SUB-HEADING: 'Watkins calls order by federal panel a ‘delaying tactic’
GIST: "A three-judge panel of the U.S. Sixth District Court of Appeals has ordered a public defender’s bid to reopen convicted murderer Danny Lee Hill’s new claim regarding bite-mark evidence to be argued before a U.S. Ohio Northern District Court judge.
Trumbull County Prosecutor Dennis Watkins claimed the Aug. 30 order allows the federal public defender to “make a new claim of an old claim.”
The order was signed by Circuit Judges Karen Nelson Moore, Eric L. Clay and Jane Branstetter Stranch.
Moore and Clay were part of a three-judge panel that supported Hill’s claims about being intellectually disabled and thus not eligible for the death penalty.
That decision was vacated in 2021 by the opinion of the full Sixth District court — and the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year refused to take up an appeal.
At issue is the defense lawyers’ attempts to overturn the death penalty sentence given to Hill in 1986 by a three-judge panel in Trumbull County.
Hill is one of two people convicted of the torture, rape and brutal murder of 12-year-old Raymond Fife in a wooded area on the southwest side of Warren in September 1985.
Watkins said the latest claim is just a “delaying tactic” on the part of both the federal public defenders and the three judges.
The case has been assigned to U.S. Judge John Adams out of Akron.
FRUSTRATED
Fife’s mother, Miriam Fife, 81, of Cortland, said she is befuddled and frustrated by the latest court ruling.
“I don’t know why they (federal public defenders) are allowed to go so far and do such ridiculous, frivolous things,” Fife said. “I thought we were done with the bite-mark thing. The courts had ruled there was nothing to that. I think they are just buying more time. Anything to delay.”
The prosecutor agreed with her.
“This so-called new bite mark evidence argument was fully litigated in the Ohio court system and determined to have no merit,” Watkins stated in a news release.
Watkins compared the tactic to Hill’s mental retardation / intellectual disability claim, which was found unsubstantiated but still is being contested by federal public defenders in a local court. “In our view, this is another meritless attempt to re-litigate — in the federal system — the same argument at the public’s expense.”
Part of the prosecution’s case in the 1986 trial was testimony from a forensic odontologist who said in his professional opinion that Hill left bite marks on Fife’s genitals.
In November 2014, Hill’s lawyers moved the state court to hold hearings upon new evidence that the bite-mark identification used at the original trial was invalid.
During hearings before a visiting judge in Trumbull County, a forensic odontologist concluded Fife’s injury was not a human bite mark.
When making her decision after the proceedings, visiting Judge Patricia Cosgrove concluded the bite-mark evidence was only one of many factors in determining whether Hill was a principal offender of Fife’s rape. Cosgrove said even if the bite-mark evidence was thrown out, the outcome of the trial would have been the same.
In a second claim on this evidence filed in June 2020, Hill’s defense lawyers alleged the state courts violated Hill’s 14th Amendment right to due process, and the three-judge panel agreed.
To counter, the Ohio Solicitor General’s Office is taking over handling of this appeal, and Benjamin Flowers has asked for a 14-day extension to file a petition for a rehearing of the matter before the entire Sixth District Appeals Court.
Watkins stated he appreciates the time, effort and personal communication with the Fife family that Flowers and the “good staff of lawyers in the attorney general’s capital crimes section” have spent on this case.
Watkins in thinking about Miriam Fife, his former employee in the prosecutor’s victim / witness advocacy office, said these legal maneuvers to delay Hill’s execution denies “the Fife family along with the citizens of Ohio their constitutional right to finality and justice.
“This case has been litigated ad nauseum — 37 years and counting. Enough is enough,” Watkins wrote."
The entire story can be read at:
https://www.tribtoday.com/news/local-news/2022/09/danny-lee-hill-bite-mark-claim-sent-to-us-judge/
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resurce. 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;
