Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Eddie Lee Howard Jr: Mississippi; Bite-Mark Forensics from controversial dentist Dr. Michael West come under scrutiny in this Death Row appeal. New York Times. (Must Read. HL);


COUNTDOWN: 15  days to Wrongful Conviction Day: (Thursday October 2, 2014);

STORY: "Mississippi death row case faults bite-mark forensics," by reporter Erik Eckholm, published by the New York Times on Deptember 15, 2014.

GIST: "In one of the country’s first nationally televised criminal trials, of the smirking serial murderer Ted Bundy in Florida in 1979, jurors and viewers alike were transfixed as dental experts showed how Mr. Bundy’s crooked teeth resembled a bite on a 20-year-old victim. Mr. Bundy was found guilty and the obscure field of “forensic dentistry” won a place in the public imagination. Since then, expert testimony matching body wounds with the dentition of the accused has played a role in hundreds of murder and rape cases, sometimes helping to put defendants on death row. But over this same period, mounting evidence has shown that matching body wounds to a suspect’s dentition is prone to bias and unreliable. A disputed bite-mark identification is at the center of an appeal that was filed Monday with the Mississippi Supreme Court. Eddie Lee Howard Jr., 61, has been on death row for two decades for the murder and rape of an 84-year-old woman, convicted largely because of what many experts call a far-fetched match of his teeth to purported bite wounds, discerned only after the woman’s body had been buried and exhumed. The identification was made by Dr. Michael West, a Mississippi dentist who was sought out by prosecutors across the country in the 1980s and 1990s but whose freewheeling methods “put a huge black eye on bite-mark evidence,” in the words of Dr. Richard Souviron, a Florida-based dental expert who helped identify Mr. Bundy in 1979, in an interview last week. Since 2000, at least 17 people convicted of murder or rape based on “expert” bite matches have been exonerated and freed, usually because DNA tests showed they had been wrongfully accused, according to research by the Innocence Project in New York. Dr. West was the expert witness in two of those cases. In six additional cases, one involving Dr. West and one involving Dr. Souviron, indictments and arrests linked to bite-mark identifications were dropped after new evidence showed that the matches were wrong. Still, without glaring new proof of innocence, courts have been reluctant to reopen cases based on even the most dubious of dental claims, leaving scores more defendants with questionable convictions to languish in prison or on death row, said Chris Fabricant, the Innocence Project’s director of strategic litigation. One of them is Mr. Howard. His appeal cites the scientific consensus that bite-mark identifications are unreliable, and questions the methods used by Dr. West. The appeal to reverse his conviction, prepared by the Mississippi Innocence Project at the University of Mississippi, also cites newly completed DNA testing that found no traces of Mr. Howard on the murder weapon, the body or elsewhere at the crime scene."
The entire story can be found at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/16/us/mississippi-death-row-appeal-highlights-shortcomings-of-bite-mark-identifications.html?_r=2

See related Innocence Project post: "The Innocence Project and the Mississippi Innocence Project filed a motion in the Mississippi Supreme Court today urging the court to vacate the capital murder conviction and death sentence of Eddie Lee Howard, Jr., based on new DNA evidence and improper bite mark analysis. Dr. Michael West, the forensic dentist who provided the only physical evidence linking Howard to the crime and who served as an expert in four other cases where the defendants were later found to be innocent, now maintains that the identification of suspects through bite mark analysis is entirely unreliable. Similarly, the American Board of Forensic Odontology (ABFO), the certifying board for forensic dentists, now concedes that it is impossible to identify a defendant from bite mark analysis where the universe of potential suspects is unknown. Male DNA recovered from the murder weapon excludes Howard as the source, and other testing undermines West’s assertions that the victim was bitten.........West became involved in the case as a result of the autopsy conducted by Dr. Steven Hayne. Hayne’s initial report did not mention finding bite marks, but three days after the burial, he requested to reexamine the body, explaining, “[there] was some question that there could be injuries inflicted by teeth.” With Hayne’s assistance, West examined and photographed the body, and using his self-pioneered technique called the “West Phenomenon,” which employs special glasses and ultraviolet light, West claimed to have observed bite marks on Kemp’s neck, arm and breast. Howard had become a suspect in the case, and he voluntarily consented to having dental impression taken. Howard was missing his top four front teeth, and the dentist created a dentition that included his false teeth. ........Despite multiple challenging factors, including the victim’s advanced age, the fact that Howard had false teeth, the inherent distortion of skin due to decomposition and the positioning of the body during his examination, West told the jury at Howard’s second trial that he had no doubt that Howard was responsible for the bite mark on Kemp’s breast. (Dr. West stated: “Do I have any doubt [Howard’s] teeth made that bite on [Kemp’s] breast? I don’t have any.”) Between Howard’s first and second trials, West had been suspended from the ABFO for using terminology that was inconsistent with its guidelines, but had been reinstated in time to testify the second time. While West refrained from using the forbidden terminology – claiming the mark “indeed and without doubt” matched a suspect’s dentition – he explained to the jury that his opinion was no less certain than it would have been had he been allowed to say it “indeed and without doubt” matched to Howard. ......... On February 11, 2012, West was asked about bite mark analysis during a sworn deposition in an unrelated civil case, and he testified that he no longer believes bite mark comparison to be a scientifically valid discipline, stating, “I no longer believe in bite mark analysis. I don’t think it should be used in court. I think you should use DNA, throw bite marks out.” West’s change of heart is consistent with the conclusions reached by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in its 2009 report Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, which found that bite mark analysis lacks scientific validity. Significantly, NAS found that there is “no science” establishing how to quantify the probability of a “match” between a suspect’s dentition and a bite mark and “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual to the exclusion of all others.”  “It’s especially troubling that three years after the Attorney General promised to investigate the many cases where Dr. West provided testimony that could have contributed to wrongful convictions, not only is the state pursuing a death sentence for Mr. Howard despite West’s own admissions that his analysis is flawed, but it has also done nothing to follow through on its ethical obligations and promises to review the other cases,” said Tucker Carrington, Executive Director of the Mississippi Innocence Project. "

 http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/New_DNA_Evidence_and_Improper_Bite_Mark_Analysis_Point_to_Mississippi_Death_Row_Inmates_Innocence.php

Innocence Blog

New DNA Evidence and Improper Bite Mark Analysis Point to Mississippi Death Row Inmate's Innocence

Posted: September 15, 2014 5:20 pm

  189 33 1 0
The Innocence Project and the Mississippi Innocence Project filed a motion in the Mississippi Supreme Court today urging the court to vacate the capital murder conviction and death sentence of Eddie Lee Howard, Jr., based on new DNA evidence and improper bite mark analysis. Dr. Michael West, the forensic dentist who provided the only physical evidence linking Howard to the crime and who served as an expert in four other cases where the defendants were later found to be innocent, now maintains that the identification of suspects through bite mark analysis is entirely unreliable. Similarly, the American Board of Forensic Odontology, the certifying board for forensic dentists, now concedes that it is impossible to identify a defendant from bite mark analysis where the universe of potential suspects is unknown. Male DNA recovered from the murder weapon excludes Howard as the source, and other testing undermines West’s assertions that the victim was bitten.

 The New York Times reported that in the more than 30years since forensic dentistry was popularized during the televised trial of serial murderer Ted Bundy, mounting evidence has shown that matching body wounds to a suspect’s dentition is prone to bias and unreliable.

 Howard, who has been on death row for the past two decades, could join the 18 people across the country that have already been proven innocent and exonerated by DNA testing after serving time on death row.

The Times reports: “Still, without glaring new proof of innocence, courts have been reluctant to reopen cases based on even the most dubious of dental claims, leaving scores more defendants with questionable convictions to languish in prison or on death row, said Chris Fabricant, the Innocence Project’s director of strategic litigation.”

 Howard was twice convicted of the 1992 murder of Georgia Kemp, who was murdered in her home. His first conviction was reversed by the Mississippi Supreme Court, which found that the trial court erred in allowing Howard to represent himself at his own death penalty trial. But in both the first and second trials, the prosecution was based on West’s testimony and statements allegedly made by Howard to law enforcement. Howard, who has struggled with severe mental health issues, never confessed to the crime, but allegedly told a detective after his arrest that “the case was solved.” He told police to investigate a handful of other people but, instead, the medical examiner had the victim’s body exhumed so West could look for bite marks. Without showing any evidence of his findings, West testified “to a reasonable medical certainty” that Howard was the biter.

 Throughout his three-decade career, West investigated more than 5,200 deaths and more than 300 bite marks. Two years ago, his thinking shifted drastically and he indicated in a 2012 deposition that bite mark analysis was open to error, and that with the availability of DNA testing it should not be used in court.

 In 2010, the Mississippi Supreme Court granted Howard the right to conduct DNA testing on crime scene evidence, which included several swab sticks, most likely from the rape kits, as well as external, vaginal and oral/anal swabs; a butcher knife suspected to be the murder weapon; a random box of matches, knee-high nylons; a pair of house slippers; a nightgown belonging to the victim; the telephone severed telephone cord and the sheets from the victim’s bed. The analysts were unable to find male DNA on any of the evidence except the knife, which contained a small amount of male DNA on the blade that did not belong to Howard.

 Howard’s lawyers argue in the motion that given the new revelations regarding bite mark analysis as well as the new DNA evidence excluding Howard as the source of DNA recovered on the knife used in the murder, Howard’s conviction should be overturned.

A copy of the legal papers filed today is available here. Howard is represented by Tucker Carrington and Will McIntosh of the Mississippi Innocence Project, as well as Vanessa Potkin, senior staff Attorney, and Chris Fabricant, director of strategic litigation, of the Innocence Project.

 Read more in the press release.

 Read the full article.


Tags: Mississippi, Unvalidated/Improper Forensics, Bitemark Evidence, Death Penalty
- See more at: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/New_DNA_Evidence_and_Improper_Bite_Mark_Analysis_Point_to_Mississippi_Death_Row_Inmates_Innocence.php#sthash.iGv70A6Z.dpuf
The Innocence Project and the Mississippi Innocence Project filed a motion in the Mississippi Supreme Court today urging the court to vacate the capital murder conviction and death sentence of Eddie Lee Howard, Jr., based on new DNA evidence and improper bite mark analysis. Dr. Michael West, the forensic dentist who provided the only physical evidence linking Howard to the crime and who served as an expert in four other cases where the defendants were later found to be innocent, now maintains that the identification of suspects through bite mark analysis is entirely unreliable. Similarly, the American Board of Forensic Odontology, the certifying board for forensic dentists, now concedes that it is impossible to identify a defendant from bite mark analysis where the universe of potential suspects is unknown. Male DNA recovered from the murder weapon excludes Howard as the source, and other testing undermines West’s assertions that the victim was bitten. - See more at: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/New_DNA_Evidence_and_Improper_Bite_Mark_Analysis_Point_to_Mississippi_Death_Row_Inmates_Innocence.php#sthash.JJR24UdR.dpuf
The Innocence Project and the Mississippi Innocence Project filed a motion in the Mississippi Supreme Court today urging the court to vacate the capital murder conviction and death sentence of Eddie Lee Howard, Jr., based on new DNA evidence and improper bite mark analysis. Dr. Michael West, the forensic dentist who provided the only physical evidence linking Howard to the crime and who served as an expert in four other cases where the defendants were later found to be innocent, now maintains that the identification of suspects through bite mark analysis is entirely unreliable. Similarly, the American Board of Forensic Odontology, the certifying board for forensic dentists, now concedes that it is impossible to identify a defendant from bite mark analysis where the universe of potential suspects is unknown. Male DNA recovered from the murder weapon excludes Howard as the source, and other testing undermines West’s assertions that the victim was bitten. - See more at: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/New_DNA_Evidence_and_Improper_Bite_Mark_Analysis_Point_to_Mississippi_Death_Row_Inmates_Innocence.php#sthash.v2M1nIaw.dpuf
For background on Wrongful Conviction Day see the following link:
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2014/06/wrongful-convictions-day-aidwyc.html
 
Interested participants may sign up by contacting Win Wahrer of The Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted at: winwahrer@aidwyc.org.

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;  

The Innocence Project and the Mississippi Innocence Project filed a motion in the Mississippi Supreme Court today urging the court to vacate the capital murder conviction and death sentence of Eddie Lee Howard, Jr., based on new DNA evidence and improper bite mark analysis. Dr. Michael West, the forensic dentist who provided the only physical evidence linking Howard to the crime and who served as an expert in four other cases where the defendants were later found to be innocent, now maintains that the identification of suspects through bite mark analysis is entirely unreliable. Similarly, the American Board of Forensic Odontology, the certifying board for forensic dentists, now concedes that it is impossible to identify a defendant from bite mark analysis where the universe of potential suspects is unknown. Male DNA recovered from the murder weapon excludes Howard as the source, and other testing undermines West’s assertions that the victim was bitten. - See more at: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/New_DNA_Evidence_and_Improper_Bite_Mark_Analysis_Point_to_Mississippi_Death_Row_Inmates_Innocence.php#sthash.JJR24UdR.dpuf
Posted by at