Rodricus Crawford: Louisiana: Radley Balko takes a hard look at Louisiana's odious criminal justice system, appraises reform measures now under way, and identifies a major obstacle: "Hugo Holland" - a fired prosecutor who Balko says became "the most powerful law enforcement official in Louisiana."..."Holland is arguably the most powerful prosecutor in Louisiana, which is odd given that not only has he never run for office, he isn’t even officially a full-time state employee. In fact, Holland was forced to resign his position as an assistant district attorney for Caddo Parish in 2012. He and another prosecutor were caught falsifying federal forms in order to procure a cache of M-16s for themselves through the Pentagon program that give surplus military gear to police departments. According to pay records obtained by the Promise of Justice Initiative and shared with The Watch, almost immediately after he was fired, Holland was re-hired by parishes all over the state as a part-time prosecutor. Some DAs have given him their most serious and high-profile cases — death penalty cases in particular. In fact, by 2015, thanks to those freelance gigs, Holland had doubled the salary he was earning when he resigned. Perhaps more importantly, Holland has also been hired by the Louisiana District Attorneys Association — with public funding — to persuade state legislators to vote against criminal-justice reform. So far, he has successfully scuttled momentum to end the death penalty in Louisiana, and persuaded lawmakers to divert money from indigent defendants in death penalty cases."

QUOTE OF THE DAY: “Hugo Holland captures everything that’s wrong with the criminal-justice system in Louisiana."

Lawyer G. Ben Cohen: Promise of Justice Initiative;

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

COMMENTARY: "How a fired prosecutor became the most powerful law enforcement official in Louisiana." by Radley Balko, published by The Washington Post on November 2, 2107. (Radley Balko blogs about criminal justice, the drug war and civil liberties for The Washington Post. He is the author of the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America's Police Forces.)

GIST:  "This past June, the Louisiana legislature passed 10 bills tackling sentencing reform, prisoner rehabilitation, and related criminal-justice reforms. The New York Times editorial board called the effort “one of the most ambitious criminal-justice reform packages in the country.” The reforms took effect recently, and supporters cite a Pew Charitable Trusts study that claims that the bills will reduce the state’s prison population by 10 percent over the next 10 years. There’s a good case to be made that the bills are historic. The state’s incarceration rate is about double the national average. If it were an independent country, Louisiana would lead the world in the rate at which it incarcerates its citizens. And even as much of the rest of the country began moving toward decarceration years ago, up until this recent series of bills, Louisiana only continued to get more punitive. So any move toward decreasing the state’s prison population would be a landmark shift in strategy. But some defense attorneys and reform advocates say that all is not as rosy it seems in Louisiana. They say the state could have done a lot more, and see the reform package as a missed opportunity. “Louisiana leads the country in incarceration,” says G. Ben Cohen, a defense attorney who takes cases in Louisiana through the nonprofit Promise of Justice Initiative. “And after these bills, it will still lead the country in incarceration.” Gov. John Bel Edwards (D) and the package’s supporters are at least a little more optimistic — they say that after 10 years, the new laws will put the state at No. 2. But the skeptics also say that the state could have done more if weren’t for the one man who is almost single-handedly holding up real criminal-justice reform: Hugo Holland, an old-school prosecutor formerly of the DA’s office that at one point led the state in death sentences. Holland is arguably the most powerful prosecutor in Louisiana, which is odd given that not only has he never run for office, he isn’t even officially a full-time state employee. In fact, Holland was forced to resign his position as an assistant district attorney for Caddo Parish in 2012. He and another prosecutor were caught falsifying federal forms in order to procure a cache of M-16s for themselves through the Pentagon program that give surplus military gear to police departments. According to pay records obtained by the Promise of Justice Initiative and shared with The Watch, almost immediately after he was fired, Holland was re-hired by parishes all over the state as a part-time prosecutor. Some DAs have given him their most serious and high-profile cases — death penalty cases in particular. In fact, by 2015, thanks to those freelance gigs, Holland had doubled the salary he was earning when he resigned. Perhaps more importantly, Holland has also been hired by the Louisiana District Attorneys Association — with public funding — to persuade state legislators to vote against criminal-justice reform. So far, he has successfully scuttled momentum to end the death penalty in Louisiana, and persuaded lawmakers to divert money from indigent defendants in death penalty cases. He was less successful in killing the reforms passed in June, but some reform advocates say he did persuade lawmakers to vote down the reforms that most worried prosecutors. “Hugo Holland captures everything that’s wrong with the criminal-justice system in Louisiana,” says Cohen. And his sudden ascendance and popularity with prosecutors has some activists worried that the state’s taste for reform may be short-lived.  (Read on at the link below  to find out why Balko concludes the punitive, law-and-order school still isn’t dead in Louisiana but lives on in Hugo , why Balko concludes that Holland's firing five years ago appears to have freed him to become one of the most influential law enforcement officials in Louisiana - and what Balko says the Rodricus Crawford case says about Louisiana's criminal justice system. HL);

The entire commentary can be found at:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2017/11/02/how-a-fired-prosecutor-became-the-most-powerful-law-enforcement-official-in-louisiana/?utm_term=.f18cc1db01c7

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.

Frits Van Beelen; Case involves discredited "forensic scientist" Dr. Colin Manock. Story asks: "Will the High Court vindicate convicted murderer Frits Van Beelen after 46 years?"..."In June Director of Public Prosecutions, Adam Kimber SC, told a full sitting of the High Court in Adelaide that Van Beelen was inextricably linked to the rape and murder of Deborah Leach. But Mr Borick argued Dr Manock fixed the time of Deborah’s death, by relying on an analysis of her stomach contents — a method that has been disproved since by scientific advancement. Dr Manock’s timing of death, of 4.30pm, was crucial to the appeal because Van Beelen had an alibi for about 4.40pm. The High Court will have to determine if the new revelations on stomach content evidence is enough to justify overturning the conviction. The State Government will be keeping a close eye on the case along with the upcoming appeal of convicted murderer Derek Bromley. Bromley has spent more than 30 years proclaiming his innocence. His lawyers have also argued there are numerous discrepancies in the original autopsy report prepared by Dr Manock."

STORY: "Will the High Court vindicate convicted murderer Frits Van Beelen after 46 years?, by reporter  Matt Smith, published by The Sunday Mail S.A. on November 4, 2017.

PHOTO CAPTION: "Frits Van Beelen was convicted of the murder of SA teenager Deborah Joan Leach at Taperoo Beach in 1971 but has always maintained his innocence."

GIST: "The  final chapter of one of South Australia’s most high-profile murders will play out in the High Court this week in a case that could have enormous ramifications for the State Government.

The High Court of Australia will on Wednesday decide if it will overturn Frits Van Beelen’s conviction for the murder of 15-year-old Deborah Leach at Taperoo Beach in 1971. Van Beelen, 69, who had previous convictions for sexual assault, was released from prison in 1990 after serving 17 years’ jail. But he has consistently maintained his innocence. Supporters and his legal team have argued evidence produced by controversial forensic scientist Dr Colin Manock helped to put him behind bars when it should not have. Prominent Adelaide criminal lawyer Kevin Borick, QC, who has represented Van Beelen since his first trial in July 1972, told the Sunday Mail the High Court would hand down its findings, from Canberra, on Wednesday with two choices. “Either overturn the conviction or dismiss the appeal,” Mr Borick said. “In my opinion it would be impossible to order a retrial after 45 years.” In June Director of Public Prosecutions, Adam Kimber SC, told a full sitting of the High Court in Adelaide that Van Beelen was inextricably linked to the rape and murder of Deborah Leach. But Mr Borick argued Dr Manock fixed the time of Deborah’s death, by relying on an analysis of her stomach contents — a method that has been disproved since by scientific advancement. Dr Manock’s timing of death, of 4.30pm, was crucial to the appeal because Van Beelen had an alibi for about 4.40pm. The High Court will have to determine if the new revelations on stomach content evidence is enough to justify overturning the conviction. The State Government will be keeping a close eye on the case along with the upcoming appeal of convicted murderer Derek Bromley. Bromley has spent more than 30 years proclaiming his innocence. His lawyers have also argued there are numerous discrepancies in the original autopsy report prepared by Dr Manock. Both Bromley and Van Beelen could sue the State Government if their convictions are overturned. “The issue of compensation is open in any of the cases in which Dr Manock is involved,” Mr Borick said. If the Van Beelen conviction is overturned it will also reignite calls for the State Government to re-examine Dr Manock’s evidence in the 400 cases that led to convictions in which he provided evidence."

The entire story can be found at the link below::

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/law-order/will-the-high-court-vindicate-convicted-murderer-frits-van-beelen-after-46-years/news-story/c4c74d2a845e714bdf78fa802d062320

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.

Larry Swearingen: Anthony Shore; Texas; "Investigators comb lake for new evidence in Swearingen death row case," the Houston Chronicle reports..."Nearly 20 years after the murder of college student Melissa Trotter rocked Montgomery County, dive teams are out searching for more evidence in the county's only death row case. The renewed search efforts come weeks after word of an abandoned confession plot between Larry Swearingen - who was convicted in Trotter's slaying - and Houston serial killer Anthony Shore threatened to cloud the case and pointed to the possibility of more evidence. "We're trying to be thorough and check off all the boxes," said Montgomery County District Attorney Brett Ligon. "We don't anticipate finding anything 20 years later."

STORY: "Investigators comb lake for new evidence in Swearingen death row case," by reporter Keri Blakinger, published by The Houston Chronicle on November 2, 2017.

GIST: "Nearly 20 years after the murder of college student Melissa Trotter rocked Montgomery County, dive teams are out searching for more evidence in the county's only death row case. The renewed search efforts come weeks after word of an abandoned confession plot between Larry Swearingen - who was convicted in Trotter's slaying - and Houston serial killer Anthony Shore threatened to cloud the case and pointed to the possibility of more evidence. "We're trying to be thorough and check off all the boxes," said Montgomery County District Attorney Brett Ligon. "We don't anticipate finding anything 20 years later." Search efforts led by Montgomery County Precinct 1 Constable Philip Cash, at Ligon's request, kicked off on Monday at an undisclosed location. So far, investigators did not indicate finding any new evidence but the hunt was still ongoing Thursday morning. "We were hopeful something could be found but we weren't really expecting anything," Ligon said. After years of slow-burning appeals and quiet courtroom wrangling, Swearingen's case rocketed back into the limelight last month after a flurry of unexpected developments. First, the confession plot with Shore. Then, a filing snafu and a cancelled execution. Next, a DNA testing agreement and a lake-bottom search. Through it all, Trotter's family has yearned for justice. "I'm frustrated," said Sandy Trotter, the slain teen's mother. "But I am convinced this is all in God's timing." On the day of Melissa Trotter's appearance in December 1998, she and Swearingen were spotted together in Montgomery College library. Afterward, a biology teacher saw the 19-year-old leaving the school with a man. Hair and fiber evidence later showed that she'd been in Swearingen's car and home the day she vanished. The killer's wife testified that she came home that evening to find the place in disarray - and in the middle of it all were Trotter's lighter and cigarettes. That afternoon, Swearingen placed a call routed through a cell tower near FM 1097 in Willis - a spot he would have passed while heading from his house to the Sam Houston National Forest where Trotter's decomposing body was found 25 days later. Swearingen was convicted and sentenced to death in 2000, but since then has repeatedly evaded the state's harshest punishment through a series of dogged appeals, many focusing on efforts to insure DNA testing. Both he and Shore had execution dates set for this fall, but judges called them off not long after news emerged of the pair's alleged confession scheme. Hours before he was scheduled to die on Oct. 18, Shore won a 90-day stay after prosecutors said the four-time killer admitted to an abandoned plan to confess to Swearingen's crime. Over the years, Swearingen has consistently professed his innocence. Shore, on the other hand, has consistently admitted to the 1992 killing of Maria del Carmen Estrada - for which he was convicted - as well as the gruesome strangulations of 14-year-old Laurie Tremblay, 9-year-old Diana Rebollar and 16-year-old Dana Sanchez. Officials first found out about the possibility of a last-minute confession attempt back in July, when a death row cell search uncovered materials relating to Trotter's killing - including a hand-drawn map marking the supposed location of more evidence - stashed in Shore's cell. The day before his scheduled execution, Shore told investigators he'd only considered confessing to get his friend off, and not because he'd actually committed the additional crime. The multiple murderer also agreed to answer questions about other cases, and a judge greenlit pushing back his first scheduled execution date. At the time, Swearingen also had a death date on the calendar - for Nov. 16 - but that has since been called off as the result of a filing error after the Montgomery County District Clerk sent notice of the execution to the wrong office. And while prosecutors in Harris County reset an execution date for Shore, Montgomery County prosecutors have not filed for a new date in the Swearingen case. Instead, they've agreed to more DNA testing in a final effort to clear the water in the two-decade-old case."

The entire story can be found at"

http://www.houstonchronicle.com/neighborhood/conroe/news/article/Investigators-comb-lake-for-new-evidence-in-12326492.php

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.

Motherisk: (Now defunct, discredited, disgraced lab Hospital for Sick Children hair analysis lab exposed by The Star): Province to require labs to be accredited; But proposed regulation system does not go far enough Toronto lawyer Daniel Brown says: "Though Brown said most of his concerns regarding standards for forensic labs were addressed during government consultations earlier this year, he is concerned the new legislation won’t address the admissibility of evidence from labs that may not be accredited and instead leave it up to the courts’ discretion. “The problem in the past is that the courts have failed to properly scrutinize evidence from non-forensic lab sources,” he said, pointing to the case of Tamara Broomfield, who was tried in 2009 and convicted for breaking her son’s bones and feeding him cocaine, as an example. In that case, which blew the lid off the Motherisk scandal, Motherisk tests on her son’s hair, which claimed to show he had consumed high levels of cocaine over 15 months, were admitted by the court. “That was done by a lab that wasn’t forensically accredited and nobody raised that issue at her trial and part of the problem is that they lacked the scientific literacy to do that,” Brown said, adding, “we can’t simply rely on the word of experts because … sometimes the experts can lead the courts astray.”

QUOTE OF THE DAY: "There was certainly a need for forensic lab accreditation and better controls over the evidence that’s being presented in criminal courts,” he said. “Hundreds of people have been impacted by faulty scientific evidence in the court rooms.........Cases are taking place everyday in the criminal court system and the family court system that are relying on forensic evidence and we want to make sure that the way this evidence is being presented in court and the standards that underlie the science are sound,” he said."

Criminal defence lawyer Daniel Brown.

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

STORY: "New rules will require forensic labs to be accredited,"  by  reporter Ainslie Cruikshank, published by The Toronto Star  on November 2, 2017.

SUB-HEADING: "Government announcement follows Star investigation into discredited Motherisk lab."

PHOTO CAPTION:  "As revealed by a Star investigation thousands of child protection cases and at least eight criminal cases across Canada relied on the results of The Hospital for Sick Children's Motherisk lab's discredited hair-strand drug and alcohol tests between the late 1990s and early 2015. Sick Kids closed the lab in 2015."

GIST: "The province has committed to new legislation that will require accreditation for forensic laboratories operating in Ontario in the wake of a Star investigation that revealed thousands of child protection cases across the country had relied on faulty evidence from the Hospital for Sick Children’s Motherisk lab. The new Forensic Laboratories Act, announced Thursday as part of a broader government effort to modernize policing in Ontario, aims to create better oversight of forensic labs to ensure they meet mandated standards going forward and is the first legislation of its kind in Canada. It’s a move Toronto criminal defence lawyer Daniel Brown called a “really great step forward,” but one that’s “long overdue.”  “There was certainly a need for forensic lab accreditation and better controls over the evidence that’s being presented in criminal courts,” he said. “Hundreds of people have been impacted by faulty scientific evidence in the court rooms.” As revealed by a Star investigation thousands of child protection cases and at least eight criminal cases across Canada relied on the results of Motherisk’s discredited hair-strand drug and alcohol tests between the late 1990s and early 2015. At the same time, the lab was earning millions of dollars in revenue. The Hospital for Sick Children closed the Motherisk lab in 2015. The revelations followed another Sick Kids scandal, which also highlighted the risks of faulty science, involving disgraced pathologist Charles Smith, whose mistakes tainted more than a dozen criminal cases. Under the province’s new accreditation framework forensic labs will be subject to proficiency testing, annual audits, performance reports and surveillance visits. “Our government is committed to holding forensic laboratories in Ontario to a consistently high standard,” said Yanni Dagonas, a spokesperson for Community Safety Minister Marie-France Lalonde, in a statement. It’s unclear how many labs will be affected by the new legislation given the current lack of oversight, but the government is proposing a transitional period of up to two years to give laboratories time to go through the accreditation process, which can take between 18 and 24 months, he said. Once the new accreditation standards come into force accreditation bodies would be able to issue warnings, suspend lab activities and revoke accreditation if labs fail to comply with the rules. The proposed legislation also says unaccredited labs that conduct testing covered by the act could be subject to fines of up to $30,000 for a first offence. Though Brown said most of his concerns regarding standards for forensic labs were addressed during government consultations earlier this year, he is concerned the new legislation won’t address the admissibility of evidence from labs that may not be accredited and instead leave it up to the courts’ discretion. “The problem in the past is that the courts have failed to properly scrutinize evidence from non-forensic lab sources,” he said, pointing to the case of Tamara Broomfield, who was tried in 2009 and convicted for breaking her son’s bones and feeding him cocaine, as an example. In that case, which blew the lid off the Motherisk scandal, Motherisk tests on her son’s hair, which claimed to show he had consumed high levels of cocaine over 15 months, were admitted by the court. “That was done by a lab that wasn’t forensically accredited and nobody raised that issue at her trial and part of the problem is that they lacked the scientific literacy to do that,” Brown said, adding, “we can’t simply rely on the word of experts because … sometimes the experts can lead the courts astray.” Brown, who is also a Toronto director with the Criminal Lawyers’ Association, tried to have Broomfield’s case reopened in 2010. Her cocaine-related conviction was eventually overturned in 2014, prompting the Star’s investigation. Many other cases that relied on Motherisk tests are now under review as well. Altogether, the disgraced lab performed tests on more than 25,000 people in Canada. Brown said he hopes to see the new rules enforced as soon as possible. “Cases are taking place everyday in the criminal court system and the family court system that are relying on forensic evidence and we want to make sure that the way this evidence is being presented in court and the standards that underlie the science are sound,” he said."

The entire story can be found at:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/11/02/new-rules-will-require-forensic-labs-to-be-accredited.html


Read more: Judge rejects proposed class-action over Motherisk drug-testing scandal

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.

Warren Abbey: Ontario: Ten years after he was acquitted, this Toronto man faces a third trial for the same murder - even though Ontario's highest court ruled that a prosecution sociologist gang 'expert's' testimony as to the sigificance of a teardrop tatooed under Abbey's right eye contained "inaccuracies" and even "falsehoods" and was "unreliable."..."The Crown had alleged at Abbey's second trial that he was an associate of the Malvern Crew gang who shot and killed Peter, mistakenly believing he was a member of the rival Galloway Boys, and that Abbey had a teardrop tattooed under his right eye about four months later. Testifying for the Crown, sociologist Mark Totten said a teardrop tattoo meant one of three things: the individual had lost a loved one or fellow gang member, had spent time in prison or had killed a rival gang member. But Ontario's top court came down hard on Totten in their ruling overturning Abbey's conviction. After the defence raised “fresh evidence” — issues surrounding Totten's research and testimony — the court found Totten's testimony contained “inaccuracies” and even “falsehoods.” A three-judge panel found his evidence “unreliable,” that he “misrepresented” the sample size of gang members in some of his studies, and that statistics he provided on the stand about gang members with teardrop tattoos are nowhere to be found in his studies. “I have concluded that the fresh evidence shows Totten's opinion evidence on the meaning of a teardrop tattoo to be too unreliable to be heard by a jury. If the trial judge had known about the fresh evidence he would have ruled Totten's evidence inadmissible,” Court of Appeal Justice John Laskin wrote for the panel. “And the absence of Totten's evidence would reasonably be expected to have affected the jury's verdict. I would admit the fresh evidence, allow Abbey's appeal, overturn his conviction and order a new trial."

STORY: "Ten years after he was acquitted, this Toronto man faces a third trial for the same murder," by Toronto Star Legal Affairs Reporter  Jacques Gallant,  published on November 1, 2017.

SUB-HEADING:  "Warren Abbey is accused of first-degree murder in the execution-style shooting death of 19-year-old Simeon Peter in 2004."

GIST: "In a rare move, a Toronto man will face a third trial for the same murder. “The Crown is intending to proceed with this prosecution,” Crown attorney Julie Battersby told a Superior Court judge Wednesday, in the case of Warren Nigel Abbey, who was sitting in the prisoner's box. Abbey is accused of first-degree murder in the execution-style shooting death of Simeon Peter, 19, in Scarborough in 2004. His lawyer declined to comment to the Star on Wednesday. Abbey was acquitted at his first trial in 2007, but after the Crown appealed, he was tried a second time in 2011, at which point he was found guilty. Then Abbey appealed, and last summer, the Ontario Court of Appeal ordered that he should face a new trial. The decision to proceed to a third trial was ultimately at the discretion of the Crown, which could have chosen to withdraw the charge. The new trial may prove to be an uphill battle for prosecutors, who find themselves without a key part of their evidence against Abbey following the Court of Appeal ruling in August. The Crown had alleged at Abbey's second trial that he was an associate of the Malvern Crew gang who shot and killed Peter, mistakenly believing he was a member of the rival Galloway Boys, and that Abbey had a teardrop tattooed under his right eye about four months later. Testifying for the Crown, sociologist Mark Totten said a teardrop tattoo meant one of three things: the individual had lost a loved one or fellow gang member, had spent time in prison or had killed a rival gang member. But Ontario's top court came down hard on Totten in their ruling overturning Abbey's conviction. After the defence raised “fresh evidence” — issues surrounding Totten's research and testimony — the court found Totten's testimony contained “inaccuracies” and even “falsehoods.” A three-judge panel found his evidence “unreliable,” that he “misrepresented” the sample size of gang members in some of his studies, and that statistics he provided on the stand about gang members with teardrop tattoos are nowhere to be found in his studies. “I have concluded that the fresh evidence shows Totten's opinion evidence on the meaning of a teardrop tattoo to be too unreliable to be heard by a jury. If the trial judge had known about the fresh evidence he would have ruled Totten's evidence inadmissible,” Court of Appeal Justice John Laskin wrote for the panel. “And the absence of Totten's evidence would reasonably be expected to have affected the jury's verdict. I would admit the fresh evidence, allow Abbey's appeal, overturn his conviction and order a new trial.” Indeed, at Abbey's first trial, the Crown was barred by the judge from having Totten give evidence, and the jury ended up acquitting Abbey. There is other Crown evidence, but Laskin noted in his ruling that the rest of the Crown's case “was not overly strong,” and included poor eyewitness testimony and “problematic” evidence from three Malvern Crew members whose testimony implicated Abbey. Two of them testified in exchange for being granted immunity on a number of serious offences, while the third member refused to testify at the second trial. It was ironic that the Court of Appeal ordered a third trial due to Totten's evidence, given the fact that it was the Court of Appeal — albeit a different panel of judges — that allowed the Crown's appeal and ordered a second trial in 2009, finding that Totten should have been allowed to give evidence on teardrop tattoos. (The issues about Totten's evidence that were before the top court this year were not before it in 2009.) Writing for a unanimous three-judge panel in 2009, Justice David Doherty said that viewed cumulatively, Totten's evidence along with the evidence of Malvern Crew members about the meaning of teardrop tattoos “could reasonably present a compelling picture for the Crown.” “I do not suggest that a jury would necessarily take that view of the excluded evidence,” he wrote. “I say only that a reasonable jury could take that view. If it did, the verdict could very well be different.” And it was. Abbey was convicted of first-degree murder by a jury at his second trial in 2011, and sentenced to life in prison without chance of parole for 25 years. A date for his third trial will be set Dec. 5."

The entire story can be found at:

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/11/01/ten-years-after-he-was-acquitted-this-toronto-man-faces-a-third-trial-for-the-same-murder.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.

Sonja Farak: Massachusetts: 'Prosecutors: Thousands of cases impacted by lab misconduct' the Associated Press reports (Seattle Times)..."Prosecutors have identified at least 6,000 cases impacted by a former chemist who authorities say was high almost every day for eight years while she worked at a state drug lab, officials said Tuesday. Numbers provided by district attorneys’ offices during a hearing at Massachusetts’ highest court provide the clearest picture to date about the potential impact of chemist Sonja Farak’s misconduct. The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and the state’s public defender agency, who are urging the Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss all the cases, have blasted prosecutors for not providing a comprehensive list of affected defendants. “We had to wait nearly five years and file this lawsuit just to hear there are at least 6,000 people affected,” Matthew Segal, legal director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, said after the hearing. “When were those people going to receive a letter from the Commonwealth if we didn’t file this lawsuit?” he asked. The ACLU and Committee for Public Counsel Services filed a petition with the court in September asking the justices to throw out all convictions tied to evidence handled by Farak, who worked at the lab between 2005 and 2013."

STORY:  "Prosecutors: Thousands of cases impacted by lab misconduct," by reporter Alanna Durkin Richer, published by The Seattle Times on october 31, 2017.

PHOTO CAPTION: "In this Jan. 22, 2013, file photo, Sonja Farak, left, stands during her arraignment at Eastern Hampshire District Court in Belchertown, Mass. Assistant Hampden County District Attorney Bethany Lynch said Tuesday, Oct. 31, 2017, in a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court hearing, that approximately 4,300 cases have been connected to evidence tested by Farak, who was convicted in 2014 of stealing drugs and tampering with evidence at the lab. Lynch said her office is deciding which cases it will agree to dismiss and which to retry."

GIST: "Prosecutors have identified at least 6,000 cases impacted by a former chemist who authorities say was high almost every day for eight years while she worked at a state drug lab, officials said Tuesday. Numbers provided by district attorneys’ offices during a hearing at Massachusetts’ highest court provide the clearest picture to date about the potential impact of chemist Sonja Farak’s misconduct. The American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and the state’s public defender agency, who are urging the Supreme Judicial Court to dismiss all the cases, have blasted prosecutors for not providing a comprehensive list of affected defendants. “We had to wait nearly five years and file this lawsuit just to hear there are at least 6,000 people affected,” Matthew Segal, legal director of the ACLU of Massachusetts, said after the hearing. “When were those people going to receive a letter from the Commonwealth if we didn’t file this lawsuit?” he asked. The ACLU and Committee for Public Counsel Services filed a petition with the court in September asking the justices to throw out all convictions tied to evidence handled by Farak, who worked at the lab between 2005 and 2013. Farak pleaded guilty in 2014 to stealing drugs from the state crime lab at the University of Massachusetts Amherst and was sentenced to 18 months behind bars.  Assistant Hampden County District Attorney Bethany Lynch told Justice Frank Gaziano that it has identified about 4,300 Farak cases and is working to determine which cases it will agree to dismiss and which ones it wants to retry. Meanwhile, officials from Berkshire, Middlesex, Northwestern and Worcester district attorneys’ offices said they’ve identified more than 2,000 Farak cases combined. The total number of affected cases statewide is almost certainly higher, because several other prosecutors who attended Tuesday’s hearing did not say how many they’ve found. A trial judge earlier this year dismissed the convictions of several defendants whose cases were handled by Farak. The judge also found that two former assistant attorneys general “tampered with the fair administration of justice” by withholding evidence about the scope of Farak’s misconduct. Farak’s case is separate from another Massachusetts drug lab scandal that resulted in the dismissal some 21,000 convictions this year. Those cases were tossed because of misconduct by Annie Dookhan, a chemist at the William A. Hinton State Laboratory in Boston, who was accused in 2012 of falsifying drug tests. She was later sentenced to three years in prison after pleading guilty to obstruction of justice, perjury and tampering with evidence."

The entire story can be found at:

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/hearing-set-in-massachusetts-drug-lab-scandal/

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.

Susan Neill-Fraser: Australia: The Mercury reports: '‘Game-changing’ evidence next year as Sue Neill-Fraser’s appeal against her murder conviction adjourned..." The legislation requires the evidence to be “fresh and compelling” for the outcome of 2010 murder trial to be altered. The defence is banking on their next witness, crime scene expert Dr Mark Reynolds, to satisfy that threshold. They will use his evidence to attack the police winching reconstruction aboard the Four Winds. The reconstruction was used to support the prosecution’s case that Neill-Fraser winched Mr Chappell’s body from the yacht to be disposed. Her barrister Tom Percy QC has told the court the “fresh evaluation” of the winching experiment would show it “lacked any genuine scientific veracity”. Outside court on Wednesday, daughter Sarah Bowles said the delay was disappointing but she was confident the appeal was gaining ground. “This case has always been about the scientific evidence and we’re calling our key scientific expert in March 2018 so we’re looking forward to that,” she said."

STORY: '‘Game-changing’ evidence next year as Sue Neill-Fraser’s appeal against her murder conviction adjourned, by reporter Patrick Billing, published by The Mercury on November 1, 2017.

GIST; "Convicted killer Susan Neill-Fraser will spend another Christmas behind bars with her landmark appeal adjourned on Wednesday. The history-making court case will recommence next year when the defence believes game-changing evidence will emerge. Since Monday the first appeal of its kind has played host to a series of characters and sensational claims. Neill-Fraser’s legal team believe the most substantial evidence casting doubt on the jury’s verdict will surface when the case resumes in March. Neill-Fraser’s bid to overturn her conviction for murdering partner Bob Chappell aboard their yacht on Australia Day 2009 is being held under never-before-used appeal laws. The legislation requires the evidence to be “fresh and compelling” for the outcome of 2010 murder trial to be altered. The defence is banking on their next witness, crime scene expert Dr Mark Reynolds, to satisfy that threshold. They will use his evidence to attack the police winching reconstruction aboard the Four Winds. The reconstruction was used to support the prosecution’s case that Neill-Fraser winched Mr Chappell’s body from the yacht to be disposed. Her barrister Tom Percy QC has told the court the “fresh evaluation” of the winching experiment would show it “lacked any genuine scientific veracity”. Outside court on Wednesday, daughter Sarah Bowles said the delay was disappointing but she was confident the appeal was gaining ground. “This case has always been about the scientific evidence and we’re calling our key scientific expert in March 2018 so we’re looking forward to that,” she said. “We have a lot of confidence in our legal team and we’re expecting that a new light will be cast on this case after we’ve heard from this witness.” So far the Supreme Court in Hobart has heard from 13 defence witnesses. Grant Maddock told the court he was rowing a dinghy in the area on the night of Mr Chappell’s disappearance and at the time had long hair. The defence will say this new evidence casts doubt on arguments at the trial that the rower was Neill-Fraser. Witness Meaghan Vass, the then homeless teenager whose DNA was found on the Four Winds, shocked the court by stating she had signed a false statutory declaration. The affidavit claimed she had been on the Four Winds the night of Bob Chappell’s disappearance, contradicting evidence she gave at the trial that she’d never been there. But on Monday she told the court she had been made to sign the statement “out of fear”. Forensic scientist Maxwell Jones told the court that Ms Vass’ DNA sample found on the yacht was typical of primary contact. At the trial prosecutors argued the DNA was put there by secondary transfer, something Mr Jones could not definitively rule out."

The entire story can be found at:
 http://www.themercury.com.au/news/scales-of-justice/gamechanging-evidence-next-year-as-sue-neillfrasers-appeal-against-her-murder-conviction-adjourned/news-story/1b8016de8620cf9041e96638890ff79b

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.