STORY: "Texas tries again," by Dave Mann, published by the National Journal Magazine on October 5, 2014. (Dave Mann is Editor of the Texas Observer);
GIST: "By refusing to investigate the Willingham case, Texas was turning its back on revolutionary advances in the field of fire science over recent decades. Methods traditionally used to investigate arson and win convictions turned out to be, in the words of leading arson expert Gerald Hurst, little more than "old wives' tales." For instance, burn patterns long thought to show that gasoline had been used to intentionally ignite a fire are now known to be false indicators. But as The Texas Observer reported in 2009, nearly 800 Texans remained in prison on arson convictions based in part on such evidence. One of them was Ed Graf, a Waco accountant serving a life sentence for a fire that killed his two stepsons in 1986. His conviction, according to Hurst and other fire scientists, rested on even shakier evidence than Willingham's. Even so, it seemed unlikely that Graf or the many others convicted on flawed arson evidence would ever have a second chance to clear their names. But on Oct. 6, Graf will be the first convicted arsonist in Texas to be retried—and could soon become the first to be freed from prison following the Willingham scandal. The retrial is the result of a sea change that began in 2011, when the Texas Legislature removed the Perry-appointed head of the state's Forensic Science Commission—the man who stalled the Willingham investigation—and the commission issued a report that termed the evidence leading to the execution outdated and unreliable. The following year, a new state fire marshal, Chris Connealy, asked six arson experts, along with the Lubbock-based Innocence Project, to reexamine his office's old arson cases. The state that had once stood by an almost certainly wrongful execution was becoming the nation's unlikely leader in pursuing justice for wrongly convicted arsonists. The forensic scientists found evidence of wrongful convictions in five cases, including Graf's, and found two others inconclusive for lack of evidence.
Graf's story is in many ways a textbook example of how arson
investigations can go awry.".........Can prosecutors convict a man of murder without any physical evidence
that murder was committed? If they do, prosecutors in other Texas
counties—and in other parts of the country as well—may be emboldened to
retry more people whose convictions rested on faulty arson
investigations. If they don't, it will be a significant victory for
innocence advocates—and for those whose convictions rest on
now-discredited science."
The entire story can be found at:
The entire story can be found at:
http://www.govexec.com/state-local/2014/10/texas-tries-again-can-lone-star-state-convict-man-where-theres-no-evidence-murder-was-committed/95819/?oref=dropdown
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/
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;
