Duane Buck: Texas; Video exposes racial discrimination in Texas death penalty system; Public asked to join in call for a new, fair sentencing hearing for Duane Buck; (A psychologist had testified that Mr. Buck posed a future danger because he is black!)

RELEASE:  "Shocking new video exposes racial discrimination in Texas death penalty system: Duane Buck facing execution after prosecutor argued he was more dangerous because he was black," posted by the National Association for Advancement of the Coloured People (NAACP), on June 10, 2013.

GIST:   "Everyone who sees this powerful video will come away from it with the alarming realization that if Duane Buck can be sentenced to death - and possibly executed -- based on racial stereotypes, then our criminal justice system is broken not just for Mr. Buck, but for all of us," said Christina Swarns, Mr. Buck's attorney and Director of the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc.'s Criminal Justice Project.  "A properly functioning criminal justice system does not condone the flagrant exploitation of racial fears and stereotypes to secure a death sentence.  It cannot countenance a racially biased and unfair execution." Former Texas Governor Mark White, who oversaw the executions of 19 individuals, narrates the video and urges citizens to take action: “It’s unfair to have someone on death row if they are not supposed to be there … Don’t wait until it is too late … Join me and more than 100 civil rights leaders, clergy, former prosecutors, and judges in calling for a new and fair sentencing hearing for Mr. Buck. Tell Texas to keep its promise.”  Over 50,000 people from Texas and around the country have signed a petition calling on Texas officials to grant Mr. Buck a new sentencing hearing. The newly released video exposes the injustice of Duane Buck’s case and encourages support for the petition for a new, fair sentencing at: https://www.change.org/petitions/sentenced-to-death-because-he-is-black-grant-duane-buck-a-new-hearing As the video shows, at Mr. Buck’s 1997 capital sentencing hearing in Harris County, the trial prosecutor elicited testimony from a psychologist that Mr. Buck posed a future danger because he is black. The prosecutor relied on this testimony in arguing in favor of a death sentence. The jury then found Mr. Buck would be a future danger and sentenced him to death.  Three years after Mr. Buck’s capital trial, in 2000, then-Texas Attorney General (now U.S. Senator) John Cornyn identified seven cases, including Mr. Buck’s, in which the State of Texas impermissibly relied on testimony linking race and dangerousness to secure a death sentence. The Attorney General promised to support new sentencing hearings for the seven identified defendants and kept its promise as to six of them. But Texas reneged on its promise to Mr. Buck and is now aggressively pursuing his execution. “It is virtually unprecedented for a state official to confess error in a capital case. And in this situation, [the Attorney General] confessed error in six capital cases,” said Kathryn Kase, Executive Director of Texas Defender Service, in the video.  Mr. Buck’s life was saved by the U.S. Supreme Court before his September 2011 scheduled execution. Two U.S. Supreme Court justices agreed that Mr. Buck’s death sentence requires review because “our criminal justice system should not tolerate” a death sentence “marred by racial overtones.” “When we apply the death penalty and we seek criminal sentences, we have to do so in a color-blind manner. Allowing this kind of racial testimony in any capital sentence proceeding undermines the entire justice process,” said Kate Black, Mr. Buck’s attorney, in the video."

The entire post can be found at:

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?account_id=hlevy15%40gmail.com#inbox/13f2ee46f51e0b5f?compose=new

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to this case;

I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site. 

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: Privy Council in London reserves decision - no indication as to when it will be released. TVNZ;

STORY: "Privy Council reserves Mark Lundy appeal decision," published by TVNZ on June 20, 2013.

 GIST: "The Privy Council in London has reserved its decision on Mark Lundy's appeal against his convictions for the murders of his wife and daughter 13 years ago. The three day appeal has wrapped up with the Crown making its final argument that Lundy was rightly convicted. Lundy is appealing his life sentence with a non-parole period of 20 years for the killing of his wife Christine and daughter Amber, 7, in their Palmerston North home in August 2000. The Crown last night rejected claims by Lundy's lawyer that the scientific evidence produced in his High Court trial in New Zealand was "flawed"......... There has already been an indication at the London hearing that the case could possibly be moved back to the Court of Appeal in New Zealand. But there has been no indication of when the Privy Council might give its reserved decision."

The entire story can be found at:

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/privy-council-reserves-mark-lundy-appeal-decision-5470281

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to this case;

I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site. 

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: 12,000 miles from New Zealand, his lawyers strenuously attack the Prosecution's evidence as to the time of death - and a week before the Privy Council hearing commenced, a document emerged that could have been helpful to the defence; (Must Reads. HL.)

STORY: "Lundy's team disputes timing evidence," by reporter Amelia Romanos, published by News 3 on June 19, 2013.

GIST: Jurors in Mark Lundy's 2002 double-murder trial were misled about the reliability of the method used to establish when the victims died, the Privy Council has been told.cLundy, who was found guilty of bludgeoning his wife Christine and their seven-year-old daughter Amber to death in their Palmerston North home in 2000, is appealing his conviction at the London court. On the second day of the hearing on Tuesday (local time), his lawyers focused on the time the victims died, which Palmerston North pathologist James Pang determined, based on their stomach contents, was between 7pm and 7:15pm. David Hislop, QC, told the court Dr Pang's tests had been internationally rejected and experts said the idea that time of death could be measured within minutes based on the gastric contents was "scientific nonsense". Time of death was pivotal to the case and the jury was deprived of evidence that would have contradicted Dr Pang's findings, Mr Hislop said. Cellphone records placed Lundy in Petone at 5:43pm and then again at 8:28pm on August 29. The prosecution's case was that he drove from Petone to Palmerston North, committed the murders, then returned to Petone - a journey of 150km - within three hours. "All the defence really had to do was stretch [the time of death] beyond 7:15pm, then the travel to Wellington becomes impossible and he has an alibi," Mr Hislop said."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.3news.co.nz/Lundys-team-disputes-timing-evidence/tabid/423/articleID/301932/Default.aspx

STORY: "Lundy appeal: Virus affected computer," by APNZ, published by the Otago  Daily Times on June 19, 2013.

GIST: The timing is crucial to the case as Crown pathologists estimated the pair was killed between 7pm and 7.15pm. However, a police computer expert at Lundy's trial in 2002 said there was evidence that the file registry in the computer was disordered which suggested the time on the machine was tampered with. Maarten Kleintjes demonstrated to the jury how it was possible to tamper with the computer and manipulate the 'shut down' time on the clock that was undetectable - giving Lundy an alibi. He also said it was "far-fetched" that a computer virus could disorder the registry files.
He did not know of such a virus, and found no sign of a virus on the Lundy computer. However, defence lawyer David Hislop QC told the Privy Council last night that a computer expert, hired for the appeal, said there were a number of ways that files could become disordered - including a virus. Forensic examiner Michael Chappell discovered that the virus-checking programme on the Lundy computer was out of date, and was in fact infected with a virus known as a KAK worm. He traced it back to an infected email some six weeks prior to the killings in August 2000. Timing is crucial to the prosecution case. If Christine Lundy shut down the computer at 10.52pm and a computer virus affected the registry files - rather than Mark Lundy tampering with the clock - then he would have an alibi.

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/261612/lundy-appeal-virus-affected-computer

STORY: "12,000 miles away from murder case that captivated New Zealand a London hearing decides on freedom of man convicted of bludgeoning wife and child to death,"  by reporter Terri Judd, published by the Independent on June 18, 2103;

GIST: 
In a dramatic claim, worthy of a case that has inspired heated debate in the antipodean nation, Mr Lundy's lawyer insisted that less than a week ago they had received evidence that could have been vital to the defence but was withheld. The court, he added, might draw the inference that there had been a "cover up" by the police. The document concerned, David Hislop QC told four of the UK's most senior judges sitting alongside New Zealand's Chief Justice Dame Sian Elias, showed that a prosecution expert had deemed key forensic evidence had degenerated too much to be strong enough to convict. Yet the DNA formed a central plank of the prosecution case......... The document was from the senior officer in the case, Detective Sergeant Ross Grantham, requesting permission from his superior to seek out an expert in the United States. Within it he explained that the neuro-pathologist they had consulted, Dr Heng Teoh, had said the 58 day lapse in time before the cells on the shirt were found meant they had degenerated badly. "He didn't think Mark Lundy should be convicted of murder on the strength of the cells," added the QC. The barrister said that material was never disclosed to the defence before the trial, adding : "We have absolutely no confidence whatsoever that the officer in charge met with his disclosure obligations." While refusing to put the allegation himself, Mr Hislop said the Privy Council might draw an inference that "someone misled or covered up to secure a conviction".

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/ten-years-on-and-12000-miles-away-from-murder-case-that-captivated-new-zealand-a-london-hearing-decides-on-freedom-of-man-convicted-of-bludgeoning-wife-and-child-to-death-8662404.html

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to this case;

I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site. 

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.    

Jesse Friedman: New York Times takes another look at the case as the deadline looms for release of a report of a reinvestigation aimed at determining whether his convictions should be upheld or overturned.

 STORY: "Reinvestigating the Friedmans," by reporter Peter Applebome, published by the New York Times, on June 15, 2013.

 PHOTO-CAPTION: "Jesse Friedman, who along with his father, Arnold, pleaded guilty to sexually abusing children in the 1980s". 

 PHOTO-CAPTION:  "Jesse, center with Arnold in 1987, was granted parole in 2001 and is awaiting a review recommended by the United States Court of Appeals."

GIST:  “I write to inform you that none of the events allegedly described by or attributed to Kenneth Doe ever took place,” a man in his 30s wrote last month, referring to his role a quarter century ago as one of the children whose allegations of sexual abuse sent three men to prison, fueled a panic in hundreds of families and were later portrayed in the 2003 documentary “Capturing the Friedmans.”  In the letter, the man said that neither Arnold Friedman, who in the 1980s ran a computer class at his house in this affluent Long Island suburb, nor Mr. Friedman’s son Jesse, who sometimes helped him, had sodomized him, touched him inappropriately or shown him pictures of naked people. He had never observed either of them engaged in anything “even remotely akin to sexual conduct.” He had no reason to believe any such acts occurred. What he did remember was that the police repeatedly came to his house to question him and would not leave until he gave them the account of sexual abuse they wanted “As a result,” his letter said, “I guess I just folded so they would leave me alone.” He is one of several key figures who have recanted or disputed parts of accusations attributed to them in the Friedman case, the subject of an almost three-year investigation by the Nassau County district attorney’s office following a withering 2010 ruling by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The court said that it could not overturn Jesse Friedman’s conviction because the appeal came too late, but that there was “a reasonable likelihood” that Mr. Friedman was wrongfully convicted. It suggested that the Nassau County district attorney, Kathleen M. Rice, reinvestigate the case to determine whether Mr. Friedman’s conviction should be upheld or overturned. Ms. Rice has said she will release a report by June 28."

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/16/nyregion/reinvestigating-the-friedmans.html?_r=0

See Wikipedia account: "Capturing the Friedmans" - "In August 2010, a federal appeals court upheld the conviction of Jesse Friedman on technical legal grounds, but took the unusual step of urging prosecutors to reopen Friedman’s case, saying that there was a “reasonable likelihood that Jesse Friedman was wrongfully convicted.^" The decision cited "overzealousness" by law enforcement officials swept up in the hysteria over child molestation in the 1980s. Following the appeals court ruling, the Nassau District Attorney's office began a three-year investigation led by District Attorney Kathleen M. Rice. A report by Rice is due to be released on June 28, 2013, but details have already emerged, including letters from some of the alleged victims in which they recant their accusations and implicate the police in coercing their statements. Prior to the report's release, The Village Voice conducted an interview with Jesse Friedman, who described himself as "freakishly optimistic", and also reported that Ross Goldstein, a childhood friend of Jesse Friedman's, had broken his 25-year silence to explain he had been coerced into false cooperation with the district attorney's office: "He told the review panel of how he'd been coerced into lying, how prosecutors coached him through details of the Friedmans' computer lab, which he'd never even seen, and how he was imprisoned for something he'd never done."^"

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capturing_the_Friedmanshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capturing_the_Friedmans


PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to this case;

I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site. 

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.     

Sent from my iPad

Mark Lundy: (New Zealand): His lawyer tells the Privy Council that the "key evidence" behind the murder conviction is "bad science." Stuff.

STORY: "Key evidence 'bad science' - Lundy appeal," by reporter Jimmy Ellingham, published buy 'Stiff' on June 18, 2013.

GIST: "More ‘‘fundamentally flawed’’ science has been placed under the Privy Council microscope as Mark Lundy’s lawyer again raises doubts about its reliability.........On the first day of the hearing, his lawyer, David Hislop, QC,  questioned the technique used to identify brain matter found on Lundy’s shirt and accused of the Crown of ‘‘expert shopping’’ and withholding important evidence. At his trial, the Crown said the killings happened at about 7pm, with cell phone records placing Lundy 150km away in Petone at 5.30pm and 8.28pm. He was said to have driven home, gone to his bedroom and killed his wife and daughter, cleaned up and returned south in that time. Last night Hislop raised doubts about the timings and criticised Crown expert witness, pathologist Dr James Pang. Pang said the killings happened about one hour and 10 minutes after Christine and Amber ate McDonald’s food, which they bought about 5.45. He based his findings on stomach contents and ‘‘gastric smell’’, something other experts had labelled ‘‘bad science’’, Hislop said. Pang made other omissions that left his conclusions ‘‘fundamentally flawed’’, Hislop said. The Crown has defended the allegations and says issues discussed at Lundy’s murder trial cannot be relitigated. ‘‘One can’t take the trial as some sort of curtain raiser,’’ deputy solicitor-general Cameron Mander told the five judges hearing Lundy’s appeal in London overnight. Lundy, who maintains his innocence, is serving a 20-year minimum jail sentence after being found guilty of killing wife Christine, and daughter, Amber, 7, on August 29, 2000, in the family’s Palmerston North home. On the first day of the hearing, his lawyer, David Hislop, QC,  questioned the technique used to identify brain matter found on Lundy’s shirt and accused of the Crown of ‘‘expert shopping’’ and withholding important  evidence. At his trial, the Crown said the killings happened at about 7pm, with cell phone records placing Lundy 150km away in Petone at 5.30pm and 8.28pm. He was said to have driven home, gone to his bedroom and killed his wife and daughter, cleaned up and returned south in that time.
Last night Hislop raised doubts about the timings and criticised Crown expert witness, pathologist Dr James Pang. Pang said the killings happened about one hour and 10 minutes after Christine and Amber ate McDonald’s food, which they bought about 5.45. He based his findings on stomach contents and ‘‘gastric smell’’, something other experts had labelled ‘‘bad science’’, Hislop said......... The appeal finishes tonight (NZT).

The entire story can be found at:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8812281/Key-evidence-bad-science-Lundy-appeal

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to this case;

I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site. 

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.     

Amanda Knox: Italy top court gives written reasons for ordering a new trial in the murder of flatmate Meredith Kercher. While finding that the appeals court acquittal decision contained "illogical" conclusions, the top court judges raise the possiblity of the so-called accomplices being linked in an act of forced sex involving Kercher "to a group erotic game that blew up and got out of control" the Associated Press reports. (Sounds like the stuff of Italian cinema to me. HL).

STORY: "Italy top court faults Amanda Knox acquittal," by reporter Nicole Winfield, published by The Associated Press on June 18, 2013.

GIST:  "Italy's high court on Tuesday faulted the appeals court that acquitted American student Amanda Knox of murdering her roommate, saying its ruling was full of "deficiencies, contradictions and illogical" conclusions and ordering the new appeals court to look at all the evidence to determine whether Knox helped kill the teen. In March, the Court of Cassation overturned Knox's acquittal in the 2007 murder of flatmate Meredith Kercher and ordered a new trial. On Tuesday, the high court issued its written reasoning for doing so. Kercher's body was found in November 2007 in her bedroom of the house she shared with Knox in Perugia, a central Italian town popular with foreign exchange students. Knox, now 25, and her Italian ex-boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito, 29, were initially convicted and sentenced to long prison terms, but a Perugia appeals court acquitted them in 2011, criticizing virtually the entire case mounted by prosecutors. The appellate court noted that the murder weapon was never found, said that DNA tests were faulty and that prosecutors provided no murder motive. A young man from Ivory Coast, Rudy Guede, was convicted of the slaying in a separate proceeding and is serving a 16-year sentence. In the 74-page Cassation ruling, the high court judges said they "had to recognize that he (Guede) was not the sole author" of the crime, Italian news agency LaPresse reported. The judges though said he was the "main protagonist." They said the new appeal process would serve to "not only demonstrate the presence of the two suspects in the place of the crime, but to possibly outline the subjective position of Guede's accomplices." It said hypotheses ran from a simple case of forced sex involving Kercher "to a group erotic game that blew up and got out of control.""

The entire story can be found at:

 http://bigstory.ap.org/article/italy-top-court-faults-amanda-knox-acquittal

See Wikipedia account of the Amanda Knox prosecution at:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amanda_Knox

 PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to this case;

I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site. 

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.     

Colin Matchim. Newfoundland; Extraordinary case; He was permitted to offer new evidence about "shaken baby syndrome" after conviction - but before being sentenced. Application to re-open the case continues in Supreme Court tomorrow (Wednesday June 19, 2013);

STORY: "Matchim assault trial may be re-opened," published by VOCM on June 18, 2013.

GIST: "Lawyers made final submissions to re-open the Colin Matchim aggravated assault trial today at Supreme Court. Matchim was convicted of shaking his infant child in 2011. Colin Matchim's defence wants Justice Wayne Dymond to either allow new evidence which they believe could acquit Matchim of aggravated assault, changing the outcome of his 2011 trial, or declare a mistrial. A defence witness told the court that shaking may not be the only cause for Matchim's daughte's injuries, while the Crown maintains that trauma is likely the leading cause. Justice Dymond noted that Matchim's is an extraordinary case, even to consider allowing new evidence after a conviction has been entered."

The case will be called at Supreme Court again tomorrow.

http://www.vocm.com/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&id=35414&latest=1

CBC story:  "Matchim has already been found guilty of shaking his three-and-a-half-month-old daughter in March 2009, causing brain damage. On Tuesday, Matchim's lawyer, Erin Breen said Dymond should consider the new defence evidence because it might impact the earlier finding of guilt. The defence called expert medical witnesses who said there could have been an underlying medical condition that caused the baby's bleeding on the brain. The Crown also called expert witnesses who said the trauma of being shaken likely caused the injuries. Crown prosecutor Phil LeFeuvre said the new medical evidence is not strong enough to re-open the case. Several doctors from the Janeway hospital testified in court that the child was a victim of shaken-baby syndrome.
Matchim had also confessed to shaking the infant. But during the trial he recanted, saying he was told that if he didn't admit doing it, the finger would be pointed at his former partner - the baby's mother - and neither would get custody of the baby."

 http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2013/06/18/nl-matchim-evidence-618.html

PUBLISHER'S NOTE:

Dear reader: Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog. We are following developments relating to this case;

I have added a search box for content in this blog which now encompasses several thousand posts. The search box is located  near the bottom of the screen just above the list of links. I am confident that this powerful search tool provided by "Blogger" will help our readers and myself get more out of the site. 

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.