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 – and because of the growing body of scientific research showing how vulnerable suspects are to widely used interrogation methods such as the notorious ‘Reid Technique.’"
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "In the scene, an investigator confronts the original case detective regarding methods used to extract a false confession. “You squeezed statements out of them after 42 hours of questioning and coercing, without food, bathroom breaks, withholding parental supervision,” the character says. “The Reid Technique has been universally rejected. That’s truth to you?” The Reid interrogation firm sued Netflix and DuVernay, arguing that the scene was intended to harm the firm’s reputation, and that it is false to assert that the technique has been “universally rejected.” In its motion to dismiss, Netflix’s attorney argued that the claim is “hyperbolic, exaggerated speech,” which is protected by the First Amendment. The attorney Natalie J. Spears also argued that restricting commentary on matters of public concern would stifle free speech."
------------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Netflix Argues Lawsuit Aims to Chill Speech on Police Tactics," by Senior Media reporter Gene Maddaus, published by Variety.
GIST: "The technique makes a brief appearance in the fourth episode of “When They See Us,” Ava DuVernay’s mini-series about the conviction and exoneration of five young men in the Central Park jogger case. In the scene, an investigator confronts the original case detective regarding methods used to extract a false confession. “You squeezed statements out of them after 42 hours of questioning and coercing, without food, bathroom breaks, withholding parental supervision,” the character says. “The Reid Technique has been universally rejected. That’s truth to you?” The Reid interrogation firm sued Netflix and DuVernay, arguing that the scene was intended to harm the firm’s reputation, and that it is false to assert that the technique has been “universally rejected.” In its motion to dismiss, Netflix’s attorney argued that the claim is “hyperbolic, exaggerated speech,” which is protected by the First Amendment. The attorney Natalie J. Spears also argued that restricting commentary on matters of public concern would stifle free speech. “Such impermissible stifling of discourse is this lawsuit’s aim,” Spears wrote. “It is a shot across the bow intended to chill any speaker that invokes the Reid Technique in connection with the ongoing debate over police interrogation methods and false confessions.” Spears filed a separate motion on behalf of DuVernay, arguing that she should be dismissed from the case because she has no connection to Illinois, where the case was filed."
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;
