Swinton bitemark exoneration generates praise for Conn Attorney General – Really?

Image result for alfred swinton hartford

The AG’s office declined to recharge Alfred Swinton after his 1991 conviction fell apart due to DNA “touch” analysis of the victim and a bitemark expert who recanted his trial testimony. The praise for the AG in this first article contradicts the objections the state presented to Swinton’s post conviction DNA testing during years of appeal.

https://www.nhregister.com/opinion/article/David-Cameron-Swinton-release-highlights-12731886.php

In 200o, The Hartford Courant had a much different take on Mr. Swinton. The certainly did.

http://articles.courant.com/2000-09-10/news/hc-cc-swinton-091000_1_alfred-swinton-diedre-dancy-carla-terry

In 2001, Swinton’s appellate attorney states that he is innocent. The state’s “top” forensic dentist is also mentioned.

http://www.journalinquirer.com/archives/swinton-convicted-may-face-more-charges/article_10b0feba-b373-5a90-bd24-edc82a4db850.html

About csidds

Dr. Michael Bowers is a long time forensic consultant in the US and international court systems.
This entry was posted in criminal justice reform, forensic science reform protecting the innocent and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s