the charles smith blog

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Stephen Lawrence: "Police under fire." Blottr. Science helped resolve case years later - but good policing at outset may have made it unnecessary. HL

STORY: "Police under fire from Lawrence and Filken," published on Blottr on January 4, 2012.

GIST: "When police first appeared on the scene it appeared as if they saw the killing as simply another gangland fracas. Stephen Lawrence was left bleeding on the pavement while the police officers attempted to arrest and interrogate his friend. The police forces also failed to follow up a number of anonymous tip-offs they were sent in the aftermath of the killing. In the inquiry it was revealed that many people that had given evidence never saw their information reproduced by the police. One of the more shocking errors was when only four days after the murder the police were performing surveillance on the Acourt’s house and failed to act when someone left the house carrying what was probably a binliner filled with the clothes they had been wearing during the murder."
The entire story can be found at:

http://www.blottr.com/uk/breaking-news/police-under-fire-lawrence-and-filkin

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

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

Gary Dobson. (UK). Excellent account of the science that led to a breakthrough in the Stephen Lawrence case. Paul Peachey. Independent;

BACKGROUND: (Wikipedia); Stephen Lawrence (13 September 1974 – 22 April 1993) was a Black British teenager from Eltham, south east London, who was murdered in a racial attack while waiting for a bus on the evening of 22 April 1993.^[1] Witnesses said he was attacked by a gang of white youths chanting racist slogans.^[2] After the initial investigation, five suspects were arrested but not convicted.^[3] It was suggested during the course of investigation that the murder had a racist motive and that Lawrence was killed because he was black, and that the handling of the case by the police and Crown Prosecution Service was affected by issues of race. A public inquiry was held in 1999,^[4] headed by Sir William Macpherson that examined the original Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) investigation and concluded that the force was "institutionally racist". The inquiry has been called 'one of the most important moments in the modern history of criminal justice in Britain'.^[5] The then–Home Secretary Jack Straw commented in 2012 that ordering the inquiry was "the single most important decision I made as Home Secretary".^[6] The results of the inquiry were published in 1999 as the Macpherson Report. On 18 May 2011, following a cold case review,^[7] it was announced that two of the original suspects, Gary Dobson and David Norris, were to stand trial for the murder in the light of "new and substantial evidence" becoming available.^[8] A jury was selected on Monday 14 November 2011, and the trial started on the following day. On 3 January 2012, Dobson and Norris were found guilty of Lawrence's murder,^[9] and were sentenced on 4 January 2012 to recommended minimum life terms of 15 and 14 years respectively^[10] for what the judge described as a "terrible and evil crime".^[11] The sentences would have been far longer but the crime had been committed before adulthood, requiring sentencing as juveniles.^[11]

ENTIRE WIKIPEDIA ACCOUNT CAN BE FOUND AT:

STORY: "The science that helped convict Gary Dobson," by reporter Paul Peachey, published in the Independent on January 3, 2012."

GIST: "This was a breakthrough, and as close as the undemonstrative Mr. Jarman would concede to a eureka moment. It was, he conceded, "a very significant finding." The discovery gave fresh impetus to the search. If a bead of blood was found, surely it must be more likely that more could be found on the jacket? At the time of the murder, the science was not far enough advanced to check for tiny specks of blood, so the scientists did not bother with anything more than a search with the naked eye. But from around 2000, DNA science was far enough advanced to put bloodstains of less than one millemetre through full DNA analysis."

THE ENTIRE STORY CAN BE FOUND AT:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/the-science-that-helped-convict-gary-dobson-6284465.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

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

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Bulletin: Ricky Dale Wyatt: Texas; Released after 31 years; Prosecutors withheld evidence on rape charge; Must now fight for exoneration; Observer;

BACKGROUND: "Ricky Dale Wyatt was cleared after spending 31 years in prison for a crime that he didn’t commit. A Dallas County judge released Wyatt and recommended that his 1981 rape conviction be overturned based on DNA and other evidence. Tragically, attorneys who prosecuted Wyatt 31 years ago contributed to this miscarriage of justice by concealing evidence of his innocence. The case was built on faulty eyewitness testimony, yet the victim originally described a perpetrator much taller and heavier than Wyatt. The prosecution dismissed these inconsistencies, arguing that the defendant’s appearance could have changed in the interval between the crime and his arrest. But there were documents in the prosecutor’s file proving that his appearance had not changed. Had this been shared with the defense as required by law, Wyatt may never have been found guilty. The efforts of the Dallas District Attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unit to seek the truth in this case are exemplary. The Unit helped secure DNA testing of biological evidence, which supported Wyatt’s innocence although it was somewhat degraded. This evidence, as well as the discovery of prosecutorial misconduct at trial, compelled authorities to further investigate the case and ultimately to call for Wyatt’s release. Ten Dallas exonerees also attended today’s hearing to show support for Wyatt and to celebrate his freedom. Mr. Wyatt plans to live with his nephew Robert Smith, who testified at his trial and who now ministers to people returning from prison. Wyatt and his family will greet supporters and speak to the media at a press conference outside the Dallas County Courthouse. The Innocence Project is assisting with Wyatt’s adjustment to the outside world after three decades of wrongful imprisonment. We anticipate his full exoneration later this year. (The Innocence Project);

STORY: "After 31 years locked up, Ricky dale Wyatt is free but not quite exonerated," by reporter Leslie Minora, published on January 4, 2012 in the Texas Observer.

GIST: "As of today, Wyatt -- convicted of the rape of a stranger and identified in a police photo line-up in 1981 -- is a free man, but he is not technically an "exoneree." Previously withheld evidence reveals police conducted but did not record a live line-up in which the victim did not identify Wyatt as her attacker. Wyatt's attorneys also say prosecutors and police withheld evidence that shows he did not resemble the victim's description of the perpetrator: For starters, there is a difference of several inches and more 20 pounds, according to Jason Kreag, who is with the Innocence Project of New York. "It definitely is a case that demonstrates the importance of prosecutors, at the time of the trial, playing by the rules," Kreag said.."

THE ENTIRE STORY CAN BE FOUND AT:

http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2012/01/after_31_years_locked_up_ricky.php

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

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

Bulletin: Shirley Rees Smith; Shaken baby syndrome; N. Y. Times asks California governor to grant pardon as a result of "misguided" SCOTUS decision.

STORY: "A very likely miscarriage of Justice." Editorial published by the New York Times on January 3, 2012.

GIST: "Ms. Smith was convicted of shaking her grandson to death. When the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned her conviction in 2006, it found “no demonstrable support” for it. There was “no physical evidence” and “no other evidence” of the severe bleeding or swelling that are the most common signs of shaken baby syndrome. The court concluded “there has very likely been a miscarriage of justice in this case.” This fall, however, five years after Ms. Smith was released, the Supreme Court overruled the Ninth Circuit, which means that she must complete her sentence unless it is commuted. The Supreme Court acknowledged that “doubts about whether Smith is in fact guilty are understandable...But the court’s majority ruled — after a bitter six-year, three-review tug of war with the Ninth Circuit — that the federal appeals court did not have enough authority to overturn the state court’s conviction."

THE ENTIRE EDITORIAL CAN BE FOUND AT:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/04/opinion/a-very-likely-miscarriage-of-justice.html?_r=3

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

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

Susan Nelles: ( Part 8); Fascinating "feminist critique" calls Grange Inquiry "witch hunt" and says media dropped ball. Elaine Buckley Day.

PUBLISHER'S VIEW: I am pleased to have the opportunity to devote some space to a newly published book: "The Nurses Are Innocent: The Digoxin Poisoning Fallacy," by Gavin Hamilton M.D. The title refers to the investigation of the deaths of babies at the Hospital for Sick Children in 1980 and 1981 for which a nurse named Susan Nelles was charged with murder. (My first free-lance story for the Toronto Star described Ms. Nelle's discharge at her preliminary hearing). I later wrote in the Star about the public inquiry in which Justice Samuel Grange found that babies had been murdered in spite of testimony which shredded the validity of digoxin tests conducted by Ontario's Centre for Forensic Sciences and raised a significant doubt as to whether any babies had been murdered. Now Dr. Hamilton, a retired radiologist, has, at least in my mind, provided the real reason for the deaths of the unfortunate babies at the renowned hospital: A toxin found in natural rubber which is technically like digoxin, which was used in disposable plastic syringes and intravenous devices. As the late Dr. Peter Macklem, the above noted witness at the Grange Inquiry, says in his preface to this book: "What can be learned from this black stain on Canada's judicial system? One lesson certainly stands out: We cannot ever again allow a group of unqualified amateur diagnosticians to make life and death decisions about such important matters as potential serial murders." Dr. Macklem's comments have me thinking about the so-called arson experts in Texas who concluded with such compelling certainty that Cameron Todd Willingham had set the fire which killed his family - and were proven to have been so terribly, terribly wrong. (Willingham, an innocent man, was executed in Texas). Dr. Hamilton also has a tantalizing theory that a certain now-disgraced pathologist named Charles Smith may have been responsible for turning the tragic deaths into murders. He points out that "In 1980 - which was at the beginning of what was to become known as the digoxin baby poisoning epidemic period, he was hired by the Hospital for Sick Children as an anatomic pathologist - with an expressed keen interest in performing autopsies on children who had died suddenly." This book can be purchased through Amazon at:

http://www.amazon.ca/Nurses-Are-Innocent-Digoxin-Poisoning/dp/1459700570

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: While digging into old files on the Susan Nelles case I uncovered a fascinating article published in a periodical called "Studies in Political Economy," by Elaine Buckley Day called "Witch Hunt: A feminist critique of the Grange Royal Commission into deaths at the Hospital for Sick Children." The article provides a thorough description of the police investigation followed by a demonstration of how, "nurses became scapegoats for events that could not be easily explained, and their voices were considered inauthentic both because they were women and they were nurses."

GIST: "Media coverage of the Commission did not focus on the testimony of the doctors. Cable television only began broadcasting live daily when Susan Nelles began to testify. As a result the public did not see and hear the doctors' testimony. At least six of the nurses who testified during the Grange proceedings reported that they were approached by strangers who recognized them as a result of their television exposure and asked them when doctors could be expected to testify.is This left the public with many false impressions. First, it confirmed the popular view that doctors are "scientific experts" whose knowledge would be too difficult for the average person to understand. Secondly, testimony such as that of the clinical pharmacologist, Dr. Stephen Spielberg, as to the possibility of medication error received little attention, as did the disagreement among the "experts" as to causes of death, flaws in testing methods used to detect the presence of digoxin, and the fact that it was the nurses who first began to raise questions concerning the increasing number of deaths."

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

"Why were women, especially nurses, treated differently from doctors throughout the Commission proceedings? The argument presented here is that this treatment bolsters and sustains male dominance through the suppression of women's knowledge. By not listening to nurses, the Commission did more than dismiss their evidence. It defined a particular viewof reason and expertise. Armed with these definitions and the power to make them hegemonic throughout the hearings, it proceeded to attack women not as knowledgeable participants in events but as potential purveyors of evil acts. Seen in this light, the Commission was indeed a witch hunt."

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

TO RETRIEVE THE ENTIRE ARTICLE:

spe.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/spe/article/download/.../10095

Enter the above address:
Click on "by author" in search box on left;
Click on initial "D."
Click on "Day. Elaine."

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

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

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

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Susan Nelles: (Part 7): Who were the "real true victims" of the "inappropriate prosecution." Book review of "No Normal Conscience," by Sharon Shore.

Monday, January 2, 2012

Susan Nelles: (Part 6); Demeanour evidence. Prosecutors tried to use it against her - and failed. Excerpt from a cross-examination.

PUBLISHER'S VIEW: I am pleased to have the opportunity to devote some space to a newly published book: "The Nurses Are Innocent: The Digoxin Poisoning Fallacy," by Gavin Hamilton M.D. The title refers to the investigation of the deaths of babies at the Hospital for Sick Children in 1980 and 1981 for which a nurse named Susan Nelles was charged with murder. (My first free-lance story for the Toronto Star described Ms. Nelle's discharge at her preliminary hearing). I later wrote in the Star about the public inquiry in which Justice Samuel Grange found that babies had been murdered in spite of testimony which shredded the validity of digoxin tests conducted by Ontario's Centre for Forensic Sciences and raised a significant doubt as to whether any babies had been murdered. Now Dr. Hamilton, a retired radiologist, has, at least in my mind, provided the real reason for the deaths of the unfortunate babies at the renowned hospital: A toxin found in natural rubber which is technically like digoxin, which was used in disposable plastic syringes and intravenous devices. As the late Dr. Peter Macklem, the above noted witness at the Grange Inquiry, says in his preface to this book: "What can be learned from this black stain on Canada's judicial system? One lesson certainly stands out: We cannot ever again allow a group of unqualified amateur diagnosticians to make life and death decisions about such important matters as potential serial murders." Dr. Macklem's comments have me thinking about the so-called arson experts in Texas who concluded with such compelling certainty that Cameron Todd Willingham had set the fire which killed his family - and were proven to have been so terribly, terribly wrong. (Willingham, an innocent man, was executed in Texas). Dr. Hamilton also has a tantalizing theory that a certain now-disgraced pathologist named Charles Smith may have been responsible for turning the tragic deaths into murders. He points out that "In 1980 - which was at the beginning of what was to become known as the digoxin baby poisoning epidemic period, he was hired by the Hospital for Sick Children as an anatomic pathologist - with an expressed keen interest in performing autopsies on children who had died suddenly." This book can be purchased through Amazon at:

http://www.amazon.ca/Nurses-Are-Innocent-Digoxin-Poisoning/dp/1459700570

Harold Levy: Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: How do prosecutors attempt to prove guilt in cases such as the prosecution of Susan Nelles where there is the evidence of scientists on one hand - and an accused person who has utterly no motive, for whom the alleged crimes would be totally out of character? All too often they attempt to establish guilt through so-called "demeanour" evidence. The Nelles case fits this picture. Prosecutors attempted to establish at the preliminary hearing through the testimony of a Dr. Fowler that Nelles, who he barely knew, demonstrated a "very strange expression." Judge David Vanek declined to find that this evidence raised an inference of guilt, as he ruled:

"On Sunday, March 22nd, at about 5am. Dr. Fowler testified that he did not see Nelles that morning until he was about to leave the hospital; and that as he was leaving he saw Nelles sitting at one end of the desks in the nurses’ station apparently writing up the final report in Cook’s medical chart. He said he knew she had been involved with Pacsai and had given the digoxin before and was anxious to see what she looked like at this time. He glanced in her direction and said that she had a very strange expression on her face and no sign at all of grief. He said he thought this was very strange that this would be her appearance at a time such a terrible thing had happened. With respect, while it appears that Dr. Fowler went to school with Nelles’ father many years ago and may have had some isolated transactions with him since, he barely knew Susan Nelles, if at all; he knew nothing about her emotional range, her reaction to stress, or her manner of expressing her grief. I am unable to find any evidence of guilt from what a doctor thought from a passing glance was “a very strange expression” on the face of a young woman he barely knew, who had suffered a most harrowing experience, and was engaged in the very emotionally disturbing duty she was bound to perform of writing up the final death note as part of her other difficult duties on the occasion of the death of a baby in her care."

A report on Vanek's decision can be found on the Networked Knowledge site at:

http://netk.net.au/Canada/Morin39.asp

Defence lawyer Austin Cooper did a superb job of establishing the inadequacy of this evidence in his cross-examination of Dr. Fowler. He includes a portion of his cross-examination in an article published in Edward Greenspan's Counsel for the Defence"The Defence of Innocence." (See link for the entire article - it's fascinating - below.)

GIST OF CROSS-EXAMINATION:

Now, as to Susan Nelles, was she a close friend of yours?
No.
Did you ever visit her house?
Never.
Or her apartment?
Never.
Has she ever visited your house?
Never.
I think you said you knew her for one year?
Just because she was on the ward.
On the ward?
Her brother is a resident on the ward and I knew her father.
Have you ever had lunch with her?
Never.
Or coffee?
Never.
Or dinner?
Never.
Ever had a sort of meaningful conversation with her about anything other than whether a baby has or hasn't had its medication or has turned blue?
Never.
Okay, so you never worked a twelve-hour shift in her company?
Never.
Did you ever see her since her arrest on March 25 other than around the court or whatever?
No, I've never seen her since then.
Did you ever see her grieving after a relative had died?
I have never seen her grieving because I don't know her. I've never seen.
Did you ever see her upset, ever?
Never.
Ever see her cry?
No.
Did you ever see her angry?
No.
Did you ever see her depressed or elated?
No.
Did you ever see her sad or shocked?
No.
Well, I'm going to suggest that you really don't know much about the lady's emotional range. You'll agree with that?
I've seen many nurses who are looking after sick patients, and her reaction, again, was very unusual.
Well, I didn't ask you that. I asked you, I suggest that you don't know much about her emotional range?
No.
You just don't know much about it?
No, except that it's unusual, under the circumstances, for a person to have that reaction.
Okay. Well, a number of witnesses here have described Susan Nelles as being a cheerful person. Do you know her well enough to even know about that?
No.
She's easy to get along with; Do you know her well enough to even know that?
No. I don't work with her.
You don't work with her. She's conscientious and eager. You don't know that, I guess?
No, I don't know that.........

THE ENTIRE ARTICLE - INCLUDING THE REST OF THIS PORTION OF THE CROSS-EXAMINATION - CAN BE FOUND AT:

http://www.criminal-lawyers.ca/criminal-defence-news/the-defence-of-innocence-1990
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at:

http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith

Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at:

http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html

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

the charles smith blog

Thursday, January 5, 2012

Stephen Lawrence: "Police under fire." Blottr. Science helped resolve case years later - but good policing at outset may have made it unnecessary. HL

Gary Dobson. (UK). Excellent account of the science that led to a breakthrough in the Stephen Lawrence case. Paul Peachey. Independent;

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Bulletin: Ricky Dale Wyatt: Texas; Released after 31 years; Prosecutors withheld evidence on rape charge; Must now fight for exoneration; Observer;

Bulletin: Shirley Rees Smith; Shaken baby syndrome; N. Y. Times asks California governor to grant pardon as a result of "misguided" SCOTUS decision.

Susan Nelles: ( Part 8); Fascinating "feminist critique" calls Grange Inquiry "witch hunt" and says media dropped ball. Elaine Buckley Day.

Tuesday, January 3, 2012

Susan Nelles: (Part 7): Who were the "real true victims" of the "inappropriate prosecution." Book review of "No Normal Conscience," by Sharon Shore.

Monday, January 2, 2012

Susan Nelles: (Part 6); Demeanour evidence. Prosecutors tried to use it against her - and failed. Excerpt from a cross-examination.

Blog Nation Badge

Followers

The Charles smith blog

Blog Archive

About Me

Search This Blog

https://forensicresources.org/

http://www.personal.psu.edu/dhk3/blogs/DoubleHelixLaw/