PUBLISHER''S NOTE:
I very grateful to 'Feedspot' for featuring the Charles Smith Blog in its top 20 list of Forensic Blogs - a distinction which I did not seek! There are currently almost 500 Blogs on its 'Forensic' list. 'Feedspot' plays an important role in helping people make the difficult choice as to which Blogs to subscribe to, among many categories, in a cyberspace where the number of Blogs is overwhelming. The list can be accessed at the link below. Thank you Feedspot!
Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
https://bloggers.feedspot.com/forensic_blogs/
------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE OF THE DAY: "According to Handler, (an Oklahoma University law student who wants Prof. Smotherman booted) this violation was compelling enough that the Supreme Court did not even consider other violations committed by the prosecution. “I've got no issue with that, but it goes to show you that their opinion doesn't really even scratch the surface of just how deeply this ran and how well orchestrated it was on the part of the prosecution,” Handler said."
———————————————————————————
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Reed Smith, an international law firm, published an independent report in 2022 that found that 10 items of evidence from the murder scene were destroyed by the state district attorney’s office, specifically naming Connie Smothermon, before Glossip’s trial, violating an agreement to safeguard evidence in capital murder cases. The report concluded that no “reasonable juror” would have convicted Glossip of murder."
———————————————————————————————
STORY: "OU law students petition to remove professor following discovery of misconduct in Richard Glossip case, by Senior News Reporter Abby Young, published by oudaily.com on March 3, 2025.
GIST: "The 5-3 Supreme Court ruling granted Glossip a new trial after nearly three decades on death row. The ruling reads that Connie Smotherman, former Oklahoma County District Attorney and head case prosecutor, committed prosecutorial misconduct because she knew her star witness, Justin Sneed, lied under oath.
OU law student Travis Handler,who posted the petition Thursday morning, said he has been concerned about Connie Smotherman’s history since he began law school. Handler said he doesn’t intend to “malign” the College of Law because it helps the community, but its professors need to be held accountable.
“The most important part (of the) rule of law is that nobody's above the law and nobody's above accountability,” Handler said. “And I hope that the law school adheres to that.”
Connie Smothermon has been an adjunct professor at the OU College of Law since 2004 and teaches at the Oklahoma City University School of Law. She also served as the head of the Domestic Violence Prosecution Unit in the Oklahoma County District Attorney’s Office.
“Pretty much everybody across the political spectrum or across the pro-prosecution, pro-defense at the law school that I spoke with were in agreement that this is an individual that should not be teaching here,” Handler said.
According to the ruling, the prosecution knew Sneed had lied under oath about receiving a prescription for bipolar disorder. If Sneed was capable of lying under oath about that, the rest of his testimony is questionable, the majority opinion states.
In 1998, Glossip was convicted for his role in the murder of Barry Van Treese. Van Treese owned a Best Budget Inn in Oklahoma City, where Glossip lived and worked as a manager. Sneed, a hotel housekeeper who worked to pay for his stay there, beat Van Treese to death in a hotel room in 1997. Sneed testified in court that Glossip had promised to pay him $10,000 to commit the murder.
In return for this testimony, Sneed received life without parole instead of the death penalty. Glossip was convicted of first-degree murder and placed on death row while maintaining his innocence.
Glossip has eaten three last meals and bypassed nine execution dates due to multiple delays and appeals.
In 2023, Glossip petitioned the state Pardon and Parole Board for clemency. Connie Smothermon’s husband, Richard Smothermon, was on the board but recused himself from the case. A majority vote was required to approve Glossip’s petition, but without Richard Smotherman’s vote, the board was locked at 2-2, resulting in Glossip not being granted clemency.
That year, the state recovered documents showing Sneed had been prescribed lithium by a jail psychiatrist to treat bipolar disorder, which contradicted his testimony that he had never seen a psychiatrist and the prescription was accidental.
Supreme Court Justice Sonya Sotomayor concluded that Glossip was entitled to a new trial because the documents showed Sneed’s testimony wasn’t credible but was the “only direct evidence” for Glossip’s conviction.
According to the ruling, Connie Smothermon’s case notes showed she was aware of Sneed’s lithium prescription and knew he lied under oath.
According to Handler, this violation was compelling enough that the Supreme Court did not even consider other violations committed by the prosecution.
“I've got no issue with that, but it goes to show you that their opinion doesn't really even scratch the surface of just how deeply this ran and how well orchestrated it was on the part of the prosecution,” Handler said.
Reed Smith, an international law firm, published an independent report in 2022 that found that 10 items of evidence from the murder scene were destroyed by the state district attorney’s office, specifically naming Connie Smothermon, before Glossip’s trial, violating an agreement to safeguard evidence in capital murder cases. The report concluded that no “reasonable juror” would have convicted Glossip of murder.
Attorney General Gentner Drummond got involved in the case and helped propel it to the Supreme Court. According to a press release from the attorney general’s office following the ruling, the Supreme Court affirmed Drummond’s conclusion that the prosecution knew about the prescription and that Sneed’s testimony was dishonest.
“I am grateful the justices understood the gravity of the situation,” Drummond said in the release. “I have long maintained that I do not believe Mr. Glossip is innocent, but it is now an undeniable fact that he did not receive a fair trial.”
Drummond said he will not pursue action against the prosecution in a press conference on Tuesday.
Neither Connie nor Richard Smotherman have responded to OU Daily’s requests to comment.
In a statement, OU Marketing and Communications wrote the university is aware of the court’s ruling and would not comment on personnel matters.
In a text message to OU Daily, Handler clarified the petition only calls for the removal of Connie Smothermon because the controversy with Richard Smothermon is secondary.
“(Connie and Richard Smothermon) have treated this as not a big of a deal as it should have been treated,” Handler said. “And I think, frankly, neither Smothermon should be teaching here, which is a shame because they're both very well experienced prosecutors.”
Thomas Reese, a public defender based in Tulsa, graduated from the OU College of Law in 2016. Reese said Connie Smothermon had years to correct her wrongdoing in the case but hasn’t. Sneed’s testimony was the only direct evidence used to condemn Glossip, and Connie Smotherman knew he was lying, he said.
“Connie Smotherman knowingly put a (possibly) innocent man on death row,” Reese said.
Connie Smothermon was trusted by the university, Reese said, and was built up as a role model to law students.
“To have the United States Supreme Court step in and vacate a state court death sentence, especially for prosecutorial misconduct, is almost unheard of,” Reese said.
Reese is working on a letter urging the university to fire Connie Smothermon, which he plans to hand deliver to College of Law Dean Anna Carpenter on Wednesday. He is gathering alums’ signatures and will send a copy to OU President Joseph Harroz Jr.
An OU law student, who wished to remain anonymous, said students in the College of Law have been aware of Connie and Richard Smothermon’s history with the Glossip case, and it’s the “elephant in the room.”
“There's rumblings of students not being okay with it, not wanting our tuition money to be spent on her salary,” the law student said. “If it goes on any further, I will be disappointed, because she is not the best of us, and that's not how we do things."
The student said they purposely avoided enrolling in any of Connie or Richard Smothermon’s classes because of Smothermon’s history. The law student signed the petition calling for Connie Smothermon’s removal.
Handler said Connie Smothermon is a “fine” professor who is knowledgeable and passionate. If he hadn’t found out, he never would have guessed she’d be capable of misconduct.
Handler said he will share the petition with Carpenter in a few days and hopes she’ll be open to it. Handler said he doesn’t blame the dean because she wasn’t at OU when Connie Smothermon was hired.
“People have known about this for a while, and efforts were not really made to remove Connie,” Handler said. “So the ball, the onus, is really on the administration now to respond appropriately.”"
The entire story can be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am grateful to 'Authory' a valuable service which creates a portfolio of all of my posts since I fired my first post into the cybersphere on the Charles Smith Blog on September 29, 2007, some 17 years ago. Today's post is number 11, 784 Yikes! Yes, this is a compulsion, but it's a healthy one ! One of the best features of 'Authory' (which I am trying out on the Blog for the first time, is a search engine for the portfolio which makes it easier for readers to follow the many important cases, issues and developments (and occasional rants) in the area of flawed pathology, flawed pathologists, and whatever else might cross my mind in jurisdictions throughout the world which are at the heart of the Blog. So, dear reader, you can access the portfolio at the following link. Just type the inquiry into the search box at the following link, and hit enter. (The search box is on the top write side of the page under 'Read more.' Why not try it out, and, as encouraging use of this search function by my readers is rather new to me, any feedback on how it is working would be appreciated at: hlevy15@gmail.com. Cheers!
https://authory.com/HaroldLevy
Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
————————————————————------------------------------------------
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;
