PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "He ( Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey) also battled St. Louis Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore over the innocence case of Chris Dunn, who spent 34 years in prison after being convicted of a 1990 St. Louis murder. The two eyewitnesses connecting him to the crime — who were both under the age of 15 at the time — have since recanted. Similar to Williams’ case, Gore filed a motion to toss Dunn’s conviction under the 2021 state law. Judge Jason Sengheiser agreed with Gore’s view of the case earlier this summer, concluding that “in light of new evidence, no juror, acting reasonably, would have voted to find Dunn guilty,” and ordered Dunn’s release. Dunn was getting ready to walk out of prison late last month when a challenge from Bailey stopped his release. As Dunn’s wife put it to The Washington Post, “He was literally 50 feet from freedom.” Dunn had to wait another week until the state supreme court ruled that Bailey didn’t have the authority to hold him. Bailey also fought to keep Sandra Hemme in prison this summer after the courts overturned her murder conviction, 43 years into a life sentence. "
"STORY: "Innocence claims challenged around the U.S." by James Lartey, published by The Marshall Project on August 16, 2024. (Jamiles Lartey is a New Orleans-based staff writer for The Marshall Project. Previously, he worked as a reporter for the Guardian covering issues of criminal justice, race and policing. Jamiles was a member of the team behind the award-winning online database “The Counted,” tracking police violence in 2015 and 2016. In 2016, he was named “Michael J. Feeney Emerging Journalist of the Year” by the National Association of Black Journalists. In his off time, Jamiles is an avid drummer, playing and recording with artists in the New Orleans area."
MARSHALL PROJECT: "This is our 100th essay since re-launching the weekly Closing Argument newsletter in 2022. Thanks to everyone who reads each week! We’re always working to make Closing Argument as useful and relevant as possible — so to mark this occasion, we want to ask you: What would you like to see this newsletter discuss in the future? Let us know by replying to this email!"
POST: "On Wednesday, Marcellus Williams will finally have a hearing on his innocence claims. The 55-year-old death row prisoner was convicted in the 1998 murder of Felicia Gayle during a robbery of her suburban St. Louis home. It comes not a moment too soon for Williams, who Missouri plans to put to death in September.
It’s not the first time he has faced such a deadline. In 2017, Williams was hours away from execution when the governor granted him a reprieve so a panel could evaluate his innocence claims, including DNA testing that wasn’t available at the time of the crime. The testing excluded Williams as the source of DNAfound on the murder weapon, according to his lawyers. Last year, a new governor disbanded the panel without releasing its findings.
A lot changed between 2017 and 2023. In 2021, the Missouri legislature passed a law that allows local prosecutors to file a motion to throw out convictions of people who they believe to be innocent. Longtime St. Louis County prosecutor Bob McCulloch — who believed fervently in Williams’ guilt — was also replaced by Wesley Bell, who ordered a review of the case and was troubled by what he found. Bell cited “clear and convincing evidence” of Williams’ innocence in a motion to vacate the conviction, a move made possible by the 2021 law.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey will oppose Williams’ release at the hearing on Wednesday, something he’s had plenty of practice at this summer. He also battled St. Louis Circuit Attorney Gabe Gore over the innocence case of Chris Dunn, who spent 34 years in prison after being convicted of a 1990 St. Louis murder. The two eyewitnesses connecting him to the crime — who were both under the age of 15 at the time — have since recanted.
Similar to Williams’ case, Gore filed a motion to toss Dunn’s conviction under the 2021 state law. Judge Jason Sengheiser agreed with Gore’s view of the case earlier this summer, concluding that “in light of new evidence, no juror, acting reasonably, would have voted to find Dunn guilty,” and ordered Dunn’s release.
Dunn was getting ready to walk out of prison late last month when a challenge from Bailey stopped his release. As Dunn’s wife put it to The Washington Post, “He was literally 50 feet from freedom.” Dunn had to wait another week until the state supreme court ruled that Bailey didn’t have the authority to hold him.
Bailey also fought to keep Sandra Hemme in prison this summer after the courts overturned her murder conviction, 43 years into a life sentence. There was no evidence linking Hemme to the crime aside from a confession that she offered while heavily sedated and in a “malleable mental state,” according to the judge who reviewed and tossed her conviction.
Bailey argued that Hemme should remain in prison to begin serving two sentences for convictions she received while incarcerated — including a 10-year sentence for attacking a prison worker with a razor blade in 1996 — an argument the state supreme court rejected.
Legal observers have expressed some surprise and dismay at just how aggressive Bailey has been in opposing wrongful conviction and innocence claims. In several cases, he has opened himself and other state officials to contempt of court charges in his efforts to keep people detained after a judge had ordered them released. But it’s not uncommon for prosecutors to take a rigid posture in the face of innocence claims. In a 2015 study of wrongful convictions, Jon Gould and Richard Leo found that police and prosecutors were the largest sources of opposition to exonerations.
A similar scenario is playing out in Erie County, New York. Last summer, a judge threw out Brian Scott Lorenz’ conviction for a 1993 murder. Prosecutors have succeeded in keeping him in prison — where he’s been for the last 30 years — while they appeal the ruling.
Looking at exonerations from death row, an analysis this week from the Death Penalty Information Center found that wrongful convictions usually occur because of several causes, including official misconduct, mistaken witness identification, false confession, and false or misleading forensic evidence.
In Texas, a law passed in 2013 was supposed to help create a pathway for relief in wrongful convictions influenced by bad forensic science. The statute, dubbed the “junk science law” has not led to a single new trial for a death row prisoner since its passage however, and criminal defense advocates like the nonprofit Texas Defender Service have said it’s not fulfilling its intended purpose.
Lawyers for Robert Roberson — who my colleague Maurice Chammah wrote about last year — say that his case ought to be the perfect test for the law. Roberson was convicted in the 2003 death of his 2-year-old daughter under the theory that she died of “shaken baby syndrome,” which has since faced medical and legal scrutiny.
Roberson is scheduled for execution in October."
The entire post can be read at:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzQVzFVcZvztPcsQtgfnPpDwmdnJ
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;
