Bulletin: Pennsylvania; 'Bite mark decision'. Crystal Dawn Weimer; ABC News reports that, "A judge on Thursday overturned a woman's murder conviction and prison sentence after a bite mark expert who testified against her at trial said he now believes his findings were "junk science."..." A dental expert, Dr. Constantine Karazulas, testified that a bite on the victim's hand matched Weimer. But the witness who placed Weimer at the scene has since recanted, and the dentist changed his mind, too. The National Academy of Science in 2009 issued a report discrediting bite mark evidence as an inexact way to match defendants to bite wounds. Marissa Bluestine, legal director of the Pennsylvania Innocence Project, which is representing Weimer, said the report was Karazulas' "epiphany" and "he independently went back and reviewed his findings." Karazulas concluded that bite marks can be used to eliminate someone as a suspect, not to conclusively match them, Bluestine said."

"A judge on Thursday overturned a woman's murder conviction and prison sentence after a bite mark expert who testified against her at trial said he now believes his findings were "junk science." Fayette County Judge John Wagner ruled in the case of 38-year-old Crystal Dawn Weimer, of Connellsville, after a brief hearing about 40 miles south of Pittsburgh. Weimer has repeatedly insisted she's innocent in the 2001 beating death of 21-year-old Curtis Haith. She was convicted of third-degree murder in 2006 and sentenced to 15 to 30 years in prison. A man imprisoned in the case had testified that Weimer helped lure Haith to the scene. A dental expert, Dr. Constantine Karazulas, testified that a bite on the victim's hand matched Weimer. But the witness who placed Weimer at the scene has since recanted, and the dentist changed his mind, too. The National Academy of Science in 2009 issued a report discrediting bite mark evidence as an inexact way to match defendants to bite wounds. Marissa Bluestine, legal director of the Pennsylvania Innocence Project, which is representing Weimer, said the report was Karazulas' "epiphany" and "he independently went back and reviewed his findings." Karazulas concluded that bite marks can be used to eliminate someone as a suspect, not to conclusively match them, Bluestine said." (Thanks to CSI DDS for drawing our attention to this story. HL);
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/womans-conviction-tossed-junk-science-bite-mark-case-34179866