Officer Gerald Goines: The Houston police officer who led a botched raid that killed two people is now facing felony murder charges, Techdirt (Reporter Tim Cushing) reports. (As Cushing, a feisty reporter in his own right, reports, an independent forensic examination of the home has contradicted many of the claims made by officers in their reports. (As per a second story which can be read at the link below...."The increasingly-awful story of the Houston Police Department's botched drug raid continues to develop. Earlier this year, the Houston PD raided the house of Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas. By the time the bullets stopped flying, the couple of 21 years was dead. The raid was predicated on a tip from a confidential informant who said he saw lots of heroin and some guns in the residence while performing a controlled buy. No heroin was found. The gun described by the informant was never found. What was found was personal use amounts of marijuana and cocaine, neither of which were mentioned by the informant. The informant never existed." (And there's much more. Read on. HL);

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "An independent forensic examination of the home contradicted many of the claims made by officers in their reports. The police chief finally distanced himself from the officers' actions, but only after enough information had come to light to show everything about the raid was a lie. Investigations have been opened on the PD and the officers involved. The two officers who led the raid are having their past investigations examined by the PD and the DA's office says this could affect as many as 14,000 cases. Not that the Houston PD is exactly being cooperative. The DA's office has had to threaten legal action to get the department to turn over paperwork linked to Officer Gerald Goines and Officer Steven Bryant. These officers are no longer facing multiple investigations into the drug task force work. They're now facing criminal charges as well."

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

STORY: "Houston Police Officer Who Led Botched Raid That Killed Two People Now Facing Felony Murder Charges," by reporter  Tim Cushing,  published by Techdirt, on Sept 12, 2019.  (From this feisty journalist's "some-of-the-best-criminals-are-cops" department.

GIST: "The increasingly-awful story of the Houston Police Department's botched drug raid continues to develop. Earlier this year, the Houston PD raided the house of Dennis Tuttle and Rhogena Nicholas. By the time the bullets stopped flying, the couple of 21 years was dead. The raid was predicated on a tip from a confidential informant who said he saw lots of heroin and some guns in the residence while performing a controlled buy. No heroin was found. The gun described by the informant was never found. What was found was personal use amounts of marijuana and cocaine, neither of which were mentioned by the informant. The informant never existed. The heroin supposedly purchased from the residence actually came from the console of an officer's police car. The affidavit obtained by Officer Gerald Goines was apparently filled with lies about a controlled drug buy that never happened and statements from an informant who had never visited the Tuttle residence. The actual tip the officers acted on was one phoned in by Rhogena Nicholas' mother, who complained about the couple using drugs in their house. Goines wasn't the only liar. Other officers on the scene lied as well. The narrative officers presented was one of being greeted by weapon-wielding residents during the no-knock raid. An independent forensic examination of the home contradicted many of the claims made by officers in their reports. The police chief finally distanced himself from the officers' actions, but only after enough information had come to light to show everything about the raid was a lie. Investigations have been opened on the PD and the officers involved. The two officers who led the raid are having their past investigations examined by the PD and the DA's office says this could affect as many as 14,000 cases. Not that the Houston PD is exactly being cooperative. The DA's office has had to threaten legal action to get the department to turn over paperwork linked to Officer Gerald Goines and Officer Steven Bryant. These officers are no longer facing multiple investigations into the drug task force work. They're now facing criminal charges as well.

Gerald Goines, the ex-Houston police officer who led the controversial no-knock raid on Harding Street, has been charged with two counts of felony murder, as KHOU 11 Investigates reporter Jeremy Rogalski first reported.
His attorney, Nicole DeBorde, said Goines was surprised by the charges.  
Goines surrendered Friday afternoon and his bond was set at $150,000 on each charge. Goines made bond Friday evening.
He is required to wear a GPS monitor and won't be allowed to have weapons or leave Harris County.

His partner in cop crime isn't facing murder charges, but is on just as short a leash as Goines.

Former Officer Steven Bryant, who was involved with the Harding Street warrant, is charged with second-degree tampering with a government document. His bond was set at $50,000. He will also wear a GPS monitor and can't leave Harris or Fort Bend counties.

Meanwhile, the HPD chief continues to reassure himself this isn't the tip of a corroded iceberg, but rather just an anomaly he can go back to ignoring when the press finds something else to occupy itself with.

However, Houston Police Chief Art Acevedo believes it's not a department wide problem.
"We've been looking at a lot of cases and we have yet to see it again, any evidence of any systemic issues," Acevedo said.

Maybe no cop on the force is as awful as these two. But cops don't just go straight from the academy to falsifying affidavits and engaging in deadly raids over drugs that came from a cop car, rather than a crime scene. They start small. And if no one stops them, it eventually grows to something that can't be contained. Chief Acevedo needs to dig a little deeper. If he's not seeing anything, it's not because it's not there. It's because he's not really looking for it.

The entire story can be read at:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190905/15231542933/houston-police-officer-who-led-botched-raid-that-killed-two-people-now-facing-felony-murder-charges.shtml

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

Read The Techdirt story on the independent investigation which put the lie to the police accounts, at the link below. (Also by Reporter Tim Cushing);

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  "Everything about the botched no-knock raid by the Houston Police Department just keeps getting worse. Here's how everything has gone down so far:

• The HPD said the raid was predicated on a tip that drugs were being sold in the house. In actuality, the "tip" was one of the now-dead resident's mother calling the police to tell them her daughter was using drugs.
• A drug buy was set up using an informant. The informant claimed he had purchased heroin from the house, seen plenty of heroin packaged for sale, and several guns. No heroin was found during the raid and the heroin sent out for testing came from the console of an officer's vehicle.
• The officers claimed one of the residents, 59-year-old Dennis Tuttle, opened fire on them, necessitating the use of force that left Tuttle and his wife of 20 years dead. The gun supposedly fired at officers was not included in the search warrant inventory.
• The officers involved in the raid are now under investigation by the FBI and the DA's office. This has led to the dismissal of criminal cases the two officers were involved in.

Everything about the raid points to a drug unit that loves to raid houses but no so much the due diligence that goes with it. This, shall we say… "zealous" enforcement of the law ended with the deaths of two drug users -- not dealers -- at the hands of cops who have proven to be entirely unreliable when it comes to the "investigation" part of drug investigations.
Another investigation has been opened. An independent forensic review -- headed by a former NCIS supervisor -- of the crime scene has been conducted and the results are jaw-dropping. Not only do they indicate the officers' narrative of the raid is highly-dubious, it shows the Houston PD's forensic team is possibly no better at its job than the officers behind the botched raid.

Hired by the relatives of Rhogena Nicholas and Dennis Tuttle, the new forensics team found no signs the pair fired shots at police — and plenty of signs that previous investigators overlooked dozens of pieces of potential evidence in what one expert called a “sloppy” investigation.
“It doesn’t appear that they took the basic steps to confirm and collect the physical evidence to know whether police were telling the truth,” said attorney Mike Doyle, who is representing the Nicholas family. “That’s the whole point of forensic scene documentation. That’s the basic check on people just making stuff up.”

The police claimed they started firing when the couple's dog charged at them as they came through the door. But the investigation shows the dog was killed in the dining room, more than 15 feet from the front door. The investigators also couldn't find anything confirming the officers' claims that Tuttle started firing at them as they came through the door. It also appears some of the officers were firing into the house before entering it -- another contradiction of the official narrative.

Some of the bullet holes outside the house appeared at least a foot from the door, a fact that Doyle flagged as troubling.
“You can’t see into the house from there,” he said, “you’re firing into the house through a wall.”

It's not just evidence that appears to contradict the official story. The independent investigators also came across a ton of evidence that was never gathered by Houston PD investigators. Left behind were items tagged as evidence, the drugs the HPD drug unit was so hot and bothered about, and a bunch of bullets and casings that could help reconstruct what actually happened inside the house during the raid.
As Radley Balko points out, this really doesn't look good for the Houston PD Forensics unit. It suggests two things -- neither of them positive.

The most damning explanation is that the investigators were covering for the cops. A slightly less damning, but still pretty bad, explanation is that the investigators simply took the cops’ word about what happened and thus saw no need to carefully inspect the crime scene. The least damning explanation is that the cops got no special treatment at all. But that would mean that this is the way crime-scene investigators handle all homicide investigations. You know you’ve been roped into a scandal when the most flattering explanation for your behavior is that you aren’t corrupt, you’re merely incompetent.

This is bad news for the Houston PD and everyone in their jurisdiction. This case has had zero positive developments since it first started making national headlines. A moratorium on no-knock raids might reduce the number of people killed by police officers, but it isn't going to fix the underlying issues that lead to the deadly raid -- and its horrendous aftermath.
 https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190516/13404142226/independent-forensic-investigation-undermines-houston-cops-narrative-about-fatal-drug-raid.shtml

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;

David Camm; Indiana: Significant Development: A federal court has ruled that he can sue for false arrest on charges of murdering his wife and children - a law suit in which he alleges that his original arrest was based on information from a "a plainly unqualified forensic assistant."..."A federal appeals court has ruled that former Indiana State Trooper David Camm can sue for false arrest in the highly publicizerd murders of his wife and two children. Camm was twice convicted of murdering his family, only to have both convictions overturned. He was acquitted in a 2013 trial and later won a civil settlement of $450,000."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The assistant, Robert Stites, was only qualified to take evidence photos but had analyzed blood spatter on Camm's clothing and told investigators Camm had been near his family when they were shot. Camm's lawyers argued he picked up the blood on his clothes as he reached for Bradley.  Furthermore, Camm alleged that Stites, Stites' boss, investigators and prosecutors "willfully or recklessly made false statements" about his involvement. Stites, court documents say, described the blood spatter on Camm's clothing to his boss over the phone.  What was once called malicious prosecution is now being called a Fourth Amendment violation, and Tuesday's opinion says officials fabricated evidence, suppressed the truth about Stites' qualifications and wrongly arrested Camm based on "unqualified observations."

STORY: "David Camm can sue for false arrest in wife and kids' murder, federal court rules," by reporter Sarah Ladd, published by The Louisville Courier Journal on September 10, 2019.

GIST: "A federal appeals court has ruled that former Indiana State Trooper David Camm can sue for false arrest in the highly publicizerd murders of his wife and two children. Camm was twice convicted of murdering his family, only to have both convictions overturned. He was acquitted in a 2013 trial and later won a civil settlement of $450,000.  Camm told police that he had come home from playing basketball at a church and found his wife, Kimberly; son Bradley, 7; and daughter Jill, 5, shot in their Georgetown home. He said he found his wife, Kimberly, lying in a pool of blood on the garage floor. His son, Bradley, 7, and daughter Jill, 5, were also shot and in the back seat of Kimberly's Ford Bronco. Camm said he thought Bradley was still alive and pulled him from the vehicle to administer CPR, according to court documents. When that didn't work, he called Indiana State Police.   The court opinion relies only on Camm's version of events and says his original arrest was based on information from a "a plainly unqualified forensic assistant." The assistant, Robert Stites, was only qualified to take evidence photos but had analyzed blood spatter on Camm's clothing and told investigators Camm had been near his family when they were shot. Camm's lawyers argued he picked up the blood on his clothes as he reached for Bradley.  Furthermore, Camm alleged that Stites, Stites' boss, investigators and prosecutors "willfully or recklessly made false statements" about his involvement. Stites, court documents say, described the blood spatter on Camm's clothing to his boss over the phone.  What was once called malicious prosecution is now being called a Fourth Amendment violation, and Tuesday's opinion says officials fabricated evidence, suppressed the truth about Stites' qualifications and wrongly arrested Camm based on "unqualified observations." Stites later testified, court documents say, that he'd investigated homicides for the Army, Naval Intelligence and the FBI, which officials discovered to be false.  Sam Lockhart, Camm's uncle, said on Thursday that the family had no comment on the decision. Charles Boney is serving a 225-year sentence in the murders. He testified against Camm in the third trial. But jurors found his testimony unreliable."

The entire story can be read at:

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2019/09/10/david-camm-can-sue-false-arrest-judge-rules/2280080001/

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

Read the entire decision at the link below: Thanks to one of my Blogger pals who sent this decision  to me with the following note: "David Cramm comes home to find his wife and two children killed. He's detained for 13 years before he's finally acquitted in a third trial. And this happens because the state lied about an "utterly unqualified" assistant pretending to be a blood-spatter analyst. (The extent of his scientific training was a single chemistry class, which he flunked.) And there's so, so much more. The state also lied about running a DNA test that could have exonerated the man. The second prosecutor was sanctioned for trying to cash in on a book deal. The first prosecutor ended up representing the real murderer."

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2019/D09-10/C:18-1440:J:Sykes:aut:T:fnOp:N:2397044:S:0
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Read the fascinating  National Registry of Exonerations entry by Maurice Possley, a truly phenomenal observer of America's criminal justice system,  at the link below: 

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Prior to the trial, a sweatshirt found under the boy's body was submitted for DNA testing. The DNA was not Camm's. The prosecution claimed the profile was submitted to the FBI's DNA database without finding a match, although evidence later showed the profile had not been submitted to the FBI database at all.Prior to the second trial, the defense obtained further DNA testing and at the defense urging, the unidentified profile was submitted to the FBI database. The DNA profile from the sweatshirt was linked to a man named Charles Boney. When questioned by police, Boney admitted owning the sweatshirt but said he had donated it to the Salvation Army prior to the shootings. After police matched Boney to a palm print found on the family’s vehicle, Boney gave an assortment of accounts, but ultimately said he had gone to the home to sell a gun to Camm and was outside of the garage when Camm shot the victims. Due to the extensive publicity, the case was moved to Warrick County Superior Court and Camm was charged with three counts of murder and a count of conspiracy to commit murder. Boney was tried separately in 2005 and was convicted of three counts of murder and one count of conspiracy to commit murder. He was sentenced to 225 years in prison.  In 2006, at Camm’s second trial, the prosecution presented the blood spatter evidence, as well as three inmates who were housed in the same jail facility with Camm and who said that Camm had admitted the killings to them. Additionally, the prosecution presented Boney's testimony that he conspired with Camm to commit the murders and, for the first time, the prosecution suggested that Camm had molested his 5-year-old daughter. The prosecution contended that the daughter either had reported or was going to report the abuse to her mother, and that Camm killed the family to conceal the molestation. The prosecution presented autopsy evidence that found blunt force trauma to her genitals and a pathologist testified the injuries were consistent with molestation occurring within 24 hours of her death. The defense contended there was no evidence that Camm ever molested his daughter and contended that if there was evidence of molestation, it was caused by Boney, who was the sole perpetrator and had previously been convicted of assaulting women. But the defense evidence was barred by the trial judge. At the close of the prosecution’s case, the judge dismissed the conspiracy charge. On March 3, 2006, Camm was convicted again of three counts of murder. This time, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole."

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

THE ENTRY: "On the night of September 28, 2000, former Indiana state trooper, David Camm, called police and reported finding the bodies of his 35-year-old wife, Kim, and their two children, 7-year-old Brad and 5-year-old Jill, shot to death in the family’s garage in Georgetown, Indiana.

Camm, who had retired as a state trooper four months earlier to work in the basement waterproofing business with an uncle, said he had been playing basketball at a church and came home around 9 p.m. to find Kim outside the family vehicle on the floor of the garage. He said he looked in the car and found the children. He thought Brad might still be alive, so he reached over Jill and took out the boy and put him on the floor and began performing CPR. When the boy did not respond, Camm, 36, called the Sellersburg, Indiana State Police post.

On October 1, 2000, Camm was charged with three counts of murder primarily based on an analysis of the t-shirt he was wearing. A state forensic analyst said that some spatters of Jill’s blood were found on the shirt and were the result of high velocity blood spatter consistent with the spatter produced by shooting someone.

Due to the extensive media coverage of the case, jurors were selected from nearby Johnson County and brought to Floyd County Superior Court for the trial in January 2002.

The prosecution’s case was two-pronged—the t-shirt with the purported blood spatter, which was challenged by a defense expert, and extensive evidence about Camm’s personal life. Twelve women testified to a variety of relationships—some adulterous and some prolonged—with Camm. The prosecution contended that the motive was $750,000 in life insurance money.

Camm maintained that he had left the house to play basketball from 7 p.m. until 9:20 p.m. when he came home and found the victims. Police determined that the shootings took place sometime after 7:30 p.m. when Kim would have arrived home with the children after Brad’s swimming practice.

On March 17, 2002, the jury convicted Camm of three counts of murder. He was sentenced to 195 years in prison.

In August 2004, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial. The court held that the introduction of the extramarital affairs had been unfairly prejudicial.

Prior to the trial, a sweatshirt found under the boy's body was submitted for DNA testing. The DNA was not Camm's. The prosecution claimed the profile was submitted to the FBI's DNA database without finding a match, although evidence later showed the profile had not been submitted to the FBI database at all.

Prior to the second trial, the defense obtained further DNA testing and at the defense urging, the unidentified profile was submitted to the FBI database. The DNA profile from the sweatshirt was linked to a man named Charles Boney.

When questioned by police, Boney admitted owning the sweatshirt but said he had donated it to the Salvation Army prior to the shootings. After police matched Boney to a palm print found on the family’s vehicle, Boney gave an assortment of accounts, but ultimately said he had gone to the home to sell a gun to Camm and was outside of the garage when Camm shot the victims.

Due to the extensive publicity, the case was moved to Warrick County Superior Court and Camm was charged with three counts of murder and a count of conspiracy to commit murder. Boney was tried separately in 2005 and was convicted of three counts of murder and one count of conspiracy to commit murder. He was sentenced to 225 years in prison.

In 2006, at Camm’s second trial, the prosecution presented the blood spatter evidence, as well as three inmates who were housed in the same jail facility with Camm and who said that Camm had admitted the killings to them.

Additionally, the prosecution presented Boney's testimony that he conspired with Camm to commit the murders and, for the first time, the prosecution suggested that Camm had molested his 5-year-old daughter. The prosecution contended that the daughter either had reported or was going to report the abuse to her mother, and that Camm killed the family to conceal the molestation. The prosecution presented autopsy evidence that found blunt force trauma to her genitals and a pathologist testified the injuries were consistent with molestation occurring within 24 hours of her death.

The defense contended there was no evidence that Camm ever molested his daughter and contended that if there was evidence of molestation, it was caused by Boney, who was the sole perpetrator and had previously been convicted of assaulting women. But the defense evidence was barred by the trial judge.

At the close of the prosecution’s case, the judge dismissed the conspiracy charge. On March 3, 2006, Camm was convicted again of three counts of murder. This time, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

In 2009, the Indiana Supreme Court reversed the convictions and sent the case back for a third trial. The Court held that Camm’s defense had been unfairly prejudiced by the introduction of the highly speculative evidence suggesting he had molested his daughter.

In the fall of 2013, Camm went on trial a third time with another change of venue—this time to Boone County Superior Court in Lebanon, Indiana.

"On the night of September 28, 2000, former Indiana state trooper, David Camm, called police and reported finding the bodies of his 35-year-old wife, Kim, and their two children, 7-year-old Brad and 5-year-old Jill, shot to death in the family’s garage in Georgetown, Indiana.

Camm, who had retired as a state trooper four months earlier to work in the basement waterproofing business with an uncle, said he had been playing basketball at a church and came home around 9 p.m. to find Kim outside the family vehicle on the floor of the garage. He said he looked in the car and found the children. He thought Brad might still be alive, so he reached over Jill and took out the boy and put him on the floor and began performing CPR. When the boy did not respond, Camm, 36, called the Sellersburg, Indiana State Police post.

On October 1, 2000, Camm was charged with three counts of murder primarily based on an analysis of the t-shirt he was wearing. A state forensic analyst said that some spatters of Jill’s blood were found on the shirt and were the result of high velocity blood spatter consistent with the spatter produced by shooting someone.

Due to the extensive media coverage of the case, jurors were selected from nearby Johnson County and brought to Floyd County Superior Court for the trial in January 2002.

The prosecution’s case was two-pronged—the t-shirt with the purported blood spatter, which was challenged by a defense expert, and extensive evidence about Camm’s personal life. Twelve women testified to a variety of relationships—some adulterous and some prolonged—with Camm. The prosecution contended that the motive was $750,000 in life insurance money.

Camm maintained that he had left the house to play basketball from 7 p.m. until 9:20 p.m. when he came home and found the victims. Police determined that the shootings took place sometime after 7:30 p.m. when Kim would have arrived home with the children after Brad’s swimming practice.

On March 17, 2002, the jury convicted Camm of three counts of murder. He was sentenced to 195 years in prison.

In August 2004, the Indiana Court of Appeals reversed the conviction and ordered a new trial. The court held that the introduction of the extramarital affairs had been unfairly prejudicial.

Prior to the trial, a sweatshirt found under the boy's body was submitted for DNA testing. The DNA was not Camm's. The prosecution claimed the profile was submitted to the FBI's DNA database without finding a match, although evidence later showed the profile had not been submitted to the FBI database at all.

Prior to the second trial, the defense obtained further DNA testing and at the defense urging, the unidentified profile was submitted to the FBI database. The DNA profile from the sweatshirt was linked to a man named Charles Boney.

When questioned by police, Boney admitted owning the sweatshirt but said he had donated it to the Salvation Army prior to the shootings. After police matched Boney to a palm print found on the family’s vehicle, Boney gave an assortment of accounts, but ultimately said he had gone to the home to sell a gun to Camm and was outside of the garage when Camm shot the victims.

Due to the extensive publicity, the case was moved to Warrick County Superior Court and Camm was charged with three counts of murder and a count of conspiracy to commit murder. Boney was tried separately in 2005 and was convicted of three counts of murder and one count of conspiracy to commit murder. He was sentenced to 225 years in prison.

In 2006, at Camm’s second trial, the prosecution presented the blood spatter evidence, as well as three inmates who were housed in the same jail facility with Camm and who said that Camm had admitted the killings to them.

Additionally, the prosecution presented Boney's testimony that he conspired with Camm to commit the murders and, for the first time, the prosecution suggested that Camm had molested his 5-year-old daughter. The prosecution contended that the daughter either had reported or was going to report the abuse to her mother, and that Camm killed the family to conceal the molestation. The prosecution presented autopsy evidence that found blunt force trauma to her genitals and a pathologist testified the injuries were consistent with molestation occurring within 24 hours of her death.

The defense contended there was no evidence that Camm ever molested his daughter and contended that if there was evidence of molestation, it was caused by Boney, who was the sole perpetrator and had previously been convicted of assaulting women. But the defense evidence was barred by the trial judge.

At the close of the prosecution’s case, the judge dismissed the conspiracy charge. On March 3, 2006, Camm was convicted again of three counts of murder. This time, he was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

In 2009, the Indiana Supreme Court reversed the convictions and sent the case back for a third trial. The Court held that Camm’s defense had been unfairly prejudiced by the introduction of the highly speculative evidence suggesting he had molested his daughter.

In the fall of 2013, Camm went on trial a third time with another change of venue—this time to Boone County Superior Court in Lebanon, Indiana. Prior to the trial, the judge barred any testimony relating to molestation. Boney testified for the prosecution that he brought an untraceable gun to the Camm home on the night of the murders and that he was outside the garage when Camm killed his wife and children.

The defense presented a Dutch forensic expert who testified that his analysis of the sweatshirt found at the scene showed the presence of Kim Camm’s DNA, suggesting Kim had struggled with Boney. The expert said he also found Boney’s DNA under one of Kim’s fingernails.

On October 24, 2013, the jury acquitted Camm and he was released. In 2014, Camm filed a federal civil rights lawsuit seeking compensation. In 2016, Floyd County settled for $450,000. The case against the remaining defendants was dismissed in January 2018."

 https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4291

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;

Tyrone Lamont Allen: Oregon: (3): Technology: White Elephant Case: (Photoshopping lineup photo of suspect): Excellent perspective from New York Times reporter Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs: Filling in' lineup photos of other people in the photo array can make lineups fairer by ensuring that the perpetrator does not stand out - but there's a line to be drawn when it comes to photos of the suspect for obvious reasons. The issue is important: As the heading of the story, by reporter Nicholas Bogel-Burrough points out: "The Police Photoshopped His (Tyrone Allen's) Mug Shot for a Lineup. He’s Not the Only One."

In the years since I started publishing this Blog I have become increasingly disturbed by the 'white elephant' in the room: Sheer, unadulterated, willful   misconduct in the criminal justice system - much  of it involving forensic evidence - committed by lab technicians,  pathologists, police officers, prosecutors and others.  Think Annie Dookhan; Think Sonia Farak; Think David Kofoed; Think Charles Smith; Think Ken Anderson; Think Gene Morrison.  I have therefore decided to run this image of a white elephant at the top of every applicable post henceforth, to draw our reader's attention to   what I see as a major problem in all too many criminal justice system's - my own included.  Harold Levy; Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
"Reformers have for years recommended that all forensic labs be independent from law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies' and this is a key reform promoted by The Justice Project (2008). But fixing these problems is only half the answer' because half of the wrongful convictions attributed to misleading forensic evidence involved deliberate forensic fraud' evidence tampering' and/or perjury.
From "The Elephant in the Crime Lab," by co-authored by Sheila Berry and Larry Ytuarte; Forensic Examiner; Spring, 2009; http://www.t-mlaw.com/blog/post/the-elephant-in-the-crime-lab/

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This is but a small portion of a much larger story which deserves to be read in its entirety at the link below.

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Chares Smith Blog.

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Officials at other police departments, including in Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia, said they keep their hands away from Photoshop. “Adding or removing tattoos is not something we do,” said Detective Donny Moses, a spokesman for the Baltimore Police Department. “We don’t tamper with them at all,” he said of photos for arrays. “We would get killed in the courts as well as the media. That’s something we don’t mess with.”

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

STORY: " by reporter Nicholas Bogel-Burrough, published by The New York Times on August 24, 2019.

SUB-HEADING: "When witness descriptions made no mention of a suspect’s facial tattoos, the police airbrushed them away for an identification lineup. The practice goes beyond one case."

PHOTO CAPTION: "Tyrone Allen’s facial tattoos were removed in a photograph shown to four bank tellers in a robbery case."

GIST: "Court records and interviews with police departments across the country show this was not an isolated episode of officers airbrushing aside a discrepancy. Some of the nation’s largest police departments regularly use Photoshop and other editing tools in cases where suspects have a distinguishing tattoo, scar, bruise or other mark. Criminal justice experts say there can be good reasons for touching up photos. For instance, adding a suspect’s birthmark to pictures of the other people in the array — known as fillers — can make lineups fairer by ensuring that the perpetrator does not stand out. Modifying the features of the suspect, however, is less common and has concerned lawyers who say investigators are encouraging positive identifications and changing the appearance of the person they are asking witnesses to identify. “Law enforcement took these photos of a defendant who did not match the description of eyewitnesses, and then altered the photo to more closely match the witness description,” said Mat dos Santos, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon. “If you can’t do a good photo lineup, the answer is not to change the photos; the answer is a photo lineup just shouldn’t be done.” Margaret Bull Kovera, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice who studies witness identification and evidence, said though it could be nearly impossible to find five filler photos that look similar to a suspect with an obvious scar or face tattoo, changing a suspect’s mug shot was unacceptable. And she said she worried that the police could alter photos in other ways, like making a suspect look thinner if they believed that the person gained weight after committing a crime.  “That’s not O.K.,” Professor Kovera said. “You can’t alter the face of the suspect.” Among the police departments that do sometimes touch up a suspect’s photo is the country’s largest, the New York Police Department, often as a last resort. “All efforts are made to alter the filler photos, not the subject’s photo,” said Sgt. Mary Frances O’Donnell, a spokeswoman for the department. When confronted with a suspect whose scars or tattoos would stand out from the filler images, the department’s photo unit adds the same feature to the five filler photos “to ensure photo arrays are fair and impartial,” she said, adding that investigators document all changes. Officials at other police departments, including in Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia, said they keep their hands away from Photoshop. “Adding or removing tattoos is not something we do,” said Detective Donny Moses, a spokesman for the Baltimore Police Department. “We don’t tamper with them at all,” he said of photos for arrays. “We would get killed in the courts as well as the media. That’s something we don’t mess with.” In some cases, doing nothing about distinguishing marks may hurt suspects the most. "

The entire story can be read at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/us/police-photoshop-tattoos.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;

When the police arrested a suspect in a series of bank holdups in Portland, Ore., they took his mug shot and prepared to show it to witnesses in a photo array alongside images of five similar-looking men.

But there was a problem: The suspect had at least a half-dozen facial tattoos, but according to surveillance video and bank tellers, the robber had none.

This was nothing a little Photoshop could not fix.

The police used editing software to remove the tattoos from the picture of the suspect, Tyrone Allen, and presented his revised face to four tellers, at least two of whom identified him as the bank robber. Prosecutors in Portland said Mr. Allen may have applied makeup before the robberies and that investigators simply mimicked the possible disguise.

Mr. Allen’s lawyer is asking a judge to throw the identifications out, The Oregonian reported this month, publicizing a practice that has drawn outrage from activists who say the police unfairly changed Mr. Allen’s appearance to match witness accounts.

Advertisement

Court records and interviews with police departments across the country show this was not an isolated episode of officers airbrushing aside a discrepancy. Some of the nation’s largest police departments regularly use Photoshop and other editing tools in cases where suspects have a distinguishing tattoo, scar, bruise or other mark.

Criminal justice experts say there can be good reasons for touching up photos. For instance, adding a suspect’s birthmark to pictures of the other people in the array — known as fillers — can make lineups fairer by ensuring that the perpetrator does not stand out.

Modifying the features of the suspect, however, is less common and has concerned lawyers who say investigators are encouraging positive identifications and changing the appearance of the person they are asking witnesses to identify.

“Law enforcement took these photos of a defendant who did not match the description of eyewitnesses, and then altered the photo to more closely match the witness description,” said Mat dos Santos, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Oregon. “If you can’t do a good photo lineup, the answer is not to change the photos; the answer is a photo lineup just shouldn’t be done.”

Margaret Bull Kovera, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice who studies witness identification and evidence, said though it could be nearly impossible to find five filler photos that look similar to a suspect with an obvious scar or face tattoo, changing a suspect’s mug shot was unacceptable. And she said she worried that the police could alter photos in other ways, like making a suspect look thinner if they believed that the person gained weight after committing a crime.

Advertisement

“That’s not O.K.,” Professor Kovera said. “You can’t alter the face of the suspect.”

Among the police departments that do sometimes touch up a suspect’s photo is the country’s largest, the New York Police Department, often as a last resort.

“All efforts are made to alter the filler photos, not the subject’s photo,” said Sgt. Mary Frances O’Donnell, a spokeswoman for the department. When confronted with a suspect whose scars or tattoos would stand out from the filler images, the department’s photo unit adds the same feature to the five filler photos “to ensure photo arrays are fair and impartial,” she said, adding that investigators document all changes.

Officials at other police departments, including in Los Angeles, Chicago and Philadelphia, said they keep their hands away from Photoshop.

“Adding or removing tattoos is not something we do,” said Detective Donny Moses, a spokesman for the Baltimore Police Department.

“We don’t tamper with them at all,” he said of photos for arrays. “We would get killed in the courts as well as the media. That’s something we don’t mess with.”

In some cases, doing nothing about distinguishing marks may hurt suspects the most. A state appeals court in New Jersey last year tossed out an identification in which a witness had selected a man as the perpetrator because he was the only person with face tattoos in a photo array.

In a study published in 2016, researchers in the United States and England asked witnesses to watch someone with a distinctive feature commit a crime. When researchers then produced a photo array in which only one person had the distinctive feature, witnesses were more likely to identify that person as the perpetrator — even when it was not the same person from the video.

Advertisement

“In essence, the unfair lineup made people more likely to confuse the guilty perpetrator with an innocent suspect,” said Melissa Colloff, a psychology lecturer at the University of Birmingham in England and an author of the study.

Experts generally agree that finding filler photos with similar identifiable markings is the ideal solution, although a 2004 survey of 220 police departments, including many of the nation’s largest, found that nearly a third did not do anything about unique marks.

According to a training manual issued by the Justice Department in 2003, when a suspect has a unique feature that a witness did not mention seeing — as in the Portland case — the police should add it to the filler photos but “should not alter the suspect’s photo.”

In these circumstances, the Miami-Dade Police Department takes a novel approach. Detectives use Adobe Photoshop to add the suspect’s tattoo or scar to two of the five filler photographs, creating an array in which half of the photos have the feature and half do not.

In a memorandum to federal law enforcement agencies and prosecutors in 2017, Sally Q. Yates, then the deputy attorney general, said the police could cover a suspect’s unique mark with a black box and place a similar box on the filler photos, the modern equivalent of what has long been done with Band-Aids for in-person police lineups. Ms. Yates said all changes should be documented.

Marc Garth Green, the deputy chief of the Seattle Police Department, said the department’s photography lab followed that advice: adding suspects’ identifying marks to filler photos but never changing the appearance of a defendant.

“We want a true, fair and accurate representation of the person we believe it to be,” Mr. Garth Green said. “Then the victim can make their decision.”

Advertisement

In the Portland case, investigators came to believe that Mr. Allen may have used makeup to cover his tattoos after an anonymous informant told the police that his unnamed roommate had said Mr. Allen was the robber, Paul Maloney, an assistant United States attorney in Oregon, wrote in a court filing.

“Investigators compared defendant’s photo to the surveillance image and saw enough similarities in the immutable facial features to include defendant in the photo array, knowing that tattoos are easily concealed with makeup,” Mr. Maloney wrote.

Sgt. Brad Yakots, a spokesman for the Portland Police Bureau, said investigators then used “digital makeup” to “help prevent misidentifying the suspect.”

“I basically painted over the tattoos,” a forensic technician at the bureau testified in court, according to The Oregonian.

Mr. Allen’s lawyer argued that the identifications should be suppressed.

“Presumably, investigators believed that showing the tellers Mr. Allen’s real face would decrease the likelihood of a positive identification, so they simply chose to make Mr. Allen look different than he actually does,” the lawyer, Mark Ahlemeyer, wrote in his motion.

The judge has not decided whether to allow the photo array identification as evidence, and the ruling could set a precedent for the use of Photoshop on mug shots.

Prosecutors in Oregon pointed to a California ruling in 2015, in which a judge allowed the introduction of a photo array in which police had used editing software to add hooded sweatshirts to six photos.

Advertisement

One of the bank tellers who identified Mr. Allen as the robber in the photo array told the police she was “100 percent” sure it was him, prosecutors said.

“The face is really clear,” she said. “I’ll never forget that face.”

The entire story can be read at:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/24/us/police-photoshop-tattoos.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;

Tyrone Allen’s facial tattoos were removed in a photograph shown to four bank tellers in a robbery case.

Tyrone Lamont Allen: Oregon. (2): (Technology): White Elephant Case: Great piece by reporter Tim Cushing in Techdirt. It contains the outrage one would expect to to see when police photo-shop line-up photo's to pin the case on a suspect - and when the police and government defend the iniquitous practice. HL..."Altering photos is apparently "standard practice among investigators," according to Detective Brett Hawkinson, an 18-year veteran of altering lineup photos and the lead investigator on this case. He's the one who gave the orders to digitally delete Allen's tattoos before putting his face in the PD's photo lineup. Yes, this is standard practice. The lead investigator could name no official policy instructing cops to remove distinctive facial features from lineup photos, but of course there wouldn't be. It's an unofficial "standard practice" -- things cops do because of the gaping void where honesty and accountability should be. No one says this is how things should be done. But this is how things are done."

In the years since I started publishing this Blog I have become increasingly disturbed by the 'white elephant' in the room: Sheer, unadulterated, willful   misconduct in the criminal justice system - much  of it involving forensic evidence - committed by lab technicians,  pathologists, police officers, prosecutors and others.  Think Annie Dookhan; Think Sonia Farak; Think David Kofoed; Think Charles Smith; Think Ken Anderson; Think Gene Morrison.  I have therefore decided to run this image of a white elephant at the top of every applicable post henceforth, to draw our reader's attention to   what I see as a major problem in all too many criminal justice system's - my own included.  Harold Levy; Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
"Reformers have for years recommended that all forensic labs be independent from law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies' and this is a key reform promoted by The Justice Project (2008). But fixing these problems is only half the answer' because half of the wrongful convictions attributed to misleading forensic evidence involved deliberate forensic fraud' evidence tampering' and/or perjury.
From "The Elephant in the Crime Lab," by co-authored by Sheila Berry and Larry Ytuarte; Forensic Examiner; Spring, 2009; http://www.t-mlaw.com/blog/post/the-elephant-in-the-crime-lab/

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Having been caught implying all black guys look alike if you remove the stuff that makes them individuals, the government is now actually arguing that this is no different than digitally removing the hat and glasses the suspect in the camera footage is wearing. Altering photos is apparently "standard practice among investigators," according to Detective Brett Hawkinson, an 18-year veteran of altering lineup photos and the lead investigator on this case. He's the one who gave the orders to digitally delete Allen's tattoos before putting his face in the PD's photo lineup. Yes, this is standard practice. The lead investigator could name no official policy instructing cops to remove distinctive facial features from lineup photos, but of course there wouldn't be. It's an unofficial "standard practice" -- things cops do because of the gaping void where honesty and accountability should be. No one says this is how things should be done. But this is how things are done. This incident was particularly egregious. And it came out in court. Now more people are finding out exactly what law enforcement agencies mean when they use the word "investigation."

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

STORY: "Cops Digitally Erase Suspect's Facial Tattoos To Make Him Look More Like The Robbery Suspect Caught On Camera," by reporter Tim Cushing, published by Techdirt on September 6, 2019. (From Techdirt's  "police-officers-dig-deep, find-new-lows department.") Techdirt is an internet blog that reports on technology's technical challenges and related business and economic policy issues, in context of the digital revolution.

BOOKING PHOTO CAPTION: "That's Tyrone Lamont Allen's booking photo. This is an image of the suspect captured by a bank's security system" ... "The first thing that jumps out of this photo is the lack of things that jump out. No tattoos on the face capture by bank cameras. Plenty of tattoos on the "suspect" the Portland police decided to arrest. But at least investigators did a little footwork first. And a little Photoshop work as well."

LINE-UP PHOTO CAPTION: "Here's the photo they used of Allen in lineups shown to bank tellers at robbed banks..."Yeah, that's Tyron Allen -- minus everything that makes him distinctively Tyrone Allen. This is what the Portland PD did to steer witnesses into handing them the suspect they wanted to arrest.

[W]hen Portland police suspected Allen was involved in four bank and credit union heists, and none of the tellers reported seeing tattoos on the face of the man who robbed them, police digitally altered Allen’s mugshot.
They covered up every one of his tattoos using Photoshop.
“I basically painted over the tattoos,’’ police forensic criminalist Mark Weber testified. “Almost like applying electronic makeup.’’
Police then presented the altered image of Allen with photos of five similar-looking men to the tellers for identification. They didn’t tell anyone that they’d changed Allen’s photo.
Some of the tellers picked out Allen.

GIST: "When the police have already decided who they like for some unsolved crime, almost nothing will stop them from getting their man. Investigations are supposed to involve investigating. But when a handful of tipsters said a black man robbed a bank, the Portland PD went to work trying to pin four bank robberies on one man. (via Simple Justice) The problem with this man was his list of distinguishing features. He had several -- all as plain as the tattoos on his face. (All photos via court documents.) All of this came out in court, leading to a large number of lawyers and laypersons alike to say WTF. Allen's lawyer said the police basically "rigged the outcome" of the photo lineup. He's not wrong. But his client is not the first person this has happened to. Rigging lineups is a cop tradition. The only distinctive feature of this one is the use of Photoshop to remove distinctive features. Now, as Scott Greenfield points out, someone with a lot of facial tattoos and a predilection for bank robberies might realize those two qualities aren't a good mix. Allen could have altered his appearance so no teller would tell cops "look for the guy with all the face tattoos." (Reminder: none of the tellers told the cops to look for a guy with a lot of face tattoos.) But that would only have made Allen memorable for other reasons.

If a guy wanted to rob a bank, knowing he had rather unique facial characteristics that would make him very easy to ID, he could “sanitize” his appearance with makeup. But upon closer scrutiny, the theory has a flaw: the amount of makeup necessary to cover up Allen’s facial tats would itself have become an identifying characteristic. Even assuming he was highly skilled in the application of makeup, it would require so much makeup to accomplish a complete cover-up that the description would have been “guy in baseball cap, glasses and face covered in makeup.”

Having been caught implying all black guys look alike if you remove the stuff that makes them individuals, the government is now actually arguing that this is no different than digitally removing the hat and glasses the suspect in the camera footage is wearing. Altering photos is apparently "standard practice among investigators," according to Detective Brett Hawkinson, an 18-year veteran of altering lineup photos and the lead investigator on this case. He's the one who gave the orders to digitally delete Allen's tattoos before putting his face in the PD's photo lineup. Yes, this is standard practice. The lead investigator could name no official policy instructing cops to remove distinctive facial features from lineup photos, but of course there wouldn't be. It's an unofficial "standard practice" -- things cops do because of the gaping void where honesty and accountability should be. No one says this is how things should be done. But this is how things are done. This incident was particularly egregious. And it came out in court. Now more people are finding out exactly what law enforcement agencies mean when they use the word "investigation." It's rarely a search for unknown criminal suspects. More often, it's cops working backwards from foregone conclusions. This is ugly and cheap and the antithesis of the image law enforcement likes to present to the public: the good guys fighting the good fight. They're fighting dirty and they like easy wins and easy days as much as anyone in the private sector. If the corner you have to cut is the distinguishing features that would rule out your favorite suspect, so be it."

The entire story can be read at:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190822/20082342843/cops-digitally-erase-suspects-facial-tattoos-to-make-him-look-more-like-robbery-suspect-caught-camera.shtml

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;

Tyrone Lamont Allen: Oregon: (1): (Technology): White Elephant Case: Extraordinary. (And I don't shock easily! HL). As reporter Debra Cassens Weiss reports in the ABA Journal: "A lawyer for a defendant charged with bank robbery noticed something amiss when he received the six photos shown to four tellers to see whether they could identify the suspect. The photo of the defendant, Tyrone Lamont Allen, did not have the distinctive tattoos that are visible on Allen’s face, according to a motion filed by Assistant Federal Public Defender Mark Ahlemeyer. Yet police had failed to disclose—to the lawyer or the tellers—that the pictures had been digitally altered before being presented in the photo lineup."..."A Portland police detective assigned to an FBI task force on bank robberies had ordered the digital change. The police criminalist who actually altered the photo testified in a hearing last week that he had also changed suspect photos in other lineups, according to Oregonian coverage. Prosecutors argued that Allen could have put on makeup to cover the tattoos, and he shouldn’t “reap a windfall” because he took steps to conceal his identity. The Photoshop alteration was the “digital equivalent of makeup,” prosecutors said. (Unbelievable HL);

In the years since I started publishing this Blog I have become increasingly disturbed by the 'white elephant' in the room: Sheer, unadulterated, willful   misconduct in the criminal justice system - much  of it involving forensic evidence - committed by lab technicians,  pathologists, police officers, prosecutors and others.  Think Annie Dookhan; Think Sonia Farak; Think David Kofoed; Think Charles Smith; Think Ken Anderson; Think Gene Morrison.  I have therefore decided to run this image of a white elephant at the top of every applicable post henceforth, to draw our reader's attention to   what I see as a major problem in all too many criminal justice system's - my own included.  Harold Levy; Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
"Reformers have for years recommended that all forensic labs be independent from law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies' and this is a key reform promoted by The Justice Project (2008). But fixing these problems is only half the answer' because half of the wrongful convictions attributed to misleading forensic evidence involved deliberate forensic fraud' evidence tampering' and/or perjury.
From "The Elephant in the Crime Lab," by co-authored by Sheila Berry and Larry Ytuarte; Forensic Examiner; Spring, 2009; http://www.t-mlaw.com/blog/post/the-elephant-in-the-crime-lab/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE OF THE DAY:  "(Assistant Federal Public Defender Mark) Ahlemeyer argued that evidence of the photo identifications should be suppressed because removing the tattoos was an “unnecessarily suggestive” law enforcement procedure “that created a substantial  likelihood of misidentification.” Use of the photo evidence would violate the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, he said. “It is hard to fathom any photo array conduct that is more ‘suggestive’ than altering a source photograph for the sole purpose of making the investigation target look more like the perpetrator,” Ahlemeyer wrote. Allowing such evidence could create a “slippery slope,” Ahlemeyer argued. “If a witness reports that a perpetrator did not have any front teeth, can the government simply black out a suspect’s teeth on the theory that it could be done with cosmetics?” he wrote. “Or if a suspect’s skin color is too dark or too light as compared to objective video evidence, can the government simply press a few strokes on a computer keyboard and adjust the color to match that objective evidence?”

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

STORY: "Cops altered mug shot after witnesses said suspect didn't have tattoos; should ID evidence be tossed?,  by reporter Debra Cassens Weiss, published by the ABA Journal on August 20, 2019. (Debra Cassens Weiss, a senior writer for the web, joined the ABA Journal staff in 1986. She was previously the managing editor, an assistant managing editor and news editor. She had worked as a news researcher for WMAQ-TV in Chicago, as a reporter and editor at the City News Bureau of Chicago, and as a newscaster at WMRO and WAUR radio (Aurora, Ill.). Weiss has a JD from DePaul University College of Law and a BA in English from the University of Illinois.)

PHOTO CAPTION: "Tyrone Lamont Allen’s booking photo and lineup photo. Images from the motion to suppress."

GIST: "A lawyer for a defendant charged with bank robbery noticed something amiss when he received the six photos shown to four tellers to see whether they could identify the suspect.
The photo of the defendant, Tyrone Lamont Allen, did not have the distinctive tattoos that are visible on Allen’s face, according to a motion filed by Assistant Federal Public Defender Mark Ahlemeyer. Yet police had failed to disclose—to the lawyer or the tellers—that the pictures had been digitally altered before being presented in the photo lineup. Now Ahlemeyer is asking U.S. District Judge Marco Hernandez to bar the witness identifications of Allen at his trial, report the Oregonian and the Washington Post. Allen has been charged in robberies of four Portland, Oregon, banks and credit unions in April 2017. He became a suspect after police received a tip from an individual who saw a photo of the robbery suspect on the news and thought Allen was the robber. None of the tellers had mentioned any tattoos on the suspect when interviewed by police. There were no tattoos visible on surveillance video of the suspect. Two of the tellers picked Allen from the photos as the suspect, while a third picked another man in the photos. A Portland police detective assigned to an FBI task force on bank robberies had ordered the digital change. The police criminalist who actually altered the photo testified in a hearing last week that he had also changed suspect photos in other lineups, according to Oregonian coverage. Prosecutors argued that Allen could have put on makeup to cover the tattoos, and he shouldn’t “reap a windfall” because he took steps to conceal his identity. The Photoshop alteration was the “digital equivalent of makeup,” prosecutors said. In a supplemental filing, prosecutors pointed to a California federal judge’s decision allowing identification evidence gained after hooded sweatshirts were digitally added to all six photos in an array shown to a victim police officer. The officer had asked for the change to be made after he was unable to identify a suspect from the six photos. Ahlemeyer argued that evidence of the photo identifications should be suppressed because removing the tattoos was an “unnecessarily suggestive” law enforcement procedure “that created a substantial likelihood of misidentification.” Use of the photo evidence would violate the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, he said. “It is hard to fathom any photo array conduct that is more ‘suggestive’ than altering a source photograph for the sole purpose of making the investigation target look more like the perpetrator,” Ahlemeyer wrote. Allowing such evidence could create a “slippery slope,” Ahlemeyer argued. “If a witness reports that a perpetrator did not have any front teeth, can the government simply black out a suspect’s teeth on the theory that it could be done with cosmetics?” he wrote. “Or if a suspect’s skin color is too dark or too light as compared to objective video evidence, can the government simply press a few strokes on a computer keyboard and adjust the color to match that objective evidence?”

The entire story can be read at:

http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/cops-altered-mugshot-after-witnesses-said-suspect-didnt-have-tattoos-should-id-evidence-be-tossed

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;

Dontae sharpe: Major development. Free at last after 24 years in prison. State's only witness (just 14 years old) later recanted her testimony - saying a detective pushed her into identifying Sharpe - and a former state medical examiner has repudiated her original opinion..."A man convicted in a 1994 Greenville murder was freed after 24 years in prison Thursday when evidence that he did not commit the crime convinced a judge to order a new trial. Because of the recanted testimony of a key witness, along with autopsy evidence showing her original testimony could not be true, Judge Bryan Collins of Wake County ruled Dontae Sharpe, 44, should have a new trial in the shooting death of George Radcliffe, a crime Sharpe never admitted to. Pitt County Assistant District Attorney Valerie Pearce said she would not pursue a new trial because of the age of the case and credibility of testimony."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Also testifying at Sharpe’s hearing Thursday was a nationally known criminal defense lawyer, Joe Cheshire. He said as he read the transcripts from the case, after the family asked him to, it was like reliving a nightmare. “It [1994] was a time before open file discovery. It was a time before police officers kept notes. It was a time before police officers were held accountable for any of their actions. It was a time of trial by ambush,” he said. Cheshire believes that had the jury heard Gilliland give her opinion that Frazier’s testimony was medically and scientifically impossible, there would have likely been a different outcome. Later, Cheshire said he came to he came to the trial because he has trouble with innocent people being in prison."

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This case is a horror story. How a prosecutor could have even laid the charge on the basis of this then-14-year old  (the state's only witness) just baffles me  - as does the fact that the former medical examiner appears to have based her original opinion on this witness's  original testimony - as opposed to scientific evidence. But most of all, the thought that the police officer  may have pressured the 14-year-old to make a false identification takes this prosecution far over the line - especially when you think that 44-year-old  Dontae Sharpe spent 24-years in prison before being freed. Kudos to criminal defence lawyer Joe Cheshire,  and to lawyers Spencer Parris and Theresa Newman for their  pro bono work on the case.

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

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

PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY: "Charlene Johnson Frazier, the state’s only witness, was just 14 when she told police she saw Sharpe shoot Radcliffe, 33, in a vacant lot at the corner of Sheppard and West Sixth Street, an area in Greenville known for drug activity at the time Two years later, Frazier recanted her testimony. She testified again on Thursday that then-Greenville Police Department Detective Ricky Best pushed her into identifying Sharpe. Frazier admitted she had been a troubled teen at the time the murder took place and realized later she was seeking attention. She told the courtroom she repeatedly ran away from home, was twice hospitalized in the adolescent psychiatry unit at what was then Pitt County Hospital and was sent to Cherry Hospital, the state hospital for those with psychiatric illnesses. “I was a kid out of control,” she said. She said in the years since she testified against Sharpe, she has since been able to turn her life around. She was there Thursday, because “the truth has to come out,” she said. “I refuse to go any further without telling the truth. Today I am doing what I should have done years ago — have a voice and stand up for myself.”

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Previous attempts to free Sharpe based on Frazier’s recanted testimony have failed, including a motion for appropriate relief that Judge W. Russell “Rusty” Duke rejected in 2016, Newman said. In May however, former state medical examiner M.G.F. Gilliland offered testimony that raised more questions about the state’s case against Sharpe. Based on the original testimony of Frazier, prosecutors at the time argued that Radcliffe was facing Sharpe when a shot was fired. Gilliland’s autopsy determined Radcliffe was shot in the side. Gilliland said she was not aware during Sharpe’s 1995 trial that the state was arguing he and Radcliffe were facing each other. Given the side-to-side path of the bullet in Radcliffe’s body, a face-to-face shooting could not have happened."

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

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY:  "Also testifying at Sharpe’s hearing Thursday was a nationally known criminal defense lawyer, Joe Cheshire. He said as he read the transcripts from the case, after the family asked him to, it was like reliving a nightmare. “It [1994] was a time before open file discovery. It was a time before police officers kept notes. It was a time before police officers were held accountable for any of their actions. It was a time of trial by ambush,” he said. Cheshire believes that had the jury heard Gilliland give her opinion that Frazier’s testimony was medically and scientifically impossible, there would have likely been a different outcome. Later, Cheshire said he came to he came to the trial because he has trouble with innocent people being in prison."

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

STORY: "Dontae Sharpe set free," published by The Daily Reflector on August 22, 2019.

GIST: "A man convicted in a 1994 Greenville murder was freed after 24 years in prison Thursday when evidence that he did not commit the crime convinced a judge to order a new trial. Because of the recanted testimony of a key witness, along with autopsy evidence showing her original testimony could not be true, Judge Bryan Collins of Wake County ruled Dontae Sharpe, 44, should have a new trial in the shooting death of George Radcliffe, a crime Sharpe never admitted to. Pitt County Assistant District Attorney Valerie Pearce said she would not pursue a new trial because of the age of the case and credibility of testimony. Pearce said she had anticipated the judge’s ruling. “We are having to dismiss it because there is not sufficient evidence to prove the case at this point. We have a recanting witness and she was the main evidence,” Pearce said. “The other witnesses are either dead or have major credibility issues. We just don’t have the evidence to prosecute it at this point.” Pearce said she could not conclusively prove Sharpe didn’t kill Radcliffe, “but I also can’t say conclusively that he did do it.” As Judge Collins set a $100,000 unsecured bond for Sharpe, which allowed him to walk free a short time after the ruling, family, friends and supporters in the courtroom erupted in jubilation. When asked in a phone interview how he maintained his determination to reject offers of a lighter sentence in exchange for a guilty plea, Sharpe told The Associated Press: “My faith, knowing I was innocent and the way I was raised. My momma always told me if you didn’t do something, don’t own up to it. Don’t say you did it.” He said his faith provided the “positivity to help me when I was around all that negativity.” Sharpe was convicted of the murder in 1995 and sentenced to life in prison. He could have been released on parole but refused because it would have required him to admit guilt. “It was a too-long journey for Dontae Sharpe,” said attorney Therese Newman, co-director of Duke University’s Wrongful Convictions Clinic. “We can lament that at some point, but right now, it’s a time of great joy to restore him to his family and his community.” Sharpe’s mother, Sarah Blakely, kept his case in the spotlight with the help of the NAACP. Blakely said she was feeling joy and she was “relieved it’s all over. Justice was served.” Sharpe’s family fought for his freedom over two decades. Also attending the trial were representatives from the Pitt County Chapter of the NAACP and the North Carolina NAACP, including state President T. Anthony Spearman, in a show of solidarity for Sharpe’s release. Charlene Johnson Frazier, the state’s only witness, was just 14 when she told police she saw Sharpe shoot Radcliffe, 33, in a vacant lot at the corner of Sheppard and West Sixth Street, an area in Greenville known for drug activity at the time Two years later, Frazier recanted her testimony. She testified again on Thursday that then-Greenville Police Department Detective Ricky Best pushed her into identifying Sharpe. Frazier admitted she had been a troubled teen at the time the murder took place and realized later she was seeking attention. She told the courtroom she repeatedly ran away from home, was twice hospitalized in the adolescent psychiatry unit at what was then Pitt County Hospital and was sent to Cherry Hospital, the state hospital for those with psychiatric illnesses. “I was a kid out of control,” she said. She said in the years since she testified against Sharpe, she has since been able to turn her life around. She was there Thursday, because “the truth has to come out,” she said. “I refuse to go any further without telling the truth. Today I am doing what I should have done years ago — have a voice and stand up for myself.”  Previous attempts to free Sharpe based on Frazier’s recanted testimony have failed, including a motion for appropriate relief that Judge W. Russell “Rusty” Duke rejected in 2016, Newman said. In May however, former state medical examiner M.G.F. Gilliland offered testimony that raised more questions about the state’s case against Sharpe. Based on the original testimony of Frazier, prosecutors at the time argued that Radcliffe was facing Sharpe when a shot was fired. Gilliland’s autopsy determined Radcliffe was shot in the side. Gilliland said she was not aware during Sharpe’s 1995 trial that the state was arguing he and Radcliffe were facing each other. Given the side-to-side path of the bullet in Radcliffe’s body, a face-to-face shooting could not have happened. The testimony in May helped convince Collins to set Thursday's hearing for a new trial. Also testifying at Sharpe’s hearing Thursday was a nationally known criminal defense lawyer, Joe Cheshire. He said as he read the transcripts from the case, after the family asked him to, it was like reliving a nightmare. “It [1994] was a time before open file discovery. It was a time before police officers kept notes. It was a time before police officers were held accountable for any of their actions. It was a time of trial by ambush,” he said. Cheshire believes that had the jury heard Gilliland give her opinion that Frazier’s testimony was medically and scientifically impossible, there would have likely been a different outcome. Later, Cheshire said he came to he came to the trial because he has trouble with innocent people being in prison. Spencer Parris, a lawyer from Wrightsville Beach was representing Sharpe, along with lawyer Theresa Newman. Parris said he was representing Sharpe “pro-bono” because, “I believe it is our duty to give our time to correct the failures of our justice system.” Both lawyers were elated at the final outcome. According to a press release from Forward Justice, a center on law, policy and strategy, Dontae’s case has been featured in the national media, including Final Appeal, an in-depth documentary series produced by Oxygen Network. According to the release, 70,000 people across the nation have signed a petition to the District Attorney’s office, the Attorney General and N.C. Governor Roy Cooper in support of Sharpe. Friends, family and supporters will gather to celebrate from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. today at Philippi Church of Christ, 3760 Philippi Circle in Greenville."

The entire story can be read at:

http://www.reflector.com/Crime-and-Rescue/2019/08/22/Dontae-Sharpe-to-go-free.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;

Skylar Richardson: Ohio: (10): Acquitted of murder, involuntary manslaughter and child endangerment. As news.com.au reports (Reporter Megan Palin): "American cheerleader sentenced over secret backyard baby burial: ‘Grotesque disregard for life."..."She was found guilty on one count of abuse of a corpse — which holds a maximum penalty of one year imprisonment. In court on Friday, Judge Donald Oda II ordered that Ms Richardson serve three years probation. She was sentenced to seven days in jail, with credit for time already served, rendering her free to go home. If she violates her probation, she can spend up to a year in jail, according to the judge."

STORY: "American cheerleader sentenced over secret backyard baby burial: ‘Grotesque disregard for life,’ by reporter Megan Palin,  published by news.com.au on Sept. 14, 2019.

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Enough already. This young woman has been put through hell after being grossly overcharged with murder, involuntary manslaughter and child endangerment. (Acquitted on all of these.)  Her lawyers aptly  accused prosecutors of creating “a false narrative” to sensationalise the case. I couldn't agree more. When you don't have the pathological evidence on which to base a charge of murder just use the old prosecutor's trick: Sensationalize the case for all that its worth. Skylar Richardson should never have been charged   with murder in the first place. The judge used some very harsh words  at the sentencing hearing. But that's often the case when a judge chooses to keep out of jail a defendant who the prosecutor seeks to lock up forever. This judge showed compassion. As news.com.au reported: "What started as an 18-year-old high school girl who was frightened and saddened because of giving birth to a stillborn baby whom she named Annabelle and then telling her doctor of the stillborn and burial in the backyard turned into something sinister and grotesque,” one of her representatives told the court. Her defence team said there was no evidence the baby was born alive. “She buried her daughter and marked the grave with flowers on top of it. She didn’t throw her in a trash can. She didn’t throw her in a dumpster,” defence lawyer Charlie Rittgers said. “She was living under this dark cloud for the last two years. Living, quite frankly, a nightmare.” This was a terribly tragic situation. I do hope that Skyler, with the help of those around her,  can somehow put this behind her as much as possible  and lead a normal life.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

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

GIST: A former high school cheerleader found not guilty of killing her baby after hiding her pregnancy has escaped further jail time for secretly burying the child in her backyard. Brooke Skylar Richardson, 20, was acquitted of aggravated murder, involuntary manslaughter and child endangerment charges by a Warren County jury on Thursday in Ohio, US. She was found guilty on one count of abuse of a corpse — which holds a maximum penalty of one year imprisonment. In court on Friday, Judge Donald Oda II ordered that Ms Richardson serve three years probation. She was sentenced to seven days in jail, with credit for time already served, rendering her free to go home. If she violates her probation, she can spend up to a year in jail, according to the judge. “I believe if you had made different decisions, Annabelle would still be here,” Mr Oda said of Ms Richardson’s dead baby. “I think that your choices before birth, during birth and after birth show a grotesque disregard for life.” Ms Richardson was 18-years-old when she allegedly told a doctor in 2017 that she gave birth to a stillborn baby girl, who she named “Annabelle”, and buried it in the backyard at her parents’ home in the village of Carlisle, just north of Cincinnati. The physician reported the incident to police who soon located the child’s remains.  Prior to the sentencing on Friday, Ms Richardson’s father, Scott Richardson, addressed the court and asked for his daughter to be released. “My daughter is suffering from an eating disorder and we are concerned about her health,” he said. The baby’s paternal grandmother read an emotional statement to the court. “Not only did I lose my first grandchild, but my baby boy (Trey Johnson) lost his daughter,” she said. “For a baby that she called ‘it’, we’re just as much the family as she is. “I’ve watched my son become a different person. “I won’t disclose his medical diagnosis because she’s done enough to him. I can personally tell you that I’ve personally been seen for depression, panic attacks, and I’m a shell of the person I was. “I would have taken her in with Trey without a question. Now, instead, every May 7, I don’t get to have a birthday party for my first grandchild. Instead, I send her balloons to heaven, to tell her how much her daddy loved her, and how much I loved her.” Ms Richardson then addressed the court. “I would do anything that you ask,” she said. “I can sometimes be selfish, but I’m getting better. I’m forever sorry. I’m so sorry. I’ve hurt a lot of people.” Assistant Prosecutor Steve Knippen asked the judge to hand down the maximum sentence. “It is clear from the defendant’s actions that she never intended for anyone to even know that her daughter existed or that the skeletal remains would ever be discovered,” Mr Knippen said. He said if it were not for Ms Richardson’s doctors who contacted authorities after she admitted to having the baby alone, “that child would still be buried in the backyard of their home without anyone knowing”. The former Ohio high school cheerleader gave birth in the bathroom at her family home on May 1, 2017. It was just a few days after her senior prom and weeks before she was set to start college. Her parents and friends said she hid the pregnancy from them. Assistant Prosecutor Julie Kraft said Ms Richardson didn’t tell anyone when she gave birth to her daughter. “Brooke took her own daughter’s life, destroyed all evidence of her birth and buried her in the backyard,” Ms Kraft said. But she returned to her doctor for birth control a few weeks later where she arose suspicion. Ms Richardson was later charged with aggravated murder, involuntary manslaughter, gross abuse of a corpse, tampering with evidence and child endangering and pleaded not guilty. According to her legal team, Ms Richardson kept quiet because she didn’t realise she was due so soon, and her response was normal for a scared teenager. In opening statements last week, prosecutors alleged Ms Richardson gave birth alone, buried the baby, disposed of the evidence and kept it a secret from everyone — including her parents. According to prosecutors, Ms Richardson “purposely” caused the baby’s death, saying the family was “obsessed” with external appearances and wanted to prevent a potential interruption of their lives. The court heard that Ms Richardson had an “extreme” reaction after being told she was pregnant and did not return for follow-up prenatal visits. County prosecutor David Fornshell previously said Ms Richardson and her family had been worried about the community’s reaction to her out-of-wedlock pregnancy. “Skylar and her family, particularly her mother, were pretty obsessed with external appearances and how things appeared to the outside world,” he said. “You have a situation where, you know, she’s a cute high school, recent high school graduate; she was a cheerleader described (as) a good girl by her lawyer as you heard after the arraignment. “And I think that kind of perception is one that Skylar wanted to perpetuate and her mother wanted to perpetuate.” Another physician called police after Ms Richardson came in months later and told her she had “gone into labour, delivered a stillborn baby and buried the baby in her backyard,” according to court papers. Her lawyers accused prosecutors of creating “a false narrative” to sensationalise the case. “What started as an 18-year-old high school girl who was frightened and saddened because of giving birth to a stillborn baby whom she named Annabelle and then telling her doctor of the stillborn and burial in the backyard turned into something sinister and grotesque,” one of her representatives told the court. Her defence team said there was no evidence the baby was born alive. “She buried her daughter and marked the grave with flowers on top of it. She didn’t throw her in a trash can. She didn’t throw her in a dumpster,” defence lawyer Charlie Rittgers said. “She was living under this dark cloud for the last two years. Living, quite frankly, a nightmare.”

Ms Richardson had been under house arrest for more than a year after a judge ordered a curfew of 9pm to 7am, random home visits and for her to be subject to GPS monitoring."

The entire story can be read at:

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/american-cheerleader-sentenced-over-backyard-baby-burial-grotesque-disregard-for-life/news-story/9675b823ac7a7292675155d520dba79f

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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;