June 16: Charles Flores: Death Row, Texas: (Junk Science Hypnosis): Major (Unwelcome) Development: Ellie Ashby reports in the Texas Tribune that the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected his submission that his conviction was improperly based on testimony from a witness who changed her recollection after hypnosis by an investigator., noting that: "Flores argued that his 1999 conviction should be overturned under the Texas “junk science” law because testimony from a key witness was improperly influenced by hypnosis performed by a police officer who was investigating the murder of 64-year-old Elizabeth “Betty” Black in Dallas County. The Texas junk science law permits inmates to challenge convictions that relied on outdated or disproven scientific procedures or practices. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals had declined to review Flores’ junk science claims, saying he failed to meet the state law’s requirement that new evidence be previously unavailable, among other standards. The Supreme Court rejected Flores’ request to order the Texas court to reconsider the appeal."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Flores’ lawyer, Gretchen Sween, said his conviction “rests on the kind of testimony that is now barred from use in Texas courtrooms.”  “The new science around memory tells us that the initial tests of an eyewitness’s memory are the only reliable ones — not the tainted testimony of a witness who has been hypnotized and makes an identification 13 months after a crime has occurred in this case,” Sween said in a statement.  “For too long, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has imposed arbitrary, unexplained barriers, denying death-sentenced prisoners with credible innocence claims, like Charles Flores, a chance to even get inside a courthouse to present their evidence of innocence before being executed,” she said.  Sween said she will continue to “pursue every available means to prove Mr. Flores’s innocence.”“All he wants is a fair trial untainted by patently unreliable testimony and official misconduct,” she said."

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Jill Barganier, one of Black’s neighbors, saw two men enter Black’s house the morning of the murder. Hoping to improve her recollection, Barganier asked investigators to place her under hypnosis. Alfredo Roen Serna, a Farmers Branch police officer, complied despite having never before performed hypnosis, Flores told the Supreme Court. Before the hypnosis session, Barganier told police both men entering Black’s house were white and had long hair. According to the petition, Flores, a Hispanic man, had short hair at the time of the crime. In addition, Barganier did not identify Flores in a photo lineup. It was only when Barganier took the witness stand that she identified Flores as one of the two suspects.  A law passed by the Texas Legislature in 2023 said evidence gathered through “investigative hypnosis performed by a law enforcement agency” was inadmissible in court."

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

STORY: "U.S. Supreme Court rejects Texas death row inmate’s appeal challenging hypnosis testimony," by Ellie Ashby, published by The Texas Tribune, on June 15, 2026.

SUB-HEADING: "Charles Flores argued that his conviction was improperly based on testimony from a witness who changed her recollection after hypnosis by an investigator.
Ellie Ashby is an Austin-based reporting fellow with the Texas Tribune and Religion News Service. A 2024 graduate of Harvard College, she wrote for The Harvard Crimson as a member of the editorial board."

GIST: "The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected Texas death row inmate Charles Flores’ efforts to force the state’s highest criminal court to reconsider his appeal.

The Supreme Court denied the petition without comment.

Flores argued that his 1999 conviction should be overturned under the Texas “junk science” law because testimony from a key witness was improperly influenced by hypnosis performed by a police officer who was investigating the murder of 64-year-old Elizabeth “Betty” Black in Dallas County.

The Texas junk science law permits inmates to challenge convictions that relied on outdated or disproven scientific procedures or practices.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals had declined to review Flores’ junk science claims, saying he failed to meet the state law’s requirement that new evidence be previously unavailable, among other standards. The Supreme Court rejected Flores’ request to order the Texas court to reconsider the appeal.

Jill Barganier, one of Black’s neighbors, saw two men enter Black’s house the morning of the murder. Hoping to improve her recollection, Barganier asked investigators to place her under hypnosis. Alfredo Roen Serna, a Farmers Branch police officer, complied despite having never before performed hypnosis, Flores told the Supreme Court.

Before the hypnosis session, Barganier told police both men entering Black’s house were white and had long hair. According to the petition, Flores, a Hispanic man, had short hair at the time of the crime.

In addition, Barganier did not identify Flores in a photo lineup. It was only when Barganier took the witness stand that she identified Flores as one of the two suspects.

A law passed by the Texas Legislature in 2023 said evidence gathered through “investigative hypnosis performed by a law enforcement agency” was inadmissible in court.

In 2016, the Court of Criminal Appeals granted Flores a stay of execution due to questions raised about Barganier’s hypnosis, but the attempt to overturn the conviction based on the junk science law was ultimately unsuccessful. 

Flores’ lawyer, Gretchen Sween, said his conviction “rests on the kind of testimony that is now barred from use in Texas courtrooms.”

“The new science around memory tells us that the initial tests of an eyewitness’s memory are the only reliable ones — not the tainted testimony of a witness who has been hypnotized and makes an identification 13 months after a crime has occurred in this case,” Sween said in a statement.

“For too long, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals has imposed arbitrary, unexplained barriers, denying death-sentenced prisoners with credible innocence claims, like Charles Flores, a chance to even get inside a courthouse to present their evidence of innocence before being executed,” she said.

Sween said she will continue to “pursue every available means to prove Mr. Flores’s innocence.”

“All he wants is a fair trial untainted by patently unreliable testimony and official misconduct,” she said."

The entire story can be read at: 

https://www.texastribune.org/2026/06/15/texas-hypnosis-appeal-supreme-court-charles-flores/

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;

June 16: Penile (not 'penal' HL) measurements: From our 'Dubious Scientific Evidence department: Question of the day: Can penis measurements justify a sexual offender's indefinite detention? Explored by Jake Sullum in 'Reason." in a commentary sub-headed, "The court (South Carolina's top court HL) unanimously ruled that penile plethysmography (PPG) is unreliable and inadmissible as evidence of recidivism risk.'..."The scientific community appears polarized as to whether to recognize the PPG as a diagnostic tool for assessing sexual deviancy," Kittredge wrote. "While some experts have found the PPG inherently unreliable—based, in part, on the lack of standardization and high error rate (upwards of twenty percent)—others have concluded the opposite and found the PPG to be an accurate and reliable diagnostic tool." But "even the experts who believe the PPG to be a valuable tool in pre-commitment evaluations acknowledge the test is not standardized." That is a fatal flaw, ('Chief Justice' HL) Kittredge said...."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  "When someone is convicted of a crime, the assumption is that he deserves to be punished because he had the ability to control his behavior. But after he completes his sentence, he can be detained as an SVP  (Sexualy Violent Predator (HL) based on the contradictory premise that he "suffer[s] from a volitional impairment rendering [him] dangerous beyond [his] control," as the Supreme Court put it in the 1997 case Kansas v. Hendricks. That's OK, the justices said, because that man is no longer a criminal paying his debt to society. Rather, he is a "patient" receiving "treatment," even if he is unlikely ever to be released based on the government's determination that he has been "cured." That legal distinction seems at least as dubious as the scientific evidence in favor of PPG.""

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

INTRO: (Reason): The South Carolina Supreme Court issued a ruling last month in a recidivism case involving the use of penile plethysmography, a dubious scientific technique that purports to measure sexual response to graphic images by gauging changes in the circumference of the subject’s penis. The test is used in cases involving people accused of violent sex offenses. REASON

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

STORY: "Penis Measurements Cannot Justify a Sex Offender's Indefinite Detention, South Carolina's Top Court Says," by Jake Sullum, published by Reason, on June 8, 2026. (Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason and a nationally syndicated columnist. He is an award-winning journalist who has covered drug policy, public health, gun control, civil liberties, and criminal justice for more than three decades.  Sullum is the author of two critically acclaimed books: Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use (Tarcher/Penguin, 2004) and For Your Own Good: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of Public Health (Free Press, 1998). His most recent book is Beyond Control: Drug Prohibition, Gun Regulation, and the Search for Sensible Alternatives (Prometheus Books, 2025), which CNN anchor Jake Tapper describes as 'a compelling and provocative book about drugs and guns...from one of the nation's most original thinkers.'")

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

SUB-HEADING: "The court unanimously ruled that penile plethysmography is unreliable and inadmissible as evidence of recidivism risk.

GIST: "South Carolina is one of 20 states that authorize indefinite civil commitment of sex offenders after they have completed their prison sentences. 

Under state law, such continued detention is allowed only when a jury concludes beyond a reasonable doubt that a respondent qualifies as a "sexually violent predator" (SVP), meaning he "suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder that makes [him] likely to engage in acts of sexual violence if not confined in a secure facility for long-term control, care, and treatment."

Although the South Carolina Office of Mental Health (OMH) concluded that Andy Hyman was not an SVP, a jury disagreed, swayed by a second opinion based largely on penile plethysmography 

(PPG), a scientifically dubious technique that aims to measure sexual response to images, audio narratives, or textual descriptions by gauging tiny changes in the circumference of the subject's penis. 

That test, the South Carolina Supreme Court unanimously ruled last month in response to Hyman's appeal, is "generally inadmissible in judicial proceedings" because it suffers from a "glaring lack of standardization," which casts doubt on its validity as a predictor of recidivism.

With that decision, the South Carolina Supreme Court joins a long list of state and federal courts that have deemed PPG results unreliable and inadmissible.

 The technique is so controversial that the OMH, which is charged with conducting pre-commitment evaluations under South Carolina's SVP law, eschews PPG as a matter of policy.

 But the state is allowed to solicit a second evaluation if it does not like the OMH's opinion, which is what happened in Hyman's case.

Hyman, who pleaded guilty to second-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor in 1997, served "a short term in prison" and "completed several years of supervised release in 2003," the South Carolina Supreme Court noted. 

Thirteen years later, Hyman pleaded guilty to the same crime, this time in the third degree, which resulted in a 10-year prison sentence. 

Before he completed that sentence, the state sought to continue detaining him as an SVP.

Marie Gehle, the OMH's chief psychologist, conducted "a series of standardized tests" and diagnosed Hyman with "pedophilic disorder."

 But she concluded that he did not fit the statutory criteria for civil commitment because he was not especially likely to reoffend. 

Unsatisfied with that assessment, the state asked Emily Gottfried, director of the Sexual Behavior Clinic and Lab at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC), for a second opinion.

Gottfried agreed that standardized tests placed Hyman "squarely within the average rate of recidivism" for sex offenders. But unlike Gehle, she also conducted a PPG test, which seemed to play an important role in her conclusion that Hyman posed "a heightened risk of reoffending."

During the trial, Gottfried described PPG as "an objective physiological measure of male sexual arousal," "the gold standard" for assessing that response, and a "strong predictor or risk factor for future sexual offending."

 The PPG results, the state's lawyer told the jury, "clearly indicate[d]" that Hyman had a "current sexual interest in children." That was enough, "in and of itself," to justify his civil commitment, the state argued.

The jury deliberated for just 22 minutes before agreeing with Gottfried. 

It rejected the contrary assessment offered by Gehle, who testified that most of the tests Gottfried had used were not designed to measure the likelihood of recidivism.

 In particular, Gehle said, PPG is not reliable, since retests produce inconsistent results, or valid as a predictor of future offending, which she said is why the OMH does not use it for pre-commitment evaluations.

Gehle emphasized that different labs use different PPG procedures, making comparisons impossible. She also noted that Gottfried had used two sets of stimuli, prolonging the test and making a positive result more likely.

The South Carolina Supreme Court elaborated on those problems in its opinion, which was written by Chief Justice John Kittredge and joined by the court's four other members. 

Although PPG has been used for decades, Kittredge noted, there remains a "significant schism in the scientific community" regarding whether it works as advertised.

"Some experts have focused on the high rate…of false positives and false negatives associated with men's ability to willfully suppress or display arousal," Kittredge wrote. 

"Other experts have noted there can be significant differences between the results of an offender's initial PPG and a subsequent retest administered several months later. 

The disparities may be explained, at least in part, by the PPG's inability to account for a host of variables that affect erectile responses." 

Those variables include "the recency of an offender's last orgasm," "his level of intoxication or fatigue," "his cardiovascular health," "his current medications," his age, his intelligence, the gender of the person administering the test, and the time of year when the test is conducted.

"The scientific community appears polarized as to whether to recognize the PPG as a diagnostic tool for assessing sexual deviancy," Kittredge wrote. "While some experts have found the PPG inherently unreliable—based, in part, on the lack of standardization and high error rate (upwards of twenty percent)—others have concluded the opposite and found the PPG to be an accurate and reliable diagnostic tool." But "even the experts who believe the PPG to be a valuable tool in pre-commitment evaluations acknowledge the test is not standardized."

That is a fatal flaw, Kittredge said, since "following uniform procedures ensures reliability and enables subsequent researchers to reproduce experiments and compare results, thereby validating research findings and improving the accuracy of the data." With PPG, he noted, "there are at least seventeen aspects—some minor, and some major—in which tests can vary from laboratory to laboratory," which underlines "PPG's complete absence of reliability."

The sets of stimuli used in PPG tests, for example, vary widely across labs and are often not specified in the scientific literature.

 That "makes it difficult to compare results across studies or to replicate a particular study's results in a subsequent study," Kittredge noted.

The cutoff for a positive result also varies. Gottfried testified that researchers typically count a 2.5-millimeter increase in penile circumference as adequate, while she prefers a five-millimeter threshold to reduce the chance of a false positive.

 But "MUSC's selected cut score is arbitrary," Kittredge noted, because "no studies that we know of indicate a 5-millimeter cut score leads to fewer false positives than a 2.5-millimeter cut score."

Gottfried "did not explain why MUSC had chosen a 5-millimeter threshold instead of, say, 4 millimeters, 7 millimeters, or 10 millimeters," Kittredge wrote. "Additionally, because the cut scores for PPGs are not nationally or internationally standardized, nothing stops MUSC or any other laboratory from arbitrarily increasing or decreasing its cut score to a different, equally random threshold in the future."

The lack of standardization "gives rise to the possibility (or, more likely, probability) that an examinee could be sent to two different laboratories and get two different results based purely on the laboratories' variable and unregulated use of different protocols or stimuli sets," Kittredge noted. "This is wholly inconsistent with recognized scientific practices, preventing any possible finding that the PPG is reliable scientific evidence."

This decision constrains the sort of evidence that can be used to indefinitely extend the incarceration of sex offenders. But it does not question the validity of that policy, a form of preventive detention that the Supreme Court has approved based on legal logic that is hard to follow.

When someone is convicted of a crime, the assumption is that he deserves to be punished because he had the ability to control his behavior. 

But after he completes his sentence, he can be detained as an SVP based on the contradictory premise that he "suffer[s] from a volitional impairment rendering [him] dangerous beyond [his] control," as the Supreme Court put it in the 1997 case Kansas v. Hendricks.

That's OK, the justices said, because that man is no longer a criminal paying his debt to society.

 Rather, he is a "patient" receiving "treatment," even if he is unlikely ever to be released based on the government's determination that he has been "cured."

That legal distinction seems at least as dubious as the scientific evidence in favor of PPG.""

The entire commentary can be read at; 

https://reason.com/2026/06/08/penis-measurements-cannot-justify-a-sex-offenders-indefinite-detention-south-carolinas-top-court-says/?utm_source=TMP-Newsletter&utm_campaign=911a3f0093-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_06_12_10_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_5e02cdad9d-911a3f0093-174331221&shem=rimspwouoe,

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;

June 15: Child Abuse Pediatricians: Parents Beware! Major (Welcome) Development: Illinois moves closer to protecting parents from flawed investigations of potential child abuse with a bill, passed unanimously by lawmakers, and now goes to the governor's desk: As Evan Holden reports in IPM News: "The bill requires child abuse pediatricians — investigators at the hospital who look at medical records to determine if there is potential child abuse — to state who they are to parents as they start an investigation. It also allows parents to get a second opinion and use that during court hearings."... "Alan Novick is a recently retired lawyer from Bloomington who spent 35 years in abuse and neglect court. Until recently, he served on the board of the Family Justice Resource Center, a Peoria-based organization that helps parents navigate child abuse cases. Novick said pediatricians don’t always indicate whether they are reporting findings to the Department of Children and Family Services [DCFS] that could lead to parents not seeing the reports, or knowing their legal rights until the day of the trial. Novick said the bill would change that “by causing the pediatrician to indicate what they’re really doing there” and tell the parents about their right to a second opinion."

QUOTE  OF THE DAY: "Sometimes kids have a vitamin D deficiency, he said, that is most of the time a genetic condition, or other genetic conditions that can lead to broken bones, which a child abuse pediatrician might not have a specialty in. Novick said a second opinion from a doctor can reveal more about a child’s current medical situation that a child abuse pediatrician might not have complete knowledge about. “There’s no juries. It gives the judge the ability to go, well, the child abuse pediatrician says this, and it’s not contradicted by the second opinion, or the child abuse pediatrician says this, and it’s absolutely contradicted. And now I know that somebody is wrong,” Novick said. Juries are used in criminal cases such as sexual abuse, but not in civil cases, which is what most child abuse cases involve."

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

QUOTE TWO  OF THE DAY: "Michelle Weidner, executive director of the Family Justice Resource Center, said the center helps family and attorneys find objective second opinions from board‑certified subspecialists with expertise in medical conditions that can mimic abuse. “The exculpatory medical evidence that there may be a medical explanation for the findings, so that the judge can make the best decision for that child, and so that we can help protect innocent families from being wrongfully separated,” she said. Weidner said children can have complex medical conditions that a child abuse pedestrian miss that a second opinion can bring to the proceedings, adding there are a lot of medical reasons a kid’s bone can break."

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

STORY: "Family advocates praise Illinois bill that gives  parents more transparency in child abuse investigations, by Reporter Evan Holden, published by IPM News, on June 8, 2026. 

APM: Illinois lawmakers unanimously passed a bill during the spring legislative session that gives more transparency and tools to parents to defend themselves in child abuse cases.

The bill requires child abuse pediatricians — investigators at the hospital who look at medical records to determine if there is potential child abuse — to state who they are to parents as they start an investigation. It also allows parents to get a second opinion and use that during court hearings.

It now goes to the governor’s desk to sign.

Alan Novick is a recently retired lawyer from Bloomington who spent 35 years in abuse and neglect court. Until recently, he served on the board of the Family Justice Resource Center, a Peoria-based organization that helps parents navigate child abuse cases.

Novick said pediatricians don’t always indicate whether they are reporting findings to the Department of Children and Family Services [DCFS] that could lead to parents not seeing the reports, or knowing their legal rights until the day of the trial.

Novick said the bill would change that “by causing the pediatrician to indicate what they’re really doing there” and tell the parents about their right to a second opinion.

Sometimes kids have a vitamin D deficiency, he said, that is most of the time a genetic condition, or other genetic conditions that can lead to broken bones, which a child abuse pediatrician might not have a specialty in.

Novick said a second opinion from a doctor can reveal more about a child’s current medical situation that a child abuse pediatrician might not have complete knowledge about.

“There’s no juries. It gives the judge the ability to go, well, the child abuse pediatrician says this, and it’s not contradicted by the second opinion, or the child abuse pediatrician says this, and it’s absolutely contradicted. And now I know that somebody is wrong,” Novick said.

Juries are used in criminal cases such as sexual abuse, but not in civil cases, which is what most child abuse cases involve.

Currently, Novick said parents can present a second opinion in court, but it is still expensive to get a second opinion from a doctor. The challenge, he said, is finding a pediatrician who is willing to conduct the examination for free.

“[Family Justice Resource Center] found some sympathetic doctors who will take a look, who will look at some medical records, and knowing already that the child abuse pediatrician has determined its abuse, sometimes they’re in a position to say no,” Novick said.

Novick said when a family is at a hospital, they do not expect someone to be an investigator, and the legislation could give parents more transparency that they are being asked questions about potential child abuse.

Michelle Weidner, executive director of the Family Justice Resource Center, said the center helps family and attorneys find objective second opinions from board‑certified subspecialists with expertise in medical conditions that can mimic abuse.

“The exculpatory medical evidence that there may be a medical explanation for the findings, so that the judge can make the best decision for that child, and so that we can help protect innocent families from being wrongfully separated,” she said.

Weidner said children can have complex medical conditions that a child abuse pedestrian miss that a second opinion can bring to the proceedings, adding there are a lot of medical reasons a kid’s bone can break.

When a parent is at the emergency room, she said, they are not always thinking clearly, which can lead to confusion that a child abuse pediatrician is part of the regular medical care team.

“The AMA [American Medical Association] code of ethics requires doctors to disclose when they’re carrying out a medical evaluation for a third party, and when a doctor is carrying out an evaluation pursuant to a contract with DCFS or pursuant to an agreement with the Children’s Advocacy Center, they are ethically obligated to disclose that to parents,” said Weidner, adding some pediatricians don’t follow the code.

Weidner said the bill requires medical professionals to disclose who they are, including their name and their involvement in the child care process, so parents know who is evaluating their child.

She said people often can see child abuse pediatricians as regular medical providers, noting they have a lot of influence on whether parents keep their child.

“When they are conducting evaluations as part of a child protection investigation, their opinions can directly influence government decisions about custody, criminal charges, and administrative,” Weidner said.

Weidner said child abuse pediatricians are not just making a medical analysis, they are also acting as a forensic consultant for DCFS.

DCFS has not responded to a request for comment.

The entire story can be read at: 

https://ift.tt/x45bcp3

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;

June 14: Hiromu Sakahara: Japan: It is most unusual for a 'retrial' to be granted in Japan - and even more unusual when the retrial has been ordered 15 years after the death of this man who had been jailed for murder. Yumi Asada and Chris Lau report on CNN on the coerced confession that led to Hiromu Sakahara's long wait for justice - and on efforts to reform Japan's extremely restrictive retrial system, noting that: "But their world (Hiromu Sakahara's family HL) turned upside down in December 1984 after the disappearance of a local liquor store manager in a suspected murder-robbery. Her body was found a month later in a field. Sakahara was initially called in by police for questioning because he was a frequent customer to the store. However, he was released shortly after his wife was able to prove that he was drinking somewhere else on the night, according to Koji. But police returned three years later to question him, and after a day of interrogation, he confessed to the crime. Sakahara later told his son he’d been beaten and kicked and only buckled after officers began to direct the threats at people around him, said Koji, who had confronted his father about his confession. The next day, police took Sakahara away. “He never came home again,” Koji recalled.'

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Hiromu Sakahara case in Japan, like the Tim Rees case in Ontario, is a classical example of police dirty tricks which can send an innocent person to prison for life, and  even, in some jurisdictions to Death Row.  Tim Rees was convicted  of second degree murder in the death of 10-year-old  Darla Thurrott in Toronto, Ontario, in 1989 and sentenced to life imprisonment with no opportunity to seek parole for 15 years. He was however exonerated when the Ontario Court of Appeal quashed the conviction on November 27, 2025 and ordered a new trial. On December 29th the prosecution withdrew the murder charge but by this time Tim Rees had spent 23 years behind bars as a child-killer, and many years thereafter on parole.  As the Toronto Star reported in its story on the withdrawal of the charges: "In court, Superior Court Justice Jane Kelly said Rees shouldn’t have spent one day in prison. The fact that the recording was not disclosed and was found in a box of tapes stored in the police chief’s office raises more questions than answers, Kelly noted. “That is for somebody else to decide what the result of that is.” Hiromu Sakahara died in 2011 while serving a life sentence for murdering a store manager in the rural town of Hino in 1984. Both cases involve police use of cases of two nefarious techniques  - a lethal combination which would horrify conscientious police officer, and make anyone else cringe as well. The first: Coercion  or fabrication of a confession. The second: Concealing of critical evidence from the defence, which makes it impossible for the accused person to establish that he or she is innocent.  It's hard to imagine any greater misconduct by the police because of  the harm caused to the the individuals, to their families and to society (where the perpetrator of the crime will  remain free to committing other terrible crimes.) The two cases have something else in common:  Since  the concealed negative's  in the Sakahara cases- and the incriminating third party videotaped statement of the probable killer in Tim Rees's case were revealed  years after the trial and after  all appeals had been exhausted, much of the  damage has already been  done.  I originally planned to devote this post to  the recent decision  to order a rare post-humous retrial for Hiromu Sakahara,  which I gather would not have been ordered unless the government intended  to posthumously exonerate him, as his family has fought for incessantly. However, the more I learned about his case,  and his families valiant battle to secure  a post-humous exoneration for him, the more I realized that there were some truly troubling  parallels with the Tim Rees case, which also involved the hiding of critical evidence by the police. So before getting into the post, I am setting out these parallels, in order to focus   public attention on the harsh injustice imposed on Tim Rees by Ontario's criminal justice system,  in order to identify those  responsible for hiding the critical evidence (It was found in a box in the office of the chief of police), and also in order to determine if prosecutors played any role in concealing  it. How else can we have confidence in our criminal justice system?  So, let the truth be out! Let justice be done for Tim Rees: And let there be accountability for those that deserve it.  As noted above, withdrawing the charges, Justice Kelly said the fact that the recording was not disclosed and was found in a box of tapes stored in the police chief’s office raises more questions than answers - and that that is for somebody else to decide what the result of that is.” So much time has gone by already. That can't happen soon enough.  

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog; 

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

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

HIROMU SAKAHARA: COERCED CONFESSION: 

 Japan Times: "Sakahara was initially called in by police for questioning because he was a frequent customer to the store. However, he was released shortly after his wife was able to prove that he was drinking somewhere else on the night, according to Koji. Sakahara later told his son he’d been beaten and kicked and only buckled after officers began to direct the threats at people around him, said Koji, who had confronted his father about his confession. The next day, police took Sakahara away. “He never came home again,” Koji recalled." 

japan-sakahara-posthumous-retrial-intl-hnk-dst

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

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

TIM REES: FABRICATED CONFESSION:  

Lawyer James Lockyer (Innocence Canada) interviewed by  CBC Radio As It Happens: “He confessed, they say. In fact, what they did was they wrote down their version of what they think might have happened if he had done it, and just had him say yes. And so it was really their words, and then they just said, ‘Sign here.’ And they caught him at a time that he was very depressed... He was in a wretched state at the time, and just wanted to get out of the room and go to sleep somewhere. So he was ready to do whatever if they asked him.” 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/timothy-rees-charges-withdrawn-9.7020986

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

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

HIROMU SAKAHARA: HIDDEN NEGATIVE FILM:

 "Editorial: The Japan News: February 2026:  (The editorial  is headed, "First Posthumous retrial;  Lost time can never be recovered:) "A photograph in the investigative files showing Sakahara purportedly leading investigators to the site where the body was dumped served as the decisive evidence that led to his conviction. However, items inconsistent with the photo later came to light. Negative film disclosed by prosecutors revealed images suggesting that police officers had actually been guiding Sakahara’s movements. The existence of these negatives was only confirmed more than a decade after the initial petition for a retrial — after Sakahara had died. Why was such crucial evidence withheld for so many years? In other cases of wrongful conviction, a recurring pattern has emerged such as the coercion of confessions to fit an investigative narrative and the selective collection of evidence. It is inevitable to conclude that investigative authorities at the time prioritized arrests and convictions of suspects — even through forced measures — over uncovering the actual truth."

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

TIM REES: THE HIDDEN TAPE-RECORDED STATEMENT OF THE LANDLORD: 

 "In its release on the pushing of the charge, Innocence Canada reports that  in 2018 filed an application alleging that he had been wrongly convicted with the then Minister of Justice, Jody Wilson-Raybould - and that, "The compelling feature of his application was an undisclosed tape-recorded statement of the landlord who lived in the same home and slept in the room immediately across the hall from Darla.  The landlord, since deceased, had given a highly incriminating statement to the police hours after the murder but the defence knew nothing of it.  The landlord was able to testify with impunity, and falsely. that he had never had a relationship with Darla and had not been in her bedroom on the night she was murdered. " Knowing what we know now, this is enough to make one weep. All the time that the prosecutor was trying to put him away for life  through this witness, for a crime he did not commit,  somewhere nearby, in the possession of the police, was a tape on which the probable killer, standing just a few feet away,  was implicating himself in the crime.. As the Innocence  Canada released continued: "If the missing tape recording had been disclosed in 1989, it is questionable whether Mr. Rees would ever have been charged, let alone convicted of Darla’s murder.  In a remarkable twist, in 1989 it was one or more members of the Toronto Service who never revealed the existence of the missing tape-recording, and in 2016 it was members of the Toronto Police Homicide Cold Squad who found the missing tape-recording after they had been assigned to respond to Innocence Canada’s request for access to the original investigative file."

https://innocencecanada.com/after-36-years-a-toronto-mans-conviction-for-the-murder-in-etobicoke-of-a-10-year-old-girl-is-quashed-by-the-ontario-court-of-a

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

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

THE POST: 

BACKGROUND: From Japan News (Yomiuri Shimbum): February 28, 2026. (Editorial under the heading 'First posthumous retrial: Lost time can never be recovered.: Link Below: "Sakahara was arrested three years after the incident based on a confession he made. Although he pleaded not guilty at trial, arguing that his confession had been coerced, he was found guilty at the district, high and supreme court level. "A photograph in the investigative files showing Sakahara purportedly leading investigators to the site where the body was dumped served as the decisive evidence that led to his conviction. However, items inconsistent with the photo later came to light. Negative film disclosed by prosecutors revealed images suggesting that police officers had actually been guiding Sakahara’s movements. The existence of these negatives was only confirmed more than a decade after the initial petition for a retrial — after Sakahara had died. Why was such crucial evidence withheld for so many years? In other cases of wrongful conviction, a recurring pattern has emerged such as the coercion of confessions to fit an investigative narrative and the selective collection of evidence. It is inevitable to conclude that investigative authorities at the time prioritized arrests and convictions of suspects — even through forced measures — over uncovering the actual truth."

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

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

QUOTE OF THE DAY: “Many of the defendants for petitioning for the retrial, they’re very old and they actually have no time left,” said Kana Sasakura, law professor at Konan University in the western city of Kobe. Sakahara’s lawyer Ryota Ishigawa, who had been fighting his case for 20 years, says the decision to grant a retrial came too late.  “As the defense team, we are deeply disappointed. There is fundamental injustice in the system as a whole. We’re frustrated that we couldn’t celebrate with the defendant,” he said. For Koji, change can’t come soon enough — the years of fighting for justice for his father have burdened him with guilt and regret. “If the retrial had been granted while he was alive, he would still be here,” he said, of his father. “I sincerely hope that Japan will, as soon as possible, bring its legal system in line with other countries, so that no more victims of wrongful convictions have to suffer."

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

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "Sakahara argued his innocence during his trial but was convicted based on police claims that he was able to lead them to the location of the body, and separately the site of the safe that was stolen from the liquor store. Throughout the 24 years Sakahara was locked up, his son and other family members would visit him and tell him to hang on, as they fought to get his case reheard. “You can’t give up in a place like this,” they would tell him. But his father contracted pneumonia in 2011, and after two decades in prison, his body was too weak to fight it. Sakahara passed away that year. “You don’t have to fight anymore. It’s okay to let go. You’ve worked so hard until now,” his sister told their father moments before his heart stopped beating, Koji recalled."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "All these years, the stigma stuck no matter how hard the family fought to change the narrative. “People viewed us as a family of a criminal,” said Koji, adding that his mother used to get harassing calls, heckling “murderer.” The family won a retrial based on negative film stored within evidence files that their lawyer argued shows that police may have guided Sakahara to the location of the body. Sakahara is believed to be only the second person granted a posthumous trial in post-war Japan."

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

PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "Sakahara is believed to be only the second person granted a posthumous trial in post-war Japan. The first was in 1985, when six years after her death, Shigeko Fuji was acquitted of killing her husband. She spent 27 years in prison for the crime that evidence ultimately suggested was committed by an intruder. Two years ago, another man, Iwao Hakamata, was acquitted after spending more than 46 years on death row for a murder his lawyer said he was forced to admit."

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

STORY: "A man was jailed for murder. 15 years after his death, he will get a retrial," by Reporters Yumi Asada and Chris Lay, published by CNN, on June 12, 2026. (Yumi Asada is a CNN Field Producer based in Tokyo...Chris Lay is a news Reporter CNN National Desk.)

STORY: "A man was jailed for murder. 15 years after his death, he will get a retrial," by Reporters Yumi Asada and Chris Lay, published by CNN, on June 12, 2026.

GIST: When a Japanese court granted Hiromu Sakahara a retrial, there was no defendant in the dock celebrating the prospect of freedom.

Instead, family members gathered around his grave to share news that he had longed to hear in life after a decades-long fight for justice.

Sakahara died in 2011 while serving a life sentence for murdering a store manager in the rural town of Hino in 1984 – based on a confession that he said was forced.

A rare posthumous retrial is expected to begin soon, but the long delays in Sakahara’s case added momentum to calls for reform to speed up the excruciatingly long process people must go through to seek redress in Japan.

“I regret that we could not save my father from prison,” his son Koji Sakahara told CNN.

“While I am happy about the decision to grant a retrial, it’s still incredibly painful,” said Koji, now 64 with hair that’s turned grey during the long campaign to prove his father’s innocence.

Japan has a reputation for “hostage justice,” a term used to describe the detention of suspects for questioning, often without access to legal counsel, for far longer than the law allows in other countries.

With a conviction rate of over 99%, human rights groups say innocent people are being jailed for crimes they didn’t commit.

Sakahara first filed for a retrial in 2001. Even after his death a decade later, his family kept pushing for a new hearing, which was repeatedly challenged by prosecutors in all three levels of court.

Sakahara’s long wait for justice inspired a new bill that, if passed, could make it harder for prosecutors to appeal decisions granting a retrial.

Officials within Japan’s Justice Department argue that the proposed changes could undermine the finality of convictions.

However, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi – a right-winger who counts Britain’s Margaret Thatcher among her political idols – has backed the legislation, telling parliament last month that it’s vital to ensuring the retrial system delivers prompt justice.

“It is unacceptable for innocent people to be punished,” she said. “If a final judgment convicts an innocent person, that person must be promptly exonerated.”
A quiet life upended

Koji Sakahara says in the early 80s his family was living an ordinary life in Hino, a quiet town about an hour’s drive east of Kyoto.

“Everyone in our family was working; we had no financial struggles, and I believe we were having a happy life with our father, who was very devoted to his children,” he said.

But their world turned upside down in December 1984 after the disappearance of a local liquor store manager in a suspected murder-robbery. Her body was found a month later in a field.

Sakahara was initially called in by police for questioning because he was a frequent customer to the store. However, he was released shortly after his wife was able to prove that he was drinking somewhere else on the night, according to Koji.

Sakahara later told his son he’d been beaten and kicked and only buckled after officers began to direct the threats at people around him, said Koji, who had confronted his father about his confession.

The next day, police took Sakahara away. “He never came home again,” Koji recalled. Sakahara argued his innocence during his trial but was convicted based on police claims that he was able to lead them to the location of the body, and separately the site of the safe that was stolen from the liquor store.

Throughout the 24 years Sakahara was locked up, his son and other family members would visit him and tell him to hang on, as they fought to get his case reheard. “You can’t give up in a place like this,” they would tell him.

But his father contracted pneumonia in 2011, and after two decades in prison, his body was too weak to fight it.

Sakahara passed away that year. “You don’t have to fight anymore. It’s okay to let go. You’ve worked so hard until now,” his sister told their father moments before his heart stopped beating, Koji recalled.

All these years, the stigma stuck no matter how hard the family fought to change the narrative. “People viewed us as a family of a criminal,” said Koji, adding that his mother used to get harassing calls, heckling “murderer.”

The family won a retrial based on negative film stored within evidence files that their lawyer argued shows that police may have guided Sakahara to the location of the body.

Sakahara is believed to be only the second person granted a posthumous trial in post-war Japan.

The first was in 1985, when six years after her death, Shigeko Fuji was acquitted of killing her husband. She spent 27 years in prison for the crime that evidence ultimately suggested was committed by an intruder.

Two years ago, another man, Iwao Hakamata, was acquitted after spending more than 46 years on death row for a murder his lawyer said he was forced to admit.
Overdue reforms

Part of the problem in Japan is the lack of legal representation for those brought in for questioning over an alleged crime.

Japan hasn’t made access to lawyers during interrogations an absolute right despite being a member of The Group of Seven (G7) – an intergovernmental forum of the US and other Western allies that often emphasizes the importance of human rights and the rule of law. These failures have long drawn criticism from the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Japan’s legal system has also been criticized for handing prosecutors too much power. Under the proposed change, they’ll only be able to appeal a retrial decision if there are “sufficient grounds.”

The country’s Justice Ministry had opposed the changes, claiming that limiting the scope for appeals could “undermine the institutional safeguards that ensure careful and fair judicial decisions.”

There is also “a significant risk that this would fundamentally alter the nature of interrogations – which play a crucial role in evidence gathering – and substantially undermine their effectiveness,” the spokesperson added.

Some criminal law experts, however, said the reform has been long overdue.

Law professor Tomonobu Ishida, at Meiji University in Tokyo, said delays for wrongly convicted individuals to seek justice are “one of the most serious problems in Japan’s criminal justice system.”

“In some retrial cases, it has taken decades before wrongful convictions were corrected. During that time, defendants and their families often suffer irreparable physical, psychological, and social harm,” he said.

Professor Koji Tabuchi, who specializes criminal law in Kyushu University in Fukuoka, said it’s time for prosecutors to forgo a zero-sum mindset when an individual’s liberty is on the line.

“When judges declare a defendant not guilty in Japan, prosecutors think: ‘We lost’,” he said. “But do they have to think so?”

Those waiting for justice in jail also aren’t getting any younger, said another expert in Japanese criminal law.

“Many of the defendants for petitioning for the retrial, they’re very old and they actually have no time left,” said Kana Sasakura, law professor at Konan University in the western city of Kobe.

Sakahara’s lawyer Ryota Ishigawa, who had been fighting his case for 20 years, says the decision to grant a retrial came too late.

“As the defense team, we are deeply disappointed. There is fundamental injustice in the system as a whole. We’re frustrated that we couldn’t celebrate with the defendant,” he said.

For Koji, change can’t come soon enough — the years of fighting for justice for his father have burdened him with guilt and regret.

“If the retrial had been granted while he was alive, he would still be here,” he said, of his father.

“I sincerely hope that Japan will, as soon as possible, bring its legal system in line with other countries, so that no more victims of wrongful convictions have to suffer.”"

The entire story can be read at: 

https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/12/asia/japan-sakahara-posthumous-retrial-intl-hnk-dst?cid=ios_app

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;

June 14: Technology Gone Wrong: Hugo Parra: San Diego: The controversial camera (licence reading) network is already under attack in North America and elsewhere for surveilling protesters, track abortion-seekers, and detaining immigrants. Ars Technica (Senior Policy Reporter Ashley Belanger) adds to the disturbing list, in a story headed, "Man jailed for a month despite Flock showing he was 5 miles from the scene, " and sub-headed, "Cop seemingly ignored Flock camera timestamp to justify arrests," which notes that: "Flock cameras are supposed to help catch violent criminals and exonerate the innocent. But for innocent people who get accused of crimes based on Flock data, the technology can create lasting harms. Parra and Beltran are both left in a particularly vulnerable position, the Times of San Diego emphasized, since they now anticipate their prior records will influence cops and courts reviewing Flock footage and perhaps make them more susceptible to wrongful arrests."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "Since his arrest, Parra told the Times of San Diego that he now gets “paranoid whenever a police officer or patrol vehicle comes into view.” “I remember all the horrible accusations being said by the [district attorney] and judge about me, and how I was a dangerous threat to the public,” Parra said. “I was able to experience being seen as guilty until proven innocent instead of the other way around."

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

"STORY: "Man jailed  for a month despite Flock showing he was 5 miles  from the scene,  by Reporter Ashley Belanger, published  by Ars Technica, on June 8, 2026. (Ashley Belanger is a senior policy reporter for Ars Technica, dedicated to tracking social impacts of emerging policies and new technologies. She is a Chicago-based journalist with 20 years of experience.)

SUR-HEADING: "Obviously the wrong car."

SUB-HEADING: "Cop seemingly ignored Flock camera timestamp to justify arrests."

GIST: "A San Diego police department is facing a lawsuit after jailing a man for a month based on a Flock camera alert that cops allegedly should have known, based on the timestamp, did not depict the car that they were looking for.

Last November, Hugo Parra was arrested on felony charges after San Diego police relied on Flock data and a witness statement to wrongly connect him to an attempted carjacking at gunpoint, the Times of San Diego reported. Cops were looking for a red Alfa Romeo car with tinted windows and a man wearing a gray hoodie, and Parra happened to be wearing a white hoodie while riding in a friend’s car that roughly matched the vehicle description.

Although Flock cameras can capture license plate data, cops did not have even a partial plate to help them verify if the car was involved in a violent crime. But the Flock data cops used to justify the arrest actually showed that Parra was five miles away at the time of the crime, Parra’s attorney, Alex Coolman, told the Times of San Diego. Rather than arrest him, cops could have used that data, as well as Parra’s cellphone location data, to corroborate Parra’s statement that he was innocent, Coolman said.

“This Flock hit was obviously the wrong car, as it could not have been in both places simultaneously,” Coolman said.

Instead, police set aside the evidence suggesting that Parra’s car was different from the vehicle police were pursuing and called in the witness, who picked out Parra as the suspect in a lineup. However, the witness only identified Parra based on superficial features, including “the jacket and the beard” and “the skin color,” the police report said, according to the Times of San Diego.

Parra, who was on probation at the time of the arrest, was “in disbelief” after cops decided to jail him. He spent nearly a month in jail, “full of fear and adrenaline because I was being charged with a violent crime,” he told the Times of San Diego.

Now, he and his friend who owns the car that Flock flagged, Ariel Beltran, are getting ready to sue the city for negligence and civil rights violations. The Times of San Diego reviewed tort claims filed in April, which argued that “San Diego Police misread its own surveillance system and ignored exculpatory evidence in a rush to judgment.”

As a penalty, the city owes the men $1.5 million each in damages, their filing alleged.

Neither the police department nor the city will comment on the pending litigation, but Coolman told the Times of San Diego that “the city has denied the men’s claims,” so the lawsuit will proceed.

Making arrests “with less information upfront”

Backlash against Flock is mounting, as the camera network has been used to surveil protesters, track abortion-seekers, and detain immigrants, digital rights group the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported. Some local groups are also resisting FBI moves to get “near real time” access to Flock data. While the EFF warns the cameras are most often used for low-level investigations like noise complaints or employment background checks, communities across political divides have questioned whether the purported benefits of the cameras are worth sacrificing privacy and risking government surveillance.

But San Diego has continued to embrace Flock. One month after Congress members called for probes into “inevitable” Flock abuse, the San Diego Police Department “looked to bolster its license plate reader program,” the Times of San Diego reported. On top of capturing audio and video, the cameras in the area could have begun collecting data from connected devices if the department signed a contract it was weighing in December. But the cops decided against using the new platform, Axios reported.

Although some police departments may not be ready to pilot Flock’s data-integration platform, they likely have encountered earlier Flock messaging encouraging cops to turn to Flock for purposes beyond its license plate reader functionality.

On Monday, the Raleigh News & Observer published a watchdog report warning “No plate? No problem” after obtaining a 2024 product presentation prepared for the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation’s license plate reader pilot program. In that presentation, cops were reminded that “cameras record data including a car’s make, decals, and body type,” as well as bumper stickers and other unique features that comprise a “Vehicle Fingerprint” that cops can supposedly rely on to track specific cars across the camera network.

It’s touted as a way for law enforcement officials to get more information “even when you don’t have full plate information” and to “build stronger cases with less information upfront,” that report showed.

Parra’s case in San Diego is a powerful example of what can go wrong when cops build supposedly strong cases using less information.

In his lawsuit, he plans to argue that cops ignored relevant Flock data when pushing forward with his arrest. Most glaringly, the Flock alert that popped up and set cops on Parra’s trail was logged 23 seconds after the cops tried and failed to stop the actual suspect. That log showed that Parra’s friend’s car was five miles away at the time the pursuit began, which Parra’s lawyer said makes it implausible that cops were pursuing that exact vehicle.

Seemingly, the car just looked too strikingly similar for the detective who saw the Flock alert to treat the hit with appropriate skepticism. The Times of San Diego reviewed Detective Gary Gonzales’ report, which noted that he saw the Flock alert and immediately “recognized the vehicle in the image as the vehicle [we] were pursuing due to the red paint and black tinted windows.”

Cops also could have checked other Flock cameras in the network to track Beltran’s car and verify Parra’s story.

Coolman told the Times of San Diego that “mass surveillance without any sense of skepticism, or common sense, is a recipe for disaster.”

“Law enforcement will come up with false positives all the time, the broader the surveillance net is cast,” Coolman said.

Flock misuse creates lasting harms

San Diego counts among cities that remain invested in Flock, spending $2 million annually to maintain access. Around the US, some communities have won fights to end such contracts and defund Flock, however, a mayor of a New York city recently showed how far some local officials might be willing to go to block defunding efforts.

In April, Carmella Mantello, the Republican mayor of Troy, New York, accused the Democrat-led city council of putting the city in “jeopardy” by working to halt Flock funding, The Washington Post reported. To keep Flock cameras running, she declared a state of emergency—which the Post noted is typically reserved for floods and blizzards.

In response, the city council sued the mayor and, as the battle lines have been drawn, is considering passing a law to permanently limit Flock’s use in the area.

Flock cameras are supposed to help catch violent criminals and exonerate the innocent. But for innocent people who get accused of crimes based on Flock data, the technology can create lasting harms. Parra and Beltran are both left in a particularly vulnerable position, the Times of San Diego emphasized, since they now anticipate their prior records will influence cops and courts reviewing Flock footage and perhaps make them more susceptible to wrongful arrests.

Since his arrest, Parra told the Times of San Diego that he now gets “paranoid whenever a police officer or patrol vehicle comes into view.”

“I remember all the horrible accusations being said by the [district attorney] and judge about me, and how I was a dangerous threat to the public,” Parra said. “I was able to experience being seen as guilty until proven innocent instead of the other way around.""

The entire story can be read at: 

\https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/06/man-jailed-for-a-month-despite-flock-showing-he-was-5-miles-from-crime-scene/

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;