Crystal Rogers: Bowling Green, Kentucky: Forrest Berkshire reports for The Paducah Sun, on 'Day 8' of her trial noting that the defence is emphasizing lack of physical evidence as testimony wraps, and that: "Houck is charged with murder and tampering with evidence in the disappearance of Rogers, his ex-girlfriend, in July 2015. Lawson is charged with conspiracy to murder and tampering with physical evidence. Lawson’s father, Steve, was convicted on similar charges to his son in May in Warren Circuit Court, where the trial was moved from Nelson County. Judge Charles Simms III is trying the case. With the physical evidence limited, that left the prosecution with witnesses who related recollections of statements and events that were years old by the time they told detectives, and some of those witness statements were made under extreme pressure in cramped, unfriendly interrogation rooms. That seemed to be the main theme defense attorneys tried to drive home to the jury as they wrapped up the final day of testimony on Thursday. Closing arguments in the case are scheduled for Monday morning, and the jury should start deliberations that afternoon."

BACKGROUND:  From a previous post of this Blog: "WHAS11abc: Reporter Joseph Garcia: Recap of first week of testimony: (I am dropping in, from time to time, on this intriguing 'no body' homicide case in which Brooks Houck is charged with murder and tampering with physical evidence, and Joseph Lawson is charged with conspiracy to commit murder and tampering with physical evidence….)..."Without a body, prosecutors will need to use phone records, surveillance video, witness testimony or other tools to prove their case. Circumstantial evidence cases are one of the hardest to build, according to WHAS11 legal analyst Nick Mudd. Brooks Houck's attorney, Steve Schroeing, argued the case presented by the prosecution is built on pressure from family and the media to solve Crystal Rogers' disappearance. "Her family was panicked," he argued. "There was an explosion of publicity on this case like Kentucky had never seen." According to his attorneys, Houck was the answer to a mystery authorities couldn't figure out. The defense argued in the first four years of investigating there was no body, no evidence of her death, no murder weapon, and not a single eyewitness who could say she was harmed. Schroeing said a change in the dynamic of the investigation came in 2023 when Kentucky State Police investigators allegedly switched from "approved police tactics to manipulation." He argued the massive dig on Thompson Hill Road was an effort to find evidence to match the prosecution's new theory. "Nothing is found," Schroeing said. "They were wrong again."

https://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2025/06/brooks-houck-joseph-lawson-second.html

--------------------------------

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: The defence called two expert witnesses: Jeffery Neuschatz, Ph.D.: A cognitive psychologist who specializes in memory and whose research focuses on false and coerced confessions………….Denver Butler: A former Louisville Metro homicide detective and supervisor who also served as a state representative from southern Louisville and two years as State Commissioner of Juvenile Justice. He founded Clemency Investigations, a non-profit that analyzes cases of convicted persons who pleaded innocent at trial."

——————————————-

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "No testing of any physical evidence indicated a violent crime or connected the suspects to a crime. No DNA evidence of Rogers was collected. A palm print and fingerprint found in the processing of Rogers’ car and personal items found in it excluded Joseph. A DNA profile could not be developed for hair found in Whitesides’ vehicle, where a human remains detection dog alerted."

--------------------------------------

STORY: "Houck-Lawson Trial Day 8: Defense emphasizes lack of physical evidence as trial wraps up," by Forrest Berkshire, special to the Kentucky Standard) published by The  Paducah Sun, July 5, 2025. (Editor’s Note: Former Standard editor Forrest Berkshire is helping with coverage of the Joseph Lawson and Brooks Houck trial. You can sign up for his newsletter with additional coverage at rogerscase.substack.com.)

PHOTO CAPTION: "Jeff Neuschatz, a cognitive psychologist, took the witness stand Thursday for the defense in the trial over the disappearance and presumed death of Crystal Rogers in 2015. Neuschatz testified for the defense team for Brooks Houck, who is accused of Rogers’ murder. In this courtroom sketch, he is under cross-examination by Special Prosecutor Shane Young.

GIST: BOWLING GREEN — The investigation into Crystal Rogers’ disappearance involved hundreds of local, state and federal agents conducting numerous searches throughout Nelson County over the course of more than eight years that never turned up a single piece of physical forensic evidence that tied Brooks Houck or Joseph Lawson to her presumed murder and disposal.

Houck is charged with murder and tampering with evidence in the disappearance of Rogers, his ex-girlfriend, in July 2015. Lawson is charged with conspiracy to murder and tampering with physical evidence. Lawson’s father, Steve, was convicted on similar charges to his son in May in Warren Circuit Court, where the trial was moved from Nelson County. Judge Charles Simms III is trying the case.

With the physical evidence limited, that left the prosecution with witnesses who related recollections of statements and events that were years old by the time they told detectives, and some of those witness statements were made under extreme pressure in cramped, unfriendly interrogation rooms.

That seemed to be the main theme defense attorneys tried to drive home to the jury as they wrapped up the final day of testimony on Thursday. Closing arguments in the case are scheduled for Monday morning, and the jury should start deliberations that afternoon.

The defense called two expert witnesses to testify:

• Jeffery Neuschatz, Ph.D.: A cognitive psychologist who specializes in memory and whose research focuses on false and coerced confessions.

• Denver Butler: A former Louisville Metro homicide detective and supervisor who also served as a state representative from southern Louisville and two years as State Commissioner of Juvenile Justice. He founded Clemency Investigations, a non-profit that analyzes cases of convicted persons who pleaded innocent at trial.Jury hears ‘coercive’ police interrogations

Dr. Neuschatz analyzed Kentucky State Police interrogations of two witnesses who testified for the prosecution.

He told the jury that police tactics can influence the memories of witnesses during an interview.

“Memory doesn’t work like a VCR,” he said.

Rather, memories are more like snippets the brain recalls that are then filled in and pieced together.

“We fill in gaps based on what we know happens in the world,” he said. “Sometimes it’s accurate, sometimes it’s not.”

He briefly described the Reid Technique of interrogations to the jury before illustrating his criticisms of the specific interviews through video clips. He said he found the interrogations “highly coercive” through tactics such as promising the subjects leniency, threatening a woman with the possibility of losing custody of her son, and not accepting their answers because they did not fit the narrative they were seeking, which forced the subjects to alter their statements in hopes of pleasing their interrogators.

Charlie Girdley interrogation

Charlie Girdley testified for the prosecution in this trial as well as Steve Lawson’s. He claimed Steve approached him on behalf of Houck to “get rid” of Rogers in his trial. In this trial, he tied Joseph to Rogers’ car the night of July 3, 2015, and comments Joseph allegedly said to him.

Highlights of Neuschatz’s testimony:

Neuschatz said he identified 314 coercive tactics during Girdley’s four-hour interview/interrogation.

Some examples of coercive statements by police, according to Neuschatz’s testimony:

“This is the most pivotal moment in your life.”

They told him he could walk out of the interview or “go to prison for the rest of your life.”

Girdley’s story evolves throughout the interview as the detectives insist he knows more than he is telling them.

Girdley testified he was up for four or five days on a meth binge when police picked him up on a warrant for absconding for his parole and took him to the interrogation.

Girdley was suspected of complicity in Rogers’ disappearance in the early stage of the investigation before attention shifted to the Lawsons.

While the interrogation lasted a little over four hours, Girdley was detained for about 10 hours.

Heather Snellen interrogation

Heather Snellen, Steve Lawson’s former girlfriend, was interviewed by police during the investigation and did not have much to offer the first time. Detectives told her if she thought of anything that might be pertinent, to contact them. She followed up with them some time later, only to find herself in a KSP interrogation room facing two detectives who insisted she knew more than she was saying. Snellen was a recovering addict seeking to maintain custody of her son.

Highlights of Neuschatz’s testimony:

Neuschatz said he identified 350 coercive tactics during Snellen’s four-hour interview/interrogation.

Some examples of coercive statements by police, according to Neuschatz’s testimony:

“We don’t care how involved you are in this thing,” they told her.

“We all make mistakes in life. We don’t want to prosecute you.”

“Help yourself…I know you know more.”

At one point Snellen stood up, gathered her things and said she wanted to leave. One detective physically blocked her progress as she tried to navigate to the doorway as he attempted to convince her to stay.

At one point the interrogation had to be halted as Snellen suffered an apparent panic attack.

Prosecution: Interrogations are not pleasant

Under cross examination by Special Prosecutor Shane Young, Neuschatz acknowledged that “The majority of interrogations are not pleasant.”

He also agreed that “Many coerced statements are true.”

Young pointed out that Girdley had an extensive history with police and the justice system, which could make more aggressive techniques necessary. Young said he only learned recently that Girdley had been up for five days, which he said made the situation “a little iffy.”

Defense ends with emphasis on lack of physical evidence

Houck’s attorney, Brian Butler, led Denver Butler (no relation), the former Louisville Metro homicide detective, through the many searches as part of the investigation, which included:

• Three searches of the Houck family farm in 2015

• A 2015 dive team search of Melody Lake

• Houck’s home and truck

• The police cruiser of Houck’s brother, Nick

• The white Buick of Houck’s grandmother, Anna Whitesides

• Whitesides’ home in Cox’s Creek

• An August 2020 three-day search of the Houck farm involving up to 100 personnel

• A 2021 search in Woodlawn subdivision where FBI excavated a driveway and recovered a woman’s underwear and clothing

• An October 2022 search of the Houck farm where over 30 items were collected for forensic testing

• A December 2023 search of Thompson Ridge in Cox’s Creek

No testing of any physical evidence indicated a violent crime or connected the suspects to a crime. No DNA evidence of Rogers was collected. A palm print and fingerprint found in the processing of Rogers’ car and personal items found in it excluded Joseph. A DNA profile could not be developed for hair found in Whitesides’ vehicle, where a human remains detection dog alerted.

Denver Butler said it is “possible” for a violent crime to be committed and leave no trace evidence, although in the vast majority of modern cases, there is something that can be recovered, even years later."

The entire story can be read at:

article_a07c83c8-e2fc-5218-a356-6fc5f49ab09d.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The Odell Tony Adams case: Portland, Oregon: Major Development: (Ballistics) As a result of a new state appeals court ruling in a case which centers around the forensic practice of matching markings on bullets to specific guns under the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) methods, KOIN (Reporter Michaela Bourgeois) reports, noting that, "While the method has been used for decades, some critics argue that it is not based on measurable science."… The case stems from a 2018 shooting at the Speakeasy Lounge. At the scene, police found several .40 caliber shell cases on the ground along with bullet holes in two cars parked in the nightclub’s parking lot, according to court documents. Police later obtained a warrant to search Adams’ home, where officers seized a Taurus handgun, court documents state. While prepping the state’s case against Adams, a forensic examiner used the AFTE method to analyze the gun and the cartridge cases found at the scene, court records say. The examiner determined that the gun seized from Adams’ home fired 10 cases found at the scene of the crime. Another AFTE examiner analyzed the gun and agreed with the original findings, court documents state."

STORY: "Forensics: appeals court finds gun forensic method is not ‘scientifically valid," by Reporter Michaela Bourgeois, published by  KOIN, on June 20, 2025. (Thanks to Dr. Mike Bowers,for drawing this development to our attention in a post on his influential Blog Forensics and Law in Focus,  (one of my favourites  (in which he points out that, "Subjectivity in bullet casing matching method is not based on scientific proof. Bitemark opinions are no better.")

https://csidds.com/2025/06/20/forensics-appeals-court-finds-gun-forensic-method-is-not-scientifically-valid/

---------------------------------------------------------

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Court documents from the appeals court describe scientific evidence, in part, as evidence that “draws its convincing force from some principle of science, mathematics and the like.” The court explained, “the state did not meet its burden to show that the AFTE method is scientifically valid, that is, that it is capable of measuring what it purports to measure and is able to produce consistent results when replicated.” The court continued, “That is so because the method does not actually measure the degree of correspondence between shell cases or bullets; rather, the practitioner’s decision on whether the degree of correspondence indicates a match ultimately depends entirely on subjective, unarticulated standards and criteria arrived at through the training and individualized experience of the practitioner.” “The state did not show that the method is replicable and therefore reliable: The method does not produce consistent results when replicated because it cannot be replicated. Multiple practitioners may analyze the same items and reach the same result, but each practitioner reaches that result based on application of their own subjective and unarticulated standards, not application of the same standards,” the appeals court added."

-----------------------------------------------------------------

GIST: "Major changes could be coming to the way shootings are prosecuted in Oregon after a recent state appeals court ruling.

The case centers around the forensic practice of matching markings on bullets to specific guns under the Association of Firearm and Toolmark Examiners (AFTE) method.

While the method has been used for decades, some critics argue that it is not based on measurable science.

Now, the Oregon Court of Appeals agrees – overturning a case that relied on the method. 

In a May 29 decision, the appeals court found that the state did not prove the method is “scientifically valid.”

Plaintiff Odell Tony Adams was appealing convictions for unlawful use of a weapon with a firearm and second-degree criminal mischief.

As part of his appeal, Adams argued that the court erred by admitting testimony and a report of an expert as scientific evidence. According to court documents, the expert used the AFTE method and “identified” cartridge cases that were found at the scene of a shooting as having been fired from a gun that was found in Adams’ home.

Adams argued that the state “failed to establish that the AFTE method is scientifically valid and thus that evidence based on it is admissible.” The appeals court agreed with Adams.

The case stems from a 2018 shooting at the Speakeasy Lounge. At the scene, police found several .40 caliber shell cases on the ground along with bullet holes in two cars parked in the nightclub’s parking lot, according to court documents.

Police later obtained a warrant to search Adams’ home, where officers seized a Taurus handgun, court documents state.

While prepping the state’s case against Adams, a forensic examiner used the AFTE method to analyze the gun and the cartridge cases found at the scene, court records say.

The examiner determined that the gun seized from Adams’ home fired 10 cases found at the scene of the crime. Another AFTE examiner analyzed the gun and agreed with the original findings, court documents state.

Court documents from the appeals court describe scientific evidence, in part, as evidence that “draws its convincing force from some principle of science, mathematics and the like.”

The court explained, “the state did not meet its burden to show that the AFTE method is scientifically valid, that is, that it is capable of measuring what it purports to measure and is able to produce consistent results when replicated.”

The court continued, “That is so because the method does not actually measure the degree of correspondence between shell cases or bullets; rather, the practitioner’s decision on whether the degree of correspondence indicates a match ultimately depends entirely on subjective, unarticulated standards and criteria arrived at through the training and individualized experience of the practitioner.”

“The state did not show that the method is replicable and therefore reliable: The method does not produce consistent results when replicated because it cannot be replicated. Multiple practitioners may analyze the same items and reach the same result, but each practitioner reaches that result based on application of their own subjective and unarticulated standards, not application of the same standards,” the appeals court added.

The appeals court noted that Adams was tried on a federal charge from the same incident. In that case, Adams was granted a motion to exclude scientific testimony of an AFTE examiner who analyzed the same gun and cartridge.

In response to the appeals court finding, Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield’s office told KOIN 6 News the office is planning to seek review by the Oregon Supreme Court and is working with law enforcement and prosecutors to determine next steps."

The entire story can be read at:

https/www.koin.com/news/oregon/oregon-appeals-court-finds-gun-forensics-method-is-not-scientifically-valid/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeremy Bamber: UK; Ballistics: Use of a silencer and much, much, more: Charged with remedying miscarriages of justice, the seemingly toothless British Criminal Case Review Commission (CRCC) comes under fire (once again) - this time for its refusal (once again) to reverse the Bamber case back to the Court of appeal, The Guardian (Reporter Simon Hattenstone) reports, noting that: "The White House Farm murders, which occurred in August 1985 in Essex, are one of the most infamous and controversial criminal cases of the 20th century. Bamber’s parents, Nevill and June, his sister Sheila Caffell and her six-year-old twin sons Daniel and Nicholas were killed. Initially, the police concluded that Caffell, who had recently been hospitalised with paranoid schizophrenia, had killed the family with one of her father’s guns. But in 1986, Bamber, then aged 24, was convicted of the murders. There was no direct evidence linking him to the killings. The conviction relied on complex forensic arguments about the possible use of a silencer (which the prosecution argued, if used, would have made the rifle too long for Caffell to kill herself with), and Bamber’s former girlfriend Julie Mugford changing her initial statement to the police to say he had told her beforehand that he was planning to kill the family and that he had hired a hitman. When the hitman she named proved to have an alibi, Mugford again changed her story to say it was Bamber who had murdered his family."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "This is the third time the CCRC has reviewed Bamber’s case. In 2002, his case was sent back to the appeal court on DNA evidence. A panel of three judges rejected the appeal. In 2011, the CCRC refused to refer the case, stating that the evidence did not raise a real possibility that the court would find his convictions unsafe. The CCRC has been criticised for the percentage of submissions it refers back to the appeal court (currently about 2%); its failure to investigate cases; the time it takes to deal with submissions; its work from home policy; and for not having the legal minimum number of commissioners."

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The four issues the CCRC examined concerned the existence of a second silencer, which  Bamber’s team suggested undermined the significance of the supposed single firearm moderator that proved so significant at his trial; a phone call allegedly made by his father to Essex police saying Caffell had gone “berserk” with a gun; the integrity of the crime scene, which was compromised by Essex police; and a 999 call that police records discovered before Bamber’s 2002 appeal showed had been made from within White House Farm at 6.09am on the day of the murders.

------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "Review body refuses to refer Jeremy Bamber case back to court of appeal," by Feature Writer Simon Hattenstone, published by The Guardian, on July 4, 2025.

SUB-HEADING: "CCRC says four of the grounds his lawyers argue undermine safety of conviction for 1985 murders fail to meet threshold."

GIST: "The Criminal Cases Review Commission has refused to refer the case of Jeremy Bamber, who was convicted of murdering five members of his family in 1985, back to the court of appeal.

The CCRC, whose chair resigned in January and whose chief executive resigned this week after successive justice secretaries declared the miscarriage of justice review body unfit for purpose, has spent four years examining four of the 10 grounds that Bamber’s lawyers identified as undermining the safety of his conviction. 

It will continue to examine the other six.

In its provisional statement of reasons, the CCRC said the four grounds did not reach the threshold for a referral to the court of appeal

Bamber has a right to challenge the provisional decision, and his legal team says it will judicially review the decision.

The White House Farm murders, which occurred in August 1985 in Essex, are one of the most infamous and controversial criminal cases of the 20th century. 

Bamber’s parents, Nevill and June, his sister Sheila Caffell and her six-year-old twin sons Daniel and Nicholas were killed.

Initially, the police concluded that Caffell, who had recently been hospitalised with paranoid schizophrenia, had killed the family with one of her father’s guns. 

But in 1986, Bamber, then aged 24, was convicted of the murders. 

There was no direct evidence linking him to the killings.

The conviction relied on complex forensic arguments about the possible use of a silencer (which the prosecution argued, if used, would have made the rifle too long for Caffell to kill herself with), and Bamber’s former girlfriend Julie Mugford changing her initial statement to the police to say he had told her beforehand that he was planning to kill the family and that he had hired a hitman.

 When the hitman she named proved to have an alibi, Mugford again changed her story to say it was Bamber who had murdered his family.

The four issues the CCRC examined concerned the existence of a second silencer, which Bamber’s team suggested undermined the significance of the supposed single firearm moderator that proved so significant at his trial; a phone call allegedly made by his father to Essex police saying Caffell had gone “berserk” with a gun; the integrity of the crime scene, which was compromised by Essex police; and a 999 call that police records discovered before Bamber’s 2002 appeal showed had been made from within White House Farm at 6.09am on the day of the murders.

Last year, the New Yorker magazine published a 17,000-word investigation by the journalist Heidi Blake examining whether Bamber had been wrongfully convicted. 

She interviewed surviving police officers including Nicholas Milbank, who had been monitoring the open line into White House Farm on the morning of the shootings. 

Milbank told Blake that a 999 call had come in at 6.09am from inside the farm (by which time Bamber had been standing outside with police for more than two hours) and that he heard human activity.

According to Milbank, it was an emergency call on an exchange line, meaning that someone had dialled 999 rather than using the open line. 

He denied any knowledge of a statement made in his name to a 2002 inquiry known as Operation Stokenchurch saying he had monitored the open line but heard nothing until the police entered. 

This 2002 statement, which was typed and unsigned, had been used by Essex police to prevent the issue of the 999 call being raised at the 2002 appeal.

Bamber’s submission to the CCRC said Milbank’s comments to the New Yorker indicated that his 2002 witness statement was fabricated by Essex police to conceal the fact that a 999 call had been made at 6.09am on 07 August 1985 by someone within the farmhouse.

However, in its provisional statement of reasons, the CCRC said that subsequent to publication of the Blake article, Milbank provided a statement, dated 10 October 2024, saying: “I have never to my knowledge spoken to the New Yorker,” and that he did not know he had been talking to a journalist. Milbank, who was still an officer with Essex police at the time, has died since making the statement.

The Jeremy Bamber Campaign has expressed its anger that the CCRC approached the Essex force rather than go directly to Blake or Milbank. “Unbelievably, the CCRC just accepted this revisionist account, and endorsed the view that Ms Blake, and the New Yorker, had obtained this material under false pretences, and it was, consequently, not worth considering,” it said.

The New Yorker has issued a statement saying: “Heidi Blake’s piece was meticulously reported and scrupulously factchecked. The New Yorker stands by the story.”

This is the third time the CCRC has reviewed Bamber’s case. In 2002, his case was sent back to the appeal court on DNA evidence.

A panel of three judges rejected the appeal. In 2011, the CCRC refused to refer the case, stating that the evidence did not raise a real possibility that the court would find his convictions unsafe.

The CCRC has been criticised for the percentage of submissions it refers back to the appeal court (currently about 2%); its failure to investigate cases; the time it takes to deal with submissions; its work from home policy; and for not having the legal minimum number of commissioners."

The entire story can be read at: 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jul/04/review-body-ccrc-refuses-to-refer-jeremy-bamber-murder-case-back-court-of-appeal

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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.

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

———————————————————————————————

FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-------------------------------------------------------------------