STORY: "Former prisoner secures his freedom by admitting to a felony," by Joseph Shapiro, published by NPR on January 4, 2013.
PUBLISHER'S VIEW: (Editorial). Some of the most blatant miscarriages of justice involving former pathologist Charles Smith were cases where utterly innocent people charged with murdering children pleaded guilty to lesser offences - and went to prison - to avoid going to prison for life because of the testimony of the revered Dr. Charles Randal Smith. Their lawyers had advised them that Smith was so renowned that a jury would likely convict them even though they were innocent. These people were also at a disadvantage because they did not have the financial resources necessary to find top notch experts who were willing to take on Charles Smith. I was therefore troubled to read the following NPR story which suggests that Ernie Lopez - a man whose innocence was demonstrated by medical evidence - had accepted a deal to plead guilty to a felony in order to avoid going back to trial and risking another conviction and who knows how many years in prison above the nine he had already served. (My years as a criminal lawyer told me that even in the best of circumstances a jury trial is a "crap-shoot.") At least Mr. Lopez is finally free, and one can only hope that the people in his community will appreciate that he is innocent and understand why he had to provide the State it's proverbial pound of flesh.
Harold Levy: Publisher. The Charles Smith Blog.
GIST: "Ernie Lopez, who was convicted of sexually assaulting a 6-month-old girl in Texas, accepted a plea deal in Amarillo, Texas, today. But that wasn't the result Lopez may have expected last January, when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals threw out his conviction. In 2011, NPR reported along with journalists from ProPublica and PBS Frontline that Lopez likely had been falsely accused of the crime. At a court appearance Friday afternoon, Lopez confessed to "injury to a child by causing serious bodily injury," a felony. Lopez now admits that he harmed the child by roughly cleaning her after a diaper change. That's dialed way down from the rape charge he was convicted of in 2003, and the murder charge he faced. But Lopez has always claimed he did nothing to harm the child, Isis Vas, whom he and his wife were babysitting. The stories by NPR, ProPublica and Frontline about Lopez were part of a series on the changing scientific understanding of what causes child deaths. The reporting found 23 cases of people in the U.S. and Canada who had been falsely accused or convicted. The story on Lopez suggested that medical evidence showed Vas did not die as a result of deliberate abuse, but because she had an extreme blood clotting disorder — one that left marks and bleeding that mimicked signs of child abuse. So why would Lopez enter into this plea deal? It may be because his only alternative was going back to trial, and risking another conviction . Last year, Lopez explained that the first time he went to trial he believed innocent people don't get convicted. Then he spent nine years in prison. This time, he would have had key medical experts and a more developed defense. Yet he still faced the risk of conviction. "I don't think any one of us believes he would be convicted," Heather Kirkwood, an attorney who handled Lopez's appeal, said earlier this week. "But in these cases, there's no guarantee."
PUBLISHER'S VIEW: (Editorial). Some of the most blatant miscarriages of justice involving former pathologist Charles Smith were cases where utterly innocent people charged with murdering children pleaded guilty to lesser offences - and went to prison - to avoid going to prison for life because of the testimony of the revered Dr. Charles Randal Smith. Their lawyers had advised them that Smith was so renowned that a jury would likely convict them even though they were innocent. These people were also at a disadvantage because they did not have the financial resources necessary to find top notch experts who were willing to take on Charles Smith. I was therefore troubled to read the following NPR story which suggests that Ernie Lopez - a man whose innocence was demonstrated by medical evidence - had accepted a deal to plead guilty to a felony in order to avoid going back to trial and risking another conviction and who knows how many years in prison above the nine he had already served. (My years as a criminal lawyer told me that even in the best of circumstances a jury trial is a "crap-shoot.") At least Mr. Lopez is finally free, and one can only hope that the people in his community will appreciate that he is innocent and understand why he had to provide the State it's proverbial pound of flesh.
Harold Levy: Publisher. The Charles Smith Blog.
GIST: "Ernie Lopez, who was convicted of sexually assaulting a 6-month-old girl in Texas, accepted a plea deal in Amarillo, Texas, today. But that wasn't the result Lopez may have expected last January, when the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals threw out his conviction. In 2011, NPR reported along with journalists from ProPublica and PBS Frontline that Lopez likely had been falsely accused of the crime. At a court appearance Friday afternoon, Lopez confessed to "injury to a child by causing serious bodily injury," a felony. Lopez now admits that he harmed the child by roughly cleaning her after a diaper change. That's dialed way down from the rape charge he was convicted of in 2003, and the murder charge he faced. But Lopez has always claimed he did nothing to harm the child, Isis Vas, whom he and his wife were babysitting. The stories by NPR, ProPublica and Frontline about Lopez were part of a series on the changing scientific understanding of what causes child deaths. The reporting found 23 cases of people in the U.S. and Canada who had been falsely accused or convicted. The story on Lopez suggested that medical evidence showed Vas did not die as a result of deliberate abuse, but because she had an extreme blood clotting disorder — one that left marks and bleeding that mimicked signs of child abuse. So why would Lopez enter into this plea deal? It may be because his only alternative was going back to trial, and risking another conviction . Last year, Lopez explained that the first time he went to trial he believed innocent people don't get convicted. Then he spent nine years in prison. This time, he would have had key medical experts and a more developed defense. Yet he still faced the risk of conviction. "I don't think any one of us believes he would be convicted," Heather Kirkwood, an attorney who handled Lopez's appeal, said earlier this week. "But in these cases, there's no guarantee."
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/01/04/168653383/former-prisoner-secures-his-freedom-by-admitting-to-a-felony
The original NPR/ ProPublica and Frontline story:
http://www.propublica.org/article/the-hardest-cases-when-children-die-justice-can-be-elusive
PUBLISHER'S NOTE
I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site.
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 found at:
http://www.thestar.com/topic/
Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.
Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.
