PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Moments when it makes you really proud to be Canadian: It is great to read in this story about the role that Tamara Parsons. a criminal justice student in Canada, has played in raising the technological issue in this case: "After he was convicted, Powell began corresponding with Tamara Parsons, a criminal justice student in Canada. Eventually, they fell in love and she moved down to Texas. She read the trial transcript and was suspicious of Knox’s analysis. “It didn’t feel like in his testimony he knew what was going on,” she said. She convinced Powell’s family to hire Al Yonovitz and Herbert Joe, who examined the video and determined that the robber was actually 5 feet 7.5 inches, with a half-inch margin of error, which would clearly rule out Powell. Parsons also submitted the case to the commission, which hired a new analyst, Grant Fredericks, who has taught video analysis at the F.B.I. National Academy in Quantico, Va. He concluded that the suspect in the video was between 5 feet 5.8 inches and 5 feet 9.4 inches, and wrote in a report that “Mr. Knox failed to follow industry accepted standards and methodologies in the execution of his photogrammetric examination.” Knox used only one image, Fredericks wrote, when he should have used many, and measured the robber’s height with a curved line along his body, as opposed to a straight line from the top of his head to the ground. “The combined errors of Knox’s work added approximately 5.5” to his height analysis,” Fredericks concluded." Bravo Ms. Parsons.
Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
-----------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Was the Robber 6-foot-3 or 5-foot-6? Testing the reliability of video analysis: By Maurice Chammah," published by The Marshall Project On December 12, 2016. (Maurice Chammah is a staff writer. His work has appeared in The New York Times, The Atlantic, and elsewhere. He was a finalist for a 2014 Livingston Award for a story on the decline of the death penalty, and a 2011-2012 Fulbright fellow in Egypt.)
PHOTO CAPTION: "The Texas Forensic Science Commission asked analyst Grant Fredericks to review a surveillance video from a 2008 Texas robbery. His findings cast doubt on the conviction of George Powell III."
PHOTO CAPTION: "George Powell III is currently serving a 28-year sentence for a robbery in Killeen. Grant Fredericks's report to the Texas Forensic Science Commission compares the height of a 3-D laser scan of Powell, left, against the height of the robber."
GIST: In June 2008, a man wearing sunglasses and a baseball cap entered a
7-Eleven store in Killeen, Texas, pointed a gun at the clerk, and
demanded money. A string of similar robberies had taken place at stores
in the area, which is near Fort Hood, and police suspected they were all
the work of one man. This time, they got lucky: a surveillance camera
captured the robber as he fled the scene. They put the video on the
evening news, and a phone tip led them to George Powell III. The clerk had initially told police the robber was around 5 feet 6
inches tall, but faced with a photo lineup, she pointed to Powell. He
stands 6 feet 3 inches. At trial, there was strong evidence in both directions — other clerks
in the area said they weren’t sure Powell was the one who had robbed
them, while a jailhouse informant said Powell had confessed to him — but
the height discrepancy was a key challenge for prosecutors. Their
solution was to call Michael Knox to the stand. A former Florida police officer, Knox told the jurors that he had
studied a still image from the surveillance footage using
photogrammetry, the science of making determinations about objects in an
environment based on visual evidence, which is commonly used to create
maps and virtual reality environments. Knox examined measurements of the
store’s doorway and estimated that the robber was at least 6 feet 1
inch. Powell, 43, was convicted and is currently serving a 28-year
sentence. But last month, Mike Ware, executive director of the Innocence
Project of Texas, filed an appeal claiming Powell is innocent and was
wrongly convicted in part because of flaws in Knox’s work. Ware’s
arguments are bolstered by an April 2016 report
by the Texas Forensic Science Commission, which uses Powell’s case to
raise questions about the overall consistency and reliability of video
analysis. Though the commission has no power to overturn a conviction, its
investigations have marshalled legal and political scrutiny around
forensic sciences from DNA to bite marks to arson. The report suggests forensic video analysis may join that list. The tools are not new. Photogrammetry traces its origins
to Leonardo da Vinci’s 15th century work on perspective. Abraham
Zapruder’s 1963 amateur video, capturing the assassination of John F.
Kennedy, was picked apart by dozens of agencies, commissions, and
individual citizens. But in recent years, many judges have been tasked
with deciding whether an individual analyst’s work is credible enough to
go before a jury. As more businesses install security cameras, police
don body cameras, and cell phone users hit record, disputes over how
such video is handled and analyzed are more likely to arise. After he was convicted, Powell began corresponding with Tamara
Parsons, a criminal justice student in Canada. Eventually, they fell in
love and she moved down to Texas. She read the trial transcript and was
suspicious of Knox’s analysis. “It didn’t feel like in his testimony he
knew what was going on,” she said. She convinced Powell’s family to hire
Al Yonovitz and Herbert Joe, who examined the video and determined that
the robber was actually 5 feet 7.5 inches, with a half-inch margin of
error, which would clearly rule out Powell. Parsons also submitted the case to the commission, which hired a new
analyst, Grant Fredericks, who has taught video analysis at the F.B.I.
National Academy in Quantico, Va. He concluded that the suspect in the
video was between 5 feet 5.8 inches and 5 feet 9.4 inches, and wrote in a
report that “Mr. Knox failed to follow industry accepted standards and
methodologies in the execution of his photogrammetric examination.” Knox used only one image, Fredericks wrote, when he should have used
many, and measured the robber’s height with a curved line along his
body, as opposed to a straight line from the top of his head to the
ground. “The combined errors of Knox’s work added approximately 5.5” to
his height analysis,” Fredericks concluded. .........But beyond the particular disputes over Powell’s case, the
commission’s report concludes that there are pressing questions about
how to establish whether an analyst’s work is reliable, and that there
is “an urgent need for more publicly accessible information” regarding
professional standards. The report “encourages the criminal justice community” — district
attorneys, judges, defense attorneys, and others — to work more closely
with the Law Enforcement and Emergency Services Video Association, which
certifies analysts only after they complete 288 hours of coursework and
defend their work in a case before a board. Knox was not certified by
the group. George Reis, a certified analyst in California, says his fellow
analysts agree that their science is valid and reliable when it’s done
well, but that judges tend to be too permissive in terms of who they let
testify. “The problem is that judges don’t want to exclude experts,” he
says. The commission report, and the results of Powell’s case, will
likely cause judges to examine the credentials of analysts more closely,
at least in Texas. A state district court will soon rule on whether Powell is entitled
to relief. That recommendation will be sent to the state’s Court of
Criminal Appeals, which will have the ultimate decision on whether to
overturn his sentence."
The entire story can be found at:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/12/12/was-the-robber-6-foot-3-or-5-foot-6?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_source=opening-statement&utm_term=newsletter-20161213-655#.PHrlwzZc
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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/
The entire story can be found at:
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2016/12/12/was-the-robber-6-foot-3-or-5-foot-6?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_source=opening-statement&utm_term=newsletter-20161213-655#.PHrlwzZc
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. 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/
