PASSAGE OF THE DAY: In addition to the Woods case, the measure addresses future misconduct, too. It requires lab employees who witness wrongdoing to report it and the lab director to investigate it and notify district attorneys who then have to notify those impacted."
-----------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Colorado lawmakers wade into a scandal at the state crime lab," by Reporter Shaun Boyd, published by CBS Colorado, on February 20, 2025. (Shaun Boyd is CBS News Colorado's political reporter. She is one of the most experienced television news reporters in Colorado.)
GIST: "Republican and Democratic lawmakers at the Colorado State Capitol have joined forces on a bill they hope restores trust in the state's crime lab after a scandal involving a veteran DNA analyst.
The bill comes as a preliminary hearing for the analyst -- Yvonne "Missy" Woods -- was delayed. A Jefferson County judge says the delay was due to the massive scope and seriousness of the alleged crimes.
Woods is charged with 102 felony counts in connection with years of alleged mishandling of DNA evidence in criminal cases across the state.
"Right now, there are defendants serving time who have no idea that the evidence used to convict them was handled by a crime lab employee implicated in misconduct. There are victims who don't know that the forensic evidence in their case may have been compromised," said state Rep. Yara Zokaie, one of the bill sponsors.
The Colorado Bureau of Investigation says it reviewed all 10,000 cases Woods handled over nearly 30 years and found anomalies in 1,000 of them.
\State Rep. Matt Soper, another bill sponsor, says he wants more transparency.
"It's been a frustration as far as lawmakers -- we haven't seen the full process. I mean, we don't know how they got down to 1,000 out of ten thousand," Soper said.
The Colorado Forensic Science Integrity Act would require the lab to review all of its records prior to July of this year. It would have until September to notify district attorneys of any cases involving misconduct, including all ten thousand handled by Woods.
DAs would then have to notify defendants, their attorneys or public defenders, and victims.
All the defendants would have a right to an attorney and hearing to determine whether the misconduct played a material role in their conviction. If it did, they would get a new trial.
Jud Lohnes with the Colorado Innocence Project says a single DNA result can affect an entire criminal case.
"A shaky eyewitness ID becomes credible when supported by DNA. A lead-tight alibi becomes unbelievable when contradicted by DNA," he said.
James Karbach with the Colorado Office of the Public Defender says the bill isn't a fishing expedition, it's basic fairness.
"I don't think it is fair of CBI or anyone to ask victims and defendants to accept CBI conclusions without a thorough review by prosecutors on behalf of the prosecution and defense lawyers on behalf of defendants. That's our system," he said.
In addition to the Woods case, the measure addresses future misconduct, too. It requires lab employees who witness wrongdoing to report it and the lab director to investigate it and notify district attorneys who then have to notify those impacted.
Lawmakers say they are hoping to fast track the bill to the governor's desk.
The following is a statement from the Colorado District Attorneys' Council:
The Colorado District Attorneys' Council recognizes and agrees with the need for heightened oversight and accountability at CBI in regard to lab issues. The District Attorneys are supportive of addressing these issues at CBI in a thoughtful manner and appreciate the open and ongoing dialogue with the Public Defenders office in regard to this bill. However, as introduced, the bill still needs significant work in areas related to process and scope as well as carefully examining its effort to create a separate cause of action with new standards for review for some defendants when existing legal options may already be an option.
The following is a statement from the Colorado Bureau of Investigation:
The CBI is committed to accountability and transparency to its processes, and we look forward to our continued coordination with the Legislature, bill sponsors and our stakeholders. It wouldn't be appropriate to comment on specifics of the bill because the process remains fluid until it's enacted into law."
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;
