GREG TAYLOR CASE: NORTH CAROLINA ORDERS "INTERNAL" REVIEW OF OLD CASES FROM ITS FORENSICS LAB IN AFTERMATH OF WRONGFUL CONVICTION.

"N.C. ATTORNEY GENERAL ROY COOPER, WHO HEADS THE SBI, SAID HE HAS ORDERED A REVIEW TO MAKE SURE PROSECUTORS AND DEFENDANTS RECEIVED CRITICAL INFORMATION. "IF NOT, IT GETS FIXED," COOPER SAID FRIDAY. "IF THE CRIME LAB WAS DEFICIENT, WE NEED TO KNOW, AND THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO KNOW IT WILL BE REMEDIED." DEFENSE ATTORNEYS AND FORENSIC SCIENTISTS DEMANDED AN EXTENSIVE REVIEW LAST WEEK. DEFENSE LAWYERS IN PARTICULAR FEAR THAT DEAVER'S APPROACH TO THE TAYLOR CASE MIGHT HAVE BEEN COMMON AT THE SBI CRIME LAB. "THE SBI IS NOT ENTITLED TO ANY TRUST RIGHT NOW," SAID STAPLES HUGHES, THE STATE'S APPELLATE DEFENDER WHOSE OFFICE REPRESENTS INDIGENT CLIENTS APPEALING THEIR CONVICTIONS. "THERE NEEDS TO BE A MASS RECALL IN WHICH THEY ARE FORCED TO REVEAL ALL OF THE CASES THAT COULD BE AFFECTED." THE SBI REVIEW IS BEING HANDLED INTERNALLY AT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE."

REPORTERS MANDY LOCKE AND ANNE BLYTHE: THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER;

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

BACKGROUND: Seventeen years ago, Taylor was convicted of the September, 1991 murder of Raleigh prostitute Jacquetta Thomas, 26, whose body was found dumped on South Blount Street in Raleigh. Taylor, 47, said he spent the night of September 25, 1991 drinking and doing drugs with friends while he drove around southeast Raleigh to buy crack cocaine. Taylor said he believed police latched on to him for the murder because he and a friend drove along a dirt path off the same cul-de-sac where Thomas's body was found. Taylor and the friend smoked crack, but his SUV got stuck as they tried to drive away. They abandoned the SUV and walked to a nearby street to get a ride. Taylor testified they saw what they thought was a body but didn't report it to police. When Taylor returned in the morning to get the SUV, the police were already there. During several days of testimony, a parade of witnesses poked holes in the original evidence against Taylor. A SBI agent testified that while initial tests on some items from Taylor's sport utility vehicle were positive for blood, follow-up tests were negative. Those negative tests were not revealed to the jury that convicted Taylor. A dog training expert testified that the bloodhound that investigators said found the scent of the victim on Taylor's SUV was not trained in scent identification. A jailhouse snitch who said that Taylor confessed his involvement in Thomas's killing to him stood by his original testimony, but did admit that Taylor got the method of killing wrong. Johnny Beck, the man who was in Taylor's SUV on the night of the murder, testified neither he nor Taylor were involved in Thomas's death. Taylor had exhausted his appeals, but the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission reviewed the evidence against him last year and recommended the case to the three judge panel for further review. The commission is the only state-run agency in the country that investigates claims of innocence. Now the Commission has declared him innocent - the first time an inmate has been freed through the actions of the state's Innocence Inquiry Commission.

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


"RALEIGH The State Bureau of Investigation will examine thousands of old cases analyzed in its forensic lab two decades ago to look for crucial evidence that may have been withheld from defendants," the Charlotte Observer story by reporters Mandy Locke and Anne Blythe, published earlier today, begins.

"The review comes on the heels of the exoneration of Greg Taylor on Feb. 17," the story continues, under the heading "SBI told to re-examine old cases: Crime lab failed to turn over key results in murder case against Taylor, recently cleared."

"A three-judge panel convened by the N.C. Innocence Inquiry Commission found that the Wake County man had spent 17 years in prison for a murder he did not commit.

Duane Deaver, a veteran SBI crime lab analyst, presented a report to prosecutors in 1991 that said a test of a substance found on Taylor's truck indicated that it was blood. At trial, a prosecutor repeatedly told jurors the substance was blood.

But Deaver actually had done a test that indicated the substance was not human blood, a result never shared with prosecutors or defense lawyers. Deaver testified recently that it was SBI policy to handle reports the way he did.

N.C. Attorney General Roy Cooper, who heads the SBI, said he has ordered a review to make sure prosecutors and defendants received critical information.

"If not, it gets fixed," Cooper said Friday. "If the crime lab was deficient, we need to know, and the public needs to know it will be remedied."

Defense attorneys and forensic scientists demanded an extensive review last week. Defense lawyers in particular fear that Deaver's approach to the Taylor case might have been common at the SBI crime lab.

"The SBI is not entitled to any trust right now," said Staples Hughes, the state's appellate defender whose office represents indigent clients appealing their convictions. "There needs to be a mass recall in which they are forced to reveal all of the cases that could be affected."

The SBI review is being handled internally at the Attorney General's office. Cooper said he might call for an independent review depending on his staff's findings. No personnel or leadership changes at the SBI have been made in the wake of Taylor's exoneration, Cooper said.

Rep. Deborah Ross, a Democrat from Raleigh and chairwoman of a House Judiciary committee, said legislators should consider calling for a review of the SBI lab by the state auditor or a legislative committee.

"We don't have investigative subpoena power, but there are things that we could and should do," Ross said.

Some prosecutors are launching their own reviews of old cases to identify any that might have been handled as Taylor's was.

Jim Woodall, president of the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys and the district attorney for Orange and Chatham counties, has begun reviewing old cases that relied on blood evidence. He is calling on other prosecutors to do the same, though he cautioned against sweeping changes based on the results in one case.

"If we have some that look questionable, we would do further testing," Woodall said, noting that the review will be a big undertaking because there is no database of old cases that will direct prosecutors to those needing review.

No policy violated

SBI Director Robin Pendergraft defended Deaver's work in Taylor's case, saying he violated no SBI policies. She explained that SBI forensic analysts report positive test results indicating a substance is blood, even if more specific tests call that result into question.

In Deaver's case, his first and only positive result came through a phenolphthalein test, a preliminary test often performed at crime scenes to give investigators clues about where blood might be. Though the test is helpful in early stages, it sometimes yields positive results for other substances such as metals and plant or animal matter.

Deaver performed tests needed to confirm the presence of blood. Those yielded negative results, according to Deaver's lab notes. He did not mention running those tests or the results in his report to prosecutors.

Pendergraft called Deaver's additional tests "inconclusive" and couldn't explain why he wouldn't have extracted additional samples to clarify any questions raised by the result. Pendergraft said prosecutors should have asked for Deaver's notes if they had been unclear about his analysis.

Some forensic scientists criticized Deaver's handling of crime scene evidence.

"It is absolutely irresponsible to stop at (the presumptive test) and say it's blood, particularly when you've got better, conclusive tests casting doubt on that," said Heather Coyle, a forensic scientist who teaches at the University of New Haven and a former serologist at the crime lab in Connecticut.

Pendergraft said she didn't know how many cases Deaver handled while working in the SBI laboratory in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Deaver says he has testified as an expert at more than 100 trials, though he was involved in far more cases that never went to trial.

Efforts to reach Deaver, who now works as an SBI criminal profiler, were unsuccessful.

His wife, Karen Deaver, defended her husband when reached this week, saying: "It's the media calling his credibility into question, not the SBI."

Longtime criminal defense lawyers think the problem is not limited to Deaver. They point to a culture that allowed agents to offer opinions not supported by science for the sake of securing a conviction.

"I think this is just showing the symptom of a major disease at the SBI," said Mike Klinkosum, one of Taylor's attorneys and an assistant public defender in Wake County.

Coyle, the Connecticut forensic scientist, has been hired by defense attorneys to review more than 30 cases analyzed in the SBI lab. She said she has noticed significant problems over the years, including analysts confusing DNA samples from the suspect and the victim. Coyle has filed complaints about half a dozen times with the national organization that accredits the lab.

"The national forensic community is disturbed. They seem to be bending the science often," Coyle said. "This is damning to the credibility of the lab and the field. They need to reclaim confidence."

A push for change

Many in the legal and science community have long wanted the forensic lab to be taken out from under the SBI and the state attorney general, a recommendation made by the National Academy of Sciences last year because of concerns that such labs work to support prosecutors' theories, not pursue truth. About half the states have independent crime labs.

Taylor's exoneration has prompted renewed requests to move the N.C. lab."


http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/02/28/1278489/sbi-told-to-re-examine-old-cases.html

THE WINDSOR PATHOLOGY CRISIS: OTTAWA CITIZEN MAKES CONNECTION WITH DR. CHARLES SMITH AS IT CITES LACK OF SAFEGUARDS.

"LIVES WERE DESTROYED AS A RESULT OF MEDICAL ERRORS BY ANOTHER ONTARIO DOCTOR, THE NOW-INFAMOUS CHARLES SMITH. HE WAS A WELL-RESPECTED CHIEF PEDIATRIC PATHOLOGIST AT TORONTO'S HOSPITAL FOR SICK CHILDREN BETWEEN 1982 AND 2003, WHO SPECIALIZED IN GIVING EXPERT TESTIMONY IN CRIMINAL COURT CASES INVOLVING CHILD ABUSE. BUT THE EVIDENCE HE GAVE WAS FLAWED, RESULTING IN THE WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS OF SEVERAL PEOPLE. LIANNE THIBAULT, FOR EXAMPLE, WAS FOUND GUILTY OF KILLING HER 11-MONTH-OLD SON NICHOLAS BASED LARGELY ON SMITH'S EVIDENCE. SHE WAS EVENTUALLY CLEARED, BUT NOT BEFORE ANOTHER CHILD WAS TAKEN FROM HER AT BIRTH AND HER NAME WAS PLACED ON A LIST OF KNOWN CHILD ABUSERS. THIBAULT ENDURED AN UNSPEAKABLE NIGHTMARE. WITH MEMORIES SO FRESH OF THE SMITH CASE, IT IS ENCOURAGING TO SEE PROVINCIAL HEALTH OFFICIALS RESPONDING QUICKLY TO THE WINDSOR DEBACLE."

EDITORIAL THE NATIONAL POST;
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: During the past two years, this Blog has reported on a crisis in Canadian pathology indicated by serious breakdowns in hospitals in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Quebec, Saskatchewan and elsewhere in the country. The purpose, beyond seeking review and reform, is to show that the wide-ranging problems with pathology in Canada were not limited to the criminal sector - and that serious errors, sometimes lethal, were being made in reading test results on living patients. In short, that there was a crisis in Canadian pathology. The following Ottawa Citizen editorial makes a compelling connection with Dr. Charles Randal Smith - who was found to have made serious errors in his analysis of tissues from living children at the Hospital for Sick children in addition to his forensic flaws - and reminds us the irreversible harm that one physician can cause when the requisite checks and balances are not in place.

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

"It is difficult to imagine many things worse than a cancer diagnosis, but Laurie Johnston can," the National Post editorial published earlier today under the heading "Healers who hurt," begins.

"After a biopsy, the Leamington, Ont. resident was told by Windsor surgeon Dr. Barbara Heartwell that she had breast cancer. She underwent a mastectomy, the amputation of her breast," the editorial continues.

"That was in 2001. Only later did she learn she never actually had cancer.

The case is one of two that have come to light alleging Heartwell performed unnecessary mastectomies.

Windsor's Hotel-Dieu Grace Hospital is investigating Heartwell's performance. The hospital is also investigating cases of flawed pathology reports, which may be connected to some of Heartwell's surgeries. The hospital has suspended a pathologist named Olive Williams, and indeed the province has stepped in to help review the botched operations and questionable pathology reports.

The external review -- by people from outside the hospital where the doctors worked -- is a good place to start understanding what went wrong and how extensive the damage is. That it should be done by people who are not colleagues of the physicians in question is just common sense.

Whether a result of human error or something else, such medical mistakes have far-reaching, often devastating, results.

Lives were destroyed as a result of medical errors by another Ontario doctor, the now-infamous Charles Smith. He was a well-respected chief pediatric pathologist at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children between 1982 and 2003, who specialized in giving expert testimony in criminal court cases involving child abuse. But the evidence he gave was flawed, resulting in the wrongful convictions of several people.

Lianne Thibault, for example, was found guilty of killing her 11-month-old son Nicholas based largely on Smith's evidence. She was eventually cleared, but not before another child was taken from her at birth and her name was placed on a list of known child abusers. Thibault endured an unspeakable nightmare.

With memories so fresh of the Smith case, it is encouraging to see provincial health officials responding quickly to the Windsor debacle. The Ontario College of Physicians is also involved. The medical establishment seems to understand that hospital errors are unlike errors in most other workplaces where the consequences are usually measured in time or money. In medicine the stakes are higher. The women who unnecessarily had their breasts removed will never be made whole.

Whatever the explanation for the errors, the Windsor horror makes clear that safeguards need to be implemented to limit the damage that any individual health worker can do. Medical errors can happen due to bad luck, incompetence or gross malpractice. A proper safety system has checks at every gate, so to speak.

As it happens, the province has been working toward this. Beginning in April, no operation will take place in the province until all the players in the operating room go through a checklist. This 32-point surgical checklist requires a double-check of the biopsy report.

About a year in the making, the checklist was the result of a worldwide study involving hospitals in Toronto and other parts of the world that found the checklist reduced the risk of errors or mistakes in surgery by about 30 per cent.

The development of more stringent error prevention strategies comes too late for the Windsor women who were done a terrible harm; their ordeal is a reminder to all physicians that just as they have the ability to repair bodies they also have the power, in an instant, to damage them."

The editorial can be found at:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/health/Healers+hurt/2620615/story.html

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

WINDSOR PATHOLOGY CRISIS; MORE ON DR. BARBARA HEARTWELL; THE SURGEON AT THE HEART OF THE STORM;

"THE SAME STEADY HANDS THAT HELD SCALPELS OVER CANCER PATIENTS – AND IN TWO CASES MISTAKENLY REMOVED BREAST TISSUE FROM HEALTHY WOMEN – HAVE ALSO TWISTED HIGH-END CRYSTALS, CORAL AND SEMI-PRECIOUS STONES INTO FASHION JEWELLERY FOR FRIENDS AND ONLINE CUSTOMERS AS A WAY FOR A WINDSOR SURGEON TO FEED HER CREATIVE URGE. "THE NEED TO FIX IS ALSO LINKED TO THE NEED TO CREATE," WROTE BARBARA HEARTWELL ON HER "DESIGNER DOCS" WEBSITE, EXPLAINING A LIFELONG PASSION OF WORKING WITH HER HANDS.

FEATURE WRITER MARY ORMSBY: THE TORONTO STAR;

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: During the past two years, this Blog has reported on a crisis in Canadian pathology indicated by serious breakdowns in hospitals in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Quebec, Saskatchewan and elsewhere in the country. The purpose, beyond seeking review and reform, is to show that the wide-ranging problems with pathology in Canada were not limited to the criminal sector - and that serious errors, sometimes lethal, were being made in reading test results on living patients. In short, to demonstrate that there was a crisis in Canadian pathology.

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


"Swarovski crystal beads twinkle on gold-filled wires as delicate pendant earrings," Toronto Star feature writer Mary Ormsby's story, published earlier today, begins, under the heading "Doctor in surgeries probe had a knack for making jewellery: When not using scalpel, Windsor surgeon crafts one-of-a-kind jewellery."

"A 50-centimetre brass, onyx and turquoise strand laces behind the neck, a turquoise and crystal bauble hanging heavily in front, below the throat," the story continues.

"The same steady hands that held scalpels over cancer patients – and in two cases mistakenly removed breast tissue from healthy women – have also twisted high-end crystals, coral and semi-precious stones into fashion jewellery for friends and online customers as a way for a Windsor surgeon to feed her creative urge.

"The need to fix is also linked to the need to create," wrote Barbara Heartwell on her "Designer Docs" website, explaining a lifelong passion of working with her hands.

Those nimble fingers are now idle, at least in the operating room of Windsor's Hôtel-Dieu Grace Hospital.

Heartwell, who performed mastectomies on two healthy patients in error, has voluntarily removed herself from performing surgery.

Hôtel-Dieu says serious concerns have surfaced about seven cases at the hospital since an unrelated review of pathology results was launched in November. Five of those patients are Heartwell's, including the two who had mistaken mastectomies.

In her other line of work, which she described as a stress reliever, Heartwell makes baubles with plastic surgeon friend Isabel Chow. The pair often sold their wares at a hospital kiosk for $15 to $120, donating portions of sales to the hospital's Heart of the City Foundation.

Chow could not be reached to comment on her friend. Staff at Chow's office said Thursday the plastic surgeon was not in the office, but added she has "no comment on anything."

On their website – designerdocs.wordpress.com – Heartwell wrote that as a young girl, she could not ignore an injured animal, a compassion that translated later into caring for people.

"As a child, I dragged home every sick and injured animal I found, in a vain effort to save them. My favourite pet was a cat who provided me with an endless supply of captured birds, snakes and bats. The obvious genetic need to help, fix and cure continued into adulthood when I became a general surgeon."

Heartwell, also a seamstress and knitter, said the tactile sensation of materials gave her pleasure.

"And yes, I am one of those people who needs to touch, squeeze and otherwise fondle all the beautiful balls of wool and bolts of fabric that are available," she wrote, simply signing her webpage letter "Barb."

According to a Windsor Star story in 2008, the Designer Docs – whose slogan is "Cool jewels made by the skilled hand of a surgeon" – became a niche market for special orders in the medical community.

"I'll have brides come in with the fabric for their bridesmaids' dresses and they'll want me to do something in crystals," Heartwell told The Windsor Star.

The 1972 University of Toronto graduate said she preferred making one-of-a-kind jewellery.

"A piece doesn't go out till I'm sure I'm done with it," Heartwell told the Windsor newspaper. "I'm not interested in mass production. It's not an assembly line."

The wife of a former Heartwell patient has defended the care he received from her.

Windsor resident Joan Jolin wrote in a letter to The Windsor Star that her husband had been misdiagnosed by their family doctor in 1983 as suffering only from gallstones and "Dr. Heartwell was one of several doctors responsible for saving my husband's life," by finding a tumour attached to his ribs."

The story can be found at:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/771859--doctor-in-surgeries-probe-had-a-knack-for-making-jewellery

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

UPDATE: WINDSOR PATHOLOGY CRISIS: DOCTOR BARBARA HEARTWELL; SURGEON AT THE HEART OF THE STORM; TORONTO STAR REPORT.

"HÔTEL-DIEU GRACE HOSPITAL SURGEON DR. BARBARA HEARTWELL HAS VOLUNTARILY STOPPED PERFORMING SURGERIES AFTER IT EMERGED SHE MISTAKENLY PERFORMED MASTECTOMIES ON TWO WOMEN WHO DID NOT HAVE BREAST CANCER. HÔTEL-DIEU HAD EARLIER SUSPENDED THE PRIVILEGES OF PATHOLOGIST DR. OLIVE WILLIAMS ON JAN. 4. OVERALL, "SEVEN SERIOUS CASES OF CONCERN" AT HÔTEL-DIEU HAVE COME TO LIGHT SINCE HOSPITAL OFFICIALS BEGAN A PATHOLOGY REVIEW LAST NOVEMBER. FIVE OF THOSE CASES INVOLVE HEARTWELL'S PATIENTS, INCLUDING THE TWO MISTAKEN MASTECTOMIES, HOSPITAL OFFICIALS SAY. HEARTWELL TOLD HÔTEL-DIEU SOME CASES OF CONCERN COULD INVOLVE "ISSUES WITH INCORRECT PATHOLOGY REPORTS," ACCORDING TO A HOSPITAL STATEMENT WEDNESDAY."

REPORTER TANYA TALAGA; TORONTO STAR;

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: During the past two years, this Blog has reported on a crisis in Canadian pathology indicated by serious breakdowns in hospitals in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Quebec, Saskatchewan and elsewhere in the country. The purpose, beyond seeking review and reform, is to show that the wide-ranging problems with pathology in Canada were not limited to the criminal sector - and that serious errors, sometimes lethal, were being made in reading test results on living patients. In short, to demonstrate that there was a crisis in Canadian pathology.

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

"The Ontario government has launched a probe into botched medical procedures at a Windsor hospital and a review of 15,000 pathology tests dating back to 2003 after mistaken mastectomies on at least two women," reporter Tanya Talaga's story, published earlier today under the heading Mistaken mastectomies spark probe of hospita," begins.

"The actions of two doctors are also being investigated by the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, the provincial medical watchdog," the story continues.

"The government is considering sending a directive to all Ontario hospitals to check their pathology reports in the wake of the Windsor revelations.

Hôtel-Dieu Grace Hospital surgeon Dr. Barbara Heartwell has voluntarily stopped performing surgeries after it emerged she mistakenly performed mastectomies on two women who did not have breast cancer.

Hôtel-Dieu had earlier suspended the privileges of pathologist Dr. Olive Williams on Jan. 4.

Overall, "seven serious cases of concern" at Hôtel-Dieu have come to light since hospital officials began a pathology review last November. Five of those cases involve Heartwell's patients, including the two mistaken mastectomies, hospital officials say.

Heartwell told Hôtel-Dieu some cases of concern could involve "issues with incorrect pathology reports," according to a hospital statement Wednesday.

The pathology review started before the hospital learned from a media outlet on Feb. 5 of the first mistaken mastectomy, said Kim Spirou, vice-president of communications at Hôtel-Dieu.

"There are two parallel processes in place. One did precede the other. The pathology situation – that predated the Heartwell case. There was already a review at Hôtel-Dieu relating to a different adverse medical event which led to the broader review."

Neither Heartwell nor Williams has been disciplined by the college in the past, according to spokeswoman Kathryn Clarke.

Health Minister Deb Matthews announced Thursday the province is stepping in and will conduct its own external review of the Windsor matter along with the local health authority – the Erie-St. Clair Local Health Integration Network.

"Clearly there was a problem here that had an impact on the lives of people," said Matthews.

"The hospital already announced that it would review what happened. We think it is important, they think it is important, that we have people outside the hospital to take a look."

Matthews said the probe could expand.

"This is an external review of the situation in Windsor. If it appears we need to go broader, we will."

Windsor Essex Pathology Associates, the laboratory that provides pathology services to Hôtel-Dieu, also provides service to the Windsor Regional and Leamington District Memorial hospitals.

Windsor Regional said it has reviewed 171 slides reviewed by a pathologist over a period of six weeks and found no problems. The hospital would not identify the pathologist, whom it says worked primarily with Hôtel-Dieu.

Williams refused to comment.

Matthews said she believes Hôtel-Dieu responded appropriately to the mistaken mastectomies. "We need to take it seriously and continue to improve our system," she said.

In an effort to cut down on medical mistakes, Ontario is implementing surgical checklists for all hospitals in April. The province will publicly report results in July.

"Ontario is leading the way when it comes to surgical checklists," she said.

"It will be in all hospitals, for all operations, by April. It is proven to reduce deaths, to reduce complications. It improves patient safety. It is the right thing to do."

Hôtel-Dieu last week acknowledged Heartwell mistakenly removed patient Laurie Johnston's breast last fall, and said Heartwell has admitted she misread the results of a needle biopsy that found the woman did not have cancer. Public interest in the story intensified when another woman, Janice Laporte, came forward to say she had a breast removed by Heartwell in 2001 in error.

The hospital revealed Wednesday that a previous, unrelated probe of pathology results had uncovered problems in seven cases.

Malpractice lawyer Paul Harte said this situation could have been avoided if the surgical checklist had been used.

"I find it appalling in this day and age a major hospital like that didn't have a checklist like this," said Harte, who successfully acted for 225 women in a class-action suit against Dr. Errol Wai-Ping.

In one of the most highly publicized cases in Ontario, Wai-Ping, a Whitby obstetrician-gynecologist, lost his licence in 2004 after amassing a multitude of patient complaints and lawsuits against him dating back to 1992.

"It is ridiculous when you think about it. Look at a high-risk industry like aviation. It would be unacceptable for a pilot to not follow a checklist. It is a simple, easy way to prevent injury," Harte said.

Hôtel-Dieu has been the subject of controversy in the past with the death of a nurse, Lori Dupont. For nine months prior to her stabbing death on Nov. 12, 2005, Dupont was harassed by her former lover, Marc Daniel, an anesthesiologist at the hospital.

She complained about his behaviour and the Ontario Nurses Association said the hospital did not do enough to protect the 36-year-old nurse.

The Dupont family lawyer, Greg Monforton, said it was troubling to hear the recent revelations about Hôtel-Dieu.

"This is hugely disquieting, to say the least," he said."

The story can be found at:

http://www.healthzone.ca/health/yourhealth/women%27shealth/article/771860--mistaken-mastectomies-spark-probe-of-hospital

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

CRISIS IN CANADIAN PATHOLOGY; IT'S ONTARIO'S TURN AGAIN. TWO CASES OF MASECTOMY FOR NON-EXISTENT CANCER REPORTED AT WINDSOR HOSPITAL. MORE PREDICTED;

"HOTEL-DIEU GRACE HOSPITAL HAD ALREADY LAUNCHED AN INTERNAL REVIEW INTO CASES INVOLVING HEARTWELL, IN ADDITION TO A PATHOLOGY REVIEW UNDERWAY SINCE NOVEMBER.
ONTARIO'S MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND THE PROVINCE'S MEDICAL REGULATORY BODY, THE COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF ONTARIO, ANNOUNCED THURSDAY THEY TOO WOULD INVESTIGATE. AND THE ASSOCIATION REPRESENTING ONTARIO'S PUBLIC HOSPITALS FEARS PROBLEMS MAY GO BEYOND WINDSOR'S BORDERS. IT CALLED ON THE PROVINCE TO GO EVEN FURTHER AND TAKE A BROAD LOOK AT ONTARIO'S PATHOLOGY SYSTEM.......
HEARTWELL HAS TOLD THE HOSPITAL A LOOK INTO HER PAST WILL UNCOVER ADDITIONAL "CASES OF CONCERN" INVOLVING INCORRECT PATHOLOGY REPORTS........AN INQUIRY INTO PEDIATRIC FORENSIC PATHOLOGY IN ONTARIO THAT WAS SPARKED BY PROBLEMS WITH THE WORK OF NOW-DISGRACED PATHOLOGIST CHARLES SMITH RECOMMENDED GREATER OVERSIGHT FOR PATHOLOGISTS.

REPORTER ALLISON JONES; THE CANADIAN PRESS;

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: During the past two years, this Blog has reported on a crisis in Canadian pathology indicated by serious breakdowns in hospitals in Newfoundland, New Brunswick, Quebec, Saskatchewan and elsewhere in the country. The purpose, beyond seeking review and reform, is to show that the wide-ranging problems with pathology in Canada were not limited to the criminal sector - and that serious errors, sometimes lethal, were being made in reading test results on living patients. In short, to demonstrate that there was a crisis in Canadian pathology.

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

"TORONTO - Revelations of unnecessary surgeries, incorrect pathology reports and the likelihood that more incidents will be uncovered sparked two new investigations Thursday into troubling events in Windsor, Ont.," the Canadian Press story by reporter Allison Jones begins, under the heading "Mistaken mastectomies, incorrect pathology spark more investigations in Ontario."

"The investigations are looking into Dr. Barbara Heartwell, who performed two unnecessary mastectomies, as well as pathology results in thousands of cases after several errors were discovered," the story, published on February 25, 2010, continues.

"Hotel-Dieu Grace Hospital had already launched an internal review into cases involving Heartwell, in addition to a pathology review underway since November.

Ontario's Ministry of Health and the province's medical regulatory body, the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, announced Thursday they too would investigate.

And the association representing Ontario's public hospitals fears problems may go beyond Windsor's borders. It called on the province to go even further and take a broad look at Ontario's pathology system.

"We need to come to grips with: how effectively is this being done?" said Tom Closson, president and CEO of the Ontario Hospital Association.

"I don't think we want to wait to see another situation emerge."

The issue first came to light when Hotel-Dieu Grace Hospital in Windsor found out that Heartwell had removed the breast of a woman who didn't have cancer.

Laurie Johnston of Leamington, Ont., had a mastectomy in November 2009 from Heartwell. The doctor admits she misread the results of a needle biopsy that found Johnston did not have cancer.

Janice Laporte, whose breast was removed by Heartwell in September 2001 but was told a week after her surgery that she didn't have cancer, came forward publicly after hearing about Johnston.

Heartwell has told the hospital a look into her past will uncover additional "cases of concern" involving incorrect pathology reports.

The troubling situation requires a look from the outside, Ontario Health Minister Deb Matthews said Thursday.

An external review will determine "what happened, what lessons we have learned and what else we need to do to prevent this from happening in the future," she said.

It's possible the scope of the investigation could be expanded outside Windsor if it is warranted, Matthews said.

Closson said peer review systems for pathologists vary across the province, and Ontario should extend the review outside Windsor.

An inquiry into pediatric forensic pathology in Ontario that was sparked by problems with the work of now-disgraced pathologist Charles Smith recommended greater oversight for pathologists.

In addition, Closson said the hospital association believes there is an "inherent problem" in the relationship between doctors and hospitals.

"The physicians operate too autonomously from the hospital," Closson said, adding the Public Hospitals Act should be amended.

A doctor with Cancer Care Ontario said while her organization doesn't have consolidated statistics, unnecessary surgeries are actually "pretty rare" in Ontario.

"Every clinician will have heard of a situation where a patient received an operation for the wrong diagnosis," said Dr. Carol Sawka, vice-president of clinical programs and quality initiatives.

"I've been in practice for 25 years and yes, from time to time it happens. But those incidents are uncommon enough that I can remember practically every one."

The health minister stressed the importance of a surgical safety checklist that as of April will be required practice in operating rooms across the province. If the checklist had been in place it could have prevented the most recent mistaken mastectomy case, Matthews has said.

NDP Leader Andrea Horwath said if there was an ombudsman in charge of health, recommendations could have been made after the first incident that could have prevented the second.

"The Windsor situation, I think, reinforces what New Democrats have been calling for for quite some time, and that is ombudsman oversight of the health-care system, both hospitals and long-term care," Horwath said.

The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario said Thursday it is investigating Heartwell. While spokeswoman Kathryn Clarke said she couldn't provide any more information on the Heartwell investigation, in general the college has the authority to conduct broad investigations.

"In those cases we have to have in our possession documentation that establishes reasonable and probable grounds to believe that the doctor may be incompetent or has committed an act of professional misconduct," Clarke said.

Investigations can take as little as three months or as long as one year, Clarke said. If evidence of incompetence or misconduct is found, the case goes to a disciplinary hearing, which is open to the public.

The college is also investigating pathologist Olive Williams, Clarke said. Hotel-Dieu Grace Hospital suspended her privileges in January.

The Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador recently approved a $17.5-million settlement in a class-action lawsuit launched by hundreds of patients whose breast cancer tests were botched. Mistakes were detected on hormone receptor tests, which play an important role in determining the most appropriate course of treatment for breast cancer patients.

Heartwell, originally from Sarnia, Ont., could not be reached for comment. According to a profile in a women's networking newsletter, Heartwell obtained a bachelor of science in zoology then studied medicine at the University of Toronto.

She did her surgical residency at McGill University and Wayne State University in Michigan, according to the write-up in the Women's Economic Forum from March 2009.

Heartwell has received research grants on growth hormones and breast cancer prevention, has published a number of studies and is actively involved in the local medical society. In addition, she creates handmade jewelry and some of the sales proceeds go to the Hotel-Dieu Grace Hospital Foundation." The story can be found at:

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100225/national/mistaken_mastectomy

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

IMPORTANT DEVELOPMENT IN BATTLE AGAINST WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS. "EXONERATION INITIATIVE; FOR CASES LACKING DNA EVIDENCE IN NEW YORK STATE; NYT;

"TWO DECADES LATER, DNA EVIDENCE HAS BEEN USED TO EXONERATE MORE THAN 230 PEOPLE WRONGFULLY CONVICTED NATIONWIDE, INCLUDING 24 IN NEW YORK STATE. THE RESULTING STORIES OF INNOCENT MEN BEING FREED AFTER DECADES IN PRISON HAVE CAPTURED THE PUBLIC’S IMAGINATION AND PROVIDED FODDER FOR A NUMBER OF HOLLYWOOD DRAMAS. BUT THE PROLIFERATION OF SUCH EXONERATIONS, AS WELL AS THE WIDER AVAILABILITY OF DNA EVIDENCE, HAS ALSO MADE IT HARDER FOR PRISONERS SEEKING TO PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE IN THE MUCH LARGER NUMBER OF CASES THAT DO NOT INVOLVE DNA EVIDENCE. MANY LAWYERS HAVE GROWN MORE RELUCTANT TO TAKE ON THESE KINDS OF CASES BECAUSE THEY ARE MUCH HARDER AND MORE EXPENSIVE TO PURSUE. NOW EFFORTS ARE EMERGING TO CHANGE THAT."........

"A SIMILAR CLINIC BEGAN OPERATING THE SAME MONTH AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, AND A NEW CLINIC AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA IS ALSO PLANNING TO HANDLE MOSTLY NON-DNA CASES."

REPORTER JOHN ELIGON: NEW YORK TIMES;

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In 1988, nine years after Gary Dotson was convicted of raping a woman in a Chicago suburb, his lawyer tried to clear his name with what was then a novel approach: DNA testing, which was conducted on the woman’s underwear," the New Yorm Times story on this important development begins.

"The DNA did not match Mr. Dotson’s, and a year later, the rape charge was overturned, making him one of the first people in the country exonerated as a result of DNA evidence," the story by reporter John Eligon, published on February 7, 2010, under the heading "New Efforts Focus on Exonerating Prisoners in Cases Without DNA Evidence," continues.

"Two decades later, DNA evidence has been used to exonerate more than 230 people wrongfully convicted nationwide, including 24 in New York State. The resulting stories of innocent men being freed after decades in prison have captured the public’s imagination and provided fodder for a number of Hollywood dramas.

But the proliferation of such exonerations, as well as the wider availability of DNA evidence, has also made it harder for prisoners seeking to prove their innocence in the much larger number of cases that do not involve DNA evidence. Many lawyers have grown more reluctant to take on these kinds of cases because they are much harder and more expensive to pursue.

Now efforts are emerging to change that.

Glenn A. Garber, a defense lawyer in Manhattan, in January began the Exoneration Initiative, a clinic devoted to investigating wrongful-conviction cases without DNA evidence.

A similar clinic began operating the same month at the University of Michigan, and a new clinic at the University of Virginia is also planning to handle mostly non-DNA cases.

So-called innocence projects at Northwestern, the University of Wisconsin and the University of Cincinnati have reported that their non-DNA caseloads have risen. And for almost a year the district attorney in Dallas has been focusing on wrongful-conviction claims that lack DNA evidence.

“All these hundreds of DNA exonerations across the country have demonstrated to anyone who’s paying attention that there are far more innocent people in prison than anybody could imagine,” said James McCloskey, the founder of Centurion Ministries, an innocence project based in New Jersey.

Cases that lack what many call the “magic bullet” of DNA often require cumbersome investigations, including finding and re-interviewing witnesses or poring over thick files to find anything vital that a trial lawyer might have missed. Even when crucial evidence is uncovered — witness recantations or exculpatory statements that were ignored by prosecutors — judges, juries and prosecutors often treat it with skepticism.

One of the most recent successes for Centurion Ministries illustrates the promise and challenges of trying to exonerate a prisoner without DNA evidence.

A state judge in Missouri last August overturned the conviction of a man who had served 23 years for a murder in St. Louis. The judge cited the credibility of the prosecution’s main witness, who had recanted his testimony that the convicted man was the killer.

But the judge’s decision came six years after a panel of federal judges, having considered much of the same evidence, ruled that though it had “a nagging suspicion that the wrong man may have been convicted of capital murder,” it could not overturn the conviction of the man, Darryl Burton, because of numerous procedural impediments. The panel suggested that the state court take another look at the case.

Despite the challenges, a study by Samuel R. Gross, a law professor at the University of Michigan, said that 195 prisoners were exonerated without the help of DNA from 1989 to 2003, with the number spiking from 2000 to 2003.

The New York State Bar Association, in a report issued last month, found that a majority of wrongful convictions it examined in New York were reconciled not because of new DNA evidence but because of mistakes by law enforcement officials, as well as the misidentification of the accused by victims or witnesses.

And the National Academy of Sciences, in a draft report, has found that forensic evidence, like fingerprinting and firearms identification, was often based on poor science practices. That finding from an influential scientific research group is likely to drive even more exoneration efforts.

Criminal justice experts say exonerations have shed light on two circumstances once thought to be extremely rare or even inconceivable: Witnesses are sometimes wrong, and people sometimes confess to crimes they did not commit.

As a result, about a dozen states are considering legislation that would require the taping of police interrogations and mandate new guidelines for the use of lineups to identify suspects.

But those involved in prosecuting crimes say that while the legal system is far from perfect, exonerations represent only a tiny fraction of those convicted of crimes. “Innocence projects try to paint the problem as epidemic,” said Joshua Marquis, a member of the board of directors of the National District Attorneys Association. “I believe the problem is episodic.”

At least one prosecutor in Texas, however, has moved aggressively to uncover wrongful convictions in cases that do not involve DNA.

New Efforts Focus on Exonerating Prisoners in Cases Without DNA Evidence

Craig Watkins, the Dallas County district attorney, said he began taking aim at such cases after DNA tests performed by his office led to 13 exonerations. Now his office has established a conviction integrity unit to re-examine the validity of hundreds of convictions.

“This is about the duty of the district attorney to seek justice,” Mr. Watkins said. “Justice means we right the wrongs of the past.”

Mr. Garber, the lawyer in Manhattan, said he was inspired to start an innocence project after helping to free a relative of his secretary. The relative, Hector Gonzalez, who was convicted of murder, was freed in 2002 after DNA testing proved that blood found on his clothes did not belong to the victim. But Mr. Gonzalez might never have gotten that far if not for some unscientific help: Several witnesses stepped forward to say that he had no role in the killing.

“There’s a huge void in New York — there’s no program handling non-DNA cases,” Mr. Garber said. “These are the more difficult cases. They’re heavier lifting and we need a program that’s going to do that.”

At the University of Michigan, David A. Moran, a director of the new innocence project there, said it was “scary” that compelling evidence of innocence was sometimes not enough to persuade judges or prosecutors.

In its first case, the clinic is working to clear two men, Deshawn Reed and his uncle Marvin Reed, who were convicted in 2001 of shooting another man in a suburb of Detroit, leaving the victim paralyzed.

Though the victim originally identified the Reeds as the suspects, he has since recanted, saying he was coaxed into accusing the two men by family members, according to court papers. Beyond that, ballistics testing conducted by defense experts linked a gun recovered from another man to the one used in the shooting, Mr. Moran said.

Still, two Michigan appeals courts have denied motions for a new trial, and the Reeds continue serving prison sentences of at least 20 years. According to court papers, prosecutors remain skeptical for two reasons: The victim has been inconsistent in describing what happened, and in his latest account, he simply said he did not know who shot him.

“One thing we’ve learned by studying these cases and litigating these cases is it could really happen to anybody,” said Daniel S. Medwed, a professor at the University of Utah who studies wrongful convictions. “Nobody is immune.”" The story can be found at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/08/nyregion/08exonerate.html

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

CAMERON TODD WILLINGHAM CASE; INDEPENDENT REVIEWS OF FORENSIC SCIENCES IN AMERICA COULD HAVE IMPLICATIONS THROUGHOUT WORLD; NEW ZEALAND PERSPECTIVE;

"THE PROBLEM IS OF COURSE THAT MOST PEOPLE WORKING FOR THE PROSECUTION DON’T REALLY WANT ANY TECHNIQUE INVESTIGATED TOO DEEPLY IN CASE PROBLEMS ARE FOUND. ONCE THAT HAPPENS THEN OTHER CONVICTIONS MIGHT BE CALLED INTO QUESTION, WHICH COULD THROW THE WHOLE SYSTEM INTO DISORDER, INCURRING ENORMOUS EXPENSE AND ALL THE OBVIOUS ASSOCIATED PROBLEMS. TO MY MIND, THAT’S NOT A GOOD ENOUGH REASON NOT TO DO IT. IF PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE SENT TO PRISON BASED, EVEN IN PART, ON SCIENTIFIC FINDINGS THEN THE SCIENCE MUST BE ROBUST AND RELIABLE (AS WELL AS OTHER LEGAL ISSUES SUCH AS RELEVANT AND REPEATABLE)".......

"THE OTHER THING TO REMEMBER IS THAT IF THE OVERALL OUTCOME OF THE US REVIEW AND THE WORK BEING CARRIED OUT TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES IDENTIFIES SOME REAL PROBLEMS, THE IMPLICATIONS COULD BE FELT THROUGHOUT COURT SYSTEMS WORLDWIDE – INCLUDING NEW ZEALAND."

DOCTOR ANNA SANDIFORD: FORENSIC REVIEW;

(According to her Web-sit "Forensic Science": Dr Anna Sandiford is a Forensic Science Consultant, Expert Witness and Company Director based in New Zealand. She has been been involved with forensic science since 1998 in both the UK and New Zealand and has assisted with cases throughout the UK, Channel Islands, Cayman Islands and New Zealand. Her areas of forensic expertise include alcohol, drugs, drug driving, drug traces, footwear/sockprints, glass and pollen (palynology). She is one of a handful of forensic pollen experts worldwide and is involved with an international team that provides environmental forensic services.")

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

BACKGROUND: (Wikipedia); Cameron Todd Willingham (January 9, 1968 – February 17, 2004), born in Carter County, Oklahoma, was sentenced to death by the state of Texas for murdering his three daughters—two year old Amber Louise Kuykendall, and one year old twins Karmon Diane Willingham and Kameron Marie Willingham— by setting his house on fire. The fire occurred on December 23, 1991 in Corsicana, Texas. Lighter fluid was kept on the front porch of Willingham’s house as evidenced by a melted container found there. Some of this fluid may have entered the front doorway of the house carried along by fire hose water. It was alleged this fluid was deliberately poured to start the fire and that Willingham chose this entrance way so as to impede rescue attempts. The prosecution also used other arson theories that have since been brought into question. In addition to the arson evidence, a jailhouse informant claimed Willingham confessed that he set the fire to hide his wife's physical abuse of the girls, although the girls showed no other injuries besides those caused by the fire. Neighbors also testified that Willingham did not try hard enough to save his children. They allege he "crouched down" in his front yard and watched the house burn for a period of time without attempting to enter the home or go to neighbors for help or request they call firefighters. He claimed that he tried to go back into the house but it was "too hot". As firefighters arrived, however, he rushed towards the garage and pushed his car away from the burning building, requesting firefighters do the same rather than put out the fire. After the fire, Willingham showed no emotion at the death of his children and spent the next day sorting through the debris, laughing and playing music. He expressed anger after finding his dartboard burned in the fire. Firefighters and other witnesses found him suspicious of how he reacted during and after the fire. Willingham was charged with murder on January 8, 1992. During his trial in August 1992, he was offered a life term in exchange for a guilty plea, which he turned down insisting he was innocent. After his conviction, he and his wife divorced. She later stated that she believed that Willingham was guilty. Prosecutors alleged this was part of a pattern of behavior intended to rid himself of his children. Willingham had a history of committing crimes, including burglary, grand larceny and car theft. There was also an incident when he beat his pregnant wife over the stomach with a telephone to induce a miscarriage. When asked if he had a final statement, Willingham said: "Yeah. The only statement I want to make is that I am an innocent man - convicted of a crime I did not commit. I have been persecuted for 12 years for something I did not do. From God's dust I came and to dust I will return - so the earth shall become my throne. I gotta go, road dog. I love you Gabby." However, his final words were directed at his ex-wife, Stacy Willingham. He turned to her and said "I hope you rot in hell, bitch" several times while attempting to extend his middle finger in an obscene gesture. His ex-wife did not show any reaction to this. He was executed by lethal injection on February 17, 2004. Subsequent to that date, persistent questions have been raised as to the accuracy of the forensic evidence used in the conviction, specifically, whether it can be proven that an accelerant (such as the lighter fluid mentioned above) was used to start the fatal fire. Fire investigator Gerald L. Hurst reviewed the case documents including the trial transcriptions and an hour-long videotape of the aftermath of the fire scene. Hurst said, "There's nothing to suggest to any reasonable arson investigator that this was an arson fire. It was just a fire." Two days before the Forensic Science Commission was to question Beyler in a public forum, the governor replaced its chairman and two other members whose terms were up. That forced the commission to delay the hearing so new members could read up on the case, and no new date has been set. Perry has since replaced a third member of the commission.

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


"U.S. academics at UCLA are being granted funds to consider error rates in latent fingerprint evidence," the post, published on February 12, 2010, under the heading "Forensic science: validation and incompetence," begins.

"Some would ask whether or not this sort of exercise should have been completed loooong ago," the post continues.

"As with any other area of applied science, regular review should be undertaken. Unfortunately, this is not something that necessarily occurs in forensic science, partly because some agencies aren’t keen on their databases being examined (see Crime DNA databases should be independently examined). Last year, the United States National Academy of Sciences issued a damning report on the state of forensic science in U.S. crime laboratories. The report basically stated that the accuracy and reliability of practically all forensic science methods, ranging from glass to fingerprints, had not been established adequately through rigorous scientific scrutiny. At the end of this month (Feb 2010), the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) is holding its annual scientific meeting, which is tellingly entitled, “Putting Our Forensic House in Order: Determining Validation and Expelling Incompetence.” So, not only is forensic science in the States being shaken upside down until the grotty bits drop out of its pockets, someone somewhere is getting paid to do the work that should have been done long ago, on an ongoing basis. Let’s hope one of the resolutions that arises from the AAFS meeting is that forensic science techniques should be reviewed regularly. The problem is of course that most people working for the prosecution don’t really want any technique investigated too deeply in case problems are found. Once that happens then other convictions might be called into question, which could throw the whole system into disorder, incurring enormous expense and all the obvious associated problems. To my mind, that’s not a good enough reason not to do it. If people are going to be sent to prison based, even in part, on scientific findings then the science must be robust and reliable (as well as other legal issues such as relevant and repeatable). If science is reviewed regularly and the law takes that into account then it should be possible to work out a system whereby the courts can be sure that the science is up-to-date, which in turn adds to the strength of science in court. It also might present the current stink that’s going on in Texas over the inadequate forensic science presented in the case of Cameron Todd Willingham (Wikipedia link), who was executed for allegedly killing his children in a house fire he was supposed to have set. The science has since been shown to have been wrong. The other thing to remember is that if the overall outcome of the US review and the work being carried out to address those issues identifies some real problems, the implications could be felt throughout court systems worldwide – including New Zealand.

The post can be found at:

http://sciblogs.co.nz/forensic-scientist/tag/cameron-todd-willingham/

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

GREG TAYLOR CASE: MORE FROM THE ASSOCIATED PRESS ON DUANE DEAVER'S FAULTY TESTIMONY; (HIS CASES CRY OUT FOR REVIEW: HL);

"“DEAVER IS REALLY A LOOSE CANNON. HE SHOULD NOT BE TESTIFYING,” SAID DIANE SAVAGE, A CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY WHO REPRESENTED FORMER DEATH ROW INMATE GEORGE GOODE AND SUCCESSFUL HAD HIS SENTENCE VACATED. “HE SAYS WHATEVER HE WANTS TO SAY.”

IN A FEDERAL COURT ORDER ISSUED LAST YEAR IN THE GOODE CASE, A FEDERAL JUDGE SAID DEAVER’S TESTIMONY WAS FAULTY BECAUSE HE LED A 1993 JURY TO BELIEVE THAT HE FOUND BLOOD, WHEN HE HAD ONLY CONDUCTED A PRELIMINARY TEST THAT INDICATED THE POSSIBILITY IT WAS PRESENT.

“A REASONABLE CONSIDERATION OF THE RECORD DEMONSTRATES THE STATE, THROUGH AGENT DEAVER, PRESENTED MISLEADING EVIDENCE ABOUT THE TESTING DONE ON PETITIONER’S BOOTS BEING CONCLUSIVE FOR THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD,” U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE MALCOLM HOWARD WROTE IN HIS ORDER, WHICH VACATED GOODE’S SENTENCE BECAUSE OF INEFFECTIVE COUNSEL AT TRIAL."

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS;

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

BACKGROUND: Seventeen years ago, Taylor was convicted of the September, 1991 murder of Raleigh prostitute Jacquetta Thomas, 26, whose body was found dumped on South Blount Street in Raleigh. Taylor, 47, said he spent the night of September 25, 1991 drinking and doing drugs with friends while he drove around southeast Raleigh to buy crack cocaine. Taylor said he believed police latched on to him for the murder because he and a friend drove along a dirt path off the same cul-de-sac where Thomas's body was found. Taylor and the friend smoked crack, but his SUV got stuck as they tried to drive away. They abandoned the SUV and walked to a nearby street to get a ride. Taylor testified they saw what they thought was a body but didn't report it to police. When Taylor returned in the morning to get the SUV, the police were already there. Taylor had exhausted his appeals, but the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission reviewed the evidence against him last year and recommended the case to the three judge panel for further review. The commission is the only state-run agency in the country that investigates claims of innocence. Now the Commission has declared him innocent - the first time an inmate has been freed through the actions of the state's Innocence Inquiry Commission. The focus now turns on the lab which failed to release crucial test results - and calls for reviews of blood analyst Duane Deaver's cases.

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

"RALEIGH — Attorneys for a convicted murderer seeking freedom sought Wednesday to show that a state expert omitted crucial test results that helped unfairly sentence the man to life in prison," the Associated Press story, published on February 10, 2010, begins, under the heading "Expert questions SBI agent's work at hearing."

"Tom Bevel, a blood spatter expert, told a three-judge panel hearing the case of Greg Taylor that the evidence used to convict Taylor in 1993 was incomplete," the story continues.

"He said the first tests of substances on parts of Taylor’s sport utility vehicle tested positive for blood. But second tests used to confirm initial results came back negative and were not made public, said Bevel, an associate professor at the University of Central Oklahoma who analyzed the lab notes of Duane Deaver, a State Bureau of Investigation agent.

“You report what the results are, positive or negative,” Bevel said. “If you get a negative, you cannot say you have blood.”

The testimony on the second day of a sometimes emotional hearing during which the judges are being asked to consider whether to exonerate Taylor, who was sentenced to life for the murder of a prostitute in Raleigh and has always insisted he is innocent. The panel is meeting at the behest of the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission, a state-run agency that believes his claim has merit.

Meanwhile Wednesday, a lawyer who argued against Deaver’s testimony in a different case told The Associated Press that the agent’s work should be questioned.

“Deaver is really a loose cannon. He should not be testifying,” said Diane Savage, a criminal defense attorney who represented former death row inmate George Goode and successful had his sentence vacated. “He says whatever he wants to say.”

In a federal court order issued last year in the Goode case, a federal judge said Deaver’s testimony was faulty because he led a 1993 jury to believe that he found blood, when he had only conducted a preliminary test that indicated the possibility it was present.

“A reasonable consideration of the record demonstrates the State, through Agent Deaver, presented misleading evidence about the testing done on petitioner’s boots being conclusive for the presence of blood,” U.S. District Judge Malcolm Howard wrote in his order, which vacated Goode’s sentence because of ineffective counsel at trial.

Noelle Talley, a spokeswoman for the state Attorney General’s office that oversees the SBI, declined to comment on Deaver’s work, citing the pending Taylor case. She said he no longer works as an SBI blood spatter expert and now has the title of criminal specialist in the investigation and training support division.

Deaver did not immediately return a phone message left Wednesday night at a number listed in his name.

Also Wednesday, Gregg McCrary, a crime scene expert and former FBI agent, testified that investigators exhibited “tunnel vision and a rush to judgment” in the case.

McCrary also said he doubted that Taylor could have committed the crime without getting blood on his clothes or in his car.

Earlier in the day, Taylor took the stand for day two of cross-examination by Wake County Assistant District Attorney Tom Ford , who prosecuted him at trial. Ford questioned differences between Taylor’s current testimony and his previous statements to police and attorneys.

Discrepancies included how much money Taylor had with him and what sort of tattoo a woman had. Taylor, who says he used to be addicted to crack, admitted his memory differed, but insisted he didn’t kill Jacquetta Thomas, a prostitute whose body was found on a deserted cul-de-sac in 1991.

Ford has argued that Taylor and a friend, Johnny Beck, picked up Thomas that night and then killed her when she refused to perform a sex act. On Wednesday, Ford insisted Thomas was in the backseat of Taylor’s white Nissan Pathfinder that night and they went to the cul-de-sac because they didn’t want to take her home.

“That woman nor anybody else was in the backseat,” Taylor replied.

Ford also yelled at the expert witness at least once.

“I’m not following you,” Bevel said to a question.

“I know I’m not following you,” Ford shouted back, standing at the witness stand.

Superior Court Judge Howard Manning appeared impatient with the hearing’s slow pace. He interrupted Ford at one point, looked at his watch, turned his back to the courtroom and closed his eyes during the prosecutor’s questioning.

North Carolina remains the only state with a government agency solely dedicated to verifying claims of innocence. The commission, established in 2006, so far has moved only one other case to a panel of judges, who denied an exoneration."

The story can be found at:

http://www.rockymounttelegram.com/state/expert-questions-sbi-agents-work-hearing-16248

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

GREG TAYLOR CASE: SBI SEROLOGIST PREVIOUSLY ACCUSED OF MISLEADING JURORS ABOUT PRESENCE OF BLOOD IN DEATH PENALTY CASE: WRAL: LOCAL NEWS;

"DEAVER, WHO HAS WORKED WITH THE SBI SINCE 1985 AND IS CERTIFIED AS A COURT EXPERT IN SEROLOGY, NOW WORKS AS A CRIMINAL SPECIALIST IN THE SBI'S TRAINING AND INVESTIGATIVE SUPPORT DIVISION. HE WAS ACCUSED OF MISLEADING JURORS ABOUT THE PRESENCE OF BLOOD IN A 1993 DEATH PENALTY CASE AGAINST GEORGE GOODE. A FEDERAL JUDGE LATER VACATED THE DEATH SENTENCE."

WRAL: LOCAL NEWS;

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

BACKGROUND: Seventeen years ago, Taylor was convicted of the September, 1991 murder of Raleigh prostitute Jacquetta Thomas, 26, whose body was found dumped on South Blount Street in Raleigh. Taylor, 47, said he spent the night of September 25, 1991 drinking and doing drugs with friends while he drove around southeast Raleigh to buy crack cocaine. Taylor said he believed police latched on to him for the murder because he and a friend drove along a dirt path off the same cul-de-sac where Thomas's body was found. Taylor and the friend smoked crack, but his SUV got stuck as they tried to drive away. They abandoned the SUV and walked to a nearby street to get a ride. Taylor testified they saw what they thought was a body but didn't report it to police. When Taylor returned in the morning to get the SUV, the police were already there. During several days of testimony, a parade of witnesses poked holes in the original evidence against Taylor. A SBI agent testified that while initial tests on some items from Taylor's sport utility vehicle were positive for blood, follow-up tests were negative. Those negative tests were not revealed to the jury that convicted Taylor. A dog training expert testified that the bloodhound that investigators said found the scent of the victim on Taylor's SUV was not trained in scent identification. A jailhouse snitch who said that Taylor confessed his involvement in Thomas's killing to him stood by his original testimony, but did admit that Taylor got the method of killing wrong. Johnny Beck, the man who was in Taylor's SUV on the night of the murder, testified neither he nor Taylor were involved in Thomas's death. Taylor had exhausted his appeals, but the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission reviewed the evidence against him last year and recommended the case to the three judge panel for further review. The commission is the only state-run agency in the country that investigates claims of innocence. Now the Commission has declared him innocent - the first time an inmate has been freed through the actions of the state's Innocence Inquiry Commission.

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

"Raleigh, N.C. — Past policies of the State Bureau of Investigation fell short in uncovering the truth in the murder trial of Gregory Taylor, the agency's director said Friday, two days after new evidence helped exonerate Taylor," WRAL'S disturbing story begins, under the heading "Past SBI crime lab policy called into question."

"Taylor, 47, was convicted of murder in 1993 but freed Wednesday after new evidence proved he did not kill a woman and leave her body in a Raleigh cul-de-sac," the story, published on February 19, 2010, continues.

"Part of the evidence had to do with blood test results that were excluded from lab reports presented at trial.

SBI agent Duane Deaver testified that it was SBI policy to report that evidence showed an indication for the presence of blood, even when secondary tests to confirm were negative.

He left those results in his bench notes and didn't tell the prosecutor, he said, although he would have explained if he had testified.

SBI Director Robin Pendergraft said Friday that the agency never withheld the evidence but admits some wasn't shared.

"The practice then was not a good practice of not sharing all the information," Pendergraft said. "That's not been the practice we've been engaged in for the past several years."

Wake County District Attorney Colon Willoughby, who argued against Taylor's release this week, said the information could have changed the verdict in the murder trial.

"I think we were blissfully ignorant that there was information out there that we should have asked for," he said.

State statute now requires the SBI and other law enforcement to turn over all notes and that all information is shared with both the prosecution and defense. Pendergraft said the advancement of DNA technology also makes evidence far more accurate.

Unlike the Taylor case, she points out SBI testing often frees the wrongly accused.

Deaver, who has worked with the SBI since 1985 and is certified as a court expert in serology, now works as a criminal specialist in the SBI's training and investigative support division.

He was accused of misleading jurors about the presence of blood in a 1993 death penalty case against George Goode. A federal judge later vacated the death sentence.

Pendergraft says if other SBI cases are questioned, the agency will investigate accordingly."

The story can be found at:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/7084085/

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

HANK SKINNER CASE: RADLEY BALKO'S INSIGHTFUL TAKE ON WHY PROSECUTORS DO NOT WANT FURTHER DNA TESTS;

"IT ISN'T DIFFICULT TO SEE WHY PROSECUTORS DON'T WANT THE DNA TESTED. THEY HAVE AN UNSYMPATHETIC SUSPECT THAT THEY CAN PLACE AT THE SCENE OF THE CRIME. IF DNA SUGGESTS SOMEONE ELSE BLED OR FOUGHT IN THE HOUSE THAT NIGHT, IT DOESN'T CONCLUSIVELY PROVE SKINNER IS INNOCENT, BUT IT DOES (OR AT LEAST OUGHT TO) RAISE ENOUGH REASONABLE DOUBT TO PREVENT HIS EXECUTION. IN 2000 DNA TESTS WERE CONDUCTED ON BLOOD TAKEN FROM A ROLL OF GAUZE AND A CASSETTE TAPE FOUND IN THE HOUSE; THAT BLOOD DIDN'T MATCH SKINNER, HIS GIRLFRIEND, OR HER SONS. THE FIRST POSSIBLE OUTCOME OF TESTING THE REMAINING EVIDENCE IS THAT THE DNA WILL MATCH DONNELL, THE ALLEGEDLY LECHEROUS, THREATENING UNCLE. DONNELL HAS SINCE DIED. IF TESTS SHOW DONNELL'S FLESH UNDER THE VICTIM'S FINGERNAILS, OR HIS BLOOD OR SEMEN AT THE SCENE, THE STATE IS LEFT WITH THE STRONG POSSIBILITY THAT THEY LET A MURDERER GO FREE, BROUGHT AN INNOCENT MAN WITHIN A WEEK OF EXECUTION, AND NO LONGER HAVE A LIVE BODY THEY CAN TRY, CONVICT, AND EXECUTE. THE SECOND POSSIBILITY—THAT THE UNTESTED EVIDENCE CAME FROM OTHER, UNKNOWN PARTIES—WOULDN'T NECESSARILY PROVE SKINNER'S INNOCENCE, BUT IT WOULD CERTAINLY COMPLICATE THE STATE'S CASE AGAINST HIM. BUT THAT'S STILL NO REASON TO REFUSE THE TESTS. IF WE'RE GOING TO EXECUTE PEOPLE FOR PARTICULARLY HEINOUS CRIMES, WE HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION TO ENSURE THAT EVERY REASONABLE POSSIBILITY OF THE SUSPECT'S INNOCENCE HAS BEEN EXPLORED AND EXHAUSTED. IGNORING EVIDENCE THAT COMPLICATES THINGS FALLS WELL SHORT OF THAT OBLIGATION. THE THIRD POSSIBLE OUTCOME FROM TESTING THE REMAINING BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE IS THAT DNA WILL COME BACK A MATCH ONLY TO SKINNER OR THE VICTIMS. THAT WOULD GO A LONG WAY TOWARD AFFIRMING SKINNER'S GUILT. ALL THE MORE REASON FOR CONDUCTING THEM."

RADLEY BALKO: REASON;

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

BACKGROUND: The editor of the Texas Tribune says in a note that "Hank Skinner is set to be executed for a 1993 murder he's always maintained he didn't commit. He wants the state to test whether his DNA matches evidence found at the crime scene, but prosecutors say the time to contest his conviction has come and gone...... We told the story of the murders and his conviction and sentencing in the first part of this story." Reporter Brandi Grissom, author of the Tribune series on Hank Skinner, writes: "I interviewed Henry "Hank" Watkins Skinner, 47, at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — death row — on January 20, 2010. Skinner was convicted in 1995 of murdering his girlfriends and her two sons; the state has scheduled his execution for February 24. Skinner has always maintained that he's innocent and for 15 years has asked the state to release DNA evidence that he says will prove he was not the killer."

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

"Henry Watkins “Hank” Skinner was supposed to be executed tomorrow, but last Tuesday a Gray County, Texas, District Court judge pushed the date back one month, to March 24," Radley Balko's insightful commentary, published on February 22, 2010, begins, under the heading "Is Texas About To Execute Another Innocent Man? State officials would rather kill a prisoner than give him a DNA test."

"Skinner has been on Death Row in Texas since 1993, awaiting execution for the murder of his girlfriend and her two sons," the commentary continues.

"He has maintained his innocence since his arrest, and investigators from the Northwestern University Journalism School’s Medill Innocence Project have shot numerous holes in the prosecution’s case. But Texas officials refuse to conduct a simple DNA test that could point to the condemned man’s innocence or cement his guilt.

Skinner's scheduled lethal injection comes shortly after Texas Gov. Rick Perry has removed sympathetic panelists from the state forensic committee's investigation into the case of Cameron Todd Willingham and replaced them with panelists critics say are stymieing the investigation. Willingham was executed in 2003 for murdering his three daughters by setting fire to his house. Nine arson experts and an investigation published in the New Yorker last year have since made a strong case that Willingham was innocent of the crime.

At the same time, Texas, a notoriously enthusiastic enforcer of the death penalty, continues to lead the nation in DNA exonerations (one county in Texas has produced more genetic exonerations than all but three states). Which makes it all the more disturbing that biological evidence from Skinner’s crime scene remains untested, at the behest of prosecutors and backed up by the courts. You’d think given recent headlines that Texas might be a bit more reluctant to execute a possibly innocent man.

Skinner doesn't dispute that he was in the house at the time his girlfriend was bludgeoned to death and her sons were stabbed to death. But he says he was unconscious at the time, knocked out by a near-lethal mix of alcohol and codeine. He was convicted because of his presence at the crime scene, because he had small spots of blood from two of the three victims on his shirt, and because of the testimony of a neighbor, Andrea Reed, who happens to be an ex-girlfriend of Skinner’s. Reed says Skinner came to her shortly after the crime and implicated himself to her. According to court records, Skinner then told Reed a number of other implausible stories about who committed the murders.

Skinner's case has been championed by the Medill Innocence Project, the team of professors and students that exposed deep flaws in the Illinois death penalty system (ultimately leading to a moratorium on executions in the state), and has freed 11 people from prison, including five who had been condemned to death. After years of investigation, the project has revealed a number of shortcomings in the state's case against skinner. Among them:

· Andrea Reed has since recanted her testimony. She now says she was pressured by police and prosecutors to falsely incriminate Skinner. In an interview with Medill students, she added that, “I did not then and do not now feel like he was physically capable of hurting anybody.”

· The untested DNA included blood taken from the murder weapons, skin taken from under the fingernails of Skinner's girlfriend, a rape test taken from her that included semen, and other blood and hair found at the scene. Skinner asked his attorney to request the evidence be tested in a letter written in 1994. The attorney never made the request, stating later that he feared doing so would implicate his client.

· Skinner's girlfriend had been stalked by an allegedly lecherous uncle, Robert Donnell. Witnesses say Donnell had approached her at a party she attended the night of her death. She left frightened, and he appeared to have followed her. A friend says the uncle had raped her in the past. Days after the murders, a neighbor reportedly saw the uncle thoroughly cleaning and repainting his truck.

· Skinner's court-appointed attorney was a former prosecutor who had actually prosecuted Skinner on a minor assault and car theft charge years earlier. Skinner's two prior crimes—which his own attorney had prosecuted—were used as aggravating factors in the death penalty portion of his trial.

· According to a new report (PDF) by toxicology specialist Harold Kalant, a moderate drinker with the levels of codeine and alcohol Skinner had in his blood would have been comatose or dead. A heavy drinker may have been rousable, but would have been "stuporous," unlikely to have the coordination necessary to carry out three murders involving multiple stabbings and bludgeonings.

It isn't difficult to see why prosecutors don't want the DNA tested. They have an unsympathetic suspect that they can place at the scene of the crime. If DNA suggests someone else bled or fought in the house that night, it doesn't conclusively prove Skinner is innocent, but it does (or at least ought to) raise enough reasonable doubt to prevent his execution. In 2000 DNA tests were conducted on blood taken from a roll of gauze and a cassette tape found in the house; that blood didn't match Skinner, his girlfriend, or her sons.

The first possible outcome of testing the remaining evidence is that the DNA will match Donnell, the allegedly lecherous, threatening uncle. Donnell has since died. If tests show Donnell's flesh under the victim's fingernails, or his blood or semen at the scene, the state is left with the strong possibility that they let a murderer go free, brought an innocent man within a week of execution, and no longer have a live body they can try, convict, and execute.

The second possibility—that the untested evidence came from other, unknown parties—wouldn't necessarily prove Skinner's innocence, but it would certainly complicate the state's case against him. But that's still no reason to refuse the tests. If we're going to execute people for particularly heinous crimes, we have a moral obligation to ensure that every reasonable possibility of the suspect's innocence has been explored and exhausted. Ignoring evidence that complicates things falls well short of that obligation.

The third possible outcome from testing the remaining biological evidence is that DNA will come back a match only to Skinner or the victims. That would go a long way toward affirming Skinner's guilt. All the more reason for conducting them.

After a conviction, the criminal justice system tends put a premium on finality, setting a high bar for reopening or retrying old cases. Given the Willingham case and the spate of exonerations across Texas, perhaps it's time the state put less emphasis on finality, and more on certainty. DNA testing in Skinner's case may not bring us closer to closing those 1993 murders, but it will bring us closer to discovering the truth about them. In a capital case especially, that alone should be reason enough to to go through with the tests."

Radley Balko is a senior editor at Reason magazine.

The commentary can be found at:

http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/22/is-texas-about-to-execute-anot

UPDATE; GREG TAYLOR CASE: ASSOCIATED PRESS; DEFENCE LAWYERS CALL FOR REVIEW OF ALL CASES WHERE SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FROM SBI LAB PLAYED KEY ROLE;

PENDERGRAFT DEFENDED THE WORDING. "IT IS LANGUAGE THAT IS ACCEPTABLE TO THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY," SHE SAID, CONFIRMING THAT IN 1991, ANALYSTS WERE PROVIDED THE WORDING FOR THEIR LAB REPORTS, BASED ON WHAT THEY FOUND IN TESTING. DEFENSE ATTORNEY JOE CHESHIRE OF RALEIGH, WHO ALSO HELPED REPRESENT TAYLOR, CALLED PENDERGRAFT'S DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE SBI HANDLED LAB REPORTS AND BENCH NOTES "A SEMANTIC ABSURDITY." "IF YOU'RE NOT HANDING OVER EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE, EVIDENCE THAT SHOWS A PERSON MAY NOT BE GUILTY, THEN YOU ARE WITHHOLDING IT," SAID CHESHIRE, WHO HAS BEEN A CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY IN NORTH CAROLINA FOR MORE THAN 35 YEARS. HE ALSO SAID HE NEVER GOT BENCH NOTES — EVEN WHEN HE REQUESTED THEM — BEFORE CHANGES IN STATE DISCOVERY LAWS REQUIRED THE SBI TO TURN THEM OVER.

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS;

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

BACKGROUND: Seventeen years ago, Taylor was convicted of the September, 1991 murder of Raleigh prostitute Jacquetta Thomas, 26, whose body was found dumped on South Blount Street in Raleigh. Taylor, 47, said he spent the night of September 25, 1991 drinking and doing drugs with friends while he drove around southeast Raleigh to buy crack cocaine. Taylor said he believed police latched on to him for the murder because he and a friend drove along a dirt path off the same cul-de-sac where Thomas's body was found. Taylor and the friend smoked crack, but his SUV got stuck as they tried to drive away. They abandoned the SUV and walked to a nearby street to get a ride. Taylor testified they saw what they thought was a body but didn't report it to police. When Taylor returned in the morning to get the SUV, the police were already there. Taylor had exhausted his appeals, but the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission reviewed the evidence against him last year and recommended the case to the three judge panel for further review. The commission is the only state-run agency in the country that investigates claims of innocence. Now the Commission has declared him innocent - the first time an inmate has been freed through the actions of the state's Innocence Inquiry Commission.

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

"RALEIGH (AP) — North Carolina's top law enforcement agency did not always automatically provide complete crime lab test results for use in trials, the agency's director told the Associated Press, bolstering an accusation that helped exonerate a murder convict this week after 16years in prison," the Associated Press story, published earlier today under the heading "Problems found with crime lab results," begins.

"Some defense attorneys said the revelation could lead them to re-examine past criminal convictions to see if they were reached without all the information available," the story continues.

"State Bureau of Investigation Director Robin Pendergraft said the agency had, in the past, provided only some information in the formal lab reports it provided to the courts. The more informal "bench notes" from SBI analysts would be available upon request from prosecutors or defense attorneys, she said.

"I wasn't here in '91, but that was the practice," she said. "It was not to withhold. It was simply to give the lab reports and to await requests from either the prosecution or the defense for the bench notes," said Pendergraft, who has been SBI director since 2001.

The practice "was not the best practice," she said. "The best practice is to give all the information up front to everyone, so there's no question." The SBI does now provide all information, she said.The problems were revealed in the case of Greg Taylor, who was convicted in 1993 of murdering a prostitute in Raleigh. The original SBI lab report, relying on a preliminary test, said lab results indicated blood was found in his SUV after the slaying. But a follow-up test came up negative. That information was in SBI Agent Duane Deaver's bench notes, but not in the report sent to the court. Taylor was exonerated last week.

It's not immediately known how many criminal cases could have been affected by the agency's previous policy.

"I think the defense bar as a whole will be well advised to go back and examine every case that Deaver was involved in," said defense attorney David Rudolf of Charlotte.

"What we don't know is how other analysts in the lab interpreted and/or followed this policy," said Rudolf, whose clients have included former NFL player Rae Carruth and novelist Michael Peterson. "If they all did, then every case in which scientific evidence from the SBI lab played a significant role would need to be looked at."After more than 16 years behind bars, Taylor spent his first full day of freedom in Durham doing things like hitting the gym and getting some new eyewear.

After breakfast and a shower, he replaced the prison-issued glasses with a pair of oval-shaped, chocolate-colored wire frames. "People can look at them and say, 'He just got out of prison,' " Taylor said. "I want to get rid of these."

Taylor spoke to reporters while holding the hand of his 26-year-old daughter, Kristen Puryear, and pushing a stroller carrying his 23-month-old grandson, Charles.

He counted off all the loved ones he lost while behind bars: a grandmother, a sister, three uncles, a cousin, a dog and two cats. But it was when he discussed the happy events he missed that he choked up.

"Her 10th birthday party," he said of his daughter.

"Her high school graduation was a big one," he said. "These are the things you can't get back."

Taylor also met with someone who was part of the chain of events leading to his exoneration: former state Chief Justice I. Beverly Lake Jr., who launched the study panel that led to creating the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission.

Taylor's case was the first exoneration to result from the work of the commission, which is the only state-run agency in the country dedicated to proving a convicted person's innocence.

If the governor grants Taylor a pardon, he can apply for compensation from the state Industrial Commission for $50,000 a year up to a maximum of $750,000.

Chris Mumma, executive director of the N.C. Center on Actual Innocence, said she hoped the SBI would now allow an independent investigative team to review of all cases that occurred when lab results weren't disclosed fully. Mumma helped represent Greg Taylor.

Deaver testified at Taylor's hearing that the wording of his lab report was dictated by SBI policy. Experts, including Dr. Deborah Radisch of the State Medical Examiner's Office, testified that scientists should not exclude any lab results from their reports to the court.

Pendergraft defended the wording. "It is language that is acceptable to the scientific community," she said, confirming that in 1991, analysts were provided the wording for their lab reports, based on what they found in testing.

Defense attorney Joe Cheshire of Raleigh, who also helped represent Taylor, called Pendergraft's description of how the SBI handled lab reports and bench notes "a semantic absurdity."

"If you're not handing over exculpatory evidence, evidence that shows a person may not be guilty, then you are withholding it," said Cheshire, who has been a criminal defense attorney in North Carolina for more than 35 years.

He also said he never got bench notes — even when he requested them — before changes in state discovery laws required the SBI to turn them over.

Pendergraft did not immediately return a follow-up phone call seeking information such as when the policy began and ended.

Cheshire and Rudolf said the SBI's practice was a violation of a 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision known simply as Brady, which requires that any evidence that might help a defendant be turned over to defense attorneys.

"If you say that there chemical indications of blood somewhere in a report and you don't say, but further testing reveals it really wasn't blood, and all you provide is the first, how is that not misleading? How is that not a falsity by omission?" Rudolf asked." The story can be found at:

http://www.salisburypost.com/News/022210-innocence-commission

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

GREG TAYLOR CASE: CHARLOTTE OBSERVER WELCOMES INNOCENCE COMMISSION'S DECISION; REGRETS THERE ARE SO MANY WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS IN NORTH CAROLINA;

"IT CORRECTS A TERRIBLE ERROR THE STATE MADE IN 1993 WHEN A WAKE COUNTY JURY CONVICTED TAYLOR OF KILLING JOQUETTA THOMAS IN SOUTHEAST RALEIGH. WAKE SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE HOWARD MANNING, WHO CHAIRED A PANEL THAT INCLUDED MECKLENBURG SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE CALVIN MURPHY AND SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE TANYA WALLACE OF ROCKINGHAM, SAID TAYLOR "HAS PROVED BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE" THAT HE IS INNOCENT. THE STANDARD OF PROOF, HE NOTED, REQUIRED "CREDIBLE, VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE OF INNOCENCE THAT HAS NOT PREVIOUSLY BEEN PRESENTED.

IT EXPOSES AN INCREDIBLY SLOPPY POLICE INVESTIGATION OF THE MURDER, A BADLY HANDLED PROSECUTION CASE THAT IGNORED COMMON SENSE AND AN INCOMPETENT DEFENSE THAT FAILED TO INVESTIGATE THE FLAWED EVIDENCE PROSECUTORS USED TO CONVICT TAYLOR.

IT CONFIRMS THE WISDOM OF FORMER N.C. SUPREME COURT CHIEF JUSTICE BEVERLY LAKE IN COMMISSIONING A STUDY OF WHETHER THE STATE SHOULD CREATE A FORMAL PROCESS TO HEAR CREDIBLE CASES OF ACTUAL INNOCENCE FROM PRISON INMATES. THE LEGISLATURE LATER CREATED THE INNOCENCE INQUIRY COMMISSION, THE FIRST OF ITS TYPE IN THE NATION, TO CONSIDER SUCH CASES. SADLY, THERE HAVE BEEN TOO MANY CASES OF WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS IN THIS STATE."

EDITORIAL: THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER;

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

BACKGROUND: Seventeen years ago, Taylor was convicted of the September, 1991 murder of Raleigh prostitute Jacquetta Thomas, 26, whose body was found dumped on South Blount Street in Raleigh. Taylor, 47, said he spent the night of September 25, 1991 drinking and doing drugs with friends while he drove around southeast Raleigh to buy crack cocaine. Taylor said he believed police latched on to him for the murder because he and a friend drove along a dirt path off the same cul-de-sac where Thomas's body was found. Taylor and the friend smoked crack, but his SUV got stuck as they tried to drive away. They abandoned the SUV and walked to a nearby street to get a ride. Taylor testified they saw what they thought was a body but didn't report it to police. When Taylor returned in the morning to get the SUV, the police were already there. Taylor had exhausted his appeals, but the North Carolina Innocence Inquiry Commission reviewed the evidence against him last year and recommended the case to the three judge panel for further review. The commission is the only state-run agency in the country that investigates claims of innocence. Now the Commission has declared him innocent - the first time an inmate has been freed through the actions of the state's Innocence Inquiry Commission.

"The decision by a three-judge panel exonerating Greg Taylor in a 1991 murder for which he spent 17 years in prison was a dramatic moment in N.C. legal history. It's notable for several things," the Charlotte Observer editorial, published on February 18, 2010, begins.

"It corrects a terrible error the state made in 1993 when a Wake County jury convicted Taylor of killing Joquetta Thomas in southeast Raleigh," the editorial continues.

"Wake Superior Court Judge Howard Manning, who chaired a panel that included Mecklenburg Superior Court Judge Calvin Murphy and Superior Court Judge Tanya Wallace of Rockingham, said Taylor "has proved by clear and convincing evidence" that he is innocent. The standard of proof, he noted, required "credible, verifiable evidence of innocence that has not previously been presented."

It exposes an incredibly sloppy police investigation of the murder, a badly handled prosecution case that ignored common sense and an incompetent defense that failed to investigate the flawed evidence prosecutors used to convict Taylor.

It confirms the wisdom of former N.C. Supreme Court Chief Justice Beverly Lake in commissioning a study of whether the state should create a formal process to hear credible cases of actual innocence from prison inmates. The legislature later created the Innocence Inquiry Commission, the first of its type in the nation, to consider such cases. Sadly, there have been too many cases of wrongful convictions in this state.

It creates a new problem for state investigators and prosecutors. Greg Taylor did not kill Thomas - but who did? It's possible her killer is still out on the streets nearly two decades after her brutal death. Prosecutors should reopen the case.

But this much is clear: Taylor did not commit the crime. Under the statute creating the Innocence Inquiry Commission, a panel of eight members must first review a case and decide whether there's a high probability that an inmate can demonstrate innocence. In some cases DNA evidence may prove innocence on the spot.

In Taylor's case, an adversarial hearing before a special session of Superior Court judges for the past week sorted through the case before Manning announced their decision in a packed courtroom at Campbell University's law school in Raleigh. Their decision is persuasive because legislators wisely set the standard for proof of innocence high. Among other things, that standard will help ensure public confidence that those freed under the process really are innocent.

That any state in America would need such a process is discouraging. But the cases of Darryl Hunt, Dwayne Dail, Ronald Cotton and now Greg Taylor - all of whom spent many years in prison but who have since been judged innocent - cried out for a formal process to guide this state's criminal justice system in correcting old errors.

That North Carolina was willing to review old cases and set them aright is, in the end, a powerful message that the state will try to do the right thing. When Joquetta Thomas's killer is apprehended, that message will be fulfilled."

The editorial can be found at:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/125/story/1254978.html

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com