the charles smith blog

Saturday, January 6, 2018

Sherman Brown; Roy Watford: Virginia; Exoneration hearings set for Wednesday in cases of The murder of a 4-year-old boy almost half a century ago and the four decades-old rape of a 12-year-old girl..."The Virginia attorney general's office is opposing both claims while lawyers for the men contend new DNA testing of purported evidence in the crimes prove their innocence."


PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "In Brown's case, the biological evidence at issue was discovered on a microscope slide created in 1969. To be exonerated by the supreme court, Watford and Brown must prove by clear and convincing evidence that no rational judge or juror would have convicted them in light of the new evidence. Their lawyers contend both men have cleared that hurdle while the state contends they have not. As far as it is known, no one has won a writ of actual innocence in cases opposed by the attorney general. Watford, who has no other criminal record, was just 18 years old when he pleaded guilty to the 1977 rape of the girl on the advice of his grandfather in a plea deal that called for no time in jail and that allowed him to try and finish high school. DNA testing in June 2016 found that Watford's DNA did not match the genetic profile identified in sperm recovered from the victim and her jeans and two other genetic profiles found in sperm from two mattress stains found in the vacant house where the assault occurred. Testing in 2010 also failed to match the DNA profiles of Watford's two younger brothers - also suspects - with any of three suspect DNA profiles identified by the Virginia Department of Forensic Science. The attorney general's office says only that the profile identified from a vaginal swab taken from the victim can confidently be associated with the crime."

STORY: "Virginia justices consider exoneration pleas in two decades-old cases," by reporter Frank Green, published by The Richmond Times-Dispatch, on January 5, 2017.

GIST: "The murder of a 4-year-old boy almost half a century ago and the four decades-old rape of a 12-year-old girl will be at issue before the Virginia Supreme Court on Wednesday. Petitions for writs of actual innocence are pending in the high court for Sherman Brown, 70, a prison inmate serving life for a 1969 slaying in Albemarle County; and Roy L. Watford III, 58, convicted of raping a girl in Portsmouth in 1977, but who never served a day in jail. The Virginia attorney general's office is opposing both claims while lawyers for the men contend new DNA testing of purported evidence in the crimes prove their innocence. Absence of DNA in and of itself does not prove innocence and the test results in each case are not as definitive as in cases where not only is the convicted person's DNA excluded from relevant, undisputed evidence of the crime, but the real perpetrator is identified by testing. Among other things the attorney general's office questions the significance of some of the test results and whether the material tested was actually related to the crime. In Brown's case, the biological evidence at issue was discovered on a microscope slide created in 1969. To be exonerated by the supreme court, Watford and Brown must prove by clear and convincing evidence that no rational judge or juror would have convicted them in light of the new evidence. Their lawyers contend both men have cleared that hurdle while the state contends they have not. As far as it is known, no one has won a writ of actual innocence in cases opposed by the attorney general. Watford, who has no other criminal record, was just 18 years old when he pleaded guilty to the 1977 rape of the girl on the advice of his grandfather in a plea deal that called for no time in jail and that allowed him to try and finish high school. DNA testing in June 2016 found that Watford's DNA did not match the genetic profile identified in sperm recovered from the victim and her jeans and two other genetic profiles found in sperm from two mattress stains found in the vacant house where the assault occurred. Testing in 2010 also failed to match the DNA profiles of Watford's two younger brothers - also suspects - with any of three suspect DNA profiles identified by the Virginia Department of Forensic Science. The attorney general's office says only that the profile identified from a vaginal swab taken from the victim can confidently be associated with the crime. Many questions about the crime and trial remain unanswered because it happened so long ago and, since Watford pleaded guilty, there is not a detailed trial record. After Watford petitioned for a writ of actual innocence and the attorney general's office responded, the justices ordered an evidentiary hearing that was held in April in Portsmouth Circuit Court. At the hearing the now-adult victim testified that when she entered the vacant house, she saw one of Watford's brothers and other men inside. However, she said a blanket was thrown over her head, so she did not see her assailants. She said she could not recall seeing or hearing Watford - whom she knew - at the scene or recall telling police that he was among her assailants. The attorney general's office does not comment on pending petitions, although in Watford's case it said in pleadings that the case was troubling, but nevertheless argued that he had not met the burden required by law for exoneration. Jonathan Sheldon, Watford's lawyer, believes his client's innocence claim is conclusive in light of the testimony at the hearing. Brown was convicted of the Oct. 1, 1969, murder of a 4-year-old Albemarle County boy. He was identified by the child's mother, who was stabbed, beaten and apparently raped in the same attack that took her son's life. A vaginal swab was taken from the mother at the University of Virginia Hospital emergency room where she was treated after the attack. It was used to create a microscope slide that was given to the hospital's pathology department on Oct. 2, 1969. The slide was discovered in a Charlottesville-area warehouse in 2015 and subjected to DNA testing. The Innocence Project filed a petition for a writ of actual innocence with the Virginia Supreme Court citing the DNA test results which they said is powerful evidence he did not commit the crime and that the mother's identification was mistaken. The partial male DNA profile identified in material on the slide does not match Brown or the woman's husband. The commonwealth's theory of the case was that the boy was slain to eliminate a witness to the rape of his mother. According to the state, the mother's DNA profile has not been identified in what is said to be her vaginal swab. The state says that a DNA profile developed when testing the slide is inconsistent with her DNA. The attorney general's office asked the justices to dismiss the petition, arguing among other things, that Brown made self-incriminating statements, that there were problems with the DNA testing and that the material tested may not even be associated with the case. The state argues that Brown cannot document who made the slide or who has had custody or access to it from 1969 to 2015 in order to show the evidence had not been altered, tampered with or substituted. The Innocence Project says they have shown a sufficient chain of custody for the slide which has been kept in a metal file cabinet, stored for a number of years at the hospital and transferred to a locked, state-run warehouse. When the slide was located at the hospital's pathology lab, it was immediately placed in a plastic container that was closed and later delivered to police. They said the evidence is old and degraded and it is not surprising that the mother's DNA was not identified on the slide. The DNA profile found on the slide that is "inconsistent" with the mother does not mean the slide was not made from her vaginal swab but rather that the profile came from the perpetrator. The Innocence Project said the self-incriminating statements cited by the attorney general were made during a parole interview and "reflect a desire to be paroled rather than a true confession of guilt." The justices have set aside 40 minutes Wednesday for Brown's case and 30 minutes for Watford. Watford said last week that he will be unable to attend the hearing."
http://www.richmond.com/news/local/central-virginia/virginia-justices-consider-exoneration-pleas-in-two-decades-old-cases/article_5922f452-0741-59e1-98ff-c83e20acd877.html

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/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.




  •  

Harold Levy at Saturday, January 06, 2018
Share
‹
›
Home
View web version

About Me

My photo
Harold Levy
Two Blogs Now: The Charles Smith Blog; The Selfless Warriors Blog: I created the Charles Smith Blog in 2007 after I retired from The Toronto Star to permit me to keep digging into the story of the flawed pathologist and the harm he had done to so many innocent parents and caregivers, and to Ontario’s criminal justice system. Since then it has taken new directions, including examinations of other flawed pathologists, flawed pathology, and flawed science and technology which has marred the quality of justice in courtrooms around the world. On International Wrongful Conviction Day in 2024, I was thrilled to have the Blog recognized by Innocence Canada, when I was presented with the, "Rubin Hurricane Carter Champion of Justice Award." The heart of the Blog is my approach to following cases which raise issues in all of these areas - especially those involving the death penalty. I have dedicated 'The Selfless Warrior Blog’ (soon to appear) to those exceptional individuals who have been ripped out of their ordinary lives by their inability to stand by in the face of a glaring miscarriage of justice. They are my ’Selfless Warriors.’ Enjoy!
View my complete profile
Powered by Blogger.