"The panel was created in 2005 to help upgrade forensic science in Texas, a move that stemmed in part from scandalous misfeasance at the Houston police crime lab. The mission of the new commission was to identify cases of negligence and when corrective action is required of a facility or entity.
The State Fire Marshal's Office is one of the entities that concluded arson was the cause of the fatal Willingham fire. It would be negligent of the commission not to do a detailed post-mortem on the fire marshal's own level of awareness of improvements in forensic standards.
If the state fire marshal hadn't heard of the modern standards that superseded those used in the Willingham case, when did that office become aware of them? Did the fire marshal sit on the sidelines as Willingham's execution drew near and debate raged over whether junk science helped convict him?
Finally, how far awry were arson investigators in reaching their conclusions about the Willingham fire?
The answer to that question could be of terrific significance to hundreds of other defendants sent to Texas prisons based on investigations that "simply applied" antiquated standards of practice."
EDITORIAL: THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Texas Forensic Science Commission appears to be steering toward a vague zone in the Cameron Todd Willingham case, a direction that would fail to address exactly how wrong arson investigators may have been in making a case that sent him to the death chamber," the Dallas Morning News editorial published on July 26, 2010 begins, under the heading, "Official 'oops' in the Willingham case?"
"Clarity, not obfuscation, is what the public deserves in this long-running legal drama," the editorial continues.
"A four-person committee investigating the Willingham case offered draft recommendations last week that would absolve arson investigators of negligence because they used outmoded standards that were common at the time in Texas in probing the fire.
Those state and local investigators, probing the 1991 house fire that killed Willingham's three daughters in Corsicana, concluded it was set. That finding was central to the murder conviction that led to his execution in 2004.
The draft findings to the Forensic Science Commission said investigators "simply applied the standard of practice" accepted at the time.
This is not where the commission's work should go – a blithe-sounding official "oops." The commission's final word on the matter should deliver a level of detail of who knew what about evolving arson-science methods and when they knew it. The commission's findings should help assure Texans that the convictions sought in their names are based on the latest available science.
The panel was created in 2005 to help upgrade forensic science in Texas, a move that stemmed in part from scandalous misfeasance at the Houston police crime lab. The mission of the new commission was to identify cases of negligence and when corrective action is required of a facility or entity.
The State Fire Marshal's Office is one of the entities that concluded arson was the cause of the fatal Willingham fire. It would be negligent of the commission not to do a detailed post-mortem on the fire marshal's own level of awareness of improvements in forensic standards.
If the state fire marshal hadn't heard of the modern standards that superseded those used in the Willingham case, when did that office become aware of them? Did the fire marshal sit on the sidelines as Willingham's execution drew near and debate raged over whether junk science helped convict him?
Finally, how far awry were arson investigators in reaching their conclusions about the Willingham fire?
The answer to that question could be of terrific significance to hundreds of other defendants sent to Texas prisons based on investigations that "simply applied" antiquated standards of practice.
The Willingham case has been portrayed as a possible fatal miscarriage of justice – an innocent man sent to his death by bumbling investigators and overly eager prosecutors. That assertion is probably not provable, however.
Scathing reviews of the arson work didn't go that far. The commission's outside expert did not say Willingham didn't set the fire. He maintained investigators couldn't reach that conclusion based on the evidence available.
The commission's job now is to make sure the state learns from the shortcomings in the Willingham case, and that requires a level of detail that preliminary work has skirted."
The editorial can be found at:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/stories/DN-willingham_27edi.State.Edition1.2d1d59f.html
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith
For a breakdown of some of the cases, issues and controversies this Blog is currently following, please turn to:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2010/07/new-feature-cases-issues-and.html
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;
