Sunday, April 6, 2025

Selena Chandler-Scott: Georgia: Miscarriage charges that should never have been brought have been dropped after a "national backlash" - but women in the state remain vulnerable to criminalization for this non-criminal conduct, Jessica Valenti writes in 'her timely Blog 'Abortion, Every Day", noting that: Incriminating evidence of what, exactly? Warren's office already cruelly sent out Chandler-Scott's fetal remains for an 'autopsy', which confirmed her miscarriage happened naturally. And even if it hadn't, Georgia law doesn't allow for the prosecution of people who have abortions. There's also no law in Georgia—or anywhere else—that dictates how someone is supposed to dispose of a miscarriage. Nor should there be! But that hasn't stopped zealous prosecutors like Warren from targeting women anyway.'

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "And while this kind of criminalization isn't new, a 2024 report from Pregnancy Justice found that there's been a marked increase in pregnancy-related criminal charges since the end of Roe. In part, it's that Dobbs emboldened anti-abortion police and prosecutors. But the root cause—and a growing issue—is fetal personhood laws. After all, if an embryo or a fetus is a person, then law enforcement can argue that a woman who flushes or throws away her miscarriage is 'concealing a death' or 'abusing a corpse.' (Georgia's 2019 abortion law grants personhood to fetuses once there's cardiac activity.)"

——————————————————————

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "It's important we don't mistake these charges being dropped as a major win. Because so long as fetal personhood laws remain, these arrests can happen and again and again. Especially now, as Republicans push legislation to make pregnancy-related prosecutions more common: The same week Chandler-Scott was arrested, Georgia lawmakers were considering a bill that would allow abortion patients to be charged with murder. The goal of that legislation—and other 'equal protection' bills like it—is to give police the power to investigate any pregnancy outcome they deem suspect."

—————————————————————————

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "And while I'm glad Chandler-Scott is free, it doesn't mean she can return to her normal life. This young woman had her name and mugshot splashed across local crime pages. As Dana Sussman, senior vice president at Pregnancy Justice, tells me, "This doesn't undo the trauma she faced of being arrested after a tragic medical emergency."

——————————————————————————

STORY: "Georgia Drops Miscarriage Charges," by Jessica Valenti, published on her Blog 'Abortion, Every Day', on April 4, 2025 (Feminist writer, NYC native. 8 books, 1 kid & a lot of opinions. Her latest book, Abortion, is out now: prh.com/abortion.

SUB-HEADING: "Selena Chandler-Scott goes free after national backlash."

GIST: "I am so relieved to be able to tell you that Georgia prosecutors have dropped all charges against Selena Chandler-Scott, the young woman arrested for how she disposed of her miscarriage.

The 24-year-old, who was found unconscious and bleeding outside of her apartment complex, was charged with 'concealing a death' and 'abandoning a dead body' after placing her fetal remains in the trash.

Today, Tift County District Attorney Patrick Warren announced: "After thorough examination of the facts and the law, my office has determined that continuing prosecution is not legally sustainable and not in the interest of justice."

Let's be clear: These charges were dropped because Warren and his office were under intense public pressure and a growing national spotlight. Indeed, he seemed almost disappointed that he wouldn't be able to punish the young woman, saying, "I do not condone the way the remains were handled, and I understand that her actions were distressing to many."

Her actions were distressing? He doesn't "condone" how she handled her pregnancy loss? Come the fuck on.

What's worse, Warren left the door open to prosecuting Chandler-Scott again in the future. "If additional information or incriminating evidence becomes available," he said, "my office may review this case again for prosecution."

Incriminating evidence of what, exactly? Warren's office already cruelly sent out Chandler-Scott's fetal remains for an 'autopsy', which confirmed her miscarriage happened naturally. And even if it hadn't, Georgia law doesn't allow for the prosecution of people who have abortions.

There's also no law in Georgia—or anywhere else—that dictates how someone is supposed to dispose of a miscarriage. Nor should there be! But that hasn't stopped zealous prosecutors like Warren from targeting women anyway.

Just a few weeks ago, we found out that a teenager was being investigated in Pennsylvania for 'abuse of a corpse' after self-managing an abortion and burying the fetus in her backyard. Brittany Watts in Ohio was charged with 'abuse of a corpse' last year after she miscarried at home in the toilet. And not long ago, another Georgia woman was under investigation for how she handled her miscarriage.

And while this kind of criminalization isn't new, a 2024 report from Pregnancy Justice found that there's been a marked increase in pregnancy-related criminal charges since the end of Roe.

In part, it's that Dobbs emboldened anti-abortion police and prosecutors. But the root cause—and a growing issue—is fetal personhood laws. After all, if an embryo or a fetus is a person, then law enforcement can argue that a woman who flushes or throws away her miscarriage is 'concealing a death' or 'abusing a corpse.' (Georgia's 2019 abortion law grants personhood to fetuses once there's cardiac activity.)

Under these laws, it doesn't matter if someone is 9 weeks or 19 weeks into pregnancy. That's why so-called 'viability' laws and language are so dangerous—even in pro-choice states, they allow police to investigate women for pregnancy loss if they believe they were past 'viability.'

It's important we don't mistake these charges being dropped as a major win. Because so long as fetal personhood laws remain, these arrests can happen and again and again. Especially now, as Republicans push legislation to make pregnancy-related prosecutions more common: The same week Chandler-Scott was arrested, Georgia lawmakers were considering a bill that would allow abortion patients to be charged with murder. The goal of that legislation—and other 'equal protection' bills like it—is to give police the power to investigate any pregnancy outcome they deem suspect.

And while I'm glad Chandler-Scott is free, it doesn't mean she can return to her normal life. This young woman had her name and mugshot splashed across local crime pages. As Dana Sussman, senior vice president at Pregnancy Justice, tells me, "This doesn't undo the trauma she faced of being arrested after a tragic medical emergency."

"No one is served by these types of charges," she says.

Except, of course, the men who are desperate to punish women."

The entire post can be read at:

https://draft.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/8917187457220816375

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;

----------------------------------------------------------------

Tommy Zeigler: Death Row: Florida: Commentrary: "The curse of 'finality.' Orlando Sentinel Columnist Scott Maxwell decries 'the twisted justice' of Tommy Zeigler's half century on death row,' noting that: "Last week, Zeigler’s legal team filed a motion based on new DNA evidence that his attorneys say proves Zeigler is innocent of the quadruple murders for which he was convicted in 1976. Evidence aside, let’s take a moment to appreciate the timing here — and how spectacularly messed up it is that Zeigler, now 79, had to wait for half a century to get this testing done. Why? Well, among other reasons, obstinate prosecutors like former Attorney General Ashley Moody were still fighting as recently as two years ago to block the evidence from being collected."

BACKGROUND: (Death Penalty Information Center): '47 years after his death sentence, Florida Court orders DNA testing for Tommy Zeigler': "Nearly 47 years after being convicted of a quadruple murder, Florida death-row prisoner Tommy Zeigler has finally been permitted to independently conduct new DNA testing on evidence he claims will prove his innocence. Circuit Court Judge Patricia L. Strowbridge approved Zeigler’s request for DNA testing in October 2022. As soon as her ruling was finalized in December, more than 100 pieces of previously untested evidence were shipped to a California lab to be tested at Zeigler’s own expense. Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody submitted an emergency appeal to the Florida Supreme Court on January 5, 2023 to stop the testing and return the evidence. The court rejected Moody’s appeal without explanation the same day. In response, Zeigler’s attorney, Terry Hadly wrote in an email to the Tampa Bay Times that “This means that we can proceed expeditiously with the testing. Conceivably, the AG’s office could continue to pursue the appeal, but the ruling is a clear signal that they are not likely to succeed.” Moody’s actions are part of a pattern of fighting DNA testing agreements made by reform prosecutor Monique H. Worrell. In July 2022, the Florida Supreme Court similarly rejected Moody’s motion to block DNA testing authorized in a court-approved agreement between Worrell and Henry Sireci, who has been on death-row for 46 years. Despite the court’s decision in Sireci’s case, which Strowbridge cited in her decision regarding Zeigler, Moody’s office still attempted to fight the agreement in Zeigler’s case. This is the culmination of a long legal process for Zeigler, who made his first DNA testing request in 1994. In 2001, DNA testing on portions of Zeigler’s clothing found no trace of the victims’ blood. Following those results, Zeigler’s lawyers requested access to more evidence and permission to conduct further tests at their own cost in 2003, but their requests were denied. Worrell had previously reviewed Zeigler’s case as part of the new Conviction Integrity Unit created by then-State Attorney Aramis Ayala and urged Ayala to consent to testing. Ayala denied the request, relying on the same erroneous interpretation of a 2001 DNA testing law in Florida as Moody. Like Sireci, Zeigler now has a chance to prove his innocence through DNA testing of evidence including never-before-tested guns, fingernail clippings, and clothes of the victims and the accused."

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/47-years-after-his-death-sentence-florida-court-orders-dna-testing-for-tommy-zeigler

-------------------------------------------------------------

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: "WORDS TO HEED: FROM OUR POST ON KEVIN COOPER'S APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING; CALIFORNIA: (Applicable wherever a state resists DNA testing): "Blogger/extraordinaire Jeff Gamso's blunt, unequivocal, unforgettable message to the powers that be in California: "JUST TEST THE FUCKING DNA." (Oh yes, Gamso raises, as he does in many of his posts, an important philosophical question: This post is headed: "What is truth, said jesting Pilate."...Says Gamso: "So what's the harm? What, exactly, are they scared of? Don't we want the truth?")

https://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2018/06/kevin-cooper-2-california-application.html

————————————————————————————

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Former Orange-Osceola prosecutors Jeff Ashton and Aramis Ayala has also fought recent DNA testing for Zeigler. Only current State Attorney Monique Worrell backed Zeigler’s request, saying, “If we ignore potential errors in our criminal legal system, we will never obtain justice.” The prosecutors who fought Zeigler’s quest for new DNA argued that the results wouldn’t make a difference with Moody (now a recently appointed U.S. senator) arguing that the case deserved “finality.” But the Florida Supreme Court was more interested in accuracy than finality and unanimously rejected Moody’s argument, voting to allow the evidence that Ziegler’s legal team says debunks the prosecution’s claims and theories from back in the 1970s."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMENTARY: "The twisted justice of Tommy Zeigler's half century on death row," by Scott Maxwell. published by The Orlando Sentinel, on March 26, 2024. (Scott Maxwell is the Metro Columnist for the Orlando Sentinel. He writes about Central Florida politics and whatever else catches his fancy. Scott particularly enjoys giving readers information they won't get elsewhere and sharing the stories politicians would rather keep secret. Scott came to the Sentinel in 1998 and has penned a column since 2002. He's a married father of two and graduate of the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill who likes travel, exercise and scary movies.)

PHOTO CAPTION: "For half a century, there have been questions about the guilt of Tommy Zeigler, who was convicted of murders that took place in 1975. Now, with new and long-awaited DNA evidence, his legal team wants a judge to intervene. Zeigler is seen here in this 2010 photo. He’s now 79."

GIST: "If you want proof of how perilously flawed death penalty cases can be, look no further than Tommy Zeigler.

Last week, Zeigler’s legal team filed a motion based on new DNA evidence that his attorneys say proves Zeigler is innocent of the quadruple murders for which he was convicted in 1976.

Evidence aside, let’s take a moment to appreciate the timing here — and how spectacularly messed up it is that Zeigler, now 79, had to wait for half a century to get this testing done.

Why? Well, among other reasons, obstinate prosecutors like former Attorney General Ashley Moody were still fighting as recently as two years ago to block the evidence from being collected.

Supreme Court overrules Moody, says death-row’s Zeigler deserves DNA testing | Commentary

Former Orange-Osceola prosecutors Jeff Ashton and Aramis Ayala has also fought recent DNA testing for Zeigler. Only current State Attorney Monique Worrell backed Zeigler’s request, saying, “If we ignore potential errors in our criminal legal system, we will never obtain justice.”

The prosecutors who fought Zeigler’s quest for new DNA argued that the results wouldn’t make a difference with Moody (now a recently appointed U.S. senator) arguing that the case deserved “finality.”

But the Florida Supreme Court was more interested in accuracy than finality and unanimously rejected Moody’s argument, voting to allow the evidence that Ziegler’s legal team says debunks the prosecution’s claims and theories from back in the 1970s.

I’ve written about Zeigler’s case many times through the years and concluded it was flawed beyond reason.

Among the troubling details: The jury in Zeigler’s case never even sentenced him to die. Jurors voted for life in prison. But the judge — whom Zeigler’s attorneys had asked to step off the case because of perceived bias — overruled the jury and ordered his execution. That is incredibly rare. Very few states even allow such a thing, and for good reason.

Just as disturbing and bizarre, at least one juror originally didn’t want to convict Zeigler at all and didn’t vote to do so until after that same judge ordered the bailiff to give her a Valium. Again, that is not normal. The case was also plagued with irregularities and inconsistencies involving witnesses and evidence.

40 years of questions about death-row’s Zeigler show problems with case, death penalty

I make no bones about the fact that I’m opposed to the death penalty for a slew of empirical reasons:

It’s unequally handed down. (People of color are more likely to be sentenced to die. So are men and those who are poor and mentally ill.) It doesn’t deter murder. (Some of the few states and countries still executing their own citizens actually have above-average murder rates.) And most troubling: We know that people have been wrongly sentenced to die again and again. (Florida leads the way with more than 30 overturned convictions and is the only state that allows split, 8-to-4 verdicts.)

I understand that some people still have emotional reasons for favoring the death penalty. But vengeance isn’t the same as justice.

And even if you don’t care about all those proven flaws and inequalities and still support capital punishment, you might consider the words of my former colleague, Charley Reese.

Reese was far more conservative than I and a big supporter of the death penalty. Heck, Charley wanted to bring back firing squads. But even Reese, after studying all of the facts, concluded that the case against Zeigler was proof that “the wheels of justice can crush innocents.”

Reese admitted in a 1992 column that, like many Central Floridians who remembered the grisly murders of Zeigler’s wife and her parents in a Winter Garden furniture store back on Christmas Eve of 1975, he “had always assumed Zeigler was guilty as heck and deserved the death penalty he got.”

Prosecutors argued Zeigler killed his wife, her parents and customer Charlie Mays while Zeigler, who ended up shot in the stomach, claimed Mays was the perpetrator.

So Reese decided to look beyond his assumptions and past his emotions to study the evidence. He even read a book about the killings and argued that anyone who did the same would have their “faith in the justice system rattled.”

Reese concluded that the state’s two-decades-long crusade to execute Zeigler was “as good an argument against the death penalty as you will find.”

Well, the state’s zeal to kill Zeigler has now spanned five decades. And there are still serious questions if not flat-out contradictions.

I’ve long acknowledged that I can’t claim to know for sure what happened that night. But I am sure the case against Zeigler has been fraught with problems from the moment it went to trial.

And if there are still legitimate questions about what happened nearly 50 years ago — questions that even the Supreme Court found valid, even if eager-to-kill prosecutors did not — that tells you most everything you need to know."

The entire commentary can be read at:

https://www.orlandosentinel.com/2025/03/26/maxwell-the-twisted-justice-of-tommy-zeiglers-half-century-on-death-row/

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

———————————————————————————————

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

---------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, April 5, 2025

Artificial intelligence, due process, and scientific evidence; Renowned Duke Law Professor Brandon Garrett, author of of 'Defending Due Process: Why Fairness Matters in a Polarized World,' presents at an internet discussion sponsored by the NACDL (National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers, to be held on Friday April 18th, 3.30 to 5.30 PM ET. (It's free! I have enrolled under the 'international category): Much to learn, For good or for bad, Artificial Intelligence will provide considerable grist for this Blog's mill... Details below. HL.

Date: Friday, April 18th, 2025
Time: 3:30 – 5:00 pm ET | 12:30 – 2:00 pm PT
Cost: FREE, but registration is required
CLE: No CLE is being offered for this program..

——————————————————————————————

THE DISCUSSION: "AI, Due Process, and Scientific Evidence." Posted on April 1, 2025. By Sarah Olson. (Forensic Resources);

"NACDL invites you to join us for a discussion exploring Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the criminal legal system featuring Duke Law Professor Brandon Garrett, author of Defending Due Process: Why Fairness Matters in a Polarized World. The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session led by NACDL President-Elect, Andrew Birrell.

AI is increasingly used to make important decisions that affect individuals, including in criminal justice settings. Due process rights are typically heightened in criminal cases, in which a person’s life, liberty, and public safety can be at stake. In criminal investigations, uses of AI have proliferated in areas such as: DNA mixture interpretation; facial recognition; recidivism risk assessments; and predictive policing. The program will discuss four issues that arise in these settings:

Whether due process ensures some access to discovery and information concerning how those technologies work, in criminal cases
Whether the AI is interpretable, or whether the factors and weights that it relies on is available to lawyers and judges
Reliability-related questions about whether the AI has been scientifically tested, and if so, what is the research available concerning its reliability and performance
Whether under Daubert and related rules regarding experts, whether experts may testify about those types of technology.

Date: Friday, April 18th, 2025
Time: 3:30 – 5:00 pm ET | 12:30 – 2:00 pm PT
Cost: FREE, but registration is required
CLE: No CLE is being offered for this program.

*Note: To encourage open discussion and dialogue, we will be following the Chatham House Rule. This allows attendees, including media representatives, to use the information shared during the program, but they cannot reveal the identity or affiliation of the speaker. For any questions regarding this policy, please contact Bonnie Hoffman, NACDL Director of Public Defense.

Presenters:

Brandon L. Garrett, L. Neil Williams, Jr. Distinguished Professor of Law, Duke University School of Law

Brandon L. Garrett, a leading scholar of criminal justice outcomes, evidence, and constitutional rights, is the inaugural L. Neil Williams, Jr. Professor of Law and director of the Wilson Center for Science and Justice at Duke Law, an initiative that brings together faculty and students to improve criminal justice outcomes.

Garrett’s current research and teaching interests focus on evidence, forensic science, constitutional rights, habeas corpus, corporate crime, and criminal law. He is the author of six books: Autopsy of a Crime Lab: Exposing the Flaws in Forensics (University of California Press, March 2021); The Death Penalty: Concepts and Insights (West Academic, 2018) (with Lee Kovarsky); End of its Rope: How Killing the Death Penalty Can Revive Criminal Justice (Harvard University Press, 2017); Too Big to Jail: How Prosecutors Compromise with Corporations (Harvard University Press, 2014); Federal Habeas Corpus: Executive Detention and Post-Conviction Litigation (Foundation Press, 2013) (with Lee Kovarsky); and Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong (Harvard University Press, 2011). These books have been translated for editions in China, Spain, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan. For more information, visit Garrett’s website.

In addition to numerous articles published in leading law reviews and scientific journals, Garrett’s work has been widely cited by courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, lower federal courts, state supreme courts, and courts in other countries. Garrett also frequently speaks about criminal justice matters before legislative and policymaking bodies, groups of practicing lawyers, law enforcement, and to local and national media. He has been involved with a number of law and science reform initiatives, including the American Law Institute’s project on policing, for which he serves as Associate Reporter, and a National Academy of Sciences Committee concerning eyewitness evidence. Garrett serves as co-director of CSAFE (Center for Statistics and Applications in Forensic Evidence.) He also serves as the court-appointed monitor in the ODonnell v. Harris County misdemeanor bail reform consent decree.
Garrett maintains online data sets relating to his research. These include:

Garrett received his BA in 1997 from Yale University. He received his JD in 2001 from Columbia Law School, where he was an articles editor of the Columbia Law Review and a Kent Scholar. After graduating, he clerked for the Hon. Pierre N. Leval of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit and then worked as an associate at Neufeld, Scheck & Brustin LLP in New York City. Before joining Duke Law in 2018, Garrett was the White Burkett Miller Professor of Law and Public Affairs and Justice Thurgood Marshall Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia. In 2015, he was a Visiting Fellow at All Souls College, Oxford University.

Andrew S. Birrell, President Elect, NACDL

Andy Birrell is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers—an honor limited to the top 1% of lawyers in the State. He is a Fellow of the American Board of Criminal Lawyers. He is the former Chairperson of the Minnesota State Bar Association Criminal Law Certification Board and was the first lawyer in Minnesota to be certified by the Minnesota State Bar Association as a Board Certified Criminal Law Specialist. Andy is a Board Certified Criminal Trial Advocate by the National Board of Trial Advocacy. He is a past President of the Minnesota Association of Criminal Lawyers. In addition to being selected a perennial Super Lawyer, he has four times been named one of Minnesota’s Top 100 Super Lawyers most recently in 2022. Andy is the second Vice President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. He also is the Secretary of the Board of Trustees of the NACDL Foundation for Criminal Defense.

Andy represents clients in all phases of criminal law and related matters from grand jury investigations through appeals in federal and state courts throughout the United States. He represents clients in matters implicating the most significant and difficult white collar criminal law matters, including those involving: RICO, money laundering, conspiracy, tax charges, mail and wire fraud, bank fraud and other related allegations.

Andy is an accomplished and seasoned appellate lawyer. He has argued before the United States Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., has successfully argued before the United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit and has won reversals of convictions and orders for new trials in the Minnesota Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.

Resources:

The Right to a Glass Box: Rethinking the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Criminal Justice, Brandon L. Garrett and Cynthia Rudin, 109 Cornell Law Review 561-627, (2024).
Due Process and AI, Brandon L. Garrett, The Volokh Conspiracy, Reason, (2025).
Interpretable algorithmic forensics, Brandon L. Garrett and Cynthia Rudin, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 120 (41) e2301842120, (2023).

The entire post can be read at:

https://forensicresources.org/2025/ai-due-process-and-scientific-evidence/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=ai-due-process-and-scientific-evidence

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

———————————————————————————————

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

----------------------------------------------------------------

the charles smith blog

Sunday, April 6, 2025

SUB-HEADING: "Selena Chandler-Scott goes free after national backlash."

Saturday, April 5, 2025

Blog Nation Badge

Followers

The Charles smith blog

Blog Archive

About Me

Search This Blog

https://forensicresources.org/

http://www.personal.psu.edu/dhk3/blogs/DoubleHelixLaw/