"The battle was for the scientific soul of the commission. Chairman and Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley had distributed a "memorandum on jurisdiction" that concluded the Legislature authorized the commission to investigate only complaints involving crime labs accredited by the Department of Public Safety.
This would exclude the controversial case of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed for the arson murder of his two young children based on allegedly bad science.
In other words, Bradley was asking the members of the commission, seven of whom are scientists, to give up most of their power to investigate the questionable use of police science in Texas.
It would be a severe blow to one of the few statewide efforts in the United States to address what the National Academy of Sciences last year reported was an epidemic of bad police science."
RICK CASEY: THE TEXAS TRIBUNE;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commen"Here's the triumphant score from Friday's Texas Forensic Science Commission: Science 8, District Attorney 0," the commentary by rick casey which appeared earlier today in the Houston Chronicle under the heading, "Science defeats DA 8-0," begins.
"The battle was for the scientific soul of the commission. Chairman and Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley had distributed a "memorandum on jurisdiction" that concluded the Legislature authorized the commission to investigate only complaints involving crime labs accredited by the Department of Public Safety," the commentary continues.
"This would exclude the controversial case of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was executed for the arson murder of his two young children based on allegedly bad science.
In other words, Bradley was asking the members of the commission, seven of whom are scientists, to give up most of their power to investigate the questionable use of police science in Texas.
It would be a severe blow to one of the few statewide efforts in the United States to address what the National Academy of Sciences last year reported was an epidemic of bad police science.
The victory for science was so overwhelming that even Bradley voted against adopting his own "memorandum."
Bradley had caused the memo to be distributed to the members of the commission and placed on Friday's agenda. It was neither signed nor dated, but it said it was "drafted, reviewed and edited through the combined efforts of the two members of the FSC who are lawyers, counsel for the Attorney General's Office" and two other government lawyers.
But early in the meeting Barbara Dean, the assistant attorney general who has served as the commission's counsel, wanted to make something very clear.
"I am not a co-author," of the memo, she said sternly while seated next to Bradley. She waited for an executive session to voice her observations about it. I don't know what she said, but the results didn't favor Bradley's position.
Lance Evans, the Fort Worth defense attorney who is the other lawyer on the committee, is a picture of politeness. He said he had reviewed the memo and "I've got my opinion pretty well formulated."
'Absurd consequences'
His opinion became clear shortly after the closed session. He said the interpretation expressed in the memorandum would lead to "absurd consequences" that the courts would not uphold.
Then he moved that "we not adopt the memorandum," which passed 8-0.
By this time Bradley had almost comically backed off. He couldn't quite bring himself to confess to having written the memo but did admit that "I helped coordinate and was the finger that hit the keyboard the most times."
He repeated several times that the memo was not intended to be binding but was "merely for reference," whatever that means.
Bradley's retreat may have been partly forced by statements to the commission by two senators, including one who sponsored the bill establishing the commission, and four members of the House committee with jurisdiction over it that his memo was entirely wrong.
Later in the meeting Bradley said he and another member of the four-member panel screening the high-profile case Willingham case had found the argument that it didn't fall under the commission's jurisdiction "compelling and interesting." But he also said he had publicly committed to completing that investigation and would do so.
(Note: Bradley chairs the Willingham panel but did not appoint himself as I reported Friday. He was elected by other members in closed session.)
The Willingham case survives, but it is only part of the importance of Friday's meeting. In what was literally a defining moment, the commissioners decided it is their job to address the broad issues of forensic science, not just what happens in a limited number of labs."
The commentary can be found at:
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/casey/7124480.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;