Saturday, July 13, 2013

George Souliotes: Arson "science." His lawyer says a plea was extorted from an innocent man. The Modesto Bee.

STORY: "McBirney on Souliotes case: Plea extorted from innocent man,"  by Jimmy McBirney, lead counsel in federal court and a member of his most recent state trial team. Published by the Modesto Bee on July 11, 2013.

GIST: "The Bee's July 5 editorial on the long-overdue release of innocent man George Souliotes argues that the end to his terrible ordeal was "unsatisfactory" because it did not conclude with a third trial. With all due respect, the editorial gets both its facts and its conclusion quite wrong.........Your editorial notes that the federal court "ruled that tactical errors in Souliotes' defense prevented his client from being adequately represented" at his trial, but it tellingly ignores the federal court's most important finding: The federal court first considered all of the evidence in Souliotes' case and concluded in a 99-page decision that Souliotes was "actually innocent." That decision had nothing to do with the adequacy of Souliotes' representation at trial, and was only concerned with whether or not Souliotes set the fire. Like advances in DNA testing, new fire science and forensic methods have gutted the case against Souliotes and proven his innocence. The federal court considered this evidence and found Souliotes was innocent, and that no reasonable juror viewing the current evidence would ever conclude he was guilty. It was only because of unusual rules that govern the federal justice system that the court then had to consider whether Souliotes received an inadequate defense before it could throw out his convictions. These same rules allowed the state to force Souliotes to face a third trial, despite the federal court's finding that Souliotes was innocent. After 16 years in prison, the 72-year-old Souliotes understandably chose to end his ordeal now rather than endure further months of incarceration while waiting for a jury to provide the same "definitive result" the federal court already provided. The only thing "unsatisfactory" is the district attorney's attempt to save face by extorting a plea for a failure to maintain working smoke alarms, rather than admitting her mistake of imprisoning an innocent man."

The entire commentary can be found at:

See story about pro bono work conducted in his defence: North California Innocence Project. "This case had an extraordinary contribution of pro bono assistance.  The herculean efforts of law firm of Orrick, Herrington and Sutcliffe, and in particular associate Jimmy McBirney, as well as associate Shannon Leung, and former associates Megan Crane, Randy Luskey, and Anne Hawkins resurrected this case from a draconian AEDPA death.  Their work in the federal court was nothing short of miraculous." (Thanks to the Wrongful Convictions Blog for drawing our attention to this post. HL);


Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to 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.