Saturday, July 12, 2025

Corey Brock Michigan: (Recent entry to National Registry of Exonerations):DNA skullduggery? From our 'Enough to make one weep' department: The prosecutors remained mum while he pleaded guilty and was sentenced to seven to thirty-two years in prison - even though DNA testing had excluded him as a perpetrator in the crime. As Maurice Possley notes: "The DNA exclusion had not been disclosed to Brock or his attorney at the time of his plea.".."Based on her work and the CIU investigation, Krauskopf, in December 2024, filed a motion for relief from judgment on behalf of Brock. The motion noted that on August 5, 1999, about eight months before Brock pled guilty, DNA testing of the evidence had been completed by the Michigan State Police crime laboratory. Brock and Harris were excluded as the sources of male DNA found on the swabs from the Jeep, swabs from J.H., and swabs from J.H.’s underwear. “There is absolutely no indication that this information was disclosed to Mr. Brock’s attorney,” the motion said. “Furthermore, there is also no indication that Mr. Brock himself was aware of this information.” The CIU (Conviction Integrity Unit) filed a concurring response."

›
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: " On May 29, 2025, David Williams, Chief Assistant Prosecutor under Oakland County Prosecutor Karen McDonald, petit...
Friday, July 11, 2025

Justin Plummer: UK: Enough to make one weep: First convicted in 1998 on the basis of "really rogue (bitemark) science; Then convicted on the statement of a convicted criminal in the pay of the police: Now, as criminologist/journalist Jon Robins tells us in a commentary headed: "The dangers of cell confessions, published by 'UnHerd,' backed by committed lawyers, he has been a granted an appeal, soon to be heard…"The Court of Appeal will now reexamine the strength of a dead man’s testimony. “This is a classic example of the dangers of cell confession evidence,” says his solicitor Annalisa Moscardini. “Justin has been so badly served by the justice system for 26 years — he was convicted in 1998 on the basis of really bogus science. The prosecution accepted that it was so bogus that when we got the case back to the Court of Appeal they threw their hand in. Now he’s been convicted on the statement of a convicted criminal in the pay of the police. He died in 1999. The evidence we have is his written statement and we couldn’t question or challenge him — yet that written evidence has now been resurrected and used to convict him. It compounds the injustice that Justin Plummer originally suffered.”

›
PUBLISHER'S NOTE:  What do police informants have to do with forensic science? (I'm glad you asked). Investigative  Reporter Pamela ...