PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am truly wondering if the timing of this extraordinary development is a coincidence. I have just learned, from an article in the New York Times, that today - which happens to be National DNA Day in the USA - the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a DNA related appeal in the Texas Rodney Reed murder case. Per The Times: "Mr. Reed was convicted of capital murder in the 1996 killing of a 19-year-old woman. He has challenged the constitutionality of a Texas DNA testing statute in an effort to prove his innocence..."The Supreme Court on Monday said it would hear an appeal by Rodney Reed, a Texas death row prisoner who has said that DNA testing of evidence would prove his innocence in the murder of a woman in 1996. Mr. Reed, who was convicted of capital murder in 1998 in the killing of Stacey Stites in Bastrop, Texas, has sought to challenge the constitutionality of a Texas DNA testing statute. His lawyers have pushed to test several pieces of evidence — including the murder weapon, Ms. Stites’s belt — for DNA evidence, a step they say will prove his innocence. The Supreme Court agreed to hear Mr. Reed’s appeal of a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which ruled in May that the statute of limitations on seeking DNA testing of evidence in his case had run out. The Supreme Court’s acceptance of the case is the latest turn in Mr. Reed’s life in prison. The highest criminal court in Texas stopped his execution in 2019 after his case attracted intense interest from lawmakers and celebrities, including Kim Kardashian and Rihanna, who called on the courts and Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas to spare his life." (The entire New York Times story by Jesus Jimenez can be read at the link below. I will continue to follow closely developments in this important case.)
Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog;
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "When we have to fight for DNA testing through litigation, it can add months and sometimes years to the process, while our clients languish in prison. Many District Attorneys have received federal grants to test evidence in old sexual assault cases and have used DNA evidence to pursue leads in unsolved “cold” cases. This April 25, we call on District Attorney’s offices throughout the region to extend their reliance on DNA testing to cases where people assert their innocence, including our current and future clients, and where there is evidence that could provide long-awaited answers. It is clear to all willing to look that wrongful convictions are not unicorns. In fact, they happen regularly. Where prosecutors are willing to examine old convictions, where they are willing to value justice over finality, we can truly find answers. That’s all we want. That’s what any of us should want. And, at minimum, that’s what we should expect from every District Attorney."
------------------------------------------------------------------
POST: New England Innocence Project; "DNA testing can give us answers; Every DA's office should want them." Published on National DNA Day; April 25, 2022.
GIST: "Today is National DNA Day, a day where we celebrate the power of DNA to help us find answers. DNA can help us get information about our ancestors or develop responses to medical conditions.
It can also uncover terrible miscarriages of justice: it can demonstrate that someone was wrongfully convicted and imprisoned for a crime they did not commit.
At the New England Innocence Project, wrongful convictions are far from theoretical. We receive hundreds of letters from innocent people in prison throughout New England each year asking for our help. In some of these cases, if physical evidence was collected and still exists, we can test it for DNA to show the person convicted was not the person who committed the crime.
To date, there have been 552 exonerations in which DNA testing played a role. So far, DNA evidence has been critical to proving the innocence of two of our own clients in Massachusetts, Dennis Maher and Gary Cifizzari.
Both Dennis and Gary were given life sentences.
The evidence against them appeared indisputably strong to the juries, judges, appellate courts, and prosecutors who presided over their cases.
In Dennis’s case, five eyewitnesses identified him. In Gary’s case, 3 bitemark experts claimed his mouth made the marks on the victim’s body. In both cases, this evidence was wrong, and the DNA evidence definitively proved what they had been saying all along: They were innocent.
Together, Dennis and Gary spent 54 years in prison for crimes they did not commit. And they are not alone. DNA testing has been shown to be a reliable and accurate way to find answers. So, why would any DA’s office deny or delay our requests to conduct this kind of scientific testing?
For the people we represent throughout New England, some of whom have been incarcerated in harsh conditions for 10, 20, or even 30 years, awaiting a chance to prove their innocence, the additional obstacles created by prosecutors simply to get DNA testing can be excruciating and are entirely unwarranted.
While there is no denying the accuracy of DNA testing, a request for testing, and even a result that affirms our client’s innocence, does not actually overturn a defendant’s conviction.
A court still has to review the evidence and decide how to proceed.
In some cases, prosecutors had originally sought scientific testing before conviction, but the technology was not advanced enough to get results. Incredibly, even in those cases, some prosecutors will still oppose post-conviction DNA testing.
That’s true even though payment for testing does not come out of a prosecutor’s budget.
The New England Innocence Project has paid for testing through donations we receive and through federal grants from the Department of Justice.
In one case, our incarcerated client even paid for part of the testing in his own case.
Finally, DNA testing is conducted by a private lab and the results are shared simultaneously with the prosecution and the defense.
In some Massachusetts counties – including Middlesex, Suffolk, and Hampden – we have been able to get agreements to testing very quickly, allowing us to get answers without extensive legal filings, hearings, and burdens placed on experts and witnesses.
When we have to fight for DNA testing through litigation, it can add months and sometimes years to the process, while our clients languish in prison.
Many District Attorneys have received federal grants to test evidence in old sexual assault cases and have used DNA evidence to pursue leads in unsolved “cold” cases.
This April 25, we call on District Attorney’s offices throughout the region to extend their reliance on DNA testing to cases where people assert their innocence, including our current and future clients, and where there is evidence that could provide long-awaited answers.
It is clear to all willing to look that wrongful convictions are not unicorns.
In fact, they happen regularly.
Where prosecutors are willing to examine old convictions, where they are willing to value justice over finality, we can truly find answers
. That’s all we want. That’s what any of us should want. And, at minimum, that’s what we should expect from every District Attorney."
The entire post 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;
