Alex Murdaugh: South Carolina: Major Development: Murder convictions in deaths of wife and son overturned. (Prosecutors have announced they intend to retry him!)..."They (prosecutors) detailed the lack of physical evidence — no DNA or blood was found splattered on Murdaugh or any of his clothes, even though the killings were at close range with powerful weapons that were never found."

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

MAJOR DEVELOPMENT: PROSECUTORS PLAN TO RETRY ALEX MURDAUGH: (The CBC reports);

 "Prosecutors say they plan to retry Murdaugh, which likely means there will be another lengthy trial in the case that has become a true crime sensation because of its combination of money, power, Southern accents and treachery. It has spawned several streaming miniseries, best-selling books and dozens of true-crime podcasts. Murdaugh, 57, will remain in prison. He pleaded guilty to stealing around $12 million US from his clients and currently is serving a 40-year federal sentence. Prosecutors said they would aggressively seek to try Murdaugh again on the murder charges, with state Attorney General Alan Wilson saying he respected the court's decision but no one is above the law. Murdaugh's lawyers pointed out that trial will look a lot different, as the justices also ruled days of evidence at the murder trial about how Murdaugh stole from clients — many of them in dire straits — shouldn't be allowed next time."

murdaugh-retrial-9.7198360

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

STORY: "South Carolina Supreme Court overturns Alex Murdaugh’s murder convictions in deaths of wife and son," by Associated Press Reporter Jeffrey Collins, published by  PBS on May 13, 2026.

GIST: "The South Carolina Supreme Court on Wednesday overturned the murder convictions and life sentence of disgraced lawyer Alex Murdaugh in the shooting deaths of his wife and younger son.

In a unanimous ruling, the justices said the conduct by the court clerk “egregiously attacked Murdaugh’s credibility” by suggesting to jurors his testimony could not be trusted. They also said the trial judge went too far in allowing evidence of Murdaugh’s financial crimes into his murder trial

But Murdaugh won’t be getting out of prison. The 57-year-old pleaded guilty to stealing around $12 million from his clients and currently is serving a 40-year federal sentence.

Still, the state Supreme Court ruling is a win for Murdaugh, who admits to being a thief, liar, insurance cheat and bad lawyer, but has adamantly denied killing his wife Maggie and younger son Paul since he found their bodies outside their home in 2021.

Prosecutors didn’t immediately say if they planned to retry Murdaugh for the murders in light of his long sentence for financial crimes. The original trial took six weeks.

The justices ruled Colleton County Clerk of Court Becky Hill, assigned to oversee the evidence and the jury during the trial, influenced jurors to find Murdaugh guilty. She hoped to improve sales of a book she was writing about the case.

The name of the book was “Behind the Doors of Justice: The Murdaugh Murders.” It was pulled from publication after plagiarism allegations were made.

“As her book’s title suggests, it turns out Hill was quite busy behind the doors of justice, thwarting the integrity of the justice system she was sworn to protect and uphold,” the justices wrote in an unsigned 27-page ruling.

Hill has since pleaded guilty to lying about what she said and did to a different judge.

Murdaugh’s lawyers also argued before the high court that the judge at his 2023 trial made rulings that prevented a fair trial, such as allowing in evidence of Murdaugh stealing from clients that had nothing to do with the killings but biased jurors against him.

They detailed the lack of physical evidence — no DNA or blood was found splattered on Murdaugh or any of his clothes, even though the killings were at close range with powerful weapons that were never found.

Prosecutors argued that the clerk’s comments were fleeting and the evidence against Murdaugh was overwhelming. His lawyer said that didn’t matter because the comments a juror said she made — urging jurors to watch Murdaugh’s body language and listen to his testimony carefully — removed his presumption of innocence before the jury ever deliberated.

Murdaugh’s legal drama continues to captivate. There have been streaming miniseries, best selling books and dozens of true crime podcasts about how the multimillionaire Southern lawyer whose family dominated and controlled the legal system in tiny Hampton County ended up in a maximum security South Carolina prison.

The justices in their ruling praised prosecutors, the defense team and the judge for outstanding work, heaping all the blame for having to try Murdaugh again on Hill.

Hill’s attorney in her criminal case didn’t return a phone call or email seeking comment.

Hill “placed her fingers on the scales of justice, thereby denying Murdaugh his right to a fair trial by an impartial jury,” the justices wrote. “Our justice system provides — indeed demands — that every person is entitled to a fair trial."

The entire story can be read at: 

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?hl=en#all/QgrcJHrnvDkZdpSjDRLNqbgdrHLZvlzTqXV

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;

May 15: Question of the day: Ottawa's promised 'Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission': AKA 'Milgaard's Law': Where is it? It was supposed to be an 'independent' lifeline - replacing a lengthy, cumbersome, bureaucratic federal process which kept innocent people in penitentiary for years while it investigated cases - when just a single torturous moment spent by an innocent person spent behind bars cannot be justified or tolerated. My former Toronto Star colleague Chief Investigative Reporter Kevin Donovan takes on this perplexing question and provides the disturbing answer - it simply does not exist - and federal officials refuse to tell us why. Just empty promises. Just words. This is shameful and disappointing. Something Prime Minister Carney must address. HL. (The article is headed:"Ottawa gave wrongfully convicted Canadians a promise of a lifeline with Milgaard’s Law. Under Mark Carney, why has nothing happened since?")

STORY: "Ottawa gave wrongfully convicted Canadians a promise of a lifeline with  Milgaard’s Law. Under Mark Carney, why has nothing happened since?, by Chief Investigative Reporter Kevin Donovan, published by The Toronto Star on May 14, 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: "The Justice Department has refused to grant an interview with the Star to explain the delay in creating the new Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission."

GIST: "The federal government has failed to set up the independent commission it promised would review allegations of wrongful conviction from people convicted of murder and other crimes. 

Heralded three years ago as a long-overdue answer to flaws in the existing internal review process by government lawyers, the “Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission” was to be a dedicated group of people experienced in wrongful convictions. 

Their job: to “review, investigate, and decide which cases should be returned to the justice system due to a potential miscarriage of justice,” according to a government statement at the time. 

The legislation behind it was the David and Joyce Milgaard Law, named for the late David Milgaard and his mother Joyce. 

David was wrongfully convicted of rape and murder and served 23 years in prison before being released and exonerated, following the advocacy of his mother and a group of lawyers. 

The government announced the new commission in 2023 and made it law in 2024.

But it never became operational. There’s no office, no staff, and the commissioners that were supposed to vet the applications were never appointed. 

“It’s very disappointing,” said Toronto lawyer James Lockyer, who first began advocating for the commission in 1993 and has had a legal hand in freeing numerous individuals from prison due to wrongful convictions.

“All I can say to the government is, please get on with it,” said Lockyer, a founding director of Innocence Canada, which advocates for the wrongfully accused. Innocence Canada has found that “eyewitness misidentification, false confessions, flawed forensic evidence, bias and discrimination collide to create wrongful convictions.”

Why the commission was not set up is shrouded in mystery. 

Justice Department officials have refused numerous requests by the Star for an explanation.

 The planned “arms-length” commission was to replace the existing in-house system that legal critics say was slow-moving, lacked transparency and had an inherent conflict of interest, because it was made up of Justice Department lawyers.

A concern was that they have an interest in protecting the justice system — not exposing its frailties.

In May 2025, six months after it was set up the Star began asking Mark Carney’s new Justice Minister Sean Fraser when the commission would be active. 

The Star’s inquiries related to a potential case for the new commission — that of Christopher Sheriffe. 

The former soccer star turned carpenter was convicted of first-degree murder in 2012 and has maintained his innocence.

 Sheriffe, now in his 14th year of a life sentence, was hoping to be the first case reviewed by the new commission. 

Instead, he is making an appeal to the existing Criminal Conviction Review Group (CCRG), staffed by eight federal lawyers.

Here is a selection of responses the Star received from the minister’s public relations staff when we asked what was going on: 

May 22, 2025: “The Commission is not yet operational or accepting applications for wrongful conviction reviews.” And, when asked by the Star for an interview with a senior Justice official: “We cannot arrange for an interview.”

The Star asked for specific information.

May 26, 2025: “There will be a process launched soon. When, I am not sure, as the new minister is getting settled and our office is still getting staffed up,” a spokesperson said, noting that the commission would be based in Winnipeg.

Six months later, the Star followed up.

Sept. 26, 2025: “The government continues to work toward making the commission operational. We have no further updates at this time. Information on next steps, such as appointments, will be made in due course,” a senior public relations official said. 

The Star continued to ask questions, receiving almost identical responses.

Last month, closing in on a year and a half after the commission became law, the public relations staff at the justice department said.

April 23, 2026: “Thank you for your email. The Government of Canada continues to work diligently towards the establishment of the Miscarriage of Justice Commission. Efforts are currently ongoing to identify and appoint a suitable chief commissioner as an important step toward full implementation of the commission. Given the importance and sensitivity of the commission’s mandate, it is essential that the right individual is selected to lead this work.”

Given the time that had passed since the law passed, the Star asked to interview a senior Justice official — not public relations staff. 

April 24, 2026: “Hello, Kevin. An interview will not be possible, but we hope the additional information will be helpful. The chief commissioner and four to eight full- or part-time commissioners will be governor in council appointments made on the recommendation of the minister of justice. Once a chief commissioner is in place, the process to appoint commissioners will be pursued,” read an email from the public relations staff.

How many Canadian prisoners are wrongfully convicted?

Nobody can put a number on the number of Canadians who have been wrongfully convicted. 

Lockyer, a lawyer who has devoted his career to advocating for the victims of wrongful convictions, said between two and three per cent of people convicted are innocent. 

Should the commission be set up, Lockyer estimates it would receive 200 serious applications each year. 

“The criminal justice system is a human system, so it’s fallible,” Lockyer told the Star in an interview. The Milgaard case, seen as a sort of flag bearer for the wrongfully convicted, was one of the many he has worked on. 

Milgaard was 16 when he was charged and was later convicted of the rape and murder of nurse Gail Miller. 

His conviction was overturned by the Supreme Court of Canada in 1992 after he had served 23 years in prison. 

In one of the many flaws discovered in his case, a police informant was found to have given false information to police in return for a $2,000 payment.

 Milgaard was fully cleared in 1997 after tests proved that semen found at the crime scene didn’t match his DNA.

The real killer, a serial rapist, was convicted years after Milgaard’s release. 

Milgaard and his mother went on to be tireless advocates for others they believed were wrongfully convicted. Joyce died in 2020; David in 2022.

When Milgaard and his lawyers first applied to the existing conviction review group, his request was dismissed. It took three more years before a second application was accepted by the group.

Other notable cases of wrongful conviction for murder in Canada include those of Steven Truscott, Guy Paul Morin, Donald Marshall and Tammy Marquardt. 

A government-initiated report that led to the final formation of the new commission noted that the existing CCRG has delays of up to six years before the lawyers review a case.

 Since 2002, only 20 “referrals” have been made back to the court from the CCRG. All were men, and all but two were white (one was Black, the other indigenous).

The report recommends that the new commission be made up of nine commissioners (one-third with legal training, one-third with expertise in wrongful convictions, and one-third representing groups that are overrepresented in prison, including at least one Black and one Indigenous commissioner). 

The report notes (using 2020 figures) that while Indigenous people make up five per cent of the Canadian population, they account for 30 per cent of Canada’s prison population.

 The report notes that Black people are also overrepresented, but does not provide the actual percentages.

The commission would not be cheap, which may be a stumbling block, given the federal government’s push toward austerity. The plan was to pay the commissioners similar to a federally-appointed judge (roughly $420,000 annually), and to have offices and support staff.

Ron Dalton, Innocence Canada co-president, himself a victim of a miscarriage of justice, thinks funding is the issue.

“You know, times are tight, money is scarce, the government’s trying to get smaller, not larger. It’s not a great time to be trying to create a new bureaucracy,” said Dalton. 

The 70-year-old Newfoundland man was convicted of second-degree murder in his wife’s 1988 death. He served eight years in prison, but was freed after it was discovered that a pathologist had mistakenly determined his wife was strangled — she had actually choked on a piece of food.

Dalton said it is long past time the government created the independent commission it promised three years ago. Innocence Canada and other groups rely on fundraising and lawyers working pro bono to advocate for people. 

“We spend all of our time either raising money to do the work we do, or fixing the government’s mistakes and paying for the privilege of doing this.”

Earlier this week, the Star reported that a new team of Toronto lawyers have taken on Sheriffe’s case as an example of a wrongful conviction.

Like in Milgaard’s case, the lawyers’ arguments centre on the use of evidence from anonymous police informants. 

The entire story can be read at: 

https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/ottawa-gave-wrongfully-convicted-canadians-a-promise-of-a-lifeline-with-milgaards-law-under-mark-carney-why-has-nothing-happened-since/article_a71e6591-3560-493f-a6ae-2cc9a1a90b97.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;

Richard Glossip: Oklahoma: Major (Welcome) Development: The Oklahoman (Staff Writer Nolan Clay) reports that he was released from jail earlier today on a $500,000 bond - a major victory for the former death row inmate who has come so close to execution that he has had three last meals, noting that: "Glossip has always maintained he is innocent of murder in the 1997 beating death of his boss at an Oklahoma City motel. His lead attorney, Don Knight, said Glossip "now has the chance to taste freedom while his defense team continues to pursue justice on his behalf." The attorney said the judge, in setting bail, "rejected the State’s claim that there is a strong case for guilt."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  "Historically, Oklahoma County judges have almost never let a defendant out of jail while awaiting trial in a murder case. Mai wrote that in granting bail, she was following a clear mandate in the Oklahoma Constitution and a 1998 Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals decision. She wrote she could only deny Glossip bail if there was clear and convincing evidence that "proof of guilt is evident, or the presumption thereof is great." She pointed in her order to issues with the key witness against Glossip."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Justin Sneed, a motel maintenance man, confessed to killing Van Treese with a baseball bat in the motel room. He said Glossip pressured him into doing it and offered him $10,000 as payment. Sneed was the key witness against Glossip at the first two trials and is expected to testify again at the third trial. Glossip's attorneys claim Sneed actually killed the motel owner during a botched robbery for drug money. They claim he incriminated Glossip to avoid getting the death penalty himself and later considered recanting his testimony."

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

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Judge Mai noted in her order that the Court of Criminal Appeals in 2001 described the evidence at the first trial, corroborating Sneed's testimony as "extremely weak." She noted the Court of Criminal Appeals was closely divided about the corroborating evidence in a 2007 opinion upholding his second conviction. She also noted that the U.S. Supreme Court determined last year that Sneed gave false testimony about why he was prescribed lithium after his arrest and that prosecutors did not correct it. She wrote that the Supreme Court found that "had the prosecution corrected Sneed on the stand, his credibility plainly would have suffered." Finally, she pointed out that Drummond himself told the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board in a 2023 letter that "the record ... does not support that he is guilty of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt."

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

STORY: "Former Oklahoma death row inmate Richard Glossip goes free on $500k bond," by Staff Writer Nolan Clay, published by The Oklahoman, on May 14, 2025.

GIST: Richard Glossip was released from jail Thursday, May 14, on a $500,000 bond, a major victory for the former death row inmate who has come so close to execution that he has had three last meals.

Glossip, 63, is awaiting his third trial in his 1997 murder-for-hire case.

He walked out the front door of the Oklahoma County jail, holding hands with his wife, Lea Glossip, as a stiff Oklahoma breeze whipped his hair. "I'm just thankful for my wife and my attorneys," he told reporters. "I'm just happy."

His release came hours after Oklahoma County District Judge Natalie Mai set bail in a 13-page order that pointed to issues with the key witness against him.

"It is the bedrock principle of Oklahoma law that bail is not used as a form of punishment," the judge wrote. "Rather, bail is simply the means to ensure that a defendant will appear to face the charges pending against him."

Glossip had been expected to be able to post bond because he has had support both nationally and internationally, including from celebrities like Kim Kardashian. His financial status has not been disclosed, but eight attorneys appeared on his behalf at a hearing in April.

Glossip has always maintained he is innocent of murder in the 1997 beating death of his boss at an Oklahoma City motel.

His lead attorney, Don Knight, said Glossip "now has the chance to taste freedom while his defense team continues to pursue justice on his behalf."

The attorney said the judge, in setting bail, "rejected the State’s claim that there is a strong case for guilt."

Glossip is out of custody for the first time since January 1997. Much of his time locked up has been at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester. He has been held in the Oklahoma County jail for more than a year.

The judge's order was filed around 10 a.m. Thursday. Glossip was released from jail at 3:36 p.m. He walked out the jail's front door after 5 p.m. after an issue with his ankle monitor was addressed.

His attorneys had asked for a fair bond and said he would live in Oklahoma County with his wife. Prosecutors with the attorney general's office had asked the judge to deny bond.

Glossip and his wife wed on March 29, 2022, while he was confined at the Oklahoma State Penitentiary.

The judge ordered Glossip to reside only at the marital home, wear an ankle monitor, observe a nightly curfew and not travel outside the state.

She also ordered him not to use any alcohol, illegal drugs or marijuana.

Historically, Oklahoma County judges have almost never let a defendant out of jail while awaiting trial in a murder case.

Mai wrote that in granting bail, she was following a clear mandate in the Oklahoma Constitution and a 1998 Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals decision.

She wrote she could only deny Glossip bail if there was clear and convincing evidence that "proof of guilt is evident, or the presumption thereof is great." She pointed in her order to issues with the key witness against Glossip.

Prosecutors said they remain focused on retrying the case.

"Ultimately, the question of the defendant's guilt or innocence will be decided by a jury of Oklahoma citizens − not a judge," Attorney General Gentner Drummond's press secretary, Leslie Berger, said.

For years, Glossip was the state's highest-profile death row inmate because of the celebrity support for his innocence claim, his close calls and a 2017 documentary about his case.

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed his 2004 murder conviction on prosecutorial misconduct grounds.

In an unusual move, Drummond joined Glossip's attorneys in asking the high court for that relief.

In June, Drummond said Glossip will be prosecuted again for murder. However, he said the death penalty will no longer be sought.

In July, his original judge for the third trial denied Glossip bond.

A month later, District Judge Heather Coyle stepped down from the case after defense attorneys raised concerns about her. Mai took over the case in December after five other Oklahoma County district judges also recused.

In April, Mai rejected Glossip's request to enforce a "plea deal" that might have resulted in his release.

Drummond in 2023 had discussions with Knight about a deal. The AG claimed the deal was never finalized and is now off.

The judge agreed the deal was not complete, in part because the murder victim's family had not been consulted about it.

Had the deal gone through, Glossip would have been sentenced to 45 years in prison after pleading guilty to accessory after the fact to first-degree murder. His attorneys believed he would have been released immediately under credits for time served.

Background of Richard Glossip's case

Glossip is accused of having his boss, Barry Van Treese, an Oklahoma City motel owner, killed in 1997 to keep from being fired for embezzlement. Glossip was the motel manager.

Van Treese was found beaten to death in Room 102 of the Best Budget Inn on Jan. 7, 1997. The victim was 54 and lived in Lawton.

Justin Sneed, a motel maintenance man, confessed to killing Van Treese with a baseball bat in the motel room. He said Glossip pressured him into doing it and offered him $10,000 as payment. Sneed was the key witness against Glossip at the first two trials and is expected to testify again at the third trial.

Glossip's attorneys claim Sneed actually killed the motel owner during a botched robbery for drug money. They claim he incriminated Glossip to avoid getting the death penalty himself and later considered recanting his testimony.

Glossip was convicted and sentenced to death the first time in 1998. The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals threw out that conviction in 2001 because of issues with his defense attorney. He was convicted and sentenced to death the second time at a 2004 retrial.

Judge Mai noted in her order that the Court of Criminal Appeals in 2001 described the evidence at the first trial, corroborating Sneed's testimony as "extremely weak."

She noted the Court of Criminal Appeals was closely divided about the corroborating evidence in a 2007 opinion upholding his second conviction.

She also noted that the U.S. Supreme Court determined last year that Sneed gave false testimony about why he was prescribed lithium after his arrest and that prosecutors did not correct it.

She wrote that the Supreme Court found that "had the prosecution corrected Sneed on the stand, his credibility plainly would have suffered."

Finally, she pointed out that Drummond himself told the Oklahoma Pardon and Parole Board in a 2023 letter that "the record ... does not support that he is guilty of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt."

Glossip came the closest to being executed on Sept. 30, 2015. He was three hours away from execution when a doctor realized a pharmacist had supplied the wrong drug for the lethal injection. The execution ended up being called off.

The mistake contributed to a hiatus in executions in Oklahoma that lasted years.

Near the end of her order, Mai wrote, "The Court hopes that a new trial, free of error, will provide all interested parties, and the citizens of Oklahoma, the closure they deserve.""

The entire story can be read at: 

https://www.oklahoman.com/story/news/local/2026/05/14/richard-glossip-has-been-behind-bars-since-1997-on-murder-for-hire-case-he-may-go-free-on-bond/90073272007/

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;