HANK SKINNER: WILL HE BE EXECUTED WITHOUT NEW DNA TESTS? A PREDICTION; RODGER JONES; DALLAS NEWS;

"Now comes the politics. The matter will end up with the Court of Criminal Appeals and then, potentially, with Perry. And I don't think either wants to live with the image of a person going to his death when the labs haven't taken a look at all the physical evidence in the case."

RODGER JONES: DALLAS NEWS;

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

BACKGROUND: "Hank Skinner faces execution for a 1993 murder he's always maintained he didn't commit. He wants the state to test whether his DNA matches evidence found at the crime scene, but prosecutors say the time to contest his conviction has come and gone......Reporter Brandi Grissom, author of the Tribune series on Hank Skinner, writes: "I interviewed Henry "Hank" Watkins Skinner, 47, at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — death row — on January 20, 2010. Skinner was convicted in 1995 of murdering his girlfriends and her two sons; Skinner has always maintained that he's innocent and for 15 years has asked the state to release DNA evidence that he says will prove he was not the killer." Texas Tribune;

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

"The best thing to happen for Hank Skinner's legal team came in August, with Rick Perry's decision to enter the hunt for the GOP presidential nomination," the Dallas News commentary by editorial writer Rodger Jones published on November 4, 2011 under the heading, "Prediction: Politics will be Hank Skinner's lifeline," begins.

"To me, that multiplied the odds in favor of Skinner winning the fight to get DNA testing on evidence in a triple murder he was convicted for in 1995. He's now got politics and public perception on his side," the commentary continues.

"With Skinner set for execution on Wednesday, this is playing out like a Hollywood script: Skinner lost a round in the trial court in Gray County yesterday. The judge ruled against the argument that Skinner should benefit from a new law that improves access to DNA tests on untested evidence or evidence never tested with the latest techniques. (Our editorial this morning gave a rundown of those items in Skinner's case.)

Now comes the politics. The matter will end up with the Court of Criminal Appeals and then, potentially, with Perry. And I don't think either wants to live with the image of a person going to his death when the labs haven't taken a look at all the physical evidence in the case.

The Court of Criminal Appeals is elected. The judges are not impervious to politics. They will have a greater sensitivity than the trial court to the reasons that the Legislature passed legislation this year improving a defendant's access to DNA tests. The backdrop is shaken confidence in the justice system as the list of exonerations grows.

Yes, Skinner may be gaming the system to buy time, as the vigilant Dudley Sharp, a pro-death penalty commentator, suggested in the American-Statesman today.

Yet the judges -- and Perry, ultimately -- will be dealing with the problem of the succinct counterargument, as put here by a Chicago journalism professor whose students took up the Skinner matter long ago:

Texas officials argue that Skinner had plenty of time to ask for the tests -- before his trial in 1995. Now it's too late, they say.

Seriously? When is it ever too late to learn the truth? If Skinner is guilty, the tests should prove it. If he's innocent, the tests should prevent Texas from making a fatal mistake.

The comeback on this is that the courts should not tolerate mischief-making, if that's what Skinner is up to, because it sets bad precedent.

If that's what the court ends up deciding, Perry has a huge political problem. He could end up looking like the ultimate yahoo governor (even worse than his New Hampshire YouTube moment) if Texas executes Skinner next week. He doesn't want that, just like George W. Bush didn't want that in the Ricky McGinn case during the 2000 presidential election.

The governor may, at his discretion, grant one 30-day reprieve to a condemned prisoner, and that's what Bush did in the McGinn case so he could get DNA tests.

It was the only move Bush had in the political playbook. It gained McGinn a few months before the results failed to clear him. McGinn ended up in the executioner's chamber just the same, and Bush ended up looking like a more reasonable governor.

The political playbook is the same today. Rick Perry, with a record 237 executions on his watch, has a harder way to go than Bush did in defending Texas justice. The exonerations have all unfolded on his watch. He's stuck with that image.

I say Skinner survives past next Wednesday's execution date."

The post can be found at:

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/11/prediction-poli.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;

CHARLES SMITH; SCHOOL BOARD WALKS SLOWLY THROUGH MINE FIELD: THE BELLEVILLE INTELLIGENCER;

"Sherret-Robinson, who spent one year in jail after being convicted of her child's death, was exonerated last year and has received financial compensation from the province.

The PECI class, she said, needs to hear the whole story.

"I don't know what exactly happens in law classes and I don't know how in-depth they would go into wrongful convictions but this is my way of educating them on how it happens. This," she said, "is real.":

REPORTER W. BRICE MCVICAR; THE BELLEVILLE INTELLIGENCER;

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

BACKGROUND: The Goudge inquiry focused largely on the flawed work of Charles Smith — formerly the province's chief pediatric pathologist and a self-styled member of the prosecution team — whose "errors" led to innocent people being branded as child murderers. (He has since been thrown out of the medical profession in Ontario); Justice Stephen Goudge's 1000-page report slammed Smith, along with Ontario's former chief coroner and his deputy, for their roles in wrongful prosecutions and asked the province to consider compensation. The provincial coroner's office found evidence of errors in 20 of 45 autopsies Smith did over a 10-year period starting in the early 1990s. Thirteen resulted in criminal charges. The inquiry heard that Smith's failings included hanging on to crucial evidence (instead of processing it), "losing" evidence which showed his opinion was wrong and may have helped show that the accused person was innocent, mistating evidence, chronic tardiness, and the catastrophic misinterpretation of findings. The cases, along with other heart-rending stories of wrongful prosecutions based in part on Smith's testimony, also raised a host of issues about the pediatric pathology system in Ontario and the use of expert evidence in the criminal courts.

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

PUBLISHER'S VIEW: This is pure Charles Smith - conning someone to have him invited to address a class of high school. He, the unrepentant former Dr. Charles Randal Smith, who is probably responsible for more miscarriages of justice and destroying the lives of more individuals and families than any other individual in Canadian history. It's just like his conning of a friend to have him hired by a hospital in Saskatoon after he had come under investigation in Ontario and had slunk away quietly from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. He, the disgraced physician recently declared incompetent and found guilty of acts of professional misconduct who didn't even have the courage to show up for his discipline hearing. The former Dr. Charles Randal Smith - a great role model for our students who, having admitted to little more than "errors" and "mistakes," has clearly begun a campaign to rehabilitate himself in the forgetful public's eye. My gut feeling is that Smith has become emboldened by the fact that he has evaded prosecution for his crimes - and by the fact that not a single radio, television or print story marked September 20, 2011 - the 3d anniversary of Justice Stephen Goudge's damning report into many of his cases. It's worth noting that at the Goudge Inquiry, contrary to the myth Smith had constructed that he was a God of forensic pathology, he purported to be an ignoramus who had no understanding of medical matters. And now, according to the Toronto Sun, he's lecturing high school students on DNA! (Perhaps he regaled the students with stories, such as the occasion in 1997 when he brought his then 11-year-old son to the exhumation of an 11-month-old child in Sudbury, Ontario, who had died suddenly about nineteen months earlier after bumping his head while playing under a table.) This Leopard truly has not changed his spots. He's mocking us. Final thought: A message to Ontario's school boards. Get something positive out of this unfortunate experience. Ask people like Sherry (Sherret) Robinson, Brenda Waudby, Bill Mullins-Johnson, and all too many others, to come and talk about their experiences in Ontario's criminal justice system. (Not Charles Smith); Why not go one step further, and set up courses on the frailties of Ontario's criminal justice system that allowed Smith to destroy lives and families with impunity for so long?

HAROLD LEVY; PUBLISHER; THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG;

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

"A review into what led to a decision to permit a disgraced pathologist address a Grade 11 class at a Prince Edward County high school is proceeding slowly and cautiously, says a local school board official," the Belleville Intelligencer story by reporter W. Brice McVicar published on November 3, 2011 under the heading, "Board walks slowly through minefield," begins.

"Kerry Donnell, spokesperson for the Hastings and Prince Edward Counties District School Board, said the review of how and why Charles Smith came to be a guest speaker at Prince Edward Collegiate Institute last week is continuing. Smith — whose flawed techniques resulted in the wrongful arrest and conviction of 13 individuals across Ontario — spoke to a law class about the role of a pathologist and DNA," the story continues.

"His appearance and speech at the school was not approved by the local school board and has resulted in officials reviewing the matter and considering introducing a policy that could change the way guest speakers are handled across the board. Currently, schools handle the invitation and appearance of guest speakers though, in this instance, a family connection between a student and Smith is believed to be the impetus behind his visit.

"It's still progressing. The review is still going on," Donnell said Thursday. "There are active meetings and discussions going on between the superintendent and the school administrators."

News of Smith's visit made national headlines and prompted local resident Sherry Sherret-Robinson — convicted of killing her infant son based on Smith's findings and testimony — to question the logic of having the man speak to students.

Donnell said the board's director of education, Rob McGall, is committed to working with the families and seeing the matter through to the "most positive or beneficial outcome" for all.

Just what a positive outcome would be, however, Donnell could not say.

"We don't know yet," she said. "If I had a crystal ball and could see into the future I'd love to know where this is going to go. That's part of where we're at now. We're going day-by-day, meeting-by-meeting to determine what's our next step."

Part of the process may involve hearing from Sherret-Robinson. She has contacted the school board and offered to speak to the same class Smith did.

Speaking to the class, Sherret-Robinson said, would allow the students to hear another angle on pathology.

"They were able to see, from his point of view, what pathology and DNA is about and there's all this controversy because there's no way he should have been there," she said. "I expressed to Mr. McGall that those students have the right to know exactly what's going on and why."

A 2007 coroner's review of 45 of Smith's autopsies between 1991 and 2002 found that Smith made questionable conclusions in 20 cases. His medical licence expired in August 2008 and was never renewed as The College of Physicians and Surgeons revoking it last February.

Sherret-Robinson, who spent one year in jail after being convicted of her child's death, was exonerated last year and has received financial compensation from the province.

The PECI class, she said, needs to hear the whole story.

"I don't know what exactly happens in law classes and I don't know how in-depth they would go into wrongful convictions but this is my way of educating them on how it happens. This," she said, "is real."

Donnell said whether Sherret-Robinson will appear before the students hasn't been determined.

"We're aware that Ms. Sherret-Robinson has asked to go in and talk to the class, but we're not there yet," Donnell said. "We still have things to work through. This is significant and we want to make sure we're making the best decisions as we move through this.""

The story can be found at:

http://www.intelligencer.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3357203

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;

HANK SKINNER; DAVID PROTESS IN THE HUFFINGTON POST; TIME IS NOT ON TEXAS CONDEMNED MAN'S SIDE; UPDATE;

"Now the clock is ticking on Hank Skinner's life. A Texas judge has ordered him executed on Nov. 9, less than a week from today. He would be executed even though the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year gave him the right to sue for access to the crime scene evidence. Executed even though that lawsuit is presently before a federal magistrate. Executed despite a new Texas statute that guarantees post-conviction DNA testing.

Texas officials argue that Skinner had plenty of time to ask for the tests -- before his trial in 1995. Now it's too late, they say.

Seriously? When is it ever too late to learn the truth? If Skinner is guilty, the tests should prove it. If he's innocent, the tests should prevent Texas from making a fatal mistake."

DAVID PROTESS; THE HUFFINGTON POST; (President of the Chicago Innocence Project);

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

BACKGROUND: "Hank Skinner faces execution for a 1993 murder he's always maintained he didn't commit. He wants the state to test whether his DNA matches evidence found at the crime scene, but prosecutors say the time to contest his conviction has come and gone......Reporter Brandi Grissom, author of the Tribune series on Hank Skinner, writes: "I interviewed Henry "Hank" Watkins Skinner, 47, at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — death row — on January 20, 2010. Skinner was convicted in 1995 of murdering his girlfriends and her two sons; Skinner has always maintained that he's innocent and for 15 years has asked the state to release DNA evidence that he says will prove he was not the killer." Texas Tribune;

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

"Time is so elusive," the Huffington Post post by David Protess published on November 3, 2011 begins under the heading, "Time is not on Texas condemned man's side."

"It's hard to remember when my journalism students and I weren't reporting about Hank Skinner's case. That's partly because it's been more than a decade, our oldest active case. When we first heard about Skinner's plight, George W. Bush was still governor of Texas," the story continues.

"We got involved sometime in 2000, when I got a call from Bryson Hull, an AP reporter in Houston. (I'm fairly certain it was early spring because the Chicago Cubs were beginning what would prove to be their 92nd season of futility. That's another way to mark time.) Hull told me about a Texas condemned man who steadfastly professed his innocence. His name was Henry Watkins Skinner, but he insisted on being called "Hank."

I distinctly recall reading the official record in Hank Skinner's case and wondering why significant crime scene evidence -- the murder weapons, the rape kit, a blood-stained windbreaker -- had not been scientifically tested. I also recall asking my journalism students, who were preoccupied with other reporting projects, if they wanted to interview Skinner on Texas' death row to see if he'd agree to DNA testing. Their reply: Road trip!

At some point, the students reported that Skinner was eager to have the tests performed. Later, the State's star witness told the students she had lied at Skinner's trial and other witnesses had good reason to believe the female victim's late uncle had committed the crime. The bloodied windbreaker looked like the uncle's, a witness said. DNA testing might determine whether it was his.

In 2010, six of the Skinner jurors told a new group of students that his life should be spared unless tests on the remaining evidence prove his guilt.

Another year passed. Still no tests.

Now the clock is ticking on Hank Skinner's life. A Texas judge has ordered him executed on Nov. 9, less than a week from today. He would be executed even though the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this year gave him the right to sue for access to the crime scene evidence. Executed even though that lawsuit is presently before a federal magistrate. Executed despite a new Texas statute that guarantees post-conviction DNA testing.

Texas officials argue that Skinner had plenty of time to ask for the tests -- before his trial in 1995. Now it's too late, they say.

Seriously? When is it ever too late to learn the truth? If Skinner is guilty, the tests should prove it. If he's innocent, the tests should prevent Texas from making a fatal mistake.

Skinner, 49, has been on death row for sixteen years, six years longer than the life expectancy of the men who reside in the Allan B. Polunsky Condemned Unit. For most of that time, Texas law enforcement has endlessly fought DNA testing, litigating the case at taxpayer's expense.

Now they're counting on a Texas judge to reject a stay and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals to side with the judge. That would leave the case in the hands of Gov. Rick Perry, who has the power to order a 30-day reprieve while the tests are done -- paid for by the defense.

Gov. Perry seems to have his own problems lately. Why add the execution of a possibly innocent man to the list?

Show the world, Governor, that the perception of you is wrong -- that you aren't a cowboy who endorses executions at any cost. Make the Skinner case a turning point in your career. Do what your predecessor, George W. Bush, did in a death row case with untested evidence. "Any time DNA evidence can be relevant as to the guilt or innocence of a person on death row, we need to use it," Bush declared in ordering a reprieve.

Stop the execution, Governor, and support DNA testing for Hank Skinner.

It's about time."

Keeping You Posted:

As expected, Texas Judge Steven R. Emmert has denied Hank Skinner's request for DNA testing under the new state law that provides for such tests in exactly these circumstances. The judge's opinion was one sentence long. It contained no reason for the denial and cited no cases -- not even the relevant state law. Skinner's lawyers will appeal to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Meanwhile, his supporters have begun their own appeal -- to Gov. Rick Perry. The on-line petition to the governor may be found at http://www.change.org/petitions/withdraw-execution-warrant-and-grant-dna-testing-to-hank-skinner-2

The post can be found at:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-protess/time-is-not-on-condemned-_b_1073854.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;

SHIRLEY REES SMITH; NEW YORK TIMES WRITER TROUBLED BY U.S. SUPREME COURT REVERSAL IN SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME CASE; ANDREW ROSENTHAL;

"Ultimately our reaction to this case has little to do with process. It’s hard for me to set aside that doctors now question whether infants can be fatally injured through shaking alone. Deborah Tuerkheimer, a professor of law at DePaul University and former assistant district attorney in Manhattan, wrote about it on our Op-Ed page in September 2010 and Emily Bazelon picked up the subject again for the Times Sunday Magazine in February this year.

Shirley Ree Smith, now 51, served 10 years of her sentence. She has been free for five years since the Ninth Circuit overturned her conviction, but she is expected to return to prison before Christmas..."

ANDREW ROSENTHAL; THE NEW YORK TIMES;

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

BACKGROUND: (FROM NPR STORY BY NINA TOTENBERG PUBLISHED ON OCTOBER 31, 2001): Shirley Smith, the grandmother of 7-week-old Etzel Smith, was convicted of killing him after a seven-day trial that was a dominated by conflicting medical experts. The jury was ultimately convinced that Etzel had died from Shaken Baby Syndrome, and Smith was sentenced 15 years to life in prison. The California state courts upheld the conviction, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned it, finding that there had been "a miscarriage of justice" because there was "no demonstrable support" for the prosecution's theory of the case. Without hearing arguments, a six-justice majority said that the appeals court had imposed its own judgment in place of the jury's judment, and that the lower court thus exceeded its authority. The court majority acknowledged that "doubts about whether Smith is in fact guilty are understandable," but nonetheless said the high degree of deference due to the state courts barred the kind of second-guessing engaged in by the federal appeals court. Dissenting were Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor. Ginsburg wrote that what is now known about SBS "casts grave doubt" on the charge leveled against Smith. She went on to note that all the experts in the case, including the prosecutor's expert witnesses, agreed that few of the usual signs of Shaken Baby Syndrome were present in this case. She observed that there had never been any report of child abuse in this family, and she said that given the doubts posed by the physical evidence in the case, the Supreme Court should have stayed its hand. She went on to chastise the majority for being "bent on rebuking the Ninth Circuit" and using the case "as a fit opportunity to teach the Ninth Circuit a lesson." For its part, the majority noted that this case had made its way to the Supreme Court twice before, and that the lower court "each time persisted in its course," setting aside the jury verdict, despite clear signals from the Supreme Court to do otherwise. This time, the court majority said, the Ninth Circuit's action "cannot be allowed to stand." The High Court decision puts an end to a highly controversial case that for more than a decade has made legal headlines in California. It also means that the grandmother, Shirley Smith, who served 10 years in prison before being released, will now have to return to prison to serve at least another five years.

http://www.wrvo.org/post/supreme-court-reinstates-conviction-grandmother-shaken-baby-case

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

"The Republican presidential candidates Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum say the Ninth Circuit appeals court, based in San Francisco, should be abolished because they often disagree with its rulings. Apparently the appellate court has some detractors on the Supreme Court, too," the New York Times commentary by Andrew Rosental published on November 1, 2011 under the heading, " Shaken Baby Syndrome," begins.

"Take a look at the Supreme Court’s first ruling of the 2011 term, issued on Monday in a case entitled Javier Cavazos, Acting Warden v. Shirley Ree Smith. (Just runs trippingly off the tongue, doesn’t it?) Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who dissented along with Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor, says bluntly that the majority chose this “case as a fit opportunity to teach the Ninth Circuit a lesson,” the commentary continues.

"I can tell a bad decision when I see one, but I don’t pretend to be an expert in the intricacies of Supreme Court decisions. So I asked our editorial board Supreme Court writer, Lincoln Caplan, for his take.

The case, Linc told me, is about a tragic death and conviction: Ms. Smith’s seven-week-old grandson died while in her care , and she was found guilty in a California trial of causing the baby’s death by shaking him. She was sentenced to 15 years to life. The Ninth Circuit noted that there are “very strict limits” for an appellate court to review a state criminal conviction, but in this case it found “no demonstrable support” for Ms. Smith’s conviction, and overturned it.

Now the Supreme Court has stepped in – to vacate the Ninth Circuit’s judgment on the premise that “it is the responsibility of the jury—not the court—to decide what conclusions should be drawn from evidence admitted at trial.” Linc and I detect a bit of glee in this rebuke.

Justice Ginsburg, however, wonders if it’s the Supreme Court, rather than the Ninth Circuit, that’s overreaching: “The Court’s summary disposition of this case, in my judgment, is a misuse of discretion.” She asks “Is this Court’s intervention really necessary?”

Ultimately our reaction to this case has little to do with process. It’s hard for me to set aside that doctors now question whether infants can be fatally injured through shaking alone. Deborah Tuerkheimer, a professor of law at DePaul University and former assistant district attorney in Manhattan, wrote about it on our Op-Ed page in September 2010 and Emily Bazelon picked up the subject again for the Times Sunday Magazine in February this year.

Shirley Ree Smith, now 51, served 10 years of her sentence. She has been free for five years since the Ninth Circuit overturned her conviction, but she is expected to return to prison before Christmas. That doesn’t sit well with us."

The commentary can be found at:

http://loyalopposition.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/shaken-baby-syndrome/#more-97

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;

ROBERT TAYLOR, JAMES HARDEN AND JONATHAN BARR; DNA EXONERATION EXPOSES CONFESSIONS EXTORTED FROM INNOCENT JUVENILES; TWO MORE EXONERATIONS COMING;

“After months of offering up disingenuous arguments to delay justice, we’re relieved the State’s Attorney’s Office has finally seen the light. This is a classic example of tunnel vision. Five teens supposedly confessed to a rape and murder of a 14-year-old girl, yet they didn’t recover any DNA from the 5 teens, they offered no evidence that the girl had a boyfiend at the time and they recovered semen from an unknown male,” said Craig Cooley, a staff attorney with the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with Cardozo School of Law. “These facts should have sent up a red flag 20 years ago, and there was certainly no reason to delay justice once Randolph was identified last spring.”

THE INNOCENCE PROJECT:

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

(Chicago, November 3, 2011) After DNA testing linked a rapist to the 1991 rape and murder of a 14-year-old southwest suburban girl, a Cook County Circuit Court judge today set aside the convictions of three men who were convicted of the crime by confessions now known to be false," the Innocence Project release issued earlier today under the heading, "Three men from Cook County exonerated of 1991 rape and murder; Exonerations of two others to follow," begins.

(A sub-heading says that: "Juveniles were forced to confess to crime that DNA evidence now proves was committed by a rapist.")

"Robert Taylor, James Harden and Jonathan Barr, all of whom were teenagers when arrested, are represented by the University of Chicago’s Exoneration Project, the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth with private attorney Jennifer Blagg and the Innocence Project," the story continues.

"In court today, the State’s Attorney’s Office noted that it would be filing papers soon to vacate the convictions of Robert Lee Veal and Shainne Sharp who were also wrongfully convicted of the crime.

“This is one of the most tragic miscarriages of justice that we’ve seen in this state and perhaps the nation. Even before they were convicted, the state had DNA evidence proving that the confessions were false, yet it chose to go forward with the prosecutions in spite of this evidence and over the objections of a juvenile court judge,” said Tara Thompson of the UChicago Law School Exoneration Project. “This destroyed the lives of these young men while the real perpetrator was allowed to go free, destroying even more lives during a 20-year crime spree.”

"On November 19, 1991, Cateresa Matthews, a 14-year-old student at Rosa Parks Middle School in Dixmoor, IL, went missing. Her body was discovered 19 days later on a footpath in a residential neighborhood near Interstate 57 in Dixmoor. She had been raped and shot in the mouth. Nearly a year after the murder, the Illinois State Police interrogated Veal, a 15-year-old student from the same school. After 5 hours in police custody, Veal signed a written statement implicating himself, Taylor (15), Barr (15), Harden (17) and Sharp (17). After 4 hours in custody, Taylor also signed a written confession. Two days later, after 21 hours in custody, Sharp did the same.

In June 1994, before any of the teenagers were tried, the Illinois State Police crime lab identified a lone male DNA profile from sperm recovered from the victim’s body. Even though all 5 defendants were excluded as the source of the semen, the prosecution pushed forward rather than seeking the source of the semen recovered from this young victim. Based on doubts about the truthfulness of the confessions, a juvenile court judge refused to charge Barr and Taylor in adult criminal court, a decision later reversed by an appellate court. Veal and Sharp pled guilty to first-degree murder and received a 20-year sentence (they were eligible for release just 7 years from the date of their pleas) in exchange for agreeing to testify against Harden, Barr and Taylor. Over the next 2 years, all 3 were convicted, and each was sentenced to at least 80 years in prison. All subsequent appeals were denied, including a post-conviction request for DNA testing.

In August 2009, James Harden, through the UChicago Exoneration Project, again sought DNA testing, a request later joined by Robert Taylor through the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth and private attorney Jennifer Blagg as well as Jonathan Barr through the Innocence Project. For more than a year, the Dixmoor Police Department claimed that it was unable to locate the DNA and was threatened with contempt of court for failing to respond to a subpoena. Eventually Judge Michele Simmons ordered the Dixmoor police to allow counsel to view the evidence storage areas and log books for themselves. In short order, the Department informed the lawyers that they had finally located the evidence. DNA testing uncovered a full male profile that was entered into the national DNA database of criminal offenders, matching serial violent offender Willie Randolph.

At the time of the crime, Randolph, 33, lived in the victim’s neighborhood and had recently been released on parole after serving a 20-year sentence for armed robbery. He was apprehended by authorities on April 12, 2011. Police questioned Randolph, whose semen had been found in the victim’s body, about the murder, and he denied having sex with Matthews. Subsequently, defendants’ attorneys located another woman who says she was also raped by Randolph at the same exact location.

“It is abundantly clear that overly aggressive police interrogation techniques can cause adults to falsely confess to serious crimes – and when it comes to juveniles, it can happen at a truly alarming rate,” said Joshua Tepfer with the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth. “These techniques don’t only hurt those wrongfully convicted, but as we saw in this case, they allow the real perpetrators to go free and commit other crimes. Hopefully this case will lead the way for much-needed reforms like requiring that all police interviews and interrogations be videotaped in full.”

Brothers Barr and Harden were just 14 and 16 when Matthews was murdered. Neither Barr nor Harden confessed to the crime and have always maintained their innocence. Their father, James Harden, Sr., provided an alibi at each of their trials, testifying that he was home with the boys on the alleged day the victim was murdered. Barr and Harden’s mother and father both passed away while they were incarcerated.

Taylor was also just 14 at the time of the murder. After a relentless interrogation, he signed a written statement confessing to the crime. He recanted soon thereafter but was convicted at trial based on his statement and the testimony from Veal and Sharp. Taylor plans to live with his father, Robert Taylor, Sr., who has stood by him throughout his two-decade fight to clear his name.

“After months of offering up disingenuous arguments to delay justice, we’re relieved the State’s Attorney’s Office has finally seen the light. This is a classic example of tunnel vision. Five teens supposedly confessed to a rape and murder of a 14-year-old girl, yet they didn’t recover any DNA from the 5 teens, they offered no evidence that the girl had a boyfiend at the time and they recovered semen from an unknown male,” said Craig Cooley, a staff attorney with the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with Cardozo School of Law. “These facts should have sent up a red flag 20 years ago, and there was certainly no reason to delay justice once Randolph was identified last spring.”

In court today, Judge Simmons vacated the convictions of the Taylor, Harden and Barr. The State’s Attorney’s Office stated that it would be filing a motion soon to vacate the convictions of Veal and Sharp. Veal is now living in Minnesota. Sharp is in prison in Indiana on a drug charge.

James Harden is represented by Tara Thompson of the UChicago Law School Exoneration Project. Robert Taylor is represented by Joshua Tepfer, Laura Nirider, and Steven Drizin of the Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth as well as private attorney Jennifer Blagg. Jonathan Barr is represented by Co-Director Peter Neufeld and Staff Attorney Craig Cooley of the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with Cardozo School of Law. "

https://mail.google.com/mail/?shva=1#inbox/1336b00692e68d4b

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;

HANK SKINNER: RADLEY BALKO CALLS IT "WILLFUL IGNORANCE AND THE LOOMING EXECUTION OF HANK SKINNER." THE AGITATOR;

"So the Texas legislature passed a new law inspired in part by Skinner’s case. One co-sponsor even said he hoped the law would give Skinner the testing he had been requesting. The prosecutors responded by . . . requesting an execution date. It’s like they want to be sure Skinner is dead before his lawyers can use the new law to get relief."

RADLEY BALKO; THE AGITATOR; Radley Balko is currently a senior writer for Huffington Post, where he does investigative reporting on civil liberties and the criminal justice system, and write about music and culture in Nashville.

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

BACKGROUND: "Hank Skinner faces execution for a 1993 murder he's always maintained he didn't commit. He wants the state to test whether his DNA matches evidence found at the crime scene, but prosecutors say the time to contest his conviction has come and gone......Reporter Brandi Grissom, author of the Tribune series on Hank Skinner, writes: "I interviewed Henry "Hank" Watkins Skinner, 47, at the Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice — death row — on January 20, 2010. Skinner was convicted in 1995 of murdering his girlfriends and her two sons; Skinner has always maintained that he's innocent and for 15 years has asked the state to release DNA evidence that he says will prove he was not the killer." Texas Tribune;

------------------------------------------------------------
"I have a new piece on the Skinner case up at Huffington Post today," The Agitator post by Radley Balko published earlier today under the heading, "Wilful ignorance and the looming execution of Hank Skinner" begins.

"If you’ve been following the case, you know most of the details," the post continues.

"But here’s a new twist:

Last year, with Skinner less than an hour from execution, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay to consider whether federal civil rights law may allow Skinner to challenge the way Texas courts have interpreted the state law that allows inmates to get DNA testing post-conviction. In March the Court ruled 6-3 that it did. The Court didn’t order the DNA testing. Rather, the decision only granted Skinner the ability to argue in federal court that Texas state courts had erred in how they applied the state’s DNA testing law.

The Texas legislature has since rendered that question moot. Last June, both houses overwhelmingly passed a revision to the DNA testing law to clarify that inmates should be able to request testing even if their counsel did not request any at trial. Lawmakers even cited Skinner’s case in passing the legislation. Hank Skinner, it seemed, would finally get his DNA tests.

And here’s where D.A. Lynn Switzer began to appear determined to carry out the execution of Hank Skinner. The new law took effect on Sept. 1, 2011. Skinner’s attorneys immediately filed for testing under the new law. Switzer’s office responded by requesting an execution date. They got it: Nov. 9.

So the Texas legislature passed a new law inspired in part by Skinner’s case. One co-sponsor even said he hoped the law would give Skinner the testing he had been requesting. The prosecutors responded by . . . requesting an execution date. It’s like they want to be sure Skinner is dead before his lawyers can use the new law to get relief.

The post can be found at:

http://www.theagitator.com/2011/11/03/willful-ignorance-and-the-looming-execution-of-hank-skinner/

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;

CHARLES SMITH; THE BELLEVILLE "INTELLIGENCER" ASKS "WHO ALLOWED THIS DISGRACE IN OUR SCHOOL?"

"What could that teacher or staff member have been thinking? Something to the effect of: 'Well, he was a doctor before all that messy inquiry stuff?'

It boggles the mind.

Admittedly, if they had not been told — and we don't know that they weren't — most students in that classroom may not have known of or even heard of Dr, Smith and his shameful record."

EDIITORIAL; THE BELLEVILLE "INTELLIGENCER;" The Intelligencer (locally nicknamed the "Intel") is the daily (except on Sundays and certain holidays) newspaper of Belleville, Ontario, Canada.

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

BACKGROUND: The Goudge inquiry focused largely on the flawed work of Charles Smith — formerly the province's chief pediatric pathologist and a self-styled member of the prosecution team — whose "errors" led to innocent people being branded as child murderers. (He has since been thrown out of the medical profession in Ontario); Justice Stephen Goudge's 1000-page report slammed Smith, along with Ontario's former chief coroner and his deputy, for their roles in wrongful prosecutions and asked the province to consider compensation. The provincial coroner's office found evidence of errors in 20 of 45 autopsies Smith did over a 10-year period starting in the early 1990s. Thirteen resulted in criminal charges. The inquiry heard that Smith's failings included hanging on to crucial evidence (instead of processing it), "losing" evidence which showed his opinion was wrong and may have helped show that the accused person was innocent, mistating evidence, chronic tardiness, and the catastrophic misinterpretation of findings. The cases, along with other heart-rending stories of wrongful prosecutions based in part on Smith's testimony, also raised a host of issues about the pediatric pathology system in Ontario and the use of expert evidence in the criminal courts.

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

PUBLISHER'S VIEW: This is pure Charles Smith - conning someone to have him invited to address a class of high school. He, the unrepentant former Dr. Charles Randal Smith, who is probably responsible for more miscarriages of justice and destroying the lives of more individuals and families than any other individual in Canadian history. It's just like his conning of a friend to have him hired by a hospital in Saskatoon after he had come under investigation in Ontario and had slunk away quietly from the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto. He, the disgraced physician recently declared incompetent and found guilty of acts of professional misconduct who didn't even have the courage to show up for his discipline hearing. The former Dr. Charles Randal Smith - a great role model for our students who, having admitted to little more than "errors" and "mistakes," has clearly begun a campaign to rehabilitate himself in the forgetful public's eye. My gut feeling is that Smith has become emboldened by the fact that he has evaded prosecution for his crimes - and by the fact that not a single radio, television or print story marked September 20, 2011 - the 3d anniversary of Justice Stephen Goudge's damning report into many of his cases. It's worth noting that at the Goudge Inquiry, contrary to the myth Smith had constructed that he was a God of forensic pathology, he purported to be an ignoramus who had no understanding of medical matters. And now, according to the Toronto Sun, he's lecturing high school students on DNA! (Perhaps he regaled the students with stories, such as the occasion in 1997 when he brought his then 11-year-old son to the exhumation of an 11-month-old child in Sudbury, Ontario, who had died suddenly about nineteen months earlier after bumping his head while playing under a table.) This Leopard truly has not changed his spots. He's mocking us. Final thought: A message to Ontario's school boards. Get something positive out of this unfortunate experience. Ask people like Sherry (Sherret) Robinson, Brenda Waudby, Bill Mullins-Johnson, and all too many others, to come and talk about their experiences in Ontario's criminal justice system. (Not Charles Smith); Why not go one step further, and set up courses on the frailties of Ontario's criminal justice system that allowed Smith to destroy lives and families with impunity for so long?

HAROLD LEVY; PUBLISHER; THE CHARLES SMITH BLOG;

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

"There are times when editorialists are in full bluster over some boneheaded bureaucratic decision, a policy slip-up or a bad choice by cops or authorities," the Intelligencer editorial published on November 1, 2011 under the heading, "Who allowed this disgrace in our school," begins?

"In the case of the teacher or staff member who let disgraced pathologist Dr. Charles Smith stand before students and address a Grade 11 class at Prince Edward Collegiate Institute last week, we are nearly at a loss for words as to the need for swift, stern and serious discipline for that educator," the editorial continues.

"Smith, of course, is the pathologist once thought to be the most experienced in the field of deaths in infants where causes were difficult to determine.

For 24 years, he worked in the pediatric forensic pathology unit at Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children where he conducted more than 1,000 child autopsies.

In October, 2008, a coroner's inquest into 45 of the cases he'd ruled on determined Smith, through his own negligence, resulted in the wrongful arrest and conviction of 13 individuals across Ontario.

Justice Stephen Goudge, who oversaw the inquest into Smith's botched pathology, determined that Smith "actively misled" superiors, "made false and misleading statements" in court and exaggerated his expertise in trials involving the infants.

"Smith lacked basic knowledge about forensic pathology," wrote Goudge in the inquiry report.

This is the man someone — we have not been told who — allowed into a classroom at PECI to speak, reportedly, on the topic of DNA.

A man who was culpable, through his own negligence and hubris, for ruining more than a dozen lives of innocent people in this province was permitted to appear before high school students as an authority on medical science?

What could that teacher or staff member have been thinking? Something to the effect of: 'Well, he was a doctor before all that messy inquiry stuff?'

It boggles the mind.

Admittedly, if they had not been told — and we don't know that they weren't — most students in that classroom may not have known of or even heard of Dr, Smith and his shameful record.

But, that doesn't go for the staff member who let him in the door. We're told Smith had a familial connection with a student there, but a staffer had to make the decision to bring the doctor into the classroom.

For that teacher, he or she should face some serious questioning about what brought about the decision to let this man into one of our schools and follow that up with a suspension without pay, if such a punishment even exists in today's education system.

Frankly, we're not holding our breath on the latter."

The editorial can be found at:

http://www.intelligencer.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=3354141

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: 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

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog; hlevy15@gmail.com;