This Prosecutor would rather put public safety at risk having the real criminal still at large than allowing a simple DNA test to prove or deny his office made a mistake. A real chickenshit move
Suit charges “retaliation for opinions about the lab” – Ex-Police lab director sues supervisors over demotion –
Other types of professional retaliation relating to forensic science. here and here.
When a man is wrongfully arrested…….Jailed 12 days, man proves his mistaken arrest by dropping pants in court; $88K settlement proposed
Planted evidence from a Crime lab (the OJ defense) is not the magic bullet for everyone arguing innocence. Forensic misconduct charges before Nebraska higher court affecting a murder case. Legal argument from the DA says “eyewitness” evidence is sufficient to sustain life sentence regardless of ex lab director malfeasance. Here’s the ex lab guy.
Legal minds will toil over the trial record to reach a finding on this appeal. Not surprising, said analysis will only look at court transcripts. They never go back to ask the original jurors what value they put on the tainted evidence.
Here’s the story snippet.
LINCOLN — Even if an Omaha man serving life for murder could prove a rogue crime scene investigator planted blood in his truck, it might not be enough to set him free.
Richard K. Cook on Wednesday asked the Nebraska Supreme Court to grant him a hearing so he can present evidence that hewas framed by David Kofoed, the former director of Douglas County’s crime lab.
During 20 minutes of oral arguments, the judges returne to a key question: Assuming Kofed fabricated blood evidence, did that evidence ultimately convict Cook?
Read the entire article here.
A tangled web. The effect of crime lab misconduct to be judged by the judges of Massachusetts.
*******
Some crime labs are so slow, their customers go to the competition.
*******
“A Massive Mess of Forensics” From The Agitator
*******
Woes of the Vermont Crime Lab. Article calls it a “struggle.”
*******
The “latest Crime Lab scandal brought to you by Broward County.”
This is a mere sip in the ocean of info on this subject. At a glance, the cases are many, but any semblance of consistent judicial penalties are few.
Prosecutorial misconduct occurs when a prosecutor breaks a law or a code of professional ethics in the course of a prosecution. In Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935), Justice Sutherland explained prosecutorial misconduct meant “overstepp[ing] the bounds of that propriety and fairness which should characterize the conduct of such an officer in the prosecution of a criminal offense.”
In the justice system, prosecutors have the power to decide what criminal charges to bring, and since 97 percent of cases are resolved without a trial, those decisions are almost always the most important factor in the outcome. That is why it is so important for prosecutors to play fair, not just to win.
Some wrongful convictions are caused by honest mistakes. But in far too many cases, the very people who are responsible for ensuring truth and justice — law enforcement officials and prosecutors — lose sight of these obligations and instead focus solely on securing convictions.
The cases of wrongful convictions are filled with evidence of negligence, fraud or misconduct by prosecutors or police departments.
Center for Prosecutorial Integrity Database This site has over 500 recent cases review for characteristics and results.
Saving the best for last. The Los Angeles Times article database about pros misconduct from 1999 to the present.
Note: The first lesson from this specific incident is: DON”T SHOW THE BODY RECOVERY IN FRONT OF THE MEDIA My mass disaster experience is similar with news copters hovering over the ocean recovery site until authorities established prohibited airspace for civilian aircraft.
Latest News of today, the tail of the aircraft has been recovered.
Water search moves westward from origianl contact site.
More forensic dentists to help with AirAsia recovery.
Other forensic experts: Photography, crime scene investigators and recovery divers.
Identification experts.
Australians send help.
Arm chair aviation experts talk about the plane “landing on the water” and then “breaking up” due to intact victims’ remains still in passenger seats. That is a bit premature, to say the least.
As usual, another bitemark meeting ignoring past wrongful convictions. Only their “famous” cases from 40 years ago.
Plus, Aussie experts help identify 4 victims of Air Asia incident.
Forensic Science Is Not CSI, in Ferguson or Anywhere Else – HuffPost Politics
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6356740?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politics&partner=skygrid
Forensic Science Is Not CSI, in Ferguson or Anywhere Else – HuffPost Politics
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6356740?utm_hp_ref=politics&ir=Politics&partner=skygrid
Comment: This is entirely the reverse opinion from a judge also from the Brooklyn bench whom last year determined that bitemark comparisons “comported” with the NY Rules of Evidence. This judge must be a different breed of cat.
**********
From the UK.
Exonerees in the UK: left penniless and abandoned. By Carole McCartney
Were it not shocking enough that we continue to wrongly convict people in England and Wales and make it ever harder for them to win their appeal, we are abandoning those individuals who manage to win their freedom, penniless, often homeless, and always damaged. With the recent showing of a compelling TV documentarly that investigates whether there has been a number of health professionals wrongful convicted of murder, concerns are once again being raised about what happens to victims even after they win their freedom. Full article here.
Forensic science fails in specific controversial areas of wherein “classic” investigation methods, never brought forth by the scientific method, are still posing as “business as usual.”. Think of the “matches” you hear about on TV. Ignore DNA and Toxicology.
This is never so true than looking at the AAFS Advance Program for its Feb 2015 meeting in Orlando, FLA. There is little to nothing about forensic mistakes which led to wrongful convictions. For the bitemark “matching” clan, it is all about “moving” ahead, and don’t “look back.” More on that below.
This failure focuses on pattern methods such as fingerprints (as is “how many matches does it take to assure a reliable “positive match” ) and bitemark “science.”
Hair comparison and bullet lead comparison s have been taken off the books as legitimate forensic evidence.
NIST/IAI/ AAFS are posing to help solve some of the gaps in legitimate testing, standards and practice. Too bad NIST setup their bitemark committee with some of the same people presenting in Orlando.
Overview on science and its “research” problems. These symptoms exist in forensics and are obvious.
Below is an excellent overview on this topic of scientific “spinning” of research results and their proclamations of success.
Now, onto a look at what the forensic bitemark section of the AAFS has to offer in Orlando. As expected, the match-up of topics is one-sided. It’s business as usual. No one discusses the NAS in 2009 statement that there is no underlying science to what these folks have said for 50 years. The NAS happened to use some of my papers to support their conclusions. They don’t even attempt their typical personal attacks regarding this 2014 article putting their 1st commandment of “dental uniqueness” (aka: a dental fingerprint) into the dirt forever. Here’s my blog opinion on the subject.
If attending, please go to the Jurisprudence (legal) section, and the other true scientific disciplines ( Anthro, Criminalistics, Path/Bio and Tox ) to find topics such as error analysis, research verification, reliability testing and terminology. There is one surprise presentation at the end of this article.
This link will send you to the entire AAFS Advance Program.
COLLATION OF THE BITEMARK SESSION OF THE ODONTOLOGY SECTION AT THE 2015 ORLANDO MEETING.
8:30 a.m. – 8:45 a.m. G9 Methodology and Interests of 3D Modeling of Bitemarks
8:45 a.m. – 9:05 a.m. G10 Bitemarks From the Emergency Room to the Courtroom: The Importance of the Expert in Forensic Odontology
9:05 a.m. – 9:20 a.m. G11 An Objective, Dynamic Bitemark Overlay Technique
9:20 a.m. – 9:40 a.m. G12 Bitemark Evidence
9:55 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. G13 Paradigm Shifts on the Validity of Bitemark Evidence and the Dramatic Connection With Best Practices in Forensic Technical Analysis Via the Poma Murder in Rome: A Case Report
10:15 a.m. – 10:35 a.m. G14 Construct Validity of Bitemark Assessments Using the ABFO Bitemark Decision Tree Note: I have previously taken an opposing view that this is NOT the “science” the NAS was expecting. Take a look.
10:35 a.m. – 11:05 a.m. G15 Bitemarks: To Profile or Not to Profile — So What’s the Question?
11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. G21 Chronological Evaluation of Bruising in Bitemarks and Blunt Trauma: Validation of the Nuzzolese-Neri-DiVella (NNDV) Colorimetric Scale
THEN AT THE END OF THE DAY
4:45 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. G58 The Implications of a Guilty Verdict for an Innocent Defendant
NOTE: I have retired from speaking at the AAFS meetings. Last time I showed up, I presented a paper on erroneous bitemark opinions that led to wrongful convictions. Soon after, I was sued for defamation for over $750,000. I hope this next presenter is protected.
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2014 annual report for this blog.
Here's an excerpt:
The concert hall at the Sydney Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 9,200 times in 2014. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 3 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.
