PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Croushore focused on one expert who ultimately testified on behalf of Mounts – but who initially had been hired by prosecutors. Dr. Andrea Wiens, a forensic pathologist, was asked by prosecutors to review Jayce’s death. Wiens ended up disagreeing with Dr. Dorothy Dean, the pathologist who conducted Jayce’s autopsy. Dean had found that Jayce died after sustaining a recent skull fracture. She said he had been struck by, or against, a fixed object. But Wiens said the skull fracture happened at least a few weeks before he died and that there was evidence it was healing. She said the cause and manner of death was undetermined. At trial, the defense called two other experts who essentially agreed with Wiens. Prosecutors called three experts who supported Dean’s findings."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "In documents filed in advance of Monday’s arguments, Croushore said Jayce had been “incredibly sickly” after being born prematurely, “with repeated episodes in which he stopped breathing.” There was no proof Mounts caused serious physical harm to Jayce, Croushore said."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Prosecutors highlight media coverage: Another issue raised during Monday’s oral arguments: Twice during the trial, prosecutors alerted jurors about the presence of a reporter from the Washington Post in the courtroom. Prosecutors raised it after one of the defense experts testified that he waived his fee because he believed Mounts shouldn’t have been charged. In closing arguments, prosecutors said the expert, a private consultant from Texas, likely would increase his business by having a national news outlet write about his testimony. “Oh my gosh. He gave up his fee. That’s how committed he is,” Assistant Prosecutor David Prem said during closing arguments. “You think he’s not getting a benefit from being here?” Croushore told the appeals court panel Monday it was unfair to allow prosecutors to bring that up. “It’s extraneous. It doesn’t relate to the evidence,” he said. “It’s addressing a person in the room who isn’t a witness … suggesting ulterior motives.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Sharonville man convicted in 2018 killing of his infant son seeks new trial," by Reporter Kevin Grasha, published by The Cincinnati Enquirer, on June 5, 2023.
GIST: "Joshua Mounts, who is serving 15 years to life in prison after a jury in 2021 found that he killed his infant son, says he is innocent.
On Monday, an attorney for the 32-year-old Sharonville man argued before Hamilton County’s 1st District Court of Appeals, seeking a new trial.
The case, attorney Paul Croushore told the three-judge panel, came down to opinions by half a dozen experts who disagreed.
“There’s a dramatic difference in what they found,” Croushore said, “leaving in question whether an offense occurred, at all.”
The trial judge, he argued, should have dismissed the case before the jury even began deliberations.
Hamilton County Assistant Prosecutor Keith Sauter said there was enough evidence to send the case to the jury. He said prosecutors at trial were required to show two things:
- Mounts was alone with his son, 7-month-old Jayce Fitzhugh, when the boy suffered the severe brain injuries that caused his death.
- There was medical testimony establishing Jayce had been abused
Both of those elements were established, Sauter said.
Croushore focused on one expert who ultimately testified on behalf of Mounts – but who initially had been hired by prosecutors.
Dr. Andrea Wiens, a forensic pathologist, was asked by prosecutors to review Jayce’s death. Wiens ended up disagreeing with Dr. Dorothy Dean, the pathologist who conducted Jayce’s autopsy.
Dean had found that Jayce died after sustaining a recent skull fracture. She said he had been struck by, or against, a fixed object.
But Wiens said the skull fracture happened at least a few weeks before he died and that there was evidence it was healing.
She said the cause and manner of death was undetermined.
At trial, the defense called two other experts who essentially agreed with Wiens. Prosecutors called three experts who supported Dean’s findings.
Jayce's death
The case against Mounts dates back to a night in January 2018.
Mounts and Jayce’s mother, his girlfriend, Kayla Fitzhugh, didn’t live together but would see each other “almost weekly,” according to testimony.
On Jan. 24, 2018, Fitzhugh went to Mounts’ parents’ home, where he lived. According to testimony, Mounts and Fitzhugh took Jayce with them that night to Walmart, then Burger King – then a house where Mounts bought unspecified, illegal drugs.
They returned to the Mounts’ home, but Fitzhugh left at about 11 p.m., according to testimony, after remembering she had an appointment the next morning.
Mounts told police that Jayce slept on his bed, in his bedroom.
He said Jayce slept through the night and woke up the next morning, crying, wanting to be fed. Mounts said he prepared a bottle and then found Jayce not breathing.
In documents filed in advance of Monday’s arguments, Croushore said Jayce had been “incredibly sickly” after being born prematurely, “with repeated episodes in which he stopped breathing.”
There was no proof Mounts caused serious physical harm to Jayce, Croushore said.
Prosecutors highlight media coverage
Another issue raised during Monday’s oral arguments: Twice during the trial, prosecutors alerted jurors about the presence of a reporter from the Washington Post in the courtroom.
Prosecutors raised it after one of the defense experts testified that he waived his fee because he believed Mounts shouldn’t have been charged.
In closing arguments, prosecutors said the expert, a private consultant from Texas, likely would increase his business by having a national news outlet write about his testimony.
“Oh my gosh. He gave up his fee. That’s how committed he is,” Assistant Prosecutor David Prem said during closing arguments. “You think he’s not getting a benefit from being here?”
Croushore told the appeals court panel Monday it was unfair to allow prosecutors to bring that up.
“It’s extraneous. It doesn’t relate to the evidence,” he said. “It’s addressing a person in the room who isn’t a witness … suggesting ulterior motives.”
The case is being heard by appeals court judges Candace Crouse, Jennifer Kinsley and Marilyn Zayas. A decision is expected later this year."
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. 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;
------------------------------------------------------------------
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater’s attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it’s the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.”
---------------------------------------------------------
