Sunday, August 2, 2026

August 2: Part 2: Marshall Project Podcast 'The Last 12 Weeks,' The. inside story on a unique collaboration between journalists and a death penalty defence team, published by The Poynter Institute, under the heading "What happens in the final week before an execution,; - and the sub-heading, "The journalists behind ‘The Last 12 Weeks’ earned extraordinary access to a death penalty defense team — and faced difficult ethical choices."...The Serial team approached Chammah, who had written about mitigation experts for The Marshall Project. They floated what Melathe called their “pie-in-the-sky idea” for a podcast: What if they could follow around death penalty lawyers racing a ticking clock? “My initial reaction was that that would be almost impossible — not practically, but because lawyers were unlikely to agree,” Chammah said. “I had written a book about the death penalty and interviewed lots of defense lawyers, and (I’d) seen that they had just been very, very appropriately cagey about their work.” Then in November, an email changed everything. Defense lawyer Greg Wiercioch reached out to Chammah to see if he’d be interested in covering the case of his client, David Wood, often referred to as the Desert Killer. Convicted of a string of murders in El Paso, Wood had been sitting on death row for more than three decades."



LINK TO THE PODCAST: 


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

QUOTE OF THE. DAY: "Chammah said listeners of “The Last 12 Weeks” will come away with an intimate understanding of what it’s like to do one of the legal system’s hardest jobs. “I think people will kind of get a deeper sense of the death penalty’s cost in the world by getting this up close to all of the emotions that surround an upcoming execution date,” he said. “And then I think I’ll also gather an appreciation for how arbitrary the system is, in the sense that whether David Wood was going to get executed seemed to turn on so many little moments that could have gone one way or another, and will ultimately never always know exactly what moment made the difference.”

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The reporting continued through to the final week before Wood’s scheduled execution in March 2025. Less than 48 hours before he was scheduled to be executed, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted a stay of execution. Melathe was with members of the defense team when the ruling came down. “This was the moment all the lawyers had been working toward for the entire time Maurice and I had been following them,” Melathe narrates in the fifth and final episode. “And they’re still a little stunned that it’s happened.”

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

STORY: "What happens in the final weeks before an execution? These reporters were inside the room," by Staff Writer Amaris Castillo, published by The Poynter Institute, on July 22, 2026.
Amaris Castillo is a writing/research assistant for NPR.)
 
SUB-HEADING: "The journalists behind ‘The Last 12 Weeks’ earned extraordinary access to a death penalty defense team — and faced difficult ethical choices."

GIST: "Many defense lawyers are naturally cagey. They work in a pressure cooker, protecting their clients’ rights while fighting for the best possible outcome. And arguably, the stakes can’t get any higher than trying to save a client’s life.

So no, defense lawyers don’t usually invite journalists into strategy meetings.

But that’s what happened when Marshall Project reporter Maurice Chammah and Serial Productions senior producer Alvin Melathe spent the final few months before a Texas execution embedded with a capital defense team.

By the end, the lawyers were recording their own phone calls and sending them to the journalists.

The resulting podcast, “The Last 12 Weeks,” offers a rare look inside capital defense work and the reporting decisions journalists face when they receive unusual access to sources whose work could determine whether someone lives or dies.

“The idea was, it would be nice if we could somehow get inside of the machine — inside of a death penalty case, in that final run, to see for ourselves what’s going on here?” Melathe recalled. “What exactly is the work? Why does it take so long for some of these allegations to come to light?”

The idea for the podcast series began with a simple question. What happens in the stretch of time right before an execution?

Melathe said the public tends to see a flurry of articles and celebrity videos (often from Kim Kardashian, an advocate against the death penalty) in the 72- to 48-hour window before an execution. But they wanted to understand what happened behind the scenes.

The Serial team approached Chammah, who had written about mitigation experts for The Marshall Project. They floated what Melathe called their “pie-in-the-sky idea” for a podcast: What if they could follow around death penalty lawyers racing a ticking clock?

“My initial reaction was that that would be almost impossible — not practically, but because lawyers were unlikely to agree,” Chammah said. “I had written a book about the death penalty and interviewed lots of defense lawyers, and (I’d) seen that they had just been very, very appropriately cagey about their work.”

Then in November, an email changed everything. Defense lawyer Greg Wiercioch reached out to Chammah to see if he’d be interested in covering the case of his client, David Wood, often referred to as the Desert Killer. Convicted of a string of murders in El Paso, Wood had been sitting on death row for more than three decades.

Looking back, Chammah said the timing was shockingly serendipitous. Wiercioch had declined interviews with Chammah in the past, but the two had always maintained a polite rapport.

“I hoped that past reporting that I had done paved the way for a ‘yes’ in this scenario, that they could trust that we would do an ethical and careful job,” Chammah said. “So that’s how it developed.”

Chammah told the Serial crew about the email. Wiercioch and his team were not immediately sold on the idea of letting a group of journalists follow them as they raced against the clock to stop Wood’s execution. It took some negotiating.

With a few months left before the execution, Melathe didn’t think there would be time for a thorough investigation into the claims the lawyers made about Wood’s innocence.

“But we could follow them around,” he said. “That was something that we were actually capable of doing.”

That access would form the backbone of the five-part podcast series, produced by The Marshall Project, Serial Productions and The New York Times. Chammah and Melathe spent a considerable amount of time shadowing members of the capital defense team as they knocked on doors looking for any morsel of information that could help their clients. They sat in on Zoom meetings, listening as the lawyers strategized their next move and shared updates.

“It’s really remarkable the sort of front row seat that we get,” said Jen Guerra, supervising editor at Serial who served as lead editor on “The Last 12 Weeks.” “I had not seen that level of access before.”

Melathe kept meticulous records of the calls the lawyers filled them in on. “You should see my spreadsheet for the story,” he said. One entry, for example, would have up to seven different phone calls Wiercioch had with his younger colleague Jeremy Schepers.

“They were just recording it on their iPhone and sending it to us, just like without us really asking. So it’s like an incredible amount of access. I’ve never had that happen before in my career.”

The access translated into an unusually rich reporting record.

“There’s so much tape, and so much of it is all unfolding in real time, so as an editor that was very exciting to work with and to see,” she said. “And of course the lawyers had given us access to their team meetings, so we got to hear them strategize, and that was really exciting to figure out how to use that in the podcast.”

Chammah said access for journalists is always talked about in simple terms: You either get it or you don’t. But he sees it as much more fluid.

“I have found that the best access I’ve ever gotten has often depended on developing trust and comfort over the course of months or years,” he said. “And although Greg himself had not let me do this before, or even given me an interview before, I was not an unknown quantity to him. I was not coming to him as a completely new name, and I think that that probably helped smooth the situation and get us that access.”

But that extraordinary access brought many ethical considerations. They began before they hit record. First, Wiercioch and his team, which included lawyer Naomi Fenwick, had to make sure Wood was on board. He was.

Then came what Melathe described as “micro moments” — how he and Chammah would deal with not being in the way of the story and influencing events.

“We tried to be as careful as possible,” Melathe said. “The truth is, what we really wanted to see was them doing their work to the extent possible.”

Observing the lawyers initially approach potential witnesses was part of the story.

“How do you door knock somebody and try and get them to give you information that will help save your client’s life? That is a real part of their jobs, and that’s something that we kind of needed in order to tell their story,” Melathe said.

But Chammah said the journalists didn’t want to be the reason why someone didn’t talk to the lawyers.

“You don’t want to taint the situation with your involvement,” he said, “and so we talked a lot to the lawyers about how to do this. And it ended up honestly being a different conversation for literally every scenario.”

They decided on a simple approach. They would not record when lawyers first approached witnesses. The lawyer would make first contact, and then either Melathe would introduce himself as a journalist with the Times, or Maurice would introduce himself as a journalist working with Serial. They would explain what they were doing, and then ask if it’d be OK to record.

Sometimes people said no. Sometimes they said yes.

“I think that, in a lot of these cases, it’s such a weird thing to be approached by a lawyer in this specific way about a death penalty case, that me being there as a journalist, trailing behind them, is like the second weirdest thing that’s happening to them that day,” Melathe said. “So it doesn’t feel like all that crazy to them. So a lot of people just said ‘yes’ for that reason.”

At the most basic level, Chammah said, they did not want to interfere with the defense team’s work. In Zoom meetings, they could sit and remain unobtrusive. The much trickier scenarios occurred in the field. A few times, the journalists were allowed to be in the room, but the witness didn’t want a microphone in their face.

Chammah said he and Melathe often returned to sources later to make sure sources were still comfortable. They also recognized that the lawyers’ ethical obligations weren’t the same as their own. While defense attorneys didn’t need to seek comment from people accused in court filings, the journalists did.

On a few occasions, they approached people named as alternate suspects in the El Paso murders, provided them with a full accounting of how they were being framed in the course of the defense filings and asked them for comment.

“We felt like because journalism and capital defense law are different fields, we have different ethical rules,” Chammah said. “Their first obligation is to their client. Our first obligation is to the public, and then it’s also to all of our sources, in some regards.”

Chammah said they decided early that they couldn’t just reflect the perspective of the defense lawyers.

“They’ll be the narrative spine of the story we’re telling because they’re the most active players, but we’re going to go to all of these other participants in the case, and seek interviews with them. And that’s what we did.”

The reporting continued through to the final week before Wood’s scheduled execution in March 2025. Less than 48 hours before he was scheduled to be executed, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted a stay of execution. Melathe was with members of the defense team when the ruling came down.

“This was the moment all the lawyers had been working toward for the entire time Maurice and I had been following them,” Melathe narrates in the fifth and final episode. “And they’re still a little stunned that it’s happened.”

Chammah said listeners of “The Last 12 Weeks” will come away with an intimate understanding of what it’s like to do one of the legal system’s hardest jobs.

“I think people will kind of get a deeper sense of the death penalty’s cost in the world by getting this up close to all of the emotions that surround an upcoming execution date,” he said. “And then I think I’ll also gather an appreciation for how arbitrary the system is, in the sense that whether David Wood was going to get executed seemed to turn on so many little moments that could have gone one way or another, and will ultimately never always know exactly what moment made the difference.”

Throughout the reporting, Chammah said, there were little moments where he thought, “This could change everything.” And had they spent the last hour a little differently, the outcome might have changed.

“There’s this kind of butterfly effect to all of this that I think will make people look at the death penalty with a lot more, I would hope, humility and carefulness.""


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;

Saturday, August 1, 2026

Part 1: August 1: David Wood: Death Row: Texas: The Death penalty Information Center's Anumta Ali zeroes in on the Marshall Projects Maurice Chammah who has built his brilliant Podcast 'The Last 12 Weeks, around the battle waged by his lawyers to. present new evidence and save his life, in the weeks leading up to David Woods 2025 execution date in Texas, noting that "In 2024, after los­ing all his appeals, Mr. Wood’s defense team obtained a sworn state­ment from pris­on­er George Hall which brought into ques­tion the legit­i­ma­cy of tes­ti­mo­ny from key pros­e­cu­tion tri­al wit­ness­es. Mr. Hall admit­ted that he and oth­er incar­cer­at­ed indi­vid­u­als were encour­aged by police to false­ly report that Mr. Wood con­fessed to com­mit­ting the Desert Murders in El Paso, Texas. Greg Wiercioch, Mr. Wood’s lead attor­ney, agreed to per­mit Mr. Chammah from The Marshall Project to cov­er the case. Through deeply vul­ner­a­ble accounts by mem­bers of Mr. Wood’s defense team, lis­ten­ers hear how they grap­pled with chal­leng­ing deci­sions, such as whether to vis­it the only liv­ing infor­mant in the hos­pi­tal, until he lat­er died from lung cancer."



LINK TO THE PODCAST: 


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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: What do police informants have to do with forensic science? (I'm glad you asked). Investigative Reporter Pamela Colloff give us a clue when she writes - at the link below - "I’ve wanted to write about jailhouse informants for a long time because they often appear in troubled cases in which the other evidence is weak." That's my experience as will as a criminal lawyer and an observer of criminal justice. Given the reality that jurors - thanks to the CSI effect - are becoming more and more insistent on the need for there to be forensic evidence, it is becoming more and more common for police to rely on shady tactics such as use of police snitches, staging lineups, coercing, inducing, or creating false confessions out of thin air, procuring false eyewitness testimony or concealing exculpatory evidence. 

HARPLD LEVY:  The Charles Smith Blog; 

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Mr. Wood spent over thir­ty years in prison and faced a pre­vi­ous exe­cu­tion date after being con­vict­ed in 1985 of mul­ti­ple killings that became known as ​“the Desert Murders.” After mul­ti­ple bod­ies were uncov­ered in the desert in El Paso, Texas, police and pros­e­cu­tors sought to deter­mine who was respon­si­ble, ulti­mate­ly using tes­ti­mo­ny from jail­house infor­mants as their key evi­dence. That same tes­ti­mo­ny was lat­er cast into doubt by Mr. Hall’s sworn statement. The series cov­ers the exten­sive efforts made by Mr. Wood’s team lead­ing up to his March 2025 exe­cu­tion date, which was halt­ed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) just two days before he was sched­uled to die. On July 30, 2025, the TCCA returned Mr. Wood’s case to the tri­al court to review his claims of inno­cence and ineffective representation."

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


PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "In con­junc­tion with the release of the pod­cast, The New York Times and The Marshall Project have also released an analy­sis of more than 9,000 death sen­tences imposed over the last 50 years, using data from the Death Penalty Information Center and Professor Frank Baumgartner."

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


POST: “The Last 12 Weeks” Podcast Illuminates the Work of a Texas Capital Defense Team," by Researcher and writer, with special interest in Wrongful convictions, Anumta Ali, published on June 25, 2026.

GIST: "On June 18, 2026, The Marshall Project released ​“The Last 12 Weeks,” a pod­cast series detail­ing the weeks lead­ing up to David Wood’s 2025 exe­cu­tion date in Texas. The series fol­lows Mr. Wood’s defense team as they re-inves­ti­gate his case and iden­ti­fy evi­dence over­looked by state pros­e­cu­tors at tri­al. Hosted and report­ed by Maurice Chammah from The Marshall Project and Alvin Melathe from Serial Productions, the series gives a dynam­ic account of the usu­al­ly pri­vate per­spec­tive of cap­i­tal defense teams as they fight for an oppor­tu­ni­ty to present new evi­dence and stop their client’s execution.

“A stay is the best the lawyers can hope for here. For the court to say, ​‘Hold up, there’s some­thing poten­tial­ly wrong here. Let’s send the case to a low­er court to dig deep­er.’ It’s high­ly unlike­ly this court will sim­ply declare David Wood inno­cent, but a stay is still big. It means David Wood gets to live, and then his team can spend months or even years con­tin­u­ing to make the case for his innocence.”

MAURICE CHAMMAH, JOUR­NAL­IST WITH THE MARSHALL PROJECT

In 2024, after los­ing all his appeals, Mr. Wood’s defense team obtained a sworn state­ment from pris­on­er George Hall which brought into ques­tion the legit­i­ma­cy of tes­ti­mo­ny from key pros­e­cu­tion tri­al wit­ness­es. Mr. Hall admit­ted that he and oth­er incar­cer­at­ed indi­vid­u­als were encour­aged by police to false­ly report that Mr. Wood con­fessed to com­mit­ting the Desert Murders in El Paso, Texas. Greg Wiercioch, Mr. Wood’s lead attor­ney, agreed to per­mit Mr. Chammah from The Marshall Project to cov­er the case. Through deeply vul­ner­a­ble accounts by mem­bers of Mr. Wood’s defense team, lis­ten­ers hear how they grap­pled with chal­leng­ing deci­sions, such as whether to vis­it the only liv­ing infor­mant in the hos­pi­tal, until he lat­er died from lung cancer.

“I think it’s worth men­tion­ing here that all of the lawyers on this call have had clients who were exe­cut­ed. Clients who they could­n’t save. Greg, Jeremy, Naomi, they’ve all had to sit in front of some­one and tell them, ​‘We’re out of options.’ They’ve all had to watch what that does to a human being, tak­ing in the news that soon they’ll be killed. I know from sto­ries I’ve done in the past that the exe­cu­tion of a client is a shat­ter­ing event for habeas lawyers. One lawyer said that the final­i­ty of it is enough to give you ver­ti­go, to watch a per­son who you’ve built a rela­tion­ship with some­times over years, be reduced to a few file box­es you put into stor­age at the office.”

MAURICE CHAMMAH, JOUR­NAL­IST WITH THE MARSHALL PROJECT

Mr. Wood spent over thir­ty years in prison and faced a pre­vi­ous exe­cu­tion date after being con­vict­ed in 1985 of mul­ti­ple killings that became known as ​“the Desert Murders.” After mul­ti­ple bod­ies were uncov­ered in the desert in El Paso, Texas, police and pros­e­cu­tors sought to deter­mine who was respon­si­ble, ulti­mate­ly using tes­ti­mo­ny from jail­house infor­mants as their key evi­dence. That same tes­ti­mo­ny was lat­er cast into doubt by Mr. Hall’s sworn statement.

The series cov­ers the exten­sive efforts made by Mr. Wood’s team lead­ing up to his March 2025 exe­cu­tion date, which was halt­ed by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA) just two days before he was sched­uled to die. On July 30, 2025, the TCCA returned Mr. Wood’s case to the tri­al court to review his claims of inno­cence and ineffective representation.

In con­junc­tion with the release of the pod­cast, The New York Times and The Marshall Project have also released an analy­sis of more than 9,000 death sen­tences imposed over the last 50 years, using data from the Death Penalty Information Center and Professor Frank Baumgartner."

The entire Post can be read at:

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/the-last-12-weeks-podcast-illuminates-the-work-of-a-texas-capital-defense-team

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;

Friday, July 31, 2026

July 31: Part Two : 'The Truth Will Out,' Junk 'Science' series: Jimmie "Chris" Duncan; Louisiana: In the previous post in this series, NBC News Investigative Reporter Dan Slepian refers to a disturbing video - buried by the court for decades - that might never have come to light if it weren't for accomplished Journalist Radley Balko, (then Senior Editor at Reason Magazine)...The article, published in 'Reason' on December 19, 2009, was headed, "Manufacturing Guilt? Experts say this exclusive video shows a dental examiner creating the bite marks that put a man on death row." As you will see, It's a wonderful article that is very relevant today, by a tough, formidable journalist, who truly understands and ably reports and comments on the world of criminal justice. HL:



QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Reason first asked Michael Bowers to comment on the video. Bowers, a practicing dentist, is a deputy medical examiner for Ventura County, California and a past chairman of the American Board of Forensic Odontology's Exam and Credentialing Committee. He worked with the Innocence Project to help free Kennedy Brewer. "This is the best documentation I've ever seen of Dr. West's junk bite-mark comparisons," Bowers said in a phone interview last month. When asked how abrasions on Oliveaux's cheek not present when the video begins could later appear, Bowers answered, "Because Dr. West created them. It was intentional. He's creating artificial abrasions in that video, and he's tampering with the evidence. It's criminal, regardless of what excuse he may come up with about his methods." Bowers added, "You never jam a plaster cast into a possible bite mark like that. It distorts the evidence. You take a photograph, or if there are indentations, you take an impression. But you don't jam plaster teeth into them." After viewing the video, Bowers submitted an affidavit for Jimmie Duncan's defense."

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Prosecutors initially refused to turn the video over to Duncan's attorneys. In one brief filed during pre-trial motions in 1995, they noted the controversy surrounding West, and argued that "the defense is somehow hoping to drag Dr. West into this case in order to create ancillary issues for the jury." A year later, they relented and finally turned over the tape. For whatever reason, Duncan's trial attorneys never used the video; they never even showed it to their own expert, forensic odontologist Richard Souviron. (Duncan's trial attorneys declined to speak with Reason, because his case is still active.)"

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Souviron recently had the opportunity to view the video for the first time. In a new affidavit submitted to Duncan's post-conviction attorneys, Souviron describes the video as showing "Dr. West, violently and repeatedly, forcing a mold of Jimmie Duncan's teeth into Ms. Oliveaux's right cheek. In doing so, Dr. West creates a mark that was not previously present. Dr. West's behavior and methods are absolutely not supported by any scientific standards or protocol." Souviron added in the affidavit that hospital photographs show that "none of the marks were present when Ms. Oliveaux was at the hospital," and that the abrasions that Reisner testified about for the prosecution "were created by the flagrant misconduct of Dr. Michael West."

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: In the previous post in this 'Jimmie Duncan, Junk Science' series, NBC News Investigative Reporter Dan Slepian refers to a disturbing video - buried by the court for decades - that might never have come to light if it weren't for accomplished Journalist Radley Balko, ( then Senior Editor at Reason Magazine) who is quoted as saying: "I started watching the video and immediately I'm floored. Balko got his hands on the tape 2 decades ago. Back then he wrote an article about it that says. "no one seems to care.: "I'm waiting for the fallout - I'm waiting for the Attorney General and, I don't know, to say something about it. And nothing happens." The article, published in 'Reason' on December 19, 2009, was headed "Manufacturing Guilt? Experts say this exclusive video shows a dental examiner creating the bite marks that put a man on death row." As you will see, It's a wonderful article that is very relevant today, by a tough, formidable journalist, who truly understands and ably reports and comments on  the world of criminal justice. 

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

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


STORY: "Manufacturing Guilt? Experts say this exclusive video shows a dental examiner creating the bite marks that put a man on death row," by Radley Balko, then a Senior Editor  at Reason  Magazine, on February 19, 2009.  

EDITORS NOTE: "The following article contains graphic and disturbing photographs and video excerpts of an examination conducted on the body of a 23-month-old girl. The images are the basis of claims that forensic experts fabricated evidence in a case that put a man on death row, where he awaits exoneration or execution."

GIST: "For most of the last 20 years, doctors Steven Hayne and Michael West have served as expert forensic witnesses for the state of Mississippi. Until 2008, Hayne served as the de facto state medical examiner, dominating a criminal autopsy market in which prosecutors contract out examinations to favored private doctors. West, a dentist, served one term as the elected coroner in Forest County, Mississippi in the 1990s and partly through his work with Hayne became a popular bite-mark examiner among prosecutors. Both men have come under intense scrutiny for questionable working procedures and dubious testimony—West off and on for 15 years, Hayne mostly in the last two. Reason has been following Hayne's deteriorating career since an October 2006 article that detailed his role in putting a possibly innocent man named Cory Maye on death row (see an archive of our Hayne-related reporting at: www.reason.com/hayne).

Last year, two men that Hayne and West helped convict of murder in the early 1990s, Levon Brooks and Kennedy Brewer, were exonerated and freed from prison through DNA testing after serving more than 30 years combined behind bars. Both men had been accused of raping and murdering the daughters of their respective girlfriends. In what has come to be a pattern with the two doctors, in each case Hayne claimed to have found in an initial autopsy what other examiners missed: bite marks on the victim's body. He then called in West, a forensic odontologist (dental examiner), who definitively matched bite marks to the defendants. Partly because of the testimony from Hayne and West, Brooks was sentenced to life in prison, and Brewer to death (he spent 14 years on death row). DNA testing in 2008 determined that the semen found on both girls belonged to a third man, 51-year-old Albert Johnson. As Brooks and Brewer were freed, Johnson confessed to both crimes.
The Brooks and Brewer cases form their own forensics riddle: How could West and Hayne have definitively linked previously undetected bite marks on the victims to two men who didn't commit the murders?

Reason recently obtained shocking video from another Hayne and West collaboration that may shed light on the question. In 1993, the two conducted an examination on a 23-month-old girl named Haley Oliveaux of West Monroe, Louisiana, who had drowned in her bathtub. The video shows bite marks mysteriously appearing on the toddler's face during the time she was in the custody of Hayne and West. It then shows West repeatedly and methodically pressing and scraping a dental mold of a man's teeth on the dead girl's skin. Forensic scientists who have viewed the footage say the video reveals not only medical malpractice, but criminal evidence tampering.

How Jimmie Duncan Landed on Death Row


Haley Oliveaux did not have a happy young life. Her mother was divorced. Her father was in prison. In November 1993, she was twice taken to the hospital after suffering seizures. On November 29 of that year, she was again admitted to the hospital, this time after allegedly pulling a chest of drawers down on top of herself while climbing to reach for a piggy bank. She suffered multiple skull fractures in the incident and, notably, some bruising on her left elbow. An investigation by the West Monroe Police Department and Ouachita Parish Child Protective Services found no evidence of abuse and no reason to doubt the piggy bank story.

Three weeks later, on December 18, Allison Oliveaux went to work at 8:45 a.m., leaving Haley in Jimmie Duncan's care. According to Duncan, he gave Haley a bath later that morning, and left her in the bathtub while he washed some dishes. At around 10:30 a.m., Duncan said, he returned to the bathroom to find her lying motionless in the tub. Duncan said he rushed Haley to the house next door, where neighbor Floyd Bennett tried to administer CPR while his son called an ambulance. The ambulance crew described Duncan as hysterical and weeping. Haley was taken to the hospital, and pronounced dead shortly thereafter. After admitting to the police that he'd left Haley alone in the tub, Jimmie Duncan was arrested and charged with negligent homicide, or criminal inaction leading to another person's death.

But after the autopsy and examination by Hayne and West, prosecutors raised the charges. Citing the bite-mark analysis, along with other evidence, prosecutors charged Duncan with capital murder, alleging that he raped Haley Oliveaux in the bathtub, forced her head underwater, bit her, and drowned her. Five years later, even though the only physical evidence directly linking him to the girl was the bite-mark analysis, Jimmie Duncan was tried, convicted, and sentenced to death. He has been on death row in Louisiana for 10 years.

Louisiana had its own medical examiners at the time who were closer to the scene of the crime. Nonetheless, Haley Oliveaux's body was taken from Glenwood Regional Medical Center in West Monroe, Louisiana, 120 miles east to Jackson, Mississippi, so it could be autopsied by Hayne. At the time, Hayne, who has never been certified in forensic pathology, was performing the majority of autopsies in Mississippi, some 1,200-1,500 per year. That's an output other forensic pathologists describe as impossible (he was also holding down two hospital jobs and testifying regularly in court).

Despite his heavy workload in Mississippi, Hayne, with West by his side, began looking for business in Louisiana, too. In October 1993, the Baton Rouge Advocate reported that officials in Ouachita Parish (where West Monroe is located) were considering sending criminal autopsies to Hayne, despite concerns expressed by other medical examiners about the quality of his work. Oliveaux was one of Hayne's first autopsies for Ouachita Parish, according to testimony from Duncan's trial. Among those who traveled 120 miles to observe the examination were the West Monroe police chief, a police detective and captain, plus two assistant district attorneys. Though it isn't particularly unusual for a district attorney or police officer to witness an autopsy, it is unusual for them to travel two hours and cross state lines to do so. The National Association of Medical Examiners discourages doctors from speaking to law enforcement officials before conducting exams because because doing so can bias a doctor's conclusions. At Duncan's trial five years later, one of his attorneys likened the Oliveaux autopsy to a job evaluation. If it was, Hayne passed. By that time Hayne was performing the bulk of Ouachita Parish's criminal autopsies, 30 to 40 per year.

Hayne testified that during an initial examination of Oliveaux's body, he was able to find bite marks that at the time no other medical professional had noticed—just as he'd done in the Brewer and Brooks cases before. And just as it happened in the Brewer and Brooks cases, Hayne's discovery of potential bite marks gave local authorities probable cause to obtain a plaster dental mold of the defendant's teeth, in this case Jimmie Duncan. Hayne then called in West to perform his unique brand of "analysis." West concluded that the marks were made by human teeth belonging to the man police and prosecutors suspected of killing the child.

The Video

Hayne and West videotaped many of their autopsies and forensic examinations over the years. For whatever reason, the video of West's examination of Haley Oliveaux was preserved, and Duncan's post-conviction attorneys found it in the district attorney's file last year. They were shocked at what they saw. The full video is 24 minutes long. The brief excerpts that follow show Oliveaux's face on successive days. At the start of the videotaped examination from December 18, 1993, her right cheek appears free of any noticeable marks. Yet after the tape cuts to December 19, 1993, the cheek shows prominent signs of abrasions, which are then exacerbated by West's handiwork.

Warning: These video excerpts, approximately 30 seconds long, contain disturbing images.

The full 24-minute video opens with Michael West's initial examination of Haley Oliveaux's body on the night of December 18, 1993. He notes several injuries, but at no time does he mention the presence of possible bite marks on Oliveaux's right cheek. The video itself shows no sign of bite marks, scrapes, or abrasions on the cheek.

At the 4:55 mark, there's a cut in the original video, representing the break between West's initial exam on December 18, and a follow-up bite-mark analysis on December 19. After the break, West stands over Oliveaux's body, which now contains a striking red abrasion on her right cheek—an abrasion that wasn't there before. West then takes the plaster cast of Jimmie Duncan's teeth and pushes it into the scrape on Oliveaux's jaw. Over the next few minutes he jams, drags, and scrapes the dental mold across Oliveaux's cheek 17 times. For the entire 24-minute video, West uses Duncan's teeth mold on Oliveaux's skin more than 50 times.

Expert Opinion on the Video


Reason first asked Michael Bowers to comment on the video. Bowers, a practicing dentist, is a deputy medical examiner for Ventura County, California and a past chairman of the American Board of Forensic Odontology's Exam and Credentialing Committee. He worked with the Innocence Project to help free Kennedy Brewer.

"This is the best documentation I've ever seen of Dr. West's junk bite-mark comparisons," Bowers said in a phone interview last month.

When asked how abrasions on Oliveaux's cheek not present when the video begins could later appear, Bowers answered, "Because Dr. West created them. It was intentional. He's creating artificial abrasions in that video, and he's tampering with the evidence. It's criminal, regardless of what excuse he may come up with about his methods." Bowers added, "You never jam a plaster cast into a possible bite mark like that. It distorts the evidence. You take a photograph, or if there are indentations, you take an impression. But you don't jam plaster teeth into them." After viewing the video, Bowers submitted an affidavit for Jimmie Duncan's defense.

Reason also showed the video to David Averill, a dentist and a former president of the American Board of Forensic Odontology. "The video is troubling. I don't know how you can explain where those marks come from. And there's just no justification for him to push the cast into the skin like that," Averill said. "That isn't an acceptable way to perform a bite mark analysis."

Duncan's post-conviction attorneys hired San Diego forensic pathologist Harry Bonnell to review Hayne and West's testimony in the case. Bonnell, who has been highly critical of Hayne in the past, sits on the board of trustees for Parents of Murdered Children, Inc., a victim advocacy group. He has worked for the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology and formerly served on the ethics committee of the National Association of Medical Examiners. By email, Bonnell told Reason, "If what I am seeing on the video is accurate, someone is using the mold of Duncan's teeth to create an apparent bite mark; this, in my mind, is criminal tampering with evidence."

In his affidavit for Jimmie Duncan's defense, Bonnell elaborated:

The injury to the cheek of Haley Oliveaux is not seen in hospital photos…and was generated by using a mold of Duncan's teeth to create a bitemark. The injuries on the child's face are abrasions, which form almost immediately, unlike bruises, therefore the fact that the marks are not present in hospital photos and in the beginning of the West Video makes it medically impossible that Jimmie Duncan could have inflicted any of these injuries. Nor is it possible that witnesses could have seen these marks in the emergency room, as abrasions cannot appear, then disappear, and then reappear at the morgue…stating that the bites (which they are not) were inflicted within 30 minutes of death is rubbish, and supported by no scientific fact or literature.

The above image of Haley Oliveaux comes from the start of the autopsy video of Haley Oliveaux on December 18, 1993. The image below comes from December 19, 1993, when the video of the examination continued.

The Tainted Dr. West


West himself never testified at Jimmie Duncan's trial. Between his examination of Oliveaux in 1993 and Duncan's trial in 1998, the bite-mark analyst came under fire for his working methods and credulity-stretching testimony. In 1994, an ethics committee from the American Academy of Forensic Sciences unanimously recommended that West be expelled from the organization. West resigned instead. His work was criticized in such national media outlets as Newsweek, the ABA Journal, and National Law Journal. By 1998, Duncan's prosecutors recognized the baggage West carried and dropped him from the case. Still, West continued to both work with Hayne and testify in Mississippi until well into the 2000s.

Duncan's prosecutors then turned to Dr. Neal Reisner, a forensic odontolgist from Scarsdale, New York. Relying only on photos West took after the examination depicted in the video, Reisner testified that the marks on Oliveaux's cheek were indeed bite marks, and that "to a reasonable degree of medical certainty," he could determine that they came from Jimmie Duncan.

The video above was never shown at Jimmie Duncan's trial. It wasn't even shown to the expert witnesses from either side. Trial Judge Charles Joiner did view the tape, and inexplicably concluded that it contained "no exculpatory evidence favorable to the defendant," a conclusion that the forensics specialists Reason spoke with strongly dispute.

Prosecutors initially refused to turn the video over to Duncan's attorneys. In one brief filed during pre-trial motions in 1995, they noted the controversy surrounding West, and argued that "the defense is somehow hoping to drag Dr. West into this case in order to create ancillary issues for the jury." A year later, they relented and finally turned over the tape. For whatever reason, Duncan's trial attorneys never used the video; they never even showed it to their own expert, forensic odontologist Richard Souviron. (Duncan's trial attorneys declined to speak with Reason, because his case is still active.)

Souviron recently had the opportunity to view the video for the first time. In a new affidavit submitted to Duncan's post-conviction attorneys, Souviron describes the video as showing "Dr. West, violently and repeatedly, forcing a mold of Jimmie Duncan's teeth into Ms. Oliveaux's right cheek. In doing so, Dr. West creates a mark that was not previously present. Dr. West's behavior and methods are absolutely not supported by any scientific standards or protocol." Souviron added in the affidavit that hospital photographs show that "none of the marks were present when Ms. Oliveaux was at the hospital," and that the abrasions that Reisner testified about for the prosecution "were created by the flagrant misconduct of Dr. Michael West."

The Hayne-West Legacy


West was still testifying in Mississippi courtrooms until at least the year 2000, long after he'd resigned from the American Academy of Forensic Sciences. As late as 2007, prosecutors were still relying primarily on West's testimony to keep Kennedy Brewer in prison. And despite the Brooks and Brewer exonerations, the state has refused to conduct a review of the hundreds of cases in which West has testified.

Tucker Carrington, director of the Mississippi chapter of the Innocence Project, argues that West's influence may run even deeper. "You also have to consider all the cases where someone may have falsely confessed, or accepted plea bargain for a crime they didn't commit after being presented with West's findings. Those cases aren't going to show up in legal searches," he says. "West was also widely used by the state's social services agencies. His testimony has helped the state take who knows how many children away from their parents."

The story with Hayne is even grimmer. In August of last year, Mississippi announced that it finally would no longer include Hayne on its list of medical examiners cleared to perform criminal autopsies. The move effectively ended Hayne's reign as Mississippi's de facto medical examiner.

But as with West, Mississippi officials still refuse to acknowledge that there was ever a significant problem with Hayne, and have no intention of investigating just how much damage he may have done to the state's criminal justice system. Given that Hayne performed approximately 80 percent to 90 percent of the state's autopsies for close to 20 years, the number of cases in which he has testified is likely in the tens of thousands. Worse yet, even in terminating Hayne, the state agreed to allow him to complete a backlog of approximately 600 autopsies. As of this article's posting, he's still testifying in Mississippi courts.

Radley Balko is a senior editor at Reason magazine.

The story can be read at:

https://reason.com/2009/02/19/manufacturing-guilt/


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

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;

July 31: Junk Science; Nick Flannery: Ohio: Robert Roberson: Texas: Josh Burns: MI: Andrew Roark: Texas; MI); Questions of the day: What happened when two scholars - one conservative George W. Bush appointee David Safavian) and one liberal (former Barack Obama advisor Van Jones) exchange views on junk science. The answer, according to the DPIC), (spoiler alert) is, not surprisingly, in their words: “To work, our jus­tice sys­tem should depend on reli­able, val­i­dat­ed evi­dence rather than unproven the­o­ries and junk sci­ence. Wrongful con­vic­tions rob inno­cent peo­ple of free­dom, drain mil­lions in tax­pay­er dol­lars through pro­tract­ed lit­i­ga­tion and unnec­es­sary incar­cer­a­tion, and force the gov­ern­ment to pay for the sub­stan­tial set­tle­ments required to redress when those con­vic­tions are overturned.” VAN JONES AND DAVID SAFAVIAN ON THE USE OF JUNK SCI­ENCE IN CRIMINAL CASES.



PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Mr
. Jones and Mr. Safavian note that “[i]n ​‘Law & Order,’ the right per­son is usu­al­ly found guilty. In real life, that’s not always the case. If we are to have true jus­tice, judges must be empow­ered to set a high bar to screen out junk sci­ence and pro­tect the inno­cent.”  They argue this would let judges screen out unre­li­able foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny before it reach­es jurors and frame the reform as essen­tial to pre­serv­ing pub­lic con­fi­dence in the justice system."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Citing Kentucky Innocence Project data find­ing that junk sci­ence con­tributed to a major­i­ty of the wrong­ful con­vic­tions it has reviewed, and to rough­ly a quar­ter of wrong­ful con­vic­tions nation­al­ly, the authors call on state courts to adopt stan­dards mir­ror­ing Federal Rule of Evidence 702, which requires foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny to rest on reli­able sci­en­tif­ic prin­ci­ples and meth­ods."

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

STORY: "Article of Interest: Conservative and Liberal Authors Highlight Junk Science’s Role in Wrongful Convictions," by Hayley Bedard, published by The Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) on July 27, 2026.

GIST: "In a July 17, 2026, op-ed, for­mer Barack Obama advi­sor Van Jones and for­mer George W. Bush appointee David Safavian joint­ly argue that courts con­tin­ue to accept dis­cred­it­ed foren­sic tech­niques as reli­able evi­dence, con­tribut­ing to wrong­ful con­vic­tions across the coun­try.

 The authors con­trast the con­fi­dent foren­sic experts seen on tele­vi­sion crime dra­mas with real-world court­rooms where they say, ​“pho­ny foren­sics” meth­ods—micro­scop­ic hair com­par­i­son, bite mark analy­sis, and blood-stain pat­tern inter­pre­ta­tion — are too often pre­sent­ed to juries as ​“so-called evidence.”

“To work, our jus­tice sys­tem should depend on reli­able, val­i­dat­ed evi­dence rather than unproven the­o­ries and junk sci­ence. Wrongful con­vic­tions rob inno­cent peo­ple of free­dom, drain mil­lions in tax­pay­er dol­lars through pro­tract­ed lit­i­ga­tion and unnec­es­sary incar­cer­a­tion, and force the gov­ern­ment to pay for the sub­stan­tial set­tle­ments required to redress when those con­vic­tions are overturned.”

The op-ed high­lights the case of Nick Flannery, an Ohio father charged with assault and child endan­ger­ment after his infant son was hos­pi­tal­ized with brain bleed­ing.

Medical experts who lat­er reviewed Mr. Flannery’s case point­ed to a pre­ex­ist­ing con­di­tion rather than abuse, yet pros­e­cu­tors intend to pro­ceed to tri­al rely­ing on a Shaken Baby Syndrome diag­no­sis, a the­o­ry the authors con­sid­er ​“long-dis­put­ed.”

The authors also point to the case of Robert Roberson, a Texas death row pris­on­er who was con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to death for the death of his young daugh­ter based on Shaken Baby Syndrome evi­dence.

Mr. Roberson’s exe­cu­tion was most recent­ly halt­ed in 2025 by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals under Article 11.073, the state’s law that allows con­vic­tions to be recon­sid­ered when under­ly­ing foren­sic evi­dence is out­dat­ed or sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly dis­cred­it­ed.

Mr. Jones and Mr. Safavian note that the lead detec­tive in Mr. Roberson’s case is expect­ed to tes­ti­fy about the unre­li­a­bil­i­ty of the evi­dence if Mr. Roberson receives a new tri­al.

They also note that, because of the junk sci­ence in Mr. Roberson’s case, he came with­in a week of exe­cu­tion and “[t]hat’s how close the jus­tice sys­tem came to an irre­versible mis­take.”

The authors also ref­er­ence Josh Burns (MI) and Andrew Roark (TX) as men whose con­vic­tions in sim­i­lar cas­es were lat­er over­turned on appeals.

Citing Kentucky Innocence Project data find­ing that junk sci­ence con­tributed to a major­i­ty of the wrong­ful con­vic­tions it has reviewed, and to rough­ly a quar­ter of wrong­ful con­vic­tions nation­al­ly, the authors call on state courts to adopt stan­dards mir­ror­ing Federal Rule of Evidence 702, which requires foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny to rest on reli­able sci­en­tif­ic prin­ci­ples and meth­ods.

Mr. Jones and Mr. Safavian note that “[i]n ​‘Law & Order,’ the right per­son is usu­al­ly found guilty. In real life, that’s not always the case. If we are to have true jus­tice, judges must be empow­ered to set a high bar to screen out junk sci­ence and pro­tect the inno­cent.”

They argue this would let judges screen out unre­li­able foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny before it reach­es jurors and frame the reform as essen­tial to pre­serv­ing pub­lic con­fi­dence in the justice system."


The entire story can be read at:


https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/article-of-interest-conservative-and-liberal-authors-highlight-junk-sciences-role-in-wrongful-convictions




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;

Thursday, July 30, 2026

July 31: Part One: 'The Truth Will Out' Junk 'Science' series: Jimmie "Chris" Duncan; Louisiana: Medical Examiner Steven Hayne and Dentist Michael West; Link to the extraordinary NBC News video that helped free Jimmie Duncan after nearly 30 years on death row for a murder that multiple judges say didn't happen...HL: (The jury did not see this video; The network says it has not been broadcast until now; Filmed by West, while conducting his post-mortem examination, and buried out of sight by court order for years, the video is proof that occasionally - even in Texas - the truth will out: (Ugly as it may be): The desecration of the face of a 23-month old child by the prosecutor's expert witnesses. The on-going persecution of an innocent man by Louisiana prosecutors. Bravo to NBC News and Investigative Reporter Dan Slepian for their superb reporting on this hugely important criminal justice story. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;)



LINK: 



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

LINK TO THE EXTRAORDINARY NBC NEWS VIDEO THAT HELPED FREE JIMMY DUNCAN AFTER NEARLY THREE DECADES ON DEATH ROW FOR A MURDER THAT MULTIPLE JUDGES SAY DIDN'T  HAPPEN. 

THE JURY DID NOT SEE IT: THE NETWORK  SAYS IT HAS NOT BEEN BROADCAST UNTIL NOW:

FILMED BY WEST, WHILE  CONDUCTING HIS POST-MORTEM   EXAMINATION, AND BURIED OUT OF SIGHT BY COURT ORDER  FOR  YEARS,  THE  VIDEO IS PROOF THAT OCCASIONALLY  'THE TRUTH WILL OUT:  UGLY AS IT MAY BE;  THE DESECRATION  OF THE FACE  OF A 23-MONTH-OLD CHILD BY THE PROSECUTOR'S EXPERT WITNESSES. THE  ON-GOING PERSECUTION BY LOUISIANA PROSECUTORS OF AN INNOCENT MAN;

BRAVO TO NBC NEWS AND INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER DAN SLEPIAN ,  FOR THEIR  SUPERB REPORTING ON THIS  HUGELY   IMPORTANT CRIMINAL JUSTICE STORY.  

HAROLD LEVY PUBLISHER: THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG:


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

QUOTES  ON LEARNING ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF THE EXPLOSIVE VIDEO: (From the NBC News production);

JIMMIE DUNCAN: "Duncan saw the tape for the first time that day in court, more than 30 years after his arrest,"I couldn't believe that all these people knew that video existed - and they still let this happen to me. 
-----------------------

ALLISON LAYTON: "Allison Layton is Hayley's mother.  Allison was in court too. She could only bear to watch a short clip of the video. But she was furious with what she saw. "I found out my daughter wasn't murdered. It never happened."... The tape wasn't the only evidence not presented to Duncan's jury. The hearing also revealed that Hayley had a history of seizures and had been rushed to the hospital several times in the months before her death. Months after the hearingJudge Sharp issued his ruling. He threw out Duncan's conviction, concluding that Hayley drowned in the bathtub as a result of a seizure and found no evidence that Hayley had been sexually abused. Alison now believes that Duncan was framed. It's kind of a big deal I think that Haley's mom  supports the guy that was convicted of killing her.  'Well. Let's get this straight. He was convicted because they lied. They railroaded this man. They fabricated evidence. They desecrated my daughter. And videotaped it."

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

ALVIN SHARP:  The presiding Judge  over the hearing at which the video was played:  "As you sit on the bench watching that video what is going through your mind? I was aghast I'm left in a state of consternation -total consternation. Is it fair to say that Dr. West is manufacturing and creating the evidence on this child's body? He's absolutely creating marks on that babies body. Do you think that what you saw by Dr. West on that tape was a crime by him. "There very well could be."But West has said he wasn't creating any marks - that the tape shows what he calls his direct comparison technique where he is simply comparing Duncan's dental mode to marks he claimed were already there. Marks, he says, that a layman might not see. There is no scientific support for his method- and it's been discredited by forensic experts.
-------------------------

INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST RADLEY BALKO: " I started watching the video and immediately I'm floored." Balko got his hands on the tape 2 decades ago. Back then he wrote an article about it that says. "no one seems to care.: "I'm waiting for the fallout - I'm waiting for the Attorney General and, I don't know, to say something about it. And nothing happens." Balko continued to investigate Hayne and West, co-authoring a book about their work. "

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

STEV TEW: "The district attorney is Steve Tew, who at the time of Duncan's trial was a prosecutor in the same office. We called emailed dropped by to speak to Kew but he declines to talk to us. In court the DA argued that Duncan was still guilty... "We don't need bite-mark evidence to put Mr. Duncan in the apartment alone with this child."

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

NBC INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST DAN SLEPIAN:"When this video showed up in my mailbox a couple of months ago. I was floored. I couldn't believe it.You hear about stuff like this happening but rarely do you actually see it on videotape."

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

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;

July 30: David Black: District of Columbia: He served 26 years in prison and then a key witness (Larry Johnson) recanted, Courts and Crime Staff Writer Dan Simon reports in the Washington Post,, noting that: "In 1997, the man’s testimony helped send David Black to prison for 26 years. Last summer, inside the same Washington courthouse, Black listened as the witness recanted one key claim after another. No, the man said, he never saw Black fire a gun. No, he never saw him flee. No, he never saw Black kill anyone. “I had to leave the courtroom,” Black recalled in an interview this week. “My emotions wouldn’t hold.” The recanted testimony is now central to Black’s legal fight to wipe out his murder conviction stemming from a shooting that shocked residents near D.C.’s Chinatown neighborhood:



PUBLISHER'S NOTE: What do police informants have to do with forensic science? (I'm glad you asked). Investigative  Reporter Pamela Colloff give us  a clue when she writes - at the link below -  "I’ve wanted to write about jailhouse informants for a long time because they often appear in troubled cases in which the other evidence is weak." That's my experience as  will as a criminal lawyer and an observer of criminal justice. Given the reality that jurors - thanks to the CSI effect - are becoming more and more insistent on the need for there to be forensic evidence, it is becoming more and more common for police to rely on shady tactics such as use of police snitches, staging lineups, coercing, inducing, or creating false confessions out of thin air, procuring false eyewitness testimony or concealing exculpatory evidence. 

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

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Johnson (recanter) said that in 1997, he couldn’t testify how he wanted to. “I tried to tell the truth,” he said, “and they wouldn’t let me.”

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The case rested largely on two witnesses, Johnson and Barbara Marshall, who testified they saw Black fire the gun. Black’s attorney at the trial, Thomas Farquhar, was able to chip away at Marshall’s credibility, according to court filings. An investigator from his office testified in front of jurors that on the eve of the trial, Marshall provided him a signed statement recanting what she’d earlier told police.:

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY:  The attorneys arranged to have Johnson testify via video on July 28, 2025. He described Chow as a good friend of the whole neighborhood. “A very kind lady and good lady,” he recalled. He had less glowing words for Black.  “We never liked each other,” he said. “He know it and I know it.”  But his testimony that Black shot Chow, he said, was a lie he felt forced to say because a police officer threatened to lock him up. And this time, from the start, his recollections were different. Rather than being in a third-floor apartment, with a view of K Street, at the time of the shooting, he was in a courtyard behind the high-rise. “Being honest, we was out there drinking beer, and some of my friends was smoking marijuana. And we were just sitting out there kicking it, well, talking, as you would say,” he said."

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

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Johnson said they heard people arguing on K Street, followed by two booms, and he and his friends walked there to investigate. “What did you see on K Street?” Black’s attorney Amelia Maxfield asked “A bunch of polices,” he said. Johnson said he also saw Chow on the ground. Asked if he ever saw anyone fire a gun, Johnson said no.  Under cross-examination, Assistant U.S. Attorney Shehzad Akhtar got Johnson to acknowledge that when he initially testified, he had agreed under oath to tell the truth, and that his memory about what happened was better in 1997 than in 2025. “Sir, it’s been 30 years. I can barely remember my name now,” Johnson said, according to a transcript. Johnson said that in 1997, he couldn’t testify how he wanted to.
“I tried to tell the truth,” he said, “and they wouldn’t let me.”

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

STORY: "He served 26 years in prison. Then a key witness recanted," by Reporter Dan Simon, published by The Washington Post,  on July. 25, 2026. (Washington Post staff writer Dan Morse covers courts and crime in Montgomery County, Md. He arrived at the paper in 2005, after reporting stops at the Wall Street Journal, Baltimore Sun and Montgomery (Ala.) Advertiser, where he was a Pulitzer Prize finalist. He is the author of "The Yoga Store Murder," published by Penguin. Honors and Awards: Pulitzer Prize finalist Books by Dan Morse: The Yoga Store MurderBuy this book)

SUB-HEADING: "David Black was 21 when he was charged with the murder of a beloved community member in D.C.’s Chinatown area. Now free, he is seeking exoneration."

GIST: "In 1997, the man’s testimony helped send David Black to prison for 26 years.

Last summer, inside the same Washington courthouse, Black listened as the witness recanted one key claim after another.

No, the man said, he never saw Black fire a gun. No, he never saw him flee. No, he never saw Black kill anyone.

“I had to leave the courtroom,” Black recalled in an interview this week. “My emotions wouldn’t hold.”

The recanted testimony is now central to Black’s legal fight to wipe out his murder conviction stemming from a shooting that shocked residents near D.C.’s Chinatown neighborhood. 

A beloved resident there, 78-year-old Alice Chow, was hit by a stray bullet as she walked home from church along K Street NW, dropping to the ground in the middle of a Sunday afternoon.

Black, 21 at the time, was arrested and went to trial. He did not testify, was found guilty by a jury and was imprisoned until he was 47.

“I just want to get exonerated and move on with my life,” the 50-year-old said.

His attorneys filed a 68-page motion last month seeking to vacate the conviction. “Mr. Black can finally prove what he has always maintained: that someone else fired the shot,” they wrote.

Their key witness in the effort was also a key witness for prosecutors in 1997: Larry Johnson. On July 28, 2025 — in the throes of Stage 4 lung cancer — Johnson recanted his earlier testimony, saying that police coerced him into giving false testimony.

Johnson died on Feb. 1, according to court filings and his obituary.

Black’s case illustrates how early-release programs enacted to help people convicted at a young age can offer only so much relief, especially if that person, as Black and his attorneys say, was innocent. 

Black was originally sentenced to 52 years in prison. 

In 2023, he used a law allowing people sentenced as young adults to seek early release. 

He prevailed and was released after serving half his sentence. 

But because his conviction remains, he said he struggles to find work and still carries the label of a murderer.

“The damage can never be undone,” he said. “Once I get exonerated, that’ll give me the opportunity to actually breathe.”

D.C. police said they do not discuss active legal disputes.

Officials at the U.S. attorney’s office in D.C., which prosecuted the case, declined to comment.

 They are scheduled to file a legal response to Black’s request by Sept. 1. In earlier filings regarding Black’s early prison release, prosecutors wrote that he had failed to “to accept responsibility for his actions.”

Four law enforcement officers involved in the case in 1997 — two detectives, a police officer and a line prosecutor — declined to comment or could not be reached.

It was not clear from Johnson’s new testimony why he waited so long to recant his original testimony.

The victim, Chow, was a Washington-area native who spoke Cantonese, Mandarin and English.

 She volunteered at a Chinese community center, translated documents for Chinese immigrants and delivered groceries to disabled neighbors.

 Her murder occurred “at a time of increasing violence in D.C., resulting in tremendous pressure to solve her murder,” Black’s attorneys wrote in recent court papers.

Family and friends of Chow could not be reached. In court filings related to Black’s early-release request, in 2023, prosecutors said they were unable to reach Chow’s relatives.

At Black’s trial, prosecutors told jurors that he recklessly fired two gunshots as he chased a man they identified as James “June Bug” Smith down K Street after an argument. 

Neither round hit the target, they said, but one struck Chow. T

The case rested largely on two witnesses, Johnson and Barbara Marshall, who testified they saw Black fire the gun.

Black’s attorney at the trial, Thomas Farquhar, was able to chip away at Marshall’s credibility, according to court filings. An investigator from his office testified in front of jurors that on the eve of the trial, Marshall provided him a signed statement recanting what she’d earlier told police.

Johnson testified that on the day of Chow’s murder, he was in a third-floor apartment drinking a beer and getting ready to watch the Pro Bowl when he heard a “ruckus outside.”

 Johnson said he went to a hallway window for a better view and saw June Bug running away as Black fired two shots.

Farquhar argued that both witnesses were mistaken and that forensic evidence contradicted prosecutors’ claims of where the shots originated.

“This case is a nightmare,” he told jurors, “because he’s charged primarily on the basis of testimony of two witnesses that no reasonable person would believe.”

Jurors struggled in their deliberations, asking for explanations on reasonable doubt and witness credibility, and at one point said they were deadlocked, according to court records.

 They came back for a second day of deliberations before reaching their decision.

Black remembered thinking their struggles were a good sign as he prepared to hear the verdict. “My knees buckled and I almost had a heart attack in the courtroom,” he recalled. “I could not believe it when I got convicted.”

In 2023 court filings, Black’s attorneys argued that understanding their client meant first understanding a childhood defined by trauma, chaos and heartbreak.

He grew up in D.C.’s Sursum Corda neighborhood amid violence fueled by Washington’s crack epidemic of the late 1980s and 1990s. 

Black was robbed at knifepoint when he was 10. 

Five years later, his mother was killed after being shot nine times at a house party.Ask The Post AIDive deeper

“In this kind of environment, David really stood out as a calm guy,” Black’s attorney from the D.C. Public Defender Service wrote, citing a childhood friend.

The new legal filing is not Black’s first effort to get his conviction vacated. 

Early in his prison sentence, he appealed the conviction to the D.C. Court of Appeals but failed to get it overturned. 

The new effort, led by attorneys from the Exoneration Project, cites D.C.’s Innocence Protection Act, which requires a party to identify the “specific new evidence” to demonstrate they are “actually innocent despite having been convicted at trial.” 

A judge can then order a conviction and the original charges be wiped out, thus ending the case, or grant a new trial.

The attorneys say previously undisclosed prosecution records point to an alternative suspect and undermine the eyewitness testimony. 

They also tried to track down Johnson and Marshall, the two witnesses who said they saw Black fire the gun.

Marshall died in January 2025. But the signed statement she gave to the defense attorney investigator in 1997, according to court records, also amounts to a recanting of her claims against Black.

In the statement, Marshall said she was inside her apartment, heard two people arguing and looked out window, but only saw blurry images. “I was not wearing my glasses,” she said in the statement attached to court filings. “I couldn’t see who they were.”

She also said in the statement that she never saw a shooting but was harassed by the police into saying so: “All I wanted to do was go home.”

The attorneys arranged to have Johnson testify via video on July 28, 2025. He described Chow as a good friend of the whole neighborhood. “A very kind lady and good lady,” he recalled.

He had less glowing words for Black.

“We never liked each other,” he said. “He know it and I know it.”

But his testimony that Black shot Chow, he said, was a lie he felt forced to say because a police officer threatened to lock him up.

And this time, from the start, his recollections were different. Rather than being in a third-floor apartment, with a view of K Street, at the time of the shooting, he was in a courtyard behind the high-rise.

“Being honest, we was out there drinking beer, and some of my friends was smoking marijuana. And we were just sitting out there kicking it, well, talking, as you would say,” he said.

Johnson said they heard people arguing on K Street, followed by two booms, and he and his friends walked there to investigate.

“What did you see on K Street?” Black’s attorney Amelia Maxfield asked.

“A bunch of polices,” he said.

Johnson said he also saw Chow on the ground. Asked if he ever saw anyone fire a gun, Johnson said no.

Under cross-examination, Assistant U.S. Attorney Shehzad Akhtar got Johnson to acknowledge that when he initially testified, he had agreed under oath to tell the truth, and that his memory about what happened was better in 1997 than in 2025.

“Sir, it’s been 30 years. I can barely remember my name now,” Johnson said, according to a transcript.

Johnson said that in 1997, he couldn’t testify how he wanted to.

“I tried to tell the truth,” he said, “and they wouldn’t let me.”

The entire story can be read at:



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;

Wednesday, July 29, 2026

July 29: Michael Stone UK: Major Development: For almost 30 years he ahas been behind bars for Murders he has denied committing from the outset: Now, his solicitor says new witnesses have come forward to name another man, Raymond Buck, as a possible suspect. Mr Buck has since died - Kent Police say they are supporting an ongoing review by the UK's CCRC (Criminal Case Review Commission) and his lawyer says these developments 'could finally clear him', ITV reports, noting that: "One of the new witnesses, Ross Shields, 39, was a child at the time of the murders. He told the Sunday Times newspaper that he overheard Buck confess to a family member on the day of the attacks: “I’ve done something unforgivable. I’ve killed three people.” According to the report, Buck was a carpenter, had a history of violence and killed himself aged 46 in 2000."


BACKGROUND:  (Wikipedia); Michael Stone (born Michael John Goodban, 7 June 1960) was convicted of the 1996 murders of Lin and Megan Russell and the attempted murder of Josie Russell. He was sentenced to three life sentences with a tariff of 25 years for the Russell killings.[1] Stone maintains his innocence and continues to contest his conviction. His legal team argues that the serial killer Levi Bellfield could possibly be the true perpetrator of the attack.[2] In February 2022, Stone's solicitor said that Bellfield had confessed to the murder of both Lin and Megan, although the truthfulness of the confession remained in doubt and Bellfield later claimed that he had confessed for a cash payment.[3]


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

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "She Michael Stone's lawyer)  told ITV Meridian: "Two witnesses have come forward. Both have given, what I believe, to be credible evidence that the perpetrator is a man by the name of Raymond Buck, who in fact took his own life in 2000.  "One of the witnesses had a number of contemporaneous documents...from the summer of 1996 which totally supported what was being said. As well as psychiatric reports and such. These really support everything that I was being told about what went on that summer.""

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

QUOTE TWO  OF THE DAY: "A CCRC spokesperson said: “A review into this application is ongoing. This is the fourth time the CCRC has investigated Mr Stone’s case. His 2003 application was ineligible because an appeal was still live. The 2006 application was closed in 2010 and wasn’t referred. The 2017 application was closed in July 2023 and wasn’t referred. "This fresh review commenced in November 2023, and we are exploring all of the possibilities the application raises to determine whether Mr Stone may have suffered a miscarriage of justice. "

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

QUOTE THREE OF THE DAY: (Referring to the recent  taking of a new DNA sample from Michael Stone):  "A decision was made in May of this year to collect a new DNA sample from Mr Stone, and this will take place on Thursday 9 July. "

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

STORY: "Investigation into 'new suspect' in Lin and Megan Russell murders, published on July 26, 2026.

GIST: "It is one of Kent's most notorious killings. Lin Russell and her 6-year-old daughter Megan were attacked on a country lane in Chillenden, Kent. Megan's sister Josie, who was 9, survived.

Michael Stone has spent almost thirty years behind bars for the murders. A crime he says he didn't commit.

His solicitor says new witnesses have come forward to name another man, Raymond Buck, as a possible suspect. Mr Buck has since died.

One of the new witnesses, Ross Shields, 39, was a child at the time of the murders.

He told the Sunday Times newspaper that he overheard Buck confess to a family member on the day of the attacks: “I’ve done something unforgivable. I’ve killed three people.”

According to the report, Buck was a carpenter, had a history of violence and killed himself aged 46 in 2000.

Kent Police say they're supporting the Criminal Cases Review Commission's ongoing review. Stone's lawyer Karen Todner says it could finally clear him.

She told ITV Meridian: "Two witnesses have come forward. Both have given, what I believe, to be credible evidence that the perpetrator is a man by the name of Raymond Buck, who in fact took his own life in 2000.

"One of the witnesses had a number of contemporaneous documents...from the summer of 1996 which totally supported what was being said. As well as psychiatric reports and such. These really support everything that I was being told about what went on that summer."

The Criminal Cases Review Commission, which looks into miscarriages of justice is assessing this claim.

A CCRC spokesperson said: “A review into this application is ongoing. This is the fourth time the CCRC has investigated Mr Stone’s case. His 2003 application was ineligible because an appeal was still live. The 2006 application was closed in 2010 and wasn’t referred. The 2017 application was closed in July 2023 and wasn’t referred.

"This fresh review commenced in November 2023, and we are exploring all of the possibilities the application raises to determine whether Mr Stone may have suffered a miscarriage of justice.

"Considerable work has been done not only on forensic aspects of the application but on the several other aspects of the application which Mr Stone's lawyers wished to be investigated.

"A decision was made in May of this year to collect a new DNA sample from Mr Stone, and this will take place on Thursday 9 July.

"Our test for referring a case is that there is a real possibility that the Court of Appeal would overturn his conviction, a test which was not met in any of the earlier applications.

"It would be inappropriate for us to make any further comment while the application is being reviewed."

Detective Chief Inspector Neil Kimber, of Kent Police, said: "During the investigation into the murders of Lin and Megan Russell and the attempted murder of Josie Russell in 1996, numerous members of public contacted the police with the names of people they thought may have been responsible.

"Each piece of information was reviewed and, in some cases, led to further enquiries into some individuals. This included contact with a relative of a man with connections to the Folkestone and London areas during the original investigation and, in 2017, discussions with another of his relatives.

"The information provided in each case was comprehensively examined in full by the investigation team.

"Following two trials at which Michael Stone was found guilty by a jury on both occasions, and an appeal to the High Court, he remains convicted of the murders of Lin and Megan Russell and the attempted murder of Josie Russell in 1996.

"Stone made an application to apply for a Judicial Review in respect of his conviction in September 2012. The Honourable Mr Justice Blake ordered that permission for the application should be refused.

"Kent Police has supported the Criminal Cases Review Commission by providing all the relevant information required throughout its ongoing review of Stone’s conviction and will continue to do so.""

The entire story can be read at:



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;