PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Texas has
lately again been getting
deserved credit as a national leader on forensic reform. Our forensic
commission is the best in the country, according
to Innocence Project cofounder Peter Neufeld, and our first-of-its-kind
junk science writ has made Texas one of only two states (California
followed suit) with the means in place to challenge junk science in old
convictions through habeas corpus writs."
--------------------------------------------------------
POST: "Top 10 junk forensic
sciences challenged in Texas," published by Grits for Breakfast on July
25, 2018. (Thanks to Mike Bowers of CSIDDS (Forensics and law in focus)
for bringing this important post to our attention.)
GIST: "In the wake of the Forensic
Science Commission declaring blood-spatter evidence in a 30-year old
murder case "not accurate or scientifically supported," Texas has
lately again been getting
deserved credit as a national leader on forensic reform. Our forensic
commission is the best in the country, according
to Innocence Project cofounder Peter Neufeld, and our first-of-its-kind
junk science writ has made Texas one of only two states (California
followed suit) with the means in place to challenge junk science in old
convictions through habeas corpus writs. The most commonly used forensics that
were questioned by the National Academy of Sciences 2009 report, "Strengthening
Forensic Science: A Path Forward" - like fingerprints or
ballistics matching - have yet to face concerted challenges. But quite a few
second-tier forensic methods have begun to wilt under scrutiny.
Here's Grits list of the top 10
forensics challenged in Texas to date.
- Dog-scent lineups
- Outdated arson standards
- Hair comparisons
- Bite marks
- Blood spatter
- DNA mixtures
- Field tests for narcotics
- Future dangerousness testimony
- Shaken baby syndrome
- Forensic hypnosis
Honorable
mention: Estimating
suspects' height based on forensic video analysis.
Of these, only dog-scent lineups and
flawed arson testimony have been eliminated, with hair comparisons mostly
displaced by mitochondrial DNA testing in 21st century cases. A prosecutor in
Collin County recently stipulated that bite-mark testimony is junk, so the
Court of Criminal Appeals will soon get a chance to declare it non-viable. The
rest are under dispute but still in use. Moreover, Texas has yet to figure out
how to respond when
forensic errors impact large numbers of already-decided cases. That's
why I've said before, Texas may be ahead of other states on forensic reform, but
don't gloat. Most other states are behind because they never left the
starting gate, and despite some notable progress, most of our needed forensic
reforms remain in front of us."
The entire post can be read 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/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;