Keith Harward: Virginia: Junk bite-mark 'science' case: Wrongly sent to prison for 33 years, this innocent man is pitching lawmakers on a 'junk science' bill, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reports.."A bill aimed at helping innocent people wrongfully convicted by flawed forensic science advanced in the General Assembly last week with the help of a man who knows all about the problem. Keith Allen Harward, 62, was convicted of the 1982 rape of a Newport News woman and the murder of her husband largely because two experts testified that Harward’s teeth matched bite marks left by the assailant on the rape victim’s legs. Though such bite-mark evidence was once seen as a valuable forensic tool, more than two dozen people across the country have now been shown to have either been wrongfully convicted or charged as a result of matching suspects’ teeth with bite marks left in human flesh. After 33 years in prison, Harward was cleared by DNA and exonerated by the Virginia Supreme Court in 2016."
QUOTES OF THE DAY: "Harward urged the Senate Court of Justice Committee to
advance the bill. “If it weren’t for DNA, I would still be [an] inmate,”
he said. There are other innocent people convicted on what is now known
to be bad science but who do not have DNA to prove it, Harward said. “I
think the people of Virginia deserve it. I deserve it. And those people
that are sitting here in prisons right now ... that were convicted
behind bogus, made up, fabricated science [used] as evidence, it’s just
not right. It’s not right,” he said."
PASSAGE OF THE DAY:"The testing that cleared Harward also
implicated the real killer, a career criminal who died a decade earlier
in an Ohio prison. Most cases,
however, do not have DNA to come to the rescue. That’s where Senate Bill
1066, introduced by Sen. Bill Stanley, R-Franklin County, would come
in. It would allow people who
claim innocence to petition the Virginia Court of Appeals, arguing that
developments in forensic science now clear them, or that they were
convicted largely by a forensic science technique or testimony that has
since been discredited. Recent
scientific studies and DNA exonerations have not only faulted key
assumptions underlying bite-mark analyses. They also discredited the
frequent overstated testimony of hair examiners and raised questions
about forensic disciplines such as bloodstain-pattern analysis. If
the court agrees the petitioner has proved the case by clear and
convincing evidence, prosecutors would have the option of retrying the
case. A similar bill passed the Senate last year but was tabled, or
defeated, in the House. On
Wednesday, Harward urged the Senate Court of Justice Committee to
advance the bill."
STORY: "Innocent man wrongly sent to prison for 33 years pitches lawmakers on 'junk science' bill," by reporter Frank Green, published by The Richmond Times-Dispatch on January 23, 2019.
GIST: "A
bill aimed at helping innocent people wrongfully convicted by flawed
forensic science advanced in the General Assembly last week with the
help of a man who knows all about the problem. Keith
Allen Harward, 62, was convicted of the 1982 rape of a Newport News
woman and the murder of her husband largely because two experts
testified that Harward’s teeth matched bite marks left by the assailant
on the rape victim’s legs. Though
such bite-mark evidence was once seen as a valuable forensic tool, more
than two dozen people across the country have now been shown to have
either been wrongfully convicted or charged as a result of matching
suspects’ teeth with bite marks left in human flesh. After
33 years in prison, Harward was cleared by DNA and exonerated by the
Virginia Supreme Court in 2016. The testing that cleared Harward also
implicated the real killer, a career criminal who died a decade earlier
in an Ohio prison. Most cases,
however, do not have DNA to come to the rescue. That’s where Senate Bill
1066, introduced by Sen. Bill Stanley, R-Franklin County, would come
in. It would allow people who
claim innocence to petition the Virginia Court of Appeals, arguing that
developments in forensic science now clear them, or that they were
convicted largely by a forensic science technique or testimony that has
since been discredited. Recent
scientific studies and DNA exonerations have not only faulted key
assumptions underlying bite-mark analyses. They also discredited the
frequent overstated testimony of hair examiners and raised questions
about forensic disciplines such as bloodstain-pattern analysis. If
the court agrees the petitioner has proved the case by clear and
convincing evidence, prosecutors would have the option of retrying the
case. A similar bill passed the Senate last year but was tabled, or
defeated, in the House. On
Wednesday, Harward urged the Senate Court of Justice Committee to
advance the bill. “If it weren’t for DNA, I would still be [an] inmate,”
he said. There are other innocent people convicted on what is now known
to be bad science but who do not have DNA to prove it, Harward said. “I
think the people of Virginia deserve it. I deserve it. And those people
that are sitting here in prisons right now ... that were convicted
behind bogus, made up, fabricated science [used] as evidence, it’s just
not right. It’s not right,” he said. Harward said, “I have no hatred for
anyone. I believe in my heart of hearts that there’s a reason for
everything and that reason is why I’m here today.” A
representative of the office of the executive secretary of the Virginia
Supreme Court told the committee Wednesday that the court had some
procedural concerns about the bill. Stanley said he would work with the
court to address the concerns. Michael
R. Doucette, executive director of the Virginia Association of
Commonwealth’s Attorneys, listed a number of concerns his group has with
the legislation. “The very last thing that any prosecutor would ever want to happen is to convict an innocent person,” Doucette said. But, he said, “Science
changes all the time.” The bill could lead to repeated petitions to the
court of appeals and the petitions could come decades after convictions,
making it difficult for law enforcement to find witnesses and other
evidence should they desire a retrial. Doucette
also said there will be a fiscal impact since presumably there would be
court-appointed lawyers and expert witnesses involved. The
committee ultimately reported the bill to the Senate Finance Committee,
which will assess the potential costs of such legislation. Earlier
Wednesday, Harward sat in the Senate gallery during the floor session,
where he was introduced by Stanley and welcomed by Lt. Gov. Justin
Fairfax and lawmakers greeted him with warm applause. “Mr.
Harward has spent his time since his release making sure that those who
are innocent are not wrongfully convicted,” Stanley said. “We
in Virginia can maybe correct that wrong, so not another innocent man
spends 33 years of his life in prison for a crime that he did not
commit.""
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;
G
M
T
Y
Text-to-speech function is limited to 200 characters