Back in action: Catch-up: Dr. Henry Lee: Connecticut: Part one: The Daily Beast (reporter Natalie O'Neill asks how many murder cases did the celebrity forensic science botch?..."A few days after Henning and Birch were granted new trials, Lee held a press conference insisting he made no errors. “In my 57-year career, I have investigated over 8,000 cases and never, ever was accused of any wrongdoing or for testifying intentionally wrong,” said Lee told a throng of reporters. “This is the first case that I have to defend myself.” But Lee’s history of problems with evidence—intentional or not—doesn’t begin and end with Henning and Birch. The 81-year-old world-renowned forensic scientist—who has appeared on dozens of crime TV shows and documentaries—has allegedly hidden evidence or given incorrect testimony in at least three other cases, potentially sending the wrong men to prison and allowing guilty ones to walk free, according to court documents and other legal sources."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: Shortly before taking a brief break for a writing assignment the American celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee burst into the headlines with accusation that he had botched evidence in several murder trials. My last post on Henry Lee  before temporarily closing shop (Friday July 12, 2109)  bore the following note: "Dr. Henry Lee: Connecticut: The famed forensic scientist is defending his work in the 1985 murder case that helped send Wendal(l) Hasan to prison, NBC Connecticut reports..."Now, a third convicted murderer, Wendal(l) Hasan, is asking the court to review his case based on a key piece of evidence that Dr. Lee testified about. Hasan has been in prison since 1986 for the murder of George Tyler in his Darien home. At the time, Dr. Lee said he tested a pair of Puma sneakers and found the victim’s blood. When the sneakers were retested in July of 2014, the state police forensic lab found the stains were not blood. On Thursday, Dr. Lee said he stands by his testing and testimony." Because my experience with the Charles Smith cases had taught me that incompetent experts seldom mess up just one or two cases - and Lee had probably given given his expert opinion in thousands of them -  I vowed upon my return to return to Dr. Lee on my return and follow developments closely. So here we go.

----------------------------------------------------------------

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "In the years since these cases, Lee has become a rock star in the world of true crime. He’s appeared on the hit Netflix documentary The Staircase and dozens of Investigation Discovery-style programs, and he also scored his own show, Trace Evidence: The Case Files of Dr. Henry Lee. He’s won prestigious awards, including the Medal of Justice and the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Science and Engineer Association. And he founded the Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science—where his methods are being taught to future generations of criminalists. But critics, including a former colleague and legal opponents, say he may simply care more about scoring legal victories than the truth. “His attitude is extremely dangerous in the criminal-justice system,” said McGraw, who is also the executive director of the Connecticut Innocence Project. “His testimony has led to some very unfair and unjust results. These are horrible cases—and there are big reasons to believe some of the men involved are innocent.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------

STORY: "How Many Murder Cases Did Celeb Forensic Scientist Henry Lee Botch?" by reporter Natalie O'Neill, published by The Daily Beast on June 24, 2019.

SUBHEADING: "Henry Lee testified in some of America’s biggest murder cases, from O.J. Simpson to JonBenet. But he’s been accused of botching evidence in multiple trials."

STORY: "Before he became a true-crime celebrity, forensic scientist Henry Lee took the stand at a wildly bloody murder trial in Connecticut. It was spring of 1989 and the then-50-year-old Chinese-American hadn’t yet worked on his splashiest cases, from O.J. Simpson and JonBenet Ramsey to Scott Peterson. In the Connecticut trial, Lee faced a difficult task. As the star witness paid by the state, he was asked to back up the prosecution’s story that two homeless teenagers had butchered 65-year-old father Everett Carr—slitting his throat and stabbing him 27 times at his daughter’s home—without getting any blood on themselves, or leaving behind a shred of physical evidence. Lee wore a crisp suit as he took a seat next to the judge. When questioned, he testified that a reddish-brown stain found on a towel in the bathroom was “identified to be blood.” Despite the violent and messy nature of the attack—which left walls and floors in the home soaked in blood—he said it was possible that the killers had fled without a drop of blood on their clothing. His testimony bolstered the state’s claim that 17-year-old Shawn Henning and 18-year-old Ricky Birch had used the towel to clean themselves up after a “burglary gone bad.” It played a huge role in convicting the friends, who were sentenced to decades behind bars. The problem is, it wasn’t true. There was in fact no blood on the towel, and it had never actually been lab-tested, the Connecticut Supreme Court recently concluded. The ruling could lead to the exoneration of both men, who are in their fifties. The case features bombshell new DNA evidence—possibly pointing to a female killer—and witnesses who have since recanted, including a jailhouse snitch and a friend of Henning’s who testified he’d confessed to being at the home. Last week, the court tossed out the convictions for both men and granted them new trials after 30 years, citing Lee’s incorrect testimony and blaming prosecutors for failing to correct it. Reached by phone, Dennis Santore, the now-retired DA who put away Henning and Birch, recently admitted “It was a fishy case.” He said, “It was tough putting it together because it was circumstantial. But we did the best we could with what we had... We didn’t do much testing back then.” Asked if he stands by the evidence, he said, “I would have to, if I put it on [trial].” A few days after Henning and Birch were granted new trials, Lee held a press conference insisting he made no errors. “In my 57-year career, I have investigated over 8,000 cases and never, ever was accused of any wrongdoing or for testifying intentionally wrong,” said Lee told a throng of reporters. “This is the first case that I have to defend myself.” But Lee’s history of problems with evidence—intentional or not—doesn’t begin and end with Henning and Birch. The 81-year-old world-renowned forensic scientist—who has appeared on dozens of crime TV shows and documentaries—has allegedly hidden evidence or given incorrect testimony in at least three other cases, potentially sending the wrong men to prison and allowing guilty ones to walk free, according to court documents and other legal sources. (Reporter Natalie O'Neill goes on in this excellent analysis to note several of Lee's high profile case, including:

* The Murder of L.A. Actress Lana Clarkson.
 
* The Murder of Young Mother Janet Myers.

 * The Disappearance and Murder of Teenager Joyce Stochmal.

 * Phil Spector and Lana Clarkson. 

* David Weinberg and Joyce Stochmal.*

 * Kerry and Janet Myers. 

* Shawn Henning and Ralph Birch:

This excellent article is an extraordinary trough of  information and analysis  which deserves to be read in full - in spite of  length. (HL);


It concludes: "The problem of botched evidence may be bigger than Henry Lee. Forensic witnesses are supposed to be credible, unbiased sources of truth within the justice system. But the set-up fails to take into account human nature, legal experts say. “There is a tendency to want to be part of the team, and to help the team. That can lead to going over boundaries that should be maintained,” said Joseph Kadane, a Carnegie Mellon University professor who has written about ethical dilemmas expert witnesses face. “There’s also the fact that one side hires you and pays the bill,” he said. “It’s a slippery slope. Someone’s monetary—or other—desires could overpower their duties to the court. One solution, policy-wise, would be to change the model so that a judge chooses a single expert that both sides agree on, he said. Ultimately, Henry Lee estimates he has worked thousands of cases over his nearly five-decade forensics career, the vast majority of which have not been discredited. He said he now works cold cases, and sometimes gives lectures on the “limitations of forensic science.” Asked if he’d do anything differently looking back, Lee said, “Maybe I’d pick another career.” He added, “They are using today’s standard to judge 30 years ago.” Indeed, forensic-science techniques that were widely used by experts in the 1980s and 1990s—including hair-particle and bite-mark evidence—have in recent years been discredited  as “junk science” and ruled inadmissible in court. “Forensics is undergoing a revolution,” Kadane said. “In the past, it hasn’t been as scientific as it needs to be. Experts reached conclusions as if they were absolutely certain when they had no business being that certain.” “The problem with forensics is that it almost always involves people—and people are not infallible.”"

The entire story can  be read at:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/henry-lee-how-many-murder-cases-did-the-celebrity-forensic-scientist-botch

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;