PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY: "Andrew O’Shea, a lawyer for Birch, said there is considerable evidence that has emerged since the 1989 trial for prosecutors to review. He said that evidence undermines the convictions. In addition to what he views as weaknesses in the state’s original case, O’Shea said lawyers have uncovered “mountains of evidence" that proves the men are innocent. "Specifically, the DNA evidence showing not only no trace of them whatsoever, but we found someone else’s DNA on the murder weapon, on the victim’s body, on these items that are intimately associated with the crime,” O’Shea said."
-------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Henning and Birch were convicted at separate trials for the bloody murder of Carr, who was stabbed 47 times, had his throat slit and whose blood was tracked throughout the house. They were convicted partially on the testimony of Lee, who told jurors that a towel in the bathroom of Carr’s home had a spot on it that he had tested and found was “consistent with blood.” Twenty years later, the Innocence Project took on the case and learned that the towel was never tested before the original trials. Subsequent testing revealed the spot on the towel wasn’t even blood. "It is inarguable that Lee, as the representative of the state police forensic laboratory, should have known that the bathroom towel had not been tested for blood. He, like any such witness, had a affirmative obligation to review any relevant test reports before testifying so as to reasonably ensure that his testimony would accurately reflect the findings of those tests,'' Justice Richard Palmer wrote in a 23-page decision. "To conclude otherwise would permit the state to gain a conviction on the basis of false or misleading testimony even though the error readily could have been avoided if the witness merely had exercised due diligence,'' Palmer wrote. The decision made clear that the court saw no evidence that Lee’s testimony about the towel was intentionally false or anything other than a mistaken recollection. The towel with the spot on it had been a key component of Shepack’s final argument to the jury in Henning’s case. The supreme court ruled that if the jury had known Lee had never tested the towel and that his testimony was inaccurate it would have impacted the way they judged the rest of his testimony. Carr’s murder was such a violent attack that investigators collected more than 70 blood samples off the walls, ceiling, floor and even a hidden cigar box. But none of it at the time matched the blood types of Birch or Henning."
----------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Lee defended his record at a press conference days after the high court handed down its ruling. “To say that I didn’t do any test is totally wrong. I didn’t say it was definitely blood,” Lee said. He said he did a field test on the towel found in the second-floor bathroom and said that it came back bright blue, indicating it was blood. He said two other tests should have been done at the laboratory, but he didn’t explain why they weren’t done in the Carr case. Lee’s statements at the press conference were contradicted by his court testimony in 1989. According to a court transcript, during his testimony during Henning’s trial, Lee said that the “reddish color smear” on the towel was "consistent with blood."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Judge orders release of man convicted of murder three decades ago in wake of State Superior Court ruling," by reporter David Owens, published by The Hartford Courant on Juky 2, 2019.
GIST: "Three decades after Ralph Birch was locked up for a murder he insists he did not commit, a Superior Court judge Tuesday ordered that he be released as the state considers whether to seek a new trial for Birch and Shawn Henning, both of whom were convicted of the 1985 murder of a New Milford man.Judge John A. Danaher’s order followed a brief hearing Tuesday in Superior Court in Torrington that was prompted by a unanimous state supreme court decision to overturn the 1989 convictions of both men and to order new trials. Henning was already free on probation when the high court ruled last month. Birch was an inmate until Tuesday, when stepped into freedom and the embrace of his mother. “I feel good, its about time,” Birch said, a moment after walking out of the Torrington courthouse. “It’s been a long time coming. It seems like it took a lot longer than it should. But I’ve got a lot of good people on my side, in my corner, and they fought for me. The high court tossed the convictions for the 1985 murder of Everett Carr after finding that renowned forensic science expert Henry Lee testified inaccurately about blood evidence at the 1989 trial.
Birch
and Henning are both free on promises to appear in court. Until
Tuesday, Birch was an inmate at the Osborn Correctional Institution in
Somers. Henning, 50, who has been free on probation since 2018, declined
to comment on the advice of his lawyer, Craig Raabe, who also declined
to comment.
Henning and Raabe stood by and smiled as Birch spoke with reporters. Henning
is living in the New London area. Birch will be staying with a friend
in Simsbury until he can move into a halfway house to begin the
transition from incarceration to the community. Both men must check with in court officials each week. Danaher continued the cases for both men to July 26. Birch, who is 52, said he was “a little overwhelmed” by his freedom and was looking forward to a steak dinner. Litchfield
State’s Attorney David Shepack, who prosecuted both men and won
convictions in 1989, did not indicate whether he would seek new trials.
Such decisions typically follow a review of the evidence, the
availability of witnesses and an assessment of the strength of the
state’s case. Complicating matters is Shepack’s scheduled retirement
Aug. 1. Shepack
was scheduled to meet Tuesday with lawyers for Birch and Henning.
Andrew O’Shea, a lawyer for Birch, said there is considerable evidence
that has emerged since the 1989 trial for prosecutors to review. He said
that evidence undermines the convictions. In
addition to what he views as weaknesses in the state’s original case,
O’Shea said lawyers have uncovered “mountains of evidence" that proves
the men are innocent. "Specifically, the DNA evidence showing not only
no trace of them whatsoever, but we found someone else’s DNA on the
murder weapon, on the victim’s body, on these items that are intimately
associated with the crime,” O’Shea said. Birch
said he hopes the state will drop the charges against him and that
he’ll be able to get on with his life. “Am I confident that that’s
what’s going to happen," he said. "My past experience, I don’t know.
That doesn’t seem the way things seem to go. I hope that’s what happens.
It seems like the right thing to do.” He
said his first years in prison were difficult because he was bitter
over his conviction for a crime he maintains he did not commit. He said
faith changed his life in 1996 “I
accepted the lord Jesus into my life back in 1996,” he said. "Since
then things have changed a lot in my life. “Before that I was pretty
bitter. I got into a lot of trouble at the beginning. The first several
years of my incarceration were extremely hard. Since I’ve found Christ
and since he’s been in my life, things have been a lot easier for me.” In the future, Birch said he’d like to be a hospice volunteer and work with children, two things he did while in prison. “Since
2001 I’ve been a volunteer for the hospice program in DOC and sat with
numerous people when they’ve passed, numerous men,” he said. “And it’s
an honor. I think I’ve gotten more out of it than they have.” Henning
and Birch were convicted at separate trials for the bloody murder of
Carr, who was stabbed 47 times, had his throat slit and whose blood was
tracked throughout the house. They
were convicted partially on the testimony of Lee, who told jurors that a
towel in the bathroom of Carr’s home had a spot on it that he had
tested and found was “consistent with blood.” Twenty
years later, the Innocence Project took on the case and learned that
the towel was never tested before the original trials. Subsequent
testing revealed the spot on the towel wasn’t even blood. "It
is inarguable that Lee, as the representative of the state police
forensic laboratory, should have known that the bathroom towel had not
been tested for blood. He, like any such witness, had a affirmative
obligation to review any relevant test reports before testifying so as
to reasonably ensure that his testimony would accurately reflect the
findings of those tests,'' Justice Richard Palmer wrote in a 23-page
decision. "To
conclude otherwise would permit the state to gain a conviction on the
basis of false or misleading testimony even though the error readily
could have been avoided if the witness merely had exercised due
diligence,'' Palmer wrote. The
decision made clear that the court saw no evidence that Lee’s testimony
about the towel was intentionally false or anything other than a
mistaken recollection.
The towel with the spot on it had been a key component of Shepack’s final argument to the jury in Henning’s case. The
supreme court ruled that if the jury had known Lee had never tested the
towel and that his testimony was inaccurate it would have impacted the
way they judged the rest of his testimony. Carr’s
murder was such a violent attack that investigators collected more than
70 blood samples off the walls, ceiling, floor and even a hidden cigar
box. But none of it at the time matched the blood types of Birch or
Henning. When the DNA testing was conducted 22 years later none matched the two men convicted of his murder. Lee defended his record at a press conference days after the high court handed down its ruling. “To
say that I didn’t do any test is totally wrong. I didn’t say it was
definitely blood,” Lee said. He said he did a field test on the towel
found in the second-floor bathroom and said that it came back bright
blue, indicating it was blood. He said two other tests should have been
done at the laboratory, but he didn’t explain why they weren’t done in
the Carr case. Lee’s statements at the press conference were contradicted by his court testimony in 1989. According
to a court transcript, during his testimony during Henning’s trial, Lee
said that the “reddish color smear” on the towel was "consistent with
blood.""
The entire story can be read at:
