Bulletin: Daniel Dougherty: Philadelphia; Startling development: Bulletin: The Philadelphia Inquirer reports that for the second time he has been found guilty in the arson fire that killed his sons. Reporter Jeff Gammage; " The sole defense witness was nationally known consultant John Lentini, head of Scientific Fire Analysis LLC in Florida. He testified that extensive damage to the home made it impossible to know where or how the fire began. The cause should have been classified undetermined, he said. Conroy, imploring the jury to see contradictions in Lentini's testimony in this case and elsewhere, called the scientist a disgrace who would "whore himself and say anything" in exchange for a consultant's fee. Quinn's 1985 findings gained fresh support from consultant and former fire marshal Thomas Schneiders. Schneiders, who reviewed the case file, said burn patterns definitively showed the fire was set in three places - a sofa, a love seat, and under a dining-room table. Dougherty has always said he awoke to a house on fire, ran outside, then tried desperately to save his sons. What's changed between that night and now, defense counsel Fryman said, is what modern experts like Lentini have learned: "Fire investigators are getting it wrong." He cited Lentini's testimony about a federal test - criticized by the prosecution as a poor training exercise - in which a fire was set and extinguished in a mock bedroom. Only three of 53 experienced firefighters could correctly identify the quadrant where the fire began. "That's how hard it is to read these burn patterns," Fryman said."

At retrial on charges of setting the fire that killed his two young sons, Daniel Dougherty Jr. was again found guilty of murder on Monday. Dougherty, convicted 16 years ago but later awarded a new trial, had sought to persuade a new jury that he had nothing to do with the boys' deaths. But after seven days of sometimes contentious deliberations, the panel reached a verdict that will likely keep him in prison for life. Dougherty, 56, who had been sentenced to death for arson and murder in 2000, was granted a new trial because the lawyer at his first trial made critical legal mistakes. At retrial, prosecutors did not seek the death penalty. For years, Dougherty has maintained his innocence, saying he the victim of a bungled fire investigation that found mistakenly labeled the blaze arson when his lawyer said the cause was impossible to determine. Dougherty's case had been closely watched by legal experts and defense groups who said the use of old, outdated fire science has put innocent people in jail. Prosecutors, then and now, insisted that the fire was deliberately set - and Dougherty, who was the last person out of the house, had ignited the blaze. Dougherty was not charged until 14 years after the fire. In 2000, Dougherty was tried, convicted and sentenced to death for killing 3-year-old John and 4-year-old Daniel Jr. in their Carver Street rowhome. His death sentence was reduced to a life sentence in 2012. Dougherty's retrial came after an appeals court ruled that his original trial lawyer's failings were so substantial that no reliable determination of guilt or innocence occurred. Prosecutors say Dougherty set the blaze to hurt two women - his girlfriend, Kathleen Schuler, who owned the home, and the boys' mother, Kathleen Dippel, from whom he was separated. In anger over their rejections that night, he destroyed the house of one and the children of the other, prosecutors said. Dougherty's lawyer said advancements in fire science make clear that the fire should have been classified "undetermined," not arson. That police waited so many years to charge Dougherty with arson and murder by itself showed doubt, he argued. During seven days of jury deliberations, the 56-year-old former mechanic stood perched between prison and freedom, absolution and guilt. Nearly 31 years ago, at age 25, his life became a play in three acts: the fire in 1985, his first trial and conviction in 2000, his retrial in 2016. Testimony showed the toll that time has taken. .........The make-up of the jury, even after one juror was replaced, was the same as the last time - nine women and three men. This jury heard from Dougherty's former wife and girlfriend that he had an alcohol problem, and when they bugged him to stop drinking, he hit them. Not called by the prosecution were two men who previously helped send Dougherty to death row - jailhouse informants who said he confessed to them when they shared a cell. In 2000 the two provided the only new evidence against Dougherty. Both testified in exchange for leniency from prosecutors in pending criminal cases. That jury was asked to believe that for 15 years, Dougherty never confessed to anyone. But within two months of being arrested, he confided in two strangers. Hours after the blaze, police asked Schuler, whose young son also shared the home, whether he ever beat his children. "No," she answered. "Those kids were his whole life." The issue of whether Dougherty was a good or bad father never came up at his retrial. The defense contends that 30 years ago, the fire marshal got it wrong. Burn patterns that seemed like proof of arson in 1985 were known by 2000, and certainly today, to be proof of nothing. The sole defense witness was nationally known consultant John Lentini, head of Scientific Fire Analysis LLC in Florida. He testified that extensive damage to the home made it impossible to know where or how the fire began. The cause should have been classified undetermined, he said. Conroy, imploring the jury to see contradictions in Lentini's testimony in this case and elsewhere, called the scientist a disgrace who would "whore himself and say anything" in exchange for a consultant's fee. Quinn's 1985 findings gained fresh support from consultant and former fire marshal Thomas Schneiders. Schneiders, who reviewed the case file, said burn patterns definitively showed the fire was set in three places - a sofa, a love seat, and under a dining-room table. Dougherty has always said he awoke to a house on fire, ran outside, then tried desperately to save his sons. What's changed between that night and now, defense counsel Fryman said, is what modern experts like Lentini have learned: "Fire investigators are getting it wrong." He cited Lentini's testimony about a federal test - criticized by the prosecution as a poor training exercise - in which a fire was set and extinguished in a mock bedroom. Only three of 53 experienced firefighters could correctly identify the quadrant where the fire began. "That's how hard it is to read these burn patterns," Fryman said.

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20160412_For_second_time__man_found_guilty_of_murder_in_arson_fire_that_killed_his_sons.html