STORY" West Memphis Three plan to appeal court denial of DNA testing," by Reporter Ashley Godwin, published by THV11, on July 7, 2022;
SUB-HEADING: Damien Echols tweeted that under the law for a process called habeas corpus, he is within his rights to file for further DNA testing."
GIST: The West Memphis Three have been fighting back after a judge denied their petition to test new DNA evidence just over two weeks ago.
Damien Echols tweeted that under the law for a process called 'Habeas Corpus' he is within his rights to file for further DNA testing of evidence from the case.
He has once again been in the national spotlight with countless people from around the country that have offered their help.
"Doesn't anyone want to be a hero here? The state can test the evidence whenever they want and they're just not doing it," said Gillian Pensavalle, Echols' friend and the creator of the True Crime Obsessed podcast.
On June 23, the West Memphis Three were in court to petition for newly discovered evidence to be tested for DNA.
Judge Tonya Alexander denied the petition, because she said that a Habeas Corpus petition cannot be filed unless you're being held under the state's custody-- which Echols is not.
But people have said that ruling was incorrect and that under Arkansas law Echols did have the right to file this case.
"Damien's DNA petition should have been granted," said Bob Ruff, creator of Truth and Justice podcast.
Ruff mentioned that one of his listeners researched the law and discovered an additional clause. It said that a convict is able to file a Habeas petition if they allege "actual innocence".
This is from the Arkansas Habeas statute.
There are 3 circumstances that allow for habeas relief. The first two require you to be in custody.
But the 3rd says OR if you’re claiming actual innocence, with no requirement to be in custody.
Test the evidence.
"The fact that he's not in prison should not have been a requirement for Habeas according to Arkansas law," said Ruff.
When we reached out Lonnie Soury, a member of Echols' defense team on the phone, he mentioned that they are in the process of appealing the judge's decision.
"We certainly believe we have every right legally, morally and ethically to have the right to test the DNA," said Soury.
We also reached out to the prosecuting attorney, but have not heard back."
The entire story can be reads at:
91-cd6da799-bbd7-4e03-8a23-644a98c09180
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;
