Bulletin: Dr. Aubrey Levin: Alberta. The former forensic psychiatrist's retrial on several counts of sexual assaults on young men he was assessing pursuant to court orders is set to begin on Monday. The Calgary Herald.

STORY: "Psychiatrist headed back to court for sexual assault trial," by reporter Daryl Slade, published by the Calgary Herald on February 28, 2014.

GIST: "A three-week retrial is set to begin Monday at Court of Queen’s Bench for former forensic psychiatrist Dr. Aubrey Levin for allegedly sexually molesting two of his patients.........The trial involves two of four counts of sexual assault that resulted in a hung jury following Levin’s first trial. The two other counts were subsequently stayed by the Crown. Levin, 74, who conducted court-ordered assessments on accused persons and wrote reports for court proceedings, was convicted on three counts of sexual assault and sentenced to five years in prison, He was acquitted on two others.........Levin appealed the three convictions and the arguments were heard last October, but the Alberta Court of Appeal has not yet ruled."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/crime-and-justice/Psychiatrist+headed+back+court+sexual+assault+retrial/9564127/story.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

Bulletin: Cameron Todd Willingham; Texas; Stunning revelation from the Innocence Project: New evidence suggests that his prosecutor deceived the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles about the testimony of a jailhouse informant in the state's bid to block a stay of execution. The Innocence Project;

RELEASE: "New evidence suggests Cameron Todd Willingham prosecutor deceived Board of Pardons and Paroles about informant testimony in opposition to stay of execution."

GIST: "The Innocence Project has filed new documents with the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles in its posthumous pardon petition for Cameron Todd Willingham pointing to new evidence, including a notation on the DA’s own file, strongly suggesting that jailhouse informant, Johnny Webb, received a deal from Navarro County District Attorney John Jackson in exchange for his testimony. This new evidence also strongly suggest that Jackson, who had since become a district court judge, deceived the Board of Pardons and Paroles and the Navarro County District Attorney’s Office about the existence of a deal, which had they known about, would have almost certainly spared Willingham’s life.........

After Willingham’s execution, the Innocence Project asked the then newly formed Texas Forensic Science Commission to investigate Willingham’s case and the case of Ernest Willis who was convicted based on similarly flawed evidence but later exonerated for the arson murder that put him on death row.  During the course of that multi-year investigation, nine of the nation’s leading arson scientists reviewed the evidence in Willingham’s case and all agreed that the original testimony of the fire investigators was based on outdated arson science. A summary of these findings is available at http://www.innocenceproject.org/willingham. The commission was ultimately barred by the Texas Attorney General from making a finding on whether the state was negligent in the wrongful execution of Willingham, however the commission acknowledged that unreliable arson science facilitated Willingham’s conviction and recommended that the state conduct a review to determine if there are other people in Texas prisons who were wrongly convicted based on faulty arson science. The new evidence the Innocence Project submitted to the Board of Pardons and Paroles earlier this month casts even further doubt on the highly unreliable testimony of Webb who incredibly claimed that Willingham told him within earshot of several law enforcement employees that he committed the crime to protect his wife who had injured or killed one of the children the night before."  

The entire release can be found at:

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm#search/cates/144797c857e4ca34

See related New York Times story by reporter John Schwartz: "What has changed is that investigators for the Innocence Project have discovered a curt handwritten note in Mr. Webb’s file in the district attorney’s office in Corsicana. The current district attorney, R. Lowell Thompson, made the files available to the Innocence Project lawyers, and in late November one of the lawyers, Bryce Benjet, received a box of photocopies. As he worked through the stack of papers, he saw a note scrawled on the inside of the district attorney’s file folder stating that Mr. Webb’s charges were to be listed as robbery in the second degree, not the heavier first-degree robbery charge he had originally been convicted on, “based on coop in Willingham.” Mr. Benjet recalled a “rush of excitement,” he said, and thought, “This is what we’ve been looking for.” The Innocence Project submitted the note, which is not dated or signed, in a new filing to the board asking that it be included as part of its September request for a pardon. Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, called the note a “smoking pistol” in the case. “We’re reaching out to the principals to see if there is an innocent explanation for this,” he said. “I don’t see one.”"

 http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/28/us/evidence-of-concealed-jailhouse-deal-raises-questions-about-a-texas-execution.html?_r=0

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

Henry Keogh: Australia; Destruction of all remaining samples from the 1994 autopsy of Anna-Jane Cheney raises serious concerns - and a troubling question: how could the authorities who took this irreparable step have been unaware of Keogh's legal moves in his battle to free himelf when they destroyed the crucial evidence? InDaily.

STORY: "Concern about destruction of Keogh evidence," by reporter  Jeremy Roberts, published by InDaily on February 27, 2014.

GIST: "The state’s forensic science laboratory destroyed its last remaining evidence in the Henry Keogh murder conviction 15 months before its own policy required, it has been revealed. In a leave to appeal application by convicted murderer Henry Keogh in the Supreme Court this month the Director of Public Prosecutions Adam Kimber SC admitted that Forensic Science South Australia (FSSA) had destroyed all remaining samples from the 1994 autopsy of Anna-Jane Cheney. Keogh is serving a minimum 26-year sentence for the murder of his then-fiancee. This year he became only the second person to use new appeal rights to test his conviction based on new evidence, with the six-day hearing ending on Monday afternoon.........The revelations in court led to disquiet among Justice Nicholson and Keogh’s lead counsel Marie Shaw, QC. Nicholson said: “It’s an interesting proposition, given the evidence we heard yesterday about the importance of retaining this sort of material, virtually indefinitely.” Shaw pointed out that at the time of the destruction Keogh had a live petition before the Governor to have his conviction reviewed. This raises a separate question for FSSA to address. The State Records schedule requires that records not be destroyed if “an agency is aware that records may be required for use in litigation … or government inquiry …” It goes on: “In such cases the records must be retained until two years after all cases and inquiries are complete, including appeals.” Keogh and his lawyers have never lost interest in agitating his case and have brought about numerous court actions and at least four petitions to the Governor of South Australia for a review of the conviction. The destruction raises the question as to how FSSA could not have known of the continuing legal moves in relation to the Keogh conviction when it destroyed the autopsy tissues."

The entire story can be found at:

http://indaily.com.au/news/2014/02/27/state-forensic-lab-destroys-keogh-evidence/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

Megan Winfrey: Texas; Freed after six years in prison she has brought a law suit against investigators who used dogs to pick her out of a "scent lineup" - a widely questioned investigative technique using dogs with names like Quincy, James Bond and Clue. One of several cases involving former County Sheriff's Deputy Keith Pikett - NBC News.

STORY: "Freed after six years, woman sues cops over dog scent evidence," by M. Alex Johnson, published by NBC News on February 26, 2014.

GIST: "A Texas woman has sued investigators who used dogs to pick her out of a "scent lineup" — a widely questioned investigative technique that nonetheless put her in prison for six years before her murder conviction was overturned. The woman, Megan Winfrey, 25, was freed in April after the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals upheld its own ruling acquitting her in the 2004 slaying of a high school custodian. Her father, Richard Winfrey Sr., and her brother, Richard Winfrey Jr., have also been cleared in the case after trials that all used the same evidence. In a suit filed this week in U.S. District Court in Houston (PDF), Winfrey accuses San Jacinto County, current and former sheriffs and deputies and the dog trainer of malicious prosecution and civil rights violations.........All three cases used the same evidence: the dogs — named Quincy, James Bond and Clue — smelled Burr's clothing and then smelled samples of the Winfrey's clothes. They "alerted," indicating that their scents were on Burr's clothes, according to their trainer and handler, former Fort Bend, Texas, County Sheriff's Deputy Keith Pikett, who is named in the suit. Winfrey's suit calls such dog scent lineups "contrived" and "the worst of junk science." And she has a lot of company. In 2004, the FBI itself reported that "human scent is easily transferred from one person or object to another" and concluded: "Identifying someone's scent at a crime scene is not an indication of complicity." And in 2005, a second FBI report found "limited scientific data" to back up dogs' use to human scents. And in 2011, the National Institutes of Health found an "overwhelming number of incorrect alerts" in its own research trials."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/freed-after-six-years-woman-sues-cops-over-dog-scent-n39681
  
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Radley Balko: How DNA testing has exposed some gaping flaws in the system calling into question traditional assumptions on the value of eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence, confessions and the appeal process. (Must Read. HL);

POST: "How many more are innocent?" by Radley Balko, published by Reason on February 08, 2014; (Radley Balko is a senior editor at Reason magazine.)

SUB-HEADING:  "America's 250th DNA exoneration raises questions about how often we send the wrong person to prison."

GIST: "Whatever the percentage, DNA testing has exposed some gaping flaws in the system, calling into question traditional assumptions on the value of eyewitness testimony, forensic evidence, confessions, and the appeals process. (In several cases in which a defendant was later exonerated by DNA testing, appeals courts not only upheld convictions, but noted the "overwhelming evidence" of the defendants' guilt.) Scalia stated in Marsh that an exoneration "demonstrates not the failure of the system but its success," but it would be naive to believe the same systemic flaws exposed by these exonerations in the small subset of cases for which DNA testing is available don't also exist in the much larger pool of non-DNA cases. Put another way, if we now know because of DNA testing that misconduct by police and prosecutors produced a wrongful conviction in a high-profile murder case, it's probably safe to assume that the same problems led to the wrongful conviction of a number of routine drug suspects over the years, too. The difference is that there's no test to clear those people's names. So these 250 DNA exonerations aren't proof that the system is working. They're a wake-up call that it isn't. Instead of falling back on groups like the Innocence Project to serve as unofficial checks against wrongful convictions, lawmakers, judges, and law enforcement officials should be looking at why there's so much work for these organizations in the first place."

The entire post can be found at:

http://reason.com/archives/2010/02/08/how-many-more-are-innocent

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Bulletin: David Eastman; Australia; Inquiry hears that his prosecutors knew that their key forensic witness - Robert Barnes (analysis of gunshot residue) - was embroiled in a police investigation; But not a single piece of paper backs this up. The Canberra Times;

STORY: "Eastman prosecutors knew of probe," by reporter Christopher Knaus, published by The Canberra Times on February 25, 2014.

GIST: "The head detective on the Winchester case has denied his team had an ‘‘understanding’’ not to tell prosecutors that their key forensic witness was embroiled in an internal Victorian police investigation. But the inquiry has heard the Australian Federal Police and the Director of Public Prosecutions have been unable to unearth a single written document proving detectives warned their counterparts of the investigation  targeting the case’s most crucial forensic expert, Robert Barnes. Mr Barnes’ analysis of gunshot residue was a key link in the circumstantial case against David Harold Eastman for gunning down ACT police chief Colin Stanley Winchester in his neighbour’s driveway in 1989. Eastman is serving a life sentence for the murder, but has always maintained his innocence."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/eastman-prosecutors-knew-of-probe-20140225-33ey5.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

Annie Dookhan: Worcester Telegram & Gazette backs up Boston Bar Association's call for an independent audit process - to avoid more "unpleasant and expensive surprises." (I wouldn't have put it that way, but it works! HL);

EDITORIAL: "Extra set of eyes," published by the Telegram on February 12, 2014.

GIST: "The Boston Bar Association Monday called for an independent audit process to be added to the oversight of state drug labs, warning that an agency independent of the criminal prosecution apparatus is necessary in order to avoid a repeat of the scandal involving former lab worker Annie Dookhan, whose tampering with test results has invalidated thousands of convictions and cost taxpayers millions of dollars.  We concur with the BBA's recommendations, and urge Gov. Patrick and the Legislature to take all necessary steps, as soon as possible, to add truly independent oversight.
Massachusetts has made some progress since the full extent of Ms. Dookhan's misconduct was revealed. Unfortunately, the primary lesson learned from her crimes was just how woefully inadequate and lax oversight and safeguard procedures were at the labs handling highly sensitive evidence for thousands of criminal cases.   While we believe the vast majority of lawyers, prosecutors, police officers, technicians, and supervisors involved in handling evidence and analyzing the technical aspects of prosecutions are honest and hard-working, the Dookhan case offers all the evidence one needs that unpleasant and expensive surprises can occur.........In order to restore public confidence in crime lab procedures, another independent overseer is needed. Lawmakers and the governor should implement the BBA's recommendation."

The entire editorial can be found at:

http://www.telegram.com/article/20140212/NEWS/302129987/-1/NEWS04

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

Bulletin: Hank Skinner: Texas; Hearing on application for DNA testing update: Attorneys waiting for transcripts; The Pampa News;

STORY: "Skinner hearing update: Attorneys waiting for transcripts," published by the Pampa News on February 24, 2014;

GIST: "It’s been exactly three weeks since defense attorneys representing convicted murder Hank Skinner and the Texas Attorney General’s Office presented the results of DNA tests to Judge Steven R. Emmert of the 31st District from the crime scene samples that were collected and stored after the triple homicide occurred 20 years ago in Pampa. Evidence was not tested for DNA comparison before the trial in 1995. Right now, both parties are waiting for transcripts from the hearings. When they get those transcripts, each party will have 21 days to submit a proposed order to Emmert, Skinner’s attorneys told The Pampa News. The judge will then issue his ruling."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.thepampanews.com/police_and_fire/article_807990e2-9da6-11e3-8c19-001a4bcf6878.html

See Wikipedia account:  "On November 27, 2009, the defense team filed a complaint in federal court against the Gray County DA, Lynn Switzer, for refusing to release the evidence to the defense for private DNA testing, which she could conceivably do without a court order. On January 15, the magistrate in charge of the complaint recommended that it be dismissed and on January 20, the Federal district Judge affirmed the dismissal. This decision is being appealed at the Federal Court of Appeals. In January 2010, Hank Skinner wrote to Lynn Switzer a letter where he states that his former prosecutor John Mann lied about the results of the hair analysis, and concludes his letter "All what I am asking you, Madam, is to do the right thing and test the evidence.^[49] The right for Skinner to bring suit under Civil Rights laws claiming that Texas law regarding post-conviction DNA testing was too restrictive was affirmed by the Supreme Court in March, 2011......On May 26, 2011, the Senate of Texas voted unanimously for the Senate Bill 122, a Criminal Justice Reform Bill, expanding access to post-conviction DNA testing. This bill, would allow post-conviction testing "whenever there is biological evidence that has not previously been tested, or when the evidence can be subjected to newer techniques that might be more revealing than the results of an older test." The passing of this law would prevent Texas courts from blocking access to DNA testing in cases where DNA was not tested through "no fault of the defendant."^[50] Skinner has maintained that the decision to not test certain pieces of DNA evidence was not his. Skinner claims his trial counsel, Harold Comer, made the decision believing the results would further incriminate Skinner. Texas Senator Rodney Ellis, who authored the bill, said: "Under current law, innocence is often being left to chance [...] Strengthening Texas' post-conviction DNA law is an essential measure to improve justice in Texas."^[51] The bill was signed into law on June 17, 2011, effective September 11, 2011.[52]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hank_Skinner

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com. 

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com. 

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Chareles Smith Blog;

Annie Dookhan: Boston Bar Association predicts Massachusetts could face another drug lab crisis unless significant reforms are put into place. Associated Press;

STORY: "Mass. legal group says labs need more oversight," by reporter Denise Lavoie, published by Associated Press on February 10, 2014.

GIST: "The state could face another drug lab crisis if it doesn't put significant reforms in place, including the creation of an independent audit process, the Boston Bar Association said in a report released Monday. The BBA, a membership organization of about 10,000 attorneys, said more oversight is needed to make sure the state doesn't have a repeat of the crisis caused by former state chemist Annie Dookhan, whose misconduct at a state drug lab has jeopardized thousands of drug convictions. Dookhan was convicted of faking test results and tampering with samples at a state Department of Public Health drug lab where police sent substances to test in criminal cases."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.chron.com/news/crime/article/Mass-legal-group-says-labs-need-more-oversight-5220874.php

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
 
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the-charles-smith-award-presented-to_28.html
 
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Bulletin: Anthony Ray Hinton: Alabama; U.S. Supreme Court pays a visit to the world of forensic science - and finds a defence lawyer providing constitutionally deficient representation; American Bar Association;

STORY: "Lawyer who didn't know about permissible expert-witness was ineffective, SCOTUS says," by reporter Debra Cassens Weiss, published by the American Bar Association Journal on February 24, 2014.

GIST: "A lawyer who was unaware that Alabama no longer capped expert-witness fees at $500 provided constitutionally deficient representation to his client, the U.S. Supreme Court has found. In a summary disposition, the court sent the case of death-row inmate Anthony Ray Hinton back to a lower court to determine whether the poor performance was prejudicial. SCOTUSblog noted the per curiam decision (PDF).........The state contended the bullets fired in all three restaurant robberies were fired from the recovered gun. Hinton’s lawyer was able to find just one rebuttal expert—one the lawyer himself deemed a poor choice—after a judge capped expert fees at $500 for each of the two murder cases. The judge believed Alabama’s cap was still in effect, saying it’s “the statutory maximum as far as I know on this and if it’s necessary that we go beyond that then I may check to see if we can.” Hinton’s lawyer didn’t ask for more money, and didn’t know that Alabama law had been amended to allow reimbursement for expenses reasonably incurred. The lone defense expert was “badly discredited” on cross-examination by the prosecutor, the opinion says. The expert’s expertise was in military ordnance, rather than firearms and toolmark identification, he admitted he had problems using the microscope at the crime lab, and his degree was in civil engineering, obtained more than a half century before the trial. The court highlights this portion of the prosecution's cross-examination of the expert: Q: Do you have some problem with your vision? A. Why, yes. Q. How many eyes do you have? A. One. On appeal, three new experts were unable to conclude the bullets came from the gun found at Hinton’s home. One of the state's trial experts refused to cooperate with the defense experts on appeal."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.abajournal.com/mobile/article/lawyer_who_didnt_know_about_permissible_expert-witness_fee_was_ineffective_

See Wrongful Convictions Blog:"Interesting SCOTUS forensics Case: "Today, in Hinton v. Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court found the trial attorney’s failure to request funding for a sufficient expert to challenge the State’s ballistics experts constituted ineffective assistance of counsel."

 http://wrongfulconvictionsblog.org/2014/02/24/interesting-scotus-forensics-case/

See: Equal Justice Initiative: "Although Mr. Hinton was never charged with this third crime, state lab technicians stated that bullets recovered from all three crimes were fired from the same weapon and claimed that they matched a weapon recovered from Mr. Hinton’s mother. Based on this gun evidence, the state charged Mr. Hinton with the two murders even though there was no other evidence linking Mr. Hinton to the crimes. In 1999, EJI took on Mr. Hinton’s case. In June 2002, three of the country’s top gun experts testified that they had examined the state’s evidence and concluded that the crime bullets could not be matched to the weapon recovered from Mr. Hinton’s mother and that the state had erred in making that claim. The trial court did not rule on the evidence of Mr. Hinton’s innocence for over two years and then signed an order prepared by the state denying relief to Mr. Hinton, in part because the evidence of innocence presented was “too late.” EJI appealed the court’s order and sought relief from the Alabama Supreme Court. The Alabama Supreme Court granted certiorari to review only one issue: whether Mr. Hinton’s rights to effective legal representation were violated when his appointed trial lawyer hired a retired civil engineer to testify about the gun evidence at trial. The prosecutor, judge, and defense counsel knew that Mr. Hinton could not have been convicted unless the jury believed the state's forensic experts' testimony that microscopic markings on the bullets showed they were all fired from Mrs. Hinton's gun. Mr. Hinton's lawyer testified later that he could not find a qualified firearms expert for the money the trial court allotted to him, so he put on a man who agreed to do the case for free, but who had never done forensic firearms analysis, whose experience with guns was limited to working with heavy artillery in the military around World War II, who did not know how to operate the comparison microscope needed to examine the evidence, and had only one eye. The prosecutor at trial characterized him as a charlatan who was "no expert at all." In 2008, the Alabama Supreme Court sent the case back to the lower court to determine whether this defense witness was a qualified and competent expert in forensic firearms identification. The judge who presided over the trial and postconviction proceedings retired, and a new judge -- without hearing any new evidence about the witness's qualifications -- decided that the witness was qualified because he knew more about guns than the average person on the street."

http://www.eji.org/deathpenalty/innocence/hinton

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog. 

Lana Canen; South Bend Indiana; Innocent woman alleges she spent eight years in prison because a police officer made an erroneous fingerprint analysis; She alleges that Sheriff's Deputy Dennis Chapman, who has not yet filed a defence to the action, touted himself as an expert in fingerprint analysis, but lacked the necessary qualifications, which was not disclosed to the defense. South Bend Tribune.

PUBLISHER'S VIEW:  I will be following this lawsuit with great interest as so many questions are swirling around it? How easy is it for a fingerprint examiner to make a mistake? Aren't there safeguards which allow these errors to be detected before a person is arrested and put through the crap shoot of a trial?  How do we know, if in fact, the fingerprint examiner erred, that he hasn't  erred in other cases? Shouldn't there be a public inquiry into what went wrong, to satisfy the public that such mistakes will not happen again?  Why did it take eight years for Lana Canen to be finally released? Why wouldn't the authorities be horrified by what happened and do their best to  compensate her for the years she has lost, without having to be sued.  To say "we are so,  oh so sorry."   And to think, this is Indiana, the same state that put former police officer David Camm through three trials  on tainted police expert testimony while his family's murderer went free.  Hmmmmmm!  What a hugely troubling, Kafkaesque  case.

Harold Levy. Publisher. The Charles Smith Blog.

STORY: "Freed woman suing Elkhart police,"  by reporter Madeline Buckley, published by the Grand Bend  Tribune on February 19, 2014. (Thanks to the Wrongful Convictions Blog for drawing this case to our attention. HL); 

GIST: "Lana Canen was released from prison wearing the sweats she bought from the commissary. She had one pair of socks and underwear. And that was all.........Now, she is suing the authorities she claims falsely imprisoned her for eight years. The lawsuit -- filed in January in Elkhart County but moved to federal court in South Bend on Tuesday -- revolves around an erroneous fingerprint identification by then-Elkhart County sheriff's Deputy Dennis Chapman, a defendant. Elkhart Police Department Officer Mark Daggy is also named as a defendant for what the suit says was advocating for Chapman's fingerprint analysis expertise. "This all could have been avoided," Canen told The Tribune during a tearful interview on Tuesday. A jury in 2005 convicted Canen and Andrew Royer of murdering Helen Sailor, a 94-year-old Elkhart woman. All three individuals lived in the same apartment complex. Police said at the time they believed Canen and Royer robbed and strangled Sailor. Royer reportedly confessed to police that he killed the woman. But police said they linked Canen to the slaying with a fingerprint at the crime scene Chapman matched to Canen. Canen was sentenced to 55 years in prison. Later, though, Canen won a post-conviction relief hearing after her attorney hired an independent examiner to analyze the print. Subsequently, Chapman said he made a mistake with the analysis. The Indiana State Police lab then excluded Canen as the source of the fingerprint. Elkhart County prosecutors declined to retry her.........The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Canen by attorneys Cara Wieneke and Michael Sutherlin, alleges that Chapman touted himself as an expert in fingerprint analysis, but lacked the necessary qualifications, which was not disclosed to the defense.The complaint says Daggy and Chapman violated Canen's Fourth and 14th Amendment rights. It claims her right to due process was violated, that she was falsely imprisoned and maliciously prosecuted.

"If there had been any other evidence to connect Lana to the murder, they would have retried the case," Sutherlin said. He said the erroneous fingerprint analysis was a matter of willful indifference, going beyond just negligence."....Chapman's attorney, Michael DeBoni, said his client did not intentionally deprive Canen of any rights, though he said he has not had the opportunity to examine the case in depth."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.southbendtribune.com/news/crime/freed-woman-suing-elkhart-police/article_653370dc-9955-11e3-9e4d-001a4bcf6878.html

See also: National Registry of Exonerations account, by Maurice Possley: (Excellent backgrounder. I got angrier and angrier as I read it. HL); "One of the investigating officers believed that Canen had previously burglarized apartments in the building, although there was no proof. Canen was questioned and denied any involvement in the crime. Police then interviewed a neighbor of Canen. The neighbor, who was a heavy drug user, told police that Canen had made incriminating statements, such as “no one was supposed to get hurt.” Canen was arrested on September 3, 2004—almost a year to the day after Royer was charged—and her fingerprints were compared to fingerprints found in the victim’s apartment.Elkhart police asked Dennis Chapman, a detective with the Elkhart County Sheriff’s Department, to conduct a comparison of a latent print found on a plastic pill container in Sailor’s apartment with Canen’s fingerprints. Although Chapman had some training in fingerprint classification and the examination of rolled fingerprints, he had no training in conducting latent fingerprint comparisons. After conducting his examination, he concluded the latent print matched Canen’s left little finger. Canen was then charged with murder. Royer and Canen went on trial together in Elkhart County Circuit Court. The primary evidence against Royer was his confession. The principal evidence against Canen was the fingerprint and the neighbor who testified that Canen had made incriminating statements. Chapman testified that he had matched Canen’s fingerprint to the print on the plastic container. Canen testified and denied any involvement in the crime. “I’ve never been in that apartment,” she told the jury. The defense had hired a retired detective to analyze Chapman’s finding, but did not call the detective as a witness after the detective concurred with Chapman’s conclusion. On August 10, 2005, the jury convicted Royer and Canen. They were each sentenced to 55 years in prison. Their convictions were upheld by the Court of Appeals of Indiana.In 2010, Canen filed a pro se post-conviction petition and attorney Cara Schaefer Wieneke was appointed to represent Canen. Wieneke requested that the prosecution provide access to the fingerprint evidence so that it could be evaluated by private expert, but the prosecution objected and her motion was denied.  When Wieneke discovered that the detective hired by Canen’s lawyer was not qualified to do fingerprint analysis and that Canen’s lawyer had not investigated Chapman’s credentials, she again asked for the evidence, but was again rebuffed. So Wieneke then sent the high-resolution photographs of the fingerprints that had been used as evidence at the trial to an independent fingerprint examiner, who concluded that Canen’s fingerprint did not match the print on the pill container. Wieneke then filed an amended post-conviction motion for a new trial on behalf of Canen, contending that Canen’s lawyer had provided an inadequate legal defense and that Canen was innocent.  Wieneke tracked down Canen’s former neighbor who recanted her testimony that Canen had made incriminating statements.  At a deposition prior to the hearing, the woman claimed she couldn’t recall whether Canen made the statements or not. During a deposition of Chapman in September 2011, in preparation for a hearing on the motion, Chapman said he had performed more than 100 fingerprint comparisons and that he had never been wrong. In the summer of 2012, as the hearing date neared, Wieneke sent the prosecution a PowerPoint presentation prepared by her expert. After prosecutors showed the presentation to Chapman, he became concerned and asked to review the original evidence. After reviewing the fingerprints, Chapman concluded that he had made a mistake—the fingerprint on the pill container was not Canen’s after all. At the August 16, 2012 hearing, Chapman said he had changed his opinion because of additional training he had received since he testified against Canen. He admitted he had overstated his fingerprint examination experience during the trial and that he had felt pressure to help the Elkhart police department solve the crime. The prosecution—which previously had objected to Wieneke’s request that the Indiana State Police Crime Lab examine the evidence—decided to send the evidence to the lab. Analysts at the lab confirmed the latent fingerprint was not Canen’s. Wieneke filed a motion for Canen’s immediate release from prison and the prosecution offered to negotiate a plea agreement for time served. On September 28, 2012, after Canen refused to negotiate, the Elkhart County District Attorney’s Office joined in the motion for Canen’s release. On November 2, 2012, the conviction was vacated, the charge was dismissed and Canen was released from prison."

http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4047

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear Reader. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are 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:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:
I look forward to hearing from readers at:

hlevy15@gmail.com.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.