RELEASE: "Forensic science put Jimmy Genrich in prison for 24 years. What if it wasn't science: A special investigation reveals a disastrous flaw affecting thousands of criminal convictions?" by science journalists Meehan Crist and Tim Requarth, published by The Nation on February 1, 2018."
GIST: Accomplished science journalists Meehan Crist and Tim Requarth investigate the hotly contested future of forensics and bring fresh scrutiny
to the wildly unscientific field. Weaving the history of forensic
‘science’ through the dramatic retelling of Jimmy Genrich's arrest,
prosecution, and ongoing Innocence Project-backed appeal, Crist and
Requarth lay out a damning case against a rigged system. Their findings
could reverse convictions, upend current cases, and forever change the
field of criminal justice.
Crist and Requarth report how an Obama-era commission
cast doubt on much of modern forensics, and how prosecutors all the way
up to the attorney general (both Loretta Lynch and current AG Jeff
Sessions) have worked to shelve the studies to protect one of their
favorite and most flawed tools. Their investigation found that flawed
forensic science is a contributing factor in up to 50% of all wrongful
convictions; forensic examiners routinely make scientifically
indefensible claims of certainty in court; and while forensic evidence
is very convincing to juries, many techniques have never been subjected
to rigorous scientific testing.
“Today, Genrich is 55 years old and has been in prison for nearly 25 years for crimes he says he didn’t commit,” write Crist and Requarth.
“His latest appeal has been taken up by the Innocence Project, in the
hopes of not only freeing Genrich, but getting the courts to recognize
recent scientific challenges to forensic pattern-matching techniques
that affect hundreds of thousands of people at all levels of the
criminal-justice system. In our investigation, we comprehensively
reviewed the literature on handheld toolmarks published in forensic
trade journals, dug through past legal rulings, pored over nearly 7,000
pages of trial transcripts, and conducted dozens of interviews with
prosecutors, defense attorneys, forensic practitioners, judges,
academics, and scientists, from Grand Junction to the Department of
Justice. What we found was a startling lack of scientific support for
forensic pattern-matching techniques such as toolmark analysis; a legal
system that has failed to separate nonsense from science even in capital
cases; and a consensus among prosecutors all the way up to the attorney
general’s office that scientifically dubious forensic techniques should
be not only protected, but expanded. With Donald Trump in the White
House and Jeff Sessions at the helm of the DOJ, the nominal momentum for
forensic-science reform spurred by the two major reports is slowing.
Genrich’s case reveals a system that makes it nearly impossible to throw
unproven forensic science out of courts and may be keeping thousands of
innocent people behind bars.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The entire feature can be read at the link below:
Forensic Science Put Jimmy Genrich in Prison for 24 Years. What if It Wasn’t Science?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
