PASSAGE OF THE DAY (1): (Executions remain near historic lows): "The report notes two death row inmates were freed in 2018: California inmate Vicente Benavides and Florida inmate Clemente Aguirre-Jarquin. Benavides, who was on death row for nearly 25 years after being convicted of raping and killing his girlfriend's 21-month-old daughter, was freed after California's highest court ruled that false medical testimony was presented at his trial. Aguirre-Jarquin, who spent 14 years behind bars for the murder of his two neighbors, was freed after evidence showed that the daughter of one of the victims confessed to the murders and her blood was at the scene."
------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY (2): (National Registry of Exonerations entry on Vincente Benavides: "On April 19, 2018, 68-year-old Vicente Benavides was released from California’s death row, 25 years after he was sentenced to death for the rape, sodomy, and murder of a 21-month-old girl in Delano, California. His convictions were vacated and the charges were dismissed after numerous experts concluded that the girl had never been raped or sodomized, and that the medical evidence used to convict Benavides was wrong........."In 2007, attorneys for Benavides filed a 395-page petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition argued that the convictions were based upon false medical testimony, that the police and prosecution withheld evidence, and that the prosecution made improper arguments. The petition also cited the failure of Benavides’s defense attorneys (both of whom were subsequently disbarred or suspended) to provide an adequate defense. Benavides was developmentally disabled—his mental capacity was that of a seven-year-old—the defense never brought that out at his trial. The primary focus of the petition, however, was on the medical testimony. “Virtually every medical observation and conclusion that the prosecution presented – from the cause of death to the ‘evidence’ of rape and sodomy – was manufactured and false,” the petition said. “The indisputable evidence presented in this petition—provided by world-renowned medical authorities, the medical personnel who observed Consuelo Verdugo immediately upon her arrival at the hospital, and the doctors who testified on behalf of the prosecution–disproves each and every element of the prosecution's case.” “The jury did not learn or know that the pathologist's cause of death—anal penetration that severed her pancreas—is medically impossible,” the petition said. “The jury did not learn or know that the numerous medical personnel who administered Consuelo's care immediately upon her arrival at the hospital emphatically deny that she had such injuries. Indeed, the jury did not hear that the injuries used to support the charges resulted not from criminal conduct, but rather from the invasive and sustained medical efforts to address Consuelo's increasingly deteriorating medical condition.” The only medical witness who did not recant his trial testimony was Dibdin, the pathologist. The habeas petition noted that Dibdin had been fired or his contract was terminated from medical examiner offices in Oklahoma City; Brown County, Wisconsin; Tasmania, Australia; San Bernardino County, California; Nevada County, California, and, some time after Benavides’s conviction, his contract with the Kern County Coroner’s Office was not renewed. In the early 2000s, Dibdin was hired as a pathologist at a hospital in South Shields, England, analyzing tissue samples to diagnose illnesses. In 2007, the General Medical Council found he had made numerous errors, some of which resulted in belated diagnoses of cancer in patients. The Council suspended Dibdin’s medical license. Subsequently, he returned to California and resumed practicing. The petition also said that the initial x-ray of Consuelo’s body showed no rib fractures, but the report of the x-ray was amended to state that the fractures were visible after detectives claimed they spotted fractures in the x-rays. The police report documenting the change in the original report of the x-rays was not disclosed to the defense. In addition, the two experts presented by Benavides’s attorneys were provided with only some of the medical evidence. Moreover, what they were given came too late to fully inform their testimony. Among evidence that was not disclosed to the evidence, according to the petition, were the lab reports of Spencer, the crime lab criminalist. Despite her testimony that there was no evidence that Consuelo was outside, the lab report documented that plant material was found on the girl’s sweatshirt and that there was dirt and blood on the sole of her shoe. The petition said that after Cristina was removed from the home by state child protective services, she was subjected to numerous interviews by social workers and detectives. During these interviews, she was threatened that unless she provided testimony favorable to the state, she would never go home. Moreover, the prosecution failed to disclose that the state paid benefits to the family members who took temporary custody of Cristina. Both had testified at Benavides’s sentencing hearing that they wanted “justice” for Consuelo. The prosecution, according to the petition, threatened Medina that if she continued to support Benavides’s innocence, she would never regain custody of Cristina. After repeated interviews and threats relating to Cristina, Medina ultimately testified—falsely, according to the petition—that she had warned Benavides not to harm her children and that if he did, “I would have you locked up.” The prosecution also failed to disclose that Dr. Diamond conducted an examination of Cristina and determined that she had never been molested. The report was significant, the defense contended, because the prosecution suggested that Cristina “was lucky to get out alive.”
------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY (3): National Registry of Exonerations entry on Clement Aguiire-Jarquin: In 2007, the work of the fingerprint analyst, Donna Birks, came under review after a co-worker reported that Birks had made a positive identification of a print that was impossible to read. The review determined that Birks was wrong when she said she identified Aguirre-Jarquin’s print on the knife. In fact, the print was not suitable for comparison. Aguirre-Jarquin filed a motion for a new trial based on the disclosure, but it was denied. In 2009, the Florida Supreme Court upheld Aguirre-Jarquin’s convictions and death sentence. In 2011, Aguirre-Jarquin’s attorneys at the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel’s office asked the Innocence Project for help in seeking DNA testing of more than 80 pieces of evidence. The results of the tests were presented at an evidentiary hearing in 2013. Aguirre-Jarquin was excluded as the source of the DNA at the scene, and Samantha’s DNA was found in eight locations that the defense contended were consistent with her being the attacker. In addition, Aguirre-Jarquin’s legal team presented evidence that Samantha had a history of mental illness and had been taken to the hospital about 60 times for psychiatric evaluations. On one occasion, while being transported by police, she was recorded saying that her mother and grandmother had “died for me.” Samantha testified and denied being the killer. She acknowledged having a violent temper, and that she had been treated for mental illness. She further admitted that on the night before the murders, she had argued with her mother. Van Sandt testified that although he and Samantha went to bed at his home on the night of the murders, he was “dead to the world” and could not say that she didn’t leave during the night. In addition, a crime scene expert testified that what was said to be blood spatter on Aguirre-Jarquin’s clothing was actually blood that had transferred when he picked up the victims. However, in August 2013, Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler denied the motion for a new trial. She ruled that the evidence would not have convinced a jury to acquit Aguirre-Jarquin."
-------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Death row executions remain near historic lows in 2018 death penalty," by Jessica Greko, published by Associated Press on December 14, 2018.
GIST: "Three states
resumed executions of death row inmates in 2018 after long breaks, but
nationwide, executions remained near historic lows this year, according
to an annual report on the death penalty released Friday. The report by the
District of Columbia-based Death Penalty Information Center says 25
executions were carried out in 2018, the fourth consecutive year in
which there have been fewer than 30 executions nationwide. Since the death penalty was
re-instated in the United States in 1976, the number of executions
peaked in 1999 with 98. They were at their lowest in 2016 with 20,
according to center statistics. Americans' support for the death penalty
similarly peaked in the 1990s and has declined since, according to
public opinion polls by Gallup. A 2018 Gallup poll showed 56 percent of
Americans supported the death penalty for a person convicted or murder. Executions in 2018 were clustered
in eight states: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Nebraska, Ohio, South
Dakota, Tennessee and Texas. About half of all the executions in 2018
took place in Texas, which carried out 13 death sentences. Tennessee was
second with three. Alabama, Florida and Georgia each had two while
Nebraska, Ohio and South Dakota each carried out one. Florida's execution Thursday of
Jose Antonio Jimenez for fatally beating and stabbing a woman during a
burglary was the most recent. According to a list maintained by the
Death Penalty Information Center , there are no other executions
scheduled this year. Nebraska, Tennessee and South
Dakota were the three states that resumed executions this year.
Nebraska's execution of Carey Dean Moore was the state's first execution
in more than 20 years. It was also the first time any state has used
the drug fentanyl in an execution. This year marked the first time in
nearly nine years that Tennessee carried out an execution. South Dakota
ended a six-year stretch without executions when it executed Rodney
Berget, who was convicted of killing a corrections officer during a
prison escape attempt.
Tennessee's executions came at
the end of a systematic challenge to lethal injection there while
executions in Nebraska and South Dakota involved inmates who gave up
challenges to their execution, said Death Penalty Information Center
executive director Robert Dunham. The center doesn't take a side in the
debate over the death penalty, Dunham said, but has criticized the way
states carry out the death penalty, singling out problems with bias and
secrecy, among others. All the inmates executed in 2018
were men, and all but two of the executions were carried out by lethal
injection, according to a center database. Two Tennessee inmates, David
Miller and Edmund Zagorski, chose to die by electric chair because of
concerns about pain associated with the state's lethal injection
procedure. Both unsuccessfully argued to courts that Tennessee's lethal
injection procedure, which uses the drug midazolam, results in a
prolonged and torturous death. Before this year, the last time a state
used the electric chair to execute an inmate was 2013. The report says that 41 new death
sentences have been imposed so far this year, the fourth straight year
with fewer than 50 new death sentences. And while three states resumed
executions this year, Washington became the 20th state to abolish the
death penalty in October, when its Supreme Court said capital punishment
in the state was "imposed in an arbitrary and racially biased manner." The report notes two death row
inmates were freed in 2018: California inmate Vicente Benavides and
Florida inmate Clemente Aguirre-Jarquin. Benavides, who was on death row
for nearly 25 years after being convicted of raping and killing his
girlfriend's 21-month-old daughter, was freed after California's highest
court ruled that false medical testimony was presented at his trial.
Aguirre-Jarquin, who spent 14 years behind bars for the murder of his
two neighbors, was freed after evidence showed that the daughter of one
of the victims confessed to the murders and her blood was at the scene. Seventeen inmates currently have execution dates set for 2019 , according to center records."
--------------------------------------------------------
The National Register of Exonerations entry on Vincent Benavides (by Maurice Possley) can be read at the link below:
"On April 19, 2018, 68-year-old Vicente Benavides was released from California’s death row, 25 years after he was sentenced to death for the rape, sodomy, and murder of a 21-month-old girl in Delano, California. His convictions were vacated and the charges were dismissed after numerous experts concluded that the girl had never been raped or sodomized, and that the medical evidence used to convict Benavides was wrong.
The case began on the evening of November 17, 1991, when the 42-year-old Benavides and his girlfriend, Estella Medina, brought Medina’s 21-month-old daughter, Consuelo, to the Delano Regional Medical Center in Delano, California. They said they thought that Consuelo might have hit her head on a door while chasing her nine-year-old sister Cristina. Consuelo was initially not fully responsive, but she was awake and responded to stimuli.
Medical personnel focused a small bruise on her forehead and scrapes on her nose and lip. They initially believed she had a closed head injury. Several unsuccessful attempts were made to insert a catheter. When Consuelo’s stomach began to distend and her condition deteriorated, she was transferred to Kern Medical Center in Bakersfield, California. The receiving nurse there noted that she had “blown pupils,” which are often seen in victims of blunt force trauma from an auto accident.
Attention was immediately focused on the girl’s distended abdomen. A nurse attempting to insert a catheter noted a bruise on Consuelo’s external genitalia. Eventually, a small feeding tube was inserted instead of a catheter. Within 20 minutes of arrival, her abdomen had become even more distended. Diagnostic surgery revealed that her bowel, duodenum, and pancreas were “cracked in half,” with portions of each on either side of her spine.
A surgeon would later testify that those injuries could have been caused by a kick or punch to the abdomen. The surgeon also noted scars, which he said indicated injuries suffered two months earlier between her colon and liver.
The morning after the surgery, Dr. Jess Diamond, a pediatrician, examined Consuelo and found a tear in her hymen and bruises around her anus. There were also tears in her anus and damage to the sphincter muscles. He concluded that her injuries were not consistent with Consuelo being hit by or running into a door. He believed that she had been sodomized, that her vaginal area had been penetrated and the vaginal wall torn, and that she had been kicked or punched in the abdomen.
On November 19, 1991, Consuelo was transferred to UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles. Her entire body was swollen and her kidneys had stopped functioning. A second surgery was performed. On November 20, Benavides was arrested. Six days later, on November 26, 1991, Consuelo died.
On December 12, 1991, Benavides was charged with first-degree murder, rape, sodomy, and lewd conduct with infliction of great bodily injury.
On March 15, 1993, Benavides went to trial in Kern County Superior Court. Medina testified that she changed Consuelo’s diaper and went to work at about 6:40 p.m. on the day of the incident. When she left, Cristina and Consuelo were eating hamburgers for dinner.
Medina said Cristina called her at 7:20 p.m. and reported that Consuelo was pale, sick, and could not breathe. Medina said she returned home and found Benavides sitting on a bed holding Consuelo in his arms. She drove them to the hospital in Delano.
Cristina testified that after the incident, state welfare officials removed her from the family, and police and social workers questioned her several times. Ultimately, in May 1992—six months later—she suddenly remembered a time when Benavides, who was caring for her and Consuelo alone overnight, took a crying Consuelo into his locked bedroom until morning. She admitted on cross-examination that the following day, Consuelo did not appear hurt or afraid of Benavides.
Cristina told the jury that on the night of the incident, she asked Benavides for permission to go outside to play with a friend. She said Benavides told her to be home in 30 minutes. She said she opened the door as she went out and closed it behind her. She said that she did not see Consuelo near the door. About 15 minutes later, Benavides came outside and told her to come home. When she got home, she said, Benavides was holding Consuelo and putting alcohol on her forehead. He told her to call Medina.
Cristina testified that on the way to the hospital, Benavides told Medina that Cristina had hit Consuelo with the door when she went outside. He said that he had found Consuelo outside and brought her back inside. Cristina told the jury that she did not hit Consuelo with the door.
A Delano detective testified that he interviewed Benavides on November 18, 1991—the day after the child was brought to the hospital. The detective said Benavides reported that when Cristina went outside, Consuelo followed her and Cristina brought her back. Benavides said he told Cristina to take Consuelo with her, but she refused and left, shutting the door hard.
Benavides said he had gone into the kitchen. After a minute, when he didn’t hear Consuelo, he came out and found the door ajar. He said he looked outside and found Consuelo on a grassy area adjacent to the carport. She was on her back with blood on her nose and mouth, and she was vomiting. The detective said Benavides said he brought the girl inside and cleaned her face with toilet tissues, but that he realized she was “injured bad” because her eyes were rolling.
Jeanne Spencer, a criminalist from the Kern County Regional Crime Laboratory, testified that she searched the apartment on November 20, 1991. She said that she did not find any blood or vomit or any indication that either had been cleaned up in the area near the door or outside. Spencer said she found paper towels soaked with vomit containing semi-digested food consistent with a hamburger bun and carpet fibers consistent with the rug in the apartment. She said she found no dirt, gravel, or any other substance she would have expected to find had the vomit been cleaned up outside.
Spencer also testified she found a towel that tested positive for blood and semen on the master bedroom floor. The blood was consistent with both Medina and Benavides, and the semen was consistent with Benavides. She found bloody tissues in the bathroom wastebasket, and vomit in a pattern indicating it came from a downward spray on the right leg of the pants Benavides was wearing when he came to the hospital.
Consuelo’s clothing was not torn and had no dirt or markings that would indicate she had landed on pavement. No semen was detected. No diaper was included in the bag of the girl’s clothes obtained from the hospital. A microscopic examination of her clothing revealed no signs of trauma.
A California Highway Patrol accident investigator testified that Consuelo would not have landed outside the apartment door on the grassy area between the building and the carport had she been hit by a car pulling into or backing into the carport. And even if she had been hit in that fashion, he said, her injuries would have been far less severe.
Dr. James Dibdin, the pathologist who conducted the autopsy, testified that Consuelo died of a blunt force penetrating injury of the anus that not only lacerated her anus, but also severely damaged her internal organs. The anus was expanded to seven or eight times its normal size. He concluded she had been anally sodomized. He said the vaginal tear was the reason for the difficulty in attempting to insert a catheter at the hospital.
Dibdin said there were several fractured ribs, which he attributed to Consuelo being gripped tightly around the chest from behind. He found bruises resulting from thumbs being pressed against her. He also found a subdural hematoma and brain swelling, which he said was evidence that Consuelo had been shaken violently during the sexual assault.
Dibdin testified that the facial abrasions resulted from Benavides holding a hand over her mouth. He said her injuries were not consistent with a fall or running into something. Dibdin admitted that he had not written up his autopsy findings until two months after Consuelo’s death, and well after Benavides had been charged with her murder and sexual assault.
Dr. Diamond testified that although he learned of the tear in the rectum wall from Dibdin’s autopsy, he had concluded at the hospital while Consuelo was still alive that she had been sexually assaulted. Dr. John Bentson testified that Consuelo’s head injuries were consistent with receiving blows to the head.
The defense lawyers presented two medical experts who testified that Consuelo’s injuries were consistent with a fall or a car accident, as well as the effects of the various medical procedures that were employed during the eight days she was hospitalized before her death. The defense also presented evidence that some plant material was removed from Consuelo’s nasal passage at UCLA.
Benavides testified that he had been cooking eggs in the kitchen when he went to look for Consuelo. He said he found her outside on the ground, vomiting and bleeding from her nose and mouth. He brought her inside and put her on the couch, and then went back out to call Cristina inside. He told the jury he tried to clean up Consuelo’s face with toilet paper. He said he used kitchen towels to clean up the vomit outside, tossing the towels into the trash.
He admitted that the door to the apartment opened inward, and that a person leaving would pull the door shut behind them. He agreed that if Consuelo hit her head on the door, she would have been inside, not outside, of the apartment.
Benavides denied assaulting Consuelo in any fashion or inflicting any harm on her.
On April 20, 1993, the jury convicted Benavides of first-degree murder, rape, sodomy, and lewd conduct inflicting serious injuries. Two days later, the jury voted to impose the death penalty.
In 2005, the California Supreme Court upheld Benavides’s convictions and death sentence.
In 2007, attorneys for Benavides filed a 395-page petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petition argued that the convictions were based upon false medical testimony, that the police and prosecution withheld evidence, and that the prosecution made improper arguments.
The petition also cited the failure of Benavides’s defense attorneys (both of whom were subsequently disbarred or suspended) to provide an adequate defense. Benavides was developmentally disabled—his mental capacity was that of a seven-year-old—the defense never brought that out at his trial.
The primary focus of the petition, however, was on the medical testimony.
“Virtually every medical observation and conclusion that the prosecution presented – from the cause of death to the ‘evidence’ of rape and sodomy – was manufactured and false,” the petition said. “The indisputable evidence presented in this petition—provided by world-renowned medical authorities, the medical personnel who observed Consuelo Verdugo immediately upon her arrival at the hospital, and the doctors who testified on behalf of the prosecution–disproves each and every element of the prosecution's case.”
“The jury did not learn or know that the pathologist's cause of death—anal penetration that severed her pancreas—is medically impossible,” the petition said. “The jury did not learn or know that the numerous medical personnel who administered Consuelo's care immediately upon her arrival at the hospital emphatically deny that she had such injuries. Indeed, the jury did not hear that the injuries used to support the charges resulted not from criminal conduct, but rather from the invasive and sustained medical efforts to address Consuelo's increasingly deteriorating medical condition.”
The only medical witness who did not recant his trial testimony was Dibdin, the pathologist. The habeas petition noted that Dibdin had been fired or his contract was terminated from medical examiner offices in Oklahoma City; Brown County, Wisconsin; Tasmania, Australia; San Bernardino County, California; Nevada County, California, and, some time after Benavides’s conviction, his contract with the Kern County Coroner’s Office was not renewed.
In the early 2000s, Dibdin was hired as a pathologist at a hospital in South Shields, England, analyzing tissue samples to diagnose illnesses. In 2007, the General Medical Council found he had made numerous errors, some of which resulted in belated diagnoses of cancer in patients. The Council suspended Dibdin’s medical license. Subsequently, he returned to California and resumed practicing.
The petition also said that the initial x-ray of Consuelo’s body showed no rib fractures, but the report of the x-ray was amended to state that the fractures were visible after detectives claimed they spotted fractures in the x-rays. The police report documenting the change in the original report of the x-rays was not disclosed to the defense.
In addition, the two experts presented by Benavides’s attorneys were provided with only some of the medical evidence. Moreover, what they were given came too late to fully inform their testimony.
Among evidence that was not disclosed to the evidence, according to the petition, were the lab reports of Spencer, the crime lab criminalist. Despite her testimony that there was no evidence that Consuelo was outside, the lab report documented that plant material was found on the girl’s sweatshirt and that there was dirt and blood on the sole of her shoe.
The petition said that after Cristina was removed from the home by state child protective services, she was subjected to numerous interviews by social workers and detectives. During these interviews, she was threatened that unless she provided testimony favorable to the state, she would never go home.
Moreover, the prosecution failed to disclose that the state paid benefits to the family members who took temporary custody of Cristina. Both had testified at Benavides’s sentencing hearing that they wanted “justice” for Consuelo.
The prosecution, according to the petition, threatened Medina that if she continued to support Benavides’s innocence, she would never regain custody of Cristina. After repeated interviews and threats relating to Cristina, Medina ultimately testified—falsely, according to the petition—that she had warned Benavides not to harm her children and that if he did, “I would have you locked up.”
The prosecution also failed to disclose that Dr. Diamond conducted an examination of Cristina and determined that she had never been molested. The report was significant, the defense contended, because the prosecution suggested that Cristina “was lucky to get out alive.”
The Supreme Court ordered the prosecution to respond to the petition. In August 2010, the prosecution filed a 501-page response, conceding that the convictions were based on false medical evidence. However, the prosecution argued that while the charges relating to sexual assault should be dismissed, Benavides’s first-degree murder conviction should be reduced to second-degree murder.
In March 2018, the California Supreme Court vacated all of the convictions, noting that the defense medical experts were virtually unanimous in concluding that Consuelo was not sexually assaulted. At least 10 physicians or treating personnel recanted their trial testimony, the court noted.
The court concluded that the injuries were caused by the numerous medical interventions and “bodywide swelling.”
“A comparison between witnesses’ trial testimony and their later declarations is striking,” the court said.
Two doctors who treated Consuelo at UCLA, the final hospital to which she was admitted, reviewed all of the medical records and declared that anal penetration could not have been the cause of death because the organs between the anus and upper abdomen were not injured. “Dr. Rick Harrison, the physician in charge of Consuelo’s care at UCLA, believed that the cause of death given by Dr. Dibdin was anatomically impossible,” the court said.
The court pointed out that Dr. Diamond, the child abuse expert who evaluated Consuelo at Kern Medical Center and testified at trial that the appearance of Consuelo’s anal region was consistent with penetration had recanted, saying “it is now my opinion to a high degree of medical certainty that Consuelo was not raped or sodomized.”
Dr. Nat Baumer, a medical expert who testified for the defense, subsequently declared that he had not been given Consuelo’s complete medical record before testifying and “[c]onsequently, [his] testimony supported the prosecution’s allegations that Consuelo had been anally penetrated with a penis which, based on [his] own observations, [he] could not support.”
The court specifically noted that Dr. Tracey Corey, a forensic pathologist who reviewed the case in post-conviction, stated that she was “embarrassed about the pathologist because what he says isn’t even . . . anatomically possible.” She added, “I’m embarrassed that . . . a pathologist didn’t know better, didn’t know anatomy better.”
On April 19, 2018, Kern County District Attorney Lisa Green moved to dismiss the charges and Benavides was released.
In October 2018, Benavides filed a lawsuit seeking compensation from Kern County. "http://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=5315
---------------------------------------------------------
The National Registry of Exonerations entry on Clemente Aguirre-Jarquin (by Maurice Possley) can be read at the link below:
"On the morning of June 17, 2004, 47-year-old Cheryl Williams and 68-year-old Carol Bareis were found stabbed to death in their home at 121 Vagabond Way in Altamonte Springs, Florida.
Mark Van Sandt called police shortly before 9 a.m. saying he discovered the bodies when he stopped to pick up clothes for his girlfriend, Samantha Williams, who was the daughter of Cheryl Williams and the granddaughter of Carol Bareis. Although Samantha lived with Cheryl and Bareis, Van Sandt said he and Samantha had spent the previous night at his home and that she had gone to work separately that morning.
Cheryl Williams had been stabbed or cut 129 times and bled to death. Her body was found blocking the front door. Bareis, who was partially paralyzed after suffering a stroke, was on the living room floor next to her wheelchair. She had been stabbed twice.
Police found a bloody 10-inch kitchen knife between the residence and the house next door at 117 Vagabond Way. Samantha, who had come to the scene, then said she had a strong suspicion—a “gut feeling”—that the attacker was 24-year-old Clemente Aguirre-Jarquin, who lived with two roommates at 117 Vagabond Way.
Aguirre-Jarquin worked at a restaurant where he washed dishes and prepped food. He had entered illegally into the U.S. after fleeing from his native Honduras when narcotics traffickers tried to force him to become a member of their gang.
At 11 a.m., Seminole County Sheriff’s deputies went to the residence. Aguirre-Jarquin and his two roommates said they knew nothing.
However, later that day, Aguirre-Jarquin went to the police and said he had been drinking during the night and ran out of beer. Because the store would not open for another hour, he said, he went next door to ask for beer. He said he went through the front door, which was never locked, and saw that Cheryl was dead. He was arrested for tampering with evidence from a crime scene.
The bloody knife police found resembled the knives used at the restaurant where Aguirre-Jarquin worked. The head chef told police that one of the restaurant’s 10-inch chef’s knives was missing.
On June 25, 2004, Aguirre-Jarquin was indicted on charges of first-degree murder and burglary. He went to trial in Seminole County Circuit Court in February 2006.
Law enforcement officers, physicians, and crime lab analysts testified about the evidence at the crime scene and the victims’ wounds. Cheryl had severe wounds to her lungs and leg, one of which severed her femoral artery. She was stabbed in the arms, legs, back, hands, feet, and chest. One stab wound to her left lung was considered the fatal wound. She also had numerous defensive wounds on her hands and feet that suggested an extremely violent struggle. Bareis died from a stab wound that severed her left ventricle. She also had been stabbed in the back.
According to the testimony, the stab wounds were consistent with being caused by the chef’s knife found between the victims’ residence and Aguirre’s home. The knife had Cheryl’s blood on the handle and Bareis’s blood on the blade. An analyst testified that this indicated that Cheryl was killed first.
Police found 67 bloody shoe impressions, of which 64 were consistent with Aguirre-Jarquin’s shoes. Law enforcement officers got a search warrant for Aguirre-Jarquin’s home and recovered a plastic bag containing his underwear, socks, T-shirt, and shorts. Cheryl’s blood was found on all of the clothing, and Bareis’s blood was found on his t-shirt, shorts, and underwear. Cheryl’s blood was found on the soles of his shoes.
A bloodstain pattern analyst testified for the prosecution that Aguirre-Jarquin’s shorts had contact stains on the front and back. The back of his shorts also had bloodstains that were the result of blood spatter, which the analyst said indicated that blood was sprayed during commission of the crime. The analyst said Aguirre-Jarquin’s socks also had bloodstains that were “consistent with dropped blood.”
A fingerprint examiner said she identified Aguirre’s fingerprint on the knife.
Samantha Williams testified that Aguirre-Jarquin had previously been a guest in their home, but was banned from the house several months earlier after she awoke during the night to find him hovering over her bed. She told the jury she had spent the night of the murders with Van Sandt. Van Sandt also testified that Samantha spent the night with him. Aguirre-Jarquin testified that he had the day before the murders off from work. He said he and his friends drank throughout the day and into the night, and that he returned to his home at 5 a.m. Because he was out of beer, he said, he walked next door. He then discovered Cheryl’s body.
Aguirre-Jarquin said he lifted Cheryl’s body onto his lap and tried to revive her, but she was dead. He said he then walked into the living room and found Bareis’s body. Aguirre-Jarquin said he saw a knife near Cheryl’s body. Because he feared the killer was still inside the house, he picked it up and screamed, “Is anybody here?”
When there was no reply, he said, he went to Samantha’s room. She was not there, but her room had been ransacked. Aguirre-Jarquin said he ran home, tossing the knife into the grass. He stripped off his clothes, put them in a plastic bag, and then washed himself. Aguirre-Jarquin said he did not call police because he was an illegal immigrant and was afraid of being deported. On February 28, 2006, the jury convicted him of first-degree murder and burglary. Two weeks later, during the punishment phase of the trial, Aguirre-Jarquin at one point rose from his seat and yelled, “They’re trying to kill me for no reason. I didn’t do it. I didn’t kill nobody.”
At the conclusion of the punishment deliberation, the jury voted 7 to 5 to impose the death penalty for the murder of Cheryl, and 9 to 3 to impose the death penalty for the murder of Bareis. The trial judge then sentenced Aguirre-Jarquin to death.
In 2007, the work of the fingerprint analyst, Donna Birks, came under review after a co-worker reported that Birks had made a positive identification of a print that was impossible to read. The review determined that Birks was wrong when she said she identified Aguirre-Jarquin’s print on the knife. In fact, the print was not suitable for comparison.
Aguirre-Jarquin filed a motion for a new trial based on the disclosure, but it was denied. In 2009, the Florida Supreme Court upheld Aguirre-Jarquin’s convictions and death sentence.
In 2011, Aguirre-Jarquin’s attorneys at the Capital Collateral Regional Counsel’s office asked the Innocence Project for help in seeking DNA testing of more than 80 pieces of evidence.
The results of the tests were presented at an evidentiary hearing in 2013. Aguirre-Jarquin was excluded as the source of the DNA at the scene, and Samantha’s DNA was found in eight locations that the defense contended were consistent with her being the attacker.
In addition, Aguirre-Jarquin’s legal team presented evidence that Samantha had a history of mental illness and had been taken to the hospital about 60 times for psychiatric evaluations. On one occasion, while being transported by police, she was recorded saying that her mother and grandmother had “died for me.”
Samantha testified and denied being the killer. She acknowledged having a violent temper, and that she had been treated for mental illness. She further admitted that on the night before the murders, she had argued with her mother.
Van Sandt testified that although he and Samantha went to bed at his home on the night of the murders, he was “dead to the world” and could not say that she didn’t leave during the night.
In addition, a crime scene expert testified that what was said to be blood spatter on Aguirre-Jarquin’s clothing was actually blood that had transferred when he picked up the victims.
However, in August 2013, Circuit Judge Jessica Recksiedler denied the motion for a new trial. She ruled that the evidence would not have convinced a jury to acquit Aguirre-Jarquin.
While the appeal of the denial of the motion for a new trial was pending, the case was remanded to allow the defense lawyers to present additional evidence that Samantha had confessed. Four people testified that Samantha had admitted she killed her mother and grandmother. Samantha’s friend, Nichole Casey, testified that on two occasions in 2010, Samantha admitted to the murders. Casey said that Samantha was crying and making “a stabbing motion toward her chest.” Casey said Samantha told her “that the demons had made her do it.”
Three of Samantha’s former neighbors testified to three separate instances in which Samantha admitted to the murders. Christine Laravuso testified that in March 2012 at a neighborhood barbeque, Samantha said, “I’m crazy, I’m evil, and I killed my grandmother and my mother.”
Two other neighbors, Marianne Laravuso and Michael Bowman, testified that in July 2012, after they asked her to leave their property, Samantha said that she “wasn’t afraid” of them and that she had “killed [her] mom and grandma.” A few months later, Marianne saw Samantha standing in her yard and asked her to leave. Marianne testified that Samantha replied, “I’m not afraid of you guys . . . I killed my mom, I killed my grandmother.”
Judge Recksiedler again denied the motion for a new trial.
In October 2016, the Florida Supreme Court reversed the denial of a new trial, vacated Aguirre-Jarquin’s convictions and death sentence, and ordered a new trial.
The court ruled that “adding the newly discovered evidence to the picture changes the focus entirely: No longer is (Aguirre-Jarquin) the creepy figure who appears over Samantha’s bed in the middle of the night; he is now the scapegoat for her crimes….And when the DNA evidence is considered together with Samantha’s numerous, unequivocal confessions, the result is reasonable doubt as to (Aguirre-Jarquin’s) culpability.”
In March 2018, during jury selection for a retrial, Judge Recksiedler declared a mistrial after jurors were heard talking about searching the Internet for information about the case.
Not long after, Judge Recksiedler agreed to remove herself from the case. The defense had alleged that she had a personal stake in obtaining a second conviction of Aguirre-Jarquin to show that her decision not to grant Aguirre a new trial was correct. Recksiedler, the defense argued, “had tried to leverage this case for her own gain by touting her denial of post-conviction relief in her application for a position on the District Court of Appeal, even while the appeal of that decision remained pending before the Florida Supreme Court."
Jury selection for a second trial began again in October 2018. On October 29, the defense revealed a sworn affidavit from Van Sandt’s current wife, Nicole Bouzigard, contradicting Van Sandt’s testimony at Aguirre-Jarquin’s 2006 trial that Samantha was with him all night. In the affidavit, Bouzigard said Van Sandt told her that Samantha woke him during the night and said she “had a bad feeling about her mother.” Van Sandt said he offered to drive her home, but she declined, saying she would get a taxi and that he should come to the house in the morning to pick up a load of laundry. Bouzigard said Van Sandt told her that Samantha left on the night of the murders by crawling out of his bedroom window.
On November 5, 2018, with jury selection still in progress, the prosecution abruptly dismissed the charges. Seminole County State’s Attorney Phil Archer issued a statement that the decision was “based upon new evidence that materially affects the credibility of a critical State witness.”
Aguirre-Jarquin was released on a federal immigration court bond after the U.S. Department of Homeland Security placed an immigration hold on him. His lawyers said they would file a claim for asylum."
---------------------------------------------------------------
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/
