down in the face of said indifference and contempt. Some have attempted to suggest that today's outcome should restore faith in the British justice system. It should not; justice delayed is always justice denied, and this outcome had to be clawed out of a reluctant state. Instead, it should bolster our faith that justice can sometimes be achieved despite the best efforts of exceptionally powerful people and bodies who have an interest in seeing it frustrated. That may be significantly less comforting, but we'll have to make do. So, this inquest outcome establishes that the Hillsborough families were right. What comes next is the process of discovering exactly how wrong everybody else was.".........The idea of closure is a hopeless one in cases like this, where the shocks and scars are borne by so many different people in so many different ways. For some this will be a glorious moment of blessed relief and vindication, for others an irrelevance in a world long broken. But Hillsborough has long persisted as a snarl of unanswered questions at the heart of British football and British social history, and now we have one of the most important and fundamental answers. They were unlawfully killed by those who were obliged to ensure their safety."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.sbnation.com/soccer/2016/4/26/11510024/hillsborough-inquest-verdicts-cover-up-liverpool-justice-for-the-96

See related story on Stefan Popper -  the discredited Hillsborough coroner who conducted the notorious  later quashed - first inquest at the link below; (Discredited Hillsborough coroner Stefan Popper under investigation - but has died - Liverpool Echo)..."The Independent Police Complaints Commission today confirmed “research continues on whether any form of influence was placed upon coroner Dr Stefan Popper as result of the relationship between him and West Midlands Police”.
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/discredited-hillsborough-coroner-stefan-popper-11246522

See Wikipedia account of the first inquest at the link below: "Inquests into the deaths, commencing later in 1989, proved controversial. South Yorkshire coroner Stefan Popper limited the main inquest to events up to 3:15 pm on the day of the disaster – nine minutes after the match was halted and the crowd spilled onto the pitch. Popper said this was because the victims were either dead, or brain dead, by 3:15 pm. The decision angered the families, many of whom felt the inquest was unable to consider the response of the police and other emergency services after that time.[141] The inquest returned a verdict of accidental death on 26 March 1991, much to the dismay of the bereaved families, who had been hoping for a verdict of unlawful killing or an open verdict, and for manslaughter charges to be brought against the officers who had been present at the disaster. Popper's decision was subsequently endorsed by the Divisional Court who considered it to have been justified in the light of the medical evidence available to him.[142] Relatives later failed to have the inquest reopened to allow more scrutiny of police actions and closer examination of the circumstances of individual cases. Anne Williams, who lost her 15-year-old son, Kevin, appealed to the European Court of Human Rights, on the strength of witness statements that her son showed signs of life at 4:00 pm. Her case was rejected in March 2009.[143] On 19 April 2009, the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced she had requested secret files concerning the disaster should be made public.[144] On 8 March 2011 the Hillsborough Independent Panel announced it would examine previously hidden documents to determine what took place after the 3:15 pm cutoff imposed during the inquest in 1991. A HIP spokesman said: "We have a wide remit to analyse all documents relating to the context, circumstances and consequences of the tragedy and its aftermath."[145] A governmental e-petition attracted over 139,000 signatories on 17 October 2011,[146] and parliament agreed to debate the full release of cabinet documents relating to the disaster to the public.[147] During a debate in the House of Commons, the Labour MP for Liverpool Walton, Steve Rotheram, read out a list of the victims and, as a result, the names were entered into Hansard – the official publication of printed scripts of all House of Commons debates.[148][149]Following an application by the Attorney-General, in December 2012 the High Court quashed the verdicts in the original inquests and ordered fresh inquests to be held."

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillsborough_disaster

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

David Szach; South Australia; Author Tom Mann's monumental book 'Body in the Freezer': A case which involves the assassination of a high profile criminal lawyer, the alleged wrongful conviction of his young partner for the murder and a background of drugs, sex and the homophobia which was undoubtedly part of the reaction to gay relationships in the 1970s. As reviewer Bob Moles notes: "Remarkably, the pathologist who is assigned to the case subsequently claims to be able to determine a reasonably precise time of death, which just happens to coincide with a witness who saw Stevenson’s young boyfriend at the premises around that time. As the prosecutor said, ‘the objective and scientific evidence means that he was dead by 6.40, and the accused was there.’ If true, there can be only one explanation. The jury accepted that explanation and convicted David Szach of the murder. However, once Tom Mann begins to set out the detailed evidence surrounding the case, the clarity and confidence in the verdict cannot be maintained. It is now clear that the forensic evidence relating to the time of death was unreliable. It is also clear that the person who gave that evidence, Dr Colin Manock, has been discredited. His evidence in the case of Henry Keogh was recently determined by the Court of Appeal to amount to no more than unwarranted and prejudicial speculation."..." I would encourage any journalist, or other interested people, who will be covering or following the appeal to obtain a copy of Mann’s book."..."Having read Tom Mann’s book, I would be very surprised if it is not determined that Mr Szach has been the victim of a ‘substantial miscarriage of justice’. Hopefully, that will re-awaken some desire on the part of the police in South Australia to identify and apprehend those who were truly responsible for this horrific and audacious crime."


REVIEW: "Body in the Freezer," by Tom Mann, as reviewed by Dr. Bob  Moles for the Civil Liberties Australia (CLA) on January 13, 2016. (Dr Bob Moles ACII (UK) LLB (Hons) (Belfast), PhD (Edinburgh), Networked Knowledge, was previously Associate Professor in Law at Adelaide University, Senior Lecturer in Law at the Australian National University and Lecturer in Law and Jurisprudence at Queen’s University, Belfast.  Dr Moles was prime mover in the campaign which produced the new ‘Right To Appeal’ law in South Australia in 2013 which is permitting the new appeals shining light into the dark crevises of a state’s ‘justice’ system gone feral.)

SUB-HEADING: "Body in the Freezer, Tom Mann: David Szach stayed locked up for murder, refusing to admit guilt. Now, 40 years later, he still fights to secure justice."

GIST:  "This is the second book by Tom Mann on serious wrongful convictions in South Australia. The first was the story of Edward Splatt, convicted of murder and subsequently granted a pardon after a Royal Commission found that all of the forensic evidence in the case was substantially flawed. In this book, Mann deals with an even more intriguing case. It involves the assassination of a high profile criminal lawyer, and the alleged wrongful conviction of his young partner for the murder.
It is set against a background of drugs, sex and the homophobia which was undoubtedly part of the reaction to gay relationships in the 1970s. Adelaide was the town in which a young law lecturer had been drowned a few years earlier after he was thrown into the river near the law faculty at which he worked. Although it was thought that police officers had been involved in the incident, subsequent attempts to convict them were unsuccessful. So, one day in 1979, Derrance Stevenson failed to turn up to court. The police are asked to investigate and a short time later they find his body in the freezer at his home-office. He had been killed by a single shot to the back of the head. It had all the signs of a professional hit. Cold, calculated…and with everything done to confuse the investigation. Remarkably, the pathologist who is assigned to the case subsequently claims to be able to determine a reasonably precise time of death, which just happens to coincide with a witness who saw Stevenson’s young boyfriend at the premises around that time. As the prosecutor said, ‘the objective and scientific evidence means that he was dead by 6.40, and the accused was there.’ If true, there can be only one explanation. The jury accepted that explanation and convicted David Szach of the murder. However, once Tom Mann begins to set out the detailed evidence surrounding the case, the clarity and confidence in the verdict cannot be maintained. It is now clear that the forensic evidence relating to the time of death was unreliable. It is also clear that the person who gave that evidence, Dr Colin Manock, has been discredited. His evidence in the case of Henry Keogh was recently determined by the Court of Appeal to amount to no more than unwarranted and prejudicial speculation. David Szach has professed his innocence in this matter for over 35 years. He refused to apply for parole. Eventually the government of South Australia passed special legislation to allow the head of the parole board to make the application on his behalf. It was hardly surprising then that the board granted his parole and David was unceremoniously bundled out of the Adelaide prison in an attempt to avoid further embarrassment. The timing of the publication of this book has been well-planned. It comes after South Australia introduced new laws in 2013 to grant a person claiming to have been wrongly convicted a right of direct access to the courts for a further appeal. When Szach applied for legal aid to exercise that right, he was refused. It seems that such funding is only available for those at risk of going to prison. David had long since finished his sentence. Determined to find justice: However, David is nothing if not determined. Despite the fact that he has been suffering from motor-neurone disease, he has been a skilled and persistent advocate in his own cause. He has collated materials, and worked with media outlets in his attempt to inform the public, not just of his own case but of the serious systemic errors which have occurred in the criminal justice system in South Australia. Anyone reading this book by Tom Mann will marvel that it has not as yet been made into a feature film. Perhaps, after the next few months, it will be. David has now secured the assistance of Australia’s largest class-action law firm – Maurice Blackburn – to present his case for a further appeal. I would encourage any journalist, or other interested people, who will be covering or following the appeal to obtain a copy of Mann’s book. It will provide essential reading for what is to come.  The Crown’s case is that David, with no history of violence or criminality of any description, spontaneously and without reason decided to murder the one person who had shown him some love and kindness..........The history of wrongful convictions is littered with cases involving tunnel vision. Police and prosecutors are sometimes keen to reassure the public that things are under control, especially when particularly horrific murders have occurred. Sometimes, the most obvious suspect turns out to be the wrong suspect. It is interesting to note that the prosecutor in the Szach case, many years later, sat as the judge in the trial of Lloyd Rayney, the barrister in Western Australia accused of the murder of his wife. The judge said that a careful analysis of the time line of the known occurrences on the evening Mrs Rayney died was not consistent with the Crown case. In Tom Mann’s analysis of the Stevenson case, he makes out a very similar argument concerning the time line of the various actions which had taken place on the evening Stevenson was killed. In retrospect, it seems that Szach, without any training, would have had to combine the skills of a trained assassin, a master of disguise and a highly skilled rally driver to achieve what on Mann’s view would still have been impossible. Fortunately for us, the deficiencies in this case will not be left hanging for much longer. Following hard on the 2015-16 heels of the overturning of the Keogh conviction after 20 years imprisonment will be the further appeals in another two notorious South Australian cases: Frits Van Beelen convicted of the murder of a young girl in the early 1970s, and Derek Bromley, convicted in 1984 of the murder of a young man by throwing him into the River Torrens. This was the same river where law lecturer Dr George Duncan had been killed by being thrown in some 12 years earlier. Along with those cases will be the appeal for David Szach. Having read Tom Mann’s book, I would be very surprised if it is not determined that Mr Szach has been the victim of a ‘substantial miscarriage of justice’. Hopefully, that will re-awaken some desire on the part of the police in South Australia to identify and apprehend those who were truly responsible for this horrific and audacious crime." Body in the Freezer: the case of David Szach, by Tom Mann, Griffin Press (2015)
ISBN: 978-0-9944162-0-9 – $25. Available from http://booksupport.net.au/ – or contact tom.mann1@bigpond.com   $25, including postage, direct from the author.

The entire review can be found at:


http://www.cla.asn.au/News/disguised-assassin-rallies-for-his-innocence/


PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;
 
Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Bulletin: Melissa Calusinski: Illinois: judge undertakes to review her retrial motions..."Calusinski's attorneys are looking to have her conviction thrown out, claiming that evidence discovered since her trial - including certain x-rays - indicates the child had pre-existing head injuries........."Calusinski's family has always maintained her innocence and said Tuesday's ruling is a step in the right direction." ...abc7.


"A judge ruled Tuesday that he will read through hundreds of pages of documents requesting a retrial for a former teacher's aide who was convicted of killing a toddler by throwing the child to the ground. Mellissa Calusinski is currently serving a 31-year sentence for throwing a 16-month-old boy to the floor at a Lake County daycare in 2009. Calusinski's attorneys are looking to have her conviction thrown out, claiming that evidence discovered since her trial - including certain x-rays - indicates the child had pre-existing head injuries.........Calusinski's family has always maintained her innocence and said Tuesday's ruling is a step in the right direction.........Both sides are expected back in court for a status hearing on June 13."
http://abc7chicago.com/news/judge-to-go-over-melissa-calusinski-retrial-motions/1309252/

Bulletin: Ben Butler: UK. Ongoing trial: Letters describe couple's turbulent relationship..."The Old Bailey was shown handwritten letters and prayers seized by police at the family home in Westover Close following Ellie's death. One "letter of prayer" found inside the bedroom at the couple's home read: "Make him stop being angry, hateful and violent.".........A note entitled "Ellie's behaviour" outlined 10 points including: "lying, not doing as she's told, does not listen or pay attention, constantly answers back, argues, constantly manipulative, feel you can't trust her, acts like a child prior to her years, we feel she is aware she is doing this". BBC News;


"A couple's turbulent relationship has been revealed in letters found after their six-year-old daughter died from head injuries. Ben Butler is accused of killing Ellie Butler at their family home in Sutton, south-west London in October. A jury heard how Ellie lived in a "toxic" environment due to Mr Butler's volatile temper, while partner Jennie Gray would do anything to please him. The 36-year-old denies murder and a separate charge of child cruelty. Ellie's mother Ms Gray, 36, also denies a child cruelty charge relating to a shoulder injury. She has admitted perverting the course of justice by giving a false account of what she did on the day Ellie died. Ellie died 11 months after the couple got her back from care. She was returned to them after Mr Butler was cleared on appeal of assaulting her as a six-week-old baby. A post-mortem examination revealed she suffered skull fractures from at least two severe impacts.  The trial continues."
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-36143084

Bulletin: Melissa Calusinski: Illinois; Decisive ruling hoped for from judge today on her request for a new trial. "Calusinski is currently serving a 31-year sentence for throwing a 16-month-old child to the floor at a Lake County day care center in 2009. Her legal team is seeking to have her conviction thrown out, claiming that evidence discovered since her trial - including certain x-rays - indicates the child had pre-existing head injuries. Calusinski's family believes Tuesday's ruling will be what they have been waiting for." ABC7;


 "A former teacher's aide found guilty of killing a toddler by throwing the boy to the ground will go to court Tuesday armed with new evidence that her attorneys say proves her innocence. A Lake County judge may rule on Melissa Calusinski's request for a new trial at Tuesday's 9 a.m. hearing. Calusinski is currently serving a 31-year sentence for throwing a 16-month-old child to the floor at a Lake County day care center in 2009. Her legal team is seeking to have her conviction thrown out, claiming that evidence discovered since her trial - including certain x-rays - indicates the child had pre-existing head injuries. Calusinski's family believes Tuesday's ruling will be what they have been waiting for."
http://abc7chicago.com/news/judge-may-rule-on-new-trial-request-in-calusinski-case/1309252/

Ben Butler: U.K. Court hears that he insisted he was the victim of a "miscarriage of justice" when police tried to talk to him about how his six-year-old daughter had died from a devastating head injury...". Pc Steve Stewart said: "I discovered them both to be hostile and unwilling to speak to police until the previous matter was known where they believed there had been a miscarriage of justice." The court heard how Butler explained he was "nervous" about talking to the authorities because of his previous experience with criminal justice. He said everything had got "twisted and turned" after Ellie suffered a bleed on the brain at six weeks old. He allegedly told officers: "Years ago Ellie had a ventouse section delivery and had a bleed on the brain at six weeks old which caused accusations. I went to court, jail, came out. "They found out it was a medical problem and a miscarriage of justice. I have nothing to hide but that's why I'm nervous. I'm currently suing the police. Everything was twisted and turned." Daily Mail Online


STORY: "Ben Butler 'hostile and aggressive' with police after death of daughter Ellie, 6" published by the Daily Mail on April 25, 2015.

GIST: "Ben Butler, 36, allegedly became "hostile" and "aggressive" towards officers and even told one to "f*** off" after little Ellie Butler was pronounced dead in hospital on the afternoon of October 28 2013. The house husband "stared accusingly" at an officer after he went about collecting the little girl's pink pyjamas for evidence and examined her body for other injuries, the court heard. And when police at St George's Hospital in Tooting tried to talk to him and his partner Jennie Gray about what happened, they were reluctant to talk, jurors were told. Pc Steve Stewart said: "I discovered them both to be hostile and unwilling to speak to police until the previous matter was known where they believed there had been a miscarriage of justice." The court heard how Butler explained he was "nervous" about talking to the authorities because of his previous experience with criminal justice. He said everything had got "twisted and turned" after Ellie suffered a bleed on the brain at six weeks old. He allegedly told officers: "Years ago Ellie had a ventouse section delivery and had a bleed on the brain at six weeks old which caused accusations. I went to court, jail, came out. "They found out it was a medical problem and a miscarriage of justice. I have nothing to hide but that's why I'm nervous. I'm currently suing the police. Everything was twisted and turned.".........Following his arrest, Butler was observed to quietly mutter to himself "I have done nothing wrong" as he was taken to a police station. Butler is on trial at the Old Bailey for allegedly murdering Ellie when he was left alone with her and another child at the house. Butler and Gray, 36, from Sutton, south west London, are also accused of child cruelty towards Ellie, who suffered a broken shoulder weeks before her death.
They deny the charges although Gray has admitted perverting the course of justice by taking part in an alleged attempt at covering up before calling 999. The court has heard how in 2007 Butler was convicted of harming Ellie when she was six weeks old, but won an appeal and got her daughter back from foster care 11 months before her death. The trial was adjourned until Tuesday."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3557695/Ben-Butler-hostile-aggressive-police-death-daughter-Ellie-6.html


PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;
 
Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Monday, April 25, 2016

Southwest of Salem: The Variety review; Film critic Nick Schager; The San Antonio Four: Anna Vasquez, Elizabeth Ramirez, Cassandra Rivera, Kristie Mayhugh; The Variety reviewer says this study of a wrongful conviction indicts hysterical homophobia in San Antonio, Texas..."Esquenazi’s film is shrewdly edited, enhancing its contentions through excerpts from official documents that highlight the flimsiness of the case against the San Antonio Four, as well as the homophobia propelling it forward. Eventually liberated from confinement, Anna, Cassandra, Elizabeth and Kristie find that the justice system continues to thwart their efforts for exoneration. In doing so, “Southwest of Salem” proves a portrait of individual tragedy, and an indictment of a system willing to let prejudice cloud its judgment — and, also, to avoid admitting its own wrongdoing."


REVIEW: Southwest of Salem, reviewed by film critic Nick Schager. Published by Variety on April 25, 2016.

SUB-HEADING:  "Reminiscent of the 'Paradise Lost' documentary series, this study of a wrongful conviction indicts hysterical homophobia in San Antonio, Texas."

GIST: "The West Memphis Three may be the most famous recent victims of satanic paranoia run amok, but the same year those teenage metalheads were convicted of murder, four women in San Antonio suffered similar wrongful arrests based largely on fears of their devilish homosexuality. Deborah S. Esquenazi’s “Southwest of Salem: The Story of the San Antonio Four” employs straightforward, intimate aesthetics to elicit intense empathy with their fight for freedom. Following a premiere at this year’s Tribeca Film Festival, this persuasive documentary appears primed to channel outrage into modest theatrical business. Esquenazi uses a standard blend of archival news clips, fuzzy home videos and newly recorded interviews (shot over a period of years) to detail the legal railroading experienced by Texas couple Anna Vasquez and Cassandra Rivera, as well as their friends Kristie Mayhugh and Elizabeth Ramirez. Hailing from homes that were alternately supportive (Anna) and intolerant (Cassandra) of their lesbianism, the women were a close-knit group, though their lives — if not their relationships — soon unraveled when, after caring for Elizabeth’s two young nieces, the quartet was accused by the children of gang-raping them. Such charges would have been catastrophic in any jurisdiction, but in conservative San Antonio, the defendants’ homosexuality was prejudicially portrayed as proof of their guilt — if not borderline demonic. Author Debbie Nathan ascribes this insanity to the era’s fanatical fear of youth-exploiting Satanism, while Esquenazi uses canny on-screen text taken from court transcripts to show how phrases like “cult-type” and “sacrificed on the altar of lust” helped imply that the women were part of a coven of gay witches. It didn’t matter that there was virtually no physical evidence to support the kids’ claims of ritualistic cruelty (apart from some dubious medical exam results), nor that Elizabeth’s brother-in-law Javier Limon had quite obviously made the entire thing up out of anger at Elizabeth for rejecting his advances (especially in favor of being with another woman). After two separate trials, Elizabeth received 37 years for her supposed crimes, and the other three were punished with decade-plus sentences. “Southwest of Salem” doesn’t need to strain to provoke indignation, so clearly innocent are its subjects — all of whom, in interviews from prison, unwaveringly proclaim that nothing happened. Despondent over their incarceration and its decimation of their families, relationships and reputations, the women are left to endure their wretched circumstances until, thanks to the efforts of a Canadian researcher who was disgusted by their case, they attract the attention of the Innocence Project of Texas. When Anna, after serving 12 years, is subsequently granted unexpected parole in 2012, their cause takes a turn for the better, and improves further when one of the supposed victims, Stephanie Limon, recants the testimony she gave as a child..........Esquenazi’s film is shrewdly edited, enhancing its contentions through excerpts from official documents that highlight the flimsiness of the case against the San Antonio Four, as well as the homophobia propelling it forward. Eventually liberated from confinement, Anna, Cassandra, Elizabeth and Kristie find that the justice system continues to thwart their efforts for exoneration. In doing so, “Southwest of Salem” proves a portrait of individual tragedy, and an indictment of a system willing to let prejudice cloud its judgment — and, also, to avoid admitting its own wrongdoing."

The entire review can be found at:

http://variety.com/2016/film/reviews/southwest-of-salem-film-review-1201759799/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;
 
Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Keith Allen Harward: Virginia; His moving in-depth interview with reporter Frank Green of the Richmond Times-Dispatch: "The principal evidence against Harward was testimony from two forensic dentists who concluded that his teeth matched bite marks left on the rape victim’s legs. One of the dentists was Dr. Lowell Levine, a pioneer in the field who had helped convict serial killer Ted Bundy and assisted in identifying the remains of Nazi war criminal Josef Mengele. “That Levine character, he was a Svengali,” Harward said. By the time Levine was done telling the jury about his background, “they were eating out of his hand,” Harward recalled. Levine, who is from New York, did not respond to requests for comment. “Bogus science, smoke and mirrors ... and it worked,” Harward said of the dentists’ testimony." (Must Read. HL);



Sunday, April 24, 2016

Dr. Waney Squier: U.K. A video of the address she delivered at the University of Oklahoma not long after she was recently thrown out of the British medical profession by the General Medical Council because she dared question the existence of the Shaken Baby Syndrome in court: "To describe her own situation, Dr. Squier tells a story about a British scientist, who, in 1972, sounded the alarm that sugar - not fat - was the greatest danger to our health. However, the scientist's findings were ridiculed and his reputation was ruined. How did the world's top nutritional scientists get it wrong for so long?" she asks. "It's an interesting story, very similar lines to shaken baby syndrome."


PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am very grateful to the University of Oklahoma for providing me with a link to the video of Dr. Squier's entire address. (The link can be found below); Dr. Squier's address was called: "Shaken Baby Syndrome: How an un-validated medical hypothesis leads to miscarriages of justice in criminal and family courts." 

The University described  Dr. Squier as: "a consultant neuropathologist to the Oxford University John Radcliffe Hospitals and honorary clinical lecturer at Oxford University (U.K.). She is a member of the British Neuropathological Society and the British Paediatric Neurology Association, and she is an elected fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Pathologists. She was among the first in the world to recognize the criminal justice implications of scientific research that cast doubt on the medical hypothesis known as Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS). Her influence has been felt around the world. She has written reports or testified as an expert witness in more than 160 cases heard in 12 countries. In addition to the Champion of Justice Award, Dr. Squier has received the Pearce Prize in Neurophysiology and the William Hey Medal."

ADDRESS: "Shaken Baby Syndrome: How an un-validated medical hypothesis leads to miscarriages of justice in criminal and family courts"  delivered by Dr. Waney Squier to the University of Oklahoma on April 11, 2016.

GIST: Dr. Squier spends the first part of her lecture educating her audience on the medical aspects of Shaken Baby Syndrome. She then proceeds to discuss her personal experience at the hands of the British Medical regulators by asking, "What happens if you challenge the mainstream view?" The answer is of course quite frightening - especially since the  tribunal which thrust her out of the medical profession described her views as 'controversial and contrary to the mainstream of current thinking.'...That's what really kicked off "the campaign to get me out of the courts," she said. Dr. Squier clearly  notes  the refusal of the British police to listen to her - or to any one else who had a contrary viewpoint on Shaken Baby Syndrome - and for the police efforts to  keep her and her colleagues out of the courts. "And one way was to report us to our  governing bodies, to report us to judicial authorities and so on." Dr. Squier  referred to two of the most high profile defence expert witnesses who now face two full Fitness to Practice hearings, noting that: "It is now inconceivable that the defence will be able to successfully deploy these experts in similar cases in the future....That's what (inaudible) the police clearly wanted to do, get rid of my defence for shaken baby cases. And I'm sad to say it - for now they have succeeded. " Asking rhetorically 'what was my misconduct?' Dr. Squier replies that, according to the General Medical Council  (GMC) it is two-fold: a refusal to accept subdural hemmorhage as being due to trauma in cases where there is no absolute evidence of trauma - and a refusal to accept shaking as a cause of intercranial injury. "So if that's my crime," she adds, "I'm afraid that's true." To describe her own situation, Dr. Squier tells a story about a British scientist, who, in 1972, sounded the alarm that sugar  - not fat - was the greatest danger to our health. However, the scientist's findings were ridiculed and his reputation was ruined. How did the world's top nutritional scientists get it wrong for so long?" she asks. ("It's an interesting story, very similar lines to shaken baby syndrome.")  In response to a question as to whether Dr. Squier intends to continue her research, she replies  that she is  "certainly not a dead horse - and  that "I'm certainly going to the field with the decision of the General Medical Council." "I can carry on working," she adds. "I would very much love to." Following Dr. Squier's address, the moderator struck deeply home with me with his description of a phenomena which made perfect sense of Dr. Squier's untenable situation to me. It's called the Galileo effect. In essence, people, like Dr. Squiers, who are way ahead of their time, come under  bitter criticism and are viewed as threats by their mediocre peers. A final word: I have transcribed the quotes as best as I could in spite of difficult sound recording conditions. So I suggest that our readers view the video and listen through their own ears, so that between us we will have gotten it right. Bravo to the University of Oklahoma  for making this important address possible - and for making it available to us.

Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

See the  granting of  the Charles Smith Blog Award to Dr. Waney Squier  and to Meryl and Susan Goldsmith of the  outstanding documentary 'The Syndrome' at the link below:  Publisher's Note: "It is always a pleasure to present a new Charles Smith Blog Award. Indeed, in the seven years that the award has been in existence, I have only presented the award to ten individuals. (Listed below); This presentation is to a neuropathologist, Dr. Waney Squier, who is facing expulsion from the medical profession in the UK for giving opinions in court which do not conform to the prevailing medical views on shaken baby syndrome -  and Meryl and Susan Goldsmith,  the two filmmakers behind the groundbreaking documentary "The Syndrome", which exposes the ugly attacks by the Syndrome's proponents against those, like Dr. Squier, who  dare question its scientific  validity. The attack on Dr. Squier is typified  by the language in a news story in the Times which ran under the damning headline, "Dr. Waney Squier: Expert's fitness to practice impaired. "Impaired" a term more commonly used for drunken drivers.  Other inflammatory words aimed at discrediting Dr. Squier in the article are "mislead courts," gave "irresponsible evidence," provided "deliberately misleading and dishonest evidence," and "her integrity cannot be relied upon." This  is the  corrosive  language of vendetta aimed at stripping away Dr. Squier's credibility in the public eye. The  General Medical Council  has shown ignorance, malice and stupidity in its blatant attempt to shut up Dr. Squier and intimidate any doctor who chooses to give expert evidence which goes against the medical profession's prevailing view. The prosecutors who prodded the General Medical Council to take discipline action against Dr. Squier  so they can no longer lose shaken baby prosecutions have also acted disgracefully. Innocence be damned.  Shame on all of them. As publisher of the Charles Smith Blog, I want to honour Dr. Squier with a place on my personal heroes list  - and presentation of the Charles Smith Blog award for her courage and fearlessness in challenging shaken baby syndrome in a rational scientific way, in spite of the threats posed by the vindictive, ignorant British medical profession, as exemplified by the General Medical Counsel, its regulatory body. I have picked Meryl and  Susan Goldsmith  as recipients of the award because of the fearlessness and courage they have displayed in making the movie "The Syndrome" - which exposes the ugly attacks  which doctors who dare challenge the science of shaken baby syndrome  have been exposed to. Asked by an interviewer for Pacific Standard Magazine whether the filmmakers had experienced a 'backlash.' one of the Goldsmith's is quoted as replying: 'Yes it's been incredibly intense. Pacific Standard Magazine did a great piece about it because we are being threatened with litigation and promoters of the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome tried to get us pulled from three film festivals! We are under heavy attack by those defending a scientific theory that is collapsing. There are an estimated 1,000 people in prison for this right now. Also, this is a major theme in our film because the doctors who are challenging the science of shaken baby syndrome have faced and continue to face outrageous attacks, which we get into in our film." Bravo to all three recipients. They are courageous and deserve our support, admiration and respect."Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog. '
 http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2016/03/the-charles-smith-blog-award-to-dr.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;
 
Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Bulletin: Hannah Overton: Texas; Dallas International Film Festival review of 'Until Proven Innocent.' - a documentary descibed as 'Both riveting and important."..."Andrew Burd died of salt poisoning at the age of four, his passing sadly leading to another tragedy.".." The Jacksons strive to create an environment of understanding and empathy, but never pander to the human element of their subject. As much as they capture the soft, poetic side of the Overton case, they also craft a stern indictment of the system that saw her jailed for being present in her own tragedy. The filmmakers carefully and meticulously detail the facts of the case, piling up enough evidence to sway even the most skeptical of viewers in direct response to the hostile environment that still follows Hannah and her family. Even entering this film convinced of her guilt, one is hard pressed to leave less than sure of her innocence."


"In 2007, Hannah Overton was convicted of capital murder by omission following the death of her adopted son, a 4-year-old boy named Andrew. She was sent to a high security prison in the midst of a media firestorm had painted her as a malicious villain who callously forced her child to consume a strange mix of water and spices as punishment for some unstated crime. Her case warranted almost no public debate: everyone was convinced that she was a monster. Everyone, that is, except for the people who knew her. Overton and her husband, Larry, were active members of Corpus Christi church who had long dreamed of having a big family. They were excellent parents to 5 children before taking Andrew in as a foster child, and there was no evidence or testimony regarding prior incidents in their home. The couple had, in fact, rushed their ailing son to the hospital in an attempt to save his life as he battled poisoning brought about by overconsumption of salt. A close inspection of the case would reveal that there was almost no grounds for Hannah’s indictment in the crime; much less a conviction resulting in a life sentence. But no one bothered to take a close look until it was too late. Populated by interviews with attorneys and journalists from across the state of Texas, Until Proven Innocent chronicles the years-long battle to exonerate Hannah Overton and reunite her with a family who waits with steadfast adoration for her return. Thanks to the dedicated efforts of Jenna and Anthony Jackson (Tomato Republic), the film plays with a personal, narrative veneer that amplifies its message about the dangers of a Criminal Justice system with overt political ties. This is Hannah’s journey, but the ramifications of it stretch far beyond her desire to return home. In cases like this, it’s natural to develop a personal bias and, subsequently, a personal reaction. That reactionary posture becomes a toxic backdrop in the fast-paced media environment of the modern era, which in turn creates a dubious setting for ordinary citizens who serve as jurors in trials like Hannah’s. Without politicizing or grand-standing, Until Proven Innocent digs its heels in against those callous, surface-level narratives and delivers a memorable and important exploration of a woman unjustly skewered by the kind of witch hunt that tends to develop in such a context. It’s a cautionary tale to some extent, but it plays like a revolutionary journey. The Jacksons strive to create an environment of understanding and empathy, but never pander to the human element of their subject. As much as they capture the soft, poetic side of the Overton case, they also craft a stern indictment of the system that saw her jailed for being present in her own tragedy. The filmmakers carefully and meticulously detail the facts of the case, piling up enough evidence to sway even the most skeptical of viewers in direct response to the hostile environment that still follows Hannah and her family. Even entering this film convinced of her guilt, one is hard pressed to leave less than sure of her innocence. "
 http://truthoncinema.com/review/until-proven-innocent-review/

See Registry of exonerations post at the link below: 'On October 2, 2006, 29-year-old Hannah Overton and her husband, Larry brought Andrew Burd, their four-year-old foster son whom they were in the process of adopting, to a hospital in Corpus Christi, Texas after the boy stopped breathing. The boy was diagnosed with a toxic salt overdose and died the following day. Ten days later, the Overtons were arrested on charges of capital murder. Prosecutors said Hannah forced the boy to drink water laced with Cajun spices as punishment for misbehaving. The prosecution claimed the boy vomited and was in and out of consciousness, but the couple waited nearly three hours before seeking medical help. Police said that one of Overton’s five biological children told investigators that Hannah watched Andrew on a security camera in a bedroom and used food and pepper as a form of punishment. A neighbor told police that Hannah called her about 3 p.m. that day and asked her to watch one of her children because Andrew was intentionally vomiting and defecating and “smearing it everywhere.” The neighbor said Hannah claimed Andrew was vomiting and defecating not because he was sick, but “to get to me.” The Overtons were granted separate trials. Hannah went to trial in Nueces County Criminal District Court in August 2007. The neighbor, Kathryn Haller, testified that “Hannah said, ‘He's not sick. He’s doing it to try to get to me.’” Haller also said that Overton told her that Andrew had thrown his feces at her earlier, that he threatened to smear it as he had the night before, and that he had vomited. Haller said Overton was afraid her younger child, Sebastian, would get into the mess Andrew had created, so she asked Haller to watch Sebastian. The county medical examiner testified that the boy died of salt poisoning and appeared to have blunt head trauma. Dr. Alexandre Rotta, who treated the boy when he was brought to the hospital, testified that Hannah told him Andrew had eaten a bowl of chili, and that when he asked for more and threw a fit she gave him a glass of water with chili powder in it. Rotta testified that tests of Andrew’s blood showed a sodium level higher than he had ever seen before. Rotta also testified that he believed the child would have survived if he had been treated before suffering cardiac arrest, although Rotta did not see the boy until many hours after he was first brought to the hospital. Overton, a former private-duty nurse, testified in her own defense and said that Andrew was “obsessed with eating” and ate more than her other children at every meal. She told the jury that his obsession was getting worse—that he was eating off of the floor, getting into the garbage, and even eating the cat’s food. Overton testified that Andrew would become upset whenever she prevented him from eating what he wanted, and that she had reported his excessive and inappropriate eating activity to the adoption supervisor, who suggested that he might have an eating disorder. She said that on the day of the incident, after feeding the children their breakfast, she fell asleep while they were watching cartoons. When she awoke, Andrew was in the pantry eating something, but she couldn’t recall what it was. She said she put him in a timeout for three minutes and Andrew threw a tantrum, defecated in his pants, and threw his feces at her—behavior that had occurred in the past. Overton said she cleaned him up and changed his clothes, but he defecated again and smeared it on the floor. Overton said she relented and reheated some leftover soup and chili mixture. She said her husband came home and they left for an appointment with her chiropractor for a treatment for a back injury. When they returned home, her husband went back to work and Andrew complained he was hungry. Overton said that after the boy began crying, she gave him more chili with Cajun seasoning added to it. When she refused his demand for a second serving, he threatened to defecate on her. Overton testified that she decided to give him a cup of water with “a couple of sprinkles” of the Cajun seasoning so that he would get the flavor she thought he wanted and would settle down. Overton said she filled a cup full of water and then poured some out because she thought it was too much. She said she put the mixture in a cup and Andrew drank it, but then demanded more chili and began to throw a fit. She told the jury that after about a 20-minute tantrum, Andrew stumbled to the floor, said he was cold, and vomited. Overton testified she thought “that he had gotten himself so worked up that he threw up.” She telephoned her husband and told him to come home, but before he arrived, Andrew began to shake, so she wrapped him in a blanket and put him into his bed with a heating pad. After consulting her intermediate EMT course book, Overton said she thought might have been “in some sort of shock,” but she was not overly concerned because this overwrought behavior had happened on prior occasions. She and her husband put Andrew into a warm bath and she used a nebulizer on him because his breathing sounded congested. They took him out of the bath and dressed him. Although his vital signs were normal, he was moaning. When his breathing became abnormal and Andrew became less responsive, the couple drove Andrew to an urgent care center. On the way, he stopped breathing and Overton began CPR. The boy vomited into her mouth and began breathing again. When they were getting out of the car in the parking lot of the urgent care center, he stopped breathing again, she said. Several family friends testified and confirmed that Andrew seem to have an insatiable appetite. A member of the Overton’s church told the jury they had to hide trashcans from the boy. On September 7, 2007, the jury convicted Overton of capital murder. The jury was polled and the jurors said their conviction as based on the failure of the couple to seek prompt medical attention—not because she had force-fed the boy the water and spice mixture. Overton was sentenced to life in prison without parole. In 2008, her husband pled no contest to a reduced charge of criminally negligent homicide and was sentenced to deferred adjudication for five years, which allowed him to care for their children. His conviction was vacated and dismissed in 2013, after he successfully completed the probationary period. Overton’s conviction and sentence were upheld on appeal. In 2011, Overton’s appellate attorney, Cynthia Orr, filed a state petition for a writ of habeas corpus seeking a new trial. The petition claimed that the prosecution had failed to disclose to Overton’s trial lawyers evidence that the salt level of Andrew’s stomach contents when he arrived at the urgent care center was 48 milliequivalents per liter. This was inconsistent with the state’s accusation that she had just force fed him sodium raising his blood sodium level to 245 milliequivalents per liter. The higher level recorded later, the defense contended, was the result of fluids and sodium medicines that were given to Andrew as part of the efforts to save his life. The defense said that when the boy was first taken to Driscoll Urgent Care Center, he was given a saline IV. Andrew was then transported to Spohn Hospital. There, Andrew went into cardiac arrest. He also was given another saline IV as well as sodium bicarbonate. Andrew was then transferred to Driscoll Children’s hospital where he was again given a saline IV and sodium bicarbonate and where Rotta saw the boy for the first time. Andrew went into cardiac arrest again and was placed on a ventilator. By the time Rotta saw Andrew, the boy had been subjected to considerable life-saving measures that included the continuous use of saline IVs, epinephrine and sodium bicarbonate. The high level of sodium detected at Spohn Hospital was not immediately reported to doctors at Driscoll Children’s Hospital, so that the Andrew was given more sodium. Moreover, the petition claimed that Overton’s trial lawyers had provided a constitutionally inadequate legal defense by failing to call an expert witness, Dr. Michael Moritz, who could have testified that the boy was not poisoned by Overton and likely had died because of accidental self-initiated consumption earlier. The witness had been interviewed under oath by the defense and prosecution during the trial, but was not called to testify and the recording of his deposition was not presented to the jury. The petition also included a letter from Anna Jimenez, who had been one of the two prosecutors at Overton’s trial. She said that she believed the lead prosecutor on the case, Sandra Eastwood, had withheld evidence favorable to Overton’s defense. In 2010, before the petition was filed, Jimenez as appointed District Attorney and had fired Eastwood for unrelated reasons. She ran for election in November 2010 and left the office after she was defeated by Mark Skurka.   “I am writing this letter because I do believe that an injustice has been done. I do not believe there was sufficient evidence to indicate that Hannah Overton intentionally killed Andrew Burd,” Jimenez wrote. “It is because I witnessed Sandra Eastwood's behavior before, during and after trial that I fear she may have purposely withheld evidence that may have been favorable to Hannah Overton's defense.” The petition said evidence suggested that Andrew's death was linked to a genetic disorder called Prader-Willi syndrome, which can cause children to eat bizarre objects. District Judge Jose Longoria, who presided over Overton’s trial, dismissed the petition the same day it was filed. Orr appealed and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ordered Longoria to hold an evidentiary hearing.  During several days of testimony, Overton’s lawyers conceded they had failed to provide an adequate legal defense by failing to call Moritz, an expert on hypernatremia—a medical condition related to an elevated salt level. Moritz testified that Andrew exhibited symptoms of emotional deprivation syndrome, which is often associated with extreme eating habits. Moritz also said that the amount of Cajun spices needed to generate a sodium level of more than 250 would be enormously higher than the amount Rotta testified to. Moritz said that Rotta’s failure to evaluate the cause Andrew’s hypernatremia was a significant oversight.  And Moritz also testified that Overton would have had extreme difficulty in forcing an amount of salt or Cajun spices into Andrew that would have resulted in such a high sodium level, but that if Andrew had a psychological problem, such as emotional deprivation syndrome, he could have consumed that amount voluntarily. Despite the testimony, the judge denied the writ again. In September 2014, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the trial judge’s finding, granted the writ and ordered a new trial. The appeals court found that Overton’s lawyers had failed to provide an adequate legal defense. The appeals court did not address the claim that the prosecution had concealed evidence of the boy’s comparatively low sodium level when he first arrived at the clinic. On December 16, 2014, Overton was released on bond pending a retrial. On April 8, 2015, Nueces County District Attorney Mark Skurka dismissed the charge. He said the decision was “a result of a myriad of factors which came about after a careful review of the previous trial, re-interviewing some of the key witnesses, consulting with some of the medical experts involved in the case, (and) reviewing evidence adduced at recent hearings.” https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4674https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4674