PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Brennan heard from defense experts at two hearings in 2022 that showed none of the petitioners’ DNA was on anything tested in the victim’s home. That testing also revealed for the first time that Nickens assault likely came at the same time that she experienced some sexual activity, indicating she may have been raped and killed at the same time."
---------------------------------------
STORY: "Chester 3’ denied new trials by state appeals court," by Reporter Alex Rose, published by The Delaware County Daily Times, on July 23, 2026.
GIST: "The Pennsylvania Superior Court has overturned a March 2024 order from Delaware County Common Pleas Court Judge Mary Alice Brennan granting new trials to a trio of men convicted in the 1997 murder of a 70-year-old Chester woman.
“The court finds that the new DNA results, if adopted by a jury, would likely compel a different verdict,” Brennan said in three subsequent identical opinions for Samuel Grasty, Morton Johnson and Derrick Chappell, known as the “Chester 3.”
But two of three Superior Court judges who reviewed the case found that Brennan’s analysis contravened clearly delineated rules for when a new trial may be granted. The standard, set by the state Supreme Court in Commonwealth v. Murchison, requires taking the totality of the evidence into consideration, including that already entered at trial.
Grasty, 49; Johnson, 46; and Chappell, 44; were separately convicted in trials from 1998 to 2001 in the death of Henrietta Nickens inside her home on the 3200 block of West 10th Street in Chester on Oct. 10, 1997.\
Chappell and Grasty each received life sentences, while Johnson received a de facto life sentence of 99 years.
They were 15, 20 and 18 years old, respectively, when the crime occurred. Chappell was later resentenced to 28 years to life after the U.S. Supreme Court retroactively changed the rules for sentencing minors.
All three have spent decades in prison, but have maintained their innocence.
Brennan heard from defense experts at two hearings in 2022 that showed none of the petitioners’ DNA was on anything tested in the victim’s home.
That testing also revealed for the first time that Nickens assault likely came at the same time that she experienced some sexual activity, indicating she may have been raped and killed at the same time.
The Commonwealth had never charged the case as a sex crime, but rather as a burglary gone wrong. The appeals court decided the new evidence merely underscored what was already known: That another unknown individual had deposited DNA at the scene.
“This same information was previously considered by all three separate factfinders and rejected,” the majority opinion stated. “The post-conviction DNA tests results are thus cumulative of previously available and previously used evidence at trial.”
President Judge Anne E. Lazarus wrote in her dissent that the new DNA evidence does not merely illustrate that the unknown person was in Nickens’ apartment that night, but also that it was “physically impossible” that any of the petitioners were present.
Defense attorneys have vowed to continue pursuing all possible avenues to free their clients."
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. 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;