KEVIN KEITH; HIS LAWYERS RESPOND TO THE STATE PAROLE BOARD'S REJECTION OF HIS REQUEST FOR CLEMENCY; TOO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS;

"The Parole Board's own recitation of facts and brief findings cannot avoid facts pointing to the existence of doubt about Mr. Keith's guilt. For example, the Parole Board found that the lineup used to identify Mr. Keith for this crime was "arguably suggestive," and recognized that the "science of measuring the extent to which an event is 'encoded' into memory is imprecise." The Parole Board also noted the there was no "biological evidence linking Keith to the crime." Unfortunately, however, the Parole Board gave "considerable deference" to the jury and courts in making its recommendation. But it is undisputed that no court or jury has ever considered the entirety of the new evidence that raises serious questions about Mr. Keith’s guilt."

STATEMENT BY KEVIN KEITH'S LAWYERS IN RESPONSE TO PAROLE BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION AGAINST CLEMENCY;

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

BACKGROUND: On the evening of February 13, 1994, Marichell Chatman, her daughter Marchae, and Marichell’s aunt Linda Chatman were shot to death at the Bucyrus Estates Apartments in Bucyrus, Ohio. Richard Warren, Marichell’s boyfriend, and Marichell’s young cousins, Quanita and Quinton Reeves, were also shot but survived. On February 15, 1994, Kevin Keith was arrested for these shootings. By May 31, 1994, Mr. Keith was sentenced to death for this crime. From crime to sentencing, only three-and-a-half months passed. In spite of his alibi and no conclusive forensic evidence proving his involvement, Mr. Keith was convicted in 1994 and sentenced to death. In 2007, after all his allotted appeals were exhausted, new counsel took on Mr. Keith’s case. Upon investigating, counsel discovered new evidence for Mr. Keith that supported what Mr. Keith was saying from day one – he is actually innocent. The new evidence proves that the primary evidence used to convict Keith was flawed. The eyewitness identification testimony by a surviving victim was improperly influenced. Thirteen years after he was convicted, Mr. Keith discovered that one of the State’s “witnesses” does not actually exist. At Keith’s trial, the police had testified about a fictitious person and attributed a statement to her in order to bolster the shaky identification testimony of the surviving victim. Mr. Keith’s new evidence further implicates an alternative suspect who told a police informant that he was paid to carry out the murders for which Keith is scheduled to die. The police were aware of the statements by the alternative suspect, but no one turned them over to Keith’s counsel. Kevin Keith has thus far failed to persuade the state's clemency board or the courts to stop his execution which is set for September 15, 2010.

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

"The Governor’s ultimate responsibility is to ensure that no human being is executed in Ohio absent absolute certainty. In Kevin Keith’s case, too many questions remain unanswered, and his execution should not proceed as planned," the Statement from Attorneys for Kevin Keith in Response to Today's Parole Board Recommendation Against Clemency," released on August 19, 2010 begins.

"The Parole Board's own recitation of facts and brief findings cannot avoid facts pointing to the existence of doubt about Mr. Keith's guilt. For example, the Parole Board found that the lineup used to identify Mr. Keith for this crime was "arguably suggestive," and recognized that the "science of measuring the extent to which an event is 'encoded' into memory is imprecise," the statement continues.

"The Parole Board also noted the there was no "biological evidence linking Keith to the crime." Unfortunately, however, the Parole Board gave "considerable deference" to the jury and courts in making its recommendation. But it is undisputed that no court or jury has ever considered the entirety of the new evidence that raises serious questions about Mr. Keith’s guilt.

Mr. Keith and his attorneys have not had the opportunity to fully utilize this new evidence to defend against the State’s theory, and Mr. Keith and his attorneys have not had the opportunity to challenge State witnesses through the crucible of cross-examination regarding the numerous inconsistencies in their testimony revealed by this discovery of new evidence. Under these circumstances, the Governor cannot be absolutely certain – as he must be – that Mr. Keith is guilty of this crime and deserves the most final of punishments: execution.

We urge the Governor to review the facts of the case on his own, without deferring to courts that have not completely reviewed the evidence before us today. For example, the Governor should consider that, absent questionable "eyewitness" testimony, there is nothing connecting Mr. Keith to this crime. Indeed, the chief eyewitness against Mr. Keith initially told four people -- in a coherent and stable state -- that he could not identify the shooter because the shooter was wearing a mask. Another survivor initially excluded Mr. Keith as the shooter entirely, noting that the shooter did not have certain physical features possessed by Mr. Keith. Thereafter, Mr. Keith’s face was projected prominently in a highly suggestive photo line-up to these witnesses that would run afoul of the very procedures recognized as unreliable and inaccurate and corrected by reform legislation signed by the Governor. And after Mr. Keith's arrest, still other witnesses who had indicated that the shooter was wearing a mask or could not be identified suddenly were "re-interviewed" by police and pointed to Mr. Keith. What's more, by the time of the clemency hearing, eyewitness descriptions has further changed -- some now stating that the shooter was not wearing a mask at all.

Moreover, brand new evidence -- never heard by a jury -- shows that another man admitted he was paid to commit the crime for which Mr. Keith stands to be executed. And still other evidence shows Mr. Keith has a strong alibi for the time of the crime, supported by four witnesses. These circumstances do not present an absolute certainty of guilt.

That is why prominent individuals and nonpartisan organizations – including more than 30 former state and federal judges and prosecutors, the Ohio Innocence Project, the National Innocence Network (comprised of 61 innocence projects and legal organizations), more than 100 Ohio faith leaders and organizations, 13 leading eyewitness and memory experts, law enforcement, death row exonerees, and thousands of citizens across Ohio and the U.S. -- support clemency for Mr. Keith.

The Parole Board’s recommendation to Governor Strickland is advisory and non-binding, and we urge the Governor to grant Mr. Keith clemency.

Rachel Troutman, Assistant State Public Defender
Andrew King, Assistant State Public Defender
Tyson Fleming, Assistant State Public Defender
John Q. Lewis, Partner, Jones Day
David Mills, The Mills Law Office LLC."

The statement can be found at:

http://kevinkeith.org/Clemency/Response.htm

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/2010/08/new-feature-cases-issues-and_15.html

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;