"GATES WAS CONVICTED BASED IN PART ON IMPROPER TESTIMONY FROM AN FBI FORENSIC ANALYST WHOSE WORK HAS SINCE BEEN WIDELY DISCREDITED. ANALYST MICHAEL MALONE TESTIFIED AT GATES’ TRIAL THAT HAIRS FROM THE CRIME SCENE WERE "MICROSCOPICALLY INDISTINGUISHABLE" FROM GATES’ HAIRS. THIS STATEMENT VASTLY OVERSTATED THE CONCLUSIONS THAT CAN BE DRAWN FROM HAIR COMPARISON.
ALTHOUGH A 1997 REPORT FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE FOUND SIGNIFICANT ERRORS IN MALONE’S WORK, NO THOROUGH REVIEW OF CONVICTIONS RELYING ON HIS ANALYSIS HAS BEEN CONDUCTED. IN OVERTURNING GATES’ CONVICTION LAST WEEK, A D.C. JUDGE ORDERED THE U.S. ATTORNEY’S OFFICE TO OPEN A SWEEPING INVESTIGATION OF MALONE’S WORK."
THE INNOCENCE PROJECT ONLINE: DECEMBER 2009;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHERS NOTE: I have followed this post with a replay of a post which ran on this Blog on March 17, 2009, under the heading "Why is it so important to review wrongful convictions? The Kyle Unger case; Manitoba. It explains how Kyle Unger was exonerated by tests performed in conjunction with a review of old murder cases ordered by the Manitoba government after DNA results discredited hair evidence that led to the wrongful conviction of another Manitoba man, James Driskell, in 1991.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Donald Eugene Gates served 27 years in federal prisons for a 1981 murder in Washington, D.C., before DNA tests proved his innocence and led to his release last week. He could be officially cleared at a hearing this morning," the article published in the December edition of Innocence Project Online begins, under the heading "D.C. Exoneration Uncovers Serious Forensic Problems."
"Gates was convicted based in part on improper testimony from an FBI forensic analyst whose work has since been widely discredited," the article continues.
"Analyst Michael Malone testified at Gates’ trial that hairs from the crime scene were "microscopically indistinguishable" from Gates’ hairs. This statement vastly overstated the conclusions that can be drawn from hair comparison.
Although a 1997 report from the U.S. Department of Justice found significant errors in Malone’s work, no thorough review of convictions relying on his analysis has been conducted. In overturning Gates’ conviction last week, a D.C. judge ordered the U.S. Attorney’s Office to open a sweeping investigation of Malone’s work.
Inconsistencies are widespread in forensic labs across the country, however, and the problem isn’t limited to a few "bad apples." A report released last week by the New York Inspector General found that a major state crime lab had covered up errors and misconduct for more than a decade.
The Innocence Project is moving forward to create a federal government entity in 2010 to make forensic science more accurate and reliable. The new federal office would direct and fund research in forensic sciences, set standards and enforce those standards. Take action today. Urge Congress to enact forensic reform that can strengthen our criminal justice system."
The story can be found at:
http://www.innocenceproject.org/docs/IPonline/Dec2009.php
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG: MARCH 17, 2009: "WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT TO REVIEW WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS? THE KYLE UNGER CASE; MANITOBA.
"FOURTEEN YEARS AFTER UNGER WAS SENT TO PENITENTIARY, DNA TESTS PROVED A HAIR FOUND ON A SWEATSHIRT WORN BY GRENIER THE NIGHT SHE DIED DID NOT COME FROM UNGER, CONTRADICTING TESTIMONY FROM AN RCMP HAIR ANALYST WHO TOLD THE JURY IT WAS "CONSISTENT" WITH THE CONVICTED MAN'S HAIR.
THE TESTS WERE PERFORMED IN CONJUNCTION WITH A REVIEW OF OLD MURDER CASES ORDERED BY THE MANITOBA GOVERNMENT AFTER DNA RESULTS DISCREDITED HAIR EVIDENCE THAT LED TO THE WRONGFUL CONVICTION OF ANOTHER MANITOBA MAN, JAMES DRISKELL, IN 1991."
TRACEY TYLER: TORONTO STAR;
"The importance of thoroughly reviewing wrongful convictions - to point towards other possible miscarriages of justice - is illustrated in Toronto Star Legal Affairs reporter Tracey Tyler's report on the new trial ordered in the Kyle Unger case, which ran on March 12,2009, under the heading, "New trial ordered in 1990 slaying."
The story runs under the sub-heading: "Federal minister says wrongful conviction 'likely occurred' in Manitoba murder case."
"Nearly 20 years after the shocking murder of a teenage girl at a rock concert in rural Manitoba, Canada's justice minister has all but admitted the victim's former high school acquaintance was wrongly convicted of the crime," the story begins;
""I am satisfied there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a miscarriage of justice likely occurred," Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said yesterday in ordering a new trial for Kyle Unger," it continues;
"Unger was convicted of first-degree murder in 1992 in the death of Brigitte Grenier, 16, who was sexually assaulted, beaten, strangled, bitten and impaled with sticks after attending a concert at a ski resort near Roseisle, a hamlet in south central Manitoba, on June 23, 1990. Her body was found the next day in a creek.
The case against Unger, 38, involved the classic ingredients of wrongful convictions. They included suspect hair comparison evidence, a jailhouse informant, a prosecutor with a history of convicting the wrong people and a controversial police technique known as a "Mr. Big sting."
Fourteen years after Unger was sent to penitentiary, DNA tests proved a hair found on a sweatshirt worn by Grenier the night she died did not come from Unger, contradicting testimony from an RCMP hair analyst who told the jury it was "consistent" with the convicted man's hair.
The tests were performed in conjunction with a review of old murder cases ordered by the Manitoba government after DNA results discredited hair evidence that led to the wrongful conviction of another Manitoba man, James Driskell, in 1991.
James Driskell was found guilty in 1991 of the 1990 murder of Perry Harder in Winnipeg. He was sentenced to life imprisonment.
The RCMP said three hair samples found in Driskell's van were Harder's, and that evidence convicted him. Later test results from Forensic Science Services in the U.K. found none of the hairs belonged to Harder.
Driskell was granted bail in November 2003 while the Justice Department investigated the case.
The inquiry's final report, released Feb. 15, says the jury in Driskell's trial was "seriously misled" on issues including the reliability of a key Crown witness. The report also said the failure of the Crown to disclose information to the defence was "careless indifference.": CBC News files;
When DNA cast doubt on Unger's case, Manitoba's attorney general asked the federal government to quash the conviction. That was nearly five years ago.
In ordering a new trial yesterday, Nicholson bypassed the more time-consuming route of ordering the province's appeals court to conduct a hearing into the case to determine if a new trial is warranted or if the conviction should be quashed. Such a process was used in the cases of Steven Truscott and Romeo Phillion in Ontario.
Meanwhile, the prosecutor in Unger's case is under scrutiny. In 2007, the Manitoba government asked a former Ontario judge, Roger Salhany, to review cases of former Crown attorney George Dangerfield, who prosecuted Driskell and Thomas Sophonow, wrongly convicted in the 1981 murder of a Winnipeg waitress.
In Unger's case, Dangerfield also relied on what Unger's lawyers say was a false confession provided during a "Mr. Big" operation.
The technique involves undercover police officers posing as organized crime figures and inviting a target – in this case Unger – to join them, as long as he can prove he has committed a major crime."
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
