Here’s the link to Forensic Dentistry Online article. Sorry.
New study confirms that bitemarks on skin are highly distorted – up to 50% !!
Someone needs to tell the Texas Forensic Science Commission about this.
http://www.forensicdentistryonline.org/effects-of-skin-elasticity-on-bite-mark-distortion/
Northern California Innocence Project litigators consider this wrongful conviction another case of junk science assisted prosecution.
““Tragically, junk science passing as expert testimony is a contributing factor in 22 percent of wrongful convictions and NCIP is actively working to free innocent people and establish policies to prevent wrongful convictions like Larry’s,” said NCIP Legal Director Linda Starr.
Earlier this week Sandee Magliozzi, Executive Director of the Northern California Innocence Project, sent out the following notification detailing a recent victory for NCIP…
Dear Friends,
We wanted to share some great news with you: yesterday afternoon the Tehama County Superior Court overturned the wrongful conviction of NCIP client Larry Pohlschneider, 46, after nearly 15 years of wrongful imprisonment! Mr. Pohlschneider’s attorneys and the Tehama County District Attorney agreed that his 2000 conviction should be vacated and the charges dismissed due to the ineffective assistance of Mr. Pohlschneider’s trial counsel.
NCIP Assistant Legal Director Maitreya Badami, Mr.
Pohlschneider’s lead attorney, commended the Tehama County District Attorney’s Office for its willingness to look at this case with fresh eyes when presented with evidence from NCIP’s investigation. “Without the District Attorney’s fairness and cooperation, Mr. Pohlschneider’s unjust incarceration might have been even more prolonged,” explained Ms. Badami. “The failure of Mr. Pohlschneider’s trial…
View original post 285 more words
New study confirms that bitemarks on skin are highly distorted – up to 50% !!
Someone needs to tell the Texas Forensic Science Commission about this.
http://www.forensicdentistryonline.org/effects-of-skin-elasticity-on-bite-mark-distortion/
Ditto.
An insightful article by Radley Balko, writing for the Washington Post.
From the article:
“That they (the two prosecutors cited in the article) have yet to be sanctioned or disciplined by a court or state bar speaks volumes about the legal profession’s ability to police itself. That they continue to be reelected is more evidence that the criminal justice reform movement should get more directly involved in electoral politics.”
This is from NPR. It also mentions the climate of faulty forensics like bitemarks, hair comps, casting doubts about reliabilty of courtroom experts.
Coding errors and defense rights to discovery are well discussed in this Slate article. Another example of obstacles to proving innocence. Some forensics dont even use programs. Bitemarkers and some others just use their eyeballs and “superior” observation skills. I kid you not. Its in the literature.
The above image is incredibly evocative. My blog on this came out September 21, 2015. thanks to the September 19, 2015 Grits for Breakfast blog from TX and …CBSDallas Fort Worth.
Houston Press October 5, 2015 and……… The Temple Daily Telegraph
This from the Innocence Blog from October 5, 2015 including most of the Houston Press article.
According to an article in today’s Houston Press, the Texas Department of Public Safety recently identified nearly 25,000 cases involving mixed DNA that may require retesting and could eventually result in a wave of appeals. The impetus is a newer and more sophisticated type of mixed-DNA testing that is far more accurate in narrowing down the pool of potential donors and that may uncover cases which resulted in wrongful convictions.
Up until now, mixed DNA tests could produce very striking results that allowed experts and prosecutors to argue that the chances that a DNA profile belonged to any other individual beside the defendant were one in a million or more. But through a new mixed-DNA testing method, the odds are dramatically reduced—from one in many to one in less than 100, reports the Houston Press. As a result, 25,000 mixed cases dating back to 1999 are going to need to be reviewed to determine which of them resulted in convictions and whether they need to be retested using the new DNA testing method.
General Counsel at the Texas Forensic Science Commission, Lynn Robitaille Garcia, said figuring out a way to tackle evaluating the 25,000 cases will be daunting and costly. The commission will be asking the governor for financial assistance to complete the work.
According to the Press, Galveston will serve as a testing ground in identifying a method by which to figure out which of its retroactive mixed-DNA cases actually resulted in convictions; its methodology could serve as a model for larger jurisdictions. Once the conviction cases are identified, the defendants in those cases will be assisted in finding lawyers to file writs. Prosecutors will then have to be prepared to handle the flood of appeals. In terms of cases currently pending trial, Jack Roady, the district attorney for Galveston County told the Houston Press that he has put a hold on all of the county’s mixed-DNA cases currently pending trial so that he can send them for retesting.
“We have to start identifying the cases and whittling the case list down,” Garcia said to the commission last week, according to the Press. “We have a duty to correct this.”
Innocence litigation in the US and around the world. Many issues in common
View original post 2 more words
NEWS BREAK: Another Forensic Scapegoat case. Last December, New York State Police forensic scientists were accused of cheating on a yet unused DNA software exam. The test maker had encouraged takers to confer during the test prep stage which included looking at old exams. It appears some NYSP detective had the brainstorm idea to launch an in house case against them and then try to get them all to quit. That did not happen. Full article. Thanks to @MaxmHouck. Who knows something about this subject.
Old 1991 conviction using FBI junk hair experts goes back to trial.
Doubts raised about Ga. medical examiner’s judgment, and credibility. Poor evidence leads to conjecture and guess work. It usually sticks, though, when one is a real pro. This guy must have x-ray vision. The unusual part is the backlash his NAME colleagues have brought to bear. His boss doesn’t seem to care.
Concern grows over DNA evidence errors in Texas and likely throughout the US
Prosecutors articulating excuses why untested DNA from a 1993 conviction should not be tested. They use old DNAfor their cold cases all the time.
Another bitemark-based conviction overturned. Dentist calls his original testimony “junk.”
What are the responsibilities of a forensic expert in court. And other musings from a crime lab guy.
Applications of DNA methods which are subjective is creating a scenario in TX which will probably be repeated across the entire US. Confidence in past convictions is rapidly deteriorating. One might say the enthusiasm for forensic DNA as a “magic bullet” outstripped reality. Many notable forensic personalities have some ‘xplaining’ to do on this.
The weight of these changes to wrongful conviction is summed up in the article as :
“It’s not probable but it’s possible.”
http://www.click2houston.com/news/concern-grows-over-dna-evidence-errors-in-texas/35607922
FORENSICS and LAW in FOCUS @ CSIDDS | News and Trends 