Paul Means: Serial Jailhouse Informant: Florida: Question of the day: Asked by Tampa Bay Times Reporter Dan Sullivan, in a story headed: "Jail informant's word helps put people away. But can he be trusted?" ... "People like him are a seldom-noticed, but common component in the workings of the criminal justice system. For prosecutors, they can help bolster otherwise imperfect evidence. Where juries might waver, a jailhouse informant can remove doubt by delivering incriminating details ostensibly uttered from a defendant’s mouth. It is commonly believed that this can put the informant in a prosecutor’s good graces, and result in lesser penalties or other benefits. The trouble, say academics and advocates for the accused, is that jailhouse informants have a strong incentive to lie. Studies have shown they are often unreliable, contribute to wrongful convictions, and juries are not always able to detect when they’re being untruthful."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: What do police informants have to do with forensic science? (I'm glad you asked). Investigative  Reporter Pamela Colloff give us  a clue when she writes - at the link below -  "I’ve wanted to write about jailhouse informants for a long time because they often appear in troubled cases in which the other evidence is weak." That's my experience as  will as a criminal lawyer and an observer of criminal justice. Given the reality that jurors - thanks to the CSI effect - are becoming more and more insistent on the need for there to be forensic evidence, it is becoming more and more common for police to rely on shady tactics such as use of police snitches, staging lineups, coercing, inducing, or creating false confessions out of thin air, procuring false eyewitness testimony or concealing exculpatory evidence.  

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;

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

STORY: "Jail informant's  word helps put people away. But can he be trusted?" by  Reporter Dan Sullivan. Published by The Tampa Bay Times.

SUB-HEADING:  "His cooperation helped him avoid prison once. Hee's no accused of causing a man's death."

PHOTO CAPTION: "Paul Means has testified in numerous Hillsborough cases, including murders, and his efforts have won him lighter sentences -- including one that left him out of jail on the night he is accused of killing a man in a crash.

GIST:  (This is a small excerpt from a lengthy story which deserves to be read - subject to paywalls - in its entirety.  I have noted below as 'passages of the day" references to three cases of particular interest to this Blog."HL);  "Means is what’s known in criminal justice parlance as a jailhouse informant, or, pejoratively, jailhouse snitch. Now 50, he has been arrested close to 40 times, state records show. For at least the last decade, he has touted an ability to extract incriminating statements from those with whom he has been incarcerated. Armed with details about murders, attempted murders, robberies and other crimes, he writes letters to prosecutors, offers to cooperate and sometimes seeks help for his own troubles. People like him are a seldom-noticed, but common component in the workings of the criminal justice system. For prosecutors, they can help bolster otherwise imperfect evidence. Where juries might waver, a jailhouse informant can remove doubt by delivering incriminating details ostensibly uttered from a defendant’s mouth. It is commonly believed that this can put the informant in a prosecutor’s good graces, and result in lesser penalties or other benefits. The trouble, say academics and advocates for the accused, is that jailhouse informants have a strong incentive to lie. Studies have shown they are often unreliable, contribute to wrongful convictions, and juries are not always able to detect when they’re being untruthful. “They come into being after the crime, which means they can be generated by the allegations themselves,” said Alexandra Natapoff, a Harvard Law School professor and leading expert on criminal informants. “Jailhouse informant evidence makes other bad evidence look better.”:

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

PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY:  (James Dailey):  "Perhaps most prominent is the case of James Dailey, who was sentenced to death for the 1985 murder of a teen girl in Pinellas County. His conviction rested heavily on testimony from three jailhouse informants. One of them, Paul Skalnik, was a known conman and prolific informant who testified in dozens of cases in Florida, Texas and elsewhere."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: (Robert DuBoise; "In Tampa, the 1983 murder case of Robert DuBoise also featured jailhouse informant testimony, coupled with now-debunked bite mark evidence. DuBoise was exonerated and released in 2020 after Warren’s conviction review unit located old DNA samples, which showed someone else committed the crime. Warren asserted that the three trials in which his office used Means was “a small number.” He also said that jailhouse informants are seldom the only factor contributing to a wrongful conviction. Scott Greenfield, a New York criminal defense lawyer and author of the Simple Justice blog, said for prosecutors to use the same jailhouse informant in three separate trials was “shocking.” “They know how bad these guys are,” Greenfield said. “There’s no excuse where they choose to use them, and they can justify this being somehow beneficial toward whatever view of justice and morality they have.

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

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: (Charles Scoble) : "October 2012. The trial of Charles Scoble. He was accused of causing the 2007 death of his newborn son. It happened when he was left alone to care for the baby while the boy’s mother worked. There were no eyewitnesses to the death. The case hinged on medical testimony. A medical examiner determined the boy died from brain injuries, the result of being hit or shaken.  Other doctors backed up the claim. But defense experts said his injuries were not from shaking, and they were not what caused his death. Months before Scoble’s trial, Means sent two letters to the Hillsborough State Attorney’s Office.  In them, he wrote he’d been jailed with Scoble in the same dormitory-style housing unit.  He said they’d gotten to know each other after Means asked to borrow the book, Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus.  They’d confided their shared troubles with women and addictions. Means went on to describe how Scoble confessed to him that he’d killed his son, how he’d shaken and hit the boy because he was “blowing his high.” He’d drawn up a self-help questionnaire for Scoble to fill out — a ruse to get him to document the purported confession. He asked the state to contact his attorney. “I can help you with this case,” he wrote. “Looking to hear from you. Oh yes I’ve already (had) my statement notarized!” He took the witness stand that fall.  A handwriting expert opined that the questionnaire responses were consistent with samples of Scoble’s handwriting. Kimberly Hindman, who prosecuted the case and would later become Warren’s chief assistant, offered a blunt assessment in closing arguments: “He is an opportunist,” she said. “And if you ever have, or anybody ever has the unfortunate circumstances of being in jail, if Paul Means comes to you, you’d better run in the other direction.” Doug Snodgrass, who served as a juror, said the physical evidence and testimony from a medical examiner and a pediatrician were the main things that convinced him of Scoble’s guilt. Means was less of a factor. “My personal opinion is his testimony kind of took a back seat,” Snodgrass said. “It was nice to have somebody to go, ‘OK, he actually did it.’ He was kind of the icing on the cake.” Scoble, who is serving a life sentence, continues to appeal his conviction. His appellate attorney, Wade Whidden, has challenged various aspects of Means’ testimony. “I believe him to be a liar,” Whidden said. In a court paper, Whidden noted that Means was facing a possible 10-year prison sentence before he testified. Sentencing guidelines pegged his  lowest permissible prison sentence at 18 months, but gave the option for drug treatment instead. One of Whidden’s appeals includes a link to an audio file of Means’ July 2012 sentencing hearing. In the recording, a prosecutor can be heard whispering to a judge that Means had agreed to testify in a case.  Means’ lawyer said he would testify in the trial of a person charged with killing a baby and that the information he provided was crucial. He’s just got a drug problem,” she told the judge. Means was sentenced to a year in jail, with an early release possible once he completed an in-jail drug treatment program. He got out four months later."

The entire story can be read at:

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#all/FMfcgzGpFqVJjBjkXJBRsDnTLPKZJjfh

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;

---

SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:

https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985

---

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;