Henry Keogh; South Australia; Withholding by prosecutors of crucial report containing criticisms of autopsy conducted by former Chief Forensic Pathologist Dr. Colin Manock shown to have disastrous consequences for Henry Keogh. Andrew L. Urban writes: “The evidence of Dr Manock that, according to the pathology, Ms Cheney’s death was a homicide and that other causes, such as a medical event or an accidental fall, were excluded, either could not have been put forward in those terms or, if it had been, would have been largely discredited.” In other words, Henry Keogh would not have even faced trial without Dr Manock’s (incorrect) evidence. He would not have spent the best part of his life behind bars. Bad science put him there, legal error kept him there."

POST: "Henry Keogh: Forensic evidence withheld by the Crown," by Andrew L. Urban, published by "Pursue Democracy" on January 19, 2015.

GIST: "When Henry Keogh walked out of jail just in time for Christmas 2014, he had served 10 extra years in prison because new forensic evidence that would have cleared him of murder was kept from him in 2004. “Detailed criticisms of the autopsy were specifically identified by Professor Vernon-Roberts in 2004. This information was first known by defence counsel in late 2013 when it was made available to them.........Professor Pounder, like Professor Vernon-Roberts, rejects the results of the autopsy carried out by Dr Manock, results which were the very basis of the prosecution. His comments were also withheld from 2004 until 2013. The court found that “If this fresh and compelling evidence had been available at trial, then the mechanism of murder postulated in evidence by Dr Manock could not have been advanced before the jury. The grip theory advanced by Dr Manock and supported by Dr James would be no more than mere speculation. “The evidence of Dr Manock that, according to the pathology, Ms Cheney’s death was a homicide and that other causes, such as a medical event or an accidental fall, were excluded, either could not have been put forward in those terms or, if it had been, would have been largely discredited.” In other words, Henry Keogh would not have even faced trial without Dr Manock’s (incorrect) evidence. He would not have spent the best part of his life behind bars. Bad science put him there, legal error kept him there."

The entire post can be found at:

http://pursuedemocracy.com/2015/01/henry-keogh-forensic-evidence-withheld-by-the-crown/

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;