PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The evidentiary hearing is now under way. It’s expected to last two weeks. My plan is to drop in on the hearing from time to time where there is particular grist for the Charles Smith Mill. But don't limit yourselves. There's a lot of very fascinating other 'stuff' - including blatant racism and police and prosecutorial misconduct - going on in the hearing room. KVUE Reporter Jenni Lee's is already providing chronological live daily updates at kvue.com.
Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From today's live KVUE up-date: (Start reading at bottom of entries).
12:28 p.m. – After a break, the State cross-examined Dr. Davis, asking if he could determine if Reed abducted, sexually assaulted or anally penetrated Stites based on autopsy photos alone. He said no. This is important because he never examined any evidence in person.
Dr. Davis testified that it is up to a jury to determine who commits a crime, not him. He said he agreed that the way Stites' body was found at the crime scene suggests she could have been sexually assaulted.
11:26 a.m. – Judge Langely tells defense they can't bootstrap their argument into an expert opinion. After a Q&A between the judge and defense, the defense moved forward with what they wanted to ask: Dr. Davis' opinion of 14 other forensic pathologists agreeing with Dr. Baker’s report.
11:06 a.m. – Dr. Davis testified that previous forensic testimony regarding intact sperm only lasting 26 hours is misleading. He said there is evidence that shows intact sperm can last a week.
Dr. Davis also testified that Stites did not suffer anal injuries. He believes Dr. Roberto Bayardo (former Travis County medical examiner) mistook natural anal anatomy for anal injuries. Dr. Andrew Baker, defense forensic pathologist, also offered similar testimony.
Judge Langley did not allow a “report” authored by two defense attorneys and not forensic experts as evidence. Judge Langley showed frustration with the defense because he says they’re trying to make their summary argument and this is not evidence.
10:35 a.m. – After a brief break, the defense called its second witness via Zoom: Dr. Gregory Davis, a forensic pathologist with more than 30 years of experience who has performed about 415 autopsies per year.
Dr. Davis said he’s concerned about Stacey Stites’ estimated time of death – which was noted as between 3 a.m. and 5 a.m. – because it is too narrow. He said Stites died before the two-hour window, but cannot give a time. This is important because the State contends Stites’ time of death is between 3 a.m. 5 a.m.
Debra Oliver, Stacey Stites’ sister, looked away as Dr. Davis and attorney talk about Stacey’s autopsy photos. Oliver said she has not been able to look at any of the graphic images."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Today's (Day 3) KVUE entire report can be read at:
-----------------------------------------------------
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:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they’ve exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
