STORY: "Issue of innocence: Is Adam Braseel serving life for another man's crime?" by reporter Matt Lakin, published by The USA Today Network on May 19, 2017.
PHOTO CAPTION: "A Grundy County jury found Adam Braseel guilty in 2007 of first-degree murder. A judge set him free a year-and-a-half ago and ordered a new trial, calling the evidence of Braseel’s guilt insufficient, but a state appeals court reversed the decision.
PHOTO CAPTION: "Braseel's supporters say the lineup violated best practices and contains too many photos that don't look like the description of the killer."
PHOTO CAPTION: "Cindy Henley served on the jury that convicted Adam Braseel of first-degree murder in 2007. She says she now believes Braseel to be innocent and that the guilty verdict was a mistake. "
GIST: "Adam Clyde Braseel clocked out of work, borrowed his mother’s car and headed to the mountain for a weekend of four-wheeling with friends. He took about a 45-minute break in between to lure an old man from home in the dark, beat him to death by the roadside, steal his wallet and try to silence an eyewitness. He made it to his next stop in time for a late supper. That’s the argument that convinced a Grundy County jury to send Braseel, then 24, to prison for life a decade ago for the death of 60-year-old Malcolm Burrows. A judge set him free a year-and-a-half ago and ordered a new trial, calling the evidence of Braseel’s guilt insufficient. The state Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the decision and took that freedom back. He’s 34 now. He’ll be 76 if he lives long enough to appear at his first parole hearing. The case has divided this small Southeast Tennessee community on the Cumberland Plateau and raised questions about the accuracy of eyewitness testimony and just what issues qualify as fair game under Tennessee’s appeals process. Braseel maintained his innocence from the moment investigators confronted him. He maintains it today.........No other suspect was ever charged in the case. Not a single piece of physical evidence linked Braseel to the crime scene – no fingerprints, no DNA, no blood, hair or clothing fibers. Prosecutors say they didn’t need it. “Two eyewitnesses clearly identified him,” said Steve Strain, the assistant 12th Judicial District attorney general who handled the trial. “He was tried like anybody else. He was represented by two established, very experienced attorneys, and the jury found him guilty.” Two more eyewitnesses swore they saw Braseel in a church parking lot at almost the exact moment of the crime. A friend testified he saw Braseel walk through his door minutes after the killing – calm, clean and composed as far as he could tell.........The Tennessee Supreme Court chose earlier this year not to hear Braseel’s case. That leaves only one further avenue of appeal – a petition in U.S. District Court to have the conviction declared unlawful and thrown out. Such petitions are rarely granted – if ever...... Braseel complied with every request from police. He agreed to a search of the Acura and signed it over to deputies. A tow truck hauled off the car, which wouldn’t start due to a dead battery. He turned over his ballcap and the clothes he said he’d worn the night before. “I gave them everything they wanted,” Braseel said. “I had nothing to hide.” Tests found none of Burrows’ blood or brain matter in the car, on the cap or on the clothes. Braseel had no visible injuries except for a bruise and small cut on his cheek – where a box had fallen on him at work, he said. He followed officers that night to the county jail in Altamont, where he let himself be fingerprinted and photographed and gave a brief statement.........The trial lasted three days in November 2007. With a judge and jury watching, Becky Hill took the witness stand and pointed out Braseel as her attacker. “He is right there,” she said. Cleek, the chief deputy, testified Hill picked Braseel out of a photo lineup days after the killing with the words, “That’s him.”.........Braseel’s lawyers say they recognized the case as lost from the moment Hill pointed to the defense table. “Juries believe eyewitnesses,” said attorney Bob Peters, who assisted with the defense. “She was not hesitant. I was studying the jurors’ faces, and there was not a single juror that didn’t believe her.” Courts have treated eyewitness testimony as the bedrock of convictions since the days of Moses and Hammurabi. But psychological studies and wrongful-conviction appeals over the past half-century have increasingly called that principle into question.
“Mistaken eyewitness
identification is the primary cause of wrongful convictions in the U.S. –
about 70 percent by most estimates,” said Gary Wells, a professor of
psychology at Iowa State University who has made a career of studying
human memory. “There’s no other single factor that quite comes close to
that. We think of eyewitness certainty as a pretty good indicator of
accuracy, and if you do everything right in the initial lineup, you can
count on the confidence of the witness as a pretty good predictor of
what’s right or wrong. But unfortunately, things can really break down
early on.” For all her ability to point out Braseel in the
courtroom, Hill couldn’t give a consistent account of how she picked him
out as her attacker. She testified at a preliminary hearing about
six weeks after the killing that the sheriff and the chief deputy came
to her sister’s home a day or two after she returned from the hospital.
They sat at the kitchen table, showed her a photo lineup, and “once I
seen the picture I knowed him. … None of (the others) look like him.” At the trial, 22 months after the killing, Hill swore she’d gone to the jail for the lineup. “I’m
not sure if I looked at (the photos) at my sister’s or not,” she
testified. “I did go to the jail and look at them. … I had been heavily
medicated. I wasn’t at myself at that time real good. … I knowed exactly
what I was telling them. I knowed what I was doing.” Cleek, the
chief deputy, insists officers went to visit Hill immediately after she
left the hospital but didn’t try to show her a lineup because she was
still in too much of a daze. “I did not present the photo lineup
to her then because I did not feel she was up to it,” he said. “I was
the one who sat two inches away from Becky Hill (later) when she poked
her finger on that photo of Adam Braseel. To me, she was certain. That
lineup, introduced as an exhibit at trial, consists of eight color mug
shots – four on top, four on the bottom – with Braseel’s on the bottom
near the center. Five of the men in the photos have bangs or bushy hair.
Four appear to be at least middle-aged or older. Three have beards. Only Braseel’s and another photo show close-cropped hair. Not everyone pictured has red hair. Grundy
County authorities didn’t record Hill’s identification, on audio or
video. The only record of the process to make its way into the court
file consists of an undated report prepared under the name of Myers, the
sheriff. “She told me that she could not positively identify the
car but that she would never forget the person’s face that assaulted
her,” the sheriff wrote. “When she saw his picture she began to cry. She
told me that she knew that this would not bring Malcolm back but that
she would never forget Adam Brazeel’s (sic) face when he assaulted her.” Myers didn’t respond to repeated efforts to reach him for this story. Defense lawyers made no objection to the lineup. “Frankly,
I’m appalled at what I’m hearing,” said Wells, the eyewitness expert,
who has no ties to Braseel’s defense. “I hesitate to criticize law
enforcement in a case like this, because they often have small staffs
and because it’s easy to hindsight people. But there needs to be some
kind of clear, documented identification process. There should be filler
(photos) of people who look like the suspect. The person conducting the
lineup should be someone other than the case detective, someone who
doesn’t even know which photo is the suspect’s so that they can’t
unconsciously influence the witness. You shouldn’t be able to look at
the lineup and tell which person is the suspect. When that doesn’t
happen, it’s up to defense attorneys to hold law enforcement to
account.” The
official photo lineup with Hill didn’t take place until Jan. 16 – nine
days after the killing and a week after her son, who was still living
with her, had already identified Braseel’s photo in a process that
raised further questions. That identification rated only a pair of
sentences in the sheriff’s report. But at trial, Myers admitted things
hadn’t gone as planned. The sheriff testified he’d been clipping
out mug shots on a desk in an unsecured trailer outside the jail to
paste into a lineup when Braden burst in unannounced.
“All of those photos was on the desk … and when he sat down he pointed at the picture and told me that that picture was the one that had did it,” Myers testified. “When he did that, I picked all those photos up in my hand, and I handed ‘em to him and I told him that I wanted him to make sure that he had picked out the right photo.” The sheriff said he couldn’t remember how the photos were arranged on the desk, how many lay face-up or how many face-down. Braden swore he saw Braseel’s photo first, then the others. “He showed me the first photo and I identified him,” the son testified. “He come up and asked me, yes, ‘Is this the man who done it?’ … He showed me three or four. … I couldn’t tell you how many (photos). There was a stack.” Experts say that’s one of the worst possible ways to conduct a photo lineup. “People want to believe the human memory is like a camera, but it’s more like an Etch-A-Sketch,” said Wells, the psychology professor. “Memory is malleable. Every time you remember an event, you reshape it in your mind. Once a witness identifies a suspect, then he becomes their memory. When they think back to the crime, they see his face. Their recollection is tainted, and there’s no way to get that back.” No one at the trial ever asked Hill or Braden whether they’d talked about his making the identification first. “It’s ridiculous,” said William J. Bevil, a retired Brevard County, Fla., homicide detective who worked on the Braseel case as a private investigator during the initial appeals process. “That kind of lineup would never fly anywhere else in the country. Her son goes back home and lives with her. Don’t you think he’s going to say, ‘Hey, Mom, guess what? I picked the guy out.’ Right away, they have messed this case up. It’s garbage in, garbage out.” Hill died in 2011, and Braden couldn’t be reached for this story. A knock at his door in Tracy City drew no answer. Defense lawyers had the right to challenge Hill’s and Braden’s identifications as tainted and try to keep the jury from hearing that testimony......... Jurors deliberated for a total of about three hours before finding Braseel guilty of first-degree murder in Burrows’ death, attempted first-degree murder in the beating of Hill and especially aggravated robbery. Circuit Judge Buddy Perry pronounced the sentence – life in prison. At least one member of the jury says she’s had second thoughts from the moment the foreman read the verdict. “It was wrong,” said Cindy Henley, who insists she argued against conviction but gave into pressure from her fellow jurors. “I don’t remember anybody else in the jury room questioning anything. I think most of them just wanted to go home. But I will never forget the look on that man’s face. I still feel guilty about that.” A review by the state Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the overall conviction and rejected the idea the photo lineups had violated Braseel’s rights. Next came the post-conviction process, when inmates get the chance to argue at the local court level for new trials based on due process violations or newly discovered evidence. A hearing on Braseel’s petition, argued by Knoxville attorney Doug Trant, reached the court docket on Nov. 17, 2015, eight years after Braseel’s conviction. A new judge, Justin Angel, five years out of law school and elected to the bench just a year before, presided this time. Trant’s argument rested primarily on the problematic nature of Hill’s and Braden’s identifications, on additional witnesses supporting Braseel’s alibi – including Jake Baum, who’d been on active duty with the Army during the trial – and on testimony pointing to other potential suspects in Burrows’ death. Trant argued Braseel’s lawyers failed him by not objecting and by not driving those points home with jurors. “Those are such important issues that certainly the defense counsel should have run with it,” Trant said. “I think they just didn’t see it.” The judge issued his decision on Christmas Day. “Identification alone is all that ties the petitioner to the crimes,” Angel wrote. Based on “clear and convincing evidence … The petitioner is entitled to a new jury trial. Braseel came home from prison, released on bond as he waited for a new trial that never came. He worked a construction job while living with his mother and sister, who’d moved back to Pelham since the trial. “I was a free man – justly free – for 10 months,” he said. “I thought it was all over with. It’s a beautiful thing to have your physical freedom, especially after it’s been taken away from you once. I take a lot less things for granted now.” That freedom didn’t last. Prosecutors appealed the judge’s decision as unfounded. The state Court of Criminal Appeals agreed. Neither of Braseel’s original lawyers testified at the post-conviction hearing. Without hearing from the attorneys, any ruling on their effectiveness amounted to guesswork, the court ruled. “A defendant in a criminal case is not entitled to perfect representation, only constitutionally adequate representation,” Judge Timothy Easter wrote. “These witnesses had a substantial and prolonged opportunity to observe the offender amid adequate lighting and from close distances. The witnesses expressed certainty . … No probability exists that the result of the trial would have been different (had the defense objected to the identifications).” That decision sent Braseel back to the prison cell where he sits today at the Bledsoe County Correctional Complex in Pikeville, Tenn. His appeals at the state level ran out in March when the Tennessee Supreme Court declined to hear his case.........Braseel’s latest attorney, Alex Little, hopes to file a petition in federal court by the end of the month. Just persuading a judge to hear that plea won’t be easy, as such hearings typically deal only with death-penalty cases or clear questions of constitutional rights."
The entire story can be found at:
“All of those photos was on the desk … and when he sat down he pointed at the picture and told me that that picture was the one that had did it,” Myers testified. “When he did that, I picked all those photos up in my hand, and I handed ‘em to him and I told him that I wanted him to make sure that he had picked out the right photo.” The sheriff said he couldn’t remember how the photos were arranged on the desk, how many lay face-up or how many face-down. Braden swore he saw Braseel’s photo first, then the others. “He showed me the first photo and I identified him,” the son testified. “He come up and asked me, yes, ‘Is this the man who done it?’ … He showed me three or four. … I couldn’t tell you how many (photos). There was a stack.” Experts say that’s one of the worst possible ways to conduct a photo lineup. “People want to believe the human memory is like a camera, but it’s more like an Etch-A-Sketch,” said Wells, the psychology professor. “Memory is malleable. Every time you remember an event, you reshape it in your mind. Once a witness identifies a suspect, then he becomes their memory. When they think back to the crime, they see his face. Their recollection is tainted, and there’s no way to get that back.” No one at the trial ever asked Hill or Braden whether they’d talked about his making the identification first. “It’s ridiculous,” said William J. Bevil, a retired Brevard County, Fla., homicide detective who worked on the Braseel case as a private investigator during the initial appeals process. “That kind of lineup would never fly anywhere else in the country. Her son goes back home and lives with her. Don’t you think he’s going to say, ‘Hey, Mom, guess what? I picked the guy out.’ Right away, they have messed this case up. It’s garbage in, garbage out.” Hill died in 2011, and Braden couldn’t be reached for this story. A knock at his door in Tracy City drew no answer. Defense lawyers had the right to challenge Hill’s and Braden’s identifications as tainted and try to keep the jury from hearing that testimony......... Jurors deliberated for a total of about three hours before finding Braseel guilty of first-degree murder in Burrows’ death, attempted first-degree murder in the beating of Hill and especially aggravated robbery. Circuit Judge Buddy Perry pronounced the sentence – life in prison. At least one member of the jury says she’s had second thoughts from the moment the foreman read the verdict. “It was wrong,” said Cindy Henley, who insists she argued against conviction but gave into pressure from her fellow jurors. “I don’t remember anybody else in the jury room questioning anything. I think most of them just wanted to go home. But I will never forget the look on that man’s face. I still feel guilty about that.” A review by the state Court of Criminal Appeals upheld the overall conviction and rejected the idea the photo lineups had violated Braseel’s rights. Next came the post-conviction process, when inmates get the chance to argue at the local court level for new trials based on due process violations or newly discovered evidence. A hearing on Braseel’s petition, argued by Knoxville attorney Doug Trant, reached the court docket on Nov. 17, 2015, eight years after Braseel’s conviction. A new judge, Justin Angel, five years out of law school and elected to the bench just a year before, presided this time. Trant’s argument rested primarily on the problematic nature of Hill’s and Braden’s identifications, on additional witnesses supporting Braseel’s alibi – including Jake Baum, who’d been on active duty with the Army during the trial – and on testimony pointing to other potential suspects in Burrows’ death. Trant argued Braseel’s lawyers failed him by not objecting and by not driving those points home with jurors. “Those are such important issues that certainly the defense counsel should have run with it,” Trant said. “I think they just didn’t see it.” The judge issued his decision on Christmas Day. “Identification alone is all that ties the petitioner to the crimes,” Angel wrote. Based on “clear and convincing evidence … The petitioner is entitled to a new jury trial. Braseel came home from prison, released on bond as he waited for a new trial that never came. He worked a construction job while living with his mother and sister, who’d moved back to Pelham since the trial. “I was a free man – justly free – for 10 months,” he said. “I thought it was all over with. It’s a beautiful thing to have your physical freedom, especially after it’s been taken away from you once. I take a lot less things for granted now.” That freedom didn’t last. Prosecutors appealed the judge’s decision as unfounded. The state Court of Criminal Appeals agreed. Neither of Braseel’s original lawyers testified at the post-conviction hearing. Without hearing from the attorneys, any ruling on their effectiveness amounted to guesswork, the court ruled. “A defendant in a criminal case is not entitled to perfect representation, only constitutionally adequate representation,” Judge Timothy Easter wrote. “These witnesses had a substantial and prolonged opportunity to observe the offender amid adequate lighting and from close distances. The witnesses expressed certainty . … No probability exists that the result of the trial would have been different (had the defense objected to the identifications).” That decision sent Braseel back to the prison cell where he sits today at the Bledsoe County Correctional Complex in Pikeville, Tenn. His appeals at the state level ran out in March when the Tennessee Supreme Court declined to hear his case.........Braseel’s latest attorney, Alex Little, hopes to file a petition in federal court by the end of the month. Just persuading a judge to hear that plea won’t be easy, as such hearings typically deal only with death-penalty cases or clear questions of constitutional rights."
The entire story can be found at:
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/c
