"THE COMMISSION, BY TAKING THIS HISTORIC STEP, SETS A STANDARD OF EXCELLENCE THAT WILL BE DEMANDED OF THE TEXAS FORENSIC SCIENCE COMMUNITY," BRADLEY WROTE TO ME IN AN E-MAIL MONDAY. "NO MORE WILL CRIMINAL DEFENDANTS, JUDGES, DEFENSE ATTORNEYS, PROSECUTORS OR VICTIMS HAVE TO GUESS AT HOW TO IDENTIFY AND CORRECT THE WRONGFUL APPLICATION OF FORENSIC SCIENCE. BUT THE DEFINITIONS APPEAR TO SET A PRETTY WEAK STANDARD. BOTH BEGIN WITH THE WORDS: "AFTER CONSIDERING ALL OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES FROM THE ACTOR'S STANDPOINT," OFFERING A SUBJECTIVE LOOPHOLE THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER THE PERSON DID GOOD SCIENCE OR BAD SCIENCE BY THE STANDARDS AT THE TIME."
COLUMNIST RICK CASEY: THE HOUSTON CHRONICLE;
(Wikipedia says the Houston Chronicle is the largest daily newspaper in Texas, USA. As of March 2008, it is the ninth-largest newspaper by circulation in the United States.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Some of the best coverage of the beleaguered Texas Forensic Science Commission has come from Rick Casey of the Houston Chronicle. the subject of Casey's January 31, 2010 column which appeared under the heading "Commentary: The revolt of the scientists" was a rift between Commission head John Bradley and several scientists on the Commission. But Casey tells us in a follow-up article three days later that Bradley emerged a winner;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second column, appeared on February 3, 2010, under the heading "A win for Bradley, and another loss."
"John Bradley, the controversial district attorney appointed by Gov. Rick Perry last fall to head the Texas Forensic Science Commission, did score one victory in Harlingen on Friday while presiding over his first meeting," the column began.
"As detailed in Sunday's column, the seven scientists on the nine-member commission rebelled at a set of policies and procedures presented by Bradley that would have given him formidable powers as chairman, including naming members and chairs of three standing committees and of ad-hoc committees that will direct the investigations of alleged failures at police labs and other agencies," it continued.
"Given that Bradley had incited a national firestorm by unilaterally cancelling a commission meeting scheduled to hear an expert's report on a case that could prove highly embarrassing to Perry, the scientists were not in a mood to give him total control over assignments regarding future cases.
But they did, after some resistance, give in on another issue. The law setting up the commission charged it with investigating allegations of "professional misconduct" and "professional negligence" at accredited crime labs and other facilities.
Bradley argued for definitions of these terms out of fairness to lab personnel.
At an earlier meeting, after consulting with a lawyer from the attorney general's office, the commission had decided not to define the terms.
Definitions adopted
The scientists on the commission are focused more on identifying bad science in the interest of reducing it rather than nailing individual practitioners. They decided that since they had no power to punish a misbehaving lab staffer, they need not define misconduct or negligence.
They also argued that since nowhere in the law or in the forensic scientific literature are the terms defined, they shouldn't be the first to do so.
Bradley is pleased that he persuaded the commission to adopt definitions, calling them "perhaps the most significant" part of the new policies.
"The Commission, by taking this historic step, sets a standard of excellence that will be demanded of the Texas forensic science community," Bradley wrote to me in an e-mail Monday. "No more will criminal defendants, judges, defense attorneys, prosecutors or victims have to guess at how to identify and correct the wrongful application of forensic science."
But the definitions appear to set a pretty weak standard. Both begin with the words: "after considering all of the circumstances from the actor's standpoint," offering a subjective loophole that has nothing to do with whether the person did good science or bad science by the standards at the time.
But having given in on this question, the scientists on the commission vetoed another one of Bradley's goals. He pressed them repeatedly and hard to hire a staff lawyer for the commission.
While publicly raising the concern that there wasn't enough work to justify it, several scientists privately voice other worries.
One concerned expense. More lawyering could mean less science.
The commission's annual budget is $250,000. More than $50,000 already goes for administrative expenses. Most serious investigations will involve having experts review the allegations of misconduct or negligence.
Nationally renowned arson expert Dr. Craig Beyler, whose intensely critical report on the arson investigation in the case of executed murderer Cameron Todd Willingham was to be presented at the meeting canceled by Bradley, was paid a fee of $36,600.
Working for chairman?
The scientists on the commission worried that with no expectations of an increased budget from the Legislature, salary and benefits for a full-time staff lawyer could mean fewer meaningful investigations.
Another concern was that the lawyer would, as a practical matter, work for the chairman, bolstering his positions regarding commission actions.
Clearly the scientists trust Barbara Dean, the assistant attorney general who has provided legal advice to the commission since its inception (and whom I misidentified Sunday as an assistant district attorney) more than they trust Bradley.
The matter was settled when Commissioner Dr. Sarah Kerrigan of Sam Houston State University asked Dean if the commission was nearing the limits of the time she could provide.
No, said Dean, deflating Bradley's argument."
The column can be found at:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/casey/6848038.html
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
