Rosa Jimenez: Texas: Injustice Watch (Co-Director Rick Tulsky) reports the amazing story of a women (an undocumented immigrant) sentenced to 99 years in prison on the basis of 'expert' evidence that she murdered a toddler she was babysitting for by supposedly stuffing towels down the boys throat - and the judge who has opened the door for her release amid evidence of her innocence (much to the dismay of prosecutors who are trying to block it). Read on for a memorable "quote of the day" - and some very welcome 'breaking news' from Injustice Watch. HL.

QUOTE ONE  OF THE DAY: "The defense relied on an expert, Dr. Ira Kanfer, who was a forensic pathologist but neither an expert in pediatrics or choking. After prosecutors grilled Kanfer about his credentials, according to the court record, he testified that he had said during a break that the prosecutors “could go fuck themselves.”

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

QUOTE TWO OF THE DAY: "It wasn’t like the state made it out to be,” said Anna Vasquez, director of outreach for the Innocence Project of Texas, who was in the courtroom Tuesday. “You can make any kind of accusation, unless there are the right experts to dispute it,” she said. Vasquez and three other women were exonerated more than a decade after they themselves were  convicted of child assault. She now works on behalf of other defendants who she believes are wrongly convicted, particularly women. Vasquez said that women face a particular onus when accused of harming a child, because the act disrupts expectations in our society that women possess a maternal instinct. “It’s very hard to fight, when a woman is accused of harming a child,” she said.  “For society, nothing can be worse than harming a child.”

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

PASSAGE ONE  OF THE DAY:  "The case hinged on prosecution expert testimony that a toddler could not have stuffed the paper down his own throat, and therefore Jimenez was guilty. The defense relied on an expert, Dr. Ira Kanfer, who was a forensic pathologist but neither an expert in pediatrics or choking. After prosecutors grilled Kanfer about his credentials, according to the court record, he testified that he had said during a break that the prosecutors “could go fuck themselves.” In a series of post-conviction proceedings, new defense experts provided evidence that contradicted the prosecution’s argument that Bryan could not have shoved the towels down his own throat."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The president of Mexico cited the Jimenez case in 2012 as an example of how Mexican nationals could not be fairly tried in the United States, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant her a new trial. Before magistrate Austin stepped in, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals had refused to overturn the verdict. Austin, in his later opinion, wrote that the ruling was “based on several factual determinations that were plainly unreasonable in light of the record before the state court.”  Austin characterized Jimenez’s court saga as the “rare case in which justice and fundamental fairness require granting the petitioner a writ of habeas corpus.” “The judge who presided over the trial has explicitly stated that he had ‘serious doubts’ about the verdict and that ‘there is a substantial likelihood that [Jimenez] was not guilty,’” Austin wrote. “He also stated that his confidence in the verdict was further undermined when he became aware of the expert testimony at the state court habeas proceedings.” His opinion also noted that a former appeals and state district judge, who presided over the state habeas evidentiary hearing, concluded that Jimenez didn’t get a fair trial, and suggested that the jury would have likely reached a different verdict if the experts from the habeas hearings had testified at the trial."

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

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Jimenez has not been able to see her own teenage children, the youngest of whom was born after she was incarcerated, in recent years. The mother also suffers from kidney disease that likely will require dialysis or a transplant, her attorneys said. Nevertheless the state attorney general, along with local prosecutors, appeared in court Tuesday to oppose granting relief to Jimenez. They contend she should remain in custody while they appeal Austin’s grant of Jimenez’s petition to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals."

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

STORY:  "Amid doubts of Texas woman’s guilt, federal jurist ponders releasing her after 17 years, by Rick Tulsky, published by Injustice Watch on January 14, 2020.  Injustice Watch: Rick Tulsky (co-director of Injustice Watch) developed a sense of the power of exposing social wrongs as a young reporter at the Jackson, Ms., Clarion Ledger; and has retained his dedication to that work at The Philadelphia Inquirer, the Los Angeles Times, the San Jose Mercury News and the Center for Investigative Reporting. His work has received more than two dozen national awards including a Pulitzer Prize, and has been a nominated finalist in two other years.)

SUB-HEADING: "A federal magistrate has rejected Texas prosecutors’ effort to delay the release of Rosa Estela Olvera Jimenez, until an appellate court can consider the state’s appeal of the magistrate’s order granting a new trial.  The ruling opens the door to her release from prison after she served 14 years, convicted of a murder, amid evidence of her innocence."


GIST: "Rosa Estela Olvera Jimenez has long insisted that she didn’t kill a toddler she was babysitting in 2003, who suffered fatal injuries from paper towels that prosecutors accused her of stuffing down the boy’s throat. Nevertheless, a jury convicted Jimenez, an undocumented immigrant living in Austin, Tx., and sentenced her to 99 years in prison. But now, after 17 years in prison, Jimenez appears likely to be released. At a Tuesday hearing, a federal magistrate judge in Austin said that he would rule shortly on a motion to release Jimenez on bail against the objections of prosecutors who are appealing the grant of her petition. The magistrate judge, Andrew W. Austin, had previously concluded in an opinion last fall that “justice and fundamental fairness” compelled him to enter an order overturning the verdict against Jimenez, requiring the state to either release her or retry her by Feb. 25. There were no witnesses to help explain how five paper towels got in the throat of her alleged victim, 21-month-old Bryan Gutierrez, according to the court record. Jimenez had been watching Bryan after his mother dropped him off at Jimenez’s house on Jan. 30, 2003, and contended that as soon as she saw the child turning blue, she took him to a neighbor, where they tried to revive him and called 911. Bryan died from his injuries several weeks later. The case hinged on prosecution expert testimony that a toddler could not have stuffed the paper down his own throat, and therefore Jimenez was guilty. The defense relied on an expert, Dr. Ira Kanfer, who was a forensic pathologist but neither an expert in pediatrics or choking. After prosecutors grilled Kanfer about his credentials, according to the court record, he testified that he had said during a break that the prosecutors “could go fuck themselves.” In a series of post-conviction proceedings, new defense experts provided evidence that contradicted the prosecution’s argument that Bryan could not have shoved the towels down his own throat. “It wasn’t like the state made it out to be,” said Anna Vasquez, director of outreach for the Innocence Project of Texas, who was in the courtroom Tuesday. “You can make any kind of accusation, unless there are the right experts to dispute it,” she said. Vasquez and three other women were exonerated more than a decade after they themselves were  convicted of child assault. She now works on behalf of other defendants who she believes are wrongly convicted, particularly women. Vasquez said that women face a particular onus when accused of harming a child, because the act disrupts expectations in our society that women possess a maternal instinct. “It’s very hard to fight, when a woman is accused of harming a child,” she said.  “For society, nothing can be worse than harming a child.” The president of Mexico cited the Jimenez case in 2012 as an example of how Mexican nationals could not be fairly tried in the United States, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant her a new trial. Before magistrate Austin stepped in, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals had refused to overturn the verdict. Austin, in his later opinion, wrote that the ruling was “based on several factual determinations that were plainly unreasonable in light of the record before the state court.”  Austin characterized Jimenez’s court saga as the “rare case in which justice and fundamental fairness require granting the petitioner a writ of habeas corpus.” “The judge who presided over the trial has explicitly stated that he had ‘serious doubts’ about the verdict and that ‘there is a substantial likelihood that [Jimenez] was not guilty,’” Austin wrote. “He also stated that his confidence in the verdict was further undermined when he became aware of the expert testimony at the state court habeas proceedings.” His opinion also noted that a former appeals and state district judge, who presided over the state habeas evidentiary hearing, concluded that Jimenez didn’t get a fair trial, and suggested that the jury would have likely reached a different verdict if the experts from the habeas hearings had testified at the trial. In seeking her release from custody while prosecutors appeal Austin’s ruling, Jimenez’s attorneys noted what they called exceptional circumstances that warranted her release. Jimenez has not been able to see her own teenage children, the youngest of whom was born after she was incarcerated, in recent years. The mother also suffers from kidney disease that likely will require dialysis or a transplant, her attorneys said. Nevertheless the state attorney general, along with local prosecutors, appeared in court Tuesday to oppose granting relief to Jimenez. They contend she should remain in custody while they appeal Austin’s grant of Jimenez’s petition to the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals."



--------------------------------------------
Update 10 a.m. cst 1/15/20: A federal magistrate has rejected Texas prosecutors' effort to delay the release of Rosa Estela Olvera Jimenez, until an appellate court can consider the state's appeal of the magistrate's order granting a new trial.  The ruling opens the door to her release from prison after she served 14 years, convicted of a murder, amid evidence of her innocence.
----------------------------------------------

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;


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


FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."


Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
 https://www.providencejournal.com/news/20191210/da-drops-murder-charge-against-taunton-man-who-served-35-years-for-1979-slaying


-------------------------------------------------------------------
The entire story can be read at:
https://www.injusticewatch.org/news/2020/amid-doubts-of-texas-womans-guilt-federal-jurist-ponders-releasing-her-after-17-years/?utm_source=Injustice+Watch+Newsletter+Subscribers&utm_campaign=37242d9caa-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_01_24_10_12_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1a5f79d769-37242d9caa-356919369