PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Indian publication "The Quint" has devoted considerable resources to reporting the investigation and prosecution of Rajesh and Nupur Talwar. A recent article, published by "The Quint" on August 10, 2015, is headed: "First On Record, CBI’s Arun Kumar: We had no Proof Against Talwars." by reporter Rishika Baruah, published by Quint on August 29, 2015." This article indicates that yet another CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) senior officer involved in the investigation has gone on record to say he believes that the Talwars are innocent. As a photo caption in the article indicates: Rajesh and Nupur Talwar were convicted for the murder of their daughter Aarushi. CBI Joint Director Arun Kumar who took over the investigation believes they were innocent." As reporter Rishika Baruah notes: "Arun
Kumar and his team were handed over a shoddy investigation. They
conducted an experiment to check if sound could travel from Aarushi’s
bedroom to the Talwars’ bedroom when both air conditioners were switched
on and there was no traffic sound. They concluded that no sound could
be heard from one room to the other." The article then quotes Kumar on this important point: "We
concluded that since it was impossible for awake and alert officers to
hear sounds from Aarushi’s room, it would have been impossible for the
Talwars to hear anything that night. Then the narco tests also proved
they showed no deception. So there was no evidence to incriminate them." As reporter Baruah notes: "This evidence was ignored in court." In the article, Kumar neatly eviscerates the 'honour-killing' theory used by the police to pin the murders on the Talwars. The publicly expressed doubts doubts of senior officers involved at one time or another in the investigation - added to the ever growing record of police errors and disclosures of manipulation of evidence - provide all the more reasons to free and exonerate Rajesh and Nupur Talwar. Harold Levy. Publisher. The Charles Smith Blog. http://www.thequint.com/india/2015/08/29/aarushi-murder-exclusive-we-had-no-evidence-against-the-talwars
See previous Charles Smith Blog post: Jagesh and Nupur
Talwar; India; Vijay Shanker, former Director of the Central Bureau
of Investigation (CBI) tells 'The Quint': "Personally, I feel that
justice has not been delivered in this (Aarushi) case."
http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2015/08/jagesh-and-nupur-talwar-india-vijay.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed
VANCOUVER — The wrongful conviction of a British Columbia man
who spent nearly three decades behind bars hinged on a flawed police
investigation and Crown prosecutors who were willing to go to extremes
to prove they'd found their man, a court has heard. Ivan Henry's
lawyer John Laxton was in B.C. Supreme Court on Monday to argue that his
client deserves compensation after he was mistakenly convicted in 1983
of 10 counts of sexual assault and spent 27 years in prison. "The
consequences to Mr. Henry and his family have been devastating and the
honour and integrity of the judicial system have been seriously
harmed,'' Laxton told the court. "His release from custody did not release him from the demons that haunted him while in custody.''........ The
B.C. Court of Appeal quashed Henry's convictions in 2010 following more
than 40 applications for relief filed by Henry and his daughters. Reading
a piece of correspondence between two Crown lawyers from 1982, Laxton
said one of the prosecutors wrote that "the accused is so obvious,''
before insisting that if "one girl'' could successfully identify Henry
they would be able to link the remaining cases together against him. Laxton
also presented in court sections of a handwritten letter from one of
the complainants sent to the private address of a police officer
involved in the investigation, revealing what he described as an
inappropriate relationship. "I didn't want to let you down. I
didn't want to disappoint you,'' read Laxton, describing the comments as
reasons offered by the woman for identifying Henry as her attacker. "You
have a very special place in my heart and I think of you often,''
Laxton read to the court. "Take care of those blue eyes.'' The
positive identification came from a photo of a police lineup that showed
Henry being held in a chokehold by officers, which Laxton described as
"seriously flawed and unfair.'' "This is the bedrock point of the failed police investigation,'' he said. Additional
information that wasn't disclosed to defence included sperm found on
several of the complainants, which Laxton said had a blood type that
failed to match his client's. "That evidence would have exonerated
Henry,'' said Laxton. "(Henry was) deprived of the ability to prove
scientifically he was not guilty.'' Henry's wrongful-conviction
lawsuit names the federal government, the province, the City of
Vancouver and the Vancouver Police Department. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/08/31/ivan-henry-wrongful-conviction_n_8067210.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-politics&ir=Canada+Politics
STORY: "Aisling Brady McCarthy; Homicide ruling reversed in case of infant’s 2013 death," by reporters Peter Schworm, Patricia Wen and John R. Ellement, published by the Boston Globe on August 31, 2105.
GIST: The state has dropped charges against Aisling Brady McCarthy,
the nanny accused of murdering an infant in her care, after the medical
examiner’s office reversed itself and said the cause of death was
undetermined, rather than a homicide. “Based on an assessment of
the present state of the evidence, including the amended ruling from the
Medical Examiner who performed the autopsy, the Commonwealth cannot
meet its burden of proof,” Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan said
in a statement. The announcement by prosecutors came just hours after news broke that
the medical examiner’s office had changed its conclusion in the death
of Rehma Sabir of Cambridge, saying her death was not a homicide caused
by blunt force trauma to the head. The medical examiner’s ruling
said that the child’s medical history could have made Rehma “prone to
easy bleeding with relatively minor trauma.” “I believe that
enough evidence has been presented to raise the possibility that the
bleeding could have been related to an accidental injury in a child with
a bleeding risk or possibly could have even been a result of an
undefined natural disease,” the ruling said.........McCarthy’s defense attorney, Melinda Thompson, said, “Miss McCarthy
was put in jail for 2½ years over a crime that never occurred. Not just a
crime that she did not commit, but a crime that did not occur. The life
of an innocent woman was ruined.’’.........McCarthy was arrested in
January 2013, five days after 1-year-old Rehma was pronounced dead at
Boston Children’s Hospital, where she was rushed after Brady found the
infant unresponsive in the child’s Cambridge home. McCarthy, an
Irish immigrant living illegally in the United States since 2002, was
ordered held without bail. She remained in custody until this May when
she was freed on $15,000 cash bail by Superior Court Judge Maureen
Hogan, who was assured McCarthy would be deported if the criminal case
against her ended. Ryan’s office had alleged that the child was in
McCarthy’s care when the girl suffered massive brain injuries
consistent with violent shaking, including extensive bleeding in her
brain and the backs of her eyes. Specialists said she was subjected to
violent force and that the injuries could not have been inflicted before
that day. But defense medical experts noted that the child
sustained bone and compression fractures several weeks before her death,
when she was traveling abroad with her family without McCarthy. They
also said the child was sick much of her life and suffered from a
bleeding disorder and gastrointestinal problems. Prodded by the
defense, the medical examiner’s office reopened its inquiry, and after
spending the past several months reviewing forensic information,
concluded this month that the infant’s death could no longer be
considered a homicide, Thompson said. Ryan, the district attorney,
said in a telephone interview that prosecutors were notified late
Thursday that the medical examiner’s office had changed its opinion. The office “could no longer opine to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the injuries were inflicted,” she said. “We weighed all our options,” she said."
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:
"The lawyers of the family of slain transgender
Jeffrey “Jennifer” Laude said a settlement with the camp of US Marine
Lance Cpl. Joseph Scott Pemberton is impossible now that both parties
have rested their cases. Pemberton is facing a murder charge at the Regional Trial Court
Branch 74 here over the death of Laude, whose body was found inside a
motel room on October 11 last year. Witnesses identified Pemberton as
the foreigner who was last seen with her as they checked into the motel. “Any settlement now is impossible, especially since both parties are
done presenting their respective evidence,” lawyer Virgie Lacsa Suarez,
one of the Laude family’s lawyers, told the Inquirer in a text message
on Monday. Suarez said since the start of the prosecution’s presentation of
evidence on March 23, there have been no talks about a settlement. “There was only a discussion on a plea bargaining as part of the pretrial period early February,” Suarez said. She also denied reports that the family demanded P38 million and six US visas to drop the case. “There is simply no truth to that… Maybe that’s what they (defense lawyers) want to offer [the family],” Suarez said. She suspected that Pemberton’s lawyers were “testing the water” when they revealed this information. “There is no truth to reports that we will drop the case at anytime,” Suarez said....... Lawyer Harry Roque Jr., the Laude family’s lead counsel, described
reports that the family is open to settlement as a “PR play” or a
publicity stunt from Pemberton’s camp. He also cautioned Pemberton’s lawyers against approaching the Laude family without the consent of the private counsels..........In April, Laude’s relatives sought at least P200 million in moral and
exemplary damages as the civil aspect of the case was tackled in
Pemberton’s trial. Roque had said Laude’s sister, Marilou, had told the court that P100
million would compensate for the “agony that the family has to go
through because Jennifer was treated like an animal.” “The family also wants another P100 million for exemplary damages so
other people, especially American soldiers, will know the cost of
treating someone like Jennifer,” Roque had said...
The Laude family has started preparing for “a national day of outrage” in time for her first death anniversary in October. Suarez said members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender
(LGBT) community will also hold a nationwide pride march to demand
justice as the Laude family awaits the court’s decision on the murder
case against Pemberton. “Now that we’re through with the hearing, we will not let up on seeking justice for Jennifer’s death,” Suarez said..........In his testimony last week, Pemberton said he pushed Laude when he
discovered that she was not a woman. Pemberton said he felt deceived and
tried to defend himself when Laude slapped him. Pemberton said he held Laude in an arm lock and later dragged her to the bathroom, hoping to revive her."
"A bid to avoid retrial by David Harold Eastman is expected to be heard in February. Meanwhile, a decision on whether to further relax the murder accused's bail conditions will be delivered on Friday. Acting Justice David Ashley, QC, on Thursday set a new timeframe
for proceedings after the matter hit a number of delays caused by
illness, legal process, and the hunt for a judge. Eastman is accused of the 1989 assassination of Assistant Federal Police Commissioner Colin Winchester. He served 19 years in jail for the murder, until an inquiry found his 1995 trial had been a miscarriage of justice. Eastman's conviction was subsequently quashed and the prosecution announced it would pursue a retrial. Eastman has launched a stay application to halt the retrial on the grounds he will not be able to get a fair hearing.........A sticking point between the parties has been the availability of evidence before the stay application. Eastman's legal team argues the application should be delayed until the defence is shown the entire prosecution case. Defence
counsel Mark Griffin, QC, asked that the judge set a cutoff date after
which time the prosecution could not add further evidence to the case. The silk said it would be unfair to mount a stay application when the full prosecution case was unknown. But
the prosecution says the continued collection of evidence – including
forensic tests overseas – should not delay the stay application."
"The camp of United States Marine Lance Corporal
Joseph Scott Pemberton, who is charged with the murder of Filipino
transgender Jeffrey “Jennifer” Laude in October last year, claimed that
the complainants have issued new demands that include six US visas and
P38 million in exchange for dropping the case. Defense counsel Rowena Flores said that the information was relayed to her by a reliable source. Flores said the new amount being asked was separate from the
P21.6 million initially asked by Laude’s lawyer Virgie Suarez, who sent
the computation in her own handwriting. The latter said that they
changed their mind and are now asking for P200 million in damages. Suarez, one of the private counsels of the Laude family,
said the payment is for the actual, moral, and exemplary damages that
Laude’s sister Marilou had declared. “The P21 million was an initial computation of damages made,” Suarez told The STAR. She, however, added that Laude’s mother Julita refused to
demand payment for damages as no amount could compensate for her
suffering. Suarez also said “there is no truth to the alleged demand for US visas.“ She said Marilou had clarified that they are not asking for US visas. “Marilou clarified that before the court and during a press conference after her testimony,” Suarez said..........Dr. Rachel Fortun, a pathologist and professor at the
University of the Philippines College of Medicine, on the other hand,
downplayed claims by prosecution witnesses that Laude died of asphyxia
by drowning. Fortun based her testimony on reports and pictures from the case. Prosecution lawyers are also opposing moves by defense lawyers to downgrade the charges from murder to homicide." http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2015/08/31/1494185/laude-camp-wants-p38-m-6-us-visas-defense-lawyer
A new website has launched as part of the investigation into the death of Redding lawyer
Gugsa Abraham "Abe" Dabela
. Dabela was found dead in his car in April 2014 of a gunshot wound to
the head. Police ruled the 35-year-old's death a suicide, but earlier
this August the state NAACP and the Norwalk branch of the NAACP
announced that they were
opening an investigation into the death. Family members launched
Justice4Abe.com
on Tuesday, with information about the life of Dabela and the
circumstances of his death. The website challenges the official finding
that his death was a suicide, and poses many questions that the
investigation is seeking answers to. Among the questions asked are: Why did the Redding Police Department issue a press release
within hours of Abe’s death classifying the gunshot as “self-inflicted”?;
Why wasn’t the death scene investigated by either the Major
Crime Squad or an investigator from the Office of the Medical Examiner
upon discovery of a gunshot victim?;
Why were Abe’s hands not tested for gunshot residue by the
Medical Examiner despite the Redding Police Department’s reports stating
that this test was requested on multiple occasions prior to the
autopsy?;
Why did the Redding Police Department not conduct in-depth
interviews with potential witnesses or others who might have relevant
information?
Is there physical evidence inconsistent with a suicide finding?" http://weston.dailyvoice.com/police-fire/website-launched-in-investigation-into-redding-death/585668/
"A jury has failed to reach a verdict in the trial of a childminder accused of causing serious harm to a ten-month-old baby. Registered
child-minder Sandra Higgins, 34, of The Beeches, Drumgola Wood, Cavan
town, Co Cavan had pleaded not guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court
to intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm to the baby girl on
March 28, 2012.........The
prosecution alleged that 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. Ms
Higgins told gardaí that she cared for the baby like her own children
and that she never assaulted her. This afternoon the jury of eight
men and four women told the judge they were unable to reach either a
unanimous or majority verdict.........Before being discharged the jury had asked a
number of questions. They asked to hear evidence of the vital signs as
given by the consultant paediatrician who treated the child and from a
UK neuropathologist called by the defence.' http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/jury-fail-to-reach-verdict-in-baby-shaking-trial-683728.html
See Irish Times coverage of UK neuropathologist Dr. Waney Squier's testimony in the case: (Neuropathologist rejects theory of shaken baby syndrome); "A UK neuropathologist has told the trial of a
child-minder charged with assaulting a baby that shaken baby syndrome
has no scientific validation. Registered child-minder Sandra Higgins
(34) is alleged to have caused the injuries to the 10-month-old baby
she was minding at her home. The trial has reached its final stages and
closing speeches will be made before the jury on Tuesday. Ms Higgins of The Beeches, Drumgola Wood, Cavan town, Co Cavan has pleaded not guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm to the baby on March 28th, 2012. Defence witness Dr Waney Squier told Sean Gillane SC,
prosecuting, she supported the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome up to
15 years ago. “Only 15 years ago I too was making the diagnosis of
shaken baby syndrome. I too was a believer in the belief that so many
people in the area of child abuse believe in. I then began to question
this,” she said. She said she questioned it when a number of elements
that supported the diagnosis were overturned by research. She said she
began studying the scientific literature on the subject in great detail. “I looked at many many cases of shaken baby
syndrome,” she said. “I could no longer agree that this was a syndrome
that had any scientific validation. I came to the view that I could not
be sure this is a real syndrome.” She rejected a suggestion from Mr Gillane that this
represented a fixed view on her part. She said she has changed her mind
in relation to the issue. “We all have to be careful. We have to keep our minds open. I’ve changed my mind already,” she said. She told Remy Farrell SC, defending, there was
evidence of a pre-existing sub-dural haemorrhage in the child. She said
this pre-existing condition would manifest in the baby’s head size, or
the baby being irritable, not wanting to feed, losing weight or
vomiting. She said there were documented cases of babies who
had inflicted injuries experiencing a “lucid interval” or a period of
time after a head injury when a baby may be perfectly normal. She said
in this case there was evidence of older damage. “I think it is very dangerous to say because the child collapses at a certain time we know when the injury occurred,” she said."
"A judge has convicted a man of severely injuring his son, then 3
months old. Lawrence Superior Court Judge Mary Ames delivered the
verdict Monday in the bench trial of Daniel Green, 30, the Salem News
reported. Ames found Green guilty of assault and battery on a child
causing substantial bodily injury, but she acquitted him of permitting
an assault and battery on the child. Green’s son was hospitalized in
November 2012 with injuries including bleeding on his brain and retinas
that caused significant vision loss and developmental delays." http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/08/25/judge-convicts-man-severely-injuring-infant-son/vvnl1M5EYjCJaU4CmWNcmJ/story.html
"The Talwars were “absolutely framed” in the murder case of their
daughter Aarushi, claims the dentist couple’s lead defence lawyer who
also questions the investigation saying it had “become too personal.” Tanveer Ahmed Mir, counsel for Aarushi’s parents Rajesh and Nupur
Talwar also claimed that the testimony by witnesses in court was what
the investigators taught them. “As I went along the case and saw the evidence I came to a conclusion
that my clients were absolutely framed. As a matter of fact anybody,
who reads that CBI charge sheet and sees the chronology of evidences as
to how the statements of the witnesses changed, can come to a conclusion
that these two people were absolutely framed for no reason whatsoever,”
said Mir. He was part of a panel discussion organised by Penguin Random House
and Mumbai Mirror -“Speak for Aarushi” in connection with journalist
Avirook Sen’s book “Aarushi”. The lawyer along with Sen, journalist-author Manu Joseph and Ellen
Barry, South Asia bureau chief New York Times, were discussing the
double murder case." http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/aarushi-talwar-case-probe-had-become-too-personal-defence-lawyer/
"On
the eve of his landmark trial seeking compensation for wrongful
conviction, Ivan Henry has inadvertently learned that the woman who
fingered him had “strong emotional ties” with the lead Vancouver police
detective. Lawyers for Henry, who spent 27 years in prison for
allegedly committing multiple sexual assaults in 1982, complained in
B.C. Supreme Court late Friday that the province and the city of
Vancouver had only accidentally revealed the veritable smoking gun. The
1983 letter, from the first woman to identify Henry well enough to
support criminal charges, should have been disclosed years ago, lawyer
Marilyn Sandford fumed to Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson. “This
was the first identification against our client that the authorities
deemed had any weight and led to his arrest and things went from there,”
Sandford explained. “(The woman) was a key witness for the VPD, a key
complainant.” Henry was freed in 2010, after the B.C. Court of
Appeal declared him acquitted for lack of evidence and because DNA
evidence showed some of the sexual attacks had been committed by another
man. However, the court did not exonerate Henry. Henry sued police, prosecutors and the federal justice minister. Wrongfully convicted individuals usually get payments offered by governments to compensate for their suffering. Henry is thought to be the first forced to sue and face a hardball trial. Both the province and the city insist Henry is not innocent......... On June 21, 1983, after Henry was convicted, but before he was sentenced, the woman wrote to Harkema. “(The
letter) begins with expressions of strong emotional feelings for the
officer and that continues on,” Sandford said. “It’s seven pages in
length.“She says among other things, ‘of all the factors I
weighed in deciding not to go out there for the trial, the one that put
me in the most conflict was you. I didn’t want to let you down, I didn’t
want to disappoint you, and I guess I didn’t want to risk never seeing
you again. There is no way I could tell you this at the time but I
believed in my soul that you understood me at the deepest level and you
have since proven this to me.’”
"Convicted murderer Frits Van Beelen has moved to have his conviction
overturned, 25 years after being freed from a 17-year jail term for
killing teen Deborah Leach. Van Beelen’s appeal will target evidence provided by South
Australia’s then chief forensic pathologist, Dr Colin Manock, to the
trial for the July 15, 1971, murder on Taperoo Beach. His legal
team will assert Dr Manock was not qualified to give evidence at the
trial, using that as the “fresh and compelling” new evidence needed to
secure the appeal. Criticism of Dr Manock’s testimony in the controversial Henry Keogh murder trial led to a historic appeal in that case, and a retrial slated for May next year. Court of Criminal Appeal documents, lodged on Wednesday by Michael
Hegarty & Associates Solicitors, assert Dr Manock should not have
been permitted to give evidence which was crucial to the prosecution
case against Van Beelen, now in his late 60s. “It has now been
established that between 1972 and 1994, Dr Manock was at all relevant
times: unprofessional, incompetent, untrustworthy,’’ the documents
assert. “The opinion Dr Manock provided as to time of death, clearly accepted by the jury, was wrong. “At
trial it was the prosecution case, based on Dr Manock’s autopsy
observations and his opinions, that the Applicant committed necrophilia
on the body of the deceased immediately after killing her.
“That
proposition was without factual or valid scientific basis ... Dr Manock
was totally unqualified to become involved in the way in which he did.’’.........Van Beelen’s application for permission to
appeal will be heard by a single Supreme Court Justice sitting as the
Court of Criminal Appeal." http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/convicted-murderer-frits-van-beelen-wants-conviction-overturned-saying-he-has-compelling-new-evidence/story-fni6uo1m-1227500386092
"A federal appeals courtroom has thrown out a civil rights lawsuit by a
person wrongfully imprisoned for 23 years who claimed a detective and
two dentists conspired to border him with bogus chew mark proof. Robert Lee Stinson was after the Innocence Venture discovered
specialists who rejected the dentists’ conclusions that a chew mark on
the murder sufferer was left by Stinson. He sued the identical yr. In 2010, DNA from the sufferer’s physique led to a special suspect,
who was and finally confessed to the homicide of 63-year-old Ione
Cychosz of Milwaukee. In 2013, a federal decide , and stated a jury ought to determine key information within the matter. However the dentists appealed and this week the seventh U.S. Circuit Courtroom of Appeals dominated of their favor. Writing for a three-judge panel, Decide Diane Sykes stated the dentists have been protected by certified immunity.........Mike Kanovitz, one among Stinson’s attorneys, stated they assume
there are critical errors within the ruling and they’re contemplating
asking the complete seventh Circuit to evaluate the three-judge panel’s
determination." http://www.suffieldtimes.com/breaking/lawsuit-brought-by-wrongly-imprisoned-man-is-dismissed/55487/
Innocence Project report on the Stinson case: "Robert Lee
Stinson served over 23 years in a Wisconsin prison for a brutal rape and murder
DNA proves he did not commit. He was convicted based on the improper and
unvalidated expert testimony of a bite-mark analyst whose conclusions were
uncontested at trial. The Crime: Early in the morning of November 3, 1984, a neighbor passing through an alley
on his way to work discovered the body of 63-year-old Ione Cychosz in a vacant
lot behind her home. She had been raped, stabbed and beaten to death. Her
clothing was scattered around the lot. Spermatozoa cells were found in a
vaginal wash, but the number of cells retrieved was too few for identification
purposes. Eight bite marks, inflicted prior to death, were also identified on
the victim’s body. The victim was last seen shortly after midnight, only a few hours before the
murder, when a friend had dropped her off and watched her enter her building.
The coroner later estimated that the time of death was between midnight and 2
a.m. The Investigation; After examining the body, dental scientist Dr. Lowell Thomas Johnson worked
with a police sketch artist and determined that the bite-marks on the body must
have come from someone missing an upper front tooth. The police questioned multiple suspects, including two men arrested for violent
sexual assaults shortly after Cychosz was murdered. Both of these men had
missing teeth consistent with Dr. Johnson’s sketch. Police investigators also
visited 21-year-old Robert Lee Stinson, whose backyard was connected to the
vacant lot where Cychosz’s body was discovered. While interviewing Stinson, the
investigators told him a joke, and noticed both a missing front tooth and a
crooked tooth when he laughed. Based on these observations, and his proximity
to the crime scene, Stinson was arrested and charged with murder. Trial: The only physical evidence against Stinson at his 1985 trial was the bite-mark
testimony of two forensic odontologists. Dr. Johnson concluded that the bite
marks “had to have been made by teeth identical” to Stinson’s, and claimed that
there was “no margin for error” in his conclusion. The State also called Dr.
Raymond Rawson, the chairman of the Bite Mark Standards Committee of the
American Board of Forensic Odontologists, who testified that the evidence in
the case was “high quality” and “overwhelming.” However, the prosecution’s
experts failed to note that Stinson was missing a tooth in the place where the
bite marks indicated a dentition. While Stinson’s attorney moved to exclude the bite-mark testimony, he did not
object to the qualifications of the State’s expert witnesses, nor did he call
his own expert to testify, although one had been retained. According to
Stinson’s attorney, he was unable to find qualified experts because Dr. Johnson
had presented the results of his analysis at an odontological conference before
the trial, and therefore many experts felt their analysis had already been
tainted by Dr. Johnson’s conclusions. Stinson also gave inconsistent accounts of his whereabouts at the time of the
murder, but as the prosecution admitted at trial, the crux of their case was
based on the bite mark analysis. After a three-day trial, Stinson was convicted
of first-degree murder on the strength of the forensic testimony, and sentenced
to life in prison. There was no other direct evidence linking him to the
murder. On appeal, Stinson argued that the bite-mark testimony was not credible and
claimed that he had been denied effective assistance of counsel. At trial,
Stinson had attempted to replace his appointed counsel, since his attorney had
only been on the case for two weeks and had not had time to prepare an adequate
defense. Stinson also claimed to have a personality conflict with his attorney.
His appeal was denied, and his conviction was upheld. Post-Conviction: The improper bite-mark testimony would eventually provide the spark that
cleared Stinson, but it took 20 years. The Wisconsin Innocence Project accepted
Stinson’s case in 2005, and sought DNA testing of saliva and blood-stains on
the victim’s sweater, which ultimately excluded Stinson. Yet this would not be
enough. Working with Christopher Plourd, a California forensic science expert
and attorney, the Wisconsin Innocence Project re-examined the bite-mark
evidence and determined that Stinson did not match the indentations. Moreover,
a panel of four nationally recognized experts independently reviewed the
findings and unanimously reached the same conclusion.. Dr. Johnson now works at Marquette University with the prosecutor who tried
Stinson’s case. He stood by his conclusions, as did the prosecutor, who noted
that, “nobody in the state of Wisconsin had done a bite-mark rape-murder case
like this one before…. So we were really reinventing the wheel.” The Milwaukee County District Attorney’s Office did not oppose Stinson’s motion
to overturn his conviction. On January 30, 2009, Circuit Judge Patricia McMahon
granted the motion, and Robert Lee Stinson, then 44, was freed and his
conviction was vacated. He had served more than two decades in prison for a crime
DNA evidence proves he didn’t commit. After his release, the District
Attorney’s office had six months to decide whether or not to retry him.
Finally, at a hearing on July 27, 2009, prosecutors, after undertaking their
own investigation, dropped all charges against Stinson. Since his release, Stinson has moved into his sister’s Milwaukee home with her
children. He also plans on writing a book about his wrongful conviction." http://www.innocenceproject.org/cases-false-imprisonment/robert-lee-stinson
"Henry
Keogh’s third murder trial is doomed to fail lawyers claim.Supreme Court documents reveal prosecutors still intend to call
evidence from Dr Colin Manock at Keogh’s trial over the death of fiance
Anna-Jane Cheney two decades ago, despite savage criticism of his
actions and expertise.Dr Manock’s continued involvement in the
case is one of many grievances Keogh raises with the court in his
application to have the matter dismissed or permanently stayed. Keogh’s counsel claims prosecutors have irreparably
contaminated proceedings by allowing Dr Manock and other witnesses to
re-read their testimony from 20 years ago.They say a jury could
not be satisfied, beyond reasonable doubt, of guilt in those
circumstances — and insist Anna-Jane Cheney was not murdered but
“innocently drowned”.In addition, they ask the court to reject evidence that was central to Keogh’s first two trials, including claims of: Bruising to Ms Cheney’s head and neck.False statements allegedly made, by Keogh, to obtain insurance policies. “Dr
Manock is entirely unreliable and has been shown to have misled the
prosecution and the court in a number of ways in this case,” the
documents assert.“He has indicated ... a lack of independence and that he is partial to the interests of the deceased’s family.“The
methods by which prosecution has insisted, despite requests to the
contrary, of proofing all its witnesses has resulted in them being
contaminated, making (them) unreliable and unfair.“The
prosecution is foredoomed to failure, and prosecutors cannot disprove
the reasonable possibility (that) the deceased died of natural causes.”.........Counsel
for Keogh had attacked the evidence of Dr Manock, then a forensic
examiner, who concluded Ms Cheney was deliberately drowned in her
bathtub. Keogh’s counsel, however, called expert witnesses who claimed Ms Cheney may have suffered a fatal anaphylactic shock caused by the drug hismanal.The
Full Court agreed Dr Manock’s assertions were “unreliable”, his
conclusions “not properly explored” and his autopsy “inadequate”.
It
said his opinion on the manner of Ms Cheney’s death was “no more than
prejudicial speculation” and that it was “reasonably arguable” Keogh had
suffered a miscarriage of justice. At the time, Dr Manock was asked if
he believed Keogh was guilty and replied: “I know he is.”Justice Malcolm Blue will consider the application during closed-court pre-trial hearings." http://m.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/sa-court-told-henry-keoghs-third-trial-for-the-murder-of-anna-jane-cheney-is-doomed-to-fail/story-fni6uo1m-1227500115464
"A forensic expert testified in court yesterday that
transgender Jeffrey “Jennifer” Laude was possibly still alive when
Pemberton left him in a motel room here in October last year. Rachel Fortun, a forensic pathologist and professor at the
University of the Philippines College of Medicine, also discounted the
possibility that Laude died of asphyxia by drowning as claimed by
prosecution witnesses. Fortun is the last of the witnesses presented by the defense.......... Police pathologist Reynaldo Dave earlier testified for the
prosecution, saying he did the autopsy and that Laude’s body bore signs
of punching and choking before Laude died by drowning. Dave also said that traumatic injuries on Laude’s body mean
the application of too much pressure to produce bleeding – hence the
conclusion of strangulation. He told the court in his testimony that the suppression
shown by the hematoma in Laude’s larynx could be a result of an arm lock
and that the oozing of fluids in the lungs with bubbles, a result of
drowning.........Pemberton, who testified on Monday, admitted to choking Laude but stressed that he only did it in self-defense......... Defense counsel Rowena Flores explained that Pemberton’s
testimony was meant to prove that the qualifying circumstances of
treachery, abuse of superior strength and cruelty were not present in
the murder case. She said Pemberton “acted in self-defense and to protect his
honor and life… and acted in immediate vindication of the wrong done to
him.”"
"A United States Marine accused of killing a transgender woman in the Philippines
acknowledged on Monday that he had choked her until she was no longer
moving, but he stopped short of saying that he had killed her, according
to the prosecutor assigned to the case. The serviceman, Lance Cpl. Joseph Scott Pemberton, 20, was arrested in October in connection with the death
of a 26-year-old Filipino, Jennifer Laude, whose name at birth was
Jeffrey. Corporal Pemberton had met Ms. Laude in an Olongapo City
nightclub while he was on liberty during military exercises, then
accompanied her to a nearby hotel room, where she was later found dead. Corporal
Pemberton, who has been charged with murder, testified during his trial
on Monday. It was the first time that he had publicly provided his
account of what took place in the room with Ms. Laude. He
said that he brought Ms. Laude and another woman to the hotel, not
knowing that they were transgender. He received oral sex from the women,
he said, and one then left to buy condoms. Ms. Laude remained in the
room, and he reached down to touch her vagina, he testified. “He
said they began fighting when he discovered that she had a penis,”
Emilie Fe Delos Santos, the prosecutor in the case, said by phone from
Olongapo City, about 80 miles north of Manila. In his testimony,
Corporal Pemberton said that he pushed Ms. Laude, she slapped him, he
punched her, then he choked her with an arm lock until she was no longer
moving. He
also testified that Ms. Laude was still breathing but appeared to be
unconscious after being put into the arm lock. He said he then brought
her to the bathroom to try to revive her and left her slumped over the
toilet. He said he then took a taxi back to his ship, where he told a
fellow Marine, “I left her unconscious.” “Pemberton
did not kill Laude,” Corporal Pemberton’s lawyer, Rowena L.
Garcia-Flores, wrote in an email on Monday. “He left Laude in the toilet
alive.” Ms.
Garcia-Flores said that Corporal Pemberton had no criminal record and
had never been in a fight before his altercation with Ms. Laude. She
said that he acted to defend his honor when he discovered that Ms. Laude
had a penis but that other factors led to the altercation, including
his fear of being “scammed.” “He was a victim of the fraud committed by a sex worker” who was older than him, she said in the email. “Pemberton
testified, ‘I felt like I was raped by Laude,’ ” she wrote in a
subsequent email. “He was repulsed, felt violated and angry; that he
would not have agreed to have sex with him if he knew he was a man.”...If
Corporal Pemberton is convicted of murder, he faces 40 years in prison,
Mr. Roque said. If his lawyers can persuade the judge that there were
complicating circumstances, like self-defense or deception regarding the
victim’s gender, the court could lower the charge to homicide, which is
punishable by 12 to 20 years. In the Philippines, there are no jury
trials, and cases are decided by a judge."
"This fall’s NYC Abusive Head Trauma/Shaken Baby Syndrome Conference,
sponsored jointly by the Queens County District Attorney’s Office and
the New York City Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, will feature
some of the most outspoken proponents of shaken baby theory but also a
few of the skeptics..........Past Queens conferences have featured roundtable discussions that
included critics as well as proponents of shaken baby theory, but this
year’s schedule lists two full presentations from skeptics, one by
attorneys Keith Findley of the Wisconsin Innocence Project and Adele
Bernhard of the Post-Conviction Innocence Clinic, and one by pathologist
Patrick Lantz, who has criticized the child abuse literature for
adopting guidelines about retinal findings without objective scientific
evidence. Attorneys Findley and Bernhard will be giving the Innocence Network
perspective on appeals in infant head trauma cases—Findley spearheaded
the appeal that freed child care provider Audrey Edmunds in 2008, and Bernhard argued last year at the successful hearing on behalf of care provider René Bailey. ........Dr.
Lantz, a pathology professor at Wake Forest Baptist Health in North
Carolina, is one of two speakers at the Queens conference scheduled
to talk about retinal hemorrhages. The other is ophthalmology
professor Brian J. Forbes at the University of Pennsylvania School of
Medicine. In 2004, Dr. Lantz published a case study and critical literature review in the BMJ that
cautioned against relying on retinal findings when diagnosing abuse. He
has since encouraged pathologists to gather more data by capturing retinal images in all child deaths, whether or not abuse is suspected." http://onsbs.com/2015/08/14/queens-head-injury-conference-opens-the-door-a-little-wider/
"Two recent high-profile news stories shined a spotlight on the use of
incentivized jailhouse snitches to supplement flawed arson science in
high-profile murder cases. Jeremy Stahl, Slate, "The Trials of Ed Graf;"Maurice Possley and Maurice Chammah, The Marshall Project, "Jailhouse snitch claims secret deal in death case" Grits has no time at the moment to comment at any length. But long-time
readers know the intersection of
informants and flawed arson science cuts across two of my long-time
interests, so I may come back to these items as the vicissitudes of time
and convenience permit. For now, I'll encourage everyone to read both
stories and offer up in the comments any observations, arguments or
suggestions which may consequently arise."
"There are no
witnesses to what happened to a 3-month-old baby that caused bleeding on
his brain and both retinas; bruising on his armpits, one leg and the
top of his spine; and an injury to his spleen. These injuries have left
the boy with significant vision loss and developmental delays. Was it a hereditary
medical condition — excess fluid on the brain — that triggered a brain
bleed and then a seizure, as the defense suggests? Or, as prosecutors
argue, was it a case of an angry father, who had already complained
about the baby’s crying, lashing out and either throwing or shaking the
infant? That’s the decision
Lawrence Superior Court Judge Mary Ames will have to make by Monday,
when she is expected to deliver her verdict in the trial of the baby’s
father, Daniel Green.
“This is a
circumstantial case,” acknowledged prosecutor Karen Hopwood in her
closing argument to Ames on Thursday. She urged the judge, however, to
“stitch together” all of that circumstantial evidence to see what
happened. The defense
reminded the judge there was no physical evidence showing what caused
the injuries — or who. “Where is the evidence that the Commonwealth has
shown that only Daniel Green could have shaken or thrown (the baby)?”
Green’s attorney, Joseph Collins, argued.
“Whatever happened
to (the baby) happened while he was in the care and custody of Beverly
Hospital and not at the motel,” suggested Collins.........The prosecution’s
expert, Dr. Alice Newton of Children’s Hospital, had testified that the
injuries to the child occurred somewhere between a half hour and four
hours before he showed symptoms. Collins suggested that could only mean
the child was already in the hospital when the damage occurred, and not
alone with Green. Hopwood argued,
however, that the child was brought in much later that night, pointing
to Beverly Hospital emergency room records showing he was first seen
after 11 p.m. She told the judge the earlier time written on the records
actually referred to the time the doctor’s notes were transcribed, on
the following day, Nov. 28." http://www.salemnews.com/news/local_news/an-angry-father-or-a-medical-issue/article_6504489a-1c6f-510f-9dc4-4a64301b8696.html
"Former Akron Police Captain Douglas
Prade has won another round of court hearings on DNA evidence in his
bid for a new trial in the 1997 shooting death of his ex-wife. It
marks the second time in three years that an evidentiary hearing will be
held to examine bite-mark evidence on Dr. Margo Prade’s lab coat. The
notorious case has received nationwide investigative television news
coverage since the former captain’s conviction in his 1998 Summit County
trial. In a court order released Thursday, Common Pleas Judge Christine Croce, scheduled the new hearing date Nov. 4 at 1 p.m.........Prade,
69, remains in a state penitentiary after an appellate court overturned
a lower court’s 2013 order freeing him from prison after he had served
nearly 15 years for the crime. That order, by now-retired Judge
Judy Hunter, was based on advanced DNA testing that excluded Prade from
crucial crime-scene evidence — a bite mark under a lab coat worn by Dr.
Prade on the morning of the slaying. Both sides always have agreed
there was a struggle inside Dr. Prade’s minivan and that the killer bit
her, leaving an impression on the upper-left arm through her lab coat
and blouse. In November 2012, Hunter held the first set of
hearings on what was then the latest test results of the bite-mark DNA.
All of the experts who testified in those hearings agreed that Prade was
excluded, and Hunter issued her findings of actual innocence the
following January." http://www.ohio.com/news/break-news/prade-wins-right-to-another-hearing-over-dna-findings-1.618107
NOTE FROM LAURA HELMUTH, PUBLISHER OF SLATE: "Our most ambitious and important story of the week was Jeremy Stahl’s Fresca on the trials of Ed Graf,
a man who was convicted of killing his sons in a fire. You’ve gotten a
few messages about this story already, and I hope you’ve had a chance to
read it and the accompanying stories in Slate Plus about Cameron Todd Willingham, another man convicted of killing his children. Willingham was innocent, and Texas executed him anyway. Texas is atoning for his death (sort of) by leading the country in reforming how it investigates arson cases. The whole series is haunting, but one statistic really captures the
scope of the problem. In the 1990s, thanks to new research and a lot of
pushing from reformers, arson investigators finally started accepting
that many supposedly distinctive signs of arson were actually common in
any accidental fire. As a result, as Jeremy wrote: “Between 1999 and
2008, arsons dropped from 15 percent to 6 percent of fires nationwide.”
Imagine how many fires that missing 9 percent represents, how many
people were convicted of arson or even murder based on shoddy forensic
science." http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/slate_plus/2015/08/slate_s_weekly_roundup_laura_helmuth_on_her_week_at_slate.html
STORY: "Texas Executed an Almost Certainly Innocent Man The Texas Forensic Science Commission chairman tried to convince Texas that Cameron Todd Willingham was a monster. Did politics trump truth?,"by Jeremy Stahl, published on August 15, 2015, by Slate. (This story is part of a special Slate Plus package on Jeremy Stahl’s “The Trials of Ed Graf.” Be
sure to check out another Slate Plus exclusive related to this story, a
profile of the family of Cameron Todd Willingham and their campaign to have him exonerated.)
GIST: "The
cases against Cameron Todd Willingham and Ed Graf were similar in many
ways. Both men were accused of setting a fire to kill their children.
Both men were accused of using accelerants to start the fire, of
trapping their children in a burning building, and of not trying hard
enough to save the children once the fire had started. Both men were
prosecuted using forensic evidence that has since been thoroughly
discredited. Both were convicted. Willingham was executed. Arson scientist John Lentini conducted a landmark 1992 study
that proved that certain supposed arson indicators could be produced in
accidental fires. He was among the first forensic scientists to
re-examine the Willingham case. He found there was no evidence that
anyone had intentionally lit Willingham’s home on fire. At least seven
other experts looked into the case and agreed. Willingham had been
convicted largely on the word of two fire investigators who had claimed
to find more than 20 indicators of arson. All of them were junk science. The faulty arson science was brought to the attention of then–Texas Gov. Rick Perry and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles before
Willingham’s execution in 2004. Walter Reaves, the appellate attorney
for both Willingham and Graf, sent a report by the Austin, Texas-based
fire scientist Gerald Hurst demonstrating the flaws in the science. The
report was ignored......... At
the end of 2013, Willingham’s family members and Michael Morton, who
has become a prominent advocate for criminal justice reform, came
together to call on Perry and the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles to
give Willingham a posthumous pardon.
In April 2014, the board voted to reject their plea. The Willingham
family is still hoping that the new governor, Greg Abbott, or a future
one will eventually grant their request. Morton says that Willingham’s prosecutor John H. Jackson, now a retired judge, should be charged with a crime.
It turns out that in addition to relying on junk science, the “second
pillar” of Jackson’s case was a jailhouse informant who has since said
that he was coerced by Jackson to lie on the stand and say that
Willingham confessed and was ultimately offered a deal in exchange for
his testimony. (Jackson, who has described the charges that he paid off
the informant as a “complete fabrication,” did not respond to multiple
messages requesting comment left with his law office.) The Washington Post reported corroborating evidence for the payoff claim in August. Jackson is currently facing disbarment after the state bar charged him with concealing evidence related to the informant’s testimony. (Read about the Willingham family’s continued attempt to seek justice at Slate Plus.) Nothing
can bring Cameron Todd Willingham back. There was one major consequence
of his case, though. The Texas Forensic Science Commission gave 17
recommendations to revamp the state fire marshal’s office, including a
proposal for it to review old arson cases where questionable science was
used. Surprisingly, the state’s new fire marshal took on every single
one of those recommendations. Ed Graf’s case was among the first up for
review."
The entire post 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:
"Like many in India, I was transfixed by the news of the double murder
of 14-year old Aarushi Talwar and the Talwar’s live-in household help,
Hemraj, in Noida. I watched in disbelief, and later incredulous horror,
at the curious twists and turns the case took until it ended in the
conviction of the dentist couple by a lower court and their sentencing
to life imprisonment. I took a special interest in the case because soft-spoken, reserved
Nupur Talwar, who worked a lot with children, was also my dentist. At
the Khan Market dental clinic that I went to, she was recommended to me
as having the gentlest hand of all, as she simply could not bear to
cause a child any pain.........However, if the Talwars continue to be incarcerated pending the
hearing of their appeal in due course by the Allahabad High Court – and
this is likely to take several years – it would be a case of justice
delayed. Maybe the honourable Supreme Court will take suo motu
cognizance of Sen’s book and the fact that the judgment was being
written even before the Defence had the opportunity to present all its
closing arguments, and take corrective action. With every additional day that the Talwars languish in jail for a
crime they did not commit, the system and we who unquestioningly support
the system are guilty of perpetuating a glaring injustice. Justice for
Aarushi and Hemraj cannot be delivered if the innocent are jailed and
the guilty go scot-free." http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/aarushi-talwar-murder-a-tragedy-of-errors/
POST: "The trials of Ed Graf," by Jeremy Stahl, published by Slate on August 16, 2015.
GIST: "The real motive, prosecutors argued, was to get the boys—a source of
regular bickering between Graf and his wife—out of their lives. His wife
testified that shortly before the fire, she had threatened to leave him
over his strict discipline of Joby and Jason, sons from a previous
marriage, and to take their newborn third son, Edward III, with her. The case was still largely circumstantial, though. The thing that
likely clinched Graf’s conviction was the scientific testimony of a pair
of forensic examiners. Joseph Porter, an investigator with the State
Fire Marshal’s Office, testified that, based on his analysis of photos
of the remains of the scene, the door of the shed must have been locked
from the outside at the time of the fire, which would indicate foul
play. He also said there were obvious charring patterns on the floor of
the shed left by an accelerant. “The fire was definitely incendiary,”
Porter declared. The prosecution’s other expert, a top fire investigator
from New York known for his report on the Osage Avenue fire,
a notorious fire set by Philadelphia officials that destroyed a
primarily black neighborhood, was brought in to testify that there was
“no doubt” that this was arson. If the fire was intentionally set, then Graf was the only suspect
with means, motives, and opportunity. Even if there was no direct
evidence connecting him to the crime, the circumstantial evidence and
the word of two arson experts was enough. The jury deliberated for four
hours before pronouncing him guilty of capital murder. The jurors then had to decide the punishment. The district attorney,
Vic Feazell, said that the “facts of the case cry out” for the death
penalty—two boys burned alive, murdered by a trusted parent.
Defense attorney Charles McDonald gave an impassioned plea that the
jurors had convicted an innocent man and would make the injustice
irreversible if they chose execution over life in prison. “I’m asking
for this man’s life because if you did make a mistake there’s going to
be some folks, somewhere down the line, it may be years … but maybe the
mistake can be corrected,” McDonald argued. “If you take this man’s
life, there ain’t no way to ever correct it.” The jurors must have found this argument compelling, because they spared Ed Graf’s life. Twenty-five years later, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals decided
that a mistake had, in fact, been made. The investigators who testified
the fire was arson used what in the years since has been discredited as
junk science. A state review panel set up to examine bad forensic
science in arson cases said that the evidence did not point to an
incendiary fire. A top fire scientist in the field went one step
further: The way the boys had died, from carbon monoxide inhalation
rather than burns, proved the fire couldn’t have been set by Graf
spreading an accelerant, and was thus likely accidental. The defense’s
theory was that the boys, who multiple witnesses said had a history of
playing with matches and cigarettes, had set the fire themselves,
attempted to put it out, and been quickly overcome by carbon monoxide
poisoning. The reason Ed Graf’s case was reviewed a quarter of a century after
he barely escaped the death chamber was because of one man: Cameron Todd
Willingham..........Whether Graf’s plea damages the good work of Chris Connealy’s review
panels remains to be seen, but the prosecution’s successful attempts to
present a case in direct contradiction to scientific evidence does
appear like it could have the negative impact that Carpenter had told me
he fears. Certainly Graf, when he looked at his options, didn’t have
faith that the jury would favor science over circumstance—and he was
right to be skeptical. Perhaps the most disturbing thing about the judicial proceedings in
these cases is how close Graf came to being sentenced to death, and how
Cameron Todd Willingham’s unjust killing by the state has remained
unacknowledged. (Not everybody feels that way. “I felt from the
beginning, as many others did, he should’ve gotten the death penalty,”
Bradburn told me. “He should not be breathing right now.” After the
Willingham controversy erupted following the publication of Grann’s
story, meanwhile, his ex-wife Stacy Kuykendall said he confessed to her,
which contradicted previous statements to reporters.)
Every last bit of evidence used against Willingham has fallen apart,
but there have been no repercussions for the execution of a man who was
almost certainly innocent. The most extreme punishment Willingham
prosecutor John Jackson currently faces is disbarment for his alleged
role in concocting a false confession. (Request for comment to Jackson’s
office went unreturned, but he has previously denied the accusation
that he helped fabricate a confession.)
Despite this, and despite polls that show Texas continues to support
the death penalty, national Innocence Project co-founder Barry Scheck
believes the state is evolving on the issue. “I think that Texas has
changed now. They included the option of life without parole so jurors
know about it, and death sentences in Texas have begun to go down,”
Scheck told me last year. “I think it’s disturbing to people in Texas,
as it is across the country, that the risk of executing innocent people
is real. It’s demonstrable in Texas, it’s not just Todd Willingham.” Texas is already making great strides on correcting bad forensic
science, led by the Forensic Science Commission, the State Fire
Marshal’s Office, and the state’s Innocence Project. “The reality is,
science is as factual and real as you can get,” Vilbas said when we
first spoke during the fire marshal’s training sessions. “Science is
gonna advance, whether a DA, or a defense attorney, or a politician
wants to face it or not. … At some point, you’re gonna have to face the
facts that you’ve got cases based on bad science. You’re either gonna do
something about it or not, and we’re going about it in a way that we’re
able to get the stakeholders involved to actually look at it and go
‘yeah, that’s not good, let’s do what we’re supposed to do.’”
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:
