Canada’s Wrongfully Convicted: (Part three of five parts): Kudos to Global News (CKNW) for taking the important topic of wrongful convictions...This segment asks 'What are the psychological consequences?' as it focuses on the wrongful convictions of Robert Baltovich, Maria Shepherd and David Milgaard cases, with a link to capsules of several of the Charles Smith cases: (William Mullins-Johnson; Dinesh Kumar; Louise Reynolds; Liane Gagnon and Tammy Marqardt..."A study conducted in the UK by forensic psychologist Adrian Grounds found those that are wrongfully convicted often suffer post-traumatic stress disorder and other psychological problems. That’s what happened to Maria Shepherd. She was wrongfully convicted of manslaughter in the death of her step-daughter in 1992, due to flawed testimony from Charles Smith, a once distinguished pediatric forensic pathologist. An inquiry into his conduct in Shepherd’s case led to Smith being stripped of his licence to practise.

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "According to research conducted by University of Ottawa criminologist Kathryn Campbell, who studies cases of wrongful conviction, at least 70 people have been exonerated in Canada. That’s an estimate, however, and there could be many more. The wrongfully convicted people she has spoken to say being in prison is hard but the mental anguish is exacerbated when you know you’re not meant to be there. Many people who are locked away become obsessed with their case, she says, and with getting out. “They were also preoccupied with injustice when they were finally released, and the idea of being intolerant of any kind of injustice because they had experienced [it].”

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

STORY: "Canada’s Wrongfully Convicted: What are the psychological impacts?, by reporters Pippa Reed and Niki Reitmeyer, published by Global News (980 CKNW) on May 3, 2019.

PHOTO CAPTION: Maria Shepherd speaks to the media outside a disciplinary hearing for disgraced pathologist Dr. Charles Smith in Toronto on Feb. 1., 2011.

GIST: "You’ve been tried and convicted for a murder you didn’t commit. Your reputation is ruined.
You feel helpless as you’re handcuffed and hauled off to prison. The court of public opinion has already had its say on your case, and it’s determined you’re guilty. And as if that’s not bad enough, you still have to face the realities of prison. This has been the very real nightmare faced by some innocent Canadians who have been wrongfully convicted of crimes. According to research conducted by University of Ottawa criminologist Kathryn Campbell, who studies cases of wrongful conviction, at least 70 people have been exonerated in Canada. That’s an estimate, however, and there could be many more. The wrongfully convicted people she has spoken to say being in prison is hard but the mental anguish is exacerbated when you know you’re not meant to be there. Many people who are locked away become obsessed with their case, she says, and with getting out. “They were also preoccupied with injustice when they were finally released, and the idea of being intolerant of any kind of injustice because they had experienced [it].” In 1992, Robert Baltovich was convicted by an Ontario court of murdering his girlfriend Elizabeth Bain and sentenced to life behind bars with no eligibility of parole for 17 years. Baltovich was hauled off to pre-trial custody in Toronto, where he spent 24 hours a day locked up, for nine months.  The nightmare continued in Kingston, Ont., where he spent almost eight years in prison.  “We walked off the bus. We walked into this huge metal cage and they locked us up and I was surrounded by other people who had also been convicted of crimes,” he said. “I remember thinking to myself this is the most surreal and nightmarish experience I’ve ever had.”   Baltovich says the early days were the easiest, getting by with the support of his family and friends, who stood by him. “You just had to make certain psychological adjustments. I went into survival mode, and thought, I don’t know how long I’m going to be here but I’m not going to let myself be consumed by self-pity or anger or despair.” But Baltovich would spend eight years behind bars before he was granted bail pending the hearing of his appeal. In 2004, the Ontario Court of Appeal set aside his murder conviction, deciding Baltovich’s initial trial had been unfair. The next step for him was to clear his name.  A study conducted in the UK by forensic psychologist Adrian Grounds found those that are wrongfully convicted often suffer post-traumatic stress disorder and other psychological problems. That’s what happened to Maria Shepherd. She was wrongfully convicted of manslaughter in the death of her step-daughter in 1992, due to flawed testimony from Charles Smith, a once distinguished pediatric forensic pathologist. An inquiry into his conduct in Shepherd’s case led to Smith being stripped of his licence to practise. Campbell says there’s a common factor among those who suffer a miscarriage of justice: They all want someone to take responsibility.“They wanted somebody to say they were sorry, that they had made a mistake,” Campbell says. But that doesn’t happen very often, he continues. “Sometimes a prosecutor will apologize to a wrongly convicted person or when they’re being exonerated, they’ll say they’re sorry, but it’s a very very difficult experience for them, absolutely.” In Baltovich’s case, he managed to resume a relatively normal life; however, today, he feels there’s been no real sense of vindication. He says he finds the prosecutors’ behaviour in his case “absolutely baffling.” “I haven’t had an apology yet,” Baltovich says. “I’m not so sure if anyone who participated in my prosecution is really that sorry.” He says despite the enormous impact prison has on a person’s psyche, many people go on to do good things. Shepherd is one of them. She became a licensed paralegal in October 2018, and now works to raise awareness of the tragic circumstances of wrongful conviction through Innocence Canada, a non-profit dedicated to identifying cases of wrongful conviction. David Milgaard spent 23 years behind bars for the 1969 rape and murder of a nurse in Saskatoon, in one of Canada’s most high profile cases of wrongful conviction.  He was exonerated in 1997 after new DNA evidence came to light.  Milgaard gave an emotional interview in 1995 about his many years behind bars and his adjustment to the outside world upon release. “I’ll never forget being a prisoner. In my own way, I still consider myself a prisoner. My situation is such that I am never going to forget it. I would like to do more to help prisoners, because I remember what it was like sitting inside a penitentiary. You die a little bit each day you spend in a penitentiary.” That resilience shown by Milgaard, Baltovich and Shepherd is unfortunately not the case for all those who have been wrongfully convicted. Studies by American academic Leslie Scott, who specializes in prison reform law, show the mental impact of prisoner’s experiences often leaves them in psychological chains, even after the prison shackles have been removed. Once released, they often struggle to find employment due to their criminal records. Financially, they may be in ruin — both from the expensive cost of legal fees and their inability to find work. Their personal relationships are rarely as they left them. The never-ending suspicion of guilt, that often continues even after their release, can destroy social ties. In fact, Leslie Scott’s study noted incredible similarities between the psychological states of those who have been wrongfully convicted — and veterans who have returned from war. After decades fighting, Shepherd, Baltovich and Milgaard were finally able to prove their innocence, and clear their names."

In Part Four of ‘Canada’s Wrongfully Convicted,’ a special series from the Jon McComb show on 980 CKNW, find out how a person in prison for a crime they did not commit can, if they’re lucky, prove their innocence and try and rebuild their lives.

The entire story can be read at:

https://globalnews.ca/news/5222807/canadas-wrongfully-convicted-what-are-the-psychological-impacts/

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.

Henry Keogh: South Australia: Major Development: Henry Keogh applauds release of hidden top-level investigation of his conviction, 7News Adelaide reports: (Reporter Emily Olle with Mike Smithson)...Publisher's Note... "Concealment of this important forensic report is significant for this Blog because it extends our list of actors in the criminal justice system who have committed forensic related misconduct from lab technicians, pathologists, police officers and prosecutors to the top law enforcement official in the land - in Keogh's case, a man named Chris Kourakis, who was Solicitor-General at the time and today is Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of South Australia."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:
As publisher of this Blog, I have published far too many posts on  what I have come to call 'white elephant cases,' all of which  are set out as follows:

"In the years since I started publishing this Blog I have become increasingly disturbed by the 'white elephant' in the room: Sheer, unadulterated, willful   misconduct in the criminal justice system - much  of it involving forensic evidence - committed by lab technicians,  pathologists, police officers, prosecutors and others.  Think Annie Dookhan; Think Sonia Farak; Think David Kofoed; Think Charles Smith; Think Ken Anderson; Think Gene Morrison. (And now think South Australian Chief Justice Chris Kourakis.)  I have therefore decided to run this image of a white elephant at the top of every applicable post henceforth, to draw our reader's attention to   what I see as a major problem in all too many criminal justice system's - my own included.  Harold Levy; Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;


"Reformers have for years recommended that all forensic labs be independent from law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies' and this is a key reform promoted by The Justice Project (2008). But fixing these problems is only half the answer' because half of the wrongful convictions attributed to misleading forensic evidence involved deliberate forensic fraud' evidence tampering' and/or perjury.
From "The Elephant in the Crime Lab," by co-authored by Sheila Berry and Larry Ytuarte; Forensic Examiner; Spring, 2009; http://www.t-mlaw.com/blog/post/the-elephant-in-the-crime-lab/"
 
Concealment of this important forensic report is significant for this Blog because it extends  our  list of actors in the criminal justice system who have committed forensic related misconduct  from lab technicians, pathologists, police officers and prosecutors to the top law enforcement official in the land - in Keogh's case, a man named Chris Kourakis, who was Solicitor-General at the time and  today  is Chief Justice of  the Supreme Court of South Australia. As 7News reports, Kourakis denied Keogh's petition for mercy - even  though at the time he possessed a forensic report - which he kept secret even from Henry Keogh's lawyers - which concluded that Anna-Jane Cheney's death  was accidental, or the result of a medical event, and that the autopsy of Dr Manock was "wholly inadequate" in numerous ways. To make matters worse, the report also recommended a test for bruising, that Kourakis chose not to have carried out. As noted by Dr. Bob Moles, in an analysis posted below: "In addition, a further test (the haemosiderin test) was recommended by the Professor. Permission for that test was not given by the Solicitor-General. When it was subsequently undertaken on the instructions of the Court of Appeal, the results had a profound affect upon the consideration of the case. It showed that the bruising to the leg had occurred long before the night in question." As Dr. Moles comments, Chief Justice  Kourakis has a lot of explaining to do, especially in the context of the South Australian government's efforts over the years to resist publication of the forensic report.  In view of the governmental obstruction of Henry Keogh's  desperate struggle for freedom and exoneration, the  high level's involved,  and the importance of maintaining public confidence in South Australia's criminal justice system, it is  hard to imagine that anything short of a public commission of inquiry will do.

Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY:  The forensic report, compiled by now-Chief Justice Chris Kourakis, Solicitor-General at the time, reviewed crucial forensics which led to the conviction and formed the basis of the former Labor government's decision to reject Keogh's petition for mercy. Among those was a forensic report from Professor Barrie Vernon-Roberts, from the Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science (IMVS). Vernon-Roberts took the preferred view that the death of Cheney was accidental, or the result of a medical event, and that the autopsy of Dr Manock was "wholly inadequate" in numerous ways. The report also recommended a test for bruising, that Kourakis chose not to have carried out. Vernon-Roberts' report was the catalyst for Keogh's successful appeal. In his report, reviewed by 7NEWS, Kourakis upheld the original evidence of guilt, despite Vernon-Roberts' blistering fault-finding. Keogh believes releasing it at the time would have fast-tracked the eventual Full Court decision in his favour." 

STORY: "Henry Keogh applauds release of hidden top-level investigation of his conviction," by Emily Olle with Mike Smithson, published by 7NEWS  Adelaide  on April 30, 2019.

SUB-HEADING: "Details of hidden investigation released into one of SA's most notorious deaths." 

PHOTO CAPTION: Photo caption: "Acquitted of his fiancée's murder after 20 years behind bars, a controversial investigation into Henry Keogh's conviction has been made public." 

GIST: "It's been a long road for Henry Keogh. He spent 20 years behind bars, controversially convicted over the murder of his fiancée Anna-Jane Cheney in 1994 - a decision that was overturned in 2014 after Channel 7's Today Tonight helped prove the forensic evidence against him was flawed. Now, details of a hidden top-level investigation into Keogh's controversial case have been made public. The case that captivated South Australia: The death of Cheney, a talented young lawyer, captivated the state. It was alleged Keogh, a financier and insurance broker who left his wife and children to be with the 29-year-old, drowned Cheney in the bathtub of her Magill home in Adelaide's east to cash in a $1 million life insurance policy. The initial Supreme Court trial was deadlocked, but a retrial found him guilty. Keogh - who has always protested his innocence - was sentenced to 25 years behind bars. But the case was far from over. His supporters, who believed Cheney died of a seizure, launched what would become a long-running and high-profile crusade to have him freed, based on what they argued was flawed forensic evidence from pathologist Dr Colin Manock. Keogh made four ViceRegal petitions for mercy, calling upon then-Attorney-General Michael Atkinson to exercise his prerogative to either refer the case for appeal or pardon him. These petitions were rejected by the then-Labor government. But in 2013 - a breakthrough. New laws allowed Keogh to launch another appeal, on the grounds of 'fresh and compelling evidence'. After 19 years in jail, he walked free in 2014 after the Court of Criminal Appeal ruled in his favour. Report revealed: Now, details of a hidden top-level investigation into Keogh's case, which could provide insight as to why his mercy bid was rejected, have been made public. It was tabled in state parliament on Monday, following a long legal battle for its release. The 148-page document was held under lock and key by the former Labor government for 13 years. The forensic report, compiled by now-Chief Justice Chris Kourakis, Solicitor-General at the time, reviewed crucial forensics which led to the conviction and formed the basis of the former Labor government's decision to reject Keogh's petition for mercy. Among those was a forensic report from Professor Barrie Vernon-Roberts, from the Institute of Medical and Veterinary Science (IMVS). Vernon-Roberts took the preferred view that the death of Cheney was accidental, or the result of a medical event, and that the autopsy of Dr Manock was "wholly inadequate" in numerous ways. The report also recommended a test for bruising, that Kourakis chose not to have carried out. Vernon-Roberts' report was the catalyst for Keogh's successful appeal. In his report, reviewed by 7NEWS, Kourakis upheld the original evidence of guilt, despite Vernon-Roberts' blistering fault-finding. Keogh believes releasing it at the time would have fast-tracked the eventual Full Court decision in his favour: Questions asked: While Attorney-General Vickie Chapman today avoided commenting on the Chief Justice's former life, the report raises questions as to why Kourakis' findings were so at odds with the Full Court's findings, a decade later. For Keogh, he believes the report's release brings him one step closer to understanding just why he was, in his opinion, denied justice. "If you persist long enough, you will win," he said. "And that's the key to winning... persistence.""

The entire story can be read at:

https://7news.com.au/news/sa/henry-keogh-applauds-release-of-hidden-top-level-investigation-of-his-conviction-c-85886

See also analysis by Dr. Bob Moles at the link below: (Dr Bob Moles, Adjunct Principal Researcher, College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Flinders University of South Australia, has consulted on the Keogh case for several years.

The report by the Solicitor-General is undated but clearly had been provided prior to the statement by the Acting Attorney-General who rejected the Keogh petition on 10 August 2006 based upon that advice. It is clear that the opinion expressed by the Solicitor-General that a referral to the Court of Appeal by the Attorney-General would have no prospect of success was clearly incorrect. The subsequent appeal by Mr Keogh based substantially upon the same evidence that was before the Solicitor-General was in fact successful. This is disturbing because the test which should be applied by an Attorney-General on a statutory referral application and that to be applied by the Court of Appeal are significantly different. In effect, the Attorney-General is considering an application for leave to appeal. At that stage, the applicant only has to show that his case is ‘reasonably arguable’. If the Attorney makes the referral the Court of Appeal will have to consider the appeal. The test for the appeal itself is more demanding. At that stage it has to be shown that there has been ‘a substantial miscarriage of justice’. So, how could the Court of Appeal find that there has been a substantial miscarriage of justice – and the Solicitor-General advise that the case is not even reasonably arguable – when they are considering substantially the same evidence? The answer is that the Solicitor-General was applying the wrong test. He repeatedly discussed whether there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of Mr Keogh’s guilt. He repeatedly stated that he was satisfied that Mr Keogh was guilty. “The combined weight of the circumstances are more than sufficient to prove Mr Keogh’s guilt” [para 16 SG Report] “..after considering all of the evidence I am satisfied, and advise you, that there is no reason to doubt the guilt of Mr Keogh.” [para 17 SG Report] What he should have been considering was whether Mr Keogh had been given a fair trial. After acknowledging that there had been significant errors in the conduct of the autopsy, and the way in which the evidence had been presented at trial, the Solicitor-General formed the view, in his advice, that the circumstantial evidence (insurance policies, affairs and lies) in conjunction with the forensic evidence as it then stood would be sufficient to support a conviction. But the Solicitor-General should have appreciated that such considerations would be suitable for evaluation – by a jury – at a retrial. The recent High Court cases state repeatedly that it is not for the appeal courts (much less a Solicitor-General) to usurp the function of the jury. The job of the appeal court is to look back at the way in which the trial was conducted, and to ask whether any errors which may have occurred could reasonably have influenced the jury in arriving at their verdict. If they could have, then the verdict must be set aside. The Solicitor-General in his report frequently acknowledged that there had been significant errors in relation to the autopsy procedures, and the way in which inferences as to the cause of death had been arrived at by Dr Manock. For example, the investigation as to other possible causes of death was woefully inadequate, and many of the inferences drawn by Dr Manock were without scientific support. As the Court of Appeal subsequently stated, Dr Manock had misled the jury, the court, the prosecution and defence counsel and the findings in relation to them had ‘changed the evidential landscape’. In the proceedings before the Medical Board Dr Manock had actually recanted on significant aspects of the evidence he had given at trial. For example, whether the assailant had used a left hand or a right hand to grip the leg, or whether it could be said that the victim had been conscious at the time of the alleged drowning. The Court of Appeal subsequently accepted that those factors alone would justify the verdict being set aside as they placed the autopsy ‘in an entirely new light’. Yet, the Solicitor-General had taken the view that those factors did not provide even a reasonably arguable case for the conviction to be reconsidered by the Court of Appeal. It is a matter of grave concern that the forensic pathology report which was furnished to the Solicitor-General by Professor Vernon-Roberts was not even disclosed by him to Mr Keogh’s lawyers as it clearly should have been. The Court of Appeal acknowledged that it had been received by the Solicitor-General (in 2004) when considering his advice, but had not been disclosed to Mr Keogh’s legal team until 2013 when he applied under the new right of appeal. That was a disgraceful lapse in the duty of disclosure by the Crown, yet the duty to disclose was not mentioned by the Solicitor-General in his advice. In addition, a further test (the haemosiderin test) was recommended by the Professor. Permission for that test was not given by the Solicitor-General. When it was subsequently undertaken on the instructions of the Court of Appeal, the results had a profound affect upon the consideration of the case. It showed that the bruising to the leg had occurred long before the night in question. The reasons for the Solicitor-General not granting that permission should be obtained. The fact that the advice by the Solicitor-General and the subsequent findings of the Court of Appeal differ so markedly in the legal principles they applied to the consideration of this case give rise to grave concern. If the assessment by the Solicitor-General could have been so much at odds with the findings of the Court of Appeal, have there been other cases in which similar differences have occurred? How is it possible that the Solicitor-General could have made such errors in his assessment of such an important case – especially when the correct legal principles have been so clearly established in High Court appeals which were obviously well known at that time? Why was the report of the Solicitor-General not released earlier, when it was clear that the legal principles governing legal privilege were also well known and clearly favoured such release? The Solicitor-General made it clear in his report that the circumstantial evidence along with the forensic evidence which remained clearly justified a finding that Mr Keogh was guilty of this terrible crime. If that were so, then after his successful appeal he would have been retried and found guilty. The fact that Dr Manock was not available to give evidence should not be determinative. Other experts could have come forward to explain the significance of his findings if they had been properly recorded. The fact that the DPP entered a nolle prosequi establishes conclusively that there was not in fact sufficient evidence to proceed to a further retrial. The fact that Dr Manock’s evidence was not in fact admissible at all, because he was not qualified as an expert, had been acknowledged by the state in legal proceedings which delivered the judgment on his case in 1978. Curiously, the Solicitor-General did not make mention of that important issue. The consequences of the advice given by the Solicitor-General could not have been more severe. Mr Keogh was denied the opportunity to put his case to the court where all of the factors could have been openly canvassed. If the new right of appeal had not been established, then Mr Keogh would never have had his case reviewed. The consequence of that is that he would have remained in prison for the rest of his life – it being a principle of parole applications in this state that applicants must admit guilt before being allowed to proceed. Such is the case of Mr Bromley. In Canada and in the UK it is clearly established practice that the reasons for the rejection of an application for a review of a potential wrongful conviction are made available to the applicant at both draft and final stages. Yet here, it had to take years of legal wrangling to not only obtain the reasons for the rejection of this application, but also the evidence upon which it was based. There has clearly been a fundamental failure of due process and the rule of law in this case. An independent judicial inquiry should be established to determine the reasons for the discrepancy between the reasoning of the Solicitor-General and that of the Court of Appeal here. Now that Mr Kourakis has been elevated to the position of Chief Justice in South Australia, he has an obligation to maintain the integrity of the judicial system in South Australia. So, does he accept that the Court of Appeal on Mr Keogh’s appeal was correct to overturn the conviction? If so, he must accept that his decision not to refer the matter to the Court of Appeal was wrong. If he maintains that his position was correct, then by implication he is saying that the Court of Appeal decision was wrong. That is not a tenable position for a Chief Justice.
https://wrongfulconvictionsreport.org/2019/05/01/kourakis-report-re-keogh-chief-justice-position-now-untenable/

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.

Christopher Abernathy: Illinois: False confession case: False confession series: Part Four: From our 'Enough to make one weep' department: $14 million settlement for man cleared of 1984 murder of 15-year-old girl, The Chicago Tribune (reporter Dan Hinkel) reports..."In 2015, then-State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez acknowledged that Abernathy had been wrongfully convicted and said none of the DNA found at the scene was his. His attorneys alleged in a 2016 lawsuit that police had pressured Abernathy, a high school dropout with learning disabilities, into confessing during an interrogation that spanned 36 hours. The DNA at the scene came from two unidentified men, according to the suit. Under an agreement signed last month, two insurers agreed to pay $13.5 million on behalf of the village and its police, according to records of the settlement provided by the National Registry of Exonerations."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This Blog is interested in false confessions because of the disturbing number of exonerations in the USA, Canada and multiple other jurisdictions throughout the world, where, in the absence of incriminating forensic evidence the conviction is based on self-incrimination – and because of the growing body of  scientific research showing how vulnerable suspects   are to widely used interrogation methods  such as  the notorious ‘Reid Technique.’"

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:

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

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "On the night of Oct. 3, 1984, Kristina walked to Rich East High School to perform at a choir concert, according to court records. Two days later, her body was found in the bushes near a Marshall Field’s store with her pink dress disheveled and her throat cut. The discovery of her body near a downtown shopping center — a popular hangout for youths — shook the suburb. Abernathy, then of Midlothian, was not charged for more than a year. Witnesses at his criminal trial said Abernathy, who had dated Kristina, made strange comments at her funeral. An acquaintance came forward and told police that Abernathy, who was 18 when he was arrested, had confessed to him that he killed the girl. Abernathy later told authorities he approached Kristina as she walked home, tried to have sex with her and accidentally killed her with a butterfly knife, according to court records. His lawyers have said the man who implicated him recanted and said he had been pressured by police. In announcing his exoneration, Alvarez said, “I cannot, I will not let a wrongful conviction stand, and in our assessment Mr. Abernathy’s conviction was just that.” Abernathy’s suit states that he was physically and sexually assaulted in prison, where he contracted HIV. Abernathy’s mother, Ann Kolus, had long insisted on his innocence, and she was ailing when she greeted him as he walked free from Stateville Correctional Center near Joliet in February 2015. According to Abernathy’s suit, she died of cancer six months later. “He was just so thankful, actually, that he got six months with her before she died,” Hamilton said.""

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

STORY: "$14 million settlement for man cleared of 1984 murder of 15-year-old girl in Park Forest," by reporter Dan Hinkel, published by The Chicago Tribune on May 1, 2019.

GIST: "Park Forest and Cook County officials have agreed to a $14 million settlement with a man who spent 29 years in prison for the rape and murder of a 15-year-old girl before he was exonerated four years ago, records show. Prosecutors allowed Christopher Abernathy to walk free after re-examining his conviction for killing Kristina Hickey after she had sung in a high school choir concert in the south suburb in 1984. In 2015, then-State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez acknowledged that Abernathy had been wrongfully convicted and said none of the DNA found at the scene was his.
His attorneys alleged in a 2016 lawsuit that police had pressured Abernathy, a high school dropout with learning disabilities, into confessing during an interrogation that spanned 36 hours. The DNA at the scene came from two unidentified men, according to the suit. Under an agreement signed last month, two insurers agreed to pay $13.5 million on behalf of the village and its police, according to records of the settlement provided by the National Registry of Exonerations. The village itself agreed to pay $200,000 and a private polygraph examiner who allegedly tested Abernathy after his arrest is on the hook for $1,000, the records show. Cook County officials agreed to pay $300,000 to settle claims against a prosecutor and detective from the sheriff’s office, according to the records. The authorities admitted no wrongdoing as part of the settlements, which do not spell out how much money will go to Abernathy, 52, and how much to his attorneys. Abernathy continues to live in the Chicago area, said one of his attorneys, Torreya Hamilton. “He’s doing as well as can be expected, given what was taken from him, which is basically his whole life,” she said.Attorneys for the defendants either declined to comment or could not be reached. The settlements include confidentiality provisions generally barring the parties from discussing the terms. Since Abernathy’s release, no one has been charged with killing the girl. On Monday, an Illinois State Police spokeswoman said the agency has an open investigation into the murder and declined to comment.
On the night of Oct. 3, 1984, Kristina walked to Rich East High School to perform at a choir concert, according to court records. Two days later, her body was found in the bushes near a Marshall Field’s store with her pink dress disheveled and her throat cut. The discovery of her body near a downtown shopping center — a popular hangout for youths — shook the suburb. Abernathy, then of Midlothian, was not charged for more than a year. Witnesses at his criminal trial said Abernathy, who had dated Kristina, made strange comments at her funeral. An acquaintance came forward and told police that Abernathy, who was 18 when he was arrested, had confessed to him that he killed the girl. Abernathy later told authorities he approached Kristina as she walked home, tried to have sex with her and accidentally killed her with a butterfly knife, according to court records. His lawyers have said the man who implicated him recanted and said he had been pressured by police. In announcing his exoneration, Alvarez said, “I cannot, I will not let a wrongful conviction stand, and in our assessment Mr. Abernathy’s conviction was just that.” Abernathy’s suit states that he was physically and sexually assaulted in prison, where he contracted HIV. Abernathy’s mother, Ann Kolus, had long insisted on his innocence, and she was ailing when she greeted him as he walked free from Stateville Correctional Center near Joliet in February 2015. According to Abernathy’s suit, she died of cancer six months later. “He was just so thankful, actually, that he got six months with her before she died,” Hamilton said.""

The entire story can be read at:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-met-christopher-abernathy-lawsuit-settled-20190429-story.html

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

Read National Registry of Exonerations entry at the link below:  

On October 3, 1984, 15-year-old Kristina Hickey disappeared while walking home from a high school choir performance in Park Forest, Illinois. Her body was found two days later behind a shopping mall. She had been raped and stabbed.

More than a year later, on November 30, 1985, police brought in 18-year-old Christopher Abernathy for questioning after an acquaintance, Allan Dennis, told police that several months earlier Abernathy had admitted killing Hickey. Abernathy had attended Hickey’s funeral—as did several hundred other teenagers—and was heard saying that he had a gun in his car and intended to fire a salute afterward. Police checked Abernathy out at that time, but decided the comment was not serious.

After more than 40 hours of interrogation, Abernathy, a high school dropout who had been classified as learning disabled, signed a confession saying he saw her walking home and wanted to have sex with her. When she refused, he attempted to rape her and then accidentally stabbed her with a pocket knife he had in his hand. Almost immediately, Abernathy recanted the confession and said he signed the statement because police told him he could go home to his mother if he did.

Abernathy went to trial in Cook County Circuit Court in January 1987. The evidence against him was the testimony of Dennis, who said that Abernathy had admitted the crime to him, and Abernathy’s confession.

No forensic or physical evidence connected Abernathy to the crime. Presumptive tests were negative for the presence of semen.

On January 15, 1987, a jury convicted Abernathy of first-degree murder, aggravated criminal sexual assault, and armed robbery. Because he was 17 at the time of the crime, Abernathy was not eligible for the death penalty. Instead, he was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

More than 15 years later, journalism students at Northwestern University began investigating the case and Dennis recanted his trial testimony. Dennis said that Abernathy had not confessed, but that police pressured him to implicate Abernathy. He said police promised to get him lenient treatment on some pending minor charges and gave him $300 to buy clothes to come to court—benefits that were not disclosed to Abernathy’s defense attorney at trial.

The Northwestern students brought the results of their investigation to a law firm where attorney Lauren Kaeseberg began preliminary work on the case. In 2013, Kaeseberg started working for the Illinois Innocence Project at the University of Illinois in Springfield, Illinois. In 2014, Kaeseberg asked the Cook County State’s Attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit to examine the case.

In August 2014, pursuant to an agreement between the Illinois Innocence Project and the Cook County Conviction Integrity Unit, an order was entered to conduct DNA testing. Eight different items were tested, including a vaginal swab, clothing of the victim and her purse. Abernathy’s DNA was not found on any of the evidence but a partial DNA profile of a different person was found on the eight items tested. The profile was not complete enough to submit to a DNA database, but the prosecution agreed with the defense team that the testing excluded Abernathy as the perpetrator of the crime.

On February 11, 2015, the Conviction Integrity Unit requested that Abernathy’s convictions be vacated. The motion was granted and the charges were dismissed.

Abernathy was released the same day and was greeted by his family, including his mother, who had visited Abernathy in prison nearly 1,000 times during the nearly 30 years he was incarcerated.

In 2016, Abernathy filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against former Park Forest police officers Carl Keuster and Donald Meyers, the Cook County State's Attorney's office and Steven Theodore, owner of a polygraph service in Hillside, Illinois. The lawsuit accused the officers of forcing Dennis to falsely state that Abernathy had admitted to the crime. The lawsuit also claimed that during the interrogation, the officers took Abernathy to Theodore's private polygraph business in Hillside, Illiinois and that they conspired with Theodore to file a false report of what Abernathy said during and after the exam. In 2019, the village of Park Forest settled for $13.7 million, Cook County agreed to pay $300,000, and Theodore agreed to pay $1,000 to settle the lawsuit.

https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/casedetail.aspx?caseid=4640

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.

Canada’s Wrongfully Convicted: (Part two of five parts): Global News (CKNW) takes on wrongful convictions in a five-part series...This segment focuses on the Robert Baltovich and Maria Shepherd cases..."Maria Shepherd: At the same time, police were gathering evidence to put Baltovich behind bars, another Canadian was about to be wrongfully accused of a heinous crime she didn’t commit."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The linchpin of the prosecution’s case (against Maria Shepherd) was the flawed evidence of Charles Smith, a once-revered pediatric forensic pathologist. He concluded in an autopsy that Kasandra had died as a result of abuse. Once that evidence was backed up by several other respected physicians, Shepherd felt she had no choice to but plead guilty to a crime which, firstly, didn’t exist, and secondly, she didn’t commit. “I thought that by complying, I could get home sooner, so I could get someone to help me and get this all fixed,” Shepherd recalled.  Smith would later be stripped of his licence for doing to Shepherd what he did to up to a dozen other people — forming erroneous opinions and providing misleading statements in court that would implicate them in the deaths of their own children.

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This is part one of what appears to be an excellent series published by Global News  on Canada's wrongfully convicted.  I recommend going directly to the link for the post  below to take advantage of  several  informative links within the post. Some of the Canadian cases are worthy of attention from people in other jurisdictions because they have led to public inquiries and recommendations for avoiding further miscarriages of justice. Issues such as mistaken eyewitness identification (Rob Baltovich) , false confessions,  and flawed pathology (and flawed pathologists)  and  tunnel vision and  hazardous cellmate testimony  (Guy Paul Morin) have been explored in depth.  I draw particular attention to the Maria Shepherd case - a Charles Smith case - which features in this opening salvo to the Five Part series..."Shepherd spent two years less a day in prison, eventually convicted on the flawed testimony from one-time-revered pediatric forensic pathologist Dr. Charles Smith. Complaints about his conduct led to a fresh investigation which found Shepherd’s stepdaughter died from natural causes." Looking forward to Part Two!

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

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

STORY: "Canada’s Wrongfully Convicted: "The cases of Robert Baltovich and Maria Shepherd,"  by Pippa Reed and Niki Reitmeyer, published by CKNW (Global News 980) on  May 1, 2019. (Part Two  of a five-part series examining wrongful convictions and why they happen.)

GIST: "Robert Baltovich was a young man in the prime of his life. He’d met a beautiful woman, Elizabeth Bain, with whom he was very much in love. But his life went into a tailspin when she went missing from the University of Toronto Scarborough campus on June 19, 1990. It was at that point Baltovich realized something terrible was unfolding. “When I got the call from her mother at 6:30 the next morning, asking if Liz was with me, and I said of course she wasn’t. That’s when we all realized something was wrong,” Baltovich said. “Liz was not the type to stay out late without telling anybody.” And when Bain’s abandoned car was discovered near the Scarborough campus with her blood inside, it quickly became evident she was never coming back.  The days, months and years that followed would test Baltovich to his core. Five months after Bain’s disappearance, Baltovich was charged with her murder. How did police reach that point? Hypnosis. That’s right, the witnesses were hypnotized by the prosecution in an effort to jog their memories. However, all it seemed to do was distort their memories, leading to false testimony. Baltovich knew he was innocent — but still, in February 1992, he was forced to stand trial for murdering Bain. Put yourself in that courtroom. The eyes of everyone upon you, as you wait for the jury to hand down a verdict, which could change the course of your future. How would you feel? “In the back of my mind I kept thinking, ‘You’re innocent, you can’t be convicted, you’re innocent, you can’t be convicted, you didn’t do this,'” he recalled. “And when, of course, the foreman said, ‘we find the accused guilty as charged’ — I mean, it was a pretty brutal feeling. I just tried to stay strong.” Maria Shepherd: At the same time, police were gathering evidence to put Baltovich behind bars, another Canadian was about to be wrongfully accused of a heinous crime she didn’t commit. In 1991, Maria Shepherd had two young children and was pregnant with her third child. “I’d never had interactions with the law,” Shepherd said. Still, she was charged with causing the death of her three-and-a-half-year-old stepdaughter, Kasandra. Kasandra had been ill. A few months prior to her death, she had even undergone a CAT scan that showed some notable space between her skull and her brain. “She was vomiting on a regular basis, and so we brought her into the hospital. She stayed there for about a month,” Shepherd recalled. “Even though we took her to the hospital, she was still discharged with no formal findings of why she was so sick except to say that they thought that she perhaps had gastroenteritis.” On April 11, 1991, Kasandra died at home. “She had a grand mal seizure,” Shepherd said. “Everything was happening so quickly. We called 911."   Fast forward to October 1992, and Shepherd was under extreme pressure to confess to manslaughter. The linchpin of the prosecution’s case was the flawed evidence of Charles Smith, a once-revered pediatric forensic pathologist. He concluded in an autopsy that Kasandra had died as a result of abuse. Once that evidence was backed up by several other respected physicians, Shepherd felt she had no choice to but plead guilty to a crime which, firstly, didn’t exist, and secondly, she didn’t commit. “I thought that by complying, I could get home sooner, so I could get someone to help me and get this all fixed,” Shepherd recalled.  Smith would later be stripped of his licence for doing to Shepherd what he did to up to a dozen other people — forming erroneous opinions and providing misleading statements in court that would implicate them in the deaths of their own children. On Oct. 22, 1992, Shepherd, who was pregnant with her youngest child Chanel, was sent to prison for manslaughter. She was sentenced to two years less a day. Both Maria Shepherd and Robert Baltovich were able to eventually prove their innocence, but it came at a heavy cost. What are the psychological effects of going to prison for a crime you didn’t commit? How do you heal from wounds that run so deep?"

In Part Three of ‘Canada’s Wrongfully Convicted,’ a special series from the Jon McComb show on 980 CKNW, we examine the psychological impacts of being wrongfully convicted. How do you put your life back together?

The entire  story can be read at:

https://globalnews.ca/news/5217934/canadas-wrongfully-convicted-robert-baltovich-maria-shepherd/
  
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.

Mark Lundy: New Zealand..."Lundy a victim of 'junk science', lawyer says in bid for Supreme Court appeal," Stuff reports. "At his appeal hearing Lundy's lawyer Jonathan Eaton, QC, argued the jury heard scientific evidence that should not have been allowed."..."Lundy's lawyer, Jonathan Eaton, QC, said the scientific evidence, an advanced type of DNA analysis, was hotly contested, not used before or since. No wonder Lundy said he had been a guinea pig through the criminal justice system with novel and junk science, he said. The evidence concerned tiny stains on Lundy's polo shirt, and whether it was brain or spinal cord matter from his wife Christine Lundy. The nearly 20-year saga over the murders of Palmerston North woman Christine Lundy and her 7-year-old daughter Amber was before the Supreme Court on Thursday. Eaton said Lundy had not received a fair retrial because the jury heard scientific evidence the Court of Appeal eventually found should not have been allowed."

PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The defence had argued the stains might contain central nervous system tissue from an animal, deposited from dropped food, and that Christine Lundy's DNA could have come from her handling her husband's clothes, or sneezing on them, for instance. It was also suggested that her tissue could have been deposited on the polo shirt because police mishandled exhibits in the case. But the most disputed evidence suggested there was a 58 per cent chance the tissue was human. One of the two Supreme Court judges, Justice William Young said that did not shut down the debate. There was still a 42 per cent chance that it was not human. Eaton said the evidence that the stain contained brain matter was also now challenged. It was new or "junk" science. He said the Court of Appeal had made fundamental errors about what scientific evidence could prove."

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

STORY: "Lundy a victim of 'junk science', lawyer says in bid for Supreme Court appeal," published by Stuff  on May 2, 2019.

PHOTO CAPTION: "At his appeal hearing Lundy's lawyer Jonathan Eaton, QC, argued the jury heard scientific evidence that should not have been allowed."

PHOTO CAPTION:  "Mark Lundy is asking the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. 

GIST:  "Convicted double-murderer Mark Lundy was a guinea pig through the justice system with "novel and junk science", his lawyer says. Lundy wants the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. Two judges of the court have reserved their decision on that application. Lundy's lawyer, Jonathan Eaton, QC, said the scientific evidence, an advanced type of DNA analysis, was hotly contested, not used before or since. No wonder Lundy said he had been a guinea pig through the criminal justice system with novel and junk science, he said. The evidence concerned tiny stains on Lundy's polo shirt, and whether it was brain or spinal cord matter from his wife Christine Lundy. The nearly 20-year saga over the murders of Palmerston North woman Christine Lundy and her 7-year-old daughter Amber was before the Supreme Court on Thursday. Eaton said Lundy had not received a fair retrial because the jury heard scientific evidence the Court of Appeal eventually found should not have been allowed. The defence had argued the stains might contain central nervous system tissue from an animal, deposited from dropped food, and that Christine Lundy's DNA could have come from her handling her husband's clothes, or sneezing on them, for instance. It was also suggested that her tissue could have been deposited on the polo shirt because police mishandled exhibits in the case. But the most disputed evidence suggested there was a 58 per cent chance the tissue was human. One of the two Supreme Court judges, Justice William Young said that did not shut down the debate. There was still a 42 per cent chance that it was not human. Eaton said the evidence that the stain contained brain matter was also now challenged. It was new or "junk" science. He said the Court of Appeal had made fundamental errors about what scientific evidence could prove. The court's conclusion that there was no room for any doubt that Lundy was guilty, notwithstanding inadmissible scientific evidence being before the jury, was a wrong use of a "proviso" for a court to uphold a conviction based on a finding that no substantial miscarriage of justice had actually occurred. It was never a case for the proviso to be applied and the assessment of inevitable guilt was flawed, Eaton said. For the Crown Philip Morgan, QC, said Eaton had overstated the effect of the evidence about the probability the material on the polo shirt was human. It was relied on at trial, but it was just one of the strands of the prosecution case. The jury was told that if they accepted the probability evidence, it made the case stronger, but if the jury put it aside it was still the combination of the brain tissue and DNA evidence that was the cornerstone of the Crown's case. The probability evidence was not particularly compelling so by the time of the final addresses at the trial it was not that significant, Morgan said. He conceded the scientific evidence became complex, but said the judge had given the jury a handout on the aspects that mattered. The case was not just about scientific evidence, Morgan said. Christine and Amber Lundy were killed at the family home when Lundy was supposed to be in Wellington on a business trip in August 2000. The Crown alleged Lundy had returned home from Wellington overnight and hacked his family to death with a weapon, probably an axe or tomahawk, that has not been found.  Lundy, who turned 60 in December, has twice been found guilty of the murders, but continues to maintain his innocence. He also continues to serve a life imprisonment sentence, with a 20-year non-parole period. Getting a Supreme Court hearing is a two-stage process. Before it hears an appeal, the court has to first accept that it is necessary in the interests of justice for the court to hear the appeal because it involves a matter of general public importance or a substantial miscarriage of justice may have occurred."

The entire story can be read at:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/112385310/convicted-doublemurderer-mark-lundy-seeks-supreme-court-appeal

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.

Charle Erickson: Missouri: (False confession series: Part Three)...Significant Development; A judge has denied his petition for habeas relief which was based on a claim that, as a teenager, police and prosecutors coerced him to confess..."The judge said in the order that Erickson never raised an issue during his guilty plea and no longer has a right to challenge his case." (Talk about cruel technicalities! HL);

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This Blog is interested in false confessions because of the disturbing number of exonerations in the USA, Canada and multiple other jurisdictions throughout the world, where, in the absence of incriminating forensic evidence the conviction is based on self-incrimination – and because of the growing body of  scientific research showing how vulnerable suspects   are to widely used interrogation methods  such as  the notorious ‘Reid Technique.’"

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:

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

STORY: "Judge denies Charles Erickson's petition for habeas relief," by reporter Katie Greathouse, published by KMIZ on April 30, 2019.

GIST: "A judge has denied a man's request to be released from prison after he claimed Boone County prosecutors and Columbia police coerced him into confessing to a murder. The judge said in the order that Erickson never raised an issue during his guilty plea and no longer has a right to challenge his case. Erickson filed the petition in Pike County, where his prison is located, alleging that Boone County prosecutors and Columbia police coerced him into confessing to the murder of Columbia Daily Tribune sports editor Kent Heitholt on Halloween night 2001. In 2004, Erickson confessed and pleaded guilty to the crime, while Ryan Ferguson pleaded not guilty. Because of his confession and story, Erickson became a key witness for the prosecution's case against Ferguson in December 2005. During the trial, Ferguson's defense attempted to poke holes in Erickson's then-recollection of the murder."

The entire  story can be read at:
https://www.abc17news.com/news/judge-denies-charles-ericksons-petition-for-habeas-relief/1073981098

For background read previous post at the link below: "PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "During their marathon interrogation, the police employed coercive methods to wrench a confession from Charles—even though he lacked any personal knowledge of Mr. Heitholt’s murder. Many of the tactics police and prosecutors employed against Charles to accomplish this goal mirror the “Reid Technique”—a once widely used, and now widely criticized, interrogation protocol that relies on deceit and false evidence ploys to pressure interrogation subjects to confess to crimes."
 https://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2019/05/charles-erickson-ohio-false-confession.html

See also Columbia Daily Tribune story at the link below: (Erickson attorney vows to keep fighting:
Charles Erickson’s attorney says despite a Tuesday ruling denying his client’s release, the fight is not over. Livingston County Judge Milan Berry on Tuesday denied a writ of habeas corpus that would have required the state to prove why Erickson should still be imprisoned for the 2001 murder of Tribune sports editor Kent Heitholt. In the one-page order, Berry wrote that Erickson voluntarily pleaded guilty in November 2004 to the crime and failed to raise a challenge during sentencing or in a timely manner afterward. “Therefore petitioner has procedurally defaulted on his claim that his sentence and conviction violated the laws or Constitution of the State of Missouri, or that his conviction violated the Constitution of the United States,” Berry wrote. Erickson is serving a 25-year sentence and is eligible for parole in 2023. While he has been incarcerated, Erickson has been sentenced twice for violence against prison guards or another inmate and is serving those sentences concurrently to the sentence from Boone County. Landon Magnusson, who has been representing Erickson pro bono throughout the Livingston County case, said he was disappointed with the judge’s decision and will be meeting with his client Wednesday afternoon. “We are disappointed,” he said. “I hate to be a man of few words right now, but I think that’s just the best way to say it. We are disappointed. I will be speaking with (Charles Erickson) this afternoon.” Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt, whose office represented the state, issued a statement Wednesday saying justice had been served in the original case and the ruling on Erickson’s petition. “Violently taking someone’s life is a heinous act against another human being. He was found guilty and now should be held responsible to the fullest extent of the law,” Schmitt said. “Charles Erickson will serve out his sentence for his unforgivable actions. Justice has already been served, and now it will be carried out.” Magnusson said because the case centers around a writ, he will start anew with another petition rather than appealing to a higher court. “The way writs work, it’s not an appeal,” Magnusson said. “It’s more like doing it anew. We will file a new, original writ before taking this to the court of appeals. It isn’t over yet. We disagree with the ruling and we will seek to obtain his freedom still.” Erickson confessed to the killing in March 2004, telling police he had “dream-like” memories of he and Ryan Ferguson robbing Heitholt. A Missouri Western District Court of Appeals panel in November 2013 vacated Ferguson’s convictions for second-degree murder and first-degree robbery. Magnusson, in the petition, argued Erickson was innocent of the crime and still had the right to challenge his conviction despite his guilty plea. He claimed his client was a victim of a coerced confession at the hands of Columbia police and a malicious prosecution by now judge Kevin Crane. In a response filed April 5, the state argued that Erickson’s claim of actual innocence — a standard of review to prove a charged defendant did not commit a crime — falls short given the evidence in the case. Assistant Attorney General Michael Spillane wrote in the response that Erickson admitted the crime to others prior to ever speaking with police and also gave them details known only to authorities. Spillane wrote that Erickson’s attorneys told him they could challenge the confession, but he was adamant in professing his guilt, even well into his sentence."
"https://www.columbiatribune.com/news/20190501/erickson-attorney-vows-to-keep-fighting

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

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.

Charles Erickson: Missouri: False confession series: (Part Two)...Reid Technique... He has already served 15 years for murder of Columbia Daily Tribune sports editor Kent Heitholt in 2001 - but his family persists in protesting his innocence and a new lawyer has filed a petition (link provided) in part alleging that a false confession obtained using the notorious Reid Technique played a role in the case..."Charles has a new lawyer, Landon Magnusson, who has filed a 98-page petition he hopes will help Charles' case. Marianne said she is very pleased to have Magnusson on board and knows he will continue to fight for her son's freedom. "We're in a wonderful stage in Charlie's case because a professionally trained appellate attorney has taken on his appeal - his habeas corpus appeal - to demonstrate actual innocence," Marianne said. "He [Landon Magnusson] has taken on this case with so much diligence and we have not had this before."

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: This Blog is interested in false confessions because of the disturbing number of exonerations in the USA, Canada and multiple other jurisdictions throughout the world, where, in the absence of incriminating forensic evidence the conviction is based on self-incrimination – and because of the growing body of  scientific research showing how vulnerable suspects   are to widely used interrogation methods  such as  the notorious ‘Reid Technique.’"

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog:

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The 98-page petition filed on Erickson's behalf by his new lawyer (entire petition at the link below)  is quite a powerful document - especially as it relates to the notorious Reid technique-  and other questionable techniques used by police in this case on teenagers.

Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.

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

PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY:  "His mother, Marianne Erickson, was one of the people at the park Sunday. She described her son as loving, beloved and caring.  "Charlie is our beloved son, brother, uncle, nephew and scholar currently working on his undergraduate degree at Ohio University," Marianne said.  She argues certain police techniques used in Charles' case contributed to his "unjust" sentence.   "Prosecutors and police can use something called the Reid technique, which allows police to lie to people that they are interrogating, and it's because of the lying and the withholding of evidence that would prove Charlie innocent that convinced him and coerced him into giving a false confession," she said."

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

PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: (From introduction to petition): "In the early spring of 2004, two teenaged boys, Charles Timothy Erickson and Ryan William Ferguson, were arrested for a crime they did not commit. During the months following their arrest, the Columbia police and Boone County prosecutors took a no-holds-barred approach to convince a jury that those two boys acted together to attack, rob, and murder a man during the early morning hours of November 1, 2001. They withheld evidence. They fabricated evidence. And they unconstitutionally coerced Charles to falsely confess and plead guilty. As a direct consequence of the State’s abuses and despite their innocence, Charles and Ryan were convicted of robbery and murder. Ryan spent a third of his life in prison before the Court of Appeals found prosecutorial abuses required his release in 2013."

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

 
PASSAGE THREE OF THE DAY: "During their marathon interrogation, the police employed coercive methods to wrench a confession from Charles—even though he lacked any personal knowledge of Mr. Heitholt’s murder. Many of the tactics police and prosecutors employed against Charles to accomplish this goal mirror the “Reid Technique”—a once widely used, and now widely criticized, interrogation protocol that relies on deceit and false evidence ploys to pressure interrogation subjects to confess to crimes."

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

STORY: "Family, support group hold rally for Charles Erickson's freedom," by reporter Temi Oshadiya, published by KOMA 8, on April 28, 2019.

GIST: "Family members and a support group met in Peace Park Sunday to gather signatures for a petition to help free Charles Erickson. Erickson is currently serving a 25-year sentence for his connection to the murder of Columbia Daily Tribune sports editor Kent Heitholt in 2001. He's been in prison now for 15 years. His mother, Marianne Erickson, was one of the people at the park Sunday. She described her son as loving, beloved and caring.  "Charlie is our beloved son, brother, uncle, nephew and scholar currently working on his undergraduate degree at Ohio University," Marianne said.  She argues certain police techniques used in Charles' case contributed to his "unjust" sentence.  "Prosecutors and police can use something called the Reid technique, which allows police to lie to people that they are interrogating, and it's because of the lying and the withholding of evidence that would prove Charlie innocent that convinced him and coerced him into giving a false confession," she said. Marianne said prosecutors should do more investigating before bringing cases to court. "I really think that prosecutors should not bring cases to trial when there is no evidence to support guilt," she said. Marianne and Les Maters, founder of Voices of Innocence, organized Sunday's petition rally to gather signatures that might help free Charles. They had nearly 20 signatures in an hour. Maters said there are many people sitting behind bars who are wrongly convicted and rallies like the one held Sunday help raise awareness.   "A friend of mine, Rodney Lincoln, said if it happened to him, it can happen to you. We need to put a stop to this," Maters said. Charles has a new lawyer, Landon Magnusson, who has filed a 98-page petition he hopes will help Charles' case. Marianne said she is very pleased to have Magnusson on board and knows he will continue to fight for her son's freedom.   "We're in a wonderful stage in Charlie's case because a professionally trained appellate attorney has taken on his appeal - his habeas corpus appeal - to demonstrate actual innocence," Marianne said. "He [Landon Magnusson] has taken on this case with so much diligence and we have not had this before." According to previous KOMU reporting, here is a timeline of events relating to Charles' case and Heitholt's murder.

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

• Nov. 2001 - Kent Heitholt is found dead in the Columbia Daily Tribune parking lot.
• March 2004 - Charles is charged and arrested for the murder along side his high school friend, Ryan Ferguson, who maintained his innocence. 
• Nov. 2004 - Charles pleads guilty to second-degree murder, first-degree robbery and accepts a plea bargain for 25 years in prison in exchange for his testimony against Ferguson. 
• Dec. 2005 - Ryan Ferguson is found guilty and sentenced to 40 years in prison. 
• Nov. 2006 - Sept. 2013 - Ryan Ferguson files multiple motions and appeals to have his conviction vacated. 
• Nov. 2013 - Ferguson's conviction is vacated and he is released from prison.
• Dec. 2018 - Landon Magnusson filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus on behalf of Charles. 

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

Charles has a parole date set for 2023, but his family and friends are hopeful that he's free before that.
"His motto is to take everyday as it comes. He is very hopeful too," Marianne said.

The entire story can be read at:

 https://www.komu.com/news/family-support-group-hold-rally-for-charles-erickson-s-freedom

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.