BACKGROUND: From Part One: "May 4: Miguel Cruz: (Part 1): Racine County: Wisconsin: Terrible consequences when a conviction unravels after a state Crime Lab Analyst retracts her forensic conclusion, as the Racine County Eye (Reporter Denise Lockwood) reports, noting that: "During the 2021 trial, Wisconsin State Crime Lab analyst Sharon Polakowski told the jury that Cruz’s Y-STR DNA comparison to a mixture found under Juanita’s right-hand fingernails was “inconclusive,” according to trial transcripts. But during a January 2025 evidentiary hearing, Polakowski admitted error under oath. “The only thing that makes sense to me is that I used incorrect protocol in the interpretation for the report that was written in 2018,” Polakowski testified at the hearing, according to transcripts. She confirmed on the stand that under the correct standards, Cruz should have been excluded."
https://draft.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/5167158651363533069
------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "To challenge (Detective)Hernandez's credibility, Cruz's attorneys pointed to the wrongful conviction of William Avery for a 1998 murder. Court records describe Hernandez's handwritten report as a "fabricated confession," which Avery denied all along. Court documents filed by Cruz's defense also allege Hernandez was found to have induced three jailhouse informants to falsely incriminate Avery. Cruz's defense pointed to at least three more cases involving alleged witness coaching and false testimony.
—————————————————————————
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "While Hernandez was never called to testify in Cruz's trial, transcripts show he was questioned at a post-conviction hearing for Cruz last year. Cruz's defense pressed him about allegedly making false statements in federal court. "You were found you perjured yourself?" Cruz's attorney said. "I'm not sure what I was found of," Hernandez said. "Despite having been adjudicated of perjury, he denied ever having done so," Cruz's defense said."
STORY: "Tossed murder conviction could impact other solved Milwaukee homicide cases, defense attorney says, by Reporter Ben Jordan and Photojournalist Jeremy Dunk, published by TMJ4, on April 23, 2026.
SUB-HEADING: "How many cases are going to get overturned because of this guy's involvement in cases? And if that's how easy this is, what the hell are we doing?" Zachary Zdroik said."
CAPTION: "A judge granted Miguel Cruz a new trial in part because his attorneys argued the jury was never alerted to a retired Milwaukee police detective's history of alleged credibility concerns."
GIST: "Could a tossed murder conviction have ripple effects in other homicide cases involving a former Milwaukee police detective?
"How many cases are going to get overturned because of this guy's involvement in cases? And if that's how easy this is, what the hell are we doing?" Zachary Zdroik said.
The question is being raised after a Racine County judge granted the defendant, Miguel Cruz, a new trial. Court documents show that one of the main reasons is that the defendant’s attorney failed to alert the jury to former Detective Gilbert Hernandez’s alleged credibility concerns. A second problem identified by Cruz's legal team centers around how a DNA analyst presented DNA evidence.
Zachary, the victim's son, strongly disagrees that Hernandez’s alleged misconduct in other cases is relevant to his mother's case.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"They brought up a corrupt history of detectives that were working on the case, and I was like, well, was there any corrupt history in my mom's case? They're like, well, no, but these cops have a corrupt history in other cases. I was like, " Why does that play a factor in my mom's? That makes no sense," Zdroik said.
————————————————————————————————————
Prosecutors say Zdroik's mother witnessed a double homicide in Milwaukee in 2000. According to the criminal complaint, she was then taken to rural Racine County and shot in the head.
Court records show the case went cold for more than a decade until witnesses came forward to investigators, including Hernandez, claiming that Cruz pulled the trigger.
Cruz's conviction was tossed last fall after a successful appeal.
"Mistakes were made on how everything was handled, and now we're here. None of this is right," Zdroik said.
To challenge (Detective)Hernandez's credibility, Cruz's attorneys pointed to the wrongful conviction of William Avery for a 1998 murder. Court records describe Hernandez's handwritten report as a "fabricated confession," which Avery denied all along.
Court documents filed by Cruz's defense also allege Hernandez was found to have induced three jailhouse informants to falsely incriminate Avery.
Cruz's defense pointed to at least three more cases involving alleged witness coaching and false testimony.
Pat Cafferty, a criminal defense attorney not affiliated with this case, weighed in on the upcoming proceedings.
"The defense has developed additional information related to his credibility and perhaps the credibility of some of the other detectives who were involved. So the second trial, assuming that's going to happen in September, will look very different than the first trial," Cafferty said.
While Hernandez was never called to testify in Cruz's trial, transcripts show he was questioned at a post-conviction hearing for Cruz last year. Cruz's defense pressed him about allegedly making false statements in federal court.
"You were found you perjured yourself?" Cruz's attorney said.
"I'm not sure what I was found of," Hernandez said.
"Despite having been adjudicated of perjury, he denied ever having done so," Cruz's defense said.
Zdroik fears how Hernandez's past could derail justice for his family and worries what it could mean for countless other homicide cases.
"How many people are getting away with murder and walking on the streets? Because that's the example we're setting by doing this, and that I don't accept," Zdroik said.
Cafferty said the ruling could have ripple effects in the future for defendants who were investigated by Hernandez.
"The potential for that certainly exists. It's more likely that a defendant who has been convicted as a result of work that Detective Hernandez did could get a new trial or get relief from an appellate court or a circuit court if they tried the case to a jury," Cafferty said.
Defense attorneys say this is why Brady lists are important, as it requires prosecutors to alert the court to a police officer's history of alleged untruthfulness or other integrity issues. Hernandez is not on Milwaukee County's Brady list, based on the latest version obtained in partnership with the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and Wisconsin Watch.
TMJ4 reached out to Hernandez to request an interview. We have yet to hear back, but our offer still stands.
This project is in partnership with the Racine County Eye. For more of our reporting on this overturned conviction, click here.
This project is in partnership with the Racine County Eye. For more of our reporting on this overturned conviction, click here.
The entire story can be read at:
https://www.tmj4.com/about-us/lighthouse/tossed-murder-conviction-could-impact-other-solved-milwaukee-homicide-cases-defense-attorney-says
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. 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.
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;pp
