Chris Tapp: Idaho; 19 years behind bars for a rape and murder a retired judge (and many others including the victim's mother) believes Tapp did not commit: "A slew of reports from former FBI investigators, a polygraph expert, DNA experts and false confession experts have come to the same conclusion: Tapp falsely confessed under coercion. Angie Dodge’s mother, Carol, has reached the same conclusion. Carol Dodge says her motivation isn’t to get Tapp out of prison. She wants her daughter’s murderer to pay for his crime. She has reviewed the evidence for years, prodded police and prosecutors relentlessly, demanded new DNA testing and sought outside experts, but she hasn’t found one piece of scientific evidence that points to Tapp. And as long as Tapp is behind bars, and as long as police continue operating under the theory that he and two other men did it, she doesn’t think the killer will face his reckoning. The science points to one man, she says. The man who left semen, hair, fingerprints and skin cells at the scene. She doesn’t know who that is. “I am at the mercy of the city of Idaho Falls and the prosecution to find the one and only killer of my daughter,” she said. “They need to do their job.” (Must Read. HL);

STORY: "Tapp confronts ‘lies’ he told that put him behind bars," by reporter Bryan  Clark, published by the Post Register on January 28 2016.

PHOTO CAPTION: "Retired Judge Mike Heavey traveled to the Idaho State Correctional Center in Kuna on Wednesday to show Chris Tapp a video that details a confession he says was false. Tapp has served 19 years in prison for a murder that many law enforcement and judicial experts believe he didn’t commit."

GIST: "Today (28 January, 2016)  marks the 19th anniversary of Chris Tapp’s time behind bars — 6,940 days. During that time Tapp’s father died. He couldn’t go to the funeral. And, three weeks ago, Lori Hollandsworth — a Tennessee woman who advocated for his release and married him in a short 2013 prison ceremony — died in a car accident. “She was my voice,” Tapp said, wiping away tears. Tapp is serving a sentence of 30 years to life for the 1996 rape and murder of Angie Dodge. He was convicted because he confessed. He says it was a false confession, that he knows nothing about the crime except what was fed to him by police during a series of long interrogations and polygraph tests. The murder: "A slew of reports from former FBI investigators, a polygraph expert, DNA experts and false confession experts have come to the same conclusion: Tapp falsely confessed under coercion. Angie Dodge’s mother, Carol, has reached the same conclusion. Carol Dodge says her motivation isn’t to get Tapp out of prison. She wants her daughter’s murderer to pay for his crime. She has reviewed the evidence for years, prodded police and prosecutors relentlessly, demanded new DNA testing and sought outside experts, but she hasn’t found one piece of scientific evidence that points to Tapp. And as long as Tapp is behind bars, and as long as police continue operating under the theory that he and two other men did it, she doesn’t think the killer will face his reckoning. The science points to one man, she says. The man who left semen, hair, fingerprints and skin cells at the scene. She doesn’t know who that is. “I am at the mercy of the city of Idaho Falls and the prosecution to find the one and only killer of my daughter,” she said. “They need to do their job.” The Bonneville County Prosecutor’s Office hired Stuart Robinson, a former police officer and private investigator based in Twin Falls, to review the investigation and outside reports. He says he has finished his initial review of the case, and is prepared to begin looking at the outside reports. He doesn’t have an exact date when he expects to release his findings. Prison:  Wednesday morning, retired Judge Mike Heavey arrived at the Boise airport. Heavey is the co-founder of Judges for Justice, an organization that investigates potential wrongful convictions. He has been looking into Tapp’s case for the last few years, spending hundreds of hours reviewing interrogation tapes, looking at evidence and investigating people he thinks could have committed the Dodge murder. Heavey has just released a two-hour video documenting how he believes Idaho Falls Police Department detectives coerced Tapp into a false confession. He has flown in from Seattle to show Tapp the video........The video isn’t a dramatic documentary. It’s a slow, plodding examination of key moments in the interrogations. The video posits that Tapp told six separate stories to police between his first interrogation in early January 1997 to his final confession later that month......... The video’s thesis is that each of the shifts in Tapp’s story can be explained by information that was fed to him by interrogators, along with the dual pressure of a possible death sentence for not cooperating and full immunity for giving police information on the crime. Repressed memories:  The video makes another suggestion: That police convinced Tapp he had repressed memories of participating in the crime, and that a polygraph machine could unlock these memories. At several points, Tapp is asked to confess to something, and he responds: But I would remember that, wouldn’t I? At one point, Detective Steve Finn, the polygrapher, tells Tapp he was deceptive when he denied involvement in the murder. Finn tells Tapp that he could face life in prison or the gas chamber. Tapp says he doesn’t remember being at the apartment. He says he’s scared. “The reason why is because you — subconsciously, you remember,” Finn tells Tapp. In a recent report, Boise State University professor and polygraph expert Charles Honts concluded police used the polygraph as a “psychological rubber hose” rather than as a tool to detect deceptiveness. The sensors used by the machine are improperly placed, Honts wrote, and the questions aimed at Tapp diverge wildly from accepted procedure.........The confession:  A few days later, with an offer of immunity, Tapp is prepared to say he was there with Hobbs. But he seems unsure of any details and he begins to offer whatever comes to his mind. Detective Ken Brown asks in what room the murder took place. “The only thing that comes to my head’s the living room,” Tapp says. “I don’t know why. It’s just the living room popped there. Anything that pops in, I’m gonna say. … I don’t know if it’s right or not.” It’s not right. The murder took place in Angie Dodge’s bedroom. Tapp gets lots of details wrong where the house is located, where the bedroom is within the apartment, where the killer ejaculated on her body. The moment when 20-year-old Tapp says he cut Angie Dodge finally comes, and inmate Tapp hangs his head and closes his eyes, not moving for several seconds. He’s asked about seeing his 20-year-old self speak the words that two decades later still have him behind bars. He looks around at the concrete floors as shouts ring through the hallways and says, “This is where I might wind up spending 30 years of my life.” Lying:  Actually, it could be much longer. Since being incarcerated, Tapp has twice attempted to re-confess and give police new names for the third man in exchange for a reduced sentence. Once he named a federal prison inmate he met. Another time he gave a name, Steve Price, that he says he made up. False confession expert Steve Drizin reviewed these confessions and wrote that they didn’t change his view that Tapp’s confession is false. Tapp never offered any information that indicates he knew anything about the crime, just that he wants out of prison. The Idaho Falls Police Department says it’s an indication Tapp’s guilty."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.postregister.com/articles/featured-news-daily-email/2016/01/28/tapp-confronts-%E2%80%98lies%E2%80%99-he-told-put-him-behind-bars#

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

Harold Levy: Publisher;

'Making a Murderer' series; Part 9, A new Zealand perspective; Teina Pora and Michael October cases: Jarrod Gilbert explains why confessions can be "unreliable" in solving crimes. "After confessing, Dassey believed the police would drop him back to school. Instead he went to jail where he remains some ten years later. Teina Pora, with an IQ of between 74 and 83 and a mental age of 9 or 10, was similar. Both young men were entirely unaware that their words were leading them to prison. But having a diminished intellectual capacity is not the only reason false confessions happen. A case with the New Zealand Public Interest Project involves Michael October. Police told October that he was at the scene of a brutal rape and murder in Christchurch in 1994. October believed them and, because he had no memory due to alcohol and drugs, he invented a story putting him there; a behaviour called confabulation. Neither Dassey, Pora nor October had lawyers while being interrogated. All were interviewed for hours on end. Teina Pora was interviewed for days. The key element to many such cases is police interviewing procedures."..."In recent years, the New Zealand police have adopted a British interrogation method called PEACE, which is far less coercive. This bodes well, but the issue of false confessions will push deep into the Kiwi consciousness as the Michael October appeal proceeds. October once said he did it. The two men who actually committed the rape and murder say otherwise."

COMMENTARY: "Why confessions are unreliable in solving crimes," by Jarod Gilbert, published by the New Zealand  Herald on January 25, 2016. (Dr Jarrod Gilbert is a sociologist at the University of Canterbury and the lead researcher at Independent Research Solutions. He is an award-winning writer who specialises in research with practical applications.)

PHOTO CAPTION:  "After confessing, Dassey believed the police would drop him back to school. Instead he went to jail where he remains some ten years later."

GIST: "The issue of false confessions has become a topic of water cooler discussion recently due to the documentary series Making a Murderer. In that, Brendan Dassey, a young, slow-speaking lad, confessed to undertaking a horrific rape and murder with his uncle.  Yet evidence for his version of events appears (based on the documentary, at least) non-existent. He said the victim was chained to the bed, but there were no markings on it. He said she was stabbed and had her throat cut, but there was no DNA evidence. No blood. Nothing. Forensic testing meant police knew the victim had been shot in the head and they desperately wanted him to say this detail. It hadn't been made public and only the killers could know it. When police probed that it was something to do with her head he paused and said they'd cut off her hair. There was no hair found either. Watching the police interviews you can almost see the stories being plucked from a young man's cotton wool mind. When his mother asked where the details came from, he said "I guessed." Pushed further he explained, "That's what I do with my homework, too." It is a conversation that distills his childlike naivety and lays it bare. After confessing, Dassey believed the police would drop him back to school. Instead he went to jail where he remains some ten years later. Teina Pora, with an IQ of between 74 and 83 and a mental age of 9 or 10, was similar. Both young men were entirely unaware that their words were leading them to prison. But having a diminished intellectual capacity is not the only reason false confessions happen. A case with the New Zealand Public Interest Project involves Michael October. Police told October that he was at the scene of a brutal rape and murder in Christchurch in 1994. October believed them and, because he had no memory due to alcohol and drugs, he invented a story putting him there; a behaviour called confabulation. Neither Dassey, Pora nor October had lawyers while being interrogated. All were interviewed for hours on end. Teina Pora was interviewed for days. The key element to many such cases is police interviewing procedures. ....... In recent years, the New Zealand police have adopted a British interrogation method called PEACE, which is far less coercive. This bodes well, but the issue of false confessions will push deep into the Kiwi consciousness as the Michael October appeal proceeds. October once said he did it. The two men who actually committed the rape and murder say otherwise."

The entire commentary can be found at:

 http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11579430

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

Harold Levy: Publisher;

Bulletin: Purvi Patel; Indiana Supreme Court to hear oral arguments on her case on Monday 23 May; "The Indiana Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the Purvi Patel case in May. Patel is serving a 20 years sentence for neglect of a dependent and feticide. Patel was convicted on the charges in February 2015. The prosecution said Patel purchased drugs over the internet to cause an abortion."

"The Indiana Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the Purvi Patel case in May. Patel is serving a 20 years sentence for neglect of a dependent and feticide. Patel was convicted on the charges in February 2015. The prosecution said Patel purchased drugs over the internet to cause an abortion. After she delivered the baby, she placed it in a dumpster behind her parents' restaurant. The defense said the baby was stillborn. Patel was convicted on both counts and sentenced to 30 years in prison on the neglect charge, with 10 years suspended, and 6 years on the feticide charge, to be served concurrently."
http://www.abc57.com/story/31091401/indiana-supreme-court-to-hear-purvi-patel-case

Bulletin: ‘Making a Murderer’ series: Part 8: Roundtable – Episodes 2 & 3 (Note: Spoilers!): "the second installment of Innocence Project of Florida’s (IPF) roundtable discussion on Making a Murderer. The second episode, “Turning the Tables,” and the third episode, “Plight of the Accused” are covered. Once again, the discussion will first give a recap of what happened in each episode, then IPF’s executive director, Seth Miller, and intake coordinator, Dr. Adina M. Thompson, will discuss the episodes."

"This week we bring you the second installment of Innocence Project of Florida’s (IPF) roundtable discussion on Making a Murderer. The second episode, “Turning the Tables,” and the third episode, “Plight of the Accused” are covered. Once again, the discussion will first give a recap of what happened in each episode, then IPF’s executive director, Seth Miller, and intake coordinator, Dr. Adina M. Thompson, will discuss the episodes. " SM:The lack of blood at the scene is one factor strongly suggesting Dassey’s confession was false and fabricated. Given the universal agreement that Avery wasn’t very sophisticated and the general disarray of his trailer, it is implausible that such a gruesome and violent murder could have occurred in the trailer and no blood from the victim would have been deposited–even with the best and most sophisticated effort to scrub the scene of any such blood. What is so odd about Dassey’s confession is that when someone is as limited as Dassey and so susceptible to a false confession, the facts fed to the confessor by the interrogators are usually at least consistent with the physical evidence as it is known. Here, Dassey’s explanation of how the murder occurred was wildly at odds with what the law enforcement officials were actually seeing at the scene. Situations like this, where the confessor is providing known false facts, is a tell-tale sign that they are falsely confessing and simply making stuff up. Yet, the interrogators here were very willing to accept Dassey’s amazing story probably because their tunnel vision was squarely focused on Avery and they were unconcerned with information that undermined their preconceived notions about the case AT: I would venture that it isn’t only the lack of blood that compromised Dassey’s confession. There is a set of factors that combined to make this a dangerous situation with conditions ripe for a false confession to happen. Some things that may increase the likelihood of a false confession that were present in Dassey’s case include: age, in that children may be more likely to falsely confess than adults; mental acuity, in that people with lower IQs may be more likely to confess than people with higher IQs; and custody, in that children who do not have a parent, guardian or attorney present may be more likely to make a false statement. When those factors are combined with the fact that investigators asked Dassey leading questions (“Who shot her in the head?”) after he failed to introduce the facts independently, AND the fact that Dassey continued to change his story to please his interviewers…well, it’s a dangerous situation. A false confession is of course possible. As Seth pointed out, the story Dassey told about slitting Halbach’s throat does not line up with the evidence collected from the location where that supposedly happened, which only adds to my suspicion about this confession. For more information about false confession and admission, I suggest reading work by Dr. Saul Kassin of John Jay College of Criminal Justice. He’s one of the people doing cutting-edge social science research in this area. Of course, I can’t say for certain whether Dassey falsely confessed or not. I can only identify the risk factors. SM: While anything is possible, I’ll go out on a limb and posit that Dassey’s admission was in fact a false confession." Go to the following link for the entire 'roundtable.'
http://floridainnocence.org/content/?p=12342

Dennis Oland: Developments; Police Commission drops review of police force pending appeal; Sentencing set for February 11; Hearing for bail pending appeal set for February 12; "Several problems with the murder investigation were highlighted during the high-profile trial. The jury heard evidence that police failed to protect the crime scene from possible contamination, used the bathroom located in the foyer outside the victim's office for two days before it was forensically tested, and never tested the back door for evidence. A key piece of evidence in the Crown's case against Oland — a blood-stained brown sports jacket — was also handled by the former lead investigator with his bare hands and rolled up into a 30 centimetre by 30 centimetre paper exhibit bag by another officer, the jury heard." CBC News.

STORY: "Dennis Oland appeal halts review of police investigation of father's murder," by reporter Bobbi-Jean MacKinnon. published by CBC News on January 29, 2016.

PHOTO CAPTION: "Dennis Oland, 47, is facing life in prison after being convicted of second-degree murder in the 2011 death of his father, prominent businessman Richard Oland." 

GIST:  "The New Brunswick Police Commission has suspended its review of the Saint John Police Force's handling of the Richard Oland murder investigation, citing Dennis Oland's appeal.........Dennis Oland, 47, was found guilty by a jury on Dec. 19 of second–degree murder in the 2011 bludgeoning death of his multimillionaire father. His lawyers filed a notice of appeal and an application for bail with the New Brunswick Court of Appeal in Fredericton on Jan. 20. Richard Oland, 69, was found dead in his Saint John office on July 7, 2011. (Canadian Yachting Association) They are seeking to have the conviction quashed, and either an acquittal entered or a new trial ordered. Oland is scheduled to be sentenced on Feb. 11, with his request for bail slated to be heard the following day. Several problems with the murder investigation were highlighted during the high-profile trial. The jury heard evidence that police failed to protect the crime scene from possible contamination, used the bathroom located in the foyer outside the victim's office for two days before it was forensically tested, and never tested the back door for evidence. A key piece of evidence in the Crown's case against Oland — a blood-stained brown sports jacket — was also handled by the former lead investigator with his bare hands and rolled up into a 30 centimetre by 30 centimetre paper exhibit bag by another officer, the jury heard.......... The body of Richard Oland, 69, was discovered laying face down in a pool of blood in his Saint John office on July 7, 2011. He had suffered 45 sharp and blunt force injuries to his head, neck and hands. His son, Dennis Oland, was the last known person to see his father alive during a meeting at his office the night before. Oland was deemed a suspect on the first day of the investigation, but wasn't charged until more than two years later, on Nov. 13, 2013."

The entire story can be  found at:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/oland-police-commission-appeal-review-1.3425935

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 Harold Levy: Publisher;

'Making a Murderer' series: Part 7: USA Today reports that Kathleen Zellner (Steven Avery's new attorney) is calling out Ken Kratz (Avery's prosecutor) for writing a book purporting to be the "the whole story" about the case. "Kratz has said that he believes evidence against Avery was left out of the wildly popular Netflix docu-series 'Making a Murderer.' He has called the series one-sided and told the Associated Press that the victim, Teresa Halbach, is being forgotten. What's still unclear is whether Kratz had been working on the book as early as last summer — long before the series came out." USA Today;

STORY: "Avery attorney rips Kratz over book," by reporter Alison Dirr, published by  USA Today on January 25, 2016.

GIST: "Ken Kratz, the prosecutor in the case against Steven Avery, is writing a book to tell the "whole story," according to a published report. And Avery's new attorney is calling him out in blunt terms. Kratz has said that he believes evidence against Avery was left out of the wildly popular Netflix docu-series "Making a Murderer." He has called the series is one-sided and told the Associated Press that the victim, Teresa Halbach, is being forgotten. What's still unclear is whether Kratz had been working on the book as early as last summer — long before the series came out. Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey, are serving life terms in prison for the murder of 25-year-old freelance photographer.cAvery's new attorney, Kathleen Zellner, tweeted a letter she said Kratz sent to Avery along with the line, "Kratz letter to SA: Confess so I can write book & profit.This bloodsucking gives vampires a bad name #MakingAMurderer." The letter tweeted by Zellner is dated Sept. 6 and titled, "I'm Sorry That You Are Not Interested." Kratz wrote to Avery: I got your letter dated August 28, 2015, wherein you tell me that your visitor list is full, and ask if I checked out other fingerprints found on Teresa Halbach's car, telling me that these people could have "set you up" for this.........Unfortunately, you only want to continue your nonsense about being set up. That's too bad, because you had ONE opportunity to finally tell all the details, but now that will never happen. By the way, the difference between you and famous convicted murderers from the past is they told their whole truthful story to someone, who then wrote a book about what actually happened and people got to understand both sides. I was willing to help you do that...but if you are going to continue to lie about what happened between you and Ms. Halbach, I am not interested. If you change your mind, and want to tell your honest story someday, please contact me. Zellner announced in mid-January that she'll be taking on his case. Since then, she's been active on Twitter, calling out Kratz and drawing parallels to her former clients, who had been exonerated."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2016/01/25/avery-attorney-rips-kratz-over-book/79291924/ 

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

Harold Levy: Publisher;

'Making a Murderer' series: Part 6: 'Avery's blood could still be 'game changer'; "(Defence attorney Jerome) Buting said he has received emails from scientists across the world about improvements in the science for chemical detection and ideas about other kinds of tests that could be just as useful — or maybe more so — than an EDTA test. He declined to go into detail, saying he has not researched the ideas or whether they would work in this case. That decision would be up to Avery’s new appeal attorneys, anyway. Wouters’ lab doesn’t usually work with bodily fluids, but he said he wouldn’t be surprised if techniques have become more exact over time. “Science marches on,” he said."USA Today Network.

STORY:  'Avery's blood could still be 'game changer,'  by Duke Behnke and Alison Dirr, published by the USA Today Network, on January 22, 2016.

GIST: "A key scene in the wildly popular "Making a Murderer" series focused on the moment defense attorney Jerome Buting found a vial of Steven Avery's blood with a pinhole in the top. It looked like a turning point for the defense. The attorneys alleged that Avery's blood, which was found in murder victim Teresa Halbach's car, had been planted — and could have come from that vial kept in the Manitowoc County Clerk of Courts office. But an FBI agent testified that it wasn't the case, dealing a serious blow to Buting's argument that the blood had been planted. Years later, Buting still doesn't trust the FBI's test method or its results. “It was rushed, the whole methodology was rushed,” Buting told USA TODAY NETWORK-Wisconsin. “It had never been validated by any other outside lab. To my knowledge it still never has been.” The possibility of proving the blood was planted still offers a glimmer of hope for a new trial. "That would be a complete game changer," Buting said. He couldn't imagine how a judge wouldn't allow a retrial. The blood in question was found in Halbach's Toyota RAV4. She was murdered in 2005, and Avery and his nephew Brendan Dassey were convicted in 2007 of killing the 25-year-old photographer. The two men were sentenced to life in prison. Both have appealed their convictions. Their cases have been back in the spotlight since the Netflix docu-series "Making a Murderer" was released in mid-December. Many viewers concluded that Manitowoc County sheriff's officers planted Avery's blood in Halbach's vehicle. The FBI and the State Crime Lab were involved in analyzing biological evidence used to convict Avery. The FBI quickly developed a procedure to test samples of blood found in Halbach's SUV for the presence of a preservative called EDTA. That was critical because if EDTA was found in the blood, it would show the blood wasn't from a fresh wound. It would bolster the critical defense assertion that the drops came from the sample of Avery's blood discovered in an unsecured box kept with files from Avery's 1985 erroneous sexual assault conviction. Neither the FBI nor the State Crime Lab will say anything about the test, including whether it has improved since Avery's 2007 trial. That's a particularly important question for Buting. "You certainly don't want to use up whatever sample is left if the science hasn't developed enough and yet maybe could be sometime in the future," Buting said. Marc LeBeau, head of the FBI's chemistry analysis section, testified during the 2007 Avery trial that the blood in the SUV didn't show any presence of EDTA, so it didn't come from the vial of Avery's blood found inside the clerk of courts office, which is located next door to the Manitowoc County Sheriff's Department. A defense witness, lab auditor Janine Arvizu, testified EDTA might have been present in the blood but might have been below the detection limit of the FBI's test. Buting said it was possible that there could have been EDTA in the bloodstains that the test couldn’t detect. But the defense was not able to get the test independently verified because there were no labs capable of running the test. The FBI declined to comment on whether its EDTA test still is in use today, whether it has been refined or whether it has been replaced by a different test. ".........Kelly L. Wouters, the laboratory director at Armstrong Forensic Laboratory in Arlington, Texas, said he had a defense attorney ask his lab last year to test a bloodstain for EDTA. “We don’t do EDTA testing but we’ve been asked about it in the past,” Wouters said. “We couldn’t find a good method for doing it and what methods there are we don’t have the equipment for.” Wouters said testing for EDTA isn’t common. In his experience, the necessary equipment is usually found in university laboratories but not as much in commercial or crime laboratories..........Buting said he has received emails from scientists across the world about improvements in the science for chemical detection and ideas about other kinds of tests that could be just as useful — or maybe more so — than an EDTA test. He declined to go into detail, saying he has not researched the ideas or whether they would work in this case. That decision would be up to Avery’s new appeal attorneys, anyway. Wouters’ lab doesn’t usually work with bodily fluids, but he said he wouldn’t be surprised if techniques have become more exact over time. “Science marches on,” he said."

The entire story can be  found at:

 http://www.postcrescent.com/story/news/local/steven-avery/2016/01/22/averys-blood-could-still-game-changer/79054730/

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:

Harold Levy: Publisher:

Scott Watson: New Zealand; Significant Development: New Zealand reports that a new book by author Ian Wishart - to be published tomorrow - clears him and that "Potential sightings of Ben Smart, 21, and Olivia Hope, 17, several days after they were thought to have died are among the more startling inclusions in the report." (Must Read. HL);

STORY: "Careful tracing of mystery boat clears Watson, says author," reported by Senior Reporter David Fisher of the New Zealand Herald on January 28, 2016.

PHOTO CAPTION:  "Potential sightings of Ben Smart, 21, and Olivia Hope, 17, several days after they were thought to have died are among the more startling inclusions in the report."

GIST: "When Warwick Jenness speaks of the murders of Olivia Hope and Ben Smart, he does so without speculation. There is a certainty to the statements he makes based on four years of solid, informed research. He is not one to make hasty decisions. Others well-versed in the case worked with Jenness - a communications engineer, commercial pilot, company director and recreational sailor.

Their findings coalesced into a report that traces the route taken by the infamous "mystery ketch" to Furneaux Lodge in the Marlborough Sounds for the New Year's Eve party of 1997. This is the vessel to which police first looked to answers over the question of the disappearance of Hope, 17, and Smart, 21. In meticulous detail, Jenness' report describes who was aboard. Scott Watson, convicted of murdering the young pair, is not among the names.   Then, in a series of startling claims, he builds a theory around the disappearance of Hope and Smart, which explains Watson's absence. It diverges completely from the prosecution case which saw Watson convicted of their murders and sent to prison for 19 years.........Mr Jenness is not the only one to claim to have identified the ketch. A new book by Ian Wishart is due for release tomorrow and also claims to have found the yacht. It will be the fifth book written on the Sounds murders. For many, the disappearance and presumed murder of Hope and Smart is one of New Zealand's most captivating and enduring mysteries. For others, there is no mystery. The killer, police and others will say, was found guilty after an 11-week trial in 1999. Convicted, Watson remains in prison, denied parole and still maintaining his innocence. "You're wrong," he told the jury 17 years ago. He has the same message today. The yachting community had many vocal opponents of the case against Watson. As the case unfolded in court, the prosecution's assertions on issues with which yachties were familiar created a small but determined group of naysayers. Key to it was Watson's yacht - a small, single-masted vessel - and testimony Hope and Smart were last seen boarding a 40-foot two-masted ketch. Yachtie Mike Kalaugher wrote a 2001 book on the case. He said there was no way to confuse Watson's boat with a much larger ketch. "This is equivalent to confusing a truck with a Mini." The hunt for the ketch was where Mr Jenness started, along with Mr Kalaugher and Keith Hunter, author of Trial By Trickery, which makes compelling arguments against Watson's conviction. Mr Jenness told the Herald: "If we can prove that the ketch existed, and I think we have, then Watson is not guilty."......... Mr Jenness, though, believes he has proved the sighting was actually on January 3. And that night, he says, the witness was sober. That evening, evidence shows, Watson was far away on a cruising holiday with his sister Sandy. He claims another sighting two days later - January 5 - which is the most astonishing assertion in the report. By then, according to the report's chain of events, Hope and Smart had been transferred to another yacht owned by someone allegedly with convictions for serious violence. A photograph, distant and grainy, shows a flash of blonde hair on a runabout. It was taken by a woman named in the report who reported a "girl with long blonde hair clearly blowing in the slipstream". There was a young man also with her. "Both appeared to be sitting with their hands behind their backs as if ... tied." The woman's husband called police - "it was three months before NZ Police followed up the information", the report claims. A day later there is another sighting of the boat. At that point, the authors conclude, Hope and Smart are no longer aboard.

The entire story can be  found at:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11580721

See Wikipedia account: "Scott Watson (born 28 June 1971) is a New Zealander who was convicted in May 1999 of the murders of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope on his boat Blade on 1 January 1998. The bodies of Smart and Hope have never been found. A sonar search of the entrance to Tory channel, an area of interest to the investigating police, found "there is no indication that the missing remains of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope are present or visible on the sea bed inside the search area".^[1] Watson is serving a life sentence with a non-parole period of 17 years.^[2] The New Zealand Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by Watson. In 2003 Watson's lawyers Mike Antunovic and Greg King applied to the Privy Council, it found no grounds for further appeal. Appeals and controversies:  The defence appealed Watson’s conviction, and the case went to the Court of Appeal in April and May 2000. Three Appeal Court judges heard submissions from both the prosecution and the defence, but decided there was no new evidence to recommend a second trial.^[11] They disregarded the defence’s submission that the “two trip” theory had appeared “out of the blue” late in the trial.^[11] Questions have been raised about the manner of the police investigation, notably by Mike Kalaugher, who in 2001 published a book which was critical of methods allegedly used by police to obtain Watson's conviction, and by Keith Hunter, in a 2003 television documentary and a 2006 book. In November 2000, after the Court of Appeal hearing, a witness who testified at his trial contacted the Weekend Herald to say his evidence given under oath was "nothing more than an act". He said he was being threatened by gang members in prison; he was coming up for parole and was put under pressure by police to testify and "I agreed on the basis that my life was getting threatened". The witness changed his story at least twice more which led Watson's lawyers to conclude he was completely unreliable.^[12] A 2010 report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority cleared police of allegations by Keith Hunter and Chris Watson. It found the police investigation had fallen short of best practice in areas which "had no significant bearing on the outcome of the investigation". No evidence was found that would support Hunter's other claims.^[13] Watson has unsuccessfully applied for a royal pardon.^{[14] [15]} In June 2015 Watson successfully challenged at court the Corrections Department's refusal to allow him to be interviewed about his case by North and South journalist Mike White.^[16] Also in June 2015 the first hearing of the Parole Board took place. Watson was denied parole on the basis of two failed drug tests and an unfavourable psychological report that attested Watson "a very high risk'' of committing violent acts if he was released from prison.^"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Watson

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

Harold Levy: Publisher;

Bulletin: Neal Robbins; Texas; Recanting pathologist case: Significant development: Texas's highest court has cleared the way for him to have a new trial in a Toddler's 1998 death after Dr. Patricia Moore, the original pathologist in the case, recanted her earlier conclusion at Robbin's trial that the death was a homicide. "Moore has had a handful of infant death cases reviewed and conclusions changed because her findings of homicide failed to stand up on re-examination. In Tristen's case, Moore later reassessed her conclusions, saying she should have ruled the manner of death "undetermined" instead of "homicide." Robbins' case was buoyed by the 2013 passage of a state law that gave defendants a new challenge if they could prove that there had been a change in the science behind evidence presented at trial." Texas Tribune;

"The state's highest criminal court on Wednesday cleared the way for a Montgomery County man to get a new trial in the 1998 suffocation of a 17-month-old girl. With the move, the court stuck to an earlier decision granting the convicted murderer relief because a 2013 state law allows challenges when scientific evidence evolves after a trial. ........The long-awaited decision involves the case of Robbins, who was convicted in the 1998 death of his girlfriend's daughter, Tristen Skye Trivet. Robbins had been caring for Tristen for hours while her mother was out. Tristen's mother checked on her once after Robbins left and thought the child was sleeping. When she checked 20 minutes later, she found that Tristen's lips were blue and that she was not breathing. Tristen was pronounced dead, and Robbins was later arrested and charged with capital murder. He was convicted in 1999 and sentenced to life in prison. In 2007, the original pathologist in the case, Dr. Patricia Moore, recanted her earlier conclusions at Robbins' trial that the death was a homicide, and Robbins' legal team has worked to get him a new trial. Moore has had a handful of infant death cases reviewed and conclusions changed because her findings of homicide failed to stand up on re-examination.  In Tristen's case, Moore later reassessed her conclusions, saying she should have ruled the manner of death "undetermined" instead of "homicide."  Robbins' case was buoyed by the 2013 passage of a state law that gave defendants a new challenge if they could prove that there had been a change in the science behind evidence presented at trial.   "I'm extremely gratified that the Court of Criminal Appeals has declined the state's invitation to second-guess its decision 14 months ago granting Neal Robbins a new trial he so clearly deserves," said Brian Wice, Robbins' attorney. "All that Neal Robbins has ever asked for in the almost two decades that I've represented him is a fair trial with a reliable result. Today's decision now makes that dream a reality." 
http://www.texastribune.org/2016/01/27/texas-highest-court-rules-expanded-junk-science-la/

See related  Grits for Breakfast  post: "Court of Criminal Appeals judges call out colleagues for judicial activism on Texas junk science writ."
http://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.ca/2016/01/court-of-criminal-appeals-judges-call.htmlhttp://gritsforbreakfast.blogspot.ca/2016/01/court-of-criminal-appeals-judges-call.html

Bulletin: Massachusetts: Major Development: George Perrot: "Behind bars for 30 years - after being arrested when he was 17-years-old - he has won a new trial over flawed FBI testimony. " Perrot was convicted with the help of the FBI's analysis of a hair found in the victim's bedroom. The FBI used a microscope to compare that hair to one taken from Perrot, and found they were essentially the same, helping convince the jury that Perrot was at the crime scene. But microscopic hair analysis has since been found to be far from exact. An FBI-led audit of cases where their analysts wrote reports or testified has found hundreds of examples where they overstated what the science of hair microscopy could show. Perrot's case was one of them, and his legal team has now convinced a judge that the testimony about the hair in his case should lead to a new trial."...""It is a horrific crime," Mayer said. "It is also horrific to think about being sent to jail as a teenager and spending the rest of your life in jail for a horrific crime that you did not commit." WCVB;

"A judge ordered a new trial Tuesday for a man serving a life sentence for raping an elderly Springfield woman, citing the same kind of flawed FBI forensics testimony that has come under scrutiny across the country and has been used to convict others since cleared by modern DNA testing. George Perrot was arrested when he was 17 years old and has spent almost all of the past 30 years behind bars for the 1985 crime.........Perrot was convicted with the help of the FBI's analysis of a hair found in the victim's bedroom. The FBI used a microscope to compare that hair to one taken from Perrot, and found they were essentially the same, helping convince the jury that Perrot was at the crime scene. But microscopic hair analysis has since been found to be far from exact. An FBI-led audit of cases where their analysts wrote reports or testified has found hundreds of examples where they overstated what the science of hair microscopy could show. Perrot's case was one of them, and his legal team has now convinced a judge that the testimony about the hair in his case should lead to a new trial. In a 79-page decision released today, Superior Court Judge Robert Kane wrote that "justice may not have been done" because hair evidence was used to help place Perrot at the crime scene, "It is well understood now that hair analysis can only tell you so much," said Kirsten Mayer of Ropes and Gray, part of Perrot's legal team. "When Mr. Perrot was convicted, the FBI expert who testified at his trial overstated what the limits of science are now understood to be.".........Judge Kane, in his decision, agreed the testimony about the hair analysis was a significant part of the prosecutor's case.

"It is a horrific crime," Mayer said. "It is also horrific to think about being sent to jail as a teenager and spending the rest of your life in jail for a horrific crime that you did not commit."
http://www.wcvb.com/news/behind-bars-for-30-years-man-wins-new-trial-over-flawed-fbi-testimony/37653430

"Making a Murderer" series: Part 5: Keith Findley who represented Steven Avery, subject of the “Making a Murderer” documentary, in the 2005 proceedings that produced DNA evidence to prove Avery’s innocence and exonerate him of a 1985 sexual assault conviction, writes in the Washington Post that "The presumption of innocence exists in theory, not reality"..."All of these assaults on the presumption of innocence — and the systemic failures to resist them — are on vivid display in the Netflix documentary series “Making a Murderer,” about the murder trials of Steven Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey. Regardless of whether Avery and Dassey are actually innocent or guilty — on that question I make no claims here — the series effectively shows how seriously compromised was the presumption of innocence. The public reaction to the case today is 180 degrees from the public’s reaction to Avery’s arrest in Teresa Halbach’s murder in 2005. As much as the public today is horrified by the apparent rush to judgment and questionable tactics used to convict Avery and Dassey, the outrage was aimed squarely at Avery and Dassey at the time of the investigation. Public judgment was swift and vicious. The crime was horrific, and the lust for retribution was palpable. The presumption of innocence had no chance." ..."Much can be done to protect the presumption of innocence, starting with enforcing the ethical rules against prejudicial pretrial publicity, changing the way police interrogate suspects and recalibrating pretrial release decisions to allow the innocent to prepare a defense."

COMMENTARY: "The presumption of innocence exists in theory, not reality," by Keith Findley, published by the Washington Post on January 19, 2016. (Keith Findley is an assistant professor of law at the University of Wisconsin Law School, where he is co-director of the Wisconsin Innocence Project. He represented Steven Avery, subject of the “Making a Murderer” documentary, in the 2005 proceedings that produced DNA evidence to prove Avery’s innocence and exonerate him of a 1985 sexual assault conviction.)

GIST:  "If, as the Supreme Court has consistently declared, the presumption of innocence is among the most fundamental principles in our criminal justice system, it is also among the most fragile.The presumption is under constant assault..........Given these natural inclinations, one would think a system built on the presumption of innocence would protect and reinforce that presumption. But in many ways, it does not.......... Pretrial bail policies, for example, are not based on assessments of any likelihood of innocence or the need for innocent people to prepare for their defense, but solely on the risk that the (presumably guilty) accused might not appear for trial. On this score, the presumption of guilt accelerated in the early 1970s when notions of preventive detention — that is, complete denial of bail — emerged as part of the Nixon administration’s mission to control “criminals” before they committed crimes. The presumption of innocence is undermined in practice, as well. Police are trained to act on a presumption of guilt in ways that exacerbate natural tendencies toward confirmation bias. Police are trained, for example, to make quick assessments of guilt and to interrogate suspects, not to learn information about the case, but to obtain a confession that confirms their suspicions. It need not be that way. Police in other countries, most notably the United Kingdom, are trained not to interrogate as if they know the answers to their questions. Instead, they embrace “investigative interviewing,” in which they employ probing, non-accusatory questions designed to elicit information. Unlike police in the United States, they are not permitted to lie to suspects about evidence to trick them into confessing. And yet this process does not impede their ability to investigate crime; suspects in the United Kingdom confess at roughly the same rate as suspects in the United States. All of these assaults on the presumption of innocence — and the systemic failures to resist them — are on vivid display in the Netflix documentary series “Making a Murderer,” about the murder trials of Steven Avery and his nephew, Brendan Dassey. Regardless of whether Avery and Dassey are actually innocent or guilty — on that question I make no claims here — the series effectively shows how seriously compromised was the presumption of innocence. The public reaction to the case today is 180 degrees from the public’s reaction to Avery’s arrest in Teresa Halbach’s murder in 2005. As much as the public today is horrified by the apparent rush to judgment and questionable tactics used to convict Avery and Dassey, the outrage was aimed squarely at Avery and Dassey at the time of the investigation. Public judgment was swift and vicious. The crime was horrific, and the lust for retribution was palpable. The presumption of innocence had no chance.,,,,,,,,,   Following nearly any controversial case will offer many lessons about our criminal justice system. Perhaps chief among them is the feebleness of the presumption of innocence in our system today, and the need to find ways to reinvigorate that bedrock principle."

 The entire story can be found at:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2016/01/19/the-presumption-of-innocence-exists-in-theory-not-reality/

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

Harold Levy: Publisher;

Motherisk: Toronto Star reporter Jacques Gallant zeroes in on victim's of the now shut down lab at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto who have been denied access to the newly established Beaman Commission because they live outside the province. “The tragedy for Natacha and William is that the surrounding circumstances suggest that Motherisk was the only factor that led to a permanent wardship order being made for their son, who has not only lost his parents, but his older siblings and extended family,” said LeRoy’s Ontario-based lawyer, Julie Kirkpatrick. When the government announced the commission, it indicated that its work would not be conducted outside of Ontario’s borders. “This is a national issue. They didn’t recognize boundaries when they did the tests, so why should a review suddenly put up these boundaries?” said McIntyre’s lawyer, Mike Dull. “These two parents are a prime example that this extends beyond Ontario. They deserve a remedy.” (I couldn't agree more. HL);

STORY: "Canadians outside Ontario affected by Motherisk results won’t have cases reviewed," by reporter Jacques Gallant, published by the Toronto Star on January 26, 2016.

SUB-HEADING: "When the government announced the commission, following a Star investigation into Motherisk’s practices, it indicated that its work would not be conducted outside of Ontario’s borders."

PHOTO CAPTION: "William McIntyre, seen with Natacha LeRoy, calls the fact that their case involving Motherisk won't be reviewed an "atrocity." Their 3-year-old son was made a ward of the province after Motherisk's now disputed testing found both parents had tested positive for traces of cocaine."

GIST: "When William McIntyre reached out to the commission looking into child protection cases that used hair test results from the Hospital for Sick Children’s Motherisk laboratory, he was shocked to learn that the review did not apply to him. Motherisk hair testing was done in cases that dealt with some of McIntyre and Natacha LeRoy’s children. The Nova Scotia residents are among an unknown number of Canadians who have been affected by Motherisk hair test results — described by an independent review as “inadequate and unreliable” — but who don’t have the possibility of having their cases reviewed by commissioner Judith Beaman because they do not reside in Ontario. While Motherisk tests were used in four other provinces — British Columbia, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia — none has indicated the intention to form the kind of review currently taking place here. “It’s an atrocity,” McIntyre, 50, told the Star on the phone from North Sydney, N.S. “How could this be just an Ontario thing? You came down and took my hair and sent it to Ontario … This is not just Ontario. This is a Canada-wide situation.” McIntyre and LeRoy’s 3-year-old son was made a ward of the province and later adopted as the result of a proceeding in which Motherisk said both parents had tested positive for traces of cocaine. McIntyre and LeRoy — who were previously in a relationship and remain good friends — deny using the drug at the time. McIntyre also claims that subsequent hair testing done in the U.S. showed he was negative. They say they were asking that the court grant custody of their son to McIntyre with access to LeRoy. LeRoy, 40, described feeling helpless when their son was taken away. Now she wants answers. “I would just like everything to come to light and be transparent,” she said. “My little girl and son have been separated. She misses him and I’m sure he misses her.” The commission, launched by the Ontario government earlier this year, will spend the next two years reviewing potentially thousands of Ontario child protection cases. Its creation follows a damning independent review — sparked by a Star investigation into Motherisk’s practices — from retired Court of Appeal Justice Susan Lang in December which found that results from the now-discontinued drug and alcohol hair testing at Motherisk were “inadequate and unreliable.” Sick Kids, whose CEO apologized for Motherisk’s practices in October, is now the defendant in at least one lawsuit, along with former lab director Gideon Koren and manager Joey Gareri, who testified at the hearing dealing with McIntyre and LeRoy’s son. “The tragedy for Natacha and William is that the surrounding circumstances suggest that Motherisk was the only factor that led to a permanent wardship order being made for their son, who has not only lost his parents, but his older siblings and extended family,” said LeRoy’s Ontario-based lawyer, Julie Kirkpatrick. When the government announced the commission, it indicated that its work would not be conducted outside of Ontario’s borders. “This is a national issue. They didn’t recognize boundaries when they did the tests, so why should a review suddenly put up these boundaries?” said McIntyre’s lawyer, Mike Dull. “These two parents are a prime example that this extends beyond Ontario. They deserve a remedy.”.........McIntyre said he received negative hair test results from an Ohio lab in 2015, but that the results — along with the fact that he has custody of his daughter with access to LeRoy — didn’t stop the children’s aid society from finalizing his son’s adoption that year. McIntyre and LeRoy’s lawyers say it’s too early for them to say what can now be done regarding the boy’s case, adding they’re waiting on transcripts from the court proceedings. “The possibilities are slim,” McIntyre said, “but I’ll take the chance.”"

The entire story can be found at:

 http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/01/26/canadians-outside-ontario-affected-by-motherisk-results-wont-have-cases-reviewed.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

Harold Levy: Publisher;