PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Alan has always maintained his innocence, but it took almost 20 years for the science and the law to catch up to the truth. As Judge Brown set forth in his November 14 ruling, the understanding of injury and death attributed to Shaken Baby Syndrome has changed radically since Alan’s 2003 conviction. Alan is represented by OIP (Ohio Innocence Project) staff attorney Donald Caster, myself, and Jim Owen, Alan’s longtime attorney, who has steadfastly helped Alan tell his story of innocence. At least 26 cases of wrongful conviction around the country have been tied to what was once called “Shaken Baby Syndrome” and is now often termed “Abusive Head Trauma.” Since the 1970s, infants and young children who died with certain types of bleeding within the head and little or no evidence of external injury were thought to have been shaken violently. Doctors also previously believed that a child who was shaken in this way would collapse immediately, making the identification of the perpetrator simple: it was always the last person with the child. Now, much more is known about the wide variety of conditions that can lead to the findings once thought to be entirely indicative of violent shaking. Doctors now know that this bleeding can be caused by genetic conditions, infections, other diseases, accidents, strokes, bleeding disorders, and more."
RELEASE: "Freedom for Alan Butts!," by Katherine Judson (Centre for Integrity in Forensic Science), published on December 9, 2022.
The Ohio Innocence Project, the Center for Integrity in Forensic Sciences, and Attorney Jim Owen are pleased to announce that Franklin County Court of Common Pleas Judge Jeffrey M. Brown has overturned our client Alan J. Butts’ wrongful conviction. He was released late last night after nearly 20 years in prison.
Alan was convicted in 2003 in the death of the 2-year-old son of his girlfriend, a death authorities and medical experts at the time attributed to violent shaking.
Because Alan was the last person with the child before his collapse, he was accused of attacking him.
Alan has always maintained his innocence, but it took almost 20 years for the science and the law to catch up to the truth. As Judge Brown set forth in his November 14 ruling, the understanding of injury and death attributed to Shaken Baby Syndrome has changed radically since Alan’s 2003 conviction.
Alan is represented by OIP staff attorney Donald Caster, myself, and Jim Owen, Alan’s longtime attorney, who has steadfastly helped Alan tell his story of innocence.
At least 26 cases of wrongful conviction around the country have been tied to what was once called “Shaken Baby Syndrome” and is now often termed “Abusive Head Trauma.”
Since the 1970s, infants and young children who died with certain types of bleeding within the head and little or no evidence of external injury were thought to have been shaken violently.
Doctors also previously believed that a child who was shaken in this way would collapse immediately, making the identification of the perpetrator simple: it was always the last person with the child.
Now, much more is known about the wide variety of conditions that can lead to the findings once thought to be entirely indicative of violent shaking.
Doctors now know that this bleeding can be caused by genetic conditions, infections, other diseases, accidents, strokes, bleeding disorders, and more.
Judge Brown heard six days of testimony in May on Alan’s motion for a new trial, including expert opinions from practitioners in pediatric radiology, pathology and neuropathology, who all affirmed that the standards for making a diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome have changed significantly since the time of Alan’s conviction in 2003.
They also shared medical facts that were overlooked in 2003 but are now known to cause the same findings that can be mistaken for Shaken Baby Syndrome.
Their testimony helped elucidate the complex factors that led to the child’s death, including infection, pneumonia, a bleeding disorder, septic shock, and metabolic abnormalities.
In his opinion, Judge Brown concluded, “This shift in understanding by the medical community raises a strong probability of a different result on retrial.”
While this is an important step in the right direction, and, of course, life-changing for Alan and his family, far too many people remain behind bars because of this flawed and outdated hypothesis.""
The entire release can be read at:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzGrbRZxcCmxXSLWtCctNgfsKpMS
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;
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;
-----------------------------------------------------------
