Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Rodricus Crawford: Louisiana: Part Five: Catholics lead calls for court to spare life of death-row inmate; Catholic News Service..."The brief called the conduct of the prosecutor in the capital case, Dale Cox, “inappropriate and unconstitutional.” “The prosecutor, as an agent of the state of Louisiana, should not have misused and misinterpreted passages in the Bible to support his call to the jury for the execution of Mr Crawford. The prosecutor’s own private interpretations of the Bible are his own and he is entitled to his own opinions,” it added. “The problem is that at critical times the prosecutor, Mr Cox, acting as an official agent of the State of Louisiana, publicly injected his own private religious interpretations of the Bible into the trial as the State’s justification to argue for the execution of Mr Crawford. Mr Cox’s statements are particularly egregious in a parish that leads the country in executions per capita and primarily due to the efforts of Mr Cox.” During the trial, in questioning Crawford’s pastor, Cox asked, “Referring to children, Christ said to his followers: Woe unto you, any of that would harm one of these. It would be better … as though you will never born. You will have a millstone put around your neck and dropped into the sea. Do you believe in that concept?” After some back-and-forth with the pastor, who said he believed not only in that passage from the Gospel but also in mercy, Cox asked him, “So, Pastor, then we should just ignore that Scripture from Christ?” Cox used the passage once more in his closing argument. Cox is the acting district attorney for Caddo Parish, or county, which accounts for nearly half of the Louisiana’s death sentences in the past five years."


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The outrageous conduct of prosecutor Dale Cox on the death penalty hearing  pointed out by the religious leaders is all the worse since Cox was using the Bible in a bid to secure the execution of an innocent man. But the death penalty hearing and the trial itself - with a conviction that ignored the medical evidence pointing to the fact that no crime had been committed - can only make us wonder why Rodricus Crawford was charged in the first place. (Other than his being black in Caddo Parrish, Louisiana and living a lifestyle Cox didn't agree with). Or in Rodricus Crawford's own  words: "It is my firm belief that Dale Cox prosecuted me for the alleged murder of my one year old son because his personal view of my life was not to his liking. I know that may be hard to believe, but it is the only thing that makes sense and is supported by the evidence and his actions. Look at the personal comments he made about me and the specific questions he asked that weren't related to any actual crime or even the alleged crime I am accused of, the phantom time I've been convicted of. Dale Cox took it personally that I smoked weed and I didn't have a job. He was angered because I had multiple beautiful, young women in my life and several children. He didn't like the fact that I lived with my mama. None of these things had anything to do with the alleged crime I've been convicted of. Dale Cox abused his position and his authority to wage his own personal war against a young African American man. I have been accused of smothering my baby boy."

Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.


The entire story can be found at:

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2015/10/20/catholics-lead-calls-for-court-to-spare-life-of-death-row-inmate/

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Monday, May 30, 2016

Bulletin: Davontae Sanford: Michigan; Detroit News says Prosecutor Kym Worthy must free man she wrongly jailed, Chief of Police James Craig should be standing next to her at the courthouse door to ask for forgiveness on behalf of the police department for its role in framing Sanford in the 2007 slayings - and Robert Slameka, the sleazy lawyer who provided the barest of representation to Sanford, ought to be carted off to take his former client’s place in the cell. "The wrong done to Davontae Sanford should make anyone who believes in justice furious. Sanford was charged with killing two men in a drug house on the city’s northeast side, and pleaded guilty during his 2008 trial. He was 14 at the time and mentally slow. He says now that his lawyer pressured him to enter the plea. Slameka, a public defender whose law license is currently under suspension, has been disciplined repeatedly for shoddy and unsavory practices. He should never be permitted to try another case. Almost as soon as Sanford went to prison, another man, Vincent Smothers, confessed to the killings and several others. Mounds of evidence corroborated Smothers’ confession. Innocence advocates have been urging a retrial for Sanford for years. In spring of 2015, the Michigan State Police launched an investigation into the case. Their report, just sent to Worthy’s office and detailed in a Detroit News story last Saturday, reportedly recommends murder charges against Smothers and another man, and clears Sanford. It also is said to implicate a high-ranking police official who testified in the case for perjury. Worthy has not indicated whether she will drop the charges against Sanford. She has not yet released the state police report. Sanford should not spend another night behind bars. He didn’t do the crime for which he was convicted. Rather, he was victimized by a legal system in Wayne County that values expediency over justice, and often tolerates — encourages —the inadequate representation of indigent defendants in the name of moving cases through quickly and cleanly. In court filings, Wayne County prosecutors contend Smothers’ confession does not necessarily acquit Sanford. This is either stubbornness or petty vindictiveness at work. They could not be this incompetent. Smothers has been willing for years to testify to Sanford’s innocence. Even a confessed hit man has more honor than the prosecutors who would rather keep the wrong man behind bars than admit they were in error." (Bravo to the Detroit News for this tough, compelling message to Prosecutor Worthy. Especially the bottom line: "Kym Worthy should stop stalling and set Davontae Sanford free."...And Worthy should also release the Michigan State Police report so she can be held accountable for her actions - or inaction. HL);


"Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy should be standing at the courthouse door to apologize to Davontae Sanford when he walks in to resume his request for a new trial for a murder that by now Worthy and everyone else must know he didn’t commit. Standing next to her should be Detroit Police Chief James Craig to ask for forgiveness on behalf of the police department for its role in framing Sanford in the 2007 slayings. And Robert Slameka, the sleazy lawyer who provided the barest of representation to Sanford, ought to be carted off to take his former client’s place in the cell. The wrong done to Davontae Sanford should make anyone who believes in justice furious. Sanford was charged with killing two men in a drug house on the city’s northeast side, and pleaded guilty during his 2008 trial. He was 14 at the time and mentally slow. He says now that his lawyer pressured him to enter the plea. Slameka, a public defender whose law license is currently under suspension, has been disciplined repeatedly for shoddy and unsavory practices. He should never be permitted to try another case. Almost as soon as Sanford went to prison, another man, Vincent Smothers, confessed to the killings and several others. Mounds of evidence corroborated Smothers’ confession. Innocence advocates have been urging a retrial for Sanford for years. In spring of 2015, the Michigan State Police launched an investigation into the case. Their report, just sent to Worthy’s office and detailed in a Detroit News story last Saturday, reportedly recommends murder charges against Smothers and another man, and clears Sanford. It also is said to implicate a high-ranking police official who testified in the case for perjury. Worthy has not indicated whether she will drop the charges against Sanford. She has not yet released the state police report. Sanford should not spend another night behind bars. He didn’t do the crime for which he was convicted.........In court filings, Wayne County prosecutors contend Smothers’ confession does not necessarily acquit Sanford. This is either stubbornness or petty vindictiveness at work. They could not be this incompetent. Smothers has been willing for years to testify to Sanford’s innocence. Even a confessed hit man has more honor than the prosecutors who would rather keep the wrong man behind bars than admit they were in error.........Kym Worthy should stop stalling and set Davontae Sanford free."
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/opinion/editorials/2016/05/27/editorial-kym-worthy-must-free-man-wrongly-jailed/85018864/

See previous post of this Blog (May 20, 2016)  at the link below: "Quadruple homicide commited by team of hitmen or 14-year-old with learning disabilities; Important, disturbing, masterfully written story by reporter by Detroit news reporter George Hunter: 'State Police call for new charges in quadruple Detroit slaying: Former Detroit police official accused of perjury in '07 homicides'..."Davontae Sanford, now 23, was convicted in 2008 of gunning down three men and a woman in a drug house on Runyon on the city’s east side the year before. He had confessed to the crime and pleaded guilty to second-degree murder, although his appellate attorneys argued he was a confused kid who was coerced into a false confession. Two weeks after he went to prison, police arrested hit man Vincent Smothers, who admitted to several killings, including those on Runyon. State investigators have wrapped up an 11-month probe into the case, which they turned over Friday to Wayne County prosecutors, Michigan State Police Lt. Calvin Hart said, although he did not confirm who the warrant requests were for. Following increasing concerns by Sanford’s supporters that the wrong man was jailed for the killings, Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy asked the state police in June to re-investigate the Runyon homicide case. “The investigation has been completed, and we’ve submitted the results to prosecutors,” Hart said. “They’ll decide whether any charges will come down against the people involved.” Sources told The News the report does not implicate Sanford in the killings; instead, it corroborates the story Smothers told police: That he and his partner, Ernest Davis, committed the crime. State police submitted warrant requests to prosecutors seeking first-degree murder charges against Smothers and Davis in the case, sources said. Sources added the investigation strongly criticizes the way police and prosecutors handled the case."
 http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2016/05/devontae-sanford-michigan-quadruple.html

Rodricus Crawford: Louisiana death row; Part Four; In his own words Rodricus Crawford - through an open letter - tells anyone who will listen that all he asks is for the new DA (James Stewart) "to do the right thing and re-examine the case...There's only one reasonable conclusion."........."It is my firm belief that Dale Cox prosecuted me for the alleged murder of my one year old son because his personal view of my life was not to his liking. I know that may be hard to believe, but it is the only thing that makes sense and is supported by the evidence and his actions. Look at the personal comments he made about me and the specific questions he asked that weren't related to any actual crime or even the alleged crime I am accused of, the phantom time I've been convicted of. Dale Cox took it personally that I smoked weed and I didn't have a job. He was angered because I had multiple beautiful, young women in my life and several children. He didn't like the fact that I lived with my mama. None of these things had anything to do with the alleged crime I ve been convicted of. Dale Cox abused his position and his authority to wage his own personal war against a young African American man. I have been accused of smothering my baby boy. I still have trouble believing that this is really happening. I was denied the opportunity to properly mourn my son death. There were several critical errors made due to either incompetence or apathy the coroner ruled my son's death a homicide simply because he had some small scars on his mouth. My son's mother and I explained that my son had fallen a couple of days prior to his death and that was how he got the injury. With their preconceived notion that a homicide had occurred, they rejected this explanation and charged me with first degree murder. Had the incompetent coroner examined the skin of the injury, he could have determined conclusively that the injury was at least a couple of days old. This alone would have destroyed Cox's theory that I smothered my son to death. There are several medical experts that have examined the available evidence in the form of medical reports and they have all reached the conclusion that my son could not have and did not die from smothering. The was edema present to his brain which could only have come from a disease that existed for a significant period of time. This edema is not associated with death from immediate smothering. My son had been sick for a while and he had been taken to a doctor for examination. The doctor failed to diagnose pneumonia which lead to my son's death. I loved my son and would have given my life for him. Dale Cox and the corrupt legal system in Shreveport, LA. has sent me to death row for a crime I did not commit, it's a crime that did not happen."


OPEN LETTER: From Rodricus Crawford to whoever will listen: 

"It is my firm belief that Dale Cox prosecuted me for the alleged murder of my one year old son because his personal view of my life was not to his liking. I know that may be hard to believe, but it is the only thing that makes sense and is supported by the evidence and his actions. Look at the personal comments he made about me and the specific questions he asked that weren't related to any actual crime or even the alleged crime I am accused of, the phantom time I've been convicted of.
 Dale Cox took it personally that I smoked weed and I didn't have a job. He was angered because I had multiple beautiful , young women in my life and several children. He didn't like the fact that I lived with my mama. None of these things had anything to do with the alleged crime I've been convicted of. Dale Cox abused his position and his authority to wage his own personal war against a young African American man. I have been accused of smothering my baby boy. I still have trouble believing that this is really happening. I was denied the opportunity to properly mourn my son death.
There were several critical errors made due to either incompetence or apathy the coroner ruled my son's death a homicide simply because he had some small scars on his mouth. My son's mother and I explained that my son had fallen a couple of days prior to his death and that was how he got the injury. With their preconceived notion that a homicide had occurred, they rejected this explanation and charged me with first degree murder. Had the incompetent coroner examined the skin of the injury, he could have determined conclusively that the injury was at least a couple of days old. This alone would have destroyed Cox's theory that I smothered my son to death. There are several medical experts that have examined the available evidence in the form of medical reports and they have all reached the conclusion that my son could not have and did not die from smothering. There was edema present to his brain which could only have come from a disease that existed for a significant period of time. This edema is not associated with death from immediate smothering. My son had been sick for a while and he had been taken to a doctor for examination. The doctor failed to diagnose pneumonia which lead to my son's death. I loved my son and would have given my life for him. Dale Cox and the corrupt legal system in Shreveport, LA. has sent me to death row for a crime I did not commit, it's a crime that did not happen. The coroner failed to perform critical test on the skin from the injury to my son's mouth. Why? Because he was not an objective party. He wrongly assumed that I was guilty and instead of doing what needed to be done to make a fair and objective determination as to the cause of death, he did what he could to support Dale Cox's witch hunt.  If I had been a young white man, those actions would not have occurred in this manner. I am angry because my life, the life's of my family members and my daughter plus close friends have been upset, altered and changed and not in a good way. We have seen this too many times. With the advent of more precise DNA, innocent people are being set free. There is no DNA involved in this case, but the evidence of innocence is blaringly clear. All of this cruelty could have been avoided if Dale Cox,  the police or the coroner had given a damn about the rights and life of this young black man. All I ask is for the new DA to do the right thing and re examine the case. There's only one reasonable conclusion.--- Rodricus Crawford."

See CBS news story on ex-Louisiana prosecutor Marty Stroud's extraordinary admission to CBS correspondent Bill Whitaker that he had abused his authority to secure the conviction of Glenn Ford -  an innocent man - and Whitaker's extraordinary interview with Dale Cox, Rodricus Crawford's prosecutor (now retired):  A taste: "There may be no more controversial prosecutor in the U.S. than Dale Cox. Between 2010 and 2014, his Caddo Parish office put more people on death row per capita than anywhere else in the country. Dale Cox: I think society should be employing the death penalty more rather than less. Bill Whitaker: But there have been 10 other inmates on death row in Louisiana who have been exonerated. Clearly, the system is not flawless. Are you sure that you've gotten it right all the time? Dale Cox: I'm reasonably confident that-- that I've gotten it right. Bill Whitaker: Reasonably confident? Dale Cox: Am I arrogant enough, am I narcissistic enough to say I couldn't make a mistake? Of course not. Bill Whitaker: But until this information came out, the state was convinced that Mr. Ford was guilty. Dale Cox: Yes. Bill Whitaker: He could have been killed. Dale Cox: Yes. Bill Whitaker: And it would've been a mistake. Dale Cox: Yes. Bill Whitaker: It sounds like you're saying that's just a risk we have to take. Dale Cox: Yes. If I had gotten this information too late, all of us would've been-- grieved beyond description." http://www.cbsnews.com/news/30-years-on-death-row-exoneration-60-minutes/

See also the following New Orleans Advocate story at the link below for a picture of the perverse criminal justice culture which has trapped Rodricus Crawford - and all too many others - and its weird definition of 'reform.' ..."There was nothing particularly unusual about the case of David Brown. Prosecutors failed to disclose evidence that might have helped him, and he wound up on death row. The U.S. Supreme Court will soon consider whether to cancel his date with the executioner. That wouldn’t be particularly unusual in an appeal out of Louisiana, either. The lead prosecutor in the Brown case was Louisiana’s itinerant death penalty specialist, Hugo Holland. DAs who really want a defendant dead will call in Holland. It doesn’t make much difference in the long run. As Louisiana Public Defender Board Chairman Robert Burns noted in a recent letter to the editor, 50 of the 52 death sentences imposed in Louisiana since 2000 have been thrown out by higher courts. Seven death-row inmates have been entirely exonerated. It was no great shock, therefore, when Holland, along with several other prosecutors, appeared at the State Capitol again last week to support a bill that tilts the odds against defendants in capital cases. The bill, which has now passed, revamps the state Public Defender Board and diverts state funds from death cases, which are frequently farmed out to private outfits. The idea is to free up some of the millions spent on capital cases and bail out local public defender offices handling less heinous offenses. With 20 of Louisiana’s 42 local offices insolvent, the criminal justice system is in danger of grinding to a halt. Prosecutors, thus, had a legitimate and compelling interest in the bill, for they cannot go about the business of racking up convictions unless counsel is provided for all defendants. Prosecutors were not just for this bill but proved its most vociferous advocates at committee hearings. That might raise a suspicion that the welfare of indigent defendants was not the bill’s principal concern. Holland certainly thinks the state Public Defender Board has spent too much hiring what he calls “boutique law firms” to provide defense counsel in capital cases. He was gung ho for the bill, because it changes the make of the board, which he thinks has been dominated by “anti-death penalty zealots.” Holland is something of a zealot on the other side, devoting his life to securing the death penalty."

http://www.theneworleansadvocate.com/opinion/15900559-123/james-gill-defender-bill-an-odd-way-to-reform

For more on Louisiana's perverse criminal justice culture  - see Radley Balko's incisive  post (April  6, 2015;  "In Louisiana prosecutor offices a toxic culture of death and invincibility: One of Thompson’s prosecutors, Orleans Parrish Assistant District Attorney James Williams, told the Los Angeles Times in 2007, “There was no thrill for me unless there was a chance for the death penalty.” Williams kept a replica electric chair on his desk. “It was hooked up to a battery, so you’d get a little jolt when you touched it,” recalls Michael Banks, one of Thompson’s attorneys. In 1995, Williams posed with this mini-execution chair in Esquire magazine. On the chair’s headboard, he had affixed the photos of the five men he had sent to death row, including Thompson. Of those five, two would later be exonerated and two more would have their sentences commuted. Williams is no longer in office. But as James Gill writes in the New Orleans Advocate, the bloodlust persists in other parts of the state. If it weren’t for Caddo Parish, capital punishment would have been largely phased out in Louisiana by now. And Caddo largely owes its pre-eminence to just two prosecutors, Dale Cox and Hugo Holland. Of the eight death sentences handed down in the last five years, Cox takes credit for four and Holland for two. Such numbers suggest they approach their grisly duty with relish. Indeed Cox, who is chief assistant district attorney up there, recently said it is a shame that executions aren’t more frequent . . . “I think we need to kill more people,” he said. He believes “we’re going the wrong way with the death penalty; we need it more than ever, and we’re using it less now.” He and Holland have certainly done their best to keep the executions coming. Holland is no longer on the DA’s staff in Caddo. He and another assistant, Leah Hall, who was also on the prosecution team in four of the successful capital cases, were fired in 2012 after obtaining a slew of automatic rifles from the Federal Property Assistance Agency to be used in the course of highly hazardous — but imaginary — joint operations with police and sheriff’s departments. Holland and Hall remain in the prosecution game in various Louisiana jurisdictions. Hall last year pulled a gun on a colleague in the Claiborne Parish DA’s office."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2015/04/06/in-louisiana-prosecutor-offices-a-toxic-culture-of-death-and-invincibility/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Sunday, May 29, 2016

Rodricus Crawford: Louisiana: Death Row; Part Three: The Innocence Network files an Amicus Brief urging the US Supreme Court to reverse his conviction - asserting that the victim’s death resulted not from suffocation, but from a fatal illness..."The Innocence Network explains that the prosecution’s evidence was based on biased witnesses and junk science. In fact, the well-established medical literature strongly indicates that the victim died of sepsis as caused by pneumonia, and that simple tests could have proven that at trial. The Innocence Network urges the Supreme Court to reverse Mr. Crawford’s conviction and death sentence."...(From the Innocence Neworks Amicus brief):..."How could Dr. Traylor and Dr. Thoma (the prosecutions's expert witnesses) be so wrong? The scientific literature explains that as well. Forensic testimony is prone to error because medical experts are susceptible to confirmation bias, a condition where experts begin an investigation with preconceived expectations and theories, and, as a result, focus only on evidence that supports those theories, ignoring or explaining away evidence to the contrary. That is what happened here. Dr. Traylor reached his erroneous conclusion before he viewed the tissue slides showing that Roderius was suffering from pneumonia and before he received the lab results establishing the presence of a blood infection. The result was that both doctors' opinions were tainted by the sort of bias that has resulted in the conviction and even the execution of innocent defendants. But in this case, the prosecution's medical witnesses were not merely prone to bias, they admitted to it. Dr. Traylor went into the autopsy "thinking" that the death was a homicide and concluded that Roderius' tragic death was a homicide before he had all the facts. Dr. Thoma started with that presumption and never re-examined it when evidence to the contrary came in."


POST: "The Innocence Network files Amicus Brief urging Supreme Court to reverse Crawford conviction," published by 'The Promise of Justice Initiative' on September 25,  2015.  (The Promise of Justice Initiative is a private, non-profit organization that advocates for humane, fair, and equal treatment of individuals in the criminal justice system. Our organization is composed of dedicated board members, staff and volunteers who are committed to our Constitution’s promises of justice and dismayed by society’s shortcomings in making good on them.)

GIST: The Innocence Network, the leading national advocate for the wrongfully convicted, has filed an amicus brief in the case of Rodricus Crawford, asserting that the victim’s death resulted not from suffocation, but from a fatal illness. The Innocence Network explains that the prosecution’s evidence was based on biased witnesses and junk science. In fact, the well-established medical literature strongly indicates that the victim died of sepsis as caused by pneumonia, and that simple tests could have proven that at trial. The Innocence Network urges the Supreme Court to reverse Mr. Crawford’s conviction and death sentence.

THE INNOCENCE NETWORK AMICUS BRIEF: Access the entire Amicus Brief at the link below; (Here is one section, under the heading 'Preliminary Statement."... "The death of one-year-old Roderius Lott was a tragedy. But that tragedy would be compounded beyond measure if his father, Rodricus Crawford, were executed for a death that resulted not from suffocation, as the prosecution's medical witnesses claimed, but from a fatal illness. The medical literature assembled for this amicus brief establishes that Roderius' death was caused by sepsis, a sometimes fatal condition resulting from the pneumonia that infected all five lobes ofRoderius' lungs.5 That literature establishes that sepsis is a tragic and too common cause of death in infants. It establishes that, untreated, death from sepsis can occur in a matter of hours, often without warning. And the objective medical evidence from Roderius' autopsy found the signs that a pathologist would expect to find in an infant who succumbed to this disease. Employing reasoning that lacks any foundation in medical science, the prosecution's witnesses, Dr. Traylor and Dr. Thoma, rejected this obvious explanation of the cause of Roderius' death. Dr. Traylor claimed that Roderius was protected from pneumonia because Roderius had received one dose out of the three dose regimen of pneumonia vaccine. But that claim has no  basis in accepted medical science- simply put, there is a reason why three doses are required. Dr. Traylor claimed that Roderius could not have died from sepsis because Roderius did not display labored breathing or a serious fever. But the medical literature establishes that death from sepsis can result quickly, with few if any symptoms or warning. Dr. Traylor claimed that Roderius did not die of sepsis because one virulent form of bacteria, Streptococcus pneumoniae, could not be identified in Roderius' blood sample. But the medical literature establishes that four tests are required to identify Streptococcus pneumoniae; the lab ran only one. And both Dr. Traylor and Dr. Thoma claimed that Roderius did not die of sepsis because he did not display severe symptoms before he went to bed the night he died. But the medical literature establishes that sepsis can kill infants quickly and without warning. The medical literature cited in this brief can be accessed at https://goo.gl/RQ73sX. The medical literature also establishes that Dr. Traylor violated standard medical protocol: he failed to examine slides of the bruised and abraded tissue on the inner part of Roderius' lips under a microscope. This most basic of tests would have established the timing of the injuries and whether they were the result of the bathroom fall that Roderius suffered the day before he died. In short, if Dr. Traylor had simply examined the bruised tissue under a microscope, or for that matter, preserved the tissue so that the defense expeti could have done so, medical science would have established with objective evidence that the inner lip injuries were caused by a prior fall, instead of a crime. How could Dr. Traylor and Dr. Thoma be so wrong? The scientific literature explains that as well. Forensic testimony is prone to error because medical experts are susceptible to confirmation bias, a condition where experts begin an investigation with preconceived expectations and theories, and, as a result, focus only on evidence that supports those theories, ignoring or explaining away evidence to the contrary. That is what happened here. Dr. Traylor reached his erroneous conclusion before he viewed the tissue slides showing that Roderius was suffering from pneumonia and before he received the lab results establishing the presence of a blood infection. The result was that both doctors' opinions were tainted by the sort of bias that has resulted in the conviction and even the execution of innocent defendants. But in this case, the prosecution's medical witnesses were not merely prone to bias, they admitted to it. Dr. Traylor went into the autopsy "thinking" that the death was a homicide and concluded that Roderius' tragic death was a homicide before he had all the facts. Dr. Thoma started with that presumption and never re-examined it when evidence to the contrary came in. The defense medical expert, Dr. Daniel Spitz, provided the jury with accurate medical science. But he was not cross-examined on the science. He was cross-examined on his compensation, on whether he made a mistake in a single case, whether he performed more autopsies than recommended in a given year, on whether he was riding on the reputational coattails of his father, an equally renowned forensic expert. As a result, a search for the truth devolved into a grandstanding sideshow and the jury accepted demonstrably erroneous claims that came from the mouths of misguided witnesses- one of whom, Dr. Traylor, self-righteously claimed to be the "voice of the victim." Louisiana courts require that every reasonable hypothesis of innocence be excluded.6 Every reasonable hypothesis cannot be excluded here. For the reasons discussed below, it is incumbent upon this Court to exercise its obligation to review the sufficiency of the scientific evidence that lies at the heart of this case with particular care and, upon that review, vacate the conviction and assure that Rodricus Crawford is not put to death on the basis of testimony that has no basis in medical science."




State v. Crawford- Innocence Network Amicus

The entire post can be found at:

http://justicespromise.org/component/content/?view=featured

See the July 13, 2015  'Daily Kos' account of the 'Rodricus Crawford'  case by Shaun King at the link below, under the heading:  "Rodricus Crawford is on death row. Read this and O% of you will think he should be."..."Rodricus Crawford should've received counseling after the death of his son. The child's death appears much more to be a tragic accident than a cold-hearted murder. Not one person testified that they had ever witnessed any type of child abuse from Rodricus Crawford or anyone in the family. To convict a man and sentence him to death with this evidence is lynching by another name and yet another sign of the New Jim Crow."

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/7/13/1401800/-Rodricus-Crawford-is-on-death-row-Read-this-and-0-of-you-will-think-he-should-be
  
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog; 

Saturday, May 28, 2016

Bulletin: Sonja Farak: Rolando Penate: Massachusetts; Dynamite exposĂ©e by "The Eye"..."Defense attorneys say withheld Farak notes implicate prosecutors," by Shawn Musgrave..."Massachusetts prosecutors withheld evidence of corrupt state narcotics testing for months from a defendant facing drug charges, and didn’t release it until after his conviction, according to newly surfaced documents and emails. The case of Rolando Penate has become a leading example for lawyers calling for further investigation into alleged misconduct by prosecutors who handled documents seized from Sonja Farak, the Amherst crime-lab chemist convicted of stealing and tampering with drug samples. Penate is seeking a new trial, contending the conviction should be reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct and evidence tainted by Farak. His is one of what lawyers say could be thousands of convictions questioned in the wake of the Farak scandal. The Farak documents indicate she used drugs on the very day she certified samples as heroin in Penate’s case. But when Penate’s lawyer tried to obtain the documents — not certain what was in them — before his client’s 2013 trial, he was rebuffed by state prosecutors who said the papers were “irrelevant” according to emails included in investigative reports unsealed earlier this month. At the time of Penate’s trial, the state Attorney General’s Office contended Farak’s misdeeds dated back only as far as 2012."..."Prosecutors have an obligation to give the defense exculpatory evidence – including anything that could weaken evidence against defendants. Compromised drug samples often fit the definition."... Defense attorney Luke Ryan describes finding undisclosed evidence that was seized from Sonja Farak’s car, as well as how he determined that the documents were from 2011. “It would be difficult to overstate the significance of these documents,” Ryan wrote to the Attorney General’s Office two days later. State prosecutors hadn’t provided this evidence to other district attorneys’ offices contending with the Farak fallout, either. Two weeks after Ryan’s discovery, the Attorney General’s Office shipped nearly 300 pages of previously undisclosed materials to local prosecutors around the state. “Not only did they not turn these documents over, but I wasn’t aware that they existed,” said Frank Flannery, who was the Hampden County assistant district attorney assigned to appeals following Farak’s arrest. “At the very least, we expected that we would get everything they collected in their case against Farak.” Flannery, now in private practice, said the substance abuse worksheets are “clearly relevant” to defendants challenging Farak’s analysis. Four months after Ryan found the worksheets, Judge Kinder compelled release of additional drug treatment records, which indicated Farak used a variety of drugs that she stole from the lab for years. Penate and other defendants are asking see all of Foster’s emails regarding Farak and other materials relating to the handling of evidence in the chemist's case. A hearing on their motions is scheduled next month."


"Massachusetts prosecutors withheld evidence of corrupt state narcotics testing for months from a defendant facing drug charges, and didn’t release it until after his conviction, according to newly surfaced documents and emails. The case of Rolando Penate has become a leading example for lawyers calling for further investigation into alleged misconduct by prosecutors who handled documents seized from Sonja Farak, the Amherst crime-lab chemist convicted of stealing and tampering with drug samples. Penate is seeking a new trial, contending the conviction should be reversed because of prosecutorial misconduct and evidence tainted by Farak. His is one of what lawyers say could be thousands of convictions questioned in the wake of the Farak scandal. The Farak documents indicate she used drugs on the very day she certified samples as heroin in Penate’s case. But when Penate’s lawyer tried to obtain the documents — not certain what was in them — before his client’s 2013 trial, he was rebuffed by state prosecutors who said the papers were “irrelevant” according to emails included in investigative reports unsealed earlier this month. At the time of Penate’s trial, the state Attorney General’s Office contended Farak’s misdeeds dated back only as far as 2012. To better estimate how many convictions will have to be reviewed because of Farak, the Supreme Judicial Court ordered a report on the history of her illicit behavior. The report concluded she was usually high while working in the lab for more than eight years before her arrest in January 2013 and started stealing samples seven years ago. A second unsealed report into allegations of wrongdoing by police and prosecutors who handled the Farak evidence, overseen by retired state judges Peter Velis and Thomas Merrigan, drew less attention. Relying on an investigation conducted by state police, the judges concluded there was “no evidence of prosecutorial misconduct or obstruction of justice” in matters related to the Farak case. Several defense attorneys who called for the Velis-Merrigan investigation say the former judges and their state police investigators got it wrong. They say court records and newly released emails show prosecutors sat on evidence they were familiar with that pointed to Farak’s drug use in 2011, when she worked on Penate’s case. “I don’t know how the Velis report reached the conclusion it did after reviewing the underlying email documents,” said Randy Gioia, deputy chief counsel at the Committee for Public Counsel Services, the state’s public defender office. Gioia called for evidentiary hearings “so prosecutors can be asked about what they knew, when they knew it, and what they did with their knowledge.” Luke Ryan, Penate’s trial lawyer, said that the state police officers working on the report “failed to obtain an appropriate understanding of the events that transpired before they were assigned to this investigation.” Prosecutors have an obligation to give the defense exculpatory evidence – including anything that could weaken evidence against defendants. Compromised drug samples often fit the definition."......... Defense attorney Luke Ryan describes finding undisclosed evidence that was seized from Sonja Farak’s car, as well as how he determined that the documents were from 2011. “It would be difficult to overstate the significance of these documents,” Ryan wrote to the Attorney General’s Office two days later. State prosecutors hadn’t provided this evidence to other district attorneys’ offices contending with the Farak fallout, either. Two weeks after Ryan’s discovery, the Attorney General’s Office shipped nearly 300 pages of previously undisclosed materials to local prosecutors around the state. “Not only did they not turn these documents over, but I wasn’t aware that they existed,” said Frank Flannery, who was the Hampden County assistant district attorney assigned to appeals following Farak’s arrest. “At the very least, we expected that we would get everything they collected in their case against Farak.” Flannery, now in private practice, said the substance abuse worksheets are “clearly relevant” to defendants challenging Farak’s analysis. Four months after Ryan found the worksheets, Judge Kinder compelled release of additional drug treatment records, which indicated Farak used a variety of drugs that she stole from the lab for years. Penate and other defendants are asking see all of Foster’s emails regarding Farak and other materials relating to the handling of evidence in the chemist’s case. A hearing on their motions is scheduled next month."
http://eye.necir.org/2016/05/28/farak-withheld-evidence/

Bulletin: Charles Flores: Texas: Major development: Stay of June 2 execution granted by Texas Court of Criminal Appeals - and case sent back to the trial court for a hearing based on his claim that improper hypnosis was used on the main eyewitness in his murder trial...". As part of Flores’ final appeal, which was filed last week, psychology professor Steven Lynn said in an affidavit that recent research shows the hypnosis could have made Barganier create false memories. “Clearly, the techniques that were used to refresh Ms. Bargainer’s memory would be eschewed today by anyone at all familiar with the extant research on hypnosis and memory,” Lynn wrote...." Now, the trial court in Flores’ case will hold a hearing specifically on the hypnosis issue and the eyewitness identification. If Flores’ lawyers can show by a preponderance of the evidence that a jury would acquit him today after hearing new scientific evidence, it would lead to a brand new trial for Flores, more than 17 years after he was convicted." Link to full reading provided; Fusion;



"Charles Flores, a Texas death row inmate who was scheduled to be executed next week June 2, was granted a stay of execution late Friday afternoon. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals stayed Flores’ execution date and sent his case back to the trial court for a hearing based on his claim that improper hypnosis was used on the main eyewitness in his murder trial. As Fusion reported earlier this month, Flores was convicted for the 1998 murder of Elizabeth “Betty” Black in a Dallas suburb. A jury sentenced him to death the following year even though prosecutors presented no physical evidence linking him to the crime, and the only witness who saw him at the scene, Jill Barganier, was hypnotized by police. As part of Flores’ final appeal, which was filed last week, psychology professor Steven Lynn said in an affidavit that recent research shows the hypnosis could have made Barganier create false memories. “Clearly, the techniques that were used to refresh Ms. Bargainer’s memory would be eschewed today by anyone at all familiar with the extant research on hypnosis and memory,” Lynn wrote. That hypnosis was the crux of the appeals court’s ruling. The court approved his application for a writ of habeas corpus by essentially finding reason to believe a reasonable juror may not have convicted him if they had heard evidence like Lynn’s testimony. Now, the trial court in Flores’ case will hold a hearing specifically on the hypnosis issue and the eyewitness identification. If Flores’ lawyers can show by a preponderance of the evidence that a jury would acquit him today after hearing new scientific evidence, it would lead to a brand new trial for Flores, more than 17 years after he was convicted.........Two of the nine judges on the appeals court, which is the highest court in Texas that hears criminal cases, dissented from granting a stay. Only one of the judges who supported Flores’ application, David Newell, wrote an opinion explaining his thinking. “Eyewitness misidentification is the leading cause of wrongful convictions across the country,” Newell wrote. “We may ultimately grant relief. We may ultimately deny relief. But either way, given the subject matter, by granting a stay this Court acknowledges that whatever we do, we owe a clear explanation for our decision to the citizens of Texas.”
http://fusion.net/story/307796/charles-flores-texas-stay-execution

Rodricus Crawford; Louisiana: Part Two; Marlene Belliveau's compelling plea to Caddo Parrish's new District Attorney James Stewart to spare an innocent father's life and proclaim his innocence..." The eyes of Canada and many States across the U.S, are on Caddo Parish and the Rodricus Crawford case. I do not pretend to be a lawyer. As above mentioned, I am a mother, and a bereaved grandmother. I am deeply concerned with the wrongful conviction and death sentence in this case. Rodricus Crawford was unjustly and wrongfully convicted for a “crime” which never existed. He and his family are grief stricken by the loss of his son and forced to suffer in silence. He has lost a huge part of his life of which he will never get back. It is time for justice, it is time to bring Rodricus home to his family. To finally mourn the devastating loss of their son, grandson, nephew. Rodricus has been deprived of being a father to his daughter, his daughter has been deprived of her father. His family has been deprived of their son, brother….the grief never goes away, but, together, as a family, the healing process can begin.""


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: In yesterday's post, I described the active  support being offered to Rodricus Stewart's sister  Vicki, by Marlene Belliveau, a Canadian who describes herself in a letter written to Caddo Parish District Attorney James Stewart dated March 9, 2016,  as 'a concerned Mother, Grandmother & Vice-Chair of the Canadian SIDS foundation with respect to Case Number 2014-KA-2153. The Rodricus Crawford case.'  As this letter points so powerfully to the presence of an innocent young man on Louisiana's death row for a crime which never occurred, I am drawing it to the attention of our readers as part of this Blog's ongoing coverage of the case. "The death of a child is a loss like none other and a grief that lasts forever. It marks an extraordinary crisis," the letter begins. I am a mother of 5 grown children and a grandmother to soon to be 16 grandchildren. On May 13th, 2013, my youngest son and his wife were blessed with the birth of their 3rd child. A beautiful healthy 9 lb, 9 ounce, rosy cheeked little girl. During her first few weeks of life, Chloe seemed to have minor breathing issues of which the Doctor dismissed and suggested it may have been caused due to fluid swallowed during birth and that it would disappear on it’s own. On July 1st, 2013, Chloe and family spent a good part of the afternoon and evening in our home. Chloe seemed to be developing “cold”. She was taken to the Doctor yet again and concerns were again dismissed. ( I will elaborate further on as to why this is of importance and relevant to Rodricus’ case and his young son Roderius). On July 06, 2013 at approx 11:00 am, I received a call from my son, he was frantic. He informed me that my Grand-Daughter had died. Chloe was 7 weeks old when her mom found her lifeless in her bed with a bloody pink froth emanating from her little nostril. What ensued next is a mirror parallel to the Crawford case. Fire Chief was first on scene ( emergency first responder). He declared infant Chloe had “blunt force trauma”, and that he was concerned about disturbing “the crime scene”. RCMP ( Federal police) arrived on scene, detained my son and daughter in law. Refused to allow them to accompany Chloe to emerge trauma, held their home as a “crime scene” for 13 hours and spent another 4 hours interrogating the parents. They were treated as and accused of being murderers. It is mandatory in the case of an infant death to perform an autopsy within the first 24 hours. A paediatric forensic pathologist to carry out post mortem is ideal. They have the expertise required Infant/child deaths. Chloe’s autopsy report concluded, “ Streptococcus pneumoniae sepsis complicating: lower respiratory tract infection and the manner of death is natural.” Sepsis is a common but lethal infection. Sepsis is a rapidly developing condition and very difficult for parents and professionals to recognize. Sometimes called blood poisoning, sepsis is the body’s often deadly response to infection. In this case, pneumonia. Sepsis kills millions and requires early suspicion and rapid treatment for survival. Once sepsis sets in, it can progress to shock and death. In the U.S, more than 42,000 children develop severe sepsis each year. Approximately 4,400 of them die - this is more than paediatric cancers. There are a large number of complications that may occur with sepsis. The complications are related to the type of initial infection, for example, in lung infection (pneumonia) with sepsis. Each patient is likely to have the potential for complications related to the source of sepsis; in general, the complications are due to organ dysfunction, damage, or loss. Death is usually due to multi organ dysfunction ( liver, kidney, or lung failure). The most common source of infection is in the lung or lungs. In Chloe’s case, we had a second autopsy performed. This was due to the fact that, in researching SIDS and speaking with world renowned paediatric pathologists, very often, what seems respiratory is actually under the SIDS umbrella. At this point, I had become involved with the Canadian SIDS Foundation, where a wonderful paediatric forensic pathologist from another Province, involved in infant deaths for 40 plus years, offered to review and conduct testing on the slides, blood samples etc ( all of which are mandatory to retain and illegal to destroy.) A diagnosis of SIDS was handed down. Natural death. The similarities are striking with respect to the lungs, thymus, brain swelling in SIDS cases. This case drew massive media coverage due to the injustices towards innocent parents. We had received many calls from lawyers ready to try this case due to the “accusations/ allegations”, treatment etc of the parents. In Oct 2015, we were successful in our suit against the Federal Government. I have recently completed writing a Federal educational training program for the RCMP, other policing agencies and for all emergency first responders when it comes to infant deaths. I have spoken and presented to coroners, ME’s and  other investigating bodies to create awareness and a better understanding when it comes to infant / child deaths. It was almost one (1) year ago that our lawyer brought Rodricus’ case to my attention. We both agreed and felt very strongly that given my passion, recent experience, my research and education in these matters, my involvement with world renowned paediatric pathologists and  with the Canadian SIDS Foundation, I could be of some help, by lending my voice to this young man, his young son and his family. I have seen the great injustices in this case and felt the need to get involved. The more I follow and become involved in this case, having read and reviewed briefs and reports on hand, and in speaking with reputable world renowned paediatric forensic pathologists, I wish to share with you information that would help facilitate the understanding of SIDS deaths (and related) and the sound judgement that Rodricus Crawford is an innocent man. The death of Roderius Crawford was a tragedy. One that has been cruelly compounded by convicting his father, Rodricus Crawford. In this case, justice has not been served by sentencing an innocent and grieving father to death. In reviewing the documentation provided with respect to this case, I do believe Roderius was victim of a pneumonia / sepsis /SIDS related death. I have conferred with 2 reputable forensic pathologists.. One is Canada based and has been active in this field for over 40 years. The second is U.S ( Seattle Washington) based and has been involved in these cases since 1964. He is 84 years old and has been to congress many times with parents accused of "killing" their babies. He has been a wonderful mentor to me and has provided me with an abundance of information, including one of his authored books. In this book he writes; “About half the victims are reported to have cold symptoms in the week prior to death. Viral studies do not show any strange or particularly virulent organisms, but rather the same viruses that cause colds." He continues on to say - " Death in SIDS is thought to be instantaneous. ( Recognized by the W.H.O as a medical disorder) Since the infants are asleep, they pass on peacefully and suffer no pain. Yet, the death scene and appearance of the body may be so unusual that shocked parents gain just the opposite impression. The death scene is often one of disarray. The infant maybe found squeezed into one corner of the bed, giving the false impression of suffocation. At the time of death , when blood ceases to flow through the body, several alterations take place that may appear grotesque to the uninitiated. They include bloody froth emanating from the nose which stains the bedding. The froth is actually edema fluid that fills the lungs, and not actual blood. Purple bruises are sometimes present, which may be mistaken for traumatic injuries. They are in fact due to the settling of the blood to the dependent portions of the body after death; the scientific term is livor mortis. Finally, since the body loses its muscle tone at the time of death, soft tissues like the nose and cheeks appear to be pushed in just from the pressure of lying on the bed." In relation to the autopsy report and the petechiae - " Tiny bleeding points called petechiae, are present in great abundance. The petechiae are especially prominent over the portion of the thymus gland located in the chest. No responsible scientist believes that external obstruction i.e.: suffocation, is involved. " As indicated in the “Final Note” portion of Roderius Crawford’s autopsy report. With respect to our Canadian counterpart, and as per certain questions I have asked here is what he writes : “This is a sad and an unfortunate case of a miscarriage of justice. The case and the conviction rests on an opinion of likely an incompetent forensic pathologist and a biased judge. It is unfortunate that the opinions of other well qualified and experienced pathologists indicating lack of pathology (physical ) evidence to support the charge of homicide was ignored. The exhumation is unlikely to solve the dilemma as the observed injuries involved soft tissues that by this time have decomposed. He also writes : The “peeling “ of the skin in this type of cases is a routine forensic practice. It is based on a belief that it will reveal concealed trauma that other “regular” pathologists could miss, as deep skin hemorrhages may not be visible on the surface . It certainly has a “shock value “ on a lay jury as it reminds one of butchery-like practice. While it has a spectacular effect on the jury, it rarely is relevant to the cause of death. It only documents a suspicion of trauma (accidental vs intentional is difficult to prove).” “The fact that the evidence has been destroyed should be in favour of the defendant ,as the case cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.” With respect to any evidence i.e blood samples, paraffin slides, tissue samples, we simply have no way to go back and retest to prove Rodricus’ innocence. It begs to question why these materials are no longer available for second opinion. In short, the destruction of these materials has negated every opportunity to have retesting conducted by a qualified forensic paediatric pathologist and new evidence of innocence confirmed. Current advances in genetic / molecular testing indicate that an underlying  biological abnormality due to genetic or molecular disorders ( such as defects in cardiac or neuronal channels) may be responsible for a large portion of SIDS deaths. At present, genetic and molecular testing carried out by coroners or medical examiners, is not part of routine. However, one would require the materials to investigate in a case such as this. There seems to be no documentation on an independent autopsy of the brain itself which is standard practice due to indications of abnormalities found in the brain stem in SIDS babies. There is also reference made under “Asphyxia secondary to smothering” that there was “Cerebral Edema without herniation.” It fails to mention that resuscitation efforts contribute to brain swelling. There is reference made “Asphyxia secondary to smothering” - Petechiae involving thymus - Refer back to paragraph - (SIDS) " Tiny bleeding points called petechiae, are present in great abundance. The petechiae are especially prominent over the portion of the thymus gland located in the chest. Again, I refer back to prior statement “No responsible scientist believes that external obstruction i.e. suffocation, is involved.” Through recent years there has been a regression with respect to identifying natural deaths in infants / children vs murder. This trend is troubling. It has become more common for coroners, ME’s to use old terminology, suffocation, pneumonia, positional asphyxia ( of which has never been scientifically proven) etc. Most forensic pathologists across North America, do not have any experience or background in paediatric pathology. Dr Charles Smith is a disgraced former Canadian pathologist who was the head paediatric forensic pathologist at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto from 1982 - 2003. During his “reign of terror” Dr Smith’s philosophy was to “think dirty”. The quality of his autopsies and the resulting criminal charges and convictions of many innocent parents, have been called into question and a full public inquiry was ordered. The Goudge Inquiry into forensic pathology revealed that the investigations of sudden infant deaths in place, led to a massive miscarriage of justice, without precedence in Canada. The Rodricus Crawford case reminds me of this. The focus was on murder. There was never any intention to shift focus to a natural death. The “think dirty” philosophy seems to have been the focus from the beginning. My knowledge of media related material in this case leads one to believe there was a deep rooted prejudice. How unfair! I don’t have to imagine the pain that Rodricus and his family have been going through. I have lived it. There have been a number of cases within the past few years of parents wrongfully sentenced to life in prison or death row due to assumptions, improper investigations, lack of competency, lack of pathology / physical evidence to support the charge of homicide, etc. The case of 34 year old Sally Clark, a British Solicitor, lost not one but 2 young sons to SIDS. Pathologists not only neglected to perform proper autopsies, they also withheld important information. She was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison in November 1998. Second autopsies conducted on sample materials proved her innocence. Mrs Clark was exonerated after serving 3 years. In Conclusion: It is important for all involved to learn that SIDS/ pneumonia,sepsis is a death to which any child - including their own - can be victim. Use caution and be aware that several “suspicious” conditions might be observed on an infants body that are quite normal. These include a bloody froth around the mouth or nose and possible discolouration of the face or extremities. Also, lividity stains in an infant are more pronounced than in an adult, and what might appear to be bruises might in fact be exaggerated lividity. Physical examination of these deaths may also reveal evidence or terminal motor activity, i.e clenched fists. All person’s involved should keep an open mind. We must remain cognizant of the fact that the majority of infant deaths are due to natural causes. Rodricus Crawford was described by family members, friends and acquaintances as a doting father, incapable of violence and brimming with pride in his children. The State Prosecutor at the time portrayed Mr Crawford as a non educated weed smoker who worked odd jobs ( mowing lawns) etc. here and there. That statement seems to imply that due to his “life choices/circumstances”, these would make him appear to be less of a loving father and more a murderer. Mr Stewart, so much has been taken away from this young man and his family. The horrible tragedy of losing a child can only be understood by a parent / family member who has walked in those shoes. I implore you to look at the concrete evidence and facts before you. Mr Crawford did not kill his son. Mr Crawford is himself a victim ,twice! Once in the death of his child who he adored, and the second, a victim of a seemingly corrupt and biased system at the time of his son’s death. Evidence presented in Rodricus Crawford’s case, which led to his conviction, was not scientifically proven, inaccurate and flawed. This case has resonated a great distance. The eyes of Canada and many States across the U.S, are on Caddo Parish and the Rodricus Crawford case. I do not pretend to be a lawyer. As above mentioned, I am a mother, and a bereaved grandmother. I am deeply concerned with the wrongful conviction  and death sentence in this case. Rodricus Crawford was unjustly and wrongfully convicted for a “crime” which never existed. He and his family are grief stricken by the loss of his son and forced to suffer in silence. He has lost a huge part of his life of which he will never get back. It is time for justice, it is time to bring Rodricus home to his family. To finally mourn the devastating loss of their son, grandson, nephew. Rodricus has been deprived of being a father to his daughter, his daughter has been deprived of her father. His family has been deprived of their son, brother….the grief never goes away, but, together, as a family, the healing process can begin."

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

See the New Yorker story  by Rachel Aviv on the 'Rodricus Crawford case at the link below: It's called 'Revenge Killing: Race and the death penalty in a Louisiana parish - and appeared in the Annals of Justice July 6 and 13, 2015 issue: "The autopsy report was sent to the office of Dale Cox, the first assistant district attorney of Caddo Parish, which includes Shreveport. After reading the police reports, he decided to seek the death penalty. Cox told me that in the past forty years he had never prosecuted a man between the ages of seventeen and twenty-six who grew up in a nuclear family. “Not one,” he said. He believes that the “destruction of the nuclear family and a tremendously high illegitimate birth rate” have brought about an “epidemic of child-killings” in the parish. At the time that he learned of Crawford’s case, he was prosecuting another young black man accused of killing his infant. After the man was sentenced to life without parole, rather than death, Cox told a local TV station, “I take it as a failure that I was unable to convince the jury to kill him.”"

 http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/06/revenge-killing

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Friday, May 27, 2016

Bulletin: William Richards: California; Major Development; "Bite-mark" testimony. The California Supreme Court Thursday threw out the conviction of a man found guilty of killing his wife after jurors heard bite-mark testimony that was later recanted - and in doing so, the unanimous high court cited a new state law inspired by Richards' murder case in its ruling..."We're thrilled that Bill's decades-long incarceration for a crime he did not commit will soon come to an end," Richards' attorney, Jan Stiglitz, said in an emailed statement. "We also hope that this decision will pave the way for other victims of 'junk science' to find a path to freedom." The Fresno Bee.



Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/nation-world/national/article80130517.html#storylink=cpy
http://www.fresnobee.com/news/nation-world/national/article80130517.html

See Blogger Mike Bowers post on CSIDDS - Forensics in focus - with a link to the entire decision - at the link below; (California Supreme Court deterines advances of forensic science sufficient to vacate conviction: "Any new filing of murder charges by the DA against Richards will bring a litany of CSI high value evidence against Richard being guilty. In fact it forms a road to his actual innocence.A jury would have to consider some of the following; DNA from an unknown make have been recovered from the murder weapon; DNA from an unknown male was found under the victim’s fingernails. The Supreme Court court noted that the bite mark evidence had been “clearly repudiated” and that “new technological advances undermined” the bite mark evidence presented at trial;  The crime scene evidence collection was either faulty or not complete which resulted in significant evidence being abandoned or lost at the outset of the San Bernardino Sheriff’s investigation. The Supreme Court also said that the defense had presented strong evidence opposing Richard’s guilt at his 4th trial where he was convicted except for the bitemark evidence.
https://csidds.com/2016/05/27/california-supreme-court-determines-advances-of-forensic-science-sufficient-to-vacate-conviction/

Rodricus Crawford: Louisiana; Death row: (Part One): 'TakePart' tells the compelling story of a sister's (Vicki Crawford-Sharp) efforts to save her brother from Louisiana's death row - with the fervent support of a Canadian woman (Marlene Belliveau) drawn to the case by a horrific personal experience of her own..."Crawford was accused of smothering his son to death and sentenced to death in 2013. Dale Cox, the district attorney who sought the death penalty in Crawford’s case, wrote a memo to the state’s probation department expressing regret that the state only used lethal injection for the death penalty, because “Crawford deserves as much physical suffering as it is humanly possible to endure before he dies.”..." Crawford-Sharp renewed her efforts to prove her brother’s innocence this week with a petition asking the district attorney who replaced Cox last November, James Stewart, to drop the charges. Stewart has echoed Cox’s arguments in response to a request from Crawford’s lawyers to overturn the sentence, and he appears unwilling to budge. Crawford's lawyers allege that the forensic evidence used to prove Rodricus was smothered is inconclusive. Last year, in a brief requesting a new trial, three doctors testified that the autopsy results were inconclusive."..."Last year, in a brief requesting a new trial, three doctors testified that the autopsy results were inconclusive. Amid the chaos of trying to keep in touch with her brother and spread the word about his case, Crawford-Sharp was surprised to connect with a complete stranger. Marlene Belliveau, who lives in Canada and is the vice-chair of the Canadian Sudden Infant Death Syndrome foundation, read about Roderius’ death and reached out about a year ago. “When my granddaughter passed away, my son and daughter-in-law were accused of murder,” Belliveau told TakePart. “Between Rodricus and my children, the stories are very similar. It’s a horrific nightmare.” Like Crawford, Belliveau’s son was interrogated by police and told he couldn’t go to the hospital to see his daughter when she died. Though Belliveau’s son and her daughter-in-law weren’t charged with a crime, the experience was traumatic."


STORY: "Sister Revives Efforts to Save Her Brother From Louisiana’s Death Row," by reporter Rebecca McCrae, published by TakePart on May 22, 2106. (TakePart is the digital news and lifestyle magazine from Participant Media, the company behind such acclaimed documentaries as Citizen four, An Inconvenient Truth and Food, Inc. and feature films including  Lincoln and SpotlightRebecca McCray is a staff writer covering social justice. She is based in New York).

SUB-HEADING: "Out of tragedy and loss, a friendship helps one woman cope with a legal battle."

GIST: "It has been four years since Vicki Crawford-Sharp lost her brother. Accused in 2012 of killing his one-year-old son, 27-year-old Rodricus Crawford sits on Louisiana’s death row and insists on his innocence. “My brother really loved his kid,” Crawford-Sharp told TakePart. “He never did anything to hurt anybody.” Crawford says he woke to find his son, Roderius Lott, unconscious next to him in the bed they shared. He called 911 while his mother and sister tried to resuscitate the baby, but they were unsuccessful. When the police arrived with the ambulance at his family’s house in Shreveport, Louisiana, they took Crawford in and questioned him about bruises on the baby’s head and lip, which he said came from a fall. Crawford was accused of smothering his son to death and sentenced to death in 2013. Dale Cox, the district attorney who sought the death penalty in Crawford’s case, wrote a memo to the state’s probation department expressing regret that the state only used lethal injection for the death penalty, because “Crawford deserves as much physical suffering as it is humanly possible to endure before he dies.” Crawford is the second-youngest man on death row in the state. Crawford-Sharp renewed her efforts to prove her brother’s innocence this week with a petition asking the district attorney who replaced Cox last November, James Stewart, to drop the charges. Stewart has echoed Cox’s arguments in response to a request from Crawford’s lawyers to overturn the sentence, and he appears unwilling to budge. Crawford's lawyers allege that the forensic evidence used to prove Rodricus was smothered is inconclusive. Last year, in a brief requesting a new trial, three doctors testified that the autopsy results were inconclusive. Amid the chaos of trying to keep in touch with her brother and spread the word about his case, Crawford-Sharp was surprised to connect with a complete stranger. Marlene Belliveau, who lives in Canada and is the vice-chair of the Canadian Sudden Infant Death Syndrome foundation, read about Roderius’ death and reached out about a year ago.  “When my granddaughter passed away, my son and daughter-in-law were accused of murder,” Belliveau told TakePart. “Between Rodricus and my children, the stories are very similar. It’s a horrific nightmare.” Like Crawford, Belliveau’s son was interrogated by police and told he couldn’t go to the hospital to see his daughter when she died. Though Belliveau’s son and her daughter-in-law weren’t charged with a crime, the experience was traumatic. Belliveau, her son, and her daughter-in-law sued the Royal Canadian Mountain Police for their treatment. “She has helped me, my mom, and my brother so much,” said Crawford-Sharp, who said she and Belliveau now talk on the phone every day. “I want to bring [Crawford] home to his family so they can finally grieve and be together, and I want it known that he is innocent,” said Belliveau.

The entire story can be found at: 


See 'The Guardian's'  take on the Rodricus Crawford case, at a  previous post (April 23) on this Blog at the link below: The Guardian takes a look at Louisiana - America's death penalty capital - and asks, through the Rodricus Crawford case, if a black DA (James Stewart) can really change the system?..."He (Stewart) has also remained quiet on the Rodricus Crawford case, even though he has the power to drop charges or dismiss an indictment, even if the person has already been convicted – which is what Crawford, who was sentenced to death, is hoping for. Cecelia Trenticosta Kappel, senior attorney with the Justice Center, says the hope was that Stewart would “see that the state’s theory that Rodricus Crawford decided to murder his son out of nowhere is implausible, unsupported by evidence, and based on abject stereotypes". According to Crawford’s attorneys and evidence submitted with his petition, she says that “the state’s case for capital murder essentially rested on two pieces of evidence: brain swelling and a busted lip. New evidence proves that the brain swelling was absolutely inconsistent with smothering; and had the state’s forensic pathologist followed standard medical protocol, the timing of the lip injury could have been conclusively proven.” In spite of these facts, Stewart’s office has filed an opposition brief to Crawford’s petition that his sentence be overturned. The brief, which rehashes the former prosecutor’s arguments in favor of the death penalty, is eerily reminiscent of Cox. So too is Stewart’s perspective on religion. “Some people get caught up in the separation of church and state. To me, all authority comes from God,” he said during an interview. Still, which “God” will you get? The one that has entire communities asking for mercy, or the one that had Cox demanding death?"

http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2016/04/rodricus-crawford-louisiana-guardian.htmlhttp://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2016/04/rodricus-crawford-louisiana-guardian.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Thursday, May 26, 2016

Jacques Delisle: Quebec; Major Development: Globe and Mail reports that new forensic evidence suggests the 81-year-old retired Quebec Court of Appeal judge has been wrongly convicted of murder: "New forensic evidence suggests the only Canadian judge convicted of murder is innocent and that his wife’s death from a gunshot wound was suicide, his lawyer says in a recent request for a Department of Justice investigation of the case."..."He has always maintained that his wife, Nicole Rainville, shot herself, though last year he told the CBC that he provided her with the loaded pistol that fired the fatal shot. Ms. Rainville was suicidal after a stroke left her right side paralyzed."..."Three forensics experts have submitted reports to the department’s Criminal Conviction Review Group attesting that the fatal bullet in Ms. Rainville’s death was fired from a 90-degree angle rather than the 30-degree angle posited by the forensic pathologist in Mr. Delisle’s trial, suggesting suicide rather than murder. The experts point to fractures on the right side of her skull that indicate the bullet travelled horizontally from left to right before ricocheting to its final resting place in the back right side of her brain. The trial pathologist who performed Ms. Rainville’s autopsy missed these fractures, as well as bullet fragments in the right side of her brain. He also apparently failed to dissect the brain, inferring the bullet’s trajectory from the entry wound and its endpoint. In his memorandum to the minister, Mr. Lockyer argues that these errors led directly to Mr. Delisle’s conviction and constitute a likely miscarriage of justice, which should trigger a formal investigation. “He just connected two dots, without realizing there was a third dot in the middle, so he didn’t look elsewhere,” Mr. Lockyer said of the trial pathologist, AndrĂ© Bourgault." Reporter Eric Andrew-Gee;


STORY: "New evidence suggests Quebec judge wrongly convicted of murder: lawyer," by reporter Eric Andrew-Gee, published by the Globe and Mail, on Thursday May 26, 2016.

GIST: "New forensic evidence suggests the only Canadian judge convicted of murder is innocent and that his wife’s death from a gunshot wound was suicide, his lawyer says in a recent request for a Department of Justice investigation of the case. Retired Quebec Court of Appeal judge Jacques Delisle has been serving a life sentence for first-degree murder since 2012, when a jury found him guilty in a trial that fascinated the province. He has lost each of his appeals, including one to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2013, and is now counting on a rarely used ministerial review that could return his case to the courts. The famed appeals lawyer James Lockyer has taken up Mr. Delisle’s case and is now urging the Justice Minister to wrap up a preliminary assessment launched last year and proceed to a formal investigation. Three forensics experts have submitted reports to the department’s Criminal Conviction Review Group attesting that the fatal bullet in Ms. Rainville’s death was fired from a 90-degree angle rather than the 30-degree angle posited by the forensic pathologist in Mr. Delisle’s trial, suggesting suicide rather than murder. The experts point to fractures on the right side of her skull that indicate the bullet travelled horizontally from left to right before ricocheting to its final resting place in the back right side of her brain. The trial pathologist who performed Ms. Rainville’s autopsy missed these fractures, as well as bullet fragments in the right side of her brain. He also apparently failed to dissect the brain, inferring the bullet’s trajectory from the entry wound and its endpoint. In his memorandum to the minister, Mr. Lockyer argues that these errors led directly to Mr. Delisle’s conviction and constitute a likely miscarriage of justice, which should trigger a formal investigation. “He just connected two dots, without realizing there was a third dot in the middle, so he didn’t look elsewhere,” Mr. Lockyer said of the trial pathologist, AndrĂ© Bourgault. Mr. Lockyer has had nearly a dozen wrongful convictions based on faulty science overturned, including several through ministerial review, and believes Mr. Delisle’s case falls into that category. “There is a systemic problem with the way science is used in criminal courts,” he said. “It points to the problems that can happen in the justice system if we place too much reliance on experts.”... Mr. Lockyer filed the request for an investigation on May 11 and expects a decision from the minister within days. If the request is granted, the 81-year-old Mr. Delisle will seek bail on the grounds of his age, pending the result of the review, which could see his case returned to an appeal court or even set for a fresh trial."

The entire story can be found at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/new-evidence-suggests-quebec-judge-wrongly-convicted-of-murder-lawyer/article30169816/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Prof. Jane Ireland: Psychologist; UK: The Lancashire Evening Post reports that she is being tried by her professional body - the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) - in connection with a research study published in 2012 which cast doubt on the validity of family court decisions with its finding that around 20 per cent of psychologists acting as expert witnesses for the family courts are not qualified: "Psychologist probed over study that hit national headlines; Prof Jane Ireland, from the University of Central Lancashire; A psychologist who poured doubt on the validity of family court decisions has been dragged before a fitness to practice hearing."..."The research found serious concerns across a range of issues beyond the startling finding that around a fifth of so-called psychologist expert witnesses are not qualified. The assessments of the expert reports found that some 20 per cent of the psychologists were working beyond their area of knowledge; around a third had no experience of mental health assessments; and some 90 per cent of experts were not in current practice. The net result was that the research concluded that around 65 per cent of expert reports in the study were of either 'poor' or 'very poor' quality. Professor Ireland told Channel 4 News: "I think we were very concerned and perturbed by some of the reports that we read, not just in terms of qualification but also the quality of the reports that we read."...Publisher's note: (The timing of the hearing is no doubt coincidental - but I couldn't help but think about the recent attack by Britain's medical profession on Dr. Waney Squier, for her counter-establishment - read 'unpopular' - research and findings on 'shaken baby syndrome. HL);


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: On March 8, 2012, this Blog published a post  on a Channel 4 News investigation which concluded that around 20 per cent of psychologists acting as expert witnesses for the family courts are not qualified, according to a Channel 4 News investigation broadcast tonight, writes producer Phil Carter. The gist of the post was as follows: "Channel 4 News spoke to families across the country involved in court proceedings and heard time and again concerns about the experts used by the courts to determine whether children are at risk and should be removed from their birth parents. But because of the secrecy of the family courts - designed to protect the identity of the children at the heart of proceedings - the experts used have largely been beyond scrutiny. This research is the first time these concerns have been to some degree independently substantiated. The research found serious concerns across a range of issues beyond the startling finding that around a fifth of so-called psychologist expert witnesses are not qualified. The assessments of the expert reports found that some 20 per cent of the psychologists were working beyond their area of knowledge; around a third had no experience of mental health assessments; and some 90 per cent of experts were not in current practice. The net result was that the research concluded that around 65 per cent of expert reports in the study were of either 'poor' or 'very poor' quality. Professor Ireland told Channel 4 News: "I think we were very concerned and perturbed by some of the reports that we read, not just in terms of qualification but also the quality of the reports that we read ...Prof Ireland and her team were given unprecedented access to psychologists' expert witness reports from three undisclosed courts across England by the FJC, an arm's length body of the Ministry of Justice. Experts play a critical role in family court cases: research suggests that at least one expert is used in 90 per cent of public law children's proceedings and many cases involve three or more experts...The findings are based on research published on Wednesday for the Family Justice Council (FJC). It was led by Professor Jane Ireland, a forensic psychologist at the University of Central Lancashire. Prof Ireland and her team were given unprecedented access to psychologists' expert witness reports from three undisclosed courts across England by the FJC, an arm's length body of the Ministry of Justice...Nigel Priestley, a lawyer closely involved in family proceedings, told of the gravity of the research's findings. "After the death penalty the most draconian act that the state can do is remove a family's child," he said. "What is at stake for many carers is the loss of their children and on the basis of a report which might or indeed might not be questionable."The entire previous post can be found at:http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2012/03/family-justice-council-report-channel-4.html
Now, four years later, Professor Jane Ireland, a forensic psychologist whose research was at the heart of the Channel 4 News investigation, has come under attack by her professional body, as reported in the following story published by the Lancashire Evening Post. (The timing of the hearing is no doubt coincidental - but I couldn't help thinking about the recent attack by Britain's  medical profession on Dr. Waney Squier, for her counter-establishment research and findings on 'shaken baby syndrome.)'

Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;

STORY: " Psychologist probed over study that hit national headlines;  Prof Jane Ireland, from the University of Central Lancashire;  A psychologist who poured doubt on the validity of family court decisions has been dragged before a fitness to practice hearing, published by the Lancashire Evening Post on May 25, 2016.

GIST: "Professor Jane Ireland, who lectures at UCLan, claimed in a study for the Family Justice Council that one in five expert witnesses in family cases were unqualified or unreliable. Her findings were published on Channel 4 and in the Daily Mail in 2012. A 10-day hearing began yesterday by the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC) into Prof Ireland’s conduct after a raft of complaints about her study were raised. Regarding the study, Prof Ireland acknowleged she made use of court documents without informed consent but claimed it wasn’t required, denied she failed to properly redact personal and sensitive information from her research, denied her methodolgy was flawed, denied she failed to declare a conflict of interest and denied her conclusions were unsubstantiated. The hearing heard from retired educational pyschologist Sam Westmacott, who had been an expert witness in family hearings for 12 years and had made a complaint about Prof Ireland’s study. It was put to Mrs Westamacott by Prof Ireland’s representative that she had complained in order to protect her own position. She replied: “I spent many years working as a writer for broadsheet and tabloid papers and producing current affair shows for the likes of TVam and consequently I realised within seconds of watching the Channel 4 programme the extreme damage that could be done to the reputation of all psychologists in this country and what concerned me most of all was the knock-on effect for families and children we work to serve."

The entire story can be found at:

 http://www.lep.co.uk/your-lancashire/pyschologist-probed-over-study-that-hit-national-headlines-1-7930760

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

Bulletin: David Eastman; Australia; His appeal to block a new murder trial will not be heard in Canberra (to avoid conflicted judges) - but rather in Melbourne (in October) before three Victorian judges, Canmua reports..."Mr Eastman spent nearly 20 years in jail for the murder of senior Australian Federal Police Commissioner Colin Winchester in Canberra in 1989. He was freed after an inquiry found there had been a miscarriage of justice, and a new trial was ordered. Mr Eastman tried to block the trial, with a stay application heard earlier this year. But in April the stay was thrown out, prompting an appeal. The case is expected to be heard in Melbourne over five days by three judges co-opted to the ACT (Australian Capital Territory) Supreme Court."


"David Eastman's appeal aimed at blocking a fresh murder trial is expected to be heard in October by three Victorian judges in Melbourne. Mr Eastman spent nearly 20 years in jail for the murder of senior Australian Federal Police Commissioner Colin Winchester in Canberra in 1989. He was freed after an inquiry found there had been a miscarriage of justice, and a new trial was ordered. Mr Eastman tried to block the trial, with a stay application heard earlier this year. But in April the stay was thrown out, prompting an appeal. The case is expected to be heard in Melbourne over five days by three judges co-opted to the ACT (Australian Capital Territory) Supreme Court. No local judges are able to sit on the case because of their past involvement. There has been so much secrecy in the case over the alternative theory that Colin Winchester was killed by organised crime figures that court orders will have to be made to allow materials to be moved to Victoria. The ACT Supreme Court is also planning the murder trial, with the search for a judge already begun. Today the court heard the trial was likely to be set down for early next year.........Mr (Kegan)  Lee (prosecutor)  said the prosecution needed time to prepare 280 witnesses. In a separate case, Mr Eastman is trying to sue the ACT Government for wrongful imprisonment."
http://canmua.net/world/david-eastman-and-039;s-appeal-to-block-new-murder-trial-not-to-be-heard-in-canberra-845296.html

See previous post on this Blog (February 8, 2016)  at the link below: "Stay application (1): The Canberra Times reports that he has launched his last-ditch bid to stave off a second trial for the 1989 murder of ACT (Australian Capital Territory) police chief Colin Winchester. One of the six grounds in favour of his argument that a retrial cannot now be conducted fairly is that, "prosecutorial misconduct occurred in the original trial, particularly due to what the defence argues was a deliberate strategy to conceal weaknesses in the forensic evidence by not disclosing some information to Mr Eastman"..."A former ACT prosecutor involved in the 1995 trial of Mr Eastman, John Edward Ibbotson, was the first witness to be called in the stay application on Monday. Mr Ibbotson was responsible, among other things, for marshalling the forensic evidence in the case against Mr Eastman, which linked the disgruntled Treasury official with the driveway where Mr Winchester was shot at point-blank range as he got out of his car. The 2014 inquiry into Mr Eastman's conviction destroyed the reliability and credibility of the expert who conducted the gunshot residue analysis that made that link."..." One new revelation to emerge in the stay application on Monday was a letter written by Mr Barnes, which criticised the overseas-based experts reviewing his work. That letter was not made available to the 2014 Eastman inquiry, despite subpoenas. Mr Barnes' letter, which was headed with a caution that it be kept secret, highlighted the extent of the divisions between the forensic experts. Yet it was never given to the defence, and was never shown to the jury. Mr Griffin alleges the prosecution deliberately tried to prevent any indication to the jury that the forensic experts were in conflict."
 http://smithforensic.blogspot.ca/2016/02/bulletin-david-eastman-canberra-times.html

Diana King, 71, Colette Devlin, 68, and Kitty O'Kane, 69: Northern Ireland; Criminalizing women for procurement of abortion pills: 'Women Are Demanding to Be Arrested for Breaking Northern Ireland's Abortion Laws', reports VICE News..."The retired social worker, who has been campaigning for years to have the UK's 1967 Abortion Act extended to Northern Ireland, told the Guardian she would tell the authorities she had not committed any offence because the drugs are not "poisonous substances, but are seen by the World Health Organisation as essential medicines."The women knew going to jail was a possibility, she said, "but we will be saying that we don't think that we have done anything wrong." A Facebook post uploaded while the women were being questioned, reported by the BBC, said "People handing themselves in highlights the unworkability of the law. It lays bare the hypocrisy of the government and pressures the state to scrap it. "If the police wish to criminalize one woman for a crime that so many of us have committed, then there can be no exception to the law, we must be arrested as well... Prisons would be filled to the brim if the law was actually enforced."


STORY: "Women Are Demanding to Be Arrested for Breaking Northern Ireland's Abortion Laws," by reporter Miriam Wells, published by VICE News on May 24, 2016.

GIST:  "Three women handed themselves in at a Northern Irish police station on Monday evening hoping to be arrested for procuring abortion pills, in protest at the country's restrictive laws. To the cheers of pro-choice campaigners standing outside, Diana King, 71, Colette Devlin, 68, and Kitty O'Kane, 69, reported to Strand Road police station in Derry and gave officers a statement saying they had received mifepristone or misoprostol pills for women too afraid to have them delivered to their homes. The drugs can safely induce an abortion up to nine weeks into a pregnancy, but are illegal to take without a doctor's consent anywhere in the UK. In England, Scotland, and Wales, women can be prescribed the drug or receive a surgical abortion on the NHS, but in Northern Ireland all abortion is illegal except when a woman's life is at risk or there is a serious or permanent risk to her mental or physical health. Abortion is not allowed in the case of fatal foetal abnormalities, rape, or incest. Northern Irish women can travel to the UK to get an abortion, but are not eligible to receive one on the NHS so need to have £1,000 to £2,000 ($1,500 to $3,000) to spend on travel, accommodation, and private treatment. "We do now have one law for the rich and one law for the poor," said King in a statement outside the police station, reported the Derry Journal. "If you can raise the £1,000 to £2,000 to travel to GB [Great Britain] for a legal abortion no-one will bother you, but if you access the nine-week abortion pills online for £60, there's a climate of fear resulting from Stormont [the Northern Ireland Assembly]and the DPP [Director of Public Prosecutions] hounding women who are already at their most vulnerable. "I don't want to believe our politicians will let this continue, but I fear they will, so it is up to us to keep campaigning." The retired social worker, who has been campaigning for years to have the UK's 1967 Abortion Act extended to Northern Ireland, told the Guardian she would tell the authorities she had not committed any offence because the drugs are not "poisonous substances, but are seen by the World Health Organisation as essential medicines." The women knew going to jail was a possibility, she said, "but we will be saying that we don't think that we have done anything wrong." A Facebook post uploaded while the women were being questioned, reported by the BBC, said "People handing themselves in highlights the unworkability of the law. It lays bare the hypocrisy of the government and pressures the state to scrap it. "If the police wish to criminalize one woman for a crime that so many of us have committed, then there can be no exception to the law, we must be arrested as well... Prisons would be filled to the brim if the law was actually enforced." The women were questioned for about three hours before being released pending a report to the Public Prosecution office, said the BBC. Last June more than 200 people signed an open letter stating they had either taken abortion pills or helped women access abortion pills in Northern Ireland, and they were willing to be arrested. Police took no action, which is why King, Devlin, and O'Kane have stepped forward, said the Guardian — seeing themselves as good candidates to take proactive action as they no longer have jobs which could be adversely impacted by a criminal record."




The entire story can be found at:

https://news.vice.com/article/women-are-demanding-to-be-arrested-for-breaking-northern-irelands-abortion-laws

See also American Bazaar's story 'Donald Trump's punishment for women evident in Purvi Patel's case' at the link below; "Back in March, the presumptive GOP nominee Trump told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who have abortions. After intense backlash for the comment, Trump backtracked to say doctors or anyone else providing an abortion should be punished, not the women themselves. In a statement on his website, he said: “The woman is a victim in this case as is the life in her womb.” He tried to further clarify his stance in an interview with The New York Times Magazine’s Robert Draper last week, saying women “punish themselves” and he didn’t mean they should be put in prison. Bustle noted that however, Patel’s case highlights the fact that often times, the woman and the provider are the same person. The 34-year-old was accused of buying medication online to induce an illegal abortion and neglecting a premature baby that could have lived. The state alleged that Patel gave birth to a live baby despite her consistent claims that she delivered a stillborn child, which constituted the additional charge of neglect. A 2009 Indiana law established stricter punishment for the death of a fetus in response to the murder of a pregnant woman, and prosecutors argued that it allowed them to charge Patel for feticide. “Because women with no other solutions end their own pregnancies, Trump’s claim that he would punish abortion providers, not women seeking abortions, isn’t any better for women than his initial statement that implied women would go to prison. When you end your own pregnancy, you become both the patient and the provider, so if performing an abortion is a punishable crime, women will absolutely end up behind bars,” noted Bustle."
http://www.americanbazaaronline.com/2016/05/24/donald-trumps-punishment-for-women-evident-in-purvi-patels-case412615/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

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.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com;

Harold Levy;

Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;