Estela Rosa Jimenez: Texas: Flawed science: Major Development: After almost 15 years, a murder conviction in a child's choking death has been overturned and a new trial ordered for a woman originally sentenced to 99 years in prison after a 21-month-old child died in her care, KVUE (Reporter Terrellyn Moffett) reports: "United States District Judge Lee Yeakel has overturned the murder conviction of Estela Rosa Jimenez and ordered a new trial based on Jimenez being denied her constitutional right to present qualified medical experts at her August 2005 trial, according to the Innocence Project."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Rosa Jimenez was convicted based only on the scientifically invalid medical theory that was physically impossible for an infant to have choked on a wad of paper towel. There were no signs of abuse, Ms. Jimenez immediately tried to resuscitate Bryan Gutierrez and called for help. As any parent knows, the state's theory made no sense. We have since presented leading experts in pediatric choking who described similar incidents of accidental choking and confirmed that nothing about this case suggested foul play.   Unfortunately, Ms. Jimenez's appointed defense counsel failed to hire a competent medical expert and the jury made its decision based on invalid science.

The Innocence Project.

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

STORY: "Woman's murder conviction in child's choking death has been overturned after 15 years," by reporter Terrellyn Moffett, published by KVUE on October 30 2019.

SUB-HEADING: "Rosa Jimenez was originally charged a 99-year prison sentence after a child died in her care."

TEXAS: "United States District Judge Lee Yeakel has overturned the murder conviction of Estela Rosa Jimenez and ordered a new trial based on Jimenez being denied her constitutional right to present qualified medical experts at her August 2005 trial, according to the Innocence Project. The decision for Jiminez's case is grounded on the earlier recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Andrew Austin issued in September 2018. It has been almost 15 years since Jimenez was convicted of murder for the death of a 21-month-old child in her care. "Jimenez has always maintained her innocence and stated the child’s death was a tragic accident and not murder," said the Innocence Project.

Bryce Benjet, Innocence Project senior staff attorney, released the following statement:"Rosa Jimenez was convicted based only on the scientifically invalid medical theory that was physically impossible for an infant to have choked on a wad of paper towel. There were no signs of abuse, Ms. Jimenez immediately tried to resuscitate Bryan Gutierrez and called for help. As any parent knows, the state's theory made no sense. We have since presented leading experts in pediatric choking who described similar incidents of accidental choking and confirmed that nothing about this case suggested foul play.   Unfortunately, Ms. Jimenez's appointed defense counsel failed to hire a competent medical expert and the jury made its decision based on invalid science. Judge Yeakel's decision today granting a new trial confirms the findings of both the trial judge and the state habeas judge that there is a reasonable likelihood Ms. Jimenez was wrongfully convicted.  There is simply no evidence that this little boy's death was anything but a tragic accident. Ms. Jimenez and her family have likewise suffered immeasurably. Her children have grown up without their mother, and Ms. Jimenez's health has deteriorated while she spent almost half of her life imprisoned for a murder that never even happened. Based on Judge Yeakel's decision, we encourage the Travis County District Attorney to closely examine this case, accept the decisions of every judge who actually heard the witnesses and dismiss this case so that Ms. Jimenez may finally return to her family and bring this tragedy to a close."

Jimenez was 19, seven months pregnant and still nursing her 1-year-old daughter when she was arrested for the boy's death, according to our partners at the Austin American-Statesman.
The Innocence Project is a nonprofit legal organization whose mission is to "free the staggering number of innocent people who remain incarcerated, and to bring reform to the system responsible for their unjust imprisonment."


The entire story can be read at:
https://www.kvue.com/article/news/crime/womans-murder-conviction-in-childs-choking-death-has-been-overturned-after-15-years/269-436620fc-4c39-4e4a-b839-7186500f6f10
 
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;

False Confessions: The Central Park Five: Guardian Correspondent Sam Levin looks at "The Interrogation Method at Center of Ava Duvernay Lawsuit," and observes "‘It Breaks Down Innocent People’..." It’s unclear exactly how defamation laws might cover this fictionalized dialogue. The complaint is, however, bringing renewed attention to the Reid technique, the company’s trainings, and related interrogation techniques and controversies. The technique, which was devised by a former police officer and polygraph expert, has increasingly been the subject of scrutiny by scholars and lawyers, who say that research and ongoing exonerations have shown it leads to false confessions." ‘It Breaks Down Innocent People’: The Interrogation Method at Center of Ava Duvernay Lawsuitnewreid


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This Blog is interested in false confessions because of the disturbing number of exonerations in the USA, Canada and multiple other jurisdictions throughout the world, where, in the absence of incriminating forensic evidence the conviction is based on self-incrimination  (as well as false identification and jailhouse informants) – and because of the growing body of  scientific research showing how vulnerable suspects (especially juveniles)  are to widely used interrogation methods  such as  the controversial ‘Reid Technique.’" 

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

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

 QUOTE OF THE DAY: (Criminal defence lawyer) Goldenberg predicted the company’s suit would only escalate scrutiny of its methods and make its PR problem even worse: “The more attention drawn to the technique, the less police departments are going to want to use it, because there’s this negative association.""

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Critics charge that the method and similar practices involve interrogators pressuring and intimidating suspects, making it seem as if the police have proof of guilt, “minimizing” the seriousness of crime and potential consequences and presenting confession as the easiest way out of the situation. In 2017, Wicklander-Zulawski and Associates, a large consulting group that has worked with the majority of police departments across the US, announced it would stop using the Reid technique, specifically due to concerns about false confessions. Alan Hirsch, the chair of the justice and law studies program at Williams College, has testified in roughly 30 cases about the Reid technique. “It’s an interrogation method designed to create anxiety, stress and eventually desperation,” he told the Guardian. “The suspect concludes that confessing is the best or even the only way out … It breaks down innocent people as well as guilty people. It’s too effective.” The “overwhelming majority of PhD social scientists who research and write about the Reid method of interrogation believe that it can be and sometimes is psychologically coercive” and increases the risk of false confessions, added Richard Leo, a law and psychology professor at the University of San Francisco and leading expert on the subject. Keren Goldenberg, a criminal defense lawyer in Massachusetts, said the depictions of interrogations in When They See Us rang true to her. “The Reid technique really capitalizes on the fear and the weaknesses of the person who is sitting in front of the interrogator,” she said. John E Reid and Associates was “grasping at straws and fiercely protecting their brand”, added Hayley Cleary, an associate professor of criminal justice at Virginia Commonwealth University and an expert on police interrogations. She noted that other countries had largely moved away from the practice. Cleary said she was grateful to When They See Us for potentially helping future jurors understand that people can be pressured to confess to crimes they did not commit: “Normalizing the idea that false confessions can happen is really, really important.”

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

STORY:  : The Interrogation Method at Center of Ava Duvernay Lawsuit," by reporter Sam Levin,  published by The Transcend Media Service on October 21, 2019.  (Sam Levin is a correspondent for Guardian US, based in Los Angeles.)

SUB-HEADING: "Police consulting firm behind widely criticized ‘Reid technique’ claims Netflix drama When They See US misrepresents method."

PHOTO CAPTION: "The Central Park Five case is now known as one of the most notorious examples of police coercing people into giving false confession."

GIST: "The director Ava DuVernay and Netflix are facing a lawsuit from the police consulting firm behind a widely criticized interrogation technique referenced in the miniseries When They See Us.
John E Reid and Associates, a US company that trains law enforcement on interrogations, filed a defamation suit on Monday [14 Oct], challenging DuVernay’s critically acclaimed Netflix drama based on the case known as the Central Park Five. When They See Us is a four-part dramatization of the true story of five black and brown teenage boys from Harlem who were wrongfully convicted of the rape of a white woman in Central Park in the spring of 1989. The case is now known as one of the most notorious examples of police coercing people into giving false confessions, and the show powerfully depicts the harrowing interrogations the young boys faced and the racist prosecution that followed. The five teens went to prison and were eventually exonerated by DNA evidence.
Since the 1970s, John E Reid and Associates has taught an interrogation method known as “the Reid technique”, which was directly discussed in DuVernay’s series. The complaint cited a quote from a prosecutor character in the series who questions a police detective’s interrogations of the boys, saying: “You squeezed statements out of them after 42 hours of questioning and coercing … The Reid technique has been universally rejected.” The detective responds: “I don’t even know what the fucking Reid Technique is. The firm’s lawsuit accuses Netflix of making false and defamatory statements, seeks damages and demands an injunction blocking Netflix from streaming the series, unless they “delete the defamatory references”. The suit alleges that the show misrepresents the nature of the Reid technique by suggesting that “coercing” statements from juveniles after “long hours of questioning without food, bathroom breaks or parental supervision” is “synonymous” with this method. It’s unclear exactly how defamation laws might cover this fictionalized dialogue. The complaint is, however, bringing renewed attention to the Reid technique, the company’s trainings, and related interrogation techniques and controversies. The technique, which was devised by a former police officer and polygraph expert, has increasingly been the subject of scrutiny by scholars and lawyers, who say that research and ongoing exonerations have shown it leads to false confessions. Critics charge that the method and similar practices involve interrogators pressuring and intimidating suspects, making it seem as if the police have proof of guilt, “minimizing” the seriousness of crime and potential consequences and presenting confession as the easiest way out of the situation.
In 2017, Wicklander-Zulawski and Associates, a large consulting group that has worked with the majority of police departments across the US, announced it would stop using the Reid technique, specifically due to concerns about false confessions. Alan Hirsch, the chair of the justice and law studies program at Williams College, has testified in roughly 30 cases about the Reid technique. “It’s an interrogation method designed to create anxiety, stress and eventually desperation,” he told the Guardian. “The suspect concludes that confessing is the best or even the only way out … It breaks down innocent people as well as guilty people. It’s too effective.” The “overwhelming majority of PhD social scientists who research and write about the Reid method of interrogation believe that it can be and sometimes is psychologically coercive” and increases the risk of false confessions, added Richard Leo, a law and psychology professor at the University of San Francisco and leading expert on the subject. Keren Goldenberg, a criminal defense lawyer in Massachusetts, said the depictions of interrogations in When They See Us rang true to her. “The Reid technique really capitalizes on the fear and the weaknesses of the person who is sitting in front of the interrogator,” she said. John E Reid and Associates was “grasping at straws and fiercely protecting their brand”, added Hayley Cleary, an associate professor of criminal justice at Virginia Commonwealth University and an expert on police interrogations. She noted that other countries had largely moved away from the practice. Cleary said she was grateful to When They See Us for potentially helping future jurors understand that people can be pressured to confess to crimes they did not commit: “Normalizing the idea that false confessions can happen is really, really important.” Representatives for DuVernay and Netflix did not respond to requests for comment. John E Reid and Associates and their attorneys in the case, Jack Carriglio and Corey Hickman, also did not respond to interview requests. The company’s lawsuit includes the defense it has repeatedly offered – that false confessions don’t come from the application of the Reid technique, “but rather they are usually caused by interrogators engaging in improper behavior that is outside of the parameters … behaviors which the courts have found to be coercive – threats, promises, denial of rights”. The technique does not involve assaulting suspects, denying them rights, conducting excessively long interrogations and some of the other particularly brutal tactics depicted in the series, the lawsuit also said. Goldenberg predicted the company’s suit would only escalate scrutiny of its methods and make its PR problem even worse: “The more attention drawn to the technique, the less police departments are going to want to use it, because there’s this negative association.""

The entire story can  be read at:
https://www.transcend.org/tms/2019/10/it-breaks-down-innocent-people-the-interrogation-method-at-center-of-ava-duvernay-lawsuit/

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;
_______________________________________________

Rodney Reed. Death Row Texas: Pressure mounts to test the DNA and keep him alive, KXAN, (reporter Phil Prazan) reports..."Many believe Reed did not kill Stites. “I don’t think anyone can say [Reed)] is guilty without a shadow of a doubt, and I don’t believe we should carry out the death penalty when there’s doubt about the truth of the case,” (Texas state representative Vikki) Goodwin wrote KXAN in a release. Reed — and the Innocence Project, which recently filed a U.S. Supreme Court petition to stall the execution — say more DNA testing will prove he did not kill 19-year-old Stacey Stites in 1996."

WORDS TO HEED: FROM OUR POST ON KEVIN COOPER'S  APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING (CALIFORNIA):


"Blogger/extraordinaire Jeff Gamso's blunt, unequivocal, unforgettable message to the powers that be in California: "JUST TEST THE FUCKING DNA." (Oh yes, Gamso raises, as he does in many of his posts, an important philosophical question: This post is headed: "What is truth, said jesting Pilate.")..."So what's the harm? What, exactly, are they scared of? Don't we want the truth?"
 https://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2018/06/kevin-cooper-2-california-application.html


https://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2018/06/kevin-cooper-2-california-application.html

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Deke Pierce is a retired Travis County Sheriff’s Deputy and helped organize Monday’s brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. “Folks that do not have anything to do with the case, think that it needs a second look by the Supreme Court,” said Pierce. He hopes to get a critical mass as many people as possible to ask the court, the local district attorney, and Governor Abbott to keep Rodney Reed alive. Pierce points to people like Anthony Graves and Michael Morton as convincing examples of the state getting it wrong. “This is a man’s life we’re talking about here,” said Pierce."

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

 STORY: Pressure mounts to keep Rodney Reed alive," by reporter  Phil Prazan,  published by KXAN on Octiber 28, 2019.

GIST: "The State of Texas will execute Rodney Reed on November 20. This week, multiple events are scheduled to draw attention to Reed, who’s convicted of killing Stacey Stites in 1996. On Monday Oct. 28, Texas state representative Vikki Goodwin, D-Austin, joined law enforcement officers to file a brief with the United States Supreme Court, asking to stop the execution. Many believe Reed did not kill Stites. “I don’t think anyone can say [Reed)] is guilty without a shadow of a doubt, and I don’t believe we should carry out the death penalty when there’s doubt about the truth of the case,” Goodwin wrote KXAN in a release. Reed — and the Innocence Project, which recently filed a U.S. Supreme Court petition to stall the execution — say more DNA testing will prove he did not kill 19-year-old Stacey Stites in 1996. Stites, a bride-to-be who worked at H-E-B, was found dumped on the side of a rural road north of Bastrop after a search that began when she didn’t show up for work that morning. While Reed was not looked into initially, he became a suspect when investigators ran his DNA as part of a separate alleged sexual assault case that was later dropped, the Reed defense says. Authorities said Reed’s DNA matched evidence found in the Stites case, and he was arrested and charged with capital murder in 1997. Reed claims he had a secret and consensual relationship with Stites, which explains the DNA match. Reed’s legal team has continuously pointed the finger at Stites’ then-fiance, former police officer Jimmy Fennell, as the killer. Investigators considered Fennell a suspect, prior to Reed’s DNA match. Fennell was later accused of raping a woman in his custody while he was a Georgetown Police Office in 2007. He pleaded guilty to lesser charges, served 10 years in prison and was released in 2018. Law enforcement officers are adding their names to the growing list of people- who want to delay Rodney Reed’s execution next month. The group represented by Reed’s lawyers filed a brief with the US Supreme Court Monday. Rep. Vikki Goodwin, D-Austin, said “As I learned more about this case, I”m more convinced that he did not receive a fair trial, that there was racial bias against Rodney Reed, and Rodney Reed did not kill Stacey Stites. Reed has long maintained that while he had a sexual relationship with Stites and he did not kill her. Deke Pierce is a retired Travis County Sheriff’s Deputy and helped organize Monday’s brief to the U.S. Supreme Court. “Folks that do not have anything to do with the case, think that it needs a second look by the Supreme Court,” said Pierce. He hopes to get a critical mass as many people as possible to ask the court, the local district attorney, and Governor Abbott to keep Rodney Reed alive. Pierce points to people like Anthony Graves and Michael Morton as convincing examples of the state getting it wrong. “This is a man’s life we’re talking about here,” said Pierce. Tuesday, pastor at Life ANew, Sherwynn Patton, will organize a similar event. Sherwynn Patton, Life ANew, told KXAN: “To communicate that heart of compassion. That’s at the very heart of God. That’s what Jesus would have us do.” This event will be Tuesday at Greater Mount Zion church with dozens of pastors. “That does get the Governor’s attention. It’s not just one cohort that is asking him to stop the execution and I believe the faith community was that missing component,” said Patton. Reed’s family has been fighting for a new trial for years, and he has tried to appeal the case at least eight times over two decades. He filed a lawsuit in federal district court last month against the state for repeatedly denying requests for DNA testing. Kim Kardashian West waded into the Rodney Reed case, urging Gov. Greg Abbott to halt the death row inmate’s planned execution on Saturday. The reality TV star tweeted her support for Reed. Kardashian West, who has 62 million followers on Twitter, said she has been “investigating” Reed’s case and tagged Abbott, telling him to “do the right thing.” KXAN has reached out to Governor Abbott’s office for a comment and has not yet heard back."

The entire story can be read at:

https://www.kxan.com/top-stories/pressure-mounts-to-keep-rodney-reed-alive/

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.

Pallavi Macharla: Massachusetts: Shaking baby syndrome; Clashing experts; An extraordinary decision by the judge; All of which made for a very perplexing case. Read on. HL...(From first story)..."A Middlesex Superior Court judge has reduced the second-degree murder conviction of a baby sitter found guilty of fatally injuring a 6-month-old baby to involuntary manslaughter, an unusual decision that underscores how the science around shaken baby cases continues to divide the criminal justice system. Judge Kenneth Fishman said that the second-degree murder conviction a jury delivered in May against Pallavi Macharla, a 44-year-old mother of two, was not “consonant with justice.” The four-week trial featured a slew of medical experts who presented strikingly different theories about what killed Ridhima Dhekane, whom Macharla was baby-sitting in March 2014 in the day-care center she ran in her Burlington home. The conflicting findings made it impossible to justify a second-degree murder conviction, Fishman wrote in the Aug. 19 decision. “This court cannot permit a verdict of second-degree murder to stand in the presence of such highly contested and inconsistent evidence,” Fishman wrote in the 17-page ruling."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: A very perplexing case: It's not every day that a judge reduces a jury's murder conviction punishable by life imprisonment  with the possibility of parole after 15 years to involuntary manslaughter with no mandatory term of imprisonment and state guidelines  calling for no more than five years in prison -  expecially a case involving the death of a baby. The judge noted that there was a clash in the evidence given by experts called by the defence and the  prosecution as is so common in shaken baby  syndrome cases, as follows: "(Justice) Fishman denied a defense motion to overturn the conviction and acquit Macharla. Fishman agreed there was no evidence that Macharla intended to hurt the child, noting that she gave the baby mouth-to-mouth resuscitation when she stopped breathing. “It appears that the defendant had no history of abusive behavior toward children in the past but rather was a patient, considerate, and loving caretaker of children,” he wrote. “There is, however, a child who has tragically died, coupled with evidence of extraordinary internal injuries that some experts would attribute to abusive head trauma in the form of a shaking and/or a blow.” Fishman’s decision followed competing motions from prosecutors and the defense over the verdict.  The defense said the verdict should be overturned in part because medical experts agreed the bleeding in the child’s brain was due to a prolonged period without oxygen. The defense also cited the testimony of biomechanical engineers, who disputed that a person has the strength to shake an infant with enough force to cause bleeding inside the brain and retinal hemorrhaging." The  decision  to reduce th3e murder conviction is the subject of the first story of this post's duo.  The second story (dated October 11) sets out the decision to re-sentence Ms. Macharla to serve three to three and a half years in prison. The guts of the story: "Macharla also spoke. “Your honor, I loved Ridhima so much, dearly as I loved my daughter and did not cause any harm to her,” she said. The court was filled with members of Marcharla’s family and the family of the six-month-old victim, Ridhima Dhekane.
Ridhima had been under Macharla’s care back in March of 2014 when she died. Prosecutors said an autopsy revealed the baby died from blunt force trauma and shaking injuries to the head. Marcharla did not call 911. Macharla said she was babysitting Ridhima in her Burlington home when the infant choked on chunky homemade applesauce, vomited and stopped breathing. “She is good and innocent she does not deserve to be in the jail,” one of Marcharla’s supporters said outside court." (As I said above, I find this to be a perplexing story. Very perplexing indeed. I wish her and her counsel best of luck on the appeal. HL);

FIRST STORY:  August 26, 2019. Reduced sentence from murder to involuntary manslaughter.)

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Fishman said in his 16 years on the bench, he had never reduced a verdict in any criminal case. “There is no doubt that the jury . . . was a serious and attentive group,” he wrote. ‘Nevertheless . . . this court is acutely aware of its responsibility to exercise the judgment to reduce the verdict in those rare instances when the verdict rendered is not consonant with justice.”

---

PASSAGE ONE  OF THE DAY:  "At trial, prosecutors said Macharla, who was a medical doctor in her native India, became frustrated when the baby began fussing and shook her so violently her brain bled. Macharla, who testified in her own defense, said the baby had vomited shortly after she fed her homemade applesauce and then stopped breathing. Fishman’s decision is the latest in a series of setbacks for state prosecutors who have had convictions in shaken baby cases overturned by higher courts or had to drop murder charges after medical examiners reversed their rulings on the cause of a baby’s death. The ruling means Macharla, who was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 15 years, will likely serve no more than five years. Involuntary manslaughter carries no minimum mandatory sentence and a maximum sentence of 20 years, but the state’s sentencing guidelines call for no more than five years in prison."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "Fishman denied a defense motion to overturn the conviction and acquit Macharla. Fishman agreed there was no evidence that Macharla intended to hurt the child, noting that she gave the baby mouth-to-mouth resuscitation when she stopped breathing. “It appears that the defendant had no history of abusive behavior toward children in the past but rather was a patient, considerate, and loving caretaker of children,” he wrote. “There is, however, a child who has tragically died, coupled with evidence of extraordinary internal injuries that some experts would attribute to abusive head trauma in the form of a shaking and/or a blow.” Fishman’s decision followed competing motions from prosecutors and the defense over the verdict.  The defense said the verdict should be overturned in part because medical experts agreed the bleeding in the child’s brain was due to a prolonged period without oxygen. The defense also cited the testimony of biomechanical engineers, who disputed that a person has the strength to shake an infant with enough force to cause bleeding inside the brain and retinal hemorrhaging. Doctors for prosecutors were dismissive of this science, Carney argued. “Their responses ranged from disdain to . . . admitting their ignorance on the topic,” Carney wrote in his motion. Prosecutors countered that defense experts “cherry-picked which findings to consider in reaching their opinions, testified beyond their area of specialty . . . and created histories to fit their theory.” By contrast, the doctors who testified for them were currently practicing in the field of pediatric care, they said."

---

---

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Fishman’s decision had striking similarities to a 1997 ruling by the judge in the case of Louise Woodward, the British nanny who was accused of shaking 8-month-old Matthew Eappen to death. After a jury convicted Woodward, then 18, of second-degree murder, the judge reduced the conviction to involuntary manslaughter and sentenced the au pair to time served — 297 days. That judge also argued that an involuntary manslaughter conviction was more “consonant with justice.”  The SJC narrowly upheld the decision in the Woodward case and she returned to England a free woman. She has since married and had a child."

---

STORY: "Judge reduces baby sitter’s murder conviction to involuntary manslaughter," by reporter Maria Cramer, published by The Boston Globe on August 26, 2019. (Maria Cramer covers the criminal justice system, including federal and state courts. She has worked at the Boston Globe since 2004. Since that time, she has covered the suburbs, Boston Police, and breaking crime stories. She was one of the lead reporters in an award-winning, five-part series about the Bowdoin-Geneva neighborhood of Boston. In 2013, she was part of the metro staff that covered the Boston Marathon bombings and would win the Pulitzer Prize for breaking news. In 2016, she spent a year on the Spotlight Team working on the series, “The Desperate and the Dead,” which was named a Pulitzer finalist.)

GIST: "A Middlesex Superior Court judge has reduced the second-degree murder conviction of a baby sitter found guilty of fatally injuring a 6-month-old baby to involuntary manslaughter, an unusual decision that underscores how the science around shaken baby cases continues to divide the criminal justice system. Judge Kenneth Fishman said that the second-degree murder conviction a jury delivered in May against Pallavi Macharla, a 44-year-old mother of two, was not “consonant with justice.” The four-week trial featured a slew of medical experts who presented strikingly different theories about what killed Ridhima Dhekane, whom Macharla was baby-sitting in March 2014 in the day-care center she ran in her Burlington home. The conflicting findings made it impossible to justify a second-degree murder conviction, Fishman wrote in the Aug. 19 decision. “This court cannot permit a verdict of second-degree murder to stand in the presence of such highly contested and inconsistent evidence,” Fishman wrote in the 17-page ruling. At trial, prosecutors said Macharla, who was a medical doctor in her native India, became frustrated when the baby began fussing and shook her so violently her brain bled. Macharla, who testified in her own defense, said the baby had vomited shortly after she fed her homemade applesauce and then stopped breathing. Fishman’s decision is the latest in a series of setbacks for state prosecutors who have had convictions in shaken baby cases overturned by higher courts or had to drop murder charges after medical examiners reversed their rulings on the cause of a baby’s death.  The ruling means Macharla, who was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 15 years, will likely serve no more than five years. Involuntary manslaughter carries no minimum mandatory sentence and a maximum sentence of 20 years, but the state’s sentencing guidelines call for no more than five years in prison. A new sentencing date has been scheduled for Sept. 27. Prosecutors can appeal Fishman’s decision to reduce the conviction. Meghan Kelly, a spokeswoman for Middlesex District Attorney Marian Ryan, declined to comment on the decision. “We are still reviewing the decision,” Kelly said. J.W. Carney Jr., Macharla’s defense lawyer, said he spoke with Macharla’s husband, who said he and his wife were “very grateful” for the ruling. “A great judge reflects many qualities, including the courage to prevent an injustice,” Carney said.  “Justice Fishman exemplified that courage in concluding that justice did not support a verdict of second-degree murder.” Fishman denied a defense motion to overturn the conviction and acquit Macharla. Fishman agreed there was no evidence that Macharla intended to hurt the child, noting that she gave the baby mouth-to-mouth resuscitation when she stopped breathing. “It appears that the defendant had no history of abusive behavior toward children in the past but rather was a patient, considerate, and loving caretaker of children,” he wrote. “There is, however, a child who has tragically died, coupled with evidence of extraordinary internal injuries that some experts would attribute to abusive head trauma in the form of a shaking and/or a blow.” Fishman’s decision followed competing motions from prosecutors and the defense over the verdict.  The defense said the verdict should be overturned in part because medical experts agreed the bleeding in the child’s brain was due to a prolonged period without oxygen. The defense also cited the testimony of biomechanical engineers, who disputed that a person has the strength to shake an infant with enough force to cause bleeding inside the brain and retinal hemorrhaging. Doctors for prosecutors were dismissive of this science, Carney argued. “Their responses ranged from disdain to . . . admitting their ignorance on the topic,” Carney wrote in his motion. Prosecutors countered that defense experts “cherry-picked which findings to consider in reaching their opinions, testified beyond their area of specialty . . . and created histories to fit their theory.” By contrast, the doctors who testified for them were currently practicing in the field of pediatric care, they said. “Through clinical examination, imaging and pathology examination, they determined that Ridhima was a victim of inflicted head trauma that caused her to go into respiratory arrest and then, consequently, cardiac arrest,” wrote Katharine B. Folger, the assistant district attorney who prosecuted the case. If prosecutors appeal the case, it will go before the state Appeals Court and possibly the Supreme Judicial Court. The defense could also appeal the ruling and argue for a full acquittal. Carney said on Monday that it is “premature” to consider that option. Fishman’s decision had striking similarities to a 1997 ruling by the judge in the case of Louise Woodward, the British nanny who was accused of shaking 8-month-old Matthew Eappen to death. After a jury convicted Woodward, then 18, of second-degree murder, the judge reduced the conviction to involuntary manslaughter and sentenced the au pair to time served — 297 days. That judge also argued that an involuntary manslaughter conviction was more “consonant with justice.” The SJC narrowly upheld the decision in the Woodward case and she returned to England a free woman. She has since married and had a child. Fishman said in his 16 years on the bench, he had never reduced a verdict in any criminal case. “There is no doubt that the jury . . . was a serious and attentive group,” he wrote. ‘Nevertheless . . . this court is acutely aware of its responsibility to exercise the judgment to reduce the verdict in those rare instances when the verdict rendered is not consonant with justice.""

The entire story can be read at:

https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2019/08/26/judge-reduces-baby-sitter-second-degree-murder-conviction-involuntary-manslaughter/qDpPN1mEkodGaOCFQkGQGM/story.html?et_rid=251574599&s_campaign=todaysheadlines:newsletter

---

SECOND STORY: October 11, 2019: Re-sentencing on the charge of involuntary manslaughter:

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;


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

SECOND STORY:

STORY: "Burlington Babysitter Sent To Prison For Infant’s Death,"  published by CBS on October 11, 2019.

GIST: "The woman convicted in the death of a six-month-old baby she who was babysitting in 2014 was sentenced Friday. Pallavi Macharla will spend three and a half to four years in state prison.

A jury found Macharla guilty of second-degree murder back in May. She was sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole after 15 years. But in August, a judge reduced the conviction to an involuntary manslaughter conviction, provoking another sentencing. In court on Friday, the judge referenced her lack of criminal history and reputation. Macharla also spoke. “Your honor, I loved Ridhima so much, dearly as I loved my daughter and did not cause any harm to her,” she said. The court was filled with members of Marcharla’s family and the family of the six-month-old victim, Ridhima Dhekane. Ridhima had been under Macharla’s care back in March of 2014 when she died. Prosecutors said an autopsy revealed the baby died from blunt force trauma and shaking injuries to the head. Marcharla did not call 911. Macharla said she was babysitting Ridhima in her Burlington home when the infant choked on chunky homemade applesauce, vomited and stopped breathing. “She is good and innocent she does not deserve to be in the jail,” one of Marcharla’s supporters said outside court. Macharla’s defense attorney J.W. Carney said because she was convicted of more than a year behind bars, it is likely Marcharla could be deported to India. “The sentence was not a harsh one. It was in the eyes of many people, lenient. We thought the judge should go down even further for a lower sentence that would not have impacted Pavalli’s deportation,” Carney said. He is planning to appeal.""

The entire story can be read at:
https://boston.cbslocal.com/2019/10/11/pallavi-macharla-babysitter-convicted-infants-death-sentenced-involuntary-manslaughter/

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;

Jeremy Bamber: The UK mass-murder case that just won't go away - even after 33 years behind bars: His lawyers cite new evidence including a forensic blood-related report..."Mass murderer Jeremy Bamber claims he has unearthed phone call evidence that could set him free, 33 years after he was jailed for slaughtering his family. Bamber, 58, has found a phone log he says proves he did not shoot parents Nevill and June, model sister Sheila “Bambi” Caffell, and her six-year-old twin sons Daniel and Nicholas in August 1985. Bamber is serving a full life tariff for the massacre at White House Farm in Essex."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "A blood-stained silencer was also found at the farm by Bamber’s cousin. Bamber’s team say they now have evidence of two silencers examined by police, both believed to contain blood that could belong to Sheila or now-deceased cousin Robert Boutflour. They say a forensic report has been given to the CPS about this evidence. Bamber believes police always had evidence that would have cleared him, but failed to disclose it at his trial, his first appeal in 1989 or second in 2002."

STORY: "Jeremy Bamber's 'new evidence' that could free him after 33 years behind bars ," by Reporter Matthew Young, published by The  Mirroron October 18, 2019.

SUB-HEADING: The mass killer was jailed for shooting parents Nevill and June, model sister Sheila “Bambi” Caffell, and her six-year-old twin sons Daniel and Nicholas."

STORY: "Mass murderer Jeremy Bamber claims he has unearthed phone call evidence that could set him free, 33 years after he was jailed for slaughtering his family. Bamber, 58, has found a phone log he says proves he did not shoot parents Nevill and June, model sister Sheila “Bambi” Caffell, and her six-year-old twin sons Daniel and Nicholas in August 1985. Bamber is serving a full life tariff for the massacre at White House Farm in Essex. His legal team say a police record referring to a call made by Bamber on the night of the White House Farm massacre in 1985 proves he was not there at the time and could form the basis of an appeal. They say it backs up the theory that Bamber’s sister Sheila Caffell, 26, murdered their parents Nevill and June, both 61, then shot her own sons, twins Nicholas and Daniel, six, before killing herself. Bamber’s lawyer Mark Newby said: “The evidence strongly suggests the chain of events could not have been what the prosecution alleged.” The phone call evidence forms one element of a huge bundle Bamber’s team will soon submit to the Criminal Case Review Commission. The previously unseen police document appears to back up Bamber’s story that two calls were made to police on the night of the murders, one from his father and one from him after Nevill rang saying Sheila had “gone crazy”. At his trial, the prosecution said only one call was made to police – from Jeremy Bamber at 3.26am from the crime scene, White House Farm in Tolleshunt D’Arcy, Essex. But the new document describes a call to police from Jeremy Bamber timed at “approx 3.37am”. His legal team argue it shows Bamber could not have made the 3.26am call from the farm and returned to his home 3.5 miles away in Goldhanger to make the second call.  The “3.37am” note came from an interview with a PC Myall, of Essex Police, during the Dickinson Inquiry into the force’s handling of the case after Bamber’s conviction in November 1986. The note was found by Bamber among thousands of police documents released to him in 2011.

PC Myall is noted as telling Dickinson: “We received a telephone call at the P.Stn (Police Station, Witham). "The officer (PC West) at CD Control (Chelmsford) was on the phone and told us that he was relating information to us and still had the informant (Jeremy Bamber) on the other telephone.” The trial judge had instructed the jury to disregard Bamber’s claims that he had called police from his home at 3.36am. And prosecutors told the trial Bamber had invented the call from Nevill to lay the blame on schizophrenic Sheila, known as Bambi when she worked as a model. Bamber was convicted by a 10-2 majority of murdering his family to claim a £436,000 inheritance. He was initially sentenced to five life sentences, to serve a minimum 25 years, but that was increased to a whole life tariff in 1994. The Mirror revealed in 2010 how lost phone logs showed it was Nevill who called police at 3.26am. A further record submitted to the Criminal Case Review Commission in 2010 showed a 3.36am call to police from Jeremy Bamber. But the CCRC ruled the 3.36am call was noted in error and that there was just one call, from Jeremy not Nevill, made at 3.26am from White House Farm scene. The new “3.37am” note is said to prove the existence of the second call. ITV last week announced a drama about the murders next year, with Freddie Fox as Bamber, who is in Wakefield jail, West Yorkshire. Bamber was famously pictured with girlfriend Julie Mugford, 21, struggling to contain his grief walking behind his parents’ coffins at their funeral. After Julie found he had cheated on her, she told police Bamber had talked of hiring a hitman to kill his parents. A blood-stained silencer was also found at the farm by Bamber’s cousin. Bamber’s team say they now have evidence of two silencers examined by police, both believed to contain blood that could belong to Sheila or now-deceased cousin Robert Boutflour. They say a forensic report has been given to the CPS about this evidence. Bamber believes police always had evidence that would have cleared him, but failed to disclose it at his trial, his first appeal in 1989 or second in 2002. Between 2004 and 2011, Bamber made three CCRC submissions in a failed attempt to get his case back to the Court of Appeal. He has also made appeals against his whole life tariff. Essex Police said: “There has never been anything to suggest that he was wrongly convicted.” But Bamber’s lawyer is now hopeful of a new appeal. Mr Newby said: “The phone call information is consistent with what Jeremy Bamber always said. It is part of a package of evidence that should lead to a positive review for Jeremy. “It’s fair to say when we go back to the CCRC we will have a pretty strong package which we hope they will refer to the Court of Appeal. We hope we will get it across the line. “If we do, it is probably this country’s greatest ever miscarriage of justice.""

The case against: The prosecution said Bamber, then 24, had cycled to White House Farm and got in via an insecure window before murdering his family. Girlfriend Julie Mugford said Bamber had planned the killings and had phoned her, saying: “Tonight’s the night.” A silencer found three days later had Sheila’s blood inside. Prosecutors said she could hardly have put it back in the cupboard if she had already killed herself with it."

The entire story can be read at:
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-bambers-new-evidence-could-20651305
https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/jeremy-bambers-new-evidence-could-20651305.amp

Read the statement Jeremy Bamber's lawyers released after the Mirror published this story at the link below: "Today a story appeared on the Front Page of the Mirror concerning the Case of Jeremy Bamber and this is our statement in relation to that. We confirm we act on behalf of Jeremy Bamber and have seen the article now published by the Mirror which we contributed to.  Further we can confirm that we are working with Jeremy's dedicated support team to build an extensive package of grounds including the evidence referred to in the Mirror so that we can provide the Criminal Cases Review Commission a set of grounds of appeal upon which it can make a swift referral back to the Court of Appeal. That also relies upon obtaining further disclosure which is currently being sought . 
This is a complex case and if successful would be one of the U.K.'s most notorious miscarriages of justice. We do not propose therefore as Jeremy's legal team  to further elaborate on the grounds to be advanced or other actions that may be imminent at this stage, however we expect to make a further statement in the coming weeks. 
https://www.qualitysolicitors.com/jordans/news/2019/10/jeremy-bamber-case-statement-following-mirror-article

Read Wikipedia entry in full at the link below: "Bamber alerted police to the shootings at around 3:30 am on 7 August 1985. He told them that Nevill telephoned him to say that Bamber's sister, Sheila Caffell, had gone "berserk" with Nevill's rifle. Caffell was found dead on the floor of her parents' bedroom, with the rifle up against her throat. June Bamber was found in the same room. Caffell's six-year-old twin sons, Nicholas and Daniel, were found in their beds in another upstairs room, while Nevill was found in the kitchen downstairs. The family had been shot 25 times, mostly at close range.^[4] Caffell had spent time in a psychiatric hospital being treated for schizophrenia months before the murders. The police believed that she was responsible until Bamber's girlfriend told them he had implicated himself.^[4] The prosecution case included that there was no evidence that Bamber's father had telephoned him. They argued that the father was too badly injured to have spoken to anyone; that there was no blood on the kitchen phone; and that he would have called the police, not Bamber. They also argued that the silencer was on the gun when the shots were fired, and that Caffell's reach was not long enough to hold the gun and silencer at her throat and press the trigger. In addition she was not strong enough, they said, to have overcome her father in what appeared to have been a violent struggle in the kitchen. They also argued that the fact Sheila had shot herself twice in her apparent suicide attempt was evidence that she was not the killer.^[20] Bamber's defence team unsuccessfully challenged the evidence over the years. They alleged that a police log suggested that Bamber's father had indeed called the police that night, and that the silencer may not have been on the gun during the attacks.^[21] The silencer evidence was unreliable, they argued, because the silencer was found in a farmhouse cupboard by one of Bamber's cousins 3 days after the murders."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Bamber

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; 

Beleaguered Weslaco crime lab; Texas: Public Information Act requests reveal disturbing backlog causing untenable delays..."A Texas Public Information Act request to DPS reveals that as of Sept. 17, the Weslaco crime lab had 2,656 unreleased requests, including 1,309 unreleased biology and DNA requests — nearly half of the lab’s total. DNA evidence is valuable to both the state and to defense attorneys, as it can exonerate people accused of crimes or prove guilt. DNA evidence is also critical in the most serious of cases and is used by prosecutors to determine what punishment to pursue."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Defendants are frequently and unnecessarily spending years in jail waiting for forensic evidence to be processed so that they can have their day in court,” (State Representative) Canales wrote. “This gross reality threatens the very essence of our legal system and the fabric of our democracy, and it devalues the credibility of the state’s governing bodies and law enforcement agency."

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

PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY: "The oldest pending DNA case at the lab is 792 days, a little more than two years, and the average turnaround for a DNA case is 300 days, according to information provided by DPS to the newspaper through the Texas Public Information Act. For forensic biology testing, the oldest pending case is approximately 1,015 days old, with an average turnaround of 218 days.The oldest pending cases in other categories, including firearms, fingerprint testing and seized drugs also stretch beyond 1,000 days. For instance, the oldest firearms case pending is 1,187 days old while the average turnaround is 228 days. The oldest pending fingerprint testing case is 1,279 days old while the average turnaround is 255 days. Finally, the longest pending seized drug case is approximately 1,209 days old while the average case takes 90 days to complete."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The oldest pending DNA case at the lab is 792 days, a little more than two years, and the average turnaround for a DNA case is 300 days, according to information provided by DPS to the newspaper through the Texas Public Information Act. For forensic biology testing, the oldest pending case is approximately 1,015 days old, with an average turnaround of 218 days.The oldest pending cases in other categories, including firearms, fingerprint testing and seized drugs also stretch beyond 1,000 days. For instance, the oldest firearms case pending is 1,187 days old while the average turnaround is 228 days. The oldest pending fingerprint testing case is 1,279 days old while the average turnaround is 255 days. Finally, the longest pending seized drug case is approximately 1,209 days old while the average case takes 90 days to complete."

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

STORY: "Info requests reveal DPS crime lab backlog exceeds 2,500 cases," by reporter Mark Reagan, published by The  Monitor on October 13, 2019.

GIST: "The Texas Department of Public Safety recognizes that its crime lab system across the state has been unable to meet the demands of the criminal justice community. DPS Director Steven C. McCraw said as much in a Sept. 26 letter to state Rep. Terry Canales, of Edinburg. Canales chairs the House of Representatives Transportation Committee, which helps decide how DPS is funded. McCraw was responding to a letter Canales penned that was prompted by a story in The Monitor, which highlighted the chronic backlog of DNA testing at the Weslaco crime lab. That backlog has resulted in serious criminal cases dragging on for years as well as speedy trial violations. “Defendants are frequently and unnecessarily spending years in jail waiting for forensic evidence to be processed so that they can have their day in court,” Canales wrote. “This gross reality threatens the very essence of our legal system and the fabric of our democracy, and it devalues the credibility of the state’s governing bodies and law enforcement agency.” The Weslaco crime lab analyzes evidence from 25 general offense types ranging from homicides to sexual assaults to arson. Law enforcement agency requests to the crime lab include several categories encompassing alcohol and toxicology to DNA testing to firearms to seized drugs. Those requests come from all across the Rio Grande Valley. A Texas Public Information Act request to DPS reveals that as of Sept. 17, the Weslaco crime lab had 2,656 unreleased requests, including 1,309 unreleased biology and DNA requests — nearly half of the lab’s total. DNA evidence is valuable to both the state and to defense attorneys, as it can exonerate people accused of crimes or prove guilt. DNA evidence is also critical in the most serious of cases and is used by prosecutors to determine what punishment to pursue. Take the case of 40-year-old Gabriel Keith Escalante, who is accused along with his girlfriend, 41-year-old Irene Navejar, of beating 53-year-old Alejandro Salinas Sr. to death and suffocating the man’s mother, 73-year-old Oliva Salinas, on April 23, 2018. Depending on the DNA testing in this case, the Hidalgo County District Attorney’s Office may pursue the death penalty against the man, who has remained jailed on charges of capital murder of multiple persons on a $1.25 million bond for about 19 months, court testimony has shown. McCraw, the DPS director, acknowledged the delays in the Weslaco crime lab’s DNA section in his response to Canales. “With respect to the Weslaco laboratory and its DNA section, the root cause of the delays is the turnover of staff and the time it takes to train new staff. This is also true for all our laboratories,” McCraw wrote. “The Weslaco DNA section has not been fully staffed in the last five years. As new staff were hired, experienced staff were pulled from focusing primarily on casework analysis to also train new employees resulting in reduced overall capacity.” The oldest pending DNA case at the lab is 792 days, a little more than two years, and the average turnaround for a DNA case is 300 days, according to information provided by DPS to the newspaper through the Texas Public Information Act. For forensic biology testing, the oldest pending case is approximately 1,015 days old, with an average turnaround of 218 days. The oldest pending cases in other categories, including firearms, fingerprint testing and seized drugs also stretch beyond 1,000 days. For instance, the oldest firearms case pending is 1,187 days old while the average turnaround is 228 days. The oldest pending fingerprint testing case is 1,279 days old while the average turnaround is 255 days. Finally, the longest pending seized drug case is approximately 1,209 days old while the average case takes 90 days to complete. However, just this year, DPS has received 5,890 requests for evidence testing in categories including seized drugs, toxicology, DNA, fingerprints and firearms with the bulk of those requests — 5,190 — falling under toxicology and seized drugs. The lab has also completed thousands of requests this year in those same categories, for a grand total of 6,073 cases. In the month of August alone, analysts at the lab released results for 738 cases. Among those released, DNA and fingerprint cases had the longest shelf life before completion, with an average case age for DNA of 431 days and an average age for fingerprint testing of 353 days. In short, the Weslaco crime lab is in high demand. “With demand far outpacing current capacity, the laboratories continue efforts to increase communication with our client base,” McCraw wrote. “Laboratory staff have been meeting with the prosecutors in the service area to both explain our current status and to gather feedback on their needs.” McCraw said DPS also encourages law enforcement and prosecutors to communicate their needs throughout the testing process. “Agencies are urged to contact us directly with any concerns,” McCraw wrote. “Due to the overwhelming demand for services, this communication is critical to ensure the laboratory is aware of casework that needs to be expedited.” Situations where DPS will expedite testing include threats to public safety, impact to court trials and jails, such as a suspect being confined for a long period of time pending lab results, high profile incidents that draw national media attention or other circumstances dictating the need for expedited analysis. McCraw told Canales that additional forensic resources the legislature provided during the last session will positively impact the Weslaco crime lab, as well as DPS’s lab system across the state. “The additional resources will allow the department to add more forensic scientists to our DNA team and add support staff to both the DNA and seized drug teams,” McCraw wrote. “These additional support staff will allow our current trained forensic scientists to focus on processing evidence and will increase the laboratory’s ability to complete the pending requests for forensic support.” But training takes time, he said. “The hiring and training of the new scientists can take up to 18 months, but once this is accomplished, they will make a significant impact in the Weslaco service area and across the state,” McCraw wrote. The additional funding provided to DPS for its crime lab system will also be used to increase salaries and to help retain highly trained employees. “To reduce the training impact on the regional laboratories, we are also moving to a centralized training model to become more responsive to our training needs,” McCraw wrote. Lastly, McCraw said a process improvement expert is working with the DNA team in Weslaco to change workflow and eliminate unproductive steps. “The project has shown successes in other parts of the state and will have a positive impact on the work being done in Weslaco,” McCraw wrote. In the meantime, the issue of delays in DNA testing is ever present at the Hidalgo County Courthouse as murder suspects continue to sit in jail, waiting on lab results so they can have their day in court."

The entire story can be read at:
https://www.themonitor.com/2019/10/13/info-requests-reveal-dps-crime-lab-backlog-exceeds-2500-cases/

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; 

Rodney Reed: Death Row. Texas. State Senator Kirk Watson has joined the growing effort to stop Rodney Reed’s execution set for November 20, KVUE (Reporter Shawna M. Reding) reports..."In Watson's letter to the governor, he wrote in part, "We will not serve justice or increase the public's faith in our legal institutions by taking the irrevocable step of executing Reed when significant and credible evidence pointing to his innocence has not undergone a thorough, unbiased review." Watson, who said he rarely comments or intervenes in criminal cases, said this murder, which happened in his district, "is unique because of the grave doubt and racial bias that continue to taint Reed's conviction." (Link to full letter provided);

STORY: "Sen. Kirk Watson joins growing effort to stop Rodney Reed’s execution," by reporter Shawna M. Reding, published by KVUE on October 24, 2019.

SUB-HEADING: "He wrote a letter to the governor, asking for a stay of execution."

GIST: "A state senator is joining the growing effort to try and stop the execution of a Bastrop, Texas, man. Austin Democrat Kirk Watson sent a letter to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Oct. 23, asking for a stay of execution for Rodney Reed. Reed is set to be executed on Nov. 20 for the 1996 murder of Stacey Stites. His supporters have been pushing for delays under the belief that DNA evidence that was never tested could exonerate him. In Watson's letter to the governor, he wrote in part, "We will not serve justice or increase the public's faith in our legal institutions by taking the irrevocable step of executing Reed when significant and credible evidence pointing to his innocence has not undergone a thorough, unbiased review." Watson, who said he rarely comments or intervenes in criminal cases, said this murder, which happened in his district, "is unique because of the grave doubt and racial bias that continue to taint Reed's conviction." Read the full letter Watson penned to Abbott. Earlier this week, attorneys for Reed sent a new letter to the governor to ask for a delay. Doctor Phil featured his case on two episodes earlier this month, casting doubt on his conviction. Reality star Kim Kardashian West tweeted at Gov. Abbott on Saturday, asking him to "do the right thing." "How can you execute a man when since his trial, substantial evidence that would exonerate Rodney Reed has come forward and even implicates the other person of interest," she tweeted."

The entire story can be read at:
https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/rodney-reed-bastrop-texas-death-row-reprieve-senator-kirk-watson/269-84dd8430-11c4-4f1d-af26-929769ba4f92

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;

Flawed forensic science: Andrew L. Urban, a very astute commentator on Australia's criminal justice puts forensic science in his country (and elsewhere) under a microscope - and concludes, as he makes patently clear, that it 'looks sick.'..."Within a single week in October this year (2019), the quality of forensic evidence tendered in criminal trials across Australia came under the microscope of public attention – and was found to be infected with the disease of unreliability."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Just a month earlier, on September 10, 2019, we published extracts from a peer reviewed paper by Chris Brook in the Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, which examines the case of Joby Rowe and finds a man was put in jail based on junk science, not scientific evidence. Brook asks: “Should forensic ‘science’ be required to actually have a scientific basis? Should scientific ‘reliability’ be explicitly required within the Australian legal system? Or should it simply follow a model of appealing to authority, allowing well qualified forensic experts to provide opinions that lack sufficient evidentiary basis?”

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

POST: "Forensic evidence under the microscope – looks sick," by Andrew L. Urban, published on his Blog, The Wrongful Convictions Report, on October 18, 2019. The Wrongful Convictions Report is devoted to exploring and exposing miscarriages of justice."

GIST: "Within a single week in October this year (2019), the quality of forensic evidence tendered in criminal trials across Australia came under the microscope of public attention – and was found to be infected with the disease of unreliability.  On October 10, Liam Mannix of The Age reported that Victoria’s Attorney General, Jill Hennesy, is calling for “an immediate national review of forensic evidence over fear flawed police forensics may be putting innocent people in jail.” The subject will be on the agenda at the national Council of Attorneys-General meeting in November. The call for an inquiry comes after The Age revealed senior legal figures including Chris Maxwell, president of the Victorian Court of Appeal, had lost confidence in the accuracy of forensic science. The review should consider the accuracy of forensic evidence and the laws that govern how it is presented in court, she said. “I’ve also called for the establishment of a working group to consider these important issues – because we need a national approach to ensure science and technology to prove guilt or innocence is used reliably and fairly,” Hennessy said in a statement. Hennessy’s call for a review was backed by Victoria Police and the Criminal Bar Association. “We continue to be concerned about forensic evidence in court. The risk of miscarriages of justice is always present when the science is doubtful,” said Daniel Gurvich, QC, chair of the bar association. A couple of weeks earlier, Justice Maxwell said that there was little proof that forensic techniques including gunshot analysis, footprint analysis, hair comparison and bite mark comparison could reliably identify criminals. He called on governments around Australia to urgently change the law, so that judges had to consider the reliability of forensic evidence before it was shown to juries. Daniel Gurvich, QC, chair of the Criminal Bar Association of Victoria, said the Victorian government should now establish an inquiry into the accuracy of forensic science, calling it “a matter of great concern in the administration of justice”. “We do agree with the president’s fears that unreliable forensic evidence is being admitted into evidence in trials,” he said. “We think unreliable forensic evidence should not get to the jury in the first place. And the danger of juries being misled, or deferring to an expert opinion, is significant.“We consider that urgent legislative change is required.” Two critical American reports, published in 2009 and 2016, led to major changes to the US and British legal systems. Not so in Australia. “When I learnt about those reports … I was shocked,” Justice Maxwell said. “With the exception of DNA, no other area of forensic science has been shown to be able reliably to connect a particular sample with a particular crime scene or perpetrator. “I was asking myself, ‘Why are we not having appeals based on questions of admissibility of forensic evidence?’” Indeed; Justice Maxwell would no doubt be shocked by the Tasmanian example of the Sue Neill-Fraser case, in which forensic evidence was presented to the jury despite being inadmissible (a further appeal against her conviction is pending):

Testimony of forensic scientist – inadmissible:
Luminol test results (described at trial as a ‘preliminary screening test’) should never be admitted in evidence in criminal trials without confirmatory follow-up tests which identify the substance involved. That did not happen here. There were actually confirmatory tests done in relation to the dinghy by way of ouchterlony tests but these were all negative. This error was partly the cause of the overturning of the wrongful convictions in the cases of the IRA bombers in the UK and of Lindy Chamberlain in Australia. At various times the witness said that it was possible for her to distinguish between a positive response (to human blood) and a false positive response (to other substances) by the quality of the glow or sparkle, and the duration of the glow. At other times she said that she could make such discriminations on the basis of her “experience”. These were the type of explanations which have been rejected in numerous previous cases. They do not accord with basic principles of scientific method. If they were reliable, then there would be “glow” and “sparkle” charts so that others could learn the technique and it would be published in scientific journals. And of course it would convert a ‘preliminary screening test’ into a ‘confirmatory test’.

Testimony of forensic pathologist – inadmissible:
This expert was asked to provide an expert opinion to the jury as to whether an older person, perhaps a bit frail, could be killed by a blow to the head with a wrench. This evidence was inadmissible for two reasons:

1. An expert can only give expert opinion evidence where the jury requires such knowledge to help them interpret the evidence which they have heard. An expert is not allowed to give such an opinion where the jury would already know such things from their own experience. For example, an expert is not allowed to give an expert opinion about what happens to a person after having consumed some alcohol – the jurors would know that it makes you drunk and they do not need an expert to tell them that. Clearly jurors would know that a single punch to the head can kill so that it follows that a single blow to the head with a heavy metal wrench could also kill.
2. An expert is only allowed to give an opinion where it assists the jury to interpret evidence which has been or will be led in evidence. There must be a factual basis in the evidence which relates to the opinion which is being given. In this case, there was none. There was no evidence of any body with injuries and no evidence that anyone had been hit with a wrench. Therefore, the opinion amounted to “speculation” which recent Court of Appeal judgments have stated to be clearly inadmissible.

***

On October 14, the ACT Supreme Court awarded David Eastman over $7 million in compensation after Eastman had spent almost 19 years behind bars for the 1989 shooting of federal police assistant commissioner Colin Winchester — the highest ranking police officer ever to be assassinated in Australia. The 74-year-old was found not guilty at a retrial in November 2018 after an inquiry recommended his conviction be quashed due to flaws in the evidence. Police and prosecutors had relied on forensic expert, Robert Barnes, whose evidence turned out to be wrong. The Court, as part of its compensation judgement, stated that his evidence so undermined the trial “that no conviction could possibly be based upon it.” (This was based on the report of the second inquiry into this case conducted by Brian Martin, a former chief justice of the Northern Territory.) The total cost to the ACT taxpayer of the Eastman case is estimated to be around $20 million. Wrongful convictions are expensive.

***

On October 16, Dr Jason Chin of Sydney University Law School gave a presentation at Sydney’s Sussex Hotel on the desirability of using open science to improve the quality of forensic evidence put before courts, titled Can we put an end to wrongful convictions?
Brief extracts:
* There is well-established imbalance in the state’s ability to develop a forensic scientific case against an accused and the accused’s ability to assess that case and amass his or her own evidence. This inequity is heightened when the foundational science behind the state’s case was conducted opaquely and published in paywalled journals (and then applied in crime labs, which have been described as ‘organizational black boxes’). Similarly, commentators have studied access to justice in terms of legal assistance and access to databases of legal decisions. However, the factual basis of access to justice has largely been neglected. This is unfortunate because if the science behind a case was transparently reported and more affordable to assess, impecunious parties may stand a better chance at mounting a defence.
* Forensic scientists have historically been associated with the police and prosecution, making it difficult for the criminally accused to find an independent expert, let alone pay for one.
* Perhaps not surprisingly, the widespread admission of untested, invalid, or misleading forensic evidence has contributed to several wrongful convictions. Many of these convictions came to light due to the rise of DNA analysis, one of the few forensic sciences to emerge from the mainstream sciences and withstand thorough validation testing.
* Acknowledgement of these wrongful convictions inspired a great deal of research, but none was as momentous as a 2009 report drafted by a National Research Council committee of the National Academy of Sciences (the ‘NAS Report’). The report, confirming longstanding worries, catalogued a host of problems:
0: deficient training and education among forensic scientists;
0: lack of peer-reviewed and published foundational research establishing the validity of forensic methods;
0: lack of protocols to minimize cognitive bias;
0: insufficient standards for reporting findings and giving testimony; and
0: scarce funding to support improvements to any of the foregoing.
* The direct impetus for many of the reforms going on in science was a crisis of confidence: opaquely conducted science was producing results that could not be reproduced.
A similar crisis of confidence may be engulfing forensic science. Attentive researchers have long noted the surprising frequency at which forensic science has committed factual mistakes. Media attention and subsequent popular knowledge seems to be catching up with this academic research. When law—a field inextricably tied to forensic science—has sought to improve confidence in its product, the answer has often been through open justice: opening courtrooms, permitting media scrutiny, and publishing decisions. It may be time that forensic science follows suit.

***

Just a month earlier, on September 10, 2019, we published extracts from a peer reviewed paper by Chris Brook in the Australian Journal of Forensic Sciences, which examines the case of Joby Rowe and finds a man was put in jail based on junk science, not scientific evidence. Brook asks: “Should forensic ‘science’ be required to actually have a scientific basis? Should scientific ‘reliability’ be explicitly required within the Australian legal system? Or should it simply follow a model of appealing to authority, allowing well qualified forensic experts to provide opinions that lack sufficient evidentiary basis?”

The entire story can be read at: 
https://wrongfulconvictionsreport.org/2019/10/18/forensic-evidence-under-the-microscope-looks-sick/
 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; 

LA Times Investigation: 'Essential California: When body parts donation complicates a death investigation. An interesting backgrounder on the important series by investigative reporter Melody Peterson. (Readers can access a limited number of free articles).

BACKGROUNDER:  "Essential California: When body parts donation complicates a death investigation," by Julia Wick  published by The L.A. Times on October 15, 2019. As noted in the Marshall Project: "After 18-year-old football player John Flath died unexpectedly during Army ROTC training, his family members hoped the coroner could tell them what happened. But because his heart had been removed before an autopsy could be done, the boy’s parents will never know. This is just one example from the Los Angeles Times’ investigative series this week, “Bodies of Evidence.” The stories give an in-depth look at the lucrative organ-harvesting industry, which has made billions taking skin, fat and bones from bodies in order to help with—among other things—cosmetic surgeries. The series, written by Melody Peterson, exposes how police cases have gone unsolved because companies harvest organs too soon before an autopsy, and she explains that even in cases where people aren’t registered donors, body parts still get removed. This all happens under state laws that have been written to benefit harvesting groups. —Joseph Darius Jaafari
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm#search/%22marshall+project%22/FMfcgxwDrldhbJQfdsFqbpDlDldpBNnK

GIST: "Companies that harvest human organs, bones and other parts have worked their way into government morgues across the country to gain access to more bodies. In some cases, procurement teams are taking body parts before coroners are able to conduct an autopsy, even in the midst of sensitive investigations such as possible homicides. The procurement companies say there has never been a case in which a death investigation has been harmed by the procurement of body parts.

But my colleague investigative reporter Melody Petersen published a blockbuster investigation that shows how companies that harvest body parts upend death investigations. Her investigation found more than two dozen cases where investigations were complicated or upended by procurement in just two Southern California morgues.

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

[Read Part 1 of the investigation: “In the rush to harvest body parts, death investigations have been upended” in the Los Angeles Times]

[Read Part 2 of the investigation: “How organ and tissue donation companies worked their way into the county morgue” in the Los Angeles Times]

I spoke to Melody about what’s happening here, and how this broken system came to be. Here’s what she told me.

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

When most people check that little box that says “donor,” it never occurs to them that that decision might someday mean that it’s more complicated for a coroner to investigate their cause of death because of how their body is harvested. What’s going on here?

Well, that’s not disclosed at all to you or your family. There’s a lot of money to be made in body parts like skin and bone and [these companies] wanted access to more bodies. So, they got laws passed across the country that said the coroner had to cooperate with them to maximize the number of donated body parts. That was about a decade ago that those laws passed. This all happened with almost no public debate and very little public notice.

What are the larger political forces at play? How were they able to get those laws passed?

The companies are very powerful lobbyists because they say their mission is to increase the number of organs available for people on the transplant waiting list, which is thousands of Americans. So state legislators were motivated to pass these laws, thinking it would help those people on the waiting list.

In reality, the number of donated organs has gone up a little bit, but it was the amount of bone, skin and tissue donated that went up much more.

I was really shocked by the role these body parts are playing in the industrial biotech market, where as you note, a half-teaspoon of ground-up human skin can be priced at hundreds of dollars. Does anyone who consents to being an organ donor consent to have their body parts potentially sold for profit? How is that legal?

Yes. When you sign up to be a donor, you might be signing up not just to give your organs but all your parts.

But in California, we do have options. The sign-up form has a section where you can choose which parts you want to give. If you only want to donate organs you can do that. You have to check off which parts you don’t want to give, otherwise you’re giving everything.

This process has been detrimental to some coroner’s offices. Your story found dozens of death investigations that were complicated or upended. Why are coroners consenting to this? Do they have a choice?

Here in California, the law made it very hard for them to say no. In some other states, the coroners are saying they don’t have a choice — they have to allow it.

Many death investigations are extraordinarily complex to begin with, and the donation of parts can make it even harder to determine the cause of death.

[See also: “Worried about how your body parts will be used? Here’s what you can do” in the Los Angeles Times]

The entire  backgrounder can be found  at:
 https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?tab=wm#section_query/in%3Ainbox/FMfcgxwDrlWwJXBNcWMRcnxPHwFVtcXs

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;