Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Bulletin: Major development; Analysis of scientific bases for ten forensic disciplines announced by American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS): Bloodstain Pattern Analysis; Digital Evidence; Fire Investigations; Firearms and Toolmarks/Ballistics; Footwear and Tire Tracks; Forensic Odontology - Bitemark Analysis; Latent Fingerprints; Trace Evidence-Fibers; Trace Evidence - Hair; Trace Evidence - Paint & Other coatings; Analysis intended "to determine what existing research supports current practice as well as what additional research would strengthen the scientific foundation of each field."

"The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) announced that it will begin conducting an analysis of the scientific bases for ten forensic disciplines. Through funding from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation, AAAS plans to review the current scientific studies regarding the procedures and testimony of forensic experts. This analysis is a direct response to some members of the National Commission on Forensic Science’s comment that further study is needed to ensure that forensic science meets Daubert’s requirements for validity and reliability in expert testimony. In 2009, the National Academy of Sciences released a report entitled Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward which found that “forensic science disciplines suffer from an inadequate research base: Few forensic scientists have the opportunity to conduct research, few academics are positioned to undertake such research, and, importantly, the funding for forensic research is insufficient.” p. 187. The AAAS analysis will be conduction quality and gap analysis of the following forensic fields in order to determine what existing research supports current practice as well as what additional research would strengthen the scientific foundation of each field: "Bloodstain Pattern Analysis; Digital Evidence; Fire Investigations; Firearms and Toolmarks/Ballistics;  Footwear and Tire Tracks; Forensic Odontology- Bitemark Analysis; Latent Fingerprints; Trace Evidence- Fibers; Trace Evidence- Hair, and  Trace Evidence- Paint & Other coatings."
https://ncforensics.wordpress.com/2015/06/29/aaas-responds-to-the-nass-call-for-research-backing-forensic-science/
Wikipedia informs us that the American Association for the Advancement of Science  is "an American international non-profit organization with the stated goals of promoting cooperation among scientists, defending scientific freedom, encouraging scientific responsibility, and supporting scientific education and science outreach for the betterment of all humanity. It is the world's largest general scientific society, with 126,995 individual and institutional members at the end of 2008,[ and is the publisher of the well-known scientific journal Science, which has a weekly circulation of 138,549."
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Association_for_the_Advancement_of_Science

Bulletin: Arkansas: Eugene Pitts; The Arkansas Supreme Court has granted this inmate serving a life sentence for a 1979 murder after learning that his conviction was tainted by testimony from discredited FBI hair match analyst Michael Malone. "He is the second Arkansas inmate to get court-appointed help in petitioning for post-conviction relief after news that the forensic testimony used against him and potentially thousands of others went beyond the limits of science." Arkansas Today;

"The Arkansas Supreme Court gave an inmate serving a life sentence for a 1979 murder an attorney after the inmate demonstrated that his conviction was tainted by testimony from a discredited FBI expert. Eugene Pitts, 67, has been in prison since since his 1979 conviction for kidnapping and slaying a romantic rival, Dr. Bernard Jones. He is the second Arkansas inmate to get court-appointed help in petitioning for post-conviction relief after news that the forensic testimony used against him and potentially thousands of others went beyond the limits of science. Pitts' case is one of at least three Arkansas cases regarding the hair analysis that are being reviewed by officials from the FBI and the Department of Justice, as well as the Innocence Project. Since the review began in 2012, federal officials determined that 26 of their 28 non-DNA microscopic hair-follicle analysts gave "erroneous" testimony in 95 percent of the cases they reviewed.  The court appointed John Wesley Hall to guide Pitts through his petition, weeks after they appointed another Little Rock defense attorney, Jeff Rosenzweig, to help Lonnie Strawhacker. That prisoner's life sentence for rape and battery charges were partially the result of testimony from the same discredited expert who testified against Pitts......... In addition to his voice identification, prosecutors relied on dirt samples found in the stolen car that matched samples on Pitts' shoes, as well as the testimony of FBI analyst Michael Malone, who testified that Pitts' hair virtually matched a hair found at the crime scene. Pitts has filed several appeals in both state and federal courts over the last several decades, trying and failing to get a DNA analysis of the hair found at the crime scene that experts linked to him. Sometime in 2008, the hair sample disappeared. In November, the Justice Department notified Pitts that Malone was one of several analysts who had provided unreliable expert testimony. While advocates for convicts like the Innocence Project say that the science proffered by Malone was in and of itself faulty, the FBI still considers microscopic hair analysis a valid technique if done properly. It now uses the analysis to supplement DNA testing, which became the standard for forensic testing in the late 1990s. Hall said that procedurally, Pitts' efforts for relief could prove difficult because there isn't a ready rule that allows for appeals of this nature. But if given a chance, Pitts will be able to show that the hair analysis testimony was "nonsense," he said."
http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/jun/26/court-assigns-aid-to-convict-in-79-murd/

Monday, June 29, 2015

Bulletin: L.A. County District Attorney's Offices announces creation of a new team - including an investigator - to focus exclusively on possible wrongful convictions. Los Angeles will join 15 other D.A. offices in the U.S. that have also established similar groups, including in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Washington, D.C. LAist; 'Michael Hanline' is cited as one of several California cases in which inmates have been released after it was determined there had not been enough evidence to secure a guilty conviction. California Innocence Project: "Fortunately, after additional DNA testing and investigation by the California Innocence Project and Ventura County District Attorney’s Office, Hanline’s conviction was reversed. On November 24, 2014, Hanline was released from Ventura County Superior Court. He was the longest wrongful incarceration in California history."

The L.A. County District Attorney's Office announced today that a new team has been created to focus exclusively on possible wrongful convictions. This new conviction review unit will consist of three veteran prosecutors, an investigator and a paralegal according to the L.A. Times, and will focus on determining if inmates are actually innocent. In particular, the team will review any "credible" claims from inmates who have been convicted of serious crimes, CBS LA reports. In April, L.A. County District Attorney Jackie Lacey requested $1 million from the Board of Supervisors to fund this new department. Los Angeles will join 15 other D.A. offices in the U.S. that have also established similar groups, including in Brooklyn, Manhattan and Washington, D.C.........This new information can come from innocence projects, lawyers or the prisoners themselves. Claims can be made to the D.A.'s office in writing, and a formal investigation will be launched for any claims that are found to have merit.
Investigating convictions is work that innocence project groups around the country have already been doing. A possible wrongful conviction was also the subject of Serial, a wildly popular podcast that explored—without any definitive conclusion—the possibility that a Maryland man was wrongfully convicted of murdering his ex-girlfriend while they were both in high school. In the last few years, there have been a number of cases in California in which inmates have been released after it was determined there had not been enough evidence to secure a guilty conviction. Susan Mellen, who spent 17 years in prison for the murder of a Lawndale man, had her conviction thrown out in October after it was argued that the only evidence to put her behind bars was the testimony of a woman with a known history of lying to authorities. Obie Anthony, who also spent 17 years in prison after he was convicted of fatally shooting a man outside of a brothel in South L.A., was also released in 2011 after, once again, it was determined that the evidence against him came from a pimp who also lied.
Last year, DNA evidence helped to release Michael Hanline, who spent 36 years in prison for the murder of a truck driver. He was initially put away based on the testimony of his then-girlfriend, a known drug user. Brian Banks spent five years in prison after being convicted of raping a classmate at Polytechnic High School in Long Beach. He was released after the woman he was accused of raping admitted she had lied to a private detective. Banks will appear in an upcoming show that focuses on wrongful convictions.
http://laist.com/2015/06/29/wrongful_convictions_team.php

Bulletin: Leo Ackley; Michigan; Michigan Supreme Court grants him a new trial on murder conviction in 2011 death of a child on basis that he did not receive adequate representation because his defence lawyer did not call any experts to explain the child's injuries; "In this case involving the unexplained and unwitnessed death of a child, expert testimony was critical to explain whether the cause of death was intentional or accidental," Justice Bridget Mary McCormack wrote in the 16-page opinion. She wrote that the seven justices agreed that "defense counsel's failure to attempt to engage a single expert witness to rebut the prosecutor's expert testimony, or to attempt to consult an expert with scientific training to support the defendant's theory of the case, fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and created a reasonable probability that this error affected the outcome of the defendant's trial." Battlecreek Inquirer;

"The Michigan Supreme Court unanimously granted a new trial to a Battle Creek man convicted of murder in the 2011 death of a child. The high court said in an opinion released Monday that Leo Ackley, 28, is entitled to a new trial on charges of child abuse and felony murder in the 2011 death of 3-year-old Baylee Stenman. Ackley ws sentenced to life in prison without parole and is housed at the Oaks Correctional Facility in Manistee. "It's a great day to be alive," said defense attorney Andrew Rodenhouse of Grand Rapids. "It's a great day to get a new trial." Prosecutors alleged the child died from a blow to the head while Ackley's girlfriend, Erica Stenman, was working and he was caring for the child. The toddler was injured July 28, 2011, and died Aug. 1. Ackley has denied he harmed the child and said she was taking a nap and he found her on the floor next to the bed. The defense argued she died from injuries from the fall. But the issue before the Michigan Supreme Court was whether Ackley was inadequately represented by his trial attorney, Ken Marks......... The defense said Marks was ineffective because while the prosecution called five experts to explain injuries to the child, the defense didn't call any, even though the circuit court had provided money to the defense to hire an expert and Marks had the name of a forensic pathologist who might testify. Marks said at hearings after the trial that he did consult with Dr. Brian Hunter, forensic pathologist and used information from several meetings to attack the testimony of the prosecutor's experts. Marks said Monday he is being sued in a civil case and can't comment on the Supreme Court decision. "In this case involving the unexplained and unwitnessed death of a child, expert testimony was critical to explain whether the cause of death was intentional or accidental," Justice Bridget Mary McCormack wrote in the 16-page opinion. She wrote that the seven justices agreed that "defense counsel's failure to attempt to engage a single expert witness to rebut the prosecutor's expert testimony, or to attempt to consult an expert with scientific training to support the defendant's theory of the case, fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and created a reasonable probability that this error affected the outcome of the defendant's trial.""
http://www.battlecreekenquirer.com/story/news/crime/2015/06/29/leo-ackley-gets-new-trial-childs-death/29483497/

Bulletin: Glenn Ford: Sad, sad news: Glenn Ford, 65, who spent nearly 30 years on Angola's death row for a murder that prosecutors eventually conceded he did not commit, died in New Orleans early Monday (June 29), supporters announced, reports nola.com; "Supporters said all he had received from the state before his death was $20 for a bus ride home from prison."

Glenn Ford, who spent nearly 30 years on Angola's death row for a murder that prosecutors eventually conceded he did not commit, died in New Orleans early Monday (June 29), supporters announced. He was 65. Ford learned he had lung cancer shortly after his release from Angola on March 11, 2014. A news release from Ford's supporters said he died at 2:11 a.m., having been "surrounded by friends, loved ones and family in recent days." Ford, who was born in Shreveport on Oct. 22, 1949, was convicted of the 1983 murder of 56-year-old Isadore Rozeman, a Shreveport jeweler and watchmaker for whom Ford had done occasional yard work. Ford had always denied killing Rozeman, and on March 10, 2014, he was exonerated of the crime when the state vacated his conviction. State District Judge Ramona Emanuel voided Ford's conviction and sentence based on new information corroborating his claim that he was not present or involved in Rozeman's death, Ford's attorneys said. Ford was tried and convicted of first-degree murder in 1984 and sentenced to death. He spent 29 years, three months and five days in solitary confinement on Angola's death row. At the time of his release, Ford was the longest-serving death row inmate in the United States, supporters said. The final 15 months of Ford's life were spent outside prison walls but not without challenges..........Attorney General Buddy Caldwell's office filed a petition to deny Ford state-mandated compensation for his wrongful conviction and imprisonment, arguing  Ford failed to meet the law's "factually innocent" clause..........First Judicial District Court Judge Katherine Clark Dorroh sided with Caldwell in a ruling three months ago, deciding Ford was aware of the plan to rob Rozeman and failed to stop it, and took and sold items stolen during the robbery. The judge also ruled Ford tried to find buyers for the weapon used in Rozeman's murder, and that he tried to hinder the police investigation by initially giving a false name for the man he later identified as Rozeman's killer. Ford died while awaiting the outcome of separate federal lawsuits aimed at securing compensation for his imprisonment and failing health, which he claimed resulted from insufficient medical treatment while in prison. Supporters said all he had received from the state before his death was $20 for a bus ride home from prison."
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2015/06/exonerated_convict_glenn_ford.html

Bulletin: Identification; Important development: "The cross-race effect." Massachusett's highest court rules that judges must instruct jurors that eyewitnesses may have greater difficulty accurately identifying somone who is not their own race, unless both prosecution and defense agree that it’s not an issue. ..The court, ruling in the case, Commonwealth v. Elvin Bastaldo, said that the “cross-race effect ... has reached a near consensus in the relevant scientific community and has been recognized by courts and scholars alike. We remain convinced that jurors who are asked to evaluate the accuracy of an identification should be informed” of the effect."

The state’s highest court ruled Thursday that judges must instruct jurors that eyewitnesses may have greater difficulty accurately identifying somone who is not their own race, unless both prosecution and defense agree that it’s not an issue. “In criminal trials that commence after the issuance of this opinion, a cross-racial instruction should always be included when giving the model eyewitness identification instruction, unless the parties agree that there was no cross-racial identification,” the court ruled in an opinion written by Supreme Judicial Court Chief Justice Ralph Gants. The court had already ruled that the instruction should be given when “warranted by the evidence” and when the “witness and offender are of different races.” But the court said it had not previously defined what evidence was necessary and who, if anyone, should decide whether the witness and the person identified were of different races. Noting that the concept of race is “notoriously unclear,” the court settled on generally requiring the instruction, unless both sides agree it’s not part of the case..........The court, ruling in the case, Commonwealth v. Elvin Bastaldo, said that the “cross-race effect ... has reached a near consensus in the relevant scientific community and has been recognized by courts and scholars alike. We remain convinced that jurors who are asked to evaluate the accuracy of an identification should be informed” of the effect."
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/06/25/high-court-requires-judges-instruct-juries-that-cross-racial-identification-can-flawed/2vBrsgqcyNY4p35pREA3IO/story.html
See related Innocence Project post at:
http://www.innocenceproject.org/news-events-exonerations/massachusetts-high-court-to-inform-jurors-about-risk-of-cross-racial-misidentificationsthe-massachusetts-criminal-justice-system-made-a-significant-step-toward-preventing-wrongful-convictions-last-week-the-state2019s-supreme-judicial-court-announced-that

Anthony Graves: Texas; The fascinating story behind his journey from Death Row to overseeing the Houston Crime Lab; NBC News;


STORY: "How Anthony Graves went from Death Row to overseeing the Houston Crime Lab," by Jon Schuppe, published by NBC News on June 28, 2015. (Thanks to the CSI DDS Blog for drawing our attention to this story);

GIST: A few weeks ago, Anthony Graves began hearing rumors that he was under consideration for a spot on the Houston Forensic Science Center's board of directors — a post that would put him in a position to help the city prevent wrongful convictions. Wrongful convictions like the one that put him on death row. The simple fact that he was being considered for the job was another form of vindication for Graves, who was exonerated in the murders of six people and released from a Texas prison five years ago.........That appointment, submitted by Houston Mayor Anise Parker, became official on Wednesday, when the Houston City Council voted to put him on the nine-member board, which has replaced the scandal-plagued Houston Crime Lab......... At the same time, the Houston Crime lab was reeling from revelations of systemic malfeasance. In 2013, Parker and the city council created the Houston Forensic Science Center, overseen by an independent board of directors, to take over the $24 million-a-year lab's operations. The Houston Forensic Science Center, a government non-profit, is unusual in its makeup. It is insulated from the police department and City Hall, and its board includes Texas who have been cleared of violent crimes. Graves will replace Anthony Robinson, who was pardoned in 2000 by then-Gov. George W. Bush after Robinson spent a decade behind bars for a rape he didn't commit.........Graves' appointment came days after the man who put him in prison, Burleson County District Attorney Charles Sebesta, was disbarred for prosecutorial misconduct. Graves said he now looked forward to being reunited with the board's newly appointed chairman, Nicole Casarez. a lawyer and journalism professor who worked eight years to free him. "I'm more excited about the fact the the chairman is the lady who saved my life," Graves said. The entire story can be found at:
 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;

Sunday, June 28, 2015

Kirk Odom: District of Columbia; Described by the Guardian as, "The man who was jailed for 22 years – on the fantasy evidence of a single hair." Reporter Ed Pilkington's masterful analysis of the FBI's pseudoscientific hair matching debacle - and its massive destruction of innocent lives and ravaging of America's criminal justice system. HL;


STORY: "The man who was jailed for 22 years - on the fantasy evidence of a single hair," by reporter Ed Pilkington, published by the Guardian.

SUB-HEADING:  Kirk Odom spent 31 years in prison and on parole after pseudoscientific analysis that has finally been discredited. Now the FBI admits it was wrong – in Odom’s case, and many thousands like it

GIST: The prosecution case against Odom was flimsy at best. The victim had seen her assailant only fleetingly and in the dark, and the composite drawing that had been based on her description – the one that the police officer had thought looked just like him – referred to a black male of “medium complexion” when Odom’s skin is very dark. He also had a convincing alibi, having been asleep at his mother’s house at the time of the attack. With such shaky evidence, Odom assumed that the authorities would soon realise their mistake and the whole nightmare would go away. “I didn’t think anything was going to come of this, because I hadn’t done anything,” he says. But when it came to trial, prosecution lawyers produced their ace card. They had a hair, they told the jury. A single strand of “negroid” hair found on the victim’s nightgown that must have come from the rapist.........Special Agent Myron T Scholberg of the Federal Bureau of Investigation stood before the jury and delivered the coup de grace. He worked at the FBI’s grand-sounding microscopic analysis unit in Washington, he said, where he was a world-leading expert in the even grander-sounding science of “hair microscopy”. Scholberg told the jury that he had analysed the rapist’s hair found at the crime scene and compared it microscopically with a sample hair taken from Odom’s head. The comparison had produced an exact match, which was significant because that was a “very rare phenomenon”. Having performed thousands of similar hair examinations over the previous 10 years, the FBI agent told the court, there had been only eight or 10 times when hairs from two different people were so similar that he could not tell them apart – suggesting the firm probability that the rapist’s hair and Odom’s hair had come from the same scalp. The testimony, proudly invoking the certainties of science, did its job: the verdict came in guilty. On the basis of that single hair Kirk Odom was to spend the next 22 years in prison and a further nine living the half-life of a paroled sex offender. The trouble was, Scholberg’s testimony wasn’t scientific, and it wasn’t true. Fast forward to 2009, by which time Odom had spent 28 years in prison and on parole. In that year the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences released a landmark report into the practice of forensic analysis in the US. The report pointed out a basic problem with the idea that you can compare two hair samples and produce a positive match. No statistics exist, the council pointed out, that map the distribution of hair properties in the general population, and that renders it impossible to make any meaningful calculations about the probabilities of a particular hair type being found. As a result, “all analyst testimony … stating that a crime scene hair was ‘highly likely’ to have come, ‘very probably’ came, or did come from the defendant violates the basic scientific criterion that expressions of probability must be supported by data”. To put that in plain English, Scholberg’s statement to the jury at the Odom trial – that the match he had found between the defendant’s and the rapist’s hair was a “very rare phenomenon” – was complete fantasy..........Fast forward to 2009, by which time Odom had spent 28 years in prison and on parole. In that year the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences released a landmark report into the practice of forensic analysis in the US. The report pointed out a basic problem with the idea that you can compare two hair samples and produce a positive match. No statistics exist, the council pointed out, that map the distribution of hair properties in the general population, and that renders it impossible to make any meaningful calculations about the probabilities of a particular hair type being found. As a result, “all analyst testimony … stating that a crime scene hair was ‘highly likely’ to have come, ‘very probably’ came, or did come from the defendant violates the basic scientific criterion that expressions of probability must be supported by data”. To put that in plain English, Scholberg’s statement to the jury at the Odom trial – that the match he had found between the defendant’s and the rapist’s hair was a “very rare phenomenon” – was complete fantasy. Where did this pseudoscientific belief in the ability to match hairs come from? Chris Fabricant of the Innocence Project, which has led much of the work in DNA exonerations of innocent prisoners, and co-author William Carrington have traced it back to 1855 when prosecutors in Mississippi claimed they could identify the murderer of a cotton plantation owner by hairs found at the crime scene.  The sophistication of the analysis – or lack of it – barely changed over the next century. But what did change after the second world war was that the FBI embraced the technique, embellishing it with the scientific seal of approval.......... The sophistication of the analysis – or lack of it – barely changed over the next century. But what did change after the second world war was that the FBI embraced the technique, embellishing it with the scientific seal of approval.........Why then did it take a further 27 years to declare Odom innocent? And why did the FBI’s team of highly trained, internationally connected specialists cling to the procedure, putting thousands more potentially innocent people behind bars?.........Three men so far – Gates, Odom and Santae Tribble – have been exonerated as a result of the epic unravelling of the FBI’s faith in hair analysis. Everyone now agrees they are just the tiniest tip of a massive iceberg. With 2,500 cases awaiting review, and possibly tens of thousands more as yet unidentified across the 50 states, it could be many more years before this tale is done. “We rely on fair trials at which the government has to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt,” Levick said. “In perhaps tens of thousands of these cases, the defendant was denied a fair trial as the prosecution produced false or misleading testimony from hair analysts – we have to re-examine all of these cases, whether or not we can prove actual innocence.”"

The entire story can be found at:
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/23/fbi-evidence-single-hair-kirk-odom

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;

Saturday, June 27, 2015

Bulletin: 'Legalswipe': Can innovative computer technology - a new legal rights app - protect the public from police harrassment in Canada and the USA?

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: In Toronto there has been a strong outcry against  an offensive, discriminatory police practice called  'carding' -in which mainly  black people and people with brown skin who are not suspected of any crime  are randomly stopped, questioned and documented. Other police forces in Ontario use 'carding' - purportedly as an 'investigatory' tool as well. Toronto Mayor  John Tory initially came out strongly for abolition but appears to be wavering in the face of pressure from the police establishment.The Ontario government is also wavering under police pressure. It has asked for a couple of months  to study the issue.  So it's not surprising to see the launching today of a crowdfunding campaign for expansion of  "Legalswipe" - an app, described by its creators as, "social innovation designed to counteract policies such as carding in Canada and stop-and-frisk in the United States, which often result in the arbitrary detention of civilians." Today's release, at the link below,  says that currently users can film and upload an encounter with the police to a Dropbox account as it happens, while also receiving situation-specific legal advice and alerting emergency contacts.The innovations permitted by expansion will include support for French and Spanish, a lawyer review service and coverage of  international law beyond Canada and the United States; A launching event was addressed by Desmond Cole, a writer whose troubling account of over 50 police encounters was the cover story for the May 2015 issue of Toronto Life. Idil Burale, a community activist and Associate for the MaRS Solutions Lab, and Omar-Ha Redeye, a lawyer and professor at Ryerson University are also connected with the project. The release indicates that Legalswipe covers the law in both Canada and the United States and is situational: it provides legal rights information depending on the type of encounter, and provides users with the exact words to use. The app also sends a personalized, geotagged message to emergency contacts.  Its developer, Christien Levien, a recent law school graduate,  says: "“I am from a community where many people have first-hand experience with police assault and brutality. I was fortunate to have received a legal education and can now use my platform and experience to advocate for those who lack the resources to defend themselves.” says Levien.
The release can be found at: 
To help support Legalswipe, please visit: www.legalswipe.com


Bulletin: The Texas junk science writ; Grits for Breakfast salutes a new Texas bill (HB 3724) which allows courts to provide habeas corpus relief to defendants whose convictions hinged on junk science, whether because the forensic field at the time got it wrong or because an individual scientist did. Neat point made by a judge in the post; "(A)s a practical matter judges don't evaluate science but evidence, and in the case of forensics in particular, testimony." Prediction: Judges will be able to directly confront the most common source of false convictions based on forensics that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sees on a fairly regular basis. (Editors query: How long will it take other states who have denied habeas corpus in these circumstances to follow Texas's lead? HL);

"Solidifying grounds for relief under Texas junk-science writ: Grits has described the importance HB 3724 by Herrero/Whitmire in defending the jurisdiction of the courts to provide habeas corpus relief to defendants whose convictions hinged on junk science, whether because the forensic field at the time got it wrong or because an individual scientist did. Its passage comes with a decision pending from the Court of Criminal Appeals in Ex Parte Robbins III, which is now (un)complicated by the passage of a statute codifying their ruling in Robbins II. The upshot of HB 3724 is that Texas' junk-science writ will become a highly functional tool in the judicial arsenal to correct error in junk science cases, as opposed to a seldom-used one that ignores most erroneous expert testimony. As Judge Cheryl Johnson  pointed out in her concurrence in Robbins II, as a practical matter judges don't evaluate science but evidence, and in the case of forensics in particular, testimony. So HB 3724 ensured that judges could directly confront the most common source of false convictions based on forensics that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals sees on a fairly regular basis."
http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.ca/2015/06/bills-focused-on-forensics-habeas-alter.html

Bulletin: Amanda Knox tells CNN - and the readers of her Blog - "Keep fighting for your innocence." While highlighting the extraordinary work being done by the Innocence Project, she points out that: "At the time of the case against Raffaele Sollecito and me in Italy, there was no Innocence Project in Italy. There was no organization that championed individual cases of actual innocence and advocated — through research, education and legislation — against the causes of wrongful conviction. The Italian Innocence Project exists as of 2015 and consists of just two legal experts, for now."

"At the time of the case against Raffaele Sollecito and me in Italy, there was no Innocence Project in Italy. There was no organization that championed individual cases of actual innocence and advocated — through research, education and legislation — against the causes of wrongful conviction. The Italian Innocence Project exists as of 2015 and consists of just two legal experts, for now. But the Innocence Network, the cooperative conglomeration of state-by-state Innocence Projects here in the United States, has existed since the first project was founded by Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law at Yeshiva University in New York City in 1992. Since its founding, 329 people have been exonerated in the United States, 20 of whom were on death row. The Innocence Project was directly involved in 176 of those cases. Equally important, it has helped to find 140 real perpetrators, bringing justice to the victims. The Innocence Project not only works to overturn wrongful convictions of individual innocents, but also analyzes the causes of convictions that have been proven wrongful. It works to implement best practices and legislation that would help prevent future wrongful convictions, including: allowing convicts to carry out post-conviction testing, such as DNA testing; preservation of evidence; reforming eyewitness practices; recording interrogations to protect against false confessions/admissions; and abolishing the death penalty. Finally, the organization works to pass legislation that would provide financial compensation to the victims of wrongful conviction who, along with their freedom, lost their financial security to years of debt and inertia. The victims of wrongful conviction are deserving of justice and help. The dedicated persons involved in Innocence Projects throughout the United States, and now throughout the world, provide the necessary resources for those wrongfully convicted to be set free. They also provide the crucial network of support for those set free to reclaim their lives in freedom—something I was reminded of when I attended the recent Innocence Network conference in 2015, fully exonerated and eager to give back the support I have received to those who are still fighting."
http://www.amandaknox.com/2015/06/24/keep-fighting-for-your-innocence/

Friday, June 26, 2015

DNA testing: Another eye-opener from the Marshall Project; "The Surprisingly Imperfect Science of DNA Testing: How a proven tool may be anything but." By reporter Katie Worth; (Produced in partnership with Fusion and Frontline); (Must Read. HL);


STORY: "The surprisingly imperfect science of DNA testing: How a proven tool may be anything but," by reporter Katie Worth, published by the Marshall Project on June 24, 2015. (This story was produced in partnership with Fusion and FRONTLINE.)  Thanks to the Wrongful Convictions Blog for bringing this insightful article to our attention.  As the WCB points out: "DNA testing is the gold standard in forensic science, and it has been used to free hundreds of innocent inmates since 1989. But it has also falsely implicated other innocents, and it likely will do so even more as labs push the technological envelope to solve crimes, the Marshall Project reports here. Add human error to the equation, and you have the recipe for potential disasters." Must Read. HL;

GIST: "Fahnestock’s answer was a simple acknowledgement that even at its best, DNA science is not absolute. To Brian, it was proof that DNA cannot be trusted. In the three decades since DNA emerged as a forensic tool, courts have rarely been skeptical about its power. When the technique of identifying people by their genes was invented, it seemed like just the thing the justice system had always been waiting for: Bare, scientific fact that could circumvent the problems of human perception, motivation, and bias. Other forensic sciences had taken a stab at this task. Lie detector tests, ballistics, fingerprinting, arson analysis, hair examinations — all aim to provide evidence independent of the flawed humans wrapped up in an investigation. But those methods were invented by law-enforcement agencies eager for clues; it is now well established that their results are not always sound. With few alternatives, police and courts spent most of the 20th century hammering away at justice with the rubber tools of traditional forensics. DNA was different. It came up through science, which began, in the 1950s, to unravel the ways the double helix drafts our existence. When DNA profiling led to its first conviction in a U.S. courtroom in 1987, DNA had already vaulted through the validating hoops of the scientific method. Soon it was accompanied by odds with enough zeros in front of the decimal to eliminate reasonable doubt. Today, most of us see DNA evidence as terrifically persuasive: A 2005 Gallup poll found that 85 percent of Americans considered DNA to be either very or completely reliable. Studies by researchers at the University of Nevada, Yale, and Claremont McKenna College found that jurors rated DNA evidence 95 percent accurate and between 90 and 94 percent persuasive, depending on where the DNA was found. That faith could be shaken, but only when lawyers made a convincing case that a lab had a history of errors. Otherwise, the mere introduction of DNA in a courtroom seemed to stymie any defense. “A mystical aura of definitiveness often surrounds the value of DNA evidence,” the studies’ authors wrote. In many cases, this aura is deserved. The method is unequivocal when it tests a large quantity of one person’s well-preserved genes, when it’s clear how that evidence arrived at a crime scene, and when the lab makes no errors in its work. But those are not circumstances enjoyed by every criminal investigation........."


The entire post can be fund at:

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2015/06/24/the-surprisingly-imperfect-science-of-dna-testing

See Mike Bowers comments on this article by Mike Bowers on his informative site  CSIDDS: (Link below); "The best journalism on this subject I have so far seen in print. From the Marshall Project. It describes the influence of DNA popularity with juries juries amounting to I call a “Reverse CSI Effect.” The original CSI effect (according to prosecutors) being juries expecting more TV-like forensic sci evidence before rendering a guilty verdict. The “reverse” is juries’s incredibly high belief in DNA accuracy when it does show up in criminal trials. This article looks at the other side of that coin, It tells the tale of interpretative limits of Low Cell Number mixed DNA specimens, and the nether world of poor evidence preservation, bio-interpretation disagreement, expectational bias, and the unsettling disparity in DNA profiling options and standards. Juries don’t seem to understand how “amped up DNA” taken from a low number of cells and the use of diverse testing “assumptions” leads to diasagreement and doubts regarding its reliability. The article clearly says that RMP studies within multiple law enforcement run databases are frowned upon or outright considered secret. The scant look that IS available should influence a layman to wonder further about weaknesses in certain aspects. Even committees of experts within the field take a dim view of each other. Barry Scheck has a substantial quote. My layman view is that LCN DNA reliability may be useful for suspect elimination. Here’s a short excerpt. “In the three decades since DNA emerged as a forensic tool, courts have rarely been skeptical about its power.”"
http://csidds.com/2015/06/25/the-reverse-csi-effect-and-imperfect-aspects-of-lcn-dna-ignored-the-marshall-project/

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: John Salmon: Ontario: What the news media seem to have omitted in their coverage of this extraordinary manslaughter acquittal 45 years after the pathologist who conducted the autopsy had got it so terribly wrong: The Contario Court of Appeal's apology to John Salmon: "...we wish to express the Court’s great regret that as a result of the comprehensive and unanimous medical evidence now before us it is clear that Mr. Salmon was wrongly convicted and spent more than three years in a penitentiary.“ (It's heartening to see such a powerful expression of regret by the highest court in Ontario. HL);

The appellant was convicted of manslaughter in the death of his common-law wife, Maxime Ditchfield. Ms. Ditchfield died on September 22, 1970. Following a jury trial, the appellant was convicted of manslaughter on March 5, 1971. He was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. He served three years and four months of this sentence and was paroled in July 1974.........The appellant always maintained his innocence. In 2000, he contacted his present counsel, James Lockyer. Commencing in 2002, Mr. Lockyer retained the services of two forensic pathologists and a forensic neuropathologist to review Ms. Ditchfield’s death. Their unanimous opinion was that she died of natural causes after a fall or series of falls. This contradicted the opinion, and testimony at the trial in 1971, of the pathologist who conducted the autopsy on Ms. Ditchfield’s body. He testified that “it takes considerable force” to cause the type of brain injuries suffered by Ms. Ditchfield. There is no doubt that his testimony was central to the appellant’s conviction..........In preparing for the appeal, the Crown retained the services of a clinical neuropathologist. Like the appellant’s experts, the Crown expert did not agree with the opinion of the doctor who conducted the autopsy to the effect that Ms. Ditchfield’s death was likely caused by blunt force trauma to the head. Instead, the Crown expert’s opinion is that the nature of Ms. Ditchfield’s injuries was not caused by blunt force or violence; rather the injuries were consistent with a fall or series of falls.........We have reviewed the entire record, including the four medical reports. We agree that they should be admitted as fresh evidence and that they are dispositive of the appeal.........The appeal is allowed, the conviction for manslaughter is set aside, and Mr. Salmon is acquitted of the offence of manslaughter.........First, in allowing the appeal, we wish to express the Court’s great regret that as a result of the comprehensive and unanimous medical evidence now before us it is clear that Mr. Salmon was wrongly convicted and spent more than three years in a penitentiary.“J.C. MacPherson J.A.”“Janet Simmons J.A.”;“H.S. LaForme J.A.” The entire judgment can be found at:
http://www.ontariocourts.ca/decisions/2015/2015ONCA0469.htm

Sebastian Prosa: Ontario; Found guilty of all charges including impaired driving causing death in a fatal car crash that left two people dead and one seriously injured - in spite of defence that he may have had his drink spiked at a downtown nightclub but his blood was not tested for date rape drugs such as GHB. "However, Justice Glen Hainey, found Prosa’s testimony not credible or reliable and rejected his testimony about having a total memory loss between drinking at the bar and waking up in the hospital after the crash." Despite the “unacceptable negligence” of scientists at the Centre of Forensic Sciences in failing to properly pack the blood sample, Hainey found Prosa could still support his defence.Toronto Star.

A judge has found a 21-year-old man guilty of all charges including impaired driving causing death in a fatal car crash that left two people dead and one seriously injured. Sabastian Prosa had admitted to having a blood-alcohol level around twice the legal limit when he sped the wrong way down Hwy. 427 on Aug. 5, 2012, crashing head-on into a minivan carrying Jayantha Wijeratne, 49, his wife, Antonette, and their 16-year-old daughter, Eleesha. Jayantha and Eleesha were killed and Antonette severely injured. Prosa, who was 19 at the time and also injured in the crash, faced 12 charges including impaired driving causing death and criminal negligence causing death.........When Prosa testified in his own defence, he said he could not remember most of the night, including how he got to a downtown Toronto bar and how he ended up behind the wheel of his SUV on the highway. The defence argued that Prosa may have had his drink spiked at a downtown nightclub but his blood was not tested for date rape drugs such as GHB. A blood-alcohol level of 148 milligrams to 173 milligrams of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood (the legal limit is 80 mg of alcohol in 100 mL of blood) is not high enough to explain his “bizarre and purposeless driving behaviour,” the defence argued. However, Justice Glen Hainey, found Prosa’s testimony not credible or reliable and rejected his testimony about having a total memory loss between drinking at the bar and waking up in the hospital after the crash. Though Prosa was adamant he drank four shots at a friend’s house, he could recall no other details such as what he drank, where he got it or what time it was, Hainey said. Under oath for a civil proceedings three months before he testified, Prosa maintained he only had two drinks. “He appeared to be evasive and had a selective memory,” Hainey said “I find he was tailoring his evidence to support his defence of involuntary intoxication.”.........Despite the “unacceptable negligence” of scientists at the Centre of Forensic Sciences in failing to properly pack the blood sample, Hainey found Prosa could still support his defence."
http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2015/06/26/man-guilty-in-drunk-driving-crash-that-killed-two.html

Bulletin: David Faulkner; Jonathan Smith; Maryland; Washington Post reports that two of three men convicted in a grisly 1987 murder on Maryland’s Eastern Shore have asked a judge to appoint Attorney General Brian E. Frosh to take over the case after state prosecutors disclosed that new handprint evidence points to a different suspect in the case. Reporter Spencer S. Hsu. " “No reasonable juror who saw the palm print — knowing where it was left and by whom it was left — would have convicted Jonathan Smith or David Faulkner,” Benjet said." (Bryce Benjet: A staff attorney for the Innocence Project);

"Two of three men convicted in a grisly 1987 murder on Maryland’s Eastern Shore have asked a judge to appoint Attorney General Brian E. Frosh to take over the case after state prosecutors disclosed that new handprint evidence points to a different suspect in the case. David Ronald Faulkner and Jonathan David Smith Sr. were sentenced to life and Ray Earl Andrews Sr. to 10 years in prison in the Jan. 5, 1987, house burglary and stabbing death of Easton resident Adeline Wilford, 64. In February, after the Maryland Court of Appeals unsealed the case, prosecutors disclosed that palm prints — recovered from the sill of an open window and inside the utility room of Wilford’s home — had been found a year earlier to match those of a Maryland inmate, Ty Anthony Brooks. Brooks, 47, was convicted in a similar break-in and assault of an elderly woman that occurred in Easton three months before Wilford’s killing and was accused of other burglaries, according to police records and attorneys. “That window is no different than the knife that was used to murder this woman,” Bryce Benjet, a staff attorney for the Innocence Project, argued in a hearing this month before Talbot County Circuit Court Judge Stephen H. Kehoe, whom the men are asking to reopen their case and declare them not guilty. “No reasonable juror who saw the palm print — knowing where it was left and by whom it was left — would have convicted Jonathan Smith or David Faulkner,” Benjet said. Although Brooks was an early suspect, his prints were not added to a state database until 2012, and they weren’t tested or matched in the Wilford case until February 2014. Prosecutors then opposed releasing Brooks’s name, later explaining that they overlooked files identifying him as a suspect. The fact was pointed out by the defense after it successfully asked Maryland’s high court to open the record. In a recent interview with Maryland State Police, Brooks, who was sent back to prison in 2013 for theft, denied ever seeing Wilford, being in her house or knowing or participating in a break-in with the defendants, according to a transcript filed June 11 by Smith in a bid for exoneration. “Never seen this house or that lady. In my life,” Brooks said in the transcript. Jane Tolar, an Easton lawyer who Brooks told police represented his family, said she was unable to comment. His family members also declined to comment. Prosecutor Joseph S. Michael said he believed that even if information about Brooks is admissable as evidence, it would make him a potential co-defendant at most and not exonerate the others. “There is no way to tell when those palm prints were left at that location,” Michael said. The match of the palm print is the latest twist in a difficult investigation. No physical evidence linked the defendants to the crime, which went uncharged for 13 years as investigators sifted through leads and tested more than 300 sets of fingerprints."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/two-men-serving-life-in-prison-for-1987-murder-ask-md-judge-to-reopen-case/2015/06/24/4fa7e24e-0ed3-11e5-a0dc-2b6f404ff5cf_story.html

Bulletin: Sandra Higgins; UK; "Independent" reporter speculates that jury's division mirrors that of the division between experts on shaken baby syndrome; " For reasons we cannot know, the jury disagreed. This is, perhaps, a reflection of disagreement in the medical arena on shaken baby syndrome."

"Amy had, the trial heard, suffered a brain injury, detached retina and retinal haemorrhaging and had seizures for five days. Doctors who treated baby Amy said her injuries were consistent with violent shaking, were non-accidental and that it was highly likely they had happened to her while in Ms Higgins's care. One leading UK child abuse expert stated that it was "a classic, textbook case" of shaken baby syndrome. SBS, a form of abusive head trauma, is normally confirmed with symptoms including subdural haemorrhaging, bleeding in the retina, and brain swelling. The jury in the trial of Ms Higgins was tasked with deciding two issues that go to the heart of the syndrome: the mechanism and the timing of the injuries. In his closing speech to the jury, Prosecutor Sean Gillane SC told the jurors they had one simple question to ask: when did the child go from normal to abnormal and what does that mean to you? Remy Farrell SC, who defended Ms Higgins, queried, however, how the prosecution could assert Amy was a perfectly normal child up to March 28 but was silent on the older injuries, including fractured ribs and fingertip bruises on her back. The defence, which argued the evidence was more suggestive of a head trauma and the possible re-activation of an old injury, said it was not contending for accidental injury. And Mr Farrell urged the jury to acquit if they couldn't say conclusively what happened and if they had any doubt that Sandra Higgins inflicted the injuries. For reasons we cannot know, the jury disagreed. This is, perhaps, a reflection of disagreement in the medical arena on shaken baby syndrome."
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/jurys-indecision-mirrors-that-of-doctors-on-shaken-baby-syndrome-31331154.html

Thursday, June 25, 2015

Bulletin: Anthony Graves; Texas; Extraordinary development; This man who spent almost 20 years in prison - including 12 on death row - for murders he did not commit will now help oversee the city of Houston's Forensic Science Centre. "Graves said he can bring an unique insight to the world of police forensic sciences. "I bring a different perspective. I've experienced the total failure of our system from top to bottom," he said." (From the 'who would believe' department. HL); Houston Chronicle.

A man who spent almost 20 years in prison - including 12 on death row - for murders he did not commit will now help oversee the city of Houston's new crime lab. On Wednesday, Anthony Graves was appointed to the board of the Houston Forensic Science Center. "I'm excited about the honor and I'm excited about the opportunity (Houston Mayor Anise Parker) gave me to represent the citizens," Graves said. The center provides forensic services, such as firearms testing and fingerprint analysis, to the Houston Police Department and other agencies. It was established in 2012 and last year took over the crime lab role from HPD. Graves said he can bring an unique insight to the world of police forensic sciences. "I bring a different perspective. I've experienced the total failure of our system from top to bottom," he said..........

Melissa Calusinski: Illinois: CBS '48 Hours' correspondent Erin Moriarty, who investigated Melissa Calusinski's conviction, asks whether newly discovered X-Ray evidence will free the convicted Illinois day care worker. (Must Read. HL);

"The latest chapter in Melissa Calusinski's bid for a new trial began earlier this month with an anonymous phone call to her father. The call is detailed in an extensive pleading filed Tuesday by Kathleen Zellner, Melissa's defense attorney in Lake County, Ill. Circuit Court.  "Mr. Calusinski, you need to tell your attorneys to get the second set of X-rays of Ben Kingan from the Lake County Coroner's office," the male caller said. Paul Calusinski, who says he didn't recognize the voice, asked "Who is this?", but the caller had already hung up. .........Now, in a newly filed petition asking for her conviction to be vacated, defense attorney Kathleen Zellner reveals the new evidence uncovered by that anonymous phone call, a set of X-rays taken during Ben Kingan's autopsy. Zellner says Melissa Calusinski was wrongfully convicted on false medical evidence and that authorities "suppressed" the X-rays that support her innocence. That "false" evidence, as everyone who watched "Blaming Melissa" on "48 Hours" knows, is that Ben Kingan had died due to an acute injury suffered on the day of his death. In fact, Dr. Eupil Choi, the pathologist who did the autopsy on Ben Kingan, has since admitted that he made a mistake at autopsy and failed to identify evidence of an earlier injury. Zellner says the newly discovered X-rays further prove that Ben had swelling in the brain in the days and weeks before he died. According to the defense filing, Ben's head in an X-ray "appears shaped like an old-fashioned light bulb," that "Ben's brain was swelled in close proximity of his skull" and that such swelling was unlikely to occur overnight due to an acute injury. Zellner also contends that the newly discovered X-rays raise doubts that Ben Kingan had suffered a skull fracture on the day he died, as Dr. Choi stated and prosecutors reminded jurors over and over again at trial. Paul DeLuca, Melissa's trial lawyer, claims in an affidavit filed in support of Zellner's petition that he had asked for the entire file, including any X-rays, but was told by then Lake County assistant state's attorney Christen Bishop that X-rays taken were "not readable or legible." He says he was given a disc with unreadable ones, but why wasn't he given the others that suddenly appeared? Were they deliberately withheld from the defense? Who is the anonymous caller who finally let Melissa's family know the X-rays existed? And why now? And there is this question: If Zellner is right and the X-rays further support the theory that Ben Kingan was injured before Melissa Calusinski even worked at the daycare center, then why did she confess? Zellner says that Melissa, who has a low IQ, adopted the story "forced upon her by police" who mistakenly believed that Ben Kingan had an acute injury that could only have happened that day. The proof, says Zellner, is that the story Melissa eventually told police doesn't match the actual evidence: Ben "did not sustain a single injury to his back, shoulders or neck" that would have resulted from being thrown to the ground."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/will-new-evidence-free-convicted-day-care-worker-melissa-calusinski

Bulletin: Sandra Higgins; UK; Shaken baby case; Mistrial; Significant development; Jury allowed by judge to reach a "majority" verdict" instead of a "unanimous" verdict - but still could not reach a verdict in this "childminder" case case in which, as reported previously by the Irish Times, "Central to the case put forward by the defence, Mr Gillane said, was the testimony of Dr Waney Squier - who questioned the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome." Irish Times.

"The jury in the trial of a childminder charged with assaulting a 10-month-old baby has failed to reach a verdict. Judge Patricia Ryan has discharged them and thanked them for their service.The judge had earlier said she would accept a majority verdict of 11 to 1 or 10 to 2. The jury returned shortly after 12.30 pm having informed the judge through the jury minder that they wished to make a statement. When they returned, the foreman handed the judge a piece of paper with a message. The judge read: “Judge, we cannot reach a unanimous or a majority verdict and do not believe we will do so with any more time.” The judge asked the foreman to hand her the issue paper and said the registrar would fill in “disagree” on the paper and hand it to the foreman to sign......... She said she would appreciate if the jury members did not speak about the case as there might be a retrial. The case has been put in for mention next Thursday. The jury had deliberated for a total of five hours and 51 minutes. They deliberated for 63 minutes in total after the judge told them they were permitted to return a majority verdict."
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/circuit-court/childminder-case-jury-discharged-after-failing-to-reach-verdict-1.2262599
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: It is noteworthy that the prosecutor attempted to attack  Dr.  Waney Squier as "a doctor without patients"...the ultimate back seat driver. The Daily Mail has reported that Dr.  Squier, a leading medical expert who has defended parents in shaken baby cases,  appeared as a prosecution expert witness against parents  in  child death cases "for decades"  before having a change of heart about 10 years ago as a result of convincing new research. Such hypocracy!
Harold Levy; Publisher. The Charles Smith Blog.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2756845/Leading-medical-expert-defended-parents-shaken-baby-cases-accused-dishonesty-misleading-courts.html#ixzz3e5VhOzrQ

Kyle Unger: James Driskell; Thomas Sophonow; Frank Ostrowski; David Milgaard; Canada; Georgialee Lang (AKA the Law Diva) looks at "The junk science responsible for wrongful convictions" and observes; "What is most startling, however, is that the scandal of faulty hair analysis has just surfaced in the United States, although evidence of its problematic nature has been known for years."


POST: "Junk science responsible for wrongful convictions," by Georgialee Lang  on "The Law Diva's Blog" on June 23, 2015.

GIST: "The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department have finally admitted there may be hundreds of wrongfully convicted persons languishing in prison, some on death row because of “junk science”, notably microscopic hair analysis. They recently revealed that for over thirty years so-called FBI “experts” have provided flawed testimony in almost every criminal case where human hair was found at the crime scene. The government’s review of cases where hair evidence was a central part of the case against an accused has led to a finding that 26 out of 28 FBI microscopic hair experts unwittingly provided flawed testimony in 95% of the 268 criminal trials that have been scrutinized. Unfortunately, most of the time the experts opined to a scientific certainty that the accused’s hair matched hair found at the crime scene, making hair analysis an important evidentiary weapon relied on by prosecutors around the country. Assisted by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Innocence Project, thus far the review indicates 32 people were given the death penalty, and of those 32, 14 have already died in prison or been executed. What is most startling, however, is that the scandal of faulty hair analysis has just surfaced in the United States, although evidence of its problematic nature has been known for years.  In 2004 Canada’s Globe and Mail newspaper highlighted a groundbreaking study from Manitoba that arose from the wrongful murder convictions of two innocent men.........Thankfully, DNA testing has now overtaken the flawed science of hair analysis, but that still leaves other areas where the science may be more illusory than accurate, including footprint analysis, bite mark analysis and the Canadian cornerstone of difficult prosecutions: Mr. Big."

The entire post can be found at:

https://lawdiva.wordpress.com/tag/kyle-unger/

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;

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

Bulletin: Dan and Fran Keller; Texas; American Statesman reports that Texas's highest criminal court has declined to review a decision last month - in what became known as the "satanic day care case" - rejecting the former Austin day care owners request to be declared innocent of crimes linked to the now-discredited belief that secret satanic cults were abusing day care children nationwide.

Former Austin day care owners pushed to be found innocent of abusing children in satanic rituals. Case was part of a panic that gripped the nation in the early 1990s, their lawyer says. The state’s highest criminal court declined Wednesday to review last month’s ruling in the “satanic day care” case of Dan and Fran Keller. Although the Court of Criminal Appeals had tossed out the Kellers’ 1992 sexual assault convictions in a May 20 ruling, the court rejected a request to declare the former Austin day care owners innocent of crimes linked to the now-discredited belief that secret satanic cults were abusing day care children nationwide.
http://www.statesman.com/news/news/court-declines-to-review-satanic-day-care-ruling/nmkWF/

Bulletin: Eddie Lee Howard: Mississippi; Death row inmate challenges bite mark evidence. " Attorney Tucker Carrington with the Mississippi Innocence Project argued to the court that new information since Howard's trial shows the scientific community has rejected the methodology and conclusions forensic dentist Dr. Michael West of Hattiesburg reached in Howard's case. "To look back at Dr. West's findings, I don't think he has ever been right," Carrington said." Hattiesburg American;

Bite mark evidence that was key to Mississippi death row inmate Eddie Lee Howard's conviction has been roundly discredited, his attorneys told the state's Supreme Court on Tuesday. Howard is seeking a new trial for his conviction on raping and killing a Lowndes County woman in 1992. Attorney Tucker Carrington with the Mississippi Innocence Project argued to the court that new information since Howard's trial shows the scientific community has rejected the methodology and conclusions forensic dentist Dr. Michael West of Hattiesburg reached in Howard's case. "To look back at Dr. West's findings, I don't think he has ever been right," Carrington said. Special Assistant Attorney General Jason L. Davis told the justices that before they toss out Howard's conviction it would be better to conduct a hearing into how bite mark evidence is now viewed by the medical community. Justices questioned both sides on changes in the acceptability of the bite mark evidence since Howard's conviction in 2000. The issues include a 2013 action by the American Board of Forensic Odontology, the only entity that certifies and oversees bite mark analysts, to change its guidelines to bar such testimony. In 2009, a National Academy of Sciences report found no scientific basis for concluding that a bite mark could identify a single suspect. In a 2012 deposition, West said he no longer believes in bite-mark analysis.........Howard, now 61, was convicted and sentenced to death in the slaying of 82-year-old Georgia Kemp of Columbus. Evidence against him included bite marks on her body. West testified they matched impressions of Howard's teeth."
http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/story/news/crime/2015/06/23/bite-marks-evidence-appeal/29183765/

Bulletin: Sandra Higgins: UK; Shaken baby syndrome case; Jury to resume deliberations Thursday. (June 25); (News Talk);

"The trial has heard evidence that the child was fine on the morning and during the day of the alleged assault. Around 5pm Ms Higgins brought her to Cavan General Hospital where she presented with a brain bleed, detached retina and fractured ribs. She continued to have seizures for days. The prosecution alleges the baby's symptoms were consistent with a violent shaking. Doctors who treated the baby girl said it was highly likely that the injuries to the child happened while she was in the care of Ms Higgins and that the injuries were non-accidental. Expert witnesses for the defence said the evidence was more suggestive of a head trauma and could have been the re-activation of an old injury. The accused told Gardaí that she treated the baby as one of her own children and never assaulted her."
http://www.newstalk.com/Jury-in-trial-of-childminder-retires-to-consider-verdict
See earlier News Talk story on arguments to jury;  "Ms Higgins - with an address at The Beeches, Drumgola Wood in Cavan Town - has pleaded not guilty to causing serious harm to the child. The injuries suffered by the 10-month-old baby at the centre of this trial 'required violence', prosecutor Sean Gillane told jurors, and were undoubtedly in the realm of non-accidental injury. Central to the case put forward by the defence, Mr Gillane said, was the testimony of Dr Waney Squier - who questioned the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome - Dr Squier 'was in fact a doctor without patients', he insisted, and the ultimate back seat driver. The defence offered a 'fixed, unshakable and wrongful view” of medical literature', he insisted, and told jurors that they were not being asked to reach a judgement on 'theories of science, medicine or life'. But were to use the most important tool available to them, their common sense. In closing, defence counsel Remy Farrell told jurors making a decision was not the same as 'having a bit of a punt' and he found it extraordinary that the prosecution would rubbish the testimony of a pathologist, in this case Dr Squier."
 http://www.newstalk.com/Sandra-Higgins-childminder-trial-baby-injuries-closing-arguments-verdict

Bulletin: Sandra Higgins: UK: Shaken Baby Syndrome; Jury in trial of childminder retires to consider verdict; "On March 28th, Ms Higgins brought the child to Cavan General Hospital - where she presented with a brain bleed, detached retina and fractured ribs. Prosecutors told jurors that this was a classic case of shaken baby syndrome. But expert witnesses for the defence countered that the evidence was more suggestive of a head trauma, and could have been the re-activation of an old injury." News Talk.

A jury in the trial of a certified child minder, accused of assaulting a 10-month-old baby in her care, has begun its deliberations. Sandra Higgins from The Beeches, Drumgola Woods in Cavan town denies intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm to the child in March 2012. The eight men and four women of the jury began considering a verdict at the Circuit Criminal Court shortly after 10am this morning, returning briefly with two enquiries for the judge before midday. They raised questions about pages in a notebook kept by Ms Higgins that tracked the behaviour and activities of the baby girl, as well as any incidents. During the trial, it heard that the victim's mother became concerned that some of the entries in the diary had been changed or added by Ms Higgins. On March 28th, Ms Higgins brought the child to Cavan General Hospital - where she presented with a brain bleed, detached retina and fractured ribs. Prosecutors told jurors that this was a classic case of shaken baby syndrome. But expert witnesses for the defence countered that the evidence was more suggestive of a head trauma, and could have been the re-activation of an old injury.
http://www.newstalk.com/Jury-in-trial-of-childminder-retires-to-consider-verdict

Bulletin: Melissa Calusinski; Illinois; Day care worker guilty of killing boy says new evidence will clear her; "But in a new court petition filed Tuesday that seeks to win her a new trial, Calusinski's lawyers said the X-rays reveal that medical experts for the state inaccurately concluded that the child suffered an acute injury the day of his 2009 death. According to the filing, new evidence will show that the Deerfield boy died as a result of an old injury caused by head-banging during tantrums." Chicago Tribune;

"Lawyers for a suburban woman found guilty of killing a toddler at a Lake County day care center say a newly discovered set of X-rays casts doubt on her conviction. Melissa Calusinski is serving a 31-year sentence for a first-degree murder conviction after authorities argued at her trial that she slammed the boy, Benjamin Kingan, to the ground while working at Minee Subee day care center in Lincolnshire. But in a new court petition filed Tuesday that seeks to win her a new trial, Calusinski's lawyers said the X-rays reveal that medical experts for the state inaccurately concluded that the child suffered an acute injury the day of his 2009 death. According to the filing, new evidence will show that the Deerfield boy died as a result of an old injury caused by head-banging during tantrums.......... According to the new filing, Calusinski's father received a mysterious call on June 10 telling him to "get the second set of X-rays" from the Lake County coroner's office. Those X-rays contain clearer images than those introduced at trial and would have boosted the defense's case, the document states. Calusinski, 28, of Carpentersville, "was wrongfully convicted based on this false medical evidence that was interjected into her alleged confession," the petition says. The document also contains a sworn statement from Dr. Nancy Jones, a forensic pathologist and former Cook County medical examiner, which said: "It is impossible to conclude, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that the final head injury was intentionally inflicted.".........Calusinski's lawyers have long said that she was coerced into confessing during a 10-hour interrogation that relied on faulty information from forensic pathologist Eupil Choi, who performed the autopsy. Choi later signed a statement in which he admitted that he "missed that (Ben) had suffered an old injury" that predated the day of his death, the petition states."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/lake-county-news-sun/news/ct-day-care-murder-appeal-met-20150623-story.html

Why indigent accused persons must get not only the representation they deserve - but also the investigation they deserve. From an article by your's truly (Harold Levy) recently published by the Ontario Bar Association's "JUST." Magazine.


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: During the course of an email interview for an article in the Ontario Bar Associations 'JUST.' Magazine, on consummate Canadian Private Investigator Brian King, who is devoting an entire year to working 'pro bono' to assist clients of  The Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted,  I experienced a moment of revelation. The interview was with Rob Baltovich, one of King's most celebrated 'pro bono' clients. I asked him how important a role the investigation  plays in a criminal case.  His answer, as will be seen in my article, which can be found at the link below, jolted me, as it made such as simple, but powerful point. As I wrote: "Baltovich stresses that indigent clients  must get “not only the representation they deserve but the  investigation they deserve: “One that might make the difference between  languishing in prison for  a crime you didn’t commit and spending your life free knowing that the right person was brought to justice." I have seen far to many tragic cases, where the state feels it has met the requirements of ensuring a fair trial by providing "an indigent person" a  lawyer. Period. Minimal, if any,  resources for investigation.  Fortunately, there are  some lawyers who conduct the investigation themselves, or even pay for the investigation themselves - and   the rare investigator such as Brian King who generously works for indigent clients 'pro bono'. But there are also overworked public defenders who provide the representation their clients deserve - but are not provided by the state with resources for  the investigation their clients deserve - even  in the most serious criminal cases. So much for fair trials.

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

ARTICLE:  "Devoted to justice: Brian King's 20-year pursuit of a killer," by Harold Levy, published by 'JUST' Magazine, Spring, 2015 edition.

SUB-HEADING: "Bre-X to Baltovich to Bernardo: as an investigator Brian King has done it all. As he prepares for retirement, Ontario’s master private eye turns his attention to public service – pro bono, of course."

GIST:  "Celebrated Canadian private investigator Brian King is at the top of his game. He started almost 40 years ago with practically nothing and built up an empire - King-Reed Associates - with offices stretching across Canada. In 2011, King-Reed merged with Canpro Global to become Canada’s largest national investigation and risk management firm Over the decades he landed wealthy, powerful clients, including banks, insurance companies, governments and even police forces. Not surprisingly, some of his cases grabbed newspaper headlines, such as his efforts in exotic locations to unravel the mysteries of the $6 billion dollar Bre-X “gold” scam. After such an extraordinary career in the private corporate world, King is about to plunge into the world of public service. The recent sale of his business has given him the opportunity to work for The Association in Defence of the Wrongly Convicted (AIDWYC), for an entire year – and he will not be charging a cent for his services. Working pro bono is nothing new for King. Since he got into the job about 40 years ago, he has worked for nothing on numerous cases where an innocent person has been imprisoned. Two of these cases are among the most notorious miscarriages of justice in Canadian history......... (One of these cases): Robert Baltovich: Wrongly convicted in 1992 and acquitted in 2008 of the murder of his girlfriend Elizabeth Bain.  Only in a defence lawyer’s wildest fantasy – or perhaps a John Grisham novel - could the client be vindicated after investigation led to a notorious serial rapist and murderer. However, life can truly prove stranger than fantasy and fiction.  By the time of the trial, the defence was able to point the finger at the as yet unidentified “Scarborough Rapist,” as the possible killer. By the time of the appeal, the Scarborough rapist had been identified as none other than Paul Bernardo, one of the most reviled criminals in Canadian history.........Robert Baltovich says that King, who provided him with “strength” and “emotional comfort”, came into his life at a time when he was “quite terrified” about what awaited him, having had no experience with the Canadian criminal justice system - and despite knowing that he was innocent, “I had no real sense that anyone was actually trying to find out what had happened to Liz.” “Brian and others who work for innocent clients give them hope that the truth, that is out there somewhere, might one day be discovered,” he adds. “Brian interviewed many witnesses who had already been infected with the tunnel vision of the police but he was able to track down valuable information, track down witnesses and peruse leads that I am convinced helped persuade the Crown to call no evidence at my second trial.”.........Robert Baltovich says King’s move will help “level the playing field,” which seems to wrongfully accused persons to be tilted in favour of the prosecution and the police. Baltovich stresses that indigent clients  must get “not only the representation they deserve but the  investigation they deserve: “One that might make the difference between  languishing in prison for  a crime you didn’t commit and spending your life free knowing that the right person was brought to justice.” “I can’t image anything more satisfying for a private investigator.”

The entire article can be found at: 

http://www.justmag.ca/spring2015/fea_devotedToJustice_spring2015.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;