Thursday, May 16, 2013

Jeffrey Havard: An open letter from Lori Howard, "a concerned United States Citizen," calling on Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood to review this disturbing death row case which is tainted by flawed medical testimony and grave doubts as to whether the child's death was a homicide.

 POST: "An open letter to Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood asking that he review Jeffrey Havard case," written by Lori Howard who describes herself as "a concerned United States citizen."

GIST: "Jeffrey Havard, as you know, has been on your Death Row since 2002, however, there are significant problems with his conviction.
  • State and Federal laws regarding cases that involve the type of accusations leveled at Mr. Havard, mandate that all evidence is to be reviewed by experts qualified in child sexual abuse. This was not done.
  • The State tried Mr. Havard without ever attempting to establish sexual assault with expert testimony on forensics.
  • The standard of proof for sexual assault, according to the law, was never met.
  • The prosecution tried this case, never establishing "to a degree of medical certainty" that a sexual assault had occurred.
  • Steven Hayne had informed the District Attorney’s Office, prior to trial, that there was not enough evidence to conclude a diagnosis of sexual battery.
  • The autopsy, which was never introduced into evidence, states that the child's body "was unremarkable" and makes no reference to sexual assault whatsoever.
  • Despite the law requiring the standard of proof, prosecutors put Mr. Havard’s life in jeopardy based only on unqualified and faulty observations, since the charge was predicated on injuries that did not exist.
  • Based on the above, this shows that no scientific methodology (differential diagnosis) was ever performed, since the so-called injuries did not exist.
  • Haynes testimony only rose to the level of possibility which did not meet the standard of proof in court, which is a "degree of medical certainty."
  • Emergency room staff (State's witnesses) claim to have seen rips, tears and bleeding in the anal area. Steven Hayne observed nothing of the sort in his autopsy report, and photographic evidence indicates no such thing.
  • Still, the ER staff gave this testimony in court and it was never challenged or objected to by the defense. Their "invalid testimony" was/is the State’s "case in chief."
  • This further underscores that none of the witnesses were qualified. "Observations" are not tests or forensic reviews.
  • Mr. Havards trial attorneys did no independent investigation of any kind, which the law requires in a capital murder case. Attorney Sermos admitted in open court that he did not understand the autopsy and had no medical knowledge.
  • The Court wrongfully denied Mr. Havard's request for his own medical expert. Instead, the Court recommended that his attorneys contact the State’s expert (Hayne).
  • Mr. Havard's attorneys did not contact Hayne or anyone else with the medical expertise they admittedly lacked.
  • The State and the Court improperly placed the burden of proof on Mr. Havard to explain the anal dilation (the ONLY binding factor in the case).
  • Jury selection for this capital murder case took one day (12/17/02), and the prosecution presented their case in one day (12/18/02), leading the trial judge to remark: "the case has been moving along quite satisfactorily."
  • Mr. Havards trial took just 48 hours from jury selection to sentencing........."
The entire post - and related matters including a petition,  can be found at:;

Dear reader: Stay tuned for future posts.. The Charles Smith Blog is following this case.


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:

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to:

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.