June 8: Tameshia Shelton: Mississippi: Major (Welcome) Development: This mother of four is serving life in prison on a murder conviction...In a 6-1 vote Thursday, the Mississippi Supreme Court declined to disturb the December decision by the state Court of Appeals ordering a new trial for Shelton. The appeals court held that prosecutors failed to prove Shelton was guilty of murder “beyond a reasonable doubt” when she stood trial in 2015 in the fatal shooting of her youngest sister’s 21-year-old boyfriend, Danelle Young. “This nightmare is close to being finally over,” her middle sister, Shenikia Shelton, said Thursday. “The missing piece of our family’s puzzle is about to be home.” The justices’ decision came days after Mississippi Today published its four-year investigation that found that Tameshia Shelton has remained behind bars for 11 years, even though much of the evidence in Young’s 2009 death suggested that he killed himself — including an apparent suicide note never presented to the jury. Shelton’s trial lawyer, Rod Ray, failed to introduce Young’s apparent suicide note as evidence — a key reason why the courts have ordered a new trial for her. The appeals court found Ray was so “ineffective” as Shelton’s defense attorney that he violated her constitutional right to a fair trial."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  "Other gaps have emerged in Shelton’s case in the years since her murder trial. The prosecution’s case against her relied upon a deputy state medical examiner’s official ruling that Young’s death was a homicide. The pathologist later called the conclusion an “error” due to lack of experience. Prosecutors also used testimony from Clay County sheriff’s deputies that conflicted with actual records. "

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

STORY: "Mississippi Supreme Court paves way for new murder trial for Tameshia Shelton," by Jerry Mitchell and Madeline Nguyen, published by Mississippi Today, June 4, 2026. (The stories of investigative reporter Jerry Mitchell have helped put four Klansmen and a serial killer behind bars. His stories have also helped free two people from death row, exposed injustices and corruption, prompting investigations and reforms as well as the firings of boards and officials. He is a Pulitzer Prize finalist, a longtime member of Investigative Reporters & Editors, and a winner of more than 30 other national awards, including a $500,000 MacArthur “genius” grant. After working for three decades for the statewide Clarion-Ledger, Mitchell left in 2019 and founded the Mississippi Center for Investigative Reporting...Madeline Nguyen  joined Mississippi Today in January 2026 after leading local and national investigations at the Howard Center for Investigative  Journalism at Arizona State University in her hometown of Phoenix. Her  award-winning work has uncovered how the Phoenix Police Department edited key moments of police violence out of released body-camera footage, how the Federal Aviation Administration has left aircrews at risk of radiation exposure and how millions of dollars in aid for homeless students went unused.)

GIST: "Tameshia Shelton, a Clay County mother of four serving life in prison on a murder conviction, will finally get what she said she’s been praying for — another day in court to try to prove her innocence.

In a 6-1 vote Thursday, the Mississippi Supreme Court declined to disturb the December decision by the state Court of Appeals ordering a new trial for Shelton. The appeals court held that prosecutors failed to prove Shelton was guilty of murder “beyond a reasonable doubt” when she stood trial in 2015 in the fatal shooting of her youngest sister’s 21-year-old boyfriend, Danelle Young.

“This nightmare is close to being finally over,” her middle sister, Shenikia Shelton, said Thursday. “The missing piece of our family’s puzzle is about to be home.”

The justices’ decision came days after Mississippi Today published its four-year investigation that found that Tameshia Shelton has remained behind bars for 11 years, even though much of the evidence in Young’s 2009 death suggested that he killed himself — including an apparent suicide note never presented to the jury.

Shelton’s trial lawyer, Rod Ray, failed to introduce Young’s apparent suicide note as evidence — a key reason why the courts have ordered a new trial for her. The appeals court found Ray was so “ineffective” as Shelton’s defense attorney that he violated her constitutional right to a fair trial.

Other gaps have emerged in Shelton’s case in the years since her murder trial. The prosecution’s case against her relied upon a deputy state medical examiner’s official ruling that Young’s death was a homicide. The pathologist later called the conclusion an “error” due to lack of experience. Prosecutors also used testimony from Clay County sheriff’s deputies that conflicted with actual records.

“We’re very pleased,” one of Shelton’s current lawyers, Sandra Levick of the Mississippi Innocence Project, said of the Supreme Court decision. “We look forward to Ms. Shelton returning to Clay County where justice can finally be done.”

The case will return to the Clay County Circuit Court and the same trial judge, Circuit Judge James T. Kitchens, who previously denied Shelton a new trial after three days of hearings in 2021 and 2022.

Prosecution would fall to the office of District Attorney Scott Colom, who supported those hearings. In 2021, Kitchens reassigned the case to the attorney general’s office.

Colom could not be reached Thursday for comment, but he previously told Mississippi Today that if the case were returned to his office, he would “look at what the facts show and do justice.”

If Shelton is freed, she would become the seventh person prosecuted in Mississippi’s 16th Judicial District to be exonerated of murder — the most of any district in the state. Like Shelton, the district’s six exonerees were all prosecuted under Colom’s predecessor as district attorney, Forrest Allgood.

Shenikia Shelton said she and her family are “so very happy and thankful to God for everything.”

She thanked her sister’s lawyers and Mississippi Today for “shedding light on the injustices. So many doors have been closed in our faces trying to fight this.”

The entire story can be read at: 

supreme-court-murder-trial-tameshia-shelton

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.  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. 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;

Chris Sheriffe: Ontario: Major (most unusual) Development; (Murder On Mount Olive hearing): As my former Toronto Star colleague Toronto Star Chief Investigative Reporter Kevin Donovan reports, "One of two men convicted of first-degree murder in the death of a Toronto furniture maker 16 years ago has changed his story in a reversal that could have significant consequences for Christopher Sheriffe — the co-accused man who continues to argue his conviction was a “miscarriage of justice," noting that: "Awet Asfaha had long maintained his innocence in the shooting of Bishen Golaub outside a neighbourhood barbecue on Mount Olive Drive in Etobicoke on a sweltering afternoon in August 2009. In a profanity-laced police interview and at trial, he claimed he knew nothing about the murder, and a mysterious man on the street was the real shooter. On Thursday, court heard he has now confessed to the shooting, and both earlier stories were “a lie.”

PASSAGE  ONE OF THE DAY:  "Sheriffe, a former soccer star who was about to begin a carpentry apprenticeship, testified at the original trial that he was driving people home after a night out in 2009 when Asfaha asked him to pull over and stop around the corner from a house on Mount Olive Drive in northwest Etobicoke. His lawyer, Samara Secter, is applying to the federal justice department for a review of his case, claiming there was a miscarriage of justice in the trial."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Sheriffe was 19 at the time of the shooting, Asfaha was 24. At the trial, Sheriffe said he barely knew Asfaha, while Asfaha identified Sheriffe and several others as members of the “Hustle Squad,” which he and a junior police officer, quoting the words of two confidential sources, said was a subgroup of the Jamestown Crips street gang. (As the 2012 trial heard, the “Hustle Squad” was never heard of before the trial, and Sheriffe’s lawyers point out it has never been heard of since. Sheriffe maintains it was the name of his pickup basketball team."

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

PASSAGE  THREE  OF THE DAY: "The hearing will continue for at least a week and a half. The case was the focus of a Toronto Star series and the podcast, Murder on Mount Olive."

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

STORY: "16 years later, this Toronto gunman has confessed his story was a ‘lie.’ What does it mean for the man who says he was wrongfully convicted?," by Chief Investigative Reporter Kevin Donovan, published by The Toronto Star on June 5, 2026. (Kevin Donovan is the Toronto Star’s Chief Investigative Reporter. His focus is on journalism that exposes wrongdoing and effects change. Over more than three decades he has reported on the activities of charities, government, police, business among other institutions. Donovan also reported from the battlefields in the Gulf War and the war in Afghanistan following 9/11. He has won three National Newspaper Awards, two Governor General’s Michener Awards, the Canadian Journalism Foundation award and three Canadian Association of Journalists Awards. As the Star’s editor of investigations for many years, Donovan led many award-winning projects for the paper. He is the author of several books, including “Secret Life: The Jian Ghomeshi Investigation” and the “Dead Times” (a fiction novel).)

SUB-HEADING: "Awet Asfaha has made the stunning admission as part of a bid for early parole in what is known as a “faint hope” hearing."

GIST: "One of two men convicted of first-degree murder in the death of a Toronto furniture maker 16 years ago has changed his story in a reversal that could have major consequences for Christopher Sheriffe — the co-accused man who continues to argue his conviction was a “miscarriage of justice.”

Awet Asfaha had long maintained his innocence in the shooting of Bishen Golaub outside a neighbourhood barbecue on Mount Olive Drive in Etobicoke on a sweltering afternoon in August 2009.

 In a profanity-laced police interview and at trial, he claimed he knew nothing about the murder, and a mysterious man on the street was the real shooter.

On Thursday, court heard he has now confessed to the shooting, and both earlier stories were “a lie.”

Asfaha made the stunning admission as part of a bid for early parole in what is known as a “faint hope” hearing. Taking accountability for a crime is one of the factors considered in similar hearings.

“Awet Asfaha shot and killed Bishen Golaub,” his lawyer, Breana Vandebeek, told court on Thursday, in advance of Asfaha’s own testimony in the coming days.

\

MURDER ON MOUNT OLIVE: PART 1

A man was shot at a Toronto barbecue. Another is in jail for life. The Star reinvestigated the case and found flaws — was the right person convicted?

A Superior Court jury has been told that Asfaha — who is in a minimum security facility on the ocean on Vancouver Island and is allowed to have a cat — is hoping to be paroled to a halfway house in Victoria where he intends to work toward his “Red Seal certification in the culinary arts” in the hope of one day running a food cart.

Meanwhile, Sheriffe is in a medium security section of Collins Bay Institution in the Kingston area. 

He was convicted as the “getaway driver” at the 2012 trial, maintains his innocence and has told the Star he cannot take accountability for something he didn’t do.

Sheriffe, a former soccer star who was about to begin a carpentry apprenticeship, testified at the original trial that he was driving people home after a night out in 2009 when Asfaha asked him to pull over and stop around the corner from a house on Mount Olive Drive in northwest Etobicoke.

 His lawyer, Samara Secter, is applying to the federal justice department for a review of his case, claiming there was a miscarriage of justice in the trial.

Sheriffe was 19 at the time of the shooting, Asfaha was 24. At the trial, Sheriffe said he barely knew Asfaha, while Asfaha identified Sheriffe and several others as members of the “Hustle Squad,” which he and a junior police officer, quoting the words of two confidential sources, said was a subgroup of the Jamestown Crips street gang. 

(As the 2012 trial heard, the “Hustle Squad” was never heard of before the trial, and Sheriffe’s lawyers point out it has never been heard of since. Sheriffe maintains it was the name of his pickup basketball team.)

Asfaha’s new story is a major development in the long-running case. Court heard Asfaha, who is serving a life sentence with no chance of parole for 25 years, is asking the jury to recommend that he be allowed to apply now, with roughly eight years before he would normally be allowed to seek parole, and five years before he could apply for day parole.

Justice Breese Davies of the Superior Court of Justice earlier determined Asfaha’s case for early parole should proceed to a jury, and a panel of 12 members was selected this week.

 That jury is now hearing evidence, including details of Asfaha’s conduct in prison. 

It will be up to them to decide if he can make an early application to the Parole Board of Canada, which would still have to determine if he should be released and under what conditions.

‘He would be a grandfather now’

Crown attorney Katherine Rogozinski is opposing Asfaha’s bid. In her opening address, Rogozinski asked them to think of the victim, a 34-year-old furniture maker who was a father of four and stepfather of one. “He would be a grandfather now,” Rogozinski said.

Golaub’s widow is attending the hearing and has struggled several times on the first day to remain composed. 

Also present are members of Asfaha’s family; court heard he lied to them for years, saying he was innocent.

Asfaha, in the prisoners’ dock wearing a white collar shirt and an oatmeal-coloured sweater, sat unmoving during the first day of the hearing, staring straight ahead. 

While it will be a week before the jury hears from Asfaha directly, his lawyer, Vandebeek, described his anticipated evidence in her opening address.

She set the stage by describing an ongoing gang feud “characterized by frequent, alternating shootings” in the area where Golaub was killed. In a statement agreed to with the crown, Vandebeek told the jury that her client had a criminal record for trafficking and possessing cocaine and his apartment was a hangout for members of the Jamestown Crips. 

On the day of the murder, Vandebeek said Asfaha and Sheriffe had been returning from a night out and were dropping off two women at an apartment. 

Vandebeek told court that there were people associated with the Jamestown Crips who were with them earlier. 

After dropping off the two young women at 1:20 p.m., Vandebeek said Asfaha and Sheriffe (Sheriffe was driving his mother’s car) turned down Mount Olive Drive (off Kipling Avenue north of the 401). 

She said they passed Golaub, who court heard had no gang affiliations and was simply waiting outside a barbecue for food. 

He was wearing a red golf shirt, and there was a suggestion at the 2012 trial that his shirt colour attracted attention as the rival “Bloods” wore red, while the Jamestown “Crips” were blue. 

“Mr. Golaub stood with his back to Mount Olive Drive as he spoke to (the host of the barbecue),” Vandebeek told the jury. She said that Asfaha, who had been in the passenger seat of Sheriffe’s car and stopped on a side street, then walked up to Golaub carrying a gun and fired three shots. 

Vandebeek, drawing on testimony from the original trial in 2012, said Golaub grabbed his chest, said he could not breathe, and fell to the sidewalk. One of the three bullets “grazed and opened his heart,” and he died en route to hospital.

‘He’s asking you guys for a second chance’

Given the two earlier stories Asfaha had told, Vandebeek acknowledged to the jury that they were lies. 

At one point, court heard, Asfaha testified that the shooting (which he then denied knowledge of) was a “cowardly” act. 

He also testified in 2012 that as he and Sheriffe sat in the car around the corner that day, a man with his hair in braids, whom he believed to be “the shooter,” showed up, got into the car with them and gave him a “cold look.”

“It is admitted that Mr. Asfaha’s testimony of what happened at his trial in relation to the shooting was false and, in fact, Mr. Asfaha was the person who shot Mr. Golaub,” Vandebeek told court Thursday. 

Court also heard from a senior parole official from British Columbia, who has reviewed Asfaha’s case and spent three hours interviewing him. 

Jordan Lonsdale, acting Parole Officer Supervisor, told court that Asfaha, who was born in Eritrea, described to him how he had suffered abuse from his father while growing up. Lonsdale said he found Asfaha “co-operative,” “respectful,” “transparent” and “genuine.” 

MURDER ON MOUNT OLIVE

A judge tossed ‘hearsay’ informant evidence against this Toronto man — then his jury heard it anyway. Chris Sheriffe ‘was wrongfully convicted,’ his new lawyers say

Lonsdale said that Asfaha’s time has not been without bumps in the road. He has received prison discipline for several things over the years, including being found with a homemade weapon described by Lonsdale as made of plastic and “four inches long,” and for having a “modified” razor. 

Lonsdale said there were other issues, including Asfaha’s suspected involvement with a prison staff member who was bringing in steroids and nicotine patches; and an “altercation” with another inmate over a Super Bowl bet in which Asfaha threw the first punch.

 After an attack in his first year in prison, which left him with a large facial scar, Asfaha experienced post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms and attempted to harm himself.

His lawyer, Vandebeek, said that despite these issues, her client has turned his life around and implored the jury to give a recommendation for early parole. 

“He’s asking you guys for a second chance,” Asfaha’s lawyer said, addressing the jury. 

Vandebeek said that Asfaha was bullied as a youth in school, stole a car and was sent by his mother to live with his father in Eritrea. 

When Asfaha returned to Canada, he was again bullied while living in Jamestown, began selling drugs and started hanging out with members of the Jamestown Crips. 

Vandebeek said he was never a member of the Crips. 

She said her client is sorry for what he did and for the “cascading effect” on the Golaub family, his own family and the community. 

Court heard that he has received support in prison from an Indigenous elder who has helped Asfaha deal with concerns over racism and colonialism.

The hearing will continue for at least a week and a half.

The case was the focus of a Toronto Star series and the podcast, Murder on Mount Olive."

The entire story can be read at: 

/www.thestar.com/news/investigations/16-years-later-this-toronto-gunman-has-confessed-his-story-was-a-lie-what-does-it-mean-for-the-man-who-says-he-was-wrongfully-convicted/article_9b0add91-9712-499c-abf1-1c526382ccce.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.  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. 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;

June 7: Brian Peixoto: Massachusetts: Death of child: New science prevails; Major (Welcome) Development. (Nota Bene: District Attorney has already announced its appeal. We will be watching! HL); 'The Mass Dump' reports that a judge has overturned Brian Peixoto's conviction for murdering a 3-year-old in 1996, in a story sub-titled, "A jury convicted Brian Peixoto of killing his girlfriend’s son—but three decades later, a judge ruled that new scientific evidence calls the verdict into doubt." As Andrew Quemere reports: "And on May 26, Plymouth County Superior Court Justice Daniel O’Shea threw out Peixoto’s murder conviction, finding that new science calls the prosecution’s theory of how Affonso died into question. In an 80-page decision, O’Shea said Peixoto is entitled to a new trial because recent research shows that children can sustain fractures at the base of the skull from short falls and that such fractures do not necessarily result in immediate death. The research, O’Shea said, contradicts the prosecution’s claim that Affonso’s injury could have only resulted from a violent assault shortly before he died."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "O’Shea made his findings after Peixoto’s lawyers and prosecutors presented new expert testimony at a six-day hearing with dates in August, December, and February. Members of Peixoto’s family—including his daughter Amber Peixoto, father Joseph Peixoto, sister Brenda Aguiar, and aunt Janice Peixoto—attended the hearing in support. In court documents, Brian Peixoto’s lawyers say that the prosecution’s theory of how Affonso died is “completely wrong” and that “it is now clear that no one beat this child to death on the evening of January 22, 1996.”  They argue that Affonso died from complications of a rare condition called post-traumatic diabetes insipidus that would have taken days to cause his death rather than killing him immediately."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The pediatrician also testified that someone pinched Affonso’s penis with the intention of “causing the child the greatest amount of suffering,” which he said was “the sort of thing that, unfortunately, we do see in cases of child abuse involving three-year-old kids whose toilet training has been a problem.” The trial prosecutor, in her closing argument, cited the alleged injuries to Affonso’s penis as evidence that Peixoto “left his mark on that baby like the Z from Zorro.” But a medical examiner who testified for the prosecution in February said she could not definitively identify the marks as injuries and that they may have actually been a common post-mortem artifact that results from the body drying after death. “Such testimony calls into question the Commonwealth’s theory that Peixoto severely beat Christopher and injured his genitalia in response to the child’s bedwetting accidents,” O’Shea wrote."

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

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "In February, Peixoto’s lawyers presented expert testimony from Janice Ophoven, a forensic pathologist who specializes in pediatric pathology. Ophoven said she concluded that Affonso died from post-traumatic diabetes insipidus (PTDI), a condition that occurs when there is damage to the part of the brain that secretes the hormone that tells the kidneys to retain water. Peixoto’s lawyers say it’s impossible to determine exactly when Affonso developed PTDI, but Ophoven testified that the condition is associated with the type of skull fracture that the boy sustained."

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

STORY: "Judge Overturns Conviction of Man Accused of Murdering Three-Year-Old in 1996," by Reporter Andrew Quemere, published by The Mass Dump, on June 1, 2026. (Andrew Quemere is an independent investigative journalist from Massachusetts. He writes about issues like wrongful convictions, police misconduct, and government transparency. He is the author of 'The Mass Dump' newsletter.")

SUB-HEADING: "A jury convicted Brian Peixoto of killing his girlfriend’s son—but three decades later, a judge ruled that new scientific evidence calls the verdict into doubt.

GIST: "A Massachusetts judge on May 26 overturned the first-degree murder conviction of a man whom prosecutors say killed his then-girlfriend’s three-year-old son 30 years ago.

At a March 1997 trial, a Bristol County prosecutor argued that shortly before Christopher Affonso, Jr.’s death, Brian Peixoto assaulted the boy in a fit of rage after he wet himself in Peixoto’s Westport apartment. 

The prosecutor presented jurors with a lurid story in which Peixoto tortured the child by pinching his penis then grabbed him by his arms and slammed his head on a hard surface eight times, causing a six-inch fracture at the base of his skull and killing him almost immediately.

But for the past three decades, Peixoto has maintained his innocence. 

And on May 26, Plymouth County Superior Court Justice Daniel O’Shea threw out Peixoto’s murder conviction, finding that new science calls the prosecution’s theory of how Affonso died into question. 

In an 80-page decision, O’Shea said Peixoto is entitled to a new trial because recent research shows that children can sustain fractures at the base of the skull from short falls and that such fractures do not necessarily result in immediate death. 

The research, O’Shea said, contradicts the prosecution’s claim that Affonso’s injury could have only resulted from a violent assault shortly before he died.

O’Shea made his findings after Peixoto’s lawyers and prosecutors presented new expert testimony at a six-day hearing with dates in August, December, and February. Members of Peixoto’s family—including his daughter Amber Peixoto, father Joseph Peixoto, sister Brenda Aguiar, and aunt Janice Peixoto—attended the hearing in support.

In court documents, Brian Peixoto’s lawyers say that the prosecution’s theory of how Affonso died is “completely wrong” and that “it is now clear that no one beat this child to death on the evening of January 22, 1996.” 

They argue that Affonso died from complications of a rare condition called post-traumatic diabetes insipidus that would have taken days to cause his death rather than killing him immediately.

About 10 days before Affonso’s death, the boy fell down the stairs at his grandmother’s house when Peixoto wasn’t present, hit his head, and fractured his clavicle, which Peixoto’s lawyers have pointed to as a possible alternative explanation for the skull fracture.

No one witnessed the alleged assault on Affonso the evening he was found collapsed in Peixoto’s Westport apartment. 

Affonso’s mother initially told investigators that she and Peixoto were both upstairs when her four-year-old daughter got their attention and said the boy was vomiting and banging his head in the basement.

 The mother said she and Peixoto then went downstairs at the same time to check on Affonso.

But after police showed the mother autopsy photos of her son’s injuries and challenged her account, she changed her story and said that Peixoto went downstairs first and she heard loud banging while she was still upstairs.

The prosecution’s theory that Peixoto was motivated by anger about Affonso wetting himself was partly based on a comment he made to police when they questioned him. According to a Massachusetts State Police trooper’s 1997 trial testimony, Peixoto said that “it pissed him off when Christopher peed his pants, but he didn’t want him to be dead.”

When Peixoto testified in his defense, he explained: “Well, basically when I made that comment, I was in shock. I just found out Christopher was dead. I realized that he wasn’t coming back. And that all the times that I was upset about him peeing his pants, I should have just been enjoying the time that we had to spend with Christopher.”

According to O’Shea’s ruling: “Peixoto was unable to present medical or other expert testimony to suggest that Christopher’s head injury was caused by a fall sometime before the date of his death. His defense therefore centered on an attempt to raise doubt as to whether he or [the mother] inflicted Christopher’s skull fracture on January 22, 1996.”

At Peixioto’s trial, the prosecution presented testimony from a pediatrician who said that causing the fracture in Affonso’s skull would have required force equivalent to a fall from a second-story window onto concrete. And a medical examiner who testified for the prosecution agreed that the injury must have been caused by a “massive application of force to the head.”

But studies from 2016 and 2022 presented by Peixoto’s lawyers found that a child could sustain such an injury from a fall of less than six feet, including a fall down stairs, and that it would not necessarily result in immediate loss of consciousness or death. O’Shea said this evidence “wholly contradicts the Commonwealth’s theory about Christopher’s cause of death.”

The pediatrician who testified at Peixoto’s trial also said that most of the bruises found on Affonso’s body occurred around the time of his death. The pediatrician said he based this conclusion on the bruises’ color. However, research has found that the age of a bruise cannot be determined in this manner, which O’Shea ruled was also newly discovered evidence undermining the prosecution’s theory.

The pediatrician also testified that someone pinched Affonso’s penis with the intention of “causing the child the greatest amount of suffering,” which he said was “the sort of thing that, unfortunately, we do see in cases of child abuse involving three-year-old kids whose toilet training has been a problem.” The trial prosecutor, in her closing argument, cited the alleged injuries to Affonso’s penis as evidence that Peixoto “left his mark on that baby like the Z from Zorro.”

But a medical examiner who testified for the prosecution in February said she could not definitively identify the marks as injuries and that they may have actually been a common post-mortem artifact that results from the body drying after death.

“Such testimony calls into question the Commonwealth’s theory that Peixoto severely beat Christopher and injured his genitalia in response to the child’s bedwetting accidents,” O’Shea wrote.

Peixoto is currently represented by Jennifer Fitzgerald and Lisa Kavanaugh, the latter of whom is the director of the Innocence Program at the state’s public defender agency, the Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services.

“We are elated by the court’s decision to grant Brian Peixoto a new trial,” Fitzgerald said in a statement. “Brian has spent nearly 30 years maintaining his innocence, and this ruling is a significant step forward in an incredibly long and painful journey.”

Fitzgerald added: “Christopher’s death was an absolute tragedy, and we understand the deep sorrow that still surrounds it. However, modern science makes it clear that Brian did not cause this child’s death. We are currently awaiting a decision from the district attorney’s office as to how they intend to proceed, and our team is fully prepared to take whatever steps are necessary next to ensure Brian’s name is cleared, and he is brought home to his family.”

The Bristol County District Attorney’s Office now has the option to appeal O’Shea’s ruling and to prosecute Peixoto again. In response to a request for comment, Bristol County Deputy District Attorney Jennifer St. Laurent Sowa said, “We are in receipt of the decision and are currently in the process of reviewing it.”

In February, Peixoto’s lawyers presented expert testimony from Janice Ophoven, a forensic pathologist who specializes in pediatric pathology. Ophoven said she concluded that Affonso died from post-traumatic diabetes insipidus (PTDI), a condition that occurs when there is damage to the part of the brain that secretes the hormone that tells the kidneys to retain water.

Peixoto’s lawyers say it’s impossible to determine exactly when Affonso developed PTDI, but Ophoven testified that the condition is associated with the type of skull fracture that the boy sustained.

When Affonso was at the emergency room on the evening of his death, testing showed his sodium level was 183, which Ophoven said was extremely high and the most important piece of evidence that the boy had PTDI.

Ophoven said Affonso also showed signs of dehydration. His mother had witnessed him acting “wobbly” prior to his death and medical personnel who treated him on the evening of his death observed that his lips were cracked and his eyes were sunken, she explained.

O’Shea ruled that Ophoven’s PTDI diagnosis is not new evidence because the condition was understood at the time of Peixoto’s trial and the test results about Affonso’s elevated sodium level were available to Peixoto’s trial attorney. However, the judge said that because of PTDI’s relationship with head trauma, it would be “manifestly unreasonable” for a defense attorney to not retain a relevant expert witness if Peixoto were tried today.

In February, the district attorney’s office presented expert testimony from David Cooke, a pediatric endocrinologist who disputed Ophoven’s PTDI diagnosis. Cooke said that Affonso did not appear to be producing the quantities of urine one would expect from a child with the condition.

But O’Shea said that he “need not determine who would prevail in a battle of the experts or whether Peixoto would be found not guilty” to rule that he was entitled to a new trial.

“[Jurors] may well have concluded that Christopher’s fall ten days before his death did not cause his skull fracture and that Peixoto administered a fatal beating in the basement,” O’Shea said. “Ultimately, however, fundamental fairness requires that a judgment of guilt or innocence be rendered by a jury informed about, not ignorant of, a scientifically plausible alternative explanation for Christopher’s tragic death.”

Although O’Shea overturned Peixoto’s conviction and vacated his sentence, the judge denied him bail.

“Peixoto has had numerous achievements while incarcerated over the past 30 years,” O’Shea said. “He has been a positive community member in the prison system and has shown himself to be a leader and mentor. He also has provided the court with many letters of support attesting to his good character and strong family support. Nonetheless, the Commonwealth’s case against Peixoto remains viable and arguably strong, notwithstanding that it now involves a battle of experts.”

UPDATE (6/2/2026): The Bristol County District Attorney’s Office filed a notice of its intent to appeal O’Shea’s ruling on June 1.""

The entire story can be read at: 

https://massdump.ghost.io/author/andrew/

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.  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. 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;

June 6: Stefon Morant: Connecticut: From our 'utterly outrageous appeals' department: New Haven and its police force broke every rule in the book in order to wrongfully convict him. He deserves every penny of the 38 million award the jury unanimously gave him. Yet New Haven - and the people who run the city clearly still haven't learned their lesson. As Investigative Reporter Jim Halladin reports: "New Haven will seek to overturn a jury's decision to award $38 million to a man who sued the city for wrongful conviction, a payout Mayor Justin Elicker this week described as "beyond the pale," noting that: "A federal jury on Friday found the city liable for police misconduct in the case of Stefon Morant, who served 21 years in prison for a double homicide before receiving a full pardon after evidence of wrongdoing by New Haven police officers came to light. The jury found police had a practice of hiding evidence that could damage their cases during the time Morant was arrested and tried in the early 1990s — rejecting the city's claim that misconduct was not widespread."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Brustin, Morant's lawyer, said the decision is in line with other wrongful conviction awards. He said Morant presented a mountain of evidence to demonstrate specific harm, including trauma and psychiatric issues that Morant suffers. He said the jury's decision is a sign that New Haven must grapple with a legacy of police misconduct that tainted criminal justice. "The position has been, 'We never did anything wrong. We're not doing anything wrong now,' which is offensive to the people of New Haven, offensive to the men who've been through this, and ... in my view suggests that the problems that existed then have not gone away," Brustin said."

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "No physical or forensic evidence ever connected Morant or Lewis to the crime. Morant alleges the investigation initially pointed to a major cocaine dealer in the area and his brother as the perpetrators. However, Morant and Lewis became suspects following a January 1991 police interview of a 16-year-old witness. Morant alleges Vincent Raucci, a former New Haven detective who was assigned to the case, coerced the teenager and another witness to implicate him and Lewis in the shootings. Jurors weighing Morant's lawsuit against the city heard testimony from the officers in a trial that lasted nearly a month. A verdict slip shows they found Raucci liable on counts of malicious prosecution and failure to disclose exculpatory evidence. Jurors held Raucci and another officer, Vaughn Maher, liable on additional counts of fabricating evidence, coercing statements and conspiracy to violate constitutional rights."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: (No tears for New Haven: The city made its bed - and now has to lie in it. No tears from me. Had the city, it's leadership and its employees (the police)  respected the civil rights of people sucked into their criminal justice system - instead of riding all over them -  they would not be in the situation they find themselves in now.  For shame! HL) "Lewis, the co-defendant in Morant's case, previously settled a lawsuit against the city of New Haven for $9.5 million after winning his release from prison. The city held settlement talks with Morant, but failed to come to terms. In comments published in the New Haven Register, Elicker suggested Morant's legal team had presented excessive demands for compensation, forcing the city to go to trial. His remarks prompted a response from Judge Sarala V. Nagala, who ordered the mayor on May 13 not to talk publicly about the lawsuit until after the jury verdict. In an interview this week, Elicker expressed sympathy for the pain and suffering Morant and his family endured, but placed blame squarely on the police officers involved. Elicker said he is working to address financial missteps by past administrations, including underfunding of pensions and borrowing that saddled the city with debt. "To add this on top of it is just very difficult for our residents today to be kind of almost punished by the the decisions of the past," he said. At the time of Morant's arrest, the city didn't carry insurance that would cover police misconduct, meaning it could be forced to pay the full damages awarded last week. Elicker noted that Morant previously received $5.8 million from the state of Connecticut after filing a wrongful conviction claim. "An additional $38 million to me seems just beyond the pale," Elicker said."

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

STORY: "Beyond the pale': New Haven will appeal $38M wrongful conviction jury award," by Reporter Jim Haddadin, published by Connecticut Public Radio, on June 3, 2026. (Jim Haddadin is an editor for The Accountability Project, Connecticut Public's investigative reporting team. He was previously an investigative producer at NBC Boston, and wrote for newspapers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.)

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

GIST: New Haven will seek to overturn a jury's decision to award $38 million to a man who sued the city for wrongful conviction, a payout Mayor Justin Elicker this week described as "beyond the pale."

A federal jury on Friday found the city liable for police misconduct in the case of Stefon Morant, who served 21 years in prison for a double homicide before receiving a full pardon after evidence of wrongdoing by New Haven police officers came to light.

The jury found police had a practice of hiding evidence that could damage their cases during the time Morant was arrested and tried in the early 1990s — rejecting the city's claim that misconduct was not widespread.

Elicker, a Democrat who became mayor in 2020, said the city is disappointed and will appeal the jury's decision.

"The actions of several officers at the time shouldn't mean that the residents of New Haven today should pay such an incredible amount of money," he said.

Morant and another man, Scott Lewis, were convicted of killing Ricardo Turner, a former New Haven alderman, and his partner, Lamont Fields. The two were fatally shot inside a second-floor apartment on Howard Avenue in New Haven in October 1990.

No physical or forensic evidence ever connected Morant or Lewis to the crime. Morant alleges the investigation initially pointed to a major cocaine dealer in the area and his brother as the perpetrators.

However, Morant and Lewis became suspects following a January 1991 police interview of a 16-year-old witness. Morant alleges Vincent Raucci, a former New Haven detective who was assigned to the case, coerced the teenager and another witness to implicate him and Lewis in the shootings.

Jurors weighing Morant's lawsuit against the city heard testimony from the officers in a trial that lasted nearly a month. A verdict slip shows they found Raucci liable on counts of malicious prosecution and failure to disclose exculpatory evidence. Jurors held Raucci and another officer, Vaughn Maher, liable on additional counts of fabricating evidence, coercing statements and conspiracy to violate constitutional rights.

Morant was represented in the case by the firm Neufeld Scheck Brustin Hoffmann & Freudenberger. His lawyer, Nick Brustin, said he's confident the decision will be upheld on appeal.

"This is as rock solid a case as we've ever had," he said.

Lewis, the co-defendant in Morant's case, previously settled a lawsuit against the city of New Haven for $9.5 million after winning his release from prison.

The city held settlement talks with Morant, but failed to come to terms. In comments published in the New Haven Register, Elicker suggested Morant's legal team had presented excessive demands for compensation, forcing the city to go to trial. His remarks prompted a response from Judge Sarala V. Nagala, who ordered the mayor on May 13 not to talk publicly about the lawsuit until after the jury verdict.

In an interview this week, Elicker expressed sympathy for the pain and suffering Morant and his family endured, but placed blame squarely on the police officers involved.

Elicker said he is working to address financial missteps by past administrations, including underfunding of pensions and borrowing that saddled the city with debt.

"To add this on top of it is just very difficult for our residents today to be kind of almost punished by the the decisions of the past," he said.

At the time of Morant's arrest, the city didn't carry insurance that would cover police misconduct, meaning it could be forced to pay the full damages awarded last week.

Elicker noted that Morant previously received $5.8 million from the state of Connecticut after filing a wrongful conviction claim.

"An additional $38 million to me seems just beyond the pale," Elicker said.

Brustin, Morant's lawyer, said the decision is in line with other wrongful conviction awards. He said Morant presented a mountain of evidence to demonstrate specific harm, including trauma and psychiatric issues that Morant suffers.

He said the jury's decision is a sign that New Haven must grapple with a legacy of police misconduct that tainted criminal justice.

"The position has been, 'We never did anything wrong. We're not doing anything wrong now,' which is offensive to the people of New Haven, offensive to the men who've been through this, and ... in my view suggests that the problems that existed then have not gone away," Brustin said."

Thee entire story can be read at: 

https://www.ctpublic.org/news/investigative/2026-06-03/new-haven-wrongful-conviction-stefon-morant-38-million-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.  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. 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;