Thursday, August 25, 2022

Former Medical Examiner David Fowler; Family of Anton Black: New York Times (Reporter Eduardo Medina) reports that the family of Anton Black, who died after being held face down for about six minutes during a 2018 encounter, has partly settled their lawsuit against three Eastern Shore Police Departments - but a claim against Fowler, who blamed congenital heart abnormalities for Mr. Black’s death and classified the death as an accident - remains unresolved and will continue... "After local prosecutors did not pursue charges in the death, Mr. Black’s family filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Baltimore in December 2020, arguing that the police officers — all of whom were white — from Police Departments in the towns of Centreville, Greensboro and Ridgely had used excessive force on Sept. 15, 2018. The lawsuit also contended that the officers tried to cover up an unjustified killing by claiming that Mr. Black was under the influence of marijuana laced with another drug and had exhibited “superhuman” strength. An autopsy report released four months later by the state’s medical examiner at the time, David Fowler, blamed congenital heart abnormalities for Mr. Black’s death and classified the death as an accident, saying there was no evidence that the police officers’ actions had played a role. The litigation by Mr. Black's family against the medical examiner’s office and Mr. Fowler — also defendants in their lawsuit — is continuing."

STORY: "Maryland Towns to Pay $5 Million in Black Teen's Death in Police Encounter," by Reporter Eduardo Medina, published by The New York Times. on August 8, 2022. 

SUB-HEADING: "The family of Anton Black, who died after being held face down for about six minutes during a 2018 encounter,  has partly settled their lawsuit against three Eastern Shore Police Departments.

GIST: "Three towns on Maryland’s Eastern Shore have agreed to pay $5 million to the family of a Black teenager who was killed in an encounter with police officers in 2018, lawyers for the family said on Monday.


The announcement of a partial settlement in the federal lawsuit brought by the family of Anton Black came nearly four years after Mr. Black, a 19-year-old former star high school athlete with a nascent modeling career, died after being restrained by three police officers, who held him face down for about six minutes, pinning his shoulder, legs and arms, according to the lawsuit. 


As part of the agreement, the towns also agreed to make changes in how their Police Departments train officers to prevent similar deaths.


Mr. Black’s death drew comparisons to the May 2020 killing of George Floyd, who was pinned to the ground under the knee of Derek Chauvin, a white former Minneapolis police officer, for more than nine minutes.


After local prosecutors did not pursue charges in the death, Mr. Black’s family filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Baltimore in December 2020, arguing that the police officers — all of whom were white — from Police Departments in the towns of Centreville, Greensboro and Ridgely had used excessive force on Sept. 15, 2018. The lawsuit also contended that the officers tried to cover up an unjustified killing by claiming that Mr. Black was under the influence of marijuana laced with another drug and had exhibited “superhuman” strength.


An autopsy report released four months later by the state’s medical examiner at the time, David Fowler, blamed congenital heart abnormalities for Mr. Black’s death and classified the death as an accident, saying there was no evidence that the police officers’ actions had played a role. The litigation by Mr. Black's family against the medical examiner’s office and Mr. Fowler — also defendants in their lawsuit — is continuing.


Jennell Black, Mr. Black’s mother, said in a statement that “there are no words to describe the immense hurt that I will always feel when I think back on that tragic day, when I think of my son.”


“No family should have to go through what we went through,” she added. “I hope the reforms within the Police Departments will save lives and prevent any family from feeling the pain we feel every day.”


In addition to the three towns, the partial settlement of the lawsuit resolved the family’s claims against several people in the towns, including Thomas Webster IV, a former Greensboro police officer; Michael Petyo, the former chief of the Greensboro Police Department; Gary Manos, the former chief of the Ridgely Police Department; and Dennis Lannon, a former Centreville police officer.


The men could not be reached or did not immediately respond to calls seeking comment on Monday night.


The lawyers representing the three towns — Patrick W. Thomas, Sharon M. VanEmburgh and Lyndsey Ryan — did not immediately respond to emails or calls seeking comment on Monday. The attorney general’s office, which is representing the medical examiner’s officer, did not immediately respond to a call seeking comment on Monday.


In the summer of 2018, Mr. Black developed mental health issues and began behaving erratically, according to the lawsuit. He was eventually found to have bipolar disorder.

On Sept. 15, 2018, a woman called 911 after seeing Mr. Black roughhousing with a 12-year-old boy, the lawsuit says. The officers who arrived used a Taser on Mr. Black and pinned him down near his mother’s home in Greensboro, the lawsuit says.


While he was being held down, Mr. Black told his mother, “I love you,” and cried out, “Please,” according to the lawsuit, which cites body camera footage from the officers.


Moments later, after his mother noticed that Mr. Black was “turning dark,” emergency medical workers tried to resuscitate him, but he died after being taken to a hospital, the lawsuit says.


Judge Catherine Blake of U.S. District Court in Maryland said in a ruling earlier this year that the video evidence from Mr. Black’s encounter with the police “is not so conclusive as to ‘clearly contradict’ and outweigh the plaintiffs’ allegations” of excessive force, which dealt a setback to the Police Departments’ case.


Richard Potter, a member of Coalition for Justice for Anton Black, a group that has sought police accountability in Mr. Black’s death, noted in a statement that the police reforms brought on by the settlement would help “prevent this kind of tragedy from happening in our community again.”


The reforms required under the settlement include more resources for police officers who encounter mental health emergencies, de-escalation training, lessons on implicit bias and transparency with hiring.


Deborah Jeon, the legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland, which represented the coalition, said in a statement that “today marks a step forward on the path toward accountability for the police killing of Anton Black.”


On top of those reforms, a Maryland law named after Mr. Black already requires disclosure of information about police misconduct investigations.


La Toya Holley, Mr. Black’s sister, said in a statement on Monday that the settlement gave her hope that another tragedy could be prevented.


“No one deserves to be killed like this,” Ms. Holley said. “Anton Black did not deserve this. He will never be forgotten.”\""


The entire story can be read at:


https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/08/us/anton-black-maryland-police-settlement.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html 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;



SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:




FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

Wednesday, August 24, 2022

Richard Glossip: Oklahoma: (False confession case/ missing or destroyed evidence/lack of physical; proof): Death Penalty battler Richard Branson explains why Richard Glossip - who faces execution for the fourth time on September 25 - is innocent, on Virgin.com..".As abhorrent as every execution is, Richard’s case is a particularly egregious example of why America’s death penalty is broken beyond repair: By all indications, he is innocent of the crime he has been convicted of. There is no evidence linking him to the 1997 murder of his employer, Barry van Treese, other than the testimony of the actual killer, who is serving a life sentence. I’ve been following Richard Glossip’s case for more than seven years now, ever since he was last scheduled for execution. In September 2015, he came within minutes of being killed, only to win a last-minute reprieve when those overseeing the execution realised that they had procured the wrong drug cocktail. It is impossible to imagine the anguish Richard must have felt, waiting once again to be led to his death knowing that he had not committed any crime. Shortly after, I had the opportunity to speak to him on the phone for several hours, and our conversation convinced me of his innocence. More than ever before, and especially in light of new evidence, I think it would be a horrific miscarriage of justice if Richard’s execution were to go ahead."


PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "In June, I was heartened to see a bipartisan group of Oklahoma lawmakers, including many who support the death penalty, step forward and express serious doubts about Richard’s case. They commissioned Reed Smith, a global law firm, to conduct an independent investigation into the details of his trials and his conviction.  Their 343-page report is a must-read case study for anyone trying to understand how time and again, in Oklahoma and elsewhere, innocent people end up trapped in a vicious cycle that leaves little room for recourse to prove their innocence when prosecutorial zeal and shoddy police investigations work against them.  According to the report’s investigative team: There exists no physical forensic evidence or credible corroborating testimony linking Glossip to the crime, our conclusion is that no reasonable juror hearing the complete record would have convicted Richard Glossip of first-degree murder."


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


POST: "Richard Glossip is innocent," by Richard Branson, published by Virgin.com. on August 8, 2022.


GIST: "Try to imagine being told that your life will end in a matter of weeks, at a precise day and time, following a merciless protocol including round-the-clock surveillance and frequthe foent searches. Now imagine having gone through this terrifying routine three times already. 


Even though you are innocent. And the world knows it.


A few weeks from now, that’s exactly what will happen to Richard Glossip. For the fourth time, he will be transferred to what is called “death watch” at Oklahoma State Penitentiary in McAlester, site of the state’s death row.


 If the State of Oklahoma gets its way, Richard will die in the death chamber on September 22, strapped to a gurney as a fatal cocktail of drugs is pumped into his veins.


As abhorrent as every execution is, Richard’s case is a particularly egregious example of why America’s death penalty is broken beyond repair: By all indications, he is innocent of the crime he has been convicted of. 


There is no evidence linking him to the 1997 murder of his employer, Barry van Treese, other than the testimony of the actual killer, who is serving a life sentence. 


I’ve been following Richard Glossip’s case for more than seven years now, ever since he was last scheduled for execution.


 In September 2015, he came within minutes of being killed, only to win a last-minute reprieve when those overseeing the execution realised that they had procured the wrong drug cocktail. 


It is impossible to imagine the anguish Richard must have felt, waiting once again to be led to his death knowing that he had not committed any crime. 


Shortly after, I had the opportunity to speak to him on the phone for several hours, and our conversation convinced me of his innocence. 


More than ever before, and especially in light of new evidence, I think it would be a horrific miscarriage of justice if Richard’s execution were to go ahead. 


It is thanks to the efforts of his intrepid attorney, Don Knight, that Richard hasn’t fallen victim to Oklahoma’s relentless machinery of death, a system so bent on executing people that it has now taken the unprecedented step of scheduling 25 executions over the course of the next two few years. 


Richard’s execution, if it goes ahead, would certainly not be the only one with credible innocence claims or other issues that should be grounds for a deeper review by the courts. 


In June, I was heartened to see a bipartisan group of Oklahoma lawmakers, including many who support the death penalty, step forward and express serious doubts about Richard’s case.


 They commissioned Reed Smith, a global law firm, to conduct an independent investigation into the details of his trials and his conviction. 


Their 343-page report is a must-read case study for anyone trying to understand how time and again, in Oklahoma and elsewhere, innocent people end up trapped in a vicious cycle that leaves little room for recourse to prove their innocence when prosecutorial zeal and shoddy police investigations work against them.


 According to the report’s investigative team:


There exists no physical forensic evidence or credible corroborating testimony linking Glossip to the crime, our conclusion is that no reasonable juror hearing the complete record would have convicted Richard Glossip of first-degree murder.


Richard’s legal team has filed an application for a hearing with Oklahoma’s Court of Criminal Appeals, and he will also have a chance to state his case in a clemency hearing with the state’s Board of Parole.


 I hope that sense prevails.


 No matter where you stand on the death penalty, the good people of Oklahoma must not allow an innocent man to be put to death in their name. It would be a stain on the reputation of Oklahoma and its commitment to fairness, justice, and the rule of law."


The entire commentary can be read at:


https://www.virgin.com/branson-family/richard-branson-blog/richard-glossip-is-innocent


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html 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;



SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:




FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

Tuesday, August 23, 2022

Rodney Reed: Texas: Question of the day: (Dallas Daily News): "Will the murder weapon in the Rodney Reed case ever be tested for DNA?"..."A state law gave Reed two years to file a motion to request a federal court hearing on his request to test the belt that was used to strangle Stites. And so Reed moved in 2019 to pursue what would likely be his final recourse for a DNA test. He asked a federal district court to determine whether the state’s refusal to test the belt compromised his right to due process That request to the federal court came less than two years after the state’s highest criminal court issued a final ruling from Texas denying his petition for DNA testing. But federal courts also said Reed was too late. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that the clock for a request to test DNA began counting down in 2014, after the state’s trial court first denied Reed’s request. Reed’s lawyers contend that the two-year window started after the state’s appeals court made its decision. This is a matter of life and death, and the state has the utmost duty to ensure it convicted the right person. It’s not unreasonable that one would wait for a state appeals court to rule before turning to federal courts for relief. After all, in Reed’s case, the state’s Court of Criminal Appeals could have decided to reverse a lower court’s decision and grant DNA testing. Now the Supreme Court will decide whether the other courts got the timeline wrong."


WORDS TO HEED: FROM OUR POST ON KEVIN COOPER'S  APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING; CALIFORNIA: (Applicable wherever a state resists DNA testing): "Blogger/extraordinaire Jeff Gamso's blunt, unequivocal, unforgettable message to the powers that be in California: "JUST TEST THE FUCKING DNA." (Oh yes, Gamso raises, as he does in many of his posts, an important philosophical question: This post is headed: "What is truth, said jesting Pilate."...Says Gamso: "So what's the harm? What, exactly, are they scared of? Don't we want the truth?") 


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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "DNA played a key role in Reed’s conviction. His genetic material was found in Stites’ body, which Reed said was the result of consensual sex. He had been previously charged — though not convicted — in several other rape cases. No other physical evidence linked Reed to Stites’ murder. And in recent years, new evidence has surfaced, including witnesses who say Stites and Reed were in a romantic relationship, along with testimony implicating Stites’ fiancé. Texas ranks third in the nation for the number of people who have been wrongfully sentenced to death, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit that studies capital punishment. That should make us all pause, particularly our courts. Today, Texas law would have required the murder weapon to be tested for DNA before the trial began. It was a grave oversight that authorities investigating Stites’ death did not test her belt. Was justice served in her case? We hope the Supreme Court’s decision will make it possible to answer that question."

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

EDITORIAL:"Will the murder weapon in the Rodney Reed case ever be tested for DNA?," published by The Dallas Daily Neews, on August 9, 2022.

GIST: "When a Texas jury sentenced Rodney Reed to death for the murder of a 19-year-old woman, the jurors did so without knowing whether Reed’s DNA lay on the murder weapon.


Reed and his lawyers have repeatedly sought post-conviction DNA testing that they believe will exonerate Reed and spare him from the death sentence he faces after he was tried for the rape and strangulation of Stacey Stites in 1996. But multiple courts have denied his request, arguing that Reed failed to reasonably prove the new evidence would reverse the trial’s outcome.


A substantial body of new evidence and witness testimony raises doubts about whether Texas convicted the right person in this case. We are glad the Supreme Court will take up the matter, and we hope it clarifies what the proper timeline is for seeking DNA testing of evidence after a conviction.


A state law gave Reed two years to file a motion to request a federal court hearing on his request to test the belt that was used to strangle Stites. And so Reed moved in 2019 to pursue what would likely be his final recourse for a DNA test. He asked a federal district court to determine whether the state’s refusal to test the belt compromised his right to due process


That request to the federal court came less than two years after the state’s highest criminal court issued a final ruling from Texas denying his petition for DNA testing.


But federal courts also said Reed was too late. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed that the clock for a request to test DNA began counting down in 2014, after the state’s trial court first denied Reed’s request. Reed’s lawyers contend that the two-year window started after the state’s appeals court made its decision.


This is a matter of life and death, and the state has the utmost duty to ensure it convicted the right person. It’s not unreasonable that one would wait for a state appeals court to rule before turning to federal courts for relief. After all, in Reed’s case, the state’s Court of Criminal Appeals could have decided to reverse a lower court’s decision and grant DNA testing.


Now the Supreme Court will decide whether the other courts got the timeline wrong.


DNA played a key role in Reed’s conviction. His genetic material was found in Stites’ body, which Reed said was the result of consensual sex. He had been previously charged — though not convicted — in several other rape cases.


No other physical evidence linked Reed to Stites’ murder. And in recent years, new evidence has surfaced, including witnesses who say Stites and Reed were in a romantic relationship, along with testimony implicating Stites’ fiancé.


Texas ranks third in the nation for the number of people who have been wrongfully sentenced to death, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a nonprofit that studies capital punishment. That should make us all pause, particularly our courts.


Today, Texas law would have required the murder weapon to be tested for DNA before the trial began. It was a grave oversight that authorities investigating Stites’ death did not test her belt. Was justice served in her case? We hope the Supreme Court’s decision will make it possible to answer that question."


https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2022/08/09/will-the-murder-weapon-in-the-rodney-reed-murder-case-ever-be-dna-tested/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html 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;



SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:




FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;\

Monday, August 22, 2022

Kevin Nunne: (Denial of post conviction DNA-testing): Access to post-conviction forensic evidence: The denial of forensic evidence to prisoners who need it to prove their innocence has led to calls for reforms to improve access to such evidence, Adam Luck and Jon Ungoed-Thomas report in the Guardian..."Kevin Nunn, who was convicted of the murder of his former girlfriend in 2006, had his appeal to access evidence rejected by the supreme court in 2014. Prisoners convicted of serious crimes who may be the victims of miscarriages of justice are being blocked from access to crucial forensic information that could prove their innocence, experts have warned. Campaigners are calling for legal reforms to provide improved access to evidence that may help prove the innocence of the wrongly convicted. They say a supreme court ruling in 2014 is effectively being used to deny access to police files and evidence. The Law Commission, the statutory independent body that reviews the law in England and Wales, confirmed this weekend it is reviewing the law around criminal appeals. Appeal, a charity and law practice that fights miscarriages of justice, wants any review to include an overhaul of the rules of disclosure and a new independent body to oversee the regime. James Burley, an investigator at Appeal, said: “I’ve no doubt there are innocent people who can’t access evidence because of the fact that the law on post-conviction disclosure is so restrictive. It’s incredibly unjust.” Lawyers or investigators working on potential miscarriages of justice cases are routinely denied access to evidence, while court transcripts may only be made available at a cost of thousands of pounds."


WORDS TO HEED: FROM OUR POST ON KEVIN COOPER'S  APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING; CALIFORNIA: (Applicable wherever a state resists DNA testing): "Blogger/extraordinaire Jeff Gamso's blunt, unequivocal, unforgettable message to the powers that be in California: "JUST TEST THE FUCKING DNA." (Oh yes, Gamso raises, as he does in many of his posts, an important philosophical question: This post is headed: "What is truth, said jesting Pilate."...Says Gamso: "So what's the harm? What, exactly, are they scared of? Don't we want the truth?") 


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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "It was revealed in court that sperm had been found on the victim, even though the court was told that Nunn was effectively infertile. The sperm was not DNA-tested at the time, and Nunn sought access to the evidence for new modern tests to see if there was a match to any known offender or possible new suspect. In June 2014, the supreme court rejected his case, ruling access to such material is only required where “there appears to be a real prospect that further enquiry will uncover something which may affect the safety of the conviction”. The court ruled this threshold had not been met. “An innocent man’s life and that of his family have been wrecked,” said Nunn’s sister Brigitte Butcher. “Kevin is still in prison after 17 years and will continue to maintain his innocence as he has done since 16 March 2005 when he was charged with murder.” The case has had wider ramifications, with police forces routinely blocking access to evidence after conviction, citing the supreme court ruling. Louise Shorter, founder of Inside Justice, which explores potential miscarriages of justice and has taken on the Nunn case, said: “Access to those exhibits used to be on a case-by-case basis but there now seems to be an absolute blanket refusal, with forces saying we only release material to the Criminal Cases Review Commission [CCRC].”

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

STORY:Thanks to 'Networked Knowledge' for bringing this story to our attention at:

http://netk.net.au/UK/UK34.pdf

GIST: "On 11 July 2022 Adam Luck, Jon Ungoed-Thomas reported in The Guardian Prisoners denied access to forensic evidence in bid to prove their innocence

Campaigners call for reforms to allow those who claim to be wrongly convicted – such as Kevin Nunn, jailed for murdering his ex-girlfriend – to obtain information to appeal

Kevin Nunn, who was convicted of the murder of his former girlfriend in 2006, had his appeal to access evidence rejected by the supreme court in 2014. Prisoners convicted of serious crimes who may be the victims of miscarriages of justice are being blocked from access to crucial forensic information that could prove their innocence, experts have warned.

Campaigners are calling for legal reforms to provide improved access to evidence that may help prove the innocence of the wrongly convicted. They say a supreme court ruling in 2014 is effectively being used to deny access to police files and evidence.

The Law Commission, the statutory independent body that reviews the law in England and Wales, confirmed this weekend it is reviewing the law around criminal appeals.

Appeal, a charity and law practice that fights miscarriages of justice, wants any review to include an overhaul of the rules of disclosure and a new independent body to oversee the regime. James Burley, an investigator at Appeal, said: “I’ve no doubt there are innocent people who can’t access evidence because of the fact that the law on post-conviction disclosure is so restrictive. It’s incredibly unjust.”

Lawyers or investigators working on potential miscarriages of justice cases are routinely denied access to evidence, while court transcripts may only be made available at a cost of thousands of pounds.

The supreme court case that set a legal threshold for getting access to evidence after conviction involved the case of former salesman Kevin Nunn from Woolpit in Suffolk. Nunn was convicted at Ipswich crown court in November 2006 for the murder of his former girlfriend, Dawn Walker. The court had heard that her body was discovered naked from the waist down next to the River Lark in Suffolk and her body had been set alight with petrol.

Nunn was convicted despite the fact there was no forensic evidence linking him to the crime and he had no history of violence.

It was revealed in court that sperm had been found on the victim, even though the court was told that Nunn was effectively infertile. The sperm was not DNA-tested at the time, and Nunn sought access to the evidence for new modern tests to see if there was a match to any known offender or possible new suspect.

In June 2014, the supreme court rejected his case, ruling access to such material is only required where “there appears to be a real prospect that further enquiry will uncover something which may affect the safety of the conviction”. The court ruled this threshold had not been met. “An innocent man’s life and that of his family have been wrecked,” said Nunn’s sister Brigitte Butcher. “Kevin is still in prison after 17 years and will continue to maintain his innocence as he has done since 16 March 2005 when he was charged with murder.”

The case has had wider ramifications, with police forces routinely blocking access to evidence after conviction, citing the supreme court ruling. Louise Shorter, founder of Inside Justice, which explores potential miscarriages of justice and has taken on the Nunn case, said: “Access to those exhibits used to be on a case-by-case basis but there now seems to be an absolute blanket refusal, with forces saying we only release material to the Criminal Cases Review Commission [CCRC].”

The CCRC is a statutory body that reviews potential miscarriages of justice and can require the production of material from the police. “The Nunn judgment was intended to stop fishing expeditions,” another investigator observed last week. “But it’s only by going on fishing expeditions that you catch fish.”

Appeal says that one of the cases where the charity has been blocked from access to case files is that of Roger Khan, a vulnerable defendant convicted of attempted murder in Newton Abbot in Devon 2011. Khan represented himself at his trial. The charity discovered one of the police investigators had a personal relationship with a possible alternative suspect, but the police refused a disclosure request on the exact links and the safeguards put in place to ensure the investigation was not tainted.

An attempt to challenge the decision by judicial review was rejected in 2019 on the grounds that the charity had not met the threshold required in the Nunn ruling. Campaigners say the CCRC uses its powers conservatively and will only typically look at cases that have already been appealed. A submission by Appeal to the Law Commission’s review warns that the Nunn judgment “leaves wrongly convicted defendants without an effective means of accessing any evidence held by law enforcement that undermines the safety of their conviction”.

The Law Commission said: “In relation to criminal appeals, the lord chancellor [Dominic Raab] has suggested that the commission should review the law, with a view to ensuring that the courts have powers that enable the effective, efficient and appropriate resolution of appeals. “We are eager to take this work forward and are currently in discussions as to the scope of the project.”

A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: “We have already asked the Law Commission to review the law around criminal appeals. We have also recently launched the National Archives Find Case Law site to boost transparency. It will ensure all court and tribunal decisions from the superior courts are available for free.”

A CCRC spokesperson said it used its investigative powers thousands of times a year and it was incorrect to say they were used conservatively.

This article was amended on 10 July 2022. An earlier version incorrectly stated in the subheading that Kevin Nunn was jailed for murdering his sister, rather than his former girlfriend. It was further amended on 11 July 2022 to include responses from the Ministry of Justice and the CCRC which were omitted from the original article during the editing process."

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


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html 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;



SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:




FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;

—————————————————————————————————

FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

Sunday, August 21, 2022

Criminalizing reproduction: From our 'Join the Crowd' department: How prosecutors who pledge not to send women (and their doctors) to jail for exercising their freedom of choice have become targets of rabid Republicans' (long with Immigrants, journalists, school teachers, transgender Americans, and abortion doctors. Steve Banen of the Maddow Blog, reports this story at the link below, in a commentary headed: "Prosecutors find themselves as Republicans’ election-year targets."..."'Roll Call' reported two weeks ago, for example, on comments House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy made at a recent conservative gathering. Speaking to the America First Policy Institute gathering in Washington, McCarthy previewed some of the policy areas to be covered, including energy, crime and foreign policy. “We’re going to withhold money [from] any prosecutor that doesn’t uphold the law and picks and chooses who they go to prosecute,” McCarthy said."



PASSAGE OF THE  DAY: "Don’t be surprised if this dynamic intensifies in the coming months and years. I’m reminded of this NBC News report published soon after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. "Dozens of elected prosecutors said Friday they would refuse to prosecute those seeking, assisting or providing abortions after the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 ruling that guaranteed a constitutional right to abortion. Prosecutors from 29 states, territories and Washington, D.C., signed a joint statement that included signatories from states like Mississippi, Missouri and Wisconsin that have banned or are poised to ban abortion services following the reversal of Roe v. Wade." Does the GOP intend to suspend and/or defund all of them, too?""

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


STORY: "Prosecutors find themselves as Republicans’ election-year targets," by Steve Benen, published  by  The Maddow Blog.


SUB-HEADING: As the midterms near, Republicans aren’t just targeting Democrats, immigrants, journalists, and school teachers. The GOP is also focused on prosecutors.


GIST: "At the Conservative Political Action Conference late last week, Republican Rep. Andy Biggs, the current chair of the right-wing House Freedom Caucus, talked up some of the goals he’d like to see his party prioritize if they’re in the majority next year — particularly when it comes to law enforcement.


“There are things you can do,” the Arizonan said, reflecting on Congress’ power. Biggs added, “You start defunding some of these bad agencies. The FBI. The DOJ.”


It might be tempting to dismiss such talk from a far-right member as irrelevant, but what’s striking is the degree to which rhetoric like this has become common, even among more influential Republicans. 


Roll Call reported two weeks ago, for example, on comments House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy made at a recent conservative gathering.

Speaking to the America First Policy Institute gathering in Washington, McCarthy previewed some of the policy areas to be covered, including energy, crime and foreign policy. “We’re going to withhold money [from] any prosecutor that doesn’t uphold the law and picks and chooses who they go to prosecute,” McCarthy said.



Right off the bat, it’s probably worth emphasizing that prosecutorial discretion isn’t exactly a new concept in American law enforcement.


 But just as notable was seeing the would-be Speaker of the House speaking publicly about his intention to defund prosecutors that Republicans disagree with.


Indeed, as the midterm elections near, Republicans aren’t just targeting 


The GOP is also increasingly focused on prosecutors as a convenient political villain.


During yesterday’s Senate proceedings, for example, Sen. Marco Rubio was among the members pushing poison-pill amendments to the Inflation Reduction Act. 


Not long after sunrise, the Florida Republican published a tweet that read, “The Democrats just blocked my effort to try and force Soros-backed prosecutors to put dangerous criminals in jail.”


The wording was problematic on a variety of levels — some critics questioned the reference to George Soros as possibly being anti-Semitic — but at its root, Rubio explicitly directed his criticism at law enforcement officials he disagrees with.


It came on the heels of another Florida Republican, Gov. Ron DeSantis, ousting an elected state attorney for taking positions on abortion and trans care that the governor didn’t like.


Don’t be surprised if this dynamic intensifies in the coming months and years. I’m reminded of this NBC News report published soon after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.


Dozens of elected prosecutors said Friday they would refuse to prosecute those seeking, assisting or providing abortions after the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 ruling that guaranteed a constitutional right to abortion. Prosecutors from 29 states, territories and Washington, D.C., signed a joint statement that included signatories from states like Mississippi, Missouri and Wisconsin that have banned or are poised to ban abortion services following the reversal of Roe v. Wade.



Does the GOP intend to suspend and/or defund all of them, too?""


The entire commentary can be read at:


https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/prosecutors-find-republicans-election-year-targets-rcna42018?cid=eml_maddow_20220808&user_email=c838168dc7288e7a8617e09d806f21e6cabd8958c3f89186ca123dd43bf5d249&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=TRMS%208/8/22&utm_term=Rachel%20Maddow%20Show


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. 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. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html 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;



SEE BREAKDOWN OF  SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG,  AT THE LINK BELOW:  HL:


https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985




FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."

Lawyer Radha Natarajan:

Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;


—————————————————————————————————


FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!

Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;