Phong Tran: Oakland, California: He allegedly paid off an anonymous tipster to finger some poor soul; He allegedly coerced a teenager to finger another poor soul; And he may have impacted as many as 200 cases! It's about a story about a beleaguered detective versus the former District Attorney whose campaign to expose and prosecute the misdeeds of police officers is ostensibly over which really belongs in our 'Nothing good can come out of this' department)…'The Detective, arrested two years ago on bribery and perjury charges under former District Attorney Pamela Price continues to face the music for his alleged misdeeds - and multiple cases linked to him have ended in dismissal or lenient plea deals,' SF News (Reporter Jay Barmann) reports, noting that: "In one case last October, a 34-year-old Sacramento man, Donte Neal, was able to cut a deal for an 11-year sentence in the 2021 killing of Byron Robinson, the ex-boyfriend of his wife, after it was discovered that Tran may have paid off an anonymous tipster to finger Neal two days after the crime. The East Bay Times finds, via a June court filing, that the 2016 conviction of 49-year-old Steven Buggs for the September 2012 killing of Lester Young in East Oakland may be imperiled because of evidence that Tran may have coerced a teenager into fingering Buggs for the crime, during an unrecorded interview, and then later testifying against him. Price charged Tran with multiple counts of perjury under oath and bribing of witnesses, and issued a warrant for his arrest in April 2025." ———————————————————————————

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  

PASSAGE ONE  OF THE DAY: "Tran continues to deny the allegations, and his attorney issued a statement to the East Bay TImes casting aspersions on Price. "It is all predictable and by design; part of a playbook used by (Price) with the ultimate goal of tearing down anything related to criminal consequences," said Tran's attorney Andrew Ganz. Ganz added that any other imperiled convictions related to Tran's casework "[say] nothing about the validity of the charges against Detective Tran." And he said both Tran and the community at large are "casualties of a war waged against them by the former DA that is fortunately over.”

———————————————————————————————

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The California Attorney General’s Office conducted its own investigation into the conviction of Marcel Prince for a 2021 murder, and concluded that Alameda County prosecutors knew about the misconduct allegations against Tran and "suppressed" them in order to achieve more convictions. But, they said, the tainted evidence was not vital to that particular case. Tran is expected back in court on July 17, and a trial date is expected to be set at that hearing. It's been estimated that as many as 200 cases that were touched by Tran could be impacted."

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

STORY: "Murder convictions imperiled as scrutiny of Oakland homicide detective grows," by Reporter Jay Barmann. published by SFist News, on July 7, 2025.

SUB-HEADING: "Phong Tran, continues to be in the spotlight and is likely still headed to trial. As the East Bay Times reports, cases continue to pile up in which the credibility of evidence and witness statements obtained by Tran is being questioned, leading to more dismissals and plea deals in serious cases."

GIST:  "An Oakland Police detective who was arrested two years ago on bribery and perjury charges under former District Attorney Pamela Price continues to face the music for his alleged misdeeds. And multiple cases linked to him have ended in dismissal or lenient plea deals.

Pamela Price may no longer be the DA in Alameda County, and her campaign to expose and prosecute the misdeeds of police officers is ostensibly over. 

But one of those she accused of improperly coercing and bribing witnesses to get murder convictions, Phong Tran, continues to be in the spotlight and is likely still headed to trial. 

As the East Bay Times reports, cases continue to pile up in which the credibility of evidence and witness statements obtained by Tran is being questioned, leading to more dismissals and plea deals in serious cases.

In one case last October, a 34-year-old Sacramento man, Donte Neal, was able to cut a deal for an 11-year sentence in the 2021 killing of Byron Robinson, the ex-boyfriend of his wife, after it was discovered that Tran may have paid off an anonymous tipster to finger Neal two days after the crime.

The East Bay Times finds, via a June court filing, that the 2016 conviction of 49-year-old Steven Buggs for the September 2012 killing of Lester Young in East Oakland may be imperiled because of evidence that Tran may have coerced a teenager into fingering Buggs for the crime, during an unrecorded interview, and then later testifying against him.

Price charged Tran with multiple counts of perjury under oath and bribing of witnesses, and issued a warrant for his arrest in April 2025.

Tran continues to deny the allegations, and his attorney issued a statement to the East Bay TImes casting aspersions on Price. "It is all predictable and by design; part of a playbook used by (Price) with the ultimate goal of tearing down anything related to criminal consequences," said Tran's attorney Andrew Ganz. Ganz added that any other imperiled convictions related to Tran's casework "[say] nothing about the validity of the charges against Detective Tran." And he said both Tran and the community at large are "casualties of a war waged against them by the former DA that is fortunately over.”

Still, while newly installed District Attorney Ursula Jones Dickson may be trying to undo some of her predecessor's work, it does not appear that Tran will be let off the hook anytime soon.

The California Attorney General’s Office conducted its own investigation into the conviction of Marcel Prince for a 2021 murder, and concluded that Alameda County prosecutors knew about the misconduct allegations against Tran and "suppressed" them in order to achieve more convictions. But, they said, the tainted evidence was not vital to that particular case.

Tran is expected back in court on July 17, and a trial date is expected to be set at that hearing.

It's been estimated that as many as 200 cases that were touched by Tran could be impacted."

The entire story can be read at: 

https://sfist.com/2025/07/07/oakland-police-detective-accused-of-bribing-and-coercing-witnesses/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

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

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

———————————————————————————————

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

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

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

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

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

Anthony Bowers: Recent Entry: National Registry of Exonerations: From our 'Enough to make one weep' department. (one of the larger departments on this Blog!) How a forensic interviewer - using a dubious technique for interviewing children - helped having him charged with rape, aggravated sodomy, and aggravated indecent liberties with a child, and sentenced to three consecutive terms of 25 years to life in prison…"Shehi-Chapman had used an interviewing technique with T.S. called “Finding Words,” a protocol deployed at many child advocacy centers. Swain sought to exclude evidence derived from this interview. In a motion, she said there was no scientific proof that the Finding Words protocol produced reliable results. The state said in a response that the protocol was “designed to elicit untainted statements from a child witness.” Judge Marek allowed the admission of the evidence."

PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY: "The jury convicted Bowers on the three charges on March 31, 2016.  Swain moved for a new trial, asserting that Judge Marek should have allowed jurors to hear that Bowers was eager to take a polygraph and that Shehi-Chapman improperly testified as an expert witness."

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

PASSAGE TWO  OF THE DAY: "Shehi-Chapman testified about her interview with T.S. as well as her education and job history. Shawna Miller, the Jackson County Attorney, asked “Based off your experience in interviewing many other children, is it at all uncommon for this type of abuse, where it’s ongoing for a long period of time, to occur in the child's home?”  Swain objected, asserting that Miller was asking Shehi-Chapman to testify as an expert. Judge Marek overruled the objection, and Shehi-Chapman said: “In my experience, of the kids that I have forensically interviewed, it is not uncommon for abuse to happen in the home. It is not uncommon for abuse to continually happen or a pattern where the same abuse continues to happen over time.”

—————————————————————

PASSAGE THREE  OF THE DAY: "The appellate court said that Judge Marek had erred in allowing Shehi-Chapman to offer an opinion on: whether abuse is commonly perpetrated by someone the child knows in the home; whether abuse frequently occurs while someone else is in the same room as the child; whether sex offenders use pornography to desensitize children to sexual acts; and how offenders use grooming to erode a victim’s boundaries. The ruling noted that the Kansas Supreme Court had ruled that grooming evidence “typically” required expert testimony."

————————————————————————————

POST: Anthony Bowers" Kansas: Recent Entry: National Registry of Exonerations: By Kenn Otterbourg: Entered on June 16, 2025.

GIST: "On March 20, 2014, S.B. contacted the Sheriff’s Department in Jackson County, Kansas, and said that her granddaughter, T.S., had been sexually abused by the girl’s great-uncle, 47-year-old Anthony Bowers. 

Deputy Travis Spiker responded and interviewed the girl, who was 6 years old. She and her mother and little sister lived with Bowers in his house in the small town of Soldier. She said that Bowers tried to touch her “girly parts” and tried to get her to “lick his boy parts.”

She said the abuse happened at night, when Bowers entered her room under the guise of watching some pet sugar gliders that were also in the room. (Sugar gliders are small nocturnal marsupials native to Australia.)  

The next day, T.S. and her grandmother went to the LifeHouse Child Advocacy Center in Topeka, where Jill Shehi-Chapman, a forensic interviewer, interviewed the girl.

T.S. said in the interview that Bowers had touched and licked her “girly parts” and put his finger inside her. She said he had made her touch his penis.  She also said that Bowers had placed her on his lap while he showed her pornography on his computer.

Sheriff’s deputies arrested Bowers on March 24, 2014, charging him with rape, aggravated sodomy, and aggravated indecent liberties with a child. 

After his arrest, Bowers was interviewed by Detective Al Dunn. Bowers said he was innocent of the charges but that it was possible that T.S. had inadvertently seen pornography on his computer. (Deputies searched Bowers’s computer and did find pornography but nothing matching the girl’s descriptions of the images she said she had seen.)

During the interview, Dunn asked Bowers if he would be willing to take a polygraph. Bowers answered, “Yes. Any day. Right now.” Dunn then asked Bowers if he would “pass” the polygraph. Bowers said. “Right now. Right now. Tomorrow. I don’t care. Any day. Any time. Any place. Anywhere. 100 percent. I have no doubts about that. None. That crap is not happening in my house. My house is not where—phew—I just don’t want to say anything. I want to go home. I want to act like this is a dream, a very bad dream. Wow, just wow. Whatever I can do for you I will do for you, no matter what it is.”

At the time of his arrest, Bowers was on probation after pleading guilty in July 2013 for an unrelated charge of battery involving his son. 

Bowers’s first trial, in Jackson County District Court, ended in a hung jury on December 22, 2014. His second trial began in March 2016. 

Prior to the second trial, Bowers’s attorney, Sarah Swain, moved to prevent Shehi-Chapman from testifying as an expert witness and then asked for a hearing. The state said in a filing and at the hearing that Shehi-Chapman would only testify about her interview with T.S. Judge Norbert Marek Jr. ruled that Shehi-Chapman could testify about her training and whether she followed her training but could not testify as an expert witness. 

Shehi-Chapman had used an interviewing technique with T.S. called “Finding Words,” a protocol deployed at many child advocacy centers. Swain sought to exclude evidence derived from this interview. In a motion, she said there was no scientific proof that the Finding Words protocol produced reliable results. The state said in a response that the protocol was “designed to elicit untainted statements from a child witness.” Judge Marek allowed the admission of the evidence.

T.S. testified that Bowers came into her room at night and sexually abused her, placing his hand and his mouth on her “girly parts.” She said she looked at pornographic photos while sitting on his lap at his computer.

During cross-examination, Swain asked T.S. about her interview with Shehi-Chapman. The girl testified that she did not remember the interview. She also testified that she remembered little about her interview with Spiker.

Shehi-Chapman testified about her interview with T.S. as well as her education and job history. Shawna Miller, the Jackson County Attorney, asked:

“Based off your experience in interviewing many other children, is it at all uncommon for this type of abuse, where it’s ongoing for a long period of time, to occur in the child's home?” 

Swain objected, asserting that Miller was asking Shehi-Chapman to testify as an expert. Judge Marek overruled the objection, and Shehi-Chapman said: “In my experience, of the kids that I have forensically interviewed, it is not uncommon for abuse to happen in the home. It is not uncommon for abuse to continually happen or a pattern where the same abuse continues to happen over time.”

Shehi-Chapman testified that abusers often would inappropriately touch their victims in the presence of others but call the contact an accident.”

Later, Shehi-Chapman testified about grooming, which she defined as the “process of eroding a victim’s boundaries to physical touch and desensitizing them to sexual issues. If somebody would want to cultivate a trust with a victim and then gradually introduce sexual behavior until it ... reaches a point where it becomes possible to perpetrate a crime against them.”

Spiker also testified about his interview with T.S.

Bowers did not testify, although jurors heard part of his recorded statement to Detective Dunn, excluding the section where he and Dunn discussed a polygraph test. The state had successfully moved to bar that part of the statement, arguing that state law prohibited evidence on the results of polygraphs or about a defendant’s offer to submit to a polygraph or refuse to take one. Swain had argued that this situation was different; Bowers hadn’t offered but rather had responded to an offer, and no test was done.

The jury convicted Bowers on the three charges on March 31, 2016. 

Swain moved for a new trial, asserting that Judge Marek should have allowed jurors to hear that Bowers was eager to take a polygraph and that Shehi-Chapman improperly testified as an expert witness. Judge Marek denied the motion on August 9, 2016, and sentenced Bowers to three consecutive terms of 25 years to life in prison. Bowers served the initial six months of that sentence at the county jail because his probation on the battery conviction had been revoked at the time of his conviction on the sexual-abuse charges.

Bowers then appealed Judge Marek’s denial. Two years later, on November 30, 2018, the Kansas Court of Appeals vacated his conviction and granted Bowers a new trial. 

The appellate court said that Judge Marek had erred in allowing Shehi-Chapman to offer an opinion on: whether abuse is commonly perpetrated by someone the child knows in the home; whether abuse frequently occurs while someone else is in the same room as the child; whether sex offenders use pornography to desensitize children to sexual acts; and how offenders use grooming to erode a victim’s boundaries. The ruling noted that the Kansas Supreme Court had ruled that grooming evidence “typically” required expert testimony.

It was possible, the appellate court said, that the jury would have come to the same decision without Shehi-Chapman’s improperly admitted testimony, but the state had not met its burden of showing the errors were harmless.

Bowers was released from prison on January 4, 2019. His retrial began in June 2021. This time, Bowers testified. Swain also presented new expert testimony about child-interview techniques and evidence pointing to the girl’s stepfather  as the real perpetrator.

On June 18, 2021, the jury acquitted Bowers on the rape and sodomy charges but hung on the indecent liberties charge. Miller dismissed that remaining charge on July 20, 2021.

After his exoneration, Bowers filed a claim for state compensation. He settled his claim in May 2025, receiving $182,650, plus $25,000 in attorney fees.

The entire story can be read at: 

https://exonerationregistry.org/cases/14229

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

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

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

———————————————————————————————

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

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

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

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

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

Criminalizing Reproduction: (Policing Pregnancy): Attacks on science, medicine and the right to choose: Question of the day: What does a reproductive police state look like?, addressed byJessica Valenti and Kylie Cheung, on the excellent Valenti Blog (one of my favourites) , 'Abortion, Every Day," which begins with a warning: "Last month, I warned that we were on the verge of a major new criminalization push. I pointed to some specific and explicit signs, like the rise of 'equal protection' bills designed to charge abortion patients with murder, and the spike in pregnancy-related arrests. But here's the thing—some of the scariest portents are actually mundane. Bureaucratic, even. Take this recent report from the Indiana Department of Health (IDOH). In ten pages, it spells out exactly how the state plans to ramp up "enforcement" of its abortion ban—from maintaining a database of women's abortions and fining hospitals that don't hand over patient information, to "collaboration" between the IDOH and the attorney general's office to help with prosecuting providers. Essentially, it's a government guidebook for how to punish anyone even tangentially involved in abortion."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  In recent years, I have taken on the  theme of 'criminalizing reproduction' - a natural theme for a Blog concerned with  flawed science in its myriad forms  - as I am utterly appalled by  the current movement in the United States (and some other countries) emboldened by the overturning of Roe Versus Wade,  towards imprisoning and conducting surveillance on women and their physicians and others who help them secure a safe abortion,  on the basis of sham science (or any other basis). I can’t remember the source, but agree  totally with the sentiment that control over their reproductive lives is far too important to women in America - or anywhere else -  so they can  participate  equally in the economic and social life of their nations without fear for  loss their freedom at the hands of political opportunists and fanatics. (Far too many of those those around these days.) '

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

——————————————————————

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "I could keep going, but it's all bad. And again—it's all incredibly boring if you don't know what you're looking at. And that's exactly the point. What better way to build a reproductive police state than through a pile of dry state documents no one will ever bother to read?"

—————————————————————————

COMMENTARY: "Here's What a Reproductive Police State Looks Like" by  Jessica Valenti   (with Kylie Cheung) published on her Blog  'Abortion, Every Day',  July 8, 2025. (Jessica Valenti is a writer, activist, and one of the country’s most influential voices on gender and politics. The award-winning author of eight books—including the New York Times bestseller Abortion—she has shaped the national conversation on feminism for over two decades.)…"Kylie Cheung is a journalist and the author of two other books on gender and power, A Woman’s Place and The Gaslit Diaries. Currently a staff writer at Jezebel, she previously worked at the culture desk at Salon and at several nonprofits where she researched reproductive health policy.

SUB-HEADING: "Policing Pregnancy."

GIST:  "Last month, I warned that we were on the verge of a major new criminalization push. I pointed to some specific and explicit signs, like the rise of ‘equal protection’ bills designed to charge abortion patients with murder, and the spike in pregnancy-related arrests. 

But here’s the thing—some of the scariest portents are actually mundane. Bureaucratic, even. 

Take this recent report from the Indiana Department of Health (IDOH).

 In ten pages, it spells out exactly how the state plans to ramp up “enforcement” of its abortion ban—from maintaining a database of women’s abortions and fining hospitals that don’t hand over patient information, to “collaboration” between the IDOH and the attorney general’s office to help with prosecuting providers.

Essentially, it’s a government guidebook for how to punish anyone even tangentially involved in abortion.

Before I go any further, I have to remind you that abortion is illegal in Indiana.

 You can only get one if your life is at risk, the fetus has a fatal abnormality, or if you’re a victim of sexual violence (and early in pregnancy).

In other words, almost no one is getting an abortion in Indiana. In fact, only twocompleted abortion reports were submitted in the first quarter of 2025. 

So why pour all this state money, manpower, and energy into policing a tiny handful of abortions? Well, don’t ever underestimate how eager these fuckers are to terrorize women. 

The whole point is to scare the hell out of anyone considering abortion, or helping someone get care. More than that, this document—and the entire effort behind it—is about building formal state systems that make pregnancy surveillance and policing look normal. Ordinary. Boring.

It’s the bureaucratic reproductive police state in action.

You can read the full IDOH report yourself here, but just a few highlights: 

• Indiana will maintain a state registry called the Database Registration of Indiana’s Vital Events (“DRIVE”). In it, you’ll find birth and death records, and—you guessed it—abortion reports. (If you’re a regular reader, you know that for over a year, I’ve been tracking Indiana Republicans’ efforts to make women’s abortion reports public records, just like birth or death certificates.)

  
  

• Any doctor or hospital that doesn’t hand over women’s abortion information will face fines and disciplinary action. The IDOH says it will increase collaboration with the state’s licensing agency to speed up those punishments.

  
  

• The state will ramp up so-called “legal compliance monitoring”—meaning they’ll scrutinize every single abortion performed under the ban’s narrow exceptions to ensure women really “deserved” that care. The IDOH will also funnel more information to the attorney general so he can target specific doctors or clinics.

I could keep going, but it’s all bad. And again—it’s all incredibly boring if you don’t know what you’re looking at. And that’s exactly the point. What better way to build a reproductive police state than through a pile of dry state documents no one will ever bother to read?"

The entire story can be read at: 

https://jessica.substack.com/p/heres-what-a-reproductive-police

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

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

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

———————————————————————————————

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

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

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

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

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