"FAULTY FORENSIC SCIENCE IS ONE OF THE MAIN CAUSES OF WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS, IMPLICATED IN APPROXIMATELY 60 PERCENT OF DNA EXONERATIONS NATIONWIDE. BITEMARK EVIDENCE, IN PARTICULAR, HAS BEEN EXPOSED BY CASES LIKE THIS, AS WELL AS BY A RECENT LANDMARK STUDY BY THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, AS A FLAWED AND HIGHLY UNRELIABLE FORM OF EVIDENCE, WITH LITTLE SCIENTIFIC FOUNDATION. IN RECENT YEARS, ERRONEOUS BITEMARK EVIDENCE HAS PLAYED A ROLE IN AT LEAST SEVEN OTHER WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS, WHICH HAVE LATER BEEN OVERTURNED BY DNA TESTING."
WISCONSIN INNOCENCE PROJECT;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background; Robert Lee Stinson was convicted of the 1985 murder of a Milwaukee woman. Stinson's conviction rested almost exclusively on bite-mark identification purporting to match Stinson's teeth to bite patterns found on the victim's body. (Dr. L Thomas Johnson, a Wisconsin bite mark analyst, testified at Stinson’s trial for a 1984 murder that bite marks on the victim’s body matched Stinson’s teeth.) In 2005, the Wisconsin Innocence Project accepted Sinton's case and developed two kinds of new evidence. First, DNA testing revealed male DNA in saliva on the victim's sweater, and this DNA excluded Stinson. Second, working with California forensic science expert Christopoher Plourd, WIP arranged for the bite-marks to be re-examined by a panel of four nationally-recognized experts, Dr. Gregory Golden, Dr. David Senn, Dr. Norman Sperber, and Dr. Denise Murmann. Using modern methods, the panel unanimously concluded that Stinson's teeth could not have inflicted the bites. The Milwaukee County District Attorney's Office did not oppose Stinson's motion to reverse his conviction, and he was freed. Bite-mark identification has been implicated in numerous other wrongful convictions around the country.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Wisconsin Innocence Project made its momentous announcement of Robert Lee Stinson's vindication on July 27, 2009;
"More than 23 years after his 1985 homicide conviction, a Milwaukee man, Robert Lee Stinson, is scheduled to appear in a Milwaukee courtroom this morning (July 27) at a hearing in which prosecutors have indicated they will drop all charges," the announcement began;
"Stinson was released from prison in January based on new evidence of his innocence, after 23 years of wrongful incarceration. Stinson's attorneys at the University of Wisconsin Law School's Wisconsin Innocence Project and Assistant District Attorney Norm Gahn agreed that the new evidence — including new forensic analysis of bitemark evidence and new exculpatory DNA evidence — required setting aside Stinson's conviction," it continued;
"After agreeing to vacate Stinson's conviction, the state had six months to further investigate Stinson's case. Because that additional investigation has yielded more evidence confirming Stinson's innocence, the state has indicated that it will drop all charges today, confirming that Stinson was wrongly convicted of murder.
"We are thrilled that justice has been served today for an innocent man," says Byron Lichstein, the lead attorney on the case for the Wisconsin Innocence Project. "Lee has waited a long time for this day, and we are happy that he can begin to start his new life as a free man."
Stinson was convicted of first-degree intentional homicide in 1985 based almost exclusively on evidence purporting to match his teeth to bitemarks found in the victim's skin. Since the time of Stinson's trial, four nationally recognized forensic odontologists — David Senn, Gregory Golden, Denise Murmann and Norman Sperber — independently evaluated the dental evidence and conclusively excluded Stinson as the source of any of the bitemarks found on the victim. In addition, male DNA found on the victim's sweater, in areas that tested presumptively positive for saliva, also conclusively excluded Stinson.
Since the conviction was vacated in January, further DNA testing has also excluded Stinson, as well as law enforcement officials who might have inadvertently left their DNA while handling the crime scene evidence. Additional police investigation has also revealed that Sinson was a quiet and gentle man whom witnesses believed could not and would not have committed such a heinous crime.
Faulty forensic science is one of the main causes of wrongful convictions, implicated in approximately 60 percent of DNA exonerations nationwide. Bitemark evidence, in particular, has been exposed by cases like this, as well as by a recent landmark study by the National Academy of Sciences, as a flawed and highly unreliable form of evidence, with little scientific foundation. In recent years, erroneous bitemark evidence has played a role in at least seven other wrongful convictions, which have later been overturned by DNA testing.
Stinson's long-awaited released came thanks to the hard work of several Wisconsin Innocence Project attorneys and law students, along with significant pro bono assistance from renowned California attorney Christopher J. Plourd, one of the nation's leading experts on forensic science evidence. The Stinson team is headed by Supervising Attorney Byron Lichstein, who worked with Wisconsin Innocence Project co-directors John Pray and Keith Findley; law students Michael Atkins, Adam Deitch, Sarah Henery, Brooke Schaefer, Brian Aleinikoff and Amy Vanden Hogen; and former law students Lanny Glinberg, Shelley Fite, Steve Grunder and Corinne Eggebrecht.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an earlier release - issued before the charges were vacated - the Wisconsin Innocence Project shed light on Dr. Johnson's reluctance to admit that he had made the terrible error;
"Faulty bite mark evidence has played a part in at least five wrongful convictions later overturned by DNA testing," that post began, under the heading, " "Wisconsin case calls bite mark evidence into question again."
"Robert Stinson in Wisconsin could become the sixth," the post continued;
"New DNA testing indicates that Stinson is in prison for a murder he didn’t commit and his case is again calling the field of forensic dentistry into question.
Dr. L Thomas Johnson, a Wisconsin bite mark analyst, testified at Stinson’s trial for a 1984 murder that bite marks on the victim’s body matched Stinson’s teeth. Now, DNA testing on saliva from the victim’s shirt have shown that another man left the bite marks. The Wisconsin Innocence Project, which represents Stinson, has filed for his release based on the new evidence.
While Johnson stands behind his work in the Stinson case, other forensic dentists have found not only that Johnson’s analysis was wrong, but also that he went too far in saying that there was “no doubt” the bite marks came from Stinson.
The case also was examined by forensic experts from Texas, California and Illinois. In their report, the experts said that while some modern methods were not available in 1984, "it should be emphasized that Drs. Johnson and Rawson should have excluded Robert Lee Stinson even based on methods and standards available at the time … because there is little or no correlation of Robert Lee Stinson's dentition to the bite marks."
The report also criticized Johnson's testimony that there was no doubt Stinson's teeth left the marks. "That statement has no evidence-based, scientific, or statistical basis and drastically overstates the level of certainty attainable using bite mark analysis," the report said.
Johnson is also leading a project to build a computer database of bite marks, attempting to bring scientific rigor to a discipline that has been criticized for lacking it. He says his research shows that bite marks have six distinct identifying points that distinguish them. But other forensic dentists are skeptical of his work.
"This is the epitome of junk science cloaked as academic research," said Dr. Michael Bowers, a California odontologist and a frequent critic of bite-mark comparisons. "I don't think his claims are supported. The study just doesn't pass muster."
Read the full story here. (Chicago Tribune, 07/10/08)
The Innocence Project has called for scientific oversight in all forensic fields, and has criticized bite mark analysis for years because there are no national standards or acceptable certification procedures. Earlier this year, two Innocence Project clients originally convicted based on bite mark comparison – Kennedy Brewer and Levon Brooks – were exonerated when DNA testing led investigators to the real perpetrator of the murders for which the two men had been convicted."
This post can be found at:
http://www.innocentproject.org/Content/1463.php;
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
