BILL DILLON CASE; (5); J.D. TUCCILLE; A FORENSIC SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE;

"A REPORT ON THE STATE OF FORENSIC MEDICINE FOR THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCE CONCEDES THAT "THE FACT IS THAT MANY FORENSIC TESTS -- SUCH AS THOSE USED TO INFER THE SOURCE OF TOOLMARKS OR BITE MARKS -- HAVE NEVER BEEN EXPOSED TO STRINGENT SCIENTIFIC SCRUTINY." OVERALL, SAYS THE REPORT: [I]N SOME CASES, SUBSTANTIVE INFORMATION AND TESTIMONY BASED ON FAULTY FORENSIC SCIENCE ANALYSES MAY HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO WRONGFUL CONVICTIONS OF INNOCENT PEOPLE. THIS FACT HAS DEMONSTRATED THE POTENTIAL DANGER OF GIVING UNDUE WEIGHT TO EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY DERIVED FROM IMPERFECT TESTING AND ANALYSIS. MOREOVER, IMPRECISE OR EXAGGERATED EXPERT TESTIMONY HAS SOMETIMES CONTRIBUTED TO THE ADMISSION OF ERRONEOUS OR MISLEADING EVIDENCE."

J.D. TUCCILLE; CIVIL LIBERTIES EXAMINER;

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

Background: Bill Dillon, was 22 when he was sentenced to life in prison in 1981, for killing a man in Canova Beach on the eastern coast of the state. During the trial, Dillon was adamant that he had not committed the crime. But a man named John Preston testified in court that he and his scent-tracking German-Shepherd connected Dillon to the killer’s bloody t-shirt. Preston, who billed himself as a "scent-tracking expert", said his dog, “Harrass 2,” even tracked Dillon’s scent repeatedly in later tests. Nearly three decades later, in 2007, DNA testing proved that Dillon’s DNA did not match the DNA on the killer’s shirt. The dog was wrong. Just eight months ago, after 26 years behind bars, Bill Dillon walked out of prison a free man. Preston was exposed by a Florida judge in 1984, who became suspicious of Preston and set up his own test for Harrass 2. The dog failed terribly. CNN unearthed documents which demonstrated that Harrass 2 could not even follow a scent for one-hundred feet. The judge determined the dog could only track successfully when his handler had advance knowledge of the case. Preston and his four-legged so-called expert were discredited in 1987 - but according to CNN, "the state of Florida never reviewed cases on which he’d testified . And nobody ever told Bill Dillon – who sat in prison another 20 years before he ever knew a thing about it. It wasn’t until 2006 that he heard Preston was a fake." The Dillon case is now attracting massive media attention in response to the Florida’s Innocence Project's well publicized concerns that dozens of inmates around the country may have been wrongly convicted as a result of John Preston and his dog. The focus now shifts to Florida's response to the Innocence Project's call for an investigation of those cases. Meanwhile, CNN informs us that Preston, the dog’s handler, died last year. He was never charged with perjury or convicted of a crime."

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

J.D. Tuccille's perceptive column on the Dillon case ran on June 15, 2009, on Examiner.com under the heading, "Prosecution dog put innocent people behind bars (and other bogus 'evidence' does the same)" - and the sub-heading "Police detection dogs can be helpful -- but they're at least as fallible as any other tool or technology."

Tuccille describes himself "a writer and editor based in northern Arizona" who can best be described as "a political junkie with a radical-libertarian bent."

"William Dillon spent 27 years behind bars for a crime he didn't commit," the column begins;

"Wilton Dedge spent a similar stretch behind bars before finally being exonerated," it continues;

"Juan Ramos was sentenced to death before being freed from prison over a crime he didn't commit. The three men are linked not just by their innocence, but by the role played in their cases by dog handler John Preston, a one-time Pennsylvania state trooper, and his amazingly talented dog, Harass II. Preston was only one of many "scientific" experts later exposed as a fraud, some of whose victims may still wait to be revealed.

Scott Maxwell of the Orlando Sentinel has the details regarding Preston and the wreckage he left behind. But the fact that Preston and his "wonder dog" were so relied upon by prosecutors and courts until exposed in the media and humiliated by one judge demonstrates just how much suspension of disbelief (or outright dishonesty) is behind the acceptance of "forensic science" that too often turns out to be either poorly applied -- or even pure hocum.

Reason magazine's Radley Balko has made justified waves in recent years by exposing the nonsense disguised as medicine peddled by Dr. Michael West, a dentist who offered scientifically implausible evidence of guilt (in several cases, of defendants later proven innocent), based on his exclusive bite-mark "technique."

Balko was also largely responsible for (hopefully) ending the career of the notorious Dr. Steven Hayne, a medical examiner without credentials who seemed to customize his testimony to meet the needs of prosecutors.

But it's not just corrupt individuals who deserve skepticial consideration -- so do whole areas of forensic "science." Drug testing, for instance, is a highly subjective "science" that has a lot to do with the skill -- and honesty -- of technicians. It's not at all uncommon for ordinary soap to test positive for illegal intoxicants.

A report on the state of forensic medicine for the National Academies of Science concedes that "The fact is that many forensic tests -- such as those used to infer the source of toolmarks or bite marks -- have never been exposed to stringent scientific scrutiny."

Overall, says the report:

[I]n some cases, substantive information and testimony based on faulty forensic science analyses may have contributed to wrongful convictions of innocent people. This fact has demonstrated the potential danger of giving undue weight to evidence and testimony derived from imperfect testing and analysis. Moreover, imprecise or exaggerated expert testimony has sometimes contributed to the admission of erroneous or misleading evidence.

"Faulty" science has to include the evidence of dogs, which have become so ubiquitous in recent years because of their supposed ability to connect defendants to crime scenes, or to simply detect forbidden substances.

But, despite the legendary power of their noses, canine-based evidence has to be taken with a grain of salt. For starters, dogs' "testimony" is highly dependent on the word of their handlers. In fact, there's no standard way for a dog to tell us that something has been detected. Some dogs just sit, others jump up and bark -- interpretation is in the eye of the handler.

Dogs, also, are notoriously easy to manipulate, since they develop close bonds with their handlers. For a 2004 report on the unreliability of detection dogs, Auburn University professor Larry Myers, a leading expert on canine detection programs, told CBS News, “They can tell you that something's there, that's not there, simply to get praise, to get food, to get whatever they're working for.”

Through improperly training his dogs, or simply lying about their alerts, it was easy for John Preston to manufacture evidence of the guilt of innocent men.

But fallibility can be as dangerous as fraud. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled in 2007 that canine testimony was acceptable in a case where the dog was only 54% accurate.

How many years of prison time are we willing to let ride on a 54% accuracy rate?

None of this is to say that forensic science is worthless. Properly used and understood it's absolutely necessary. After all, William Dillon and Wilton Dedge were freed of the shackles placed on them by bogus canine testimony because of the more rigorous standards set by DNA evidence.

But presenting fallible and sometimes fraudulent evidence as if it's beyond question runs the risk of discrediting good science along with the bad. The damage done by the John Prestons of the world can only be undone if we treat science as an imperfect part of an imperfect world -- not as the magic so-often peddled by charlatans."

The column can be found at:

http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Liberties-Examiner~y2009m6d15-Prosecution-dog-put-innocent-people-behind-bars-and-other-bogus-evidence-does-the-same

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

BILL DILLON CASE: (4); FLORIDA INNOCENCE PROJECT'S PROFILE OF THE CASE - ANATOMY OF A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE WITH BRUTAL RESULTS;

"PRESTON, A PURPORTED EXPERT IN SCENT TRACKING HIRED BY THE STATE, TESTIFIED THAT HIS DOG, HARASS II, HAD, PRIOR TO TRIAL, LINKED DILLON TO THE CRIME SCENE AND THE YELLOW T-SHIRT. PRESTON’S CLAIMS HAVE BEEN THOROUGHLY DISCREDITED BY EXPERTS IN THE FIELD OF SCENT TRACKING, MEDIA REPORTS (INCLUDING AN EXPOSE ON THE TV SHOW 20/20), MULTIPLE STATE SUPREME COURTS (INCLUDING THE ARIZONA SUPREME COURT, WHICH CALLED HIM A “CHARLATAN”), POLICE TRAINING MANUALS, AND LAW REVIEW ARTICLES. AND IN 1984, WHEN HE WAS A CAPITAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY, CURRENT BREVARD COUNTY STATE ATTORNEY NORMAN WOLFINGER, SAID, “I WOULDN’T WANT MY LIFE TO DEPEND ON WHAT [PRESTON’S] DOG SAYS.”"

FLORIDA INNOCENCE PROJECT;

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: Bill Dillon, was 22 when he was sentenced to life in prison in 1981, for killing a man in Canova Beach on the eastern coast of the state. During the trial, Dillon was adamant that he had not committed the crime. But a man named John Preston testified in court that he and his scent-tracking German-Shepherd connected Dillon to the killer’s bloody t-shirt. Preston, who billed himself as a "scent-tracking expert", said his dog, “Harrass 2,” even tracked Dillon’s scent repeatedly in later tests. Nearly three decades later, in 2007, DNA testing proved that Dillon’s DNA did not match the DNA on the killer’s shirt. The dog was wrong. Just eight months ago, after 26 years behind bars, Bill Dillon walked out of prison a free man. Preston was exposed by a Florida judge in 1984, who became suspicious of Preston and set up his own test for Harrass 2. The dog failed terribly. CNN unearthed documents which demonstrated that Harrass 2 could not even follow a scent for one-hundred feet. The judge determined the dog could only track successfully when his handler had advance knowledge of the case. Preston and his four-legged so-called expert were discredited in 1987 - but according to CNN, "the state of Florida never reviewed cases on which he’d testified . And nobody ever told Bill Dillon – who sat in prison another 20 years before he ever knew a thing about it. It wasn’t until 2006 that he heard Preston was a fake." The Dillon case is now attracting massive media attention in response to the Florida’s Innocence Project's well publicized concerns that dozens of inmates around the country may have been wrongly convicted as a result of John Preston and his dog. The focus now shifts to Florida's response to the Innocence Project's call for an investigation of those cases. Meanwhile, CNN informs us that Preston, the dog’s handler, died last year. He was never charged with perjury or convicted of a crime."

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

"On November 18, 2008, William Dillon was freed from prison after 27 years when postconviction DNA testing demonstrated his actual innocence of a 1981 murder<" the Innocence Project's account begins.

"Dillon’s 27 years equals the longest time served by any of the 232 DNA exonorees nationwide. He is the third man to be exonerated in Brevard County in recent years," the account continues;

"The Crime
On the morning of August 17, 1981, James Dvorak was found murdered at Canova Beach. He had been brutally beaten to death and left in a wooded area, an apparent homosexual meeting place near the beach.

Dillon became a suspect because several days after the murder, while hanging out at Canova Beach, he was approached by police who were questioning people about the crime. Dillon had read about the murder in the newspaper and had seen the yellow police tape in a wooded area near the beach. He told police that he assumed the taped area was where the crime occurred. Perhaps because they had no other suspects, police inferred from this that Dillon had further information about the crime and subsequently brought him in for questioning. After several days and multiple interrogations, police arrested Dillon.

The Trial
The State’s case was based largely on the testimony of four key witnesses—an admitted perjurer, a fraudulent dog scent expert, a snitch whose charges were dropped in return for his testimony, and a half-blind eyewitness—as well as a t-shirt worn by the killer, which now reveals that Dillon was not the murderer.

(1) Donna Parrish: Parrish, Dillon’s sometime sexual partner, was the only witness to testify that she saw Dillon at the crime scene. However, she did not witness the murder itself. She gave inconsistent statements to police throughout the investigation and gave implausible, confused testimony at trial, which seemed to suggest that she had stumbled upon the already-dead body independent of Dillon, told no one, and later followed him back to the body. She also claimed that on the night in question, Dillon was wearing the yellow t-shirt.

Less than a month after trial, Parrish recanted her trial testimony in its entirety, under oath, stating that she had been pressured by the Sheriff’s Office and the State Attorney’s Office and threatened with 25 years in prison. In particular, she said that she had lied about following Dillon to the body and had lied when she said that he had worn or even owned the yellow t-shirt. In fact, she said that she and Dillon had spent the night in question at a motel room with acquaintances, and her entire trial testimony regarding their whereabouts was a fabrication. Furthermore, Florida Today newspaper reported that, during the investigation, Parrish and the lead investigator, Sgt. Charles Slaughter, had a sexual liaison. Slaughter was suspended and eventually resigned as a result.

(2) John Preston: Preston, a purported expert in scent tracking hired by the State, testified that his dog, Harass II, had, prior to trial, linked Dillon to the crime scene and the yellow t-shirt. Preston’s claims have been thoroughly discredited by experts in the field of scent tracking, media reports (including an expose on the tv show 20/20), multiple state supreme courts (including the Arizona Supreme Court, which called him a “charlatan”), police training manuals, and law review articles. And in 1984, when he was a capital defense attorney, current Brevard County State Attorney Norman Wolfinger, said, “I wouldn’t want my life to depend on what [Preston’s] dog says.”

(3) Roger Dale Chapman: Chapman’s testimony was suspect from the outset. He said that Dillon confessed to the murder and reenacted it in the middle of the jail dining hall. Despite the presence of other inmates, however, there were no other witnesses to this alleged confession. Furthermore, Chapman’s report of the confession included numerous details that were at odds with the facts of the case. For example, Chapman said that Dillon had told him that the crime occurred on a beach miles away from the beach where it actually occurred, Canova Beach.

After Chapman agreed to testify against Dillon, the State dropped pending charges against him for the rape of a sixteen-year-old girl.

(4) John Parker: Parker testified that on the night of the murder, he picked up a sweaty, bloody man hitchhiking near the scene of the crime and the two had oral sex. The man, who called himself “Jim,” left behind a bloody yellow t-shirt that Parker later turned over to police. At trial, Parker identified that man as Dillon.

There has always been ample reason to doubt Parker’s identification. He was legally blind in one eye and his description of the assailant differed markedly from Dillon’s actual characteristics. Furthermore, at trial, Parker conceded that he wasn’t sure that Dillon was, in fact, the man he picked up.

(5) The Yellow T-shirt: At trial, the State’s theory was clear: the killer wore the yellow t-shirt during the crime and later left it in Parker’s truck. The State referenced the t-shirt dozens of times throughout trial. By repeatedly linking the t-shirt to the crime scene and Dillon to the t-shirt, the State was able to link Dillon to the crime scene. For example, Parker testified that he picked up the hitchhiker with the t-shirt near the scene of the crime and Parrish testified that Dillon was wearing the t-shirt on the evening of the murder. In addition, through a convoluted series of scent lineups and scent detections, Preston’s dog was able to link Dillon to the t-shirt and to the crime scene.

Postconviction
DNA evidence that demonstrates Dillon’s innocence came as a result of a 2007 motion filed by Dillon’s attorneys, Mike Pirolo and the Innocence Project of Florida. DNA testing revealed that DNA from sweat on the bloody yellow t-shirt (the State’s key piece of evidence at trial) did not come from Dillon; it came from person(s) unknown. This confirmed what Dillon had said all along — that someone other than Dillon committed the murder.

On November 14, 2008, Dillon’s conviction was vacated. He was released on November 18, 2008, when the court granted him bond and he walked out of the Brevard County Jail with his family and his legal team. The State declined to re-try Dillon and filed a Nolle Prosequi with the court on December 10, 2008. Dillon spent over 27 years in prison for a crime he did not commit."

The specifics:

Jurisdiction: Eighteenth Circuit County: Brevard

Charge: First-Degree Felony Murder

Conviction: First-Degree Felony Murder

Sentence: Life

Year of Conviction: 1981

Exoneration Date: 12/10/08

Sentence Served: 27 Years

Real perpetrator found? Not Yet

Contributing Causes: Eyewitness Misidentification, Informant/Snitch, Unreliable/Limited Science, Perjured Witness Testimony, Manufactured Evidence

Compensation? Not Yet

This account can be found at:

http://floridainnocence.org/content/?page_id=49

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

BILL DILLON CASE: (3) COLUMNIST SCOTT MAXWELL ASKS IF A "MAGICAL DOG" JAILED A FOURTH INNOCENT MAN - HE HAS BEEN IN PRISON MORE THAN TWO DECADES;

"NOW COMES WORD THERE MAY BE A FOURTH: ANOTHER MAN STILL IN PRISON MORE THAN TWO DECADES AFTER PRESTON AND HIS GERMAN SHEPHERD PROVIDED THE KEY EVIDENCE ALLEGEDLY TYING HIM TO THE SCENE OF THE CRIME.

"THERE ARE A LOT OF SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THIS CASE AND THE OTHERS," SAID BREVARD-SEMINOLE'S ASSISTANT PUBLIC DEFENDER, MIKE PIROLO. "I MEAN, IT'S SCARY HOW SIMILAR MANY OF THESE CASES ARE.""

ORLANDO SENTINEL COLUMNIST SCOTT MAXWELL;
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background: Bill Dillon, was 22 when he was sentenced to life in prison in 1981, for killing a man in Canova Beach on the eastern coast of the state. During the trial, Dillon was adamant that he had not committed the crime. But a man named John Preston testified in court that he and his scent-tracking German-Shepherd connected Dillon to the killer’s bloody t-shirt. Preston, who billed himself as a "scent-tracking expert", said his dog, “Harrass 2,” even tracked Dillon’s scent repeatedly in later tests. Nearly three decades later, in 2007, DNA testing proved that Dillon’s DNA did not match the DNA on the killer’s shirt. The dog was wrong. Just eight months ago, after 26 years behind bars, Bill Dillon walked out of prison a free man. Preston was exposed by a Florida judge in 1984, who became suspicious of Preston and set up his own test for Harrass 2. The dog failed terribly. CNN unearthed documents which demonstrated that Harrass 2 could not even follow a scent for one-hundred feet. The judge determined the dog could only track successfully when his handler had advance knowledge of the case. Preston and his four-legged so-called expert were discredited in 1987 - but according to CNN, "the state of Florida never reviewed cases on which he’d testified . And nobody ever told Bill Dillon – who sat in prison another 20 years before he ever knew a thing about it. It wasn’t until 2006 that he heard Preston was a fake." The Dillon case is now attracting massive media attention in response to the Florida’s Innocence Project's well publicized concerns that dozens of inmates around the country may have been wrongly convicted as a result of John Preston and his dog. The focus now shifts to Florida's response to the Innocence Project's call for an investigation of those cases. Meanwhile, CNN informs us that Preston, the dog’s handler, died last year. He was never charged with perjury or convicted of a crime."

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

"In hindsight, it's hard to believe that John Preston and his magical dog were ever allowed to testify in court" columnist Scott Maxwell asks in his column which appeared on June24, 2009, under the heading, "Did magical dog jail a fourth innocent man?"

"Preston's claims — that his dog could track scents through water, even years after a suspect supposedly left them — were preposterous. And Preston was, ultimately, discredited in court," the column continues;

"Since then, three of the Brevard County men whom Preston helped convict subsequently had their convictions overturned.

Now comes word there may be a fourth: another man still in prison more than two decades after Preston and his German shepherd provided the key evidence allegedly tying him to the scene of the crime.

"There are a lot of similarities between this case and the others," said Brevard-Seminole's assistant public defender, Mike Pirolo. "I mean, it's scary how similar many of these cases are."

What's also scary is how many of these cases have yet to be scrutinized

Preston testified in dozens of Central Florida cases in the early '80s. A judge would later say prosecutors retained Preston and his act "to confirm the state's preconceived notions about cases."

And yet, until now, there has been no thorough check to see whether others were wrongfully convicted as well.

That, however, is starting to change.

•A national legal group has taken up the cause of the fourth person.

•The Public Defender's Office in Brevard opening a broader inquiry of its own.

•And this tale of perverted justice will get a national audience tonight when Anderson Cooper is slated to spotlight Preston and his cases during his 10 o'clock show on CNN.

Meanwhile, as others search for justice, some of Florida's highest-placed officials — Gov. Charlie Crist, Attorney General Bill McCollum and Brevard-Seminole State Attorney Norm Wolfinger — remain uninvolved and unmoved.

A gruesome murder
The biggest news is the emergence of nationally renowned Centurion Ministries, a faith-based legal group in Princeton, N.J., that has helped exonerate more than 40 people.

Centurion is taking on the case of Gary Bennett, a Palm Bay man convicted in the 1983 murder of 54-year-old Helen Nardi.

Nardi's death was a gruesome one.

According to Sentinel reports from the time, she was found stabbed 26 times in the neck, chest and back with an ice pick, steak knife, screwdriver and pair of scissors. The ice-pick blade and scissors were left embedded in her nude body.

Prosecutors, however, needed to tie Bennett to the weapons, which Preston and his dog helped do. The dog first sniffed Bennett and then, according to Preston, found the same scent on crucial evidence.

Prosecutors also relied upon fingerprints in the victim's house, which Bennett argued he probably left three days earlier when visiting the victim, whom he knew. They also used testimony from jailhouse snitches — who were promised leniency in exchange for their help.

Centurion Ministries attorney Kate Germond did not want to discuss details of Bennett's case this week, saying she hoped she could work hand in hand with local officials. If she does, she might not be working with Wolfinger, who as a public defender briefly represented Bennett before he was elected state attorney in 1984.

At Wolfinger's request, Gov. Charlie Crist assigned another prosecutor to handle any new developments in the case: Orange-Osceola's Lawson Lamar.

A new inquiry
Meanwhile, Brevard-Seminole Public Defender James Russo is launching an inquiry of his own.

Russo's goal is to try to find out how many other people Preston helped convict. And he received some help last weekend from Florida Today, the Melbourne-based newspaper that did an impressive job scanning its archives to uncover the names of about a dozen more cases in which Preston was involved.

The public defender had hoped Wolfinger's office would actually pursue this matter.

Said Pirolo: "He has an obligation from a legal, moral and ethical standpoint."

Wolfinger knows that some of Preston's cases, which predate his tenure, went bad. He has not only admitted it; he apologized on his office's behalf after much-belated DNA tests directly contradicted some of the state's prior claims. But he has refused to conduct an investigation to see whether others were improperly convicted, essentially arguing that the burden is on the convicted to mount their own defense.

That line infuriates Gary Bennett's niece, Rebecca, 27, who was a toddler when her uncle went to prison — and whose family has always believed her uncle is innocent.

"You know, that sounds good, saying we should just take care of it ourselves," Rebecca Bennett said. "But we're a middle-class family. We can't afford top-notch lawyers. And this has just been awful."

The recent spate of attention has given the Bennetts the first hope they've had in years.

I certainly don't know for sure whether Bennett was wrongfully convicted.

But I do know that three of John Preston's cases have already been overturned — and that Preston was involved in dozens more cases that have not yet been scrutinized.

And those facts alone are enough to know that justice demands better."

The article can be found at:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orl-asecorl-maxwell-preston-062409062409jun24,0,6590313.columnScott Maxwell can be reached at 407-420-6141 or smaxwell@orlandosentinel.com.

Harold Levy15@gmail.com;

BILL DILLON CASE (2); ORLANDO SENTINEL EDITORIAL (JULY 26); A MUST READ; TAKES ON MAGIC DOGS, THEIR FRAUDULENT MASTERS - AND DEMANDS JUSTICE;

"AT THAT MOMENT IN 1984, EVERY ONE OF THE CASES IN WHICH PRESTON TESTIFIED SHOULD'VE BEEN REVIEWED.

SO SAYS STATE SEN. DAN GELBER, A FORMER PROSECUTOR AND ONE OF TWO DEMOCRATS HOPING TO FACE THE REPUBLICAN KOTTKAMP IN THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S RACE NEXT FALL. "THE NIGHTMARE OF ANY PROSECUTOR IS TO PUT AN INNOCENT PERSON IN JAIL," GELBER SAID. "IT'S AN ABOMINATION OF THE SYSTEM.""

EDITORIAL; THE ORLANDO SENTINEL; 26 JULY, 2009;
PHOTO: ILL DILLON ON HIS RELEASE FROM PRISON;

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: Bill Dillon, was 22 when he was sentenced to life in prison in 1981, for killing a man in Canova Beach on the eastern coast of the state. During the trial, Dillon was adamant that he had not committed the crime. But a man named John Preston testified in court that he and his scent-tracking German-Shepherd connected Dillon to the killer’s bloody t-shirt. Preston, who billed himself as a "scent-tracking expert", said his dog, “Harrass 2,” even tracked Dillon’s scent repeatedly in later tests. Nearly three decades later, in 2007, DNA testing proved that Dillon’s DNA did not match the DNA on the killer’s shirt. The dog was wrong. Just eight months ago, after 26 years behind bars, Bill Dillon walked out of prison a free man. Preston was exposed by a Florida judge in 1984, who became suspicious of Preston and set up his own test for Harrass 2. The dog failed terribly. CNN unearthed documents which demonstrated that Harrass 2 could not even follow a scent for one-hundred feet. The judge determined the dog could only track successfully when his handler had advance knowledge of the case. Preston and his four-legged so-called expert were discredited in 1987 - but according to CNN, "the state of Florida never reviewed cases on which he’d testified . And nobody ever told Bill Dillon – who sat in prison another 20 years before he ever knew a thing about it. It wasn’t until 2006 that he heard Preston was a fake." The Dillon case is now attracting massive media attention in response to the Florida’s Innocence Project's well publicized concerns that dozens of inmates around the country may have been wrongly convicted as a result of John Preston and his dog. The focus now shifts to Florida's response to the Innocence Project's call for an investigation of those cases. Meanwhile, CNN informs us that Preston, the dog’s handler, died last year. He was never charged with perjury or convicted of a crime."

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

It is refreshing to see the principled editorial published by the Orlando Sentinel on the Bill Dillon case under the heading, "Investigations and elections provide new hope for justice."

"State Attorney Norm Wolfinger has finally launched an investigation into the tale of twisted justice that involves false testimony, wrongfully imprisoned men and a supposedly magic dog in Brevard County," the editorial,published on July 26, 2009, begins.

"The investigation, which he confirmed Friday afternoon, centers on discredited dog handler John Preston," the editorial continues.

"The review comes much too late for the men Preston helped convict — two of whom spent more than 20 years behind bars before they were exonerated and freed.

But others are still in prison or have been released and are living with felony records.

And, for the first time, politicians statewide are getting involved.

In fact, when contacted last week, all but one of the leading candidates for governor and attorney general vowed to look into the Preston cases, if elected.

Democratic candidate for governor Alex Sink said such a review was simply "logical," given what's known.

Republican A.G. hopeful Jeff Kottkamp said, "Equal justice for all is a guiding principle of our society. Obviously a case of wrongful incarceration — or in this instance, cases ... is something we cannot tolerate."

Kottkamp's passionate remarks stand in stark contrast to the uninterested and dismissive responses from both his boss, Gov. Charlie Crist, and the man he wants to replace, Attorney General Bill McCollum.

Despite repeated calls to investigate the Preston cases — and the possibility that others may have been wrongfully convicted — both Crist and McCollum have sat on the sidelines, saying that getting involved is simply not their job.

Both are now seeking higher offices.

The wonder dog
It all started back in the early 1980s when Preston, a former state trooper from Pennsylvania, began wowing juries with what seemed like a wonder dog.

Preston claimed his German shepherd could do all kinds of things that most dogs could not — tracking scents across water, through treetops, even years after they were left.

The feats may sound ridiculous for any canine that's not wearing a cape and doesn't fly.

But prosecutors and the juries ate it up — until one judge finally put Preston and his dog to the test.

During a 1984 trial, Judge Gilbert Goshorn asked Preston and his dog to track a fresh scent, but the two failed miserably and Preston left town.

"The dog simply could not track anything," Goshorn would later say in an affidavit. "In short, I believe that Preston was regularly retained to confirm the state's preconceived notions about cases."

At that moment in 1984, every one of the cases in which Preston testified should've been reviewed.

So says State Sen. Dan Gelber, a former prosecutor and one of two Democrats hoping to face the Republican Kottkamp in the attorney general's race next fall. "The nightmare of any prosecutor is to put an innocent person in jail," Gelber said. "It's an abomination of the system."

His Democratic opponent, Dave Aronberg, agreed. "The attorney general has an obligation to do justice, no matter what. And justice is not just convictions," he said. "I will look at this. I will not ignore it."

None of the three candidates for attorney general vowed to do anything as specific as impaneling a statewide grand jury. Nor did they promise to free a single soul or overturn a single case. Nor should they. In fact, no one is asking them to.

All they have vowed to do is look into the cases — which is all anyone has asked.

New perspectives?
Until now, Attorney General McCollum's only response was that all this was beyond his "jurisdiction."

But then last week, the man who wants to be your next governor tweaked that response just a bit. Said spokeswoman Sandi Copes: "... upon further consideration of this situation, he would invite these individuals to seek relief through clemency."

Clemency places the responsibility on the shoulders of those who were imprisoned. But it took two of the men Preston helped imprison more than 20 years — and the help of national groups like the Innocence Project — to finally win their freedom.

That's why Brevard-Seminole Public Defender James Russo and the Innocence Project have called for wholesale review of the cases.

Wolfinger, who took office after Preston had been discredited, said Friday that he would welcome such a review.

"I certainly do not want an innocent person to be in jail," he said.

In the meantime, Wolfinger said his office will continue doing it's own "re-review."

Wolfinger calls it a "re-review" because he argues that his office looked into the Preston cases long ago.

"The perception is that nothing has ever been done and that hundreds of people are in jail," he said. "Well, that's not true. This office does care and has cared."

Still, it's obvious that Wolfinger's original effort wasn't a complete success — as evidenced by the fact that courts freed two men long after his "review" was complete.

So far, Wolfinger says his office has found only four Preston-related convicts still behind bars.

And he feels confident that three of those four men belong there.

He would not comment on the third, Gary Bennett — because another nationally respected group believes it will soon prove Bennett's innocence as well. The groundwork for an appeal is under way.

It's good that Wolfinger is taking a closer look and compiling a complete list of all the Preston-related cases.

But it's even better that most of the statewide candidates are vowing to get involved.

Because after a quarter century and three wrongful convictions tied to the same man, an independent investigation is long overdue."

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;

BILL DILLON CASE (1); FREED AFTER SERVING 27 YEARS; CONVICTION BASED ON "INFALLIBLE SCENT-TRACKING DOG"; DOZENS WRONGLY CONVICTED ON SAME EVIDENCE?

"PRESTON AND HIS FOUR-LEGGED SO-CALLED EXPERT WERE DISCREDITED IN 1987. BUT THE STATE OF FLORIDA NEVER REVIEWED CASES ON WHICH HE’D TESTIFIED . AND NOBODY EVER TOLD BILL DILLON – WHO SAT IN PRISON ANOTHER 20 YEARS BEFORE HE EVER KNEW A THING ABOUT IT. IT WASN’T UNTIL 2006 THAT HE HEARD PRESTON WAS A FAKE."

REPORTER RANDI KAYE; CNN: AC360;
PHOTO: BILL DILLON ON HIS RELEASE FROM PRISON;

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

Background: Bill Dillon, was 22 when he was sentenced to life in prison in 1981, for killing a man in Canova Beach on the eastern coast of the state. During the trial, Dillon was adamant that he had not committed the crime. But a man named John Preston testified in court that he and his scent-tracking German-Shepherd connected Dillon to the killer’s bloody t-shirt. Preston, who billed himself as a "scent-tracking expert", said his dog, “Harrass 2,” even tracked Dillon’s scent repeatedly in later tests. Nearly three decades later, in 2007, DNA testing proved that Dillon’s DNA did not match the DNA on the killer’s shirt. The dog was wrong. Just eight months ago, after 26 years behind bars, Bill Dillon walked out of prison a free man. Preston was exposed by a Florida judge in 1984, who became suspicious of Preston and set up his own test for Harrass 2. The dog failed terribly. CNN unearthed documents which demonstrated that Harrass 2 could not even follow a scent for one-hundred feet. The judge determined the dog could only track successfully when his handler had advance knowledge of the case. Preston and his four-legged so-called expert were discredited in 1987 - but according to CNN, "the state of Florida never reviewed cases on which he’d testified . And nobody ever told Bill Dillon – who sat in prison another 20 years before he ever knew a thing about it. It wasn’t until 2006 that he heard Preston was a fake." The Dillon case is now attracting massive media attention in response to the Florida’s Innocence Project's well publicized concerns that dozens of inmates around the country may have been wrongly convicted as a result of John Preston and his dog. The focus now shifts to Florida's response to the Innocence Project's call for an investigation of those cases. Meanwhile, CNN informs us that Preston, the dog’s handler, died last year. He was never charged with perjury or convicted of a crime."

See the CNN video here:
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/07/30/fake-scent-tracking-dog-sends-man-to-prison-for-life/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Bill Dillon story - subject of a CNN expose - was recently told by reporter Randi Kaye, a correspondent for AC360

A cut-line for the story indicates that "Dillon was sentenced to life in prison in 1981, at the age of 22."

"A Florida man who was convicted of murder in part because of the work of an allegedly infallible scent-tracking dog, is free now, because the dog and the dog’s owner has been exposed as a fraud," the story begins;

"Unfortunately for Bill Dillon he had to spend 26 years in prison before the error in his case was rectified," it continues;

"Bill Dillon, was 22 when he was sentenced to life in prison in 1981, for killing a man in Canova Beach on the eastern coast of the state.

During the trial, Dillon was adamant that he had not committed the crime. But a man named John Preston testified in court that he and his scent-tracking German-Shepherd connected Dillon to the killer’s bloody t-shirt. Preston said his dog, “Harrass 2,” even tracked Dillon’s scent repeatedly in later tests.

Dillon expected to remain in prison for the rest of his life – all because of “Harrass 2,” and his handler, Preston, who billed himself around the country as a so-called scent -tracking expert.

But nearly three decades later, in 2007, DNA testing proved that Dillon’s DNA did not match the DNA on the killer’s shirt. The dog was wrong. Just eight months ago, after 26 years behind bars, Bill Dillon walked out of prison a free man.

“Supposedly the dog got my scent three times,” Dillon told CNN, “and I never saw freedom again.” Dillon also said he remembers the dog’s “huge” head from the trial and that he looked like a “bear.”

In 1981, DNA testing wasn’t used in criminal investigations so authorities relied simply on the presumed legendary nose of Preston’s German Shepherd. Preston testified that his dog had tracked Dillon’s scent to a piece of paper he had touched, and had even tracked Dillon to a room he was in at the courthouse.

Preston and his dog had a track-record – he had convinced juries more than a hundred times of his dog’s miraculous talents. In Dillon’s case, Preston even told the court his dog had the ability to track a scent under water; to actually smell below the water. CNN consulted tracking dog experts in Florida about this. They told us “no way, that’s not possible.”

In 1984, before Preston was exposed as a fraud, he told ABC News that he believed he was never wrong. Tim McGuire, a dog-tracking expert with Florida’s Volusia County Sheriff’s Department, said it was implausible that a dog could have picked up Dillon’s scent back in 1981 eight days after the murder, and just after a massive hurricane had blown through the area.

McGuire viewed videotapes of Preston’s dog, Harrass 2, at work. In the tapes, there are multiple times when the dog urinates on evidence. “The dog should work methodically.” But McGuire said he did not consider what Harrass 2 was doing, “work.”

Preston was exposed by a Florida judge in 1984, who became suspicious of Preston and set up his own test for Harrass 2. The dog failed terribly.

Documents obtained by CNN show he could not even follow a scent for one-hundred feet. The judge determined the dog could only track successfully when his handler had advance knowledge of the case.

Dillon thinks Preston and his scent-tracking dog were part of a larger conspiracy.
“Preston could lead the dog to the suspect or the evidence,” alleges Dillon, but “any cases that were weak, not good enough to go to the jury, they [the prosecution] fed Preston information, paid him good money to come and lie.”
Florida’s Attorney General told CNN it is not aware of any evidence of a conspiracy involving John Preston and his dog.

Preston and his four-legged so-called expert were discredited in 1987. But the state of Florida never reviewed cases on which he’d testified . And nobody ever told Bill Dillon – who sat in prison another 20 years before he ever knew a thing about it. It wasn’t until 2006 that he heard Preston was a fake.

Florida’s Innocence Project believes dozens of inmates around the country may have been wrongly convicted as a result of John Preston and his dog. It is calling for an investigation of those cases. Meanwhile, Preston, the dog’s handler, died last year. He was never charged with perjury or convicted of a crime.ILL"

Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;