Wonderland comes to the Georgia Supreme Court

The Georgia Supreme Court is apparently stocked with imbeciles. Either that or they are simply dishonest to the core

As I have noted before, Georgia is one of these theocratic states where the detestable sex offender registry requires people to register as sex offenders, even when they have not committed a sexually based crime. There are two cases where individuals were placed on this odious, useless, counter-productive list where no sex was involved.

I previously reported on a young man who accompanied a friend when the friend robbed a Dairy Queen. A teenager was exiting the store as the robber went in. The robber instructed the young man to lie on the ground until they finished the robbery. No physical contact with the youth took place. But the underage accomplice in the case is now listed as a registered sex offender in Georgia.

The case that these morons in robes heard was similar. One Jake Rainer, then 18, along with unnamed co-defendants, met a 17-year-old girl who said she would sell them pot. She got in their car and they drove her to a cul-de-sac where they relieved her of her marijuana, without paying. Instead of rightfully charging them with theft (something the government doesn't oppose on principle) they robbers were charged with "false imprisonment" and forced to register as sex offenders. Again no sexual contact took place, no attempt at sexual contact took place. There isn't even evidence that anyone thought about sex, let alone did anything sexual.

Now consider that the sex offender registry is itself a vicious form of perpetual punishment applied very indiscriminately, as we see in this case. Having the status of "sex offender," the closest any human even gets to eternal life, means that one is constantly penalized. Presence on that data base, no matter what the circumstances of the "crime," means that one is banned from living in most places, especially in Georgia. There are entire counties where a "sex offender" is basically banned from living there. It subjects one to constant harassment from would-be vigilantes as well as the local police. It is used to deny people seeking to better themselves, from obtaining a college education. It is used so that many on the list are incapable of finding employment. The whole purpose of the registry is to inflict unrelenting punishment on people, even if the sex was consenting and non-violent. And, as we saw here, one need not even commit a sexual crime to be on the list.

The Georgia Supreme Court was asked to rule on the list being cruel and unusual punishment. It certainly is cruel, unfortunately in these less civilized times it is not unusual. Justice Harold Melton rejected the arguments entirely because he said such registries "are regulatory, not punitive, in nature." What a butt wipe! A proper understanding of the nature of "regulatory" actions shows them to differ little from punitive actions.

Consider an area completely outside the realm of sex offenses. If a businessman uses his premises to sell drugs the government may come in and confiscate his business under Rico laws, thus putting him out of business. In truth they can do this merely by accusing him of a crime, even if they have no evidence he actually did anything illegal. The business is gone, the owner is bankrupt. Now consider the same business getting zoned out of existence, regulated into oblivion instead. What is the difference between punitive actions and regulatory actions if both can inflict the same harm?

In this case much of the harm that is inflicted eternally on these "offenders" is not just government sanctioned, but government mandated. Surely when government arrests people for living in their own home, due to sex offender zoning laws, that is punitive. There is a fine line between regulatory actions and punitive ones and the sex offender laws were intentionally created as punitive measures.

The Court ruled that "it is of no consequence whether or not one has committed an offense that is 'sexual' in nature before being required to register." No consequence! Exactly where does this justice have his brains?

Conservatives ought to be worried. This ruling basically says that a government regulation, one that is onerous and harmful, is not punitive because the government calls it a regulation instead of punishment. The court also said that the state may place people on the sex offender list, for public scrutiny and harassment, even if they have never committed a sex crime in their life. As the Justice (sic.) put it, "it is of no consequence" whether or not a sex crime was committed.

I am going to rename my cat Fido, because that will apparently, miraculously turn him into a dog, at least if the logic of the court is accurate. Calling something regulatory, instead of punitive, makes it non-punitive, no matter how much punishment is inflicted by it.

The court said that it was perfectly fine to do this because it "advances the State's legitimate goal of informing the public for purposes of protecting children from those who would harm them." Get real! In this case Rainer was within a few months of the same age of the girl he robbed. She was dealing an illegal drug and he took the drug. If the police did it they would be applauded. There is no reason to assume that Rainer is a threat to children and it is absurd to say that the girl was a child. This girl is old enough to consent to sex in Georgia, and old enough to marry. Yet if she deals drugs and is robbed her robber becomes a sex offender because the State is protecting children.

This should indicate exactly how America's sex laws are running wild, as well as contradicting common sense. The Court ruled:

There is no requirement that sexual activity be involved. Rainer’s belief that the term “sexual offender” may only apply to offenders who commit sexual offenses against minors does not change the fact that the definition provided in the statute, and not the definition that Rainer wishes to impose upon the statute, controls.

Do you get that? Rainer argued that it was wrong to call him a "sex offender" when he never committed a sexual offense. The Court refers to that reasonable definitional issue as merely a "belief" which doesn't matter because the State has redefined the term "sex offense" to include offenses that are entirely non-sexual. In Through the Looking-Glass (aka, Alice in Wonderland), Alice speaks to Humpty Dumpty who tells her: "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." Of course when Lewis Caroll wrote that, he meant it as nonsense. When Justice Melton wrote something similar he thought it made perfect sense.

Melton says that Rainer's definition of sex offender is "incorrect" because the Georgia legislature has redefined the word to mean "just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." In children's fantasies this might be amusing, but in the law it is dangerous.

In related news a new study says that 20 percent of teens have sent erotic photos of themselves by cell phone. For most of these teens that means they have committed a felony, could be imprisoned, and may very likely be listed a sex offenders. Given America's tendency to see sex as evil I would assume that when 20 percent of teens admit to sexting, that the actual numbers are significantly higher. As I see it, the government may as well publish well publish a list of the names of everyone in the country, call it a "sex offenders" list and get it over with. The over-criminalization of everything continues unabashed and it is destroying lives.
Labels: sex offender registries

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Charming correctional officer

Glued-on grill ripped off Tenn. man's teeth in jail, taking teeth with it. The bitch who did it is the one who should be made to pay

When a Tennessee jailer ripped the gold grill from a new inmate's teeth two days before Thanksgiving last year, it left the 31-year-old man in excruciating pain and left taxpayers on the hook for nearly $100,000 in damages.

Anthony McCoy spat out blood and teeth in a trash can and was in agony for more than a week after Davidson County Sheriff's Lt. Tanya Mayhew reached into his mouth and yanked out the grill, along with the cement attached to his teeth, said his lawyer, David Raybin. The forced extraction pulled the enamel off McCoy's front teeth and left him with a damaged mouth that still isn't fixed, Raybin said. Nashville Metro Council on Tuesday approved a $95,000 settlement to avoid a lawsuit.

It happened Nov. 24, a day after McCoy was admitted to the Metro Jail on charges of contempt of court for failure to pay child support, two counts of violation of an order of protection and harassment. When a guard asked McCoy to remove his grill while he was being processed in the jail, he said it was permanently cemented to his teeth years earlier.

In a legal analysis, the Metro Council's office acknowledges that Mayhew then reached into McCoy's mouth and ripped off the grill, causing an estimated $10,000 worth of damage to McCoy's teeth.

McCoy made repeated but futile requests for medical treatment," Raybin said. "There was no urgency at all," Raybin said of the Metro Jail officials and Correct Care Solutions, the company that Nashville contracts with to provide inmate medical care. "This guy was in agony for over a week and a half." The inmate's claim is based on pain and suffering, as well as the dental damage.

CCS has agreed to pay $20,000 because of the "unwarranted delay" in receiving treatment, the Metro Council's legal analysis says. It also says Mayhew broke sheriff's office policy by reaching into the inmate's mouth. The paperwork also acknowledges that McCoy waited 10 days before ever receiving medical treatment beyond Tylenol, in spite of repeated pleas for help. It's not clear why McCoy had to wait so long to get treatment or how many times he asked for help. It's also not clear whether jail officials ever requested that CCS see him sooner. In an e-mail to The Associated Press, CCS declined to comment.

A Sheriff's Department spokeswoman said that since the incident, a new policy specifically prohibits jailers from removing inmates' grills. The Sheriff's Department referred other questions about the case to the county Health Department, which oversees the contract with CCS.

A Health Department spokesman said that federal privacy laws barred officials from saying whether McCoy sought medical treatment while in the jail.

City officials have previously been happy with the quality of care CCS has provided to the inmates, but are going to closely monitor the agency, said Health Department spokesman Brian Todd. "We don't ever want to see something like this happen again." "This appears to be an unusual and pretty reprehensible act," Councilman Ronnie Steine, chairman of the budget and finance committee, told The Tennessean newspaper of Nashville. "My hope is that the employee has had the appropriate disciplinary action for something that seems to be an egregious act."

The lieutenant who pulled out the grill was demoted and received five days suspension.

McCoy was later convicted on the harassment charges and released from jail on Feb. 2.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

MO: City settles suit with cop fired for criticizing quota system

Police bosses normally deny that they have a quota system so it is good that someone blew the whistle on one -- and even better that he was vindicated. The city would have settled because they knew how bad the publicity of a trial would have been for them

The city will pay $100,000 to a former police officer who claimed he was fired because he criticized a police ticket-quota system. The out-of-court settlement with Randall Messina was approved 6-1 by the City Council following a more than two-hour, closed-door session Monday, said Mayor Dick Stratman. Council member Connie Groff voted against it, he said.

Messina sued Washington in federal court in April 2008, saying his free speech rights were violated. In his complaint, Messina alleged Stratman, Police Chief Ken Hahn, and Capt. Kevin Menefee communicated between August and November 2007 about a police ticket-quota system to counter falling city revenue.

At a Nov. 1, 2007, police staff meeting, Hahn outlined new "performance standards" for officers that required a "quota of arrests, written reports, tickets issued, warnings issued and self-initiated activities," the suit claimed.

City officials have maintained Messina was fired for insubordination. On Tuesday, Stratman said he was restricted from commenting on the settlement. The City Council voted to fire Messina in February 2008, after he criticized the alleged quota system on television. He was hired as a patrolman in August 2005.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Pre-crime policing

Allegedly “disgruntled” man has his guns seized, and “voluntarily” surrenders to two SWAT teams and dozens of police officers for a crime that hadn’t been committed. The police can now seize you and cart you away for something that exists only in their imagination. And what check is there on what they might imagine? None.

To hear them tell it, the five police agencies who apprehended 39-year-old Oregonian David Pyles early on the morning of March 8 thwarted another lone wolf mass murderer. The police "were able to successfully take a potentially volatile male subject into protective custody for a mental evaluation," announced a press release put out by the Medford, Oregon, police department. The subject had recently been placed on administrative leave from his job, was "very disgruntled," and had recently purchased several firearms. "Local Law Enforcement agencies were extremely concerned that the subject was planning retaliation against his employers," the release said. Fortunately, Pyles "voluntarily" turned himself over to police custody, and the legally purchased firearms "were seized for safekeeping."

This voluntary exchange involved two SWAT teams, police officers from Medford and nearby Roseburg, sheriff's deputies from Jackson and Douglas counties, and the Oregon State Police. Oregon State Police Sgt. Jeff Proulx explained to South Oregon's Mail Tribune why the operation was such a success: "Instead of being reactive, we took a proactive approach."

There's just one problem: David Pyles hadn't committed any crime, nor was he suspected of having committed one. The police never obtained a warrant for either search or arrest. They never consulted with a judge or mental health professional before sending out the military-style tactical teams to take Pyle in.

"They woke me up with a phone call at about 5:50 in the morning," Pyles told me in a phone interview Friday. "I looked out the window and saw the SWAT team pointing their guns at my house. The officer on the phone told me to turn myself in. I told them I would, on three conditions: I would not be handcuffed. I would not be taken off my property. And I would not be forced to get a mental health evaluation. He agreed. The second I stepped outside, they jumped me. Then they handcuffed me, took me off my property, and took me to get a mental health evaluation."

By noon the same day, Pyles had already been released from the Rogue Valley Medical Center with a clean bill of mental health. Four days later the Medford Police Department returned Pyle’s guns, despite telling him earlier in the week—falsely—that he'd need to undergo a second background check before he could get them back. On Friday the Medford Police Department put out a second press release, this time announcing that the agency had returned the "disgruntled" worker's guns, and "now considers this matter closed.

That seems unlikely. Pyles' case has spurred outrage in the gun rights community. Kevin Starrett of the Oregon Firearms Federation has been advising Pyles, and helped get his guns back. Oregon-based syndicated conservative talk radio host Lars Larson has taken up the story. And Pyles is now attorney shopping for a possible civil rights lawsuit.

At root behind this case and others like it is our naïve, hopeful, and sometimes even dangerous belief that every horrible shooting spree or lone-wolf act of terrorism can be prevented. We seem unable to accept the idea that bad people will occasionally do bad things. Every new mass shooting spurs an urge to assign blame beyond the shooter: What political ideology inspired him? Who missed the “warning signs,” and why wasn't he apprehended ahead of time? Gun retailers are scrutinized and vilified, even when they've complied with the law. In ensuing days and weeks, politicians mull new laws, often both ineffective and constricting on our liberty.

There's nothing wrong with looking for signs that someone is about to snap, and if he's putting up multiple red flags, we'd certainly want law enforcement to investigate, possibly to chat with the person and his friends and family. And obviously if someone has made specific threats, a criminal investigation should follow. But that's a far cry from what happened to Pyles.

Pyles' problems began last June after a series of grievances with his employer, the Oregon Department of Transportation. "This was always a professional thing for me," he says. "It was never personal. We were handling the grievances through the process stipulated in the union contract." Pyles declined to discuss the nature of the complaints, citing stipulations in his contract.

On March 4, Pyles was placed on administrative leave, which required him to work from home. On March 5, 6, and 7, after getting his income tax refund, he made three purchases of five firearms. Pyles describes himself as a gun enthusiast, who had already owned several weapons. All three new purchases required an Oregon background check, which would have prohibited the transactions had Pyles ever been convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor involving violence, or been committed by the state to a mental health institution. Pyles says he has no criminal record, and says he never threatened anyone in his office. (A specific threat of violence would have likely brought a criminal charge.) The Oregon State Police, the Medford Police Department, and the Oregon Department of Transportation did not respond to requests for comment.

"In my opinion, the apprehension of David Pyles was a violation of Oregon's kidnapping laws," says James Leuenberger, a criminal defense attorney who is also advising Pyles. "He definitely deserves to be compensated for what they did to him, but even if he wins a civil rights suit, that will just result in the officers' employers paying for their mistakes." That of course means the final tab will be paid by Oregon's taxpayers, not the offending cops. "I want these law enforcement officials held personally responsible," Leuenberger says. "I want them criminally charged."

It's hard to see that happening. Joseph Bloom, a psychiatrist at Oregon Health & Science University and a specialist in civil commitment law, says the police who apprehended and detained Pyles were likely acting under the cover of Oregon law. Bloom says the police are permitted to make a determination on their own to take someone in for a mental health evaluation—there's no requirement that they first consult with a judge or mental health professional. Bloom believes this is a wise policy. "It's important to remember that this is a civil process," he says. "There's no arrest, these people aren't being taking to jail. It's not a criminal action."

So SWAT teams, guns, and handcuffs...but not a criminal action? And what if Pyles had refused to "voluntarily" surrender to the police? "Well, yes," Bloom says. "I guess then it would become a criminal matter."

If what happened to Pyles is legal, in Oregon or elsewhere, we need to take a second look at the civil commitment power. Even setting aside the SWAT team overkill in Medford, there's something awfully discomfiting about granting government authorities the power to yank someone from their home and drag them in for a mental health evaluation based on a series of actions that were perfectly legal, especially with no prior oversight from a judge, or guidance from a psychiatrist.

"The idea that Pyles turned himself in voluntarily is ridiculous," says Starrett, the gun rights activist. "There's nothing voluntary about waking up to a SWAT team outside your home, then having a police negotiator call and suggest you surrender. They had no arrest warrant. But Pyles only had one option. If he didn't come out on his own, they were going to come in to get him."

Even if the apprehension of Pyles was legal, the seizure of his guns wasn't. Because civil commitment laws aren't criminal in nature, they don't carry authorization for the police to search a private residence. According to Pyles, he closed the door behind him as he left his home. Because the police didn't have a search warrant, they had no right to even enter Pyles' home, much less seize guns inside that he bought and possessed legally.

For a potential mass murderer, Pyles is remarkably placid and big-picture about what happened to him. "I've been looking for a new job for months," he says. "But given the economy, I'm pretty lucky to be getting a paycheck, even given all of this. For me, this is about civil rights. This seems like something the NRA and the ACLU can agree on. South Oregon is big gun country. If something like this can happen here, where just about everyone owns a gun, it can happen anywhere."

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Arrogant cops thought they knew who the murderer was and ignored other clear possibilities

Three current persons of interest in the death of 16-year-old Kimberly Simon were questioned by police within the year after she was killed in 1985, current investigators said. But for reasons that still remain unclear today, past investigators instead turned their attention to 19-year-old Steven Barnes, who was released from prison in late 2008 after DNA proved his innocence.

It would take nearly 25 years before those same past suspects now once again find themselves linked to Simon's homicide. Less than a week after Saturday's “America's Most Wanted” aired a program on the Simon's case, Oneida County District Attorney's Investigator Richard Ferrucci on Tuesday shared new details about what the 16-month investigation has uncovered so far.

What unfolded the night Simon died? Simon was last seen leaving her River Road home shortly before 6 p.m. Sept. 18, 1985, as she walked to meet friends at the Whitesboro Junior High School on Route 69. Simon never made it, and instead she likely snuck away to a popular hangout spot along the Sauquoit Creek in New York Mills known as “Three Bears,” named after a stone structure that resembled something out of a fairy tale, investigators said.

There, Simon likely spent the last hours of her life with at least four young males known for satanic rituals, investigators said. As another young girl at the time watched from behind the bushes, she reportedly saw one member of the group have sex with an unconscious Simon. “Were they true Satanists? No, I believe they were cowards using this as a guise to drug and sexually abuse young women,” Ferrucci said. “I just think this was their way of trying to make people afraid of them.” It's those “sick and demented” individuals - now in their 40s - whom investigators have focused on since Barnes was exonerated.

Whatever occurred in the hours after Simon was seen unconscious at Three Bears until her partially clothed body was found nearly 4 miles away the next day is a mystery investigators continue to face. While Simon might have been drugged that night, a bruise on her face suggests she was struck at some point, investigators say. One of Simon's shoes reportedly seen downstream from Three Bears also might be a clue about how things unfolded that night.

Simon's body likely was driven in unknown vehicle and carried into a wooded area along the Mohawk River in Marcy, not too far from where she was last seen walking the evening before. Her arm was stiffened upwards with rigor mortis, which suggested she had been dead for some time in another position.

The horrific screams of a female were reportedly heard after 1 a.m. that night in another popular hangout spot known as the “Water Tower” behind the Hart's Hill Elementary School on Clinton Street, investigators said. This location was about 2 miles south from where Simon's body was discovered. Shredded papers from Simon's purse also were scattered along both sides of Clinton Street, less than a mile away from Three Bears, investigators said. This suggests the suspects might have tossed Simon's belongings out a car window either before or after they disposed of her body.

Police believe another female - Allison Scranton, who attended New Hartford High School -spent time with one person of interest that night. Investigators confirmed Tuesday that Scranton died in December 1997, but Ferrucci still would like to talk to anyone who knew Scranton or has any information about what Scranton might have witnessed that night.

Investigators also still question what another youth, Michele Mikalajunas of Whitesboro, might have known about Simon's death before she committed suicide less than a month later in October 1985. Both girls were students in the Whitesboro Central School District. “We have reason to believe that Michele might have held some information pertaining to what happened to Kim Simon,” but it is unclear whether she attended the Three Bears party that night, Ferrucci said.

What did past investigators know? Shortly after Simon's death, former investigators with the Oneida County Sheriff's Office were made aware of the same group of youths and disturbing behavior that today's investigators are targeting, Ferrucci said. In fact, the past investigators talked to two of the suspects in 1985 and a third suspect in 1986, Ferrucci said.

One of the first tips past investigators probed in 1985 was that Simon had been seen with this group of interest at a hotel party the previous Friday, Sept. 13, 1985, Ferrucci said. That initially led investigators to two current suspects, one of which admitted at the time that he knew Simon, that she had been to his house at least once, and that they partied together, Ferrucci said.

A third suspect was questioned less than a year later in 1986 when he reportedly signed a letter threatening to kill the young girl who witnessed what was going on at Three Bears that night. Although, at the time, the girl only told police she was being threatened by the group responsible for Simon's death, it wasn't until after Barnes was exonerated in 2008 that she acknowledged seeing someone having sex with Simon.

The past investigators, however, never documented what they concluded after talking with these three suspects back then, Ferrucci said. And today, those past investigators haven't been able to explain why they didn't pursue those suspects further. “It wasn't done maliciously, I just believe that in their hearts and in their minds they believed they were tracking the right person,” referring to Barnes, Ferrucci said.

Simon's parents, William and Cheryl Simon, also received threatening notes and phone calls even after Barnes was in jail, Ferrucci said. Although the Simons say they turned those letters over to past investigators, Ferrucci said the letters have not yet been found.

What are the current obstacles? Investigators still are awaiting final DNA test results to determine whether any DNA recovered from Simon's body matches any persons of interest or anyone who has been in the prison system. One person of interest - Richard W. Miller Jr. - has since died in February. It still is unclear how that may affect the outcome of this case.

Several people also have come forward with information that they overheard certain persons of interest openly speak about their role in Simon's death, Ferrucci said. But because some of those conversations occurred so many years ago, Ferrucci said it is a challenge today to verify those allegations.

But considering how a previous rush to judgment played a role in Barnes' wrongful conviction, Ferrucci said he has no choice but to be patient this time for the sake of Simon's family. “A previous conviction in this case is the biggest obstacle to overcome, but we are going to do it,” Ferrucci said. “It just makes everything so much harder.”

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Grossly unjust official foot-dragging by Canadian authorities

How long are 2,100 days? That's six whole years. It's enough time to see a child from birth to the first grade. Or, in Canada's current political climate, enough time for three general elections and a few prorogations.It is a particularly long time if you have to spend it in limbo.

This is how Deveryn Ross has lived the last six years of his life. A successful lawyer, Ross was convicted of fraud in 1995 for his role in a botched restaurant venture in Brandon. He spent less than a year in jail, having been released as a low-risk offender following the Headingley jail riot.

Ross was accused of deceiving investors, some of whom had money taken from their retirement savings without their knowledge. In some cases, signatures were forged to access the money.

For a decade after his release, Ross worked tirelessly to earn a review of his case by the federal justice minister. He discovered that two other men involved in the venture admitted to the Manitoba Securities Commission they had deceived investors. This was not disclosed at his trial.

In May 2004, Ross filed an application under the Criminal Code to have the federal justice minister review his case. In July 2004, the Department of Justice Canada assigned Alex Pringle, a noted Alberta lawyer, to review the case. This was done to avoid a conflict of interest; the prosecutor in Ross's case, Paul Jensen, was now working for the DOJ.

The Free Press published a detailed investigation of the case in March 2005, which included new evidence that supported Ross's claims of innocence. Former Manitoba attorney general Jim McCrae and former Brandon police chief Dick Scott both publicly called for a review of the case.

A few weeks after the story appeared, along with an editorial criticizing delays in the federal process for reviewing claims of wrongful conviction, the man in charge of that process wrote to the Free Press. Kerry Scullion, head of the Criminal Convictions Review Group objected to the Free Press's assertion that these reviews take too long. "Barring any unexpected complications, the review will be completed in a little less than 18 months from the time the application was received," he wrote.

Unfortunately, "unexpected complications" were exactly what unfolded.

The first unexpected complication was Pringle's workload. After agreeing to review the Ross case, Pringle accepted several large and complex assignments, including an extended gig at the judicial inquiry into the wrongful conviction of David Milgaard.

In an interview, Scullion acknowledged Ross's application has taken much longer than anticipated, in part because of Pringle's workload. However, he said that is a risk when you contract with top defence lawyers to review claims of innocence.

That was, however, not the only unexpected complication. Correspondence from Pringle, recently obtained by the Free Press, shows both Manitoba Justice and the Manitoba Securities Commission were tardy in turning over case files. In fact, the MSC fought Ottawa on the release of one key document that, Ross's lawyers believe, shows there was a vigorous debate within the commission about whether to disclose evidence to Ross during his trial. Ross has kept these details from the public out of a concern it would have further delayed his application.

The final unexpected complication was the political environment. There have been three federal elections since Ross filed his application, and one change in government. Elections, and the accompanying cabinet shuffles they bring, tend to reset the game clock on wrongful convictions.

Pringle finished interviewing witnesses in February 2007. A preliminary investigative report was completed in May 2008. A final report was sent to federal Justice in June 2009.

Those reports confirm evidence was not disclosed to Ross prior to his trial. They also confirm new evidence supporting Ross's case. It is now up to Federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson to determine if all this adds up to a miscarriage of justice.

Often, when faced with a massive failure of process, the authors of that failure try to find reasonable excuses for unreasonable delays.

It seems reasonable there might be delays when you hire a top lawyer with a busy schedule to review a case of this complexity. But given the circumstances -- a man who had his life stolen from him when he was convicted of this crime -- the contractor could demonstrate a greater sense of urgency or turn it over to someone who can.

It also seems reasonable that political uncertainty would lead to delays. Again, one would hope someone would take a look at the clock and realize that cabinet shuffle or no, this has taken too much time.

Hiring independent counsel to avoid a conflict of interest is reasonable. But allowing the case to drag on for six years leaves Ottawa open to allegations it has dragged its heels on a case involving one of its own employees.

In the long and painful campaign to reclaim his life, Deveryn Ross lost 2,100 days that no one will be able to replace. All the reasonable excuses won't change that.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

The dark side of DNA evidence

Contaminated samples, inept analysts and genetic quirks have led to miscarriages of justice, Kirk Makin reports

Gregory Turner feared he was bound for life in prison after an RCMP lab reported odds of 163 trillion to 1 that a tiny amount of DNA on his gold ring could have come from anybody but a 56-year-old woman found murdered in rural Newfoundland. The only real evidence in a first-degree murder charge against Mr. Turner, the golden sheen of DNA appeared certain to become a silver bullet in the hands of the Crown.

"I told my lawyer, Jerome Kennedy, that there was no way in the world it was true," Mr. Turner recalled in an interview. "He believed me. He said that I was too stupid to commit that crime and leave no evidence."

A lucky hunch by Mr. Kennedy - now Newfoundland's Minister of Health - saved Mr. Turner from a life behind bars. He sought the name and DNA profile of every technician who had worked at the RCMP lab. It turned out that the technician who had tested the ring had also been working on the victim's fingernails a few inches away, creating a strong possibility of contamination.

The technician conceded at Mr. Turner's 2001 trial that she had also contaminated evidence in two previous cases. In another disturbing twist, it emerged that she had mistakenly contaminated Mr. Turner's ring with her own DNA, causing police to waste considerable time on a futile search for a presumed accomplice.

Mr. Turner still has nightmares. "I remember the judge saying that he was denying me bail based on the likelihood I'd be convicted based on a DNA match," he said. "I think DNA can be good, but its only as good as the people who perform it. I spent 27 months in jail for a crime I didn't do."

In just 20 years, DNA has become a staple of crime-lab analysis, capturing the imagination of scriptwriters and anchoring thousands of criminal convictions. Its record of accuracy is superb - at least, when samples are collected and analyzed under reliable conditions by experts.

But cautionary tales such as Mr. Turner's are starting to pile up. As scientists are able to analyze smaller and smaller portions of DNA, the spectre of DNA evidence being planted at crime scenes becomes a more chilling possibility. There is also an emerging understanding that some individuals may elude detection because they have more than one DNA profile; that lab botch-ups happen with distressing regularity; and that overly dogmatic or underqualified courtroom experts represent a constant danger.

In a legal paper he wrote in 2004, Mr. Kennedy described the case as a blow to the scientific objectivity of the RCMP lab, as well as the credibility of future DNA reports. "In this case, bad science was exposed," he said. "...This case is an example of how untested scientific techniques, human error and bad science could have combined to obtain a conviction for murder."

Last year, University of Virginia law professor Brandon Garrett and Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project, found that three of 156 U.S. individuals ultimately exonerated in serious crimes had been wrongly convicted because of DNA errors. In one case, a technician grossly overstated evidence. Another featured lab contamination. The third wrongful conviction came after senior analyst Fred Zain gave evidence in court he knew to be false.

Prof. Young describes the Zain case as "a classic example of why you can't simply roll over and play dead in the face of science." After his shortcomings at the Virginia State Police Crime Laboratory were discovered, Mr. Zain left and became head of a medical examiner's lab in Texas. His errors became one of several problems the state ultimately faced. "They have had to reopen hundreds of cases in Texas because of the discovery of horrible preservation and contamination issues," said Alan Young, a professor at York University's Osgoode Hall Law School. "They had to literally shut down a lab in Houston because it was generating so many false results."

In other cases, the errors were inadvertent but no less damaging. Several years ago, a developmentally handicapped girl in Australia was linked to the murder of a toddler hundreds of kilometres away based on DNA found on the victim's clothing. It turned out the suspect had recently reported being sexually assaulted. A condom connected with the assault was being tested in a forensic lab at the same time as the murdered child's clothing.

And in England, bartender Peter Hamkin, 23, spent 20 days fearing deportation to face murder charges in Italy in 2002 before Interpol discovered that it had blundered in matching his DNA profile to that of a wanted killer in Tuscany. "I was a prisoner in my own home, constantly on the edge thinking the Italian police were going to arrive to take me away," he said afterward.

Faked results

In a recent publication of the National Association of Criminal Defence Lawyers, lawyer William Thompson deplored the rash of faked and mistaken DNA results. "Police and prosecutors have demanded DNA tests in an ever-expanding number of cases, putting pressure on labs to keep pace," he said.

In Canada, the RCMP, Ontario's Centre of Forensic Sciences and a handful of private labs analyze crime-scene DNA. While CFS has raised its standards since 1995, when an inquiry into the wrongful murder conviction of Guy Paul Morin heard that clothing fibres used to convict him had actually been shed by a lab technician's sweater, an incident last summer was a sobering reminder.

With his first-degree murder trial just two weeks away, Michael Smith of St. Thomas, Ont., learned from the Centre of Forensic Sciences that a defective lot of semen-testing kits several months earlier had yielded a false positive result in his case. "I was shocked that it was a mistake, but also that it had taken so long for them to tell us," said Mr. Smith's lawyer, Robert Upsdell. Mr. Upsdell asked a top Canadian DNA analyst, John Waye - head of the Molecular Diagnostic Genetics Service of the Hamilton Regional Laboratory Medicine Program - to look into the problem. Dr. Waye recalled that "many, many cases" were affected by the faulty testing kits, including some that had already gone to trial.

While CFS was retesting samples in the Smith case, it discovered that the locations on the victim's body where swabs were obtained had been mislabeled when CFS received them in 2007. "Had the retesting not been required, this mistake would never have been discovered," Mr. Upsdell said.

Dr. Waye said Canadian labs are inspected annually by independent auditors and have improved quality control and tracking of sample. Still, tens of thousands of samples flow in and out every year. "They do a mind-boggling amount of work, and it is really done as an assembly line. You can do your own job absolutely perfectly, but if somebody messes something up before it gets to you, everything you do is messed up, too."

Leo Adler, a Toronto lawyer who specializes in DNA cases, said most lawyers simply don't believe they can beat a DNA case and seek a plea bargain. "I would say that 99 times out of a hundred, nobody is fighting it any more," he said. "I suspect that there are lawyers whose clients say: 'Hey, it wasn't me,' and the lawyer says: 'You're going to go down, so let's work something out.' "

Mr. Adler said the problem with capitulation is that many cases involve experts making subjective conclusions about DNA sources that were mixed together and in different locations at a crime scene. Technicians can be tempted to stretch their conclusions in the belief that they are helping to convict a dangerous criminal, he added: "When a submission goes in to CFS, it goes along with a police theory."

Ricardo Federico, a Toronto lawyer who issues a monthly DNA newsletter, said he was jolted last summer when an Israeli company, Nucleix Ltd., announced it could synthesize DNA. The news raised the spectre of criminals framing innocent people starting with a couple of microscopic cells. "Sharp, brilliant minds are not always on the side of law and order," Mr. Adler said, citing a Saskatchewan man who surgically planted a vial of somebody else's blood in his forearm in an attempt to foil a blood test several years ago "People are always trying to stay one step ahead."

Another scientific development that has caused concern is the discovery of individuals who have two distinct DNA strands in their bodies. Known as chimeras, they have unusual DNA profiles that can come about either because of a blood transfusion or because two embryos merged in their mother's uterus. Estimates of the number of chimeras range from a tiny proportion of the population up to 10 per cent. Catherine Arcabascio, a law professor at Nova Southeastern University, said in a recent scholarly article a chimera can potentially leave misleading DNA deposits at a crime scene. "If he is a chimera, the DNA from his saliva could, in theory, differ from the DNA in his semen, skin, blood or some other sample left at the scene."

Mr. Federico criticized Canadian courts for working on a dangerous assumption that DNA tests are accurate, unless the defence can prove otherwise. "The DNA party is over," he said. "It should be the Crown that has an onus to show that testing has been authenticated."

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Man Exonerated by DNA 33 Years After Rape Conviction

In a story that is becoming all too familiar these days, a man was recently exonerated by DNA evidence for a crime he was convicted of 33 years ago. Freddie Peacock, 60, got the news at a hearing in Rochester, New York, on Thursday. The good news came 28 years after he was released on parole for an alleged raping of a Rochester woman in 1976.

The exoneration came from the work of The Innocence Project, affiliated with the Cardozo School of Law. The Project's co-director, Peter Neufeld, was in court with Peacock and his attorneys when the judgment was handed down.

Peacock, who is mentally ill, told the officers that he'd been hospitalized for mental illness; however, the officers continued to interrogate Peacock until he confessed. He was given 20 years in prison and released on parole in 1982.

Most interesting about Peacock's case is that he was badgered by police until he simply said, "I did it," without having any knowledge of how, when or where he committed the crime. This case is disturbing for a number of reasons. We also know that Peacock's case is not the only such case in the country, and there are thousands of other questionable cases that have never been challenged by the Innocence Project, leaving innocent men and women behind bars for crimes they did not commit. Of tremendous concern is the fact that many of these men and women are African American, leaving black families to struggle without the heads of households present to raise their children.

Here are some quick thoughts:

1) Mr. Peacock and his family should be compensated: Any wrongfully convicted American who spends more than a year in prison should receive $10 million dollars in cash from the federal government. If we can bail out the bankers, we can also afford to bail out those who are falsely accused and arrested. You can't replace the time someone loses for being in prison when they didn't commit a crime. Going to prison is a horrible and traumatic experience.

2) Officers and prosecutors involved in the case should be put on trial: The idea that this man can present a confession that has no details or other evidence is unbelievable. Clearly, the prosecutors and officers involved in this crime are guilty of the worst forms of corruption and unethical behavior. I am not sure why we believe that they should be held above the punishments thrust upon the defendants whose lives they've chosen to carelessly destroy.

3) The federal government should dramatically expand funding for the Innocence Project: If the Innocence Project is finding so many people who were falsely convicted, there are undoubtedly many more. The federal government should allocate billions to providing DNA testing to any defendant who requests it. Defendants should be IMMEDIATELY released from prison if it is found that their DNA does not match that of the defendant at the scene of the crime. We should not let laws and systems get in the way of doing what is just.

4) Any small amount of time in prison can destroy your life: I have a relative who went to prison for only two years at the age of 17. He is now a 46-year-old man who cannot psychologically overcome the horrible things that happened to him during his time in the penitentiary. If any innocent man or woman is sent to prison for any amount of time, we should all be deeply concerned and someone should pay a very serious price for delivering such a horrible injustice.

I long for the day when cases like Freddie Peacock receive the outrage that they deserve. This should not be happening in America, but it still happens every single day.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Cover-up exposed in post-Katrina police killings

A New Orleans police supervisor pled guilty February 24 in a federal court to charges of conspiracy to cover up the police shooting of six unarmed people a few days after Hurricane Katrina struck the city. Two of the victims, Ronald Madison, a 40-year-old mentally disabled man, and James Brissette, 19, were killed, while the other four were seriously wounded, one losing part of her arm.

Police lieutenant Michael Lohman, who just retired from the force at age 42, admitted taking the lead in efforts to manufacture evidence that the police shooting was legitimate. He described the events of that day in detail in sworn testimony before US District Judge Ivan Lemelle.

Lohman is now cooperating with federal authorities, who began an investigation into the shootings on the Danziger Bridge shortly after a local judge dismissed murder and attempted murder charges against seven policemen in 2008. He is expected to testify against the cops who actually fired the shots on September 4, 2005. The retired police supervisor remains free on $50,000 bond. Judge Lemelle set a May 26 sentencing date for Lohman, who faces up to five years in prison and three years of supervised release, as well as a $250,000 fine.

Danziger Bridge crosses the Industrial Canal in eastern New Orleans, connecting the Gentilly neighborhood on the west and the New Orleans East neighborhood. It was one of the few ways of moving across the city in the flood conditions that followed Hurricane Katrina, which struck New Orleans on August 29, 2005.

Ronald Madison was shot to death near a motel on the west side of the span. He was crossing the bridge with his brother Lance, a FedEx worker, as they tried to reach the dentist’s office of his brother, Romell. The other five victims were shot while walking together on the eastern side of the bridge. Leonard Bartholomew III was shot in the head, his wife Susan Bartholomew lost part of her arm, their daughter Leisha and a nephew, Jose Holmes, were hit by multiple gunshots. Brissette, a cousin of the Bartholomews, was killed.

A total of seven policemen were involved in the shootings. Officer Robert Faulcon, who quit the NOPD soon afterwards, shot Ronald Madison. The other six, who fired on the Bartholomews, are Sgt. Kenneth Bowen, Sgt. Robert Gisevius Jr., Officer Anthony Villavaso II, Officer Mike Hunter Jr., Officer Robert Barrios and Officer Ignatius Hills. All six have been assigned to desk duties since the killings.

Lohman arrived at the bridge in response to the report of police opening fire, and immediately understood that it was a “bad shooting,” he told the court last week. None of the victims had been armed, and no shots had been fired at the cops, so the evidence would not support a claim of self-defense. He therefore proceeded to manufacture evidence, while coaching the police on the scene so their statements would sustain the planned cover-up. Lohman worked with two NOPD investigators, Sgt. Arthur Kaufman and Sgt. Gerard Dugue, to concoct a report justifying the shootings. He described how he frequently discussed with Kaufman how to make the report “more plausible.”

At one point, he threw out the draft report the others had produced and wrote a 17-page substitute, in which he made changes such as increasing the number of policemen who had allegedly seen Ronald Madison throw a gun into the Industrial Canal—there was no such weapon—from one to four. The additional three policemen then had to be told what they had “seen” so their statements would be in synch. Lohman’s report also falsified the testimony of the Bartholomews, portraying them as admitting that some members of the family had fired on the police.

Lance Madison had been arrested at the scene and charged with attempted murder against the police and Kaufman logged into evidence a gun that was described as belonging to Madison, although it had been planted on him. In their discussions, Lohman testified, he asked Kaufman whether “the gun was ‘clean,’ meaning that it could not be traced back to another crime.” This was necessary to conceal the fact that the gun had been in the possession of the police before it was planted at the shooting scene.

Lance Madison was held in prison for weeks on the bogus murder charges. He was taken before a grand jury, which refused to indict him. He obtained legal representation from longtime civil rights attorney Mary Howell, and the charges were eventually dropped. Both families, the Madisons and Bartholomews, filed federal civil rights lawsuits against the NOPD.

Under pressure from public outrage over the killings, Orleans Parish District Attorney Eddie Jordan brought charges against the seven cops in December 2006. A New Orleans grand jury indicted Bowen, Gisevius, Villavaso and Faulcon on charges of first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder. Hunter and Barrios were charged with attempted first-degree murder, and Hills with attempted second-degree murder.

The seven cops were treated as heroes by the NOPD and the police union when first arraigned, and their case (the “Danziger 7”) became a rallying point for right-wing political forces. District Judge Raymond Bigelow dismissed the charges on August 13, 2008, seizing on alleged misconduct by the prosecutor’s office in what may have been a coordinated effort to “throw” the case.

Soon afterwards the families and local civil rights groups petitioned for federal intervention in the case, and the Civil Rights Division of the US Department of Justice agreed to begin the investigation that has now blown open the cover-up.

Lohman was an early target, and as late as May 27, 2009, in an interview with federal investigators, he continued to stonewall. But some time after that date, he began cooperating in the hope of a lighter sentence.

According to the current Orleans Parish district attorney, Leon Cannizzaro, Lohman’s admission of a police cover-up and his role in it will affect many other cases in which Lohman was a key witness, since defendants convicted on the basis of his testimony will now be able to file claims that his credibility is now impeached.

The exposure of the police cover-up in the Danziger Bridge shootings also adds to suspicions over a series of police killings and unexplained murders in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. These include:

• Matthew McDonald, shot to death by police on September 3, 2005. Police claimed he was reaching into a plastic bag carrying a handgun, despite orders to drop it. The autopsy of the victim has since “disappeared” from the coroner’s office.

• Henry Glover, shot by unknown persons September 2, 2005, and brought by friends to a police checkpoint, at which the friends were arrested and a car with Glover in the back seat was driven away by police. The car was found days later, badly burned, with Glover’s incinerated remains inside.

• Danny Brumfield Sr., shot to death by police after Hurricane Katrina, in front of the Morial Convention Center, after allegedly attacking police with a pair of scissors.

There is, in addition, the notorious police beating of Robert Davis, a 64-year-old retired teacher, in the French Quarter shortly after the hurricane. A videotape of the brutality was widely viewed at the time, but the policeman involved, Officer Robert Evangelist, has been reinstated and returned to work.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Minn. juror wonders if Toyota driver deserves new trial

As a man convicted of vehicular homicide pushes for a new trial, some jurors wonder if they would've convicted him had they known about Toyota's troubles.

Koua Fong Lee, 32, is more than two years into an eight-year prison sentence. In June of 2006, his 1996 Toyota Camry slammed into another car, ultimately killing three people.

"I hope they visit the whole issue of whether this was a possible malfunction and that he gets his day," said one juror, who asked to be identified only as juror number six.

Lee has always insisted he tried to stop his car, but the brakes did not work. An expert found nothing wrong with the brakes, so prosecutors argued Lee must have stepped on the accelerator instead. "That was all that was presented to us," juror number six said. "We had no inkling of any of this other stuff that's coming out in the news today."

In the wake of Toyota's sudden acceleration problems, the juror wonders if that would've been enough to create reasonable doubt. "People need to be aware that if we were presented with evidence back then that there could have been an issue, I believe things would have been different and I don't know that it would have gone as far as a trial," juror number six said.

KARE attempted to reach other jurors from Lee's case. Some did not return messages, others could not be reached and one declined to comment. But two other jurors told the St. Paul Pioneer Press they're having second thoughts about the verdict.

Lee is trying to get his case reopened. Relatives of the victims now support his efforts and believe he's innocent. And Ramsey County prosecutors are open to taking another look at the car. "But there needs to be evidence that a wrongful conviction occured," Ramsey County attorney Susan Gaertner told KARE 11 in late February. "We can't go by media reports of things that happened elsewhere with other vehicles."

Brent Schafer, Lee's attorney, hopes to meet with prosecutors in the next couple weeks to see if getting a new trial is possible. If not, he'll try to get experts to take another look at the car. No matter what happens, he plans to ask a judge for a new trial.

The '96 Camry is not part of Toyota's recent recalls and its acceleration system has a different design. Still, it has received complaints about sudden unintended acceleration, according to a review of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database.

Juror number six just hopes the case comes to a close with no lingering questions left unanswered. She lost her sister and niece to a car accident about 25 years ago and knows how tough it can be for everyone involved. "Ultimately, to be honest with you, I hope that people can find some kind-of peace after such a tragic accident," she said.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Claiming wrongful conviction, Oregon man sues state, county

A Salem man released after spending a decade in prison for the killings of three people has filed lawsuits seeking $21.5 million from Oregon and Polk County officials for wrongful conviction and imprisonment. The suits filed Friday by Philip Scott Cannon, 43, came almost 10 years after he was convicted of killing three people at a mobile home west of Salem. A lawsuit filed in federal court in Portland seeks $20 million from Polk County and several people. A state court suit seeks $1.5 million from the state of Oregon.

Cannon was convicted in February 2000 by a Polk County jury of the shooting deaths of Jason Kinser and his girlfriend, Suzan Osborne, both 26, and their friend, Celesta Graves, 24. All were found shot in the back of the head Nov. 23, 1998. No murder weapon was found.

Cannon has maintained that he is innocent. Ballistics tests used to convict him later were discredited, and prosecutors dropped plans for a new trial after finding that evidence had been destroyed.

Cannon was freed Dec. 18 after spending 10 years in prison.

Original report here

Background. Report from last year. A key "witness" looks like the actual guilty party

The Oregon attorney general's office said Friday the state has approved his release from prison pending a new trial after Cannon claimed that forensic evidence was flawed and witness testimony was questionable.

The technique used to analyze bullets at the murder scene has been discredited by the National Academy of Sciences and the FBI no longer uses it.

Cannon's attorney, Mark Geiger, also says the credibility of a key prosecution witness remains in doubt. The witness, Bimla Boyd, was convicted of manslaughter in 2003 after she pleaded no contest to killing a 54-year-old man she claimed was sexually abusing her 14-year-old daughter.

"But the turning point, I believe, was the forensic evidence," Geiger said Friday. In a report released in February, the National Academy of Sciences said many forensic science techniques used by police and federal investigators, with the exception of DNA analysis, are inconsistent and do not meet standards necessary for conviction - including the bullet analysis used in the Cannon case.

The murders of Jason Roger Kinser and his girlfriend Suzan Renee Osborne, both 26, and Celesta Joy Graves, 24, in November 1998 were among several death investigations during a four-year period at the rural property where Boyd lived, including the overdose death of her ex-husband. Each of the three victims had been shot once in the head with a .22-caliber handgun.

During his trial in 2000, Boyd testified that she saw Cannon on the property before the slayings to bid for a plumbing job. Geiger said the agreement limits what he can say about the case, but he said Boyd's testimony was a key element in creating the timeline of events the jury considered to convict Cannon. Cannon's ex-girlfriend and a neighbor who saw Boyd that day have disputed the timeline.

At her manslaughter trial in 2003, Boyd was accused of shooting Robert Daniel Spencer, 54, in the throat with a rifle after trying to persuade a man hunting on her rural property to shoot Spencer for her. Geiger said Boyd was released earlier this year after serving a six-year sentence.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE





8 March, 2010

Dialing “911″ — are you sure you want to take that risk?

Too many tragic events begin with a person in trouble, or someone acting on their behalf, picking up the phone and dialing "911". Then, into this already tense situation come armed agents of the state whose very job it is to find things to "arrest" people for. This is not a recipe for solving problems, but for manufacturing them. It complicates a situation. Too often the person in trouble, or a family member, ends up being attacked or killed by the responding cops

There is a huge difference between calling 911 when you are being held hostage by a crazed lunatic and calling 911 because of a medical emergency or a fire. In the first instance it is probably not always the optimum solution to have cops show up; in the last two it can be positively disastrous.

There needs to be an alternative to 911 where cops are not sent by default. Calling 911 has become too dangerous, since there is no situation so bad it can't be made worse by adding a cop, and since LEOs now have the "us vs. them" attitude drilled into them during their training.

Calling 911 could be made safe again, if cops were only sent if the person didn't request they not be sent. Of course, this entirely reasonable request would be seen as an admission of guilt rather than a recognition of the dangers inherent in mixing guns and badges. Obviously this means that what is needed is a free market solution, not administered by the government in any way.

In other news, just in case you think LEOs and their leash-holders are the "good guys"- Here is another location following the example of Albuquerque's scam to "legally" steal cars and extort money.

Original report here. See the original for links



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Dialing “911″ — are you sure you want to take that risk?

Too many tragic events begin with a person in trouble, or someone acting on their behalf, picking up the phone and dialing "911". Then, into this already tense situation come armed agents of the state whose very job it is to find things to "arrest" people for. This is not a recipe for solving problems, but for manufacturing them. It complicates a situation. Too often the person in trouble, or a family member, ends up being attacked or killed by the responding cops

There is a huge difference between calling 911 when you are being held hostage by a crazed lunatic and calling 911 because of a medical emergency or a fire. In the first instance it is probably not always the optimum solution to have cops show up; in the last two it can be positively disastrous.

There needs to be an alternative to 911 where cops are not sent by default. Calling 911 has become too dangerous, since there is no situation so bad it can't be made worse by adding a cop, and since LEOs now have the "us vs. them" attitude drilled into them during their training.

Calling 911 could be made safe again, if cops were only sent if the person didn't request they not be sent. Of course, this entirely reasonable request would be seen as an admission of guilt rather than a recognition of the dangers inherent in mixing guns and badges. Obviously this means that what is needed is a free market solution, not administered by the government in any way.

In other news, just in case you think LEOs and their leash-holders are the "good guys"- Here is another location following the example of Albuquerque's scam to "legally" steal cars and extort money.

Original report here. See the original for links



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Prosecutor reflects on wrongful conviction in D.C. killing

Good to see (rare) penitence from a prosecutor who got it wrong. But using a paid informant was asking for trouble

It is the type of news no prosecutor wants to hear: The defendant you worked for months to send to prison for 28 years is actually innocent. J. Brooks Harrington received such news in December when a DNA test proved that Donald E. Gates, the District man Harrington prosecuted and helped send to prison, was innocent of raping and murdering a Georgetown University student in 1981. "I can't express how sick this has made me feel," said Harrington, 61. "I was always trying to be about protecting people. To find out that I had the wrong guy is beyond description."

It was the first murder conviction overturned by DNA evidence in the history of the U.S. attorney's office in the District. Prosecutors there declined to talk about the Gates case publicly. Behind closed doors, many are checking and double-checking their caseloads to make sure they don't have another Gates.

"Not only can this happen again, but it will," said Harrington, now an ordained minister in Fort Worth. "Nobody has any interest in convicting somebody who didn't commit a crime. You do your best with the evidence you have. I was just flatly wrong about it. I did my best, and it wasn't good enough."

Emotion fractured Harrington's voice as he talked about the exonerated man. Harrington now keeps a photo of Gates that he downloaded from the Internet in a frame over his desk. Also on the desk is a letter he received from Gates after he was released. It reads: "Rev. Harrington, I forgive you. I forgave you a long time ago. Now I consider you my friend. Your brother in Christ, Donald."

Gates's absolution left Harrington in tears. "It's one thing to say I ought to forgive and not have bitterness, but he really seems not to have any," Harrington said. "He was more than kind to me. He's an amazing man."

Meanwhile, Gates, 58, remains in Tennessee, trying to adjust to freedom just months after his release. "I don't have any anger towards anyone," he said recently. "I can't focus on what has happened to me. I can only focus on the now."

For five years, Harrington was a star prosecutor U.S. Attorney's Office in the District. Between 1978 and 1983, he prosecuted about 70 of the District's most gripping rape and murder cases. During that time, he received a not guilty verdict in only five trials, he recalled. In 1982, he was promoted to deputy director of the D.C. Superior Court's felony trial division. "Institutionally, you don't rise in the office by being afraid to prosecute difficult cases," Harrington said. "There's a certain amount of institutional pressure. The more you win difficult cases, the more you move up the totem pole."

The most talented prosecutors, who exude strength and know how to wield power, tend to rise faster. "A person who is a prosecutor has a tremendous amount of power, and a lot of that power is exercised behind closed doors, interviewing and preparing witnesses," he said. "It takes a lot of moral integrity. But even then, it's not infallible."

Prosecutors also face additional pressure from community leaders and residents to ensure a criminal isn't set free to commit another crime. "If you have the right person and the jury acquits, that person goes out and does the crime some more," Harrington said. "You have to protect the community."

Harrington said he believed he was protecting the community when he convinced a jury that Gates was the man who raped and killed Catherine Schilling, 21, a college student whose naked body was found in Rock Creek Park in 1981 with five bullet wounds to her head. Gates, all the while, maintained his innocence.

As lead prosecutor, Harrington based his case on several pieces of evidence. A hair taken from Gates was found to have matched a hair found on Schilling's body, according to an FBI forensics analyst. The hair, Harrington later said in court, was the "key" and the "link and the corroboration to every other evidence."

Harrington also relied on the testimony of a paid informant, who told authorities that Gates admitted to killing Schilling during a botched robbery. Gates told lawyers that he never met the informant to whom he supposedly confessed. Harrington said later that it was the first time he had put a paid informant on the witness stand during a trial. And Harrington considered Gates's criminal history, which included assault charges and the assault of a woman in Rock Creek Park just days before Schilling's body was found.

The murder case against Gates began unraveling in 1997, when the Justice Department found that the FBI analyst who reviewed the hair sample, Michael P. Malone, made false reports on cases across the country, including Gates's. "None of us knew the hair examiner was dishonest," Harrington said.

In 2000, the Justice Department asked the U.S. attorney's office to review the Gates case. By then, Harrington had left the office and moved to Fort Worth. Other lawyers in the office reviewed the case but found that the informant's testimony and Gates's criminal history outweighed the false testimony from the FBI.

Harrington said he was not contacted about the new evidence in the Gates case until December, after officials in the U.S. attorney's office forwarded a copy of the DNA request from Gates's new attorney.

Harrington, a former Marine and graduate of George Washington University Law School, is co-pastor of the 7,000-member First United Methodist Church in Fort Worth. He uses his legal expertise to help abused women and children in the city and volunteers with the Innocence Project, a national group dedicated to exonerating wrongfully convicted people.

The Gates case wasn't the first time a defendant put in prison by Harrington was later found to be innocent. In 1980, Harrington convinced a D.C. Superior Court jury that Archie Alston, then 47, of Northeast Washington shot a man during a fight over money. Alston told attorneys and police that he never shot the man but instead hit him with a brick in self-defense. Alston was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon, a gun, and carrying a pistol without a license.

Alston spent five months in jail before he persuaded another defense attorney to take his appeal. The new attorney reviewed extensive medical examiner and hospital reports that said the victim's wounds were not consistent with bullets. A year later, a D.C. Superior Court judge granted Alston a new trial and criticized Alston's previous attorney for "gross incompetence." Before the second trial was to begin in 1982, Harrington dropped all charges against Alston.

A month later, Harrington announced that he was leaving the U.S. attorney's office and moving to Texas.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Former Inmate On Death Row Awarded $525,000 For Wrongful Conviction

Another Burge victim

A former inmate on death row who spent 19 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit has been awarded an additional $525,000 for his troubles.

Leroy Orange was behind bars for the murder of four people including his girlfriend and her son, a crime he says he falsely admitted to doing after being shocked, beaten and tortured by former Chicago Police Commander John Burge for a confession. He was released in 2003 after Governor George Ryan deemed the city's death penalty “broken”, setting the wrongfully convicted man free.

He will receive the additional $525,000 on top of the $5.5million that will be awarded to him in five installments until 2014. As previously reported, two other Chicago men were freed in July after being tortured into false confessions by John Burge. Ronald Kitchen and Marvin Reeves were set free after Kitchen was sentenced to death and Reeves, five life terms for the deaths of five people.

Burge is set to stand trial for torturing at least 200 suspects from 1972 to 1991.

$5.5 million? Wow, now that's what I call an apology…..

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Texas gov. clears man wrongfully convicted of rape

This is still a terrible disgrace. He died in prison at age 39 because he didn't get proper treatment for his medical condition. And the real villain confessed 15 years ago but was ignored and cannot now be prosecuted

Texas Gov. Rick Perry on Monday pardoned a man who died in prison after serving more than 13 years for a wrongful rape conviction. Perry granted the state's first posthumous pardon to Tim Cole in Austin after receiving a recommendation from the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Cole was convicted of a 1985 rape of a Texas Tech University student in Lubbock. The Army veteran was cleared by DNA evidence in 2008, nine years after he died in prison of complications from asthma at age 39.

"I am so happy," Ruby Session, Cole's mother, said from her Burleson home. "I just know that Tim is up there smiling."

Perry called Session personally Monday after signing her son's pardon. "We have a rainy, rainy day," Session said she told Perry. "And I said, 'Those are his tears of joy.'"

In a statement, Perry said he had been looking forward to the day he could call Session and tell her he'd pardoned her son. "The State of Texas cannot give back the time he spent in prison away from his loved ones, but today I was finally able to tell her we have cleared his name, and hope this brings a measure of peace to his family," Perry said.

The family had sought a pardon from Perry, who was sympathetic but maintained he could not legally grant a posthumous pardon. The state attorney general clarified the law in January, clearing the way for Monday's pardon.

While Cole's family was happy to receive the news from Perry, there also was sorrow. "We do feel very sad that he's not here," said Cory Session, Cole's youngest brother. "We knew somehow, some way it was going to happen that his name would be cleared. We just didn't know that it would come with the tragedy of his death. We didn't know it would take this long."

Cole is also the first Texas man to be posthumously cleared by DNA testing. The 2008 test cleared Cole and implicated convicted rapist Jerry Wayne Johnson, who confessed in several letters to court officials that date back to 1995. Johnson cannot be prosecuted for the rape that sent Cole to prison because the statute of limitations has expired.

Last year, state district Judge Charles Baird pronounced Cole innocent during an exoneration hearing. Baird said mistaken witness identification, questionable suspect lineups and a faulty police investigation led to Cole's wrongful conviction.

Original report here


(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

DEA Response to War on Pain Medicine

John Stossel gets an airy response to real complaints

In this week’s show “Hands Off My Meds” (re-airing tonight at 10pm ET, Saturday at 7pm ET, and Sunday at 11pm ET), I ask: Why does the DEA, in its zeal to prosecute the disastrous War on Drugs, frequently harass and prosecute doctors who prescribe pain medicine with opiates—legal medications like oxycontin, vicodin and percocet—to patients with chronic pain?

Ron Libby, a professor of political science at the University of North Florida and author of “The Criminalization of Medicine: America’s War on Doctors,” says this government crackdown leaves thousands of patients in pain. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons says this to its members: “If you’re thinking about getting into pain management using opioids as appropriate: DON’T. Forget what you learned in medical school – drug agents [from the DEA] now set medical standards.”

The DEA declined to be interviewed. They sent us this instead:

DEA’s mission is to protect the public health and safety. In the performance of this mission, DEA targets and investigates those individuals who violate the law, regardless of their profession. American jurisprudence is deeply rooted on the fundamental principle of equal justice under the law. Coinciding with this basic principle is another overarching principle – no one is above the law. When seeking medical care, the American public must be able to trust their doctor. They have a right to know that their doctor isn’t going to trade prescriptions for sex, file millions of dollars worth of fraudulent insurance or Medicare claims, or be impaired from self abuse of controlled substances while treating patients. Fortunately, the vast majority of doctors are outstanding professionals who truly desire to provide medical care and treatment to patients, to heal.

Doctors who issue controlled substance prescriptions for a legitimate medical purpose in the usual course of professional practice have nothing to fear from the DEA. But rather than extinguish this fear with facts, Mr. Libby stokes the ambers of fear with false or misleading information that only perpetuates misconceptions and fear. On average, DEA arrests only 85 doctors annually of the more than 750,000 medical doctors and doctors of osteopathic medicine. Most DEA investigations of physicians are initiated due to information provided by a medical or pharmacy board, an employee of the doctor, a patient or other law enforcement agency. More often than not DEA utilizes its regulatory authority rather than its criminal investigative authority to administratively sanction practitioners and other DEA registrants. If a criminal or civil case is warranted, the determination to prosecute rests with the State or Federal prosecutor. Mr. Libby, however, believes that is implausible for a doctor to commit a criminal offense or that they should somehow be immune from prosecution. He further believes that if law enforcement uncovers criminal activity involving a doctor, officials should simply advise the doctor to stop violating the law. Apparently, he believes that doctors should never be held accountable for their actions.

It is Mr. Libby’s belief that doctors are simply duped into committing criminal offenses. The facts, however, are quite different. The doctors investigated by the DEA have committed acts that are far from the mainstream of medical practice. For example, a doctor in Spring Hill, Florida anesthetized his patient and then attempted to have nonconsensual sex with the patient. Several physicians were associated with 34 rogue Internet pharmacies in 2006 who dispensed more than 98 million dosage units of controlled substances to patients they never met, examined, or performed diagnostic tests to make an appropriate diagnosis. . How about the pain clinic in Florida whose employees had to stage a burglary at the clinic to cover for the thousands of dosage units its doctor doled out as if every day were Halloween or the doctor in Taylor, MI who falsified and instructed others to falsify patient files; prescribed controlled substances in such combinations that they were likely to cause death; and provided prescriptions for controlled substances to individuals the doctor knew were addicted or who would sell the drugs illegally.

Mr. Libby has stated on several occasions that he is concerned about the under treatment of pain in the U.S. He apparently has not visited South Florida lately where there are more than 500 pain clinics in just a three-county area alone. These clinics advertise that walk-ins are welcome and that there is no waiting. However, of the top 100 practitioners that dispense oxycodone from their office, 96 of them are in Florida and 86 are in the same three-county area. The proliferation of pain clinics in one South Florida county has been so great that city and county officials are looking to enact ordinances to ban any new ones from opening. DEA is statutorily responsible for enforcing the Controlled Substances Act which is designed to prevent and detect the diversion of controlled substances. In executing its responsibilities, DEA does not enforce the law in a “cafeteria style” - picking and choosing which provisions of law it will enforce and which ones it won’t.

DEA does not target physicians based on their practice specialty or medical conditions that they diagnose and treat. DEA encourages doctors to treat pain, or any other medical condition, as medically warranted and under the regulations and standards established by the practitioner’s licensing/professional board. DEA does not want to interfere with the legitimate practice of medicine. DEA routinely meets with medical groups and medical associations to achieve an appropriate balance between the practice of medicine and law enforcement.

Mr. Libby claims that DEA is demonizing pain doctors for practicing medicine. Ironically, his accusations against DEA seem to demonize legitimate law enforcement.

I find Mr Libby much more convincing than the DEA.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

Lawyer Arrested in His Home Claims Civil Rights Breach

On a wintry evening two years ago, Petit-Clair was about to take a shower in his home in an over-55 community in Brick Township, N.J., when officers with drawn guns barged in. They had seen suspicious signs that suggested a burglar who had been plundering homes in the neighborhood was inside the house. Half-naked, but armed with a pistol, the 68-year-old Petit-Clair engaged in a tense standoff in the darkened house until he could see that one of the intruders was a K-9 officer. Later he was led away in handcuffs and charged with making a terroristic threat and possessing an illegal rifle accessory.

A judge dismissed the charges two months later. It was all a mistake.

Then it was the police officers' turn to squirm. Petit-Clair sued eight of them in federal court, alleging that his civil rights were violated, that police damaged parts of an expensive gun collection and that his thumb was injured by too-tight handcuffs. Now it's up to U.S. District Judge Joel Pisano in Trenton, N.J., to decide summary judgment motions by the defense that say the police acted reasonably in what turned out to be an action against an innocent man.

Petit-Clair was well-known in government circles in Essex County during his years in the Newark Corporation Counsel's Office, as an attorney for the Johnson-Nixon-era Model Cities Program and as counsel to the Essex County Educational Services Commission until the mid-1990s. He also is an avid gunsmith and collector of weaponry, and the client list of his solo practice in Brick includes the Shore Shot Pistol Range in Lakewood, N.J.

At the time of the incident at Petit-Claire's house, Brick was in the throes of a burglary scare that had residents on edge. Break-ins at a number of homes, particularly in adult communities, had prompted robo-calls from the police department warning people to lock their doors lest the thief, dubbed the "senior burglar," claim another victim.

Petit Claire's lawyer, Louis Barbone of Jacobs & Barbone in Atlantic City, N.J., did not return a call on Wednesday, but here's what happened according to the complaint he filed in November 2008 in Petit-Clair v. Brick Township, 08-5450.

Around 6 p.m. on Jan. 11, 2008, Petit-Clair was getting ready for sport shooting the next day by packing up some guns for transport, and he was about to take a shower when he heard a commotion. An intruder had entered through a rear door and was swinging a flashlight at Petit-Clair's snarling German shepherd. Could it be the burglar that homeowners were being warned about? "Get out," Petit-Clair shouted. The response was, "Call off your dog or I'll shoot." Petit-Clair ran into his bedroom, picked up a pistol and yelled, "I'm armed, get out or I'll shoot."

Finally, Petit-Clair peered around a corner into his living room and noticed another man and saw that he was a K-9 officer with a dog of his own. Petit-Clair put down his handgun and was arrested.

He spent two hours in his driveway, covered only by a t-shirt and bathrobe, while officers began a search of his house. He was taken to Kimball Hospital's psychiatric ward for evaluation. He was found to be mentally fit but was charged with the indictable offenses of possession of a large capacity magazine and making terroristic threats -- both of which were administratively dismissed two months later.

The federal-court suit says the officers violated his constitutional rights, falsely arrested him and caused him emotional distress, financial losses and violation of his privacy.

In motions for summary judgment on behalf of the town and the officers filed this year, the defense argues the events of that night gave the officers probable cause to enter the house and to arrest Petit-Clair. They also argue that the officers are protected by qualified immunity from suits arising from the acts of public officials.

According to a defense brief, Patrolman Ronald Braem was patrolling the wood line behind Petit-Clair's house in a community hit several times by the "senior burglar." Braem noticed suspicious tire tracks and observed the glass insert from a storm door on the rear porch of Petit-Claire's house was on the ground, there was broken glass nearby and the door was partially opened. Breaking in through rear glass doors was the senior burglar's modus operandi, and Braem concluded he might have caught the criminal in the act, the brief says.

Officer Jeffery Lempicki thought so, too. Peering in through the window, it looked to him like the house had been ransacked and a cache of weapons was visible. "As soon as Officer Lempicki entered the plaintiff's residence, he was approached by a subject screaming, 'get out, I have a gun.' The plaintiff was holding a silver handgun and officer Lempicki kept screaming at him to 'drop the gun. Brick Police, drop the gun.' However the plaintiff was yelling 'get out of my house, I don't care who you are, get out I am going to shoot you,'" the brief says.

After Petit-Clair came out with his hands up, the officers looked around the house. The brief says, "It appeared to have been ransacked -- guns, weapon parts, bullets, and gunpowder were strewn around the residence within plain view. Also in plain view were rifles and high capacity magazines."

The defense says the signs clearly pointed to a burglary in progress and gave the officers reason to enter the premises. And they acted reasonably in subduing a half-naked man with a handgun in a house in great disarray with guns strewn around, the briefs say. As it turned out, Petit-Clair had the correct papers that allowed him to possess the guns and the disputed magazine under New Jersey law.

While Petit-Clair has not filed replies to the summary judgment motions and is not commenting, pleadings suggest he is prepared to cite evidence that reasonable police professionals wouldn't have acted as the Brick police did.

A police expert for the plaintiff gave evidence that officers who believe a burglary is in progress don't barge into a house until making sure there are no potential hostages inside, particularly if there are two cars in the driveway, as there were at Petit-Claire's that night. And by Petit-Claire's reckoning, once the police officers realized he was the homeowner, they should have backed off, not arrested him.

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE

NY: Alleged Killer Wants a New Trial in Exotic Dancer Murder Case

Paul Cortez, who in 2007 was convicted of murdering dancer Catherine Woods in her upper East Side apartment, wants his conviction reversed and is requesting a new trial because of "inept" representation, according to an appeal which notes that his lawyers didn't show up until the fourth day of his trial. Cortez is currently serving a sentence of 25 years to life.

Cortez' new lawyer, Jeffrey Lichtman, a high-profile New York attorney who has represented John Gotti Jr. and has appeared with Curtis Sliwa on radio, filed the appeal in New York State Supreme Court.

The appeal is based on several points of law but saves his most scathing analysis for Cortez' former attorneys Laura Miranda and Dawn Florio. "Paul Cortez received an unfair trial by virtue of unprepared and inept defenders who mishandled critical evidence due to unwaived - and unwaivable - conflicts of interest," the brief states. "(Cortez') conviction should be reversed."

Miranda and Florio were handpicked by Cortez but did not appear for the first three days of his trial when the jury was to be chosen. After making the judge, her client, and everyone else wait for hours, Miranda faxed a letter to Judge Carol Berkman claiming that her mother had suffered an illness and that she - Miranda - had flown to Puerto Rico unexpectedly. Florio, meanwhile, claimed to be at a relative's funeral. The absence of both lawyers meant that Cortez was "literally unrepresented" as his trial began, the brief states.

The judge fined Miranda $1,000 and held her in contempt of court. As for Florio, she was already under indictment by the Manhattan District Attorney's office, charged with slipping contraband to an inmate, a fact that clearly gave her a conflict of interest, according to the appeal.

Cortez, who had been the lead singer in a band and a devotee of the Hindu religion at the time of the murder, was a talented singer and actor who had won scholarships to elite schools throughout his early life. Catherine Woods was a small-town girl from Columbus, Ohio, who moved to New York to pursue her dream of dancing on Broadway.

She eventually turned to exotic dancing to earn money. She and Cortez, who was also a personal trainer, met at a gym and he repeatedly tried to convince her to give up exotic dancing, a source of conflict between the two.

Woods was found stabbed to death on November 27, 2005 in her one-bedroom apartment on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Her male roommate and sometime boyfriend David Haughn had left the apartment for approximately 20 minutes so he could pick up his car and drive Woods to the club where she was dancing. When he returned, Haughn said he found Woods stabbed to death.

The case against Cortez largely was circumstantial except for a bloody fingerprint which police say was found on Woods' bedroom wall. Police said it matched Cortez and District Attorney Peter Casolaro told the jury that it could only have been made during the murder. Cortez, who took the stand in his own defense, maintained that he had been in Woods' apartment many times and had probably touched that wall.

One of the criticisms in the appeals brief is that Cortez' defense attorneys did not hire any independent experts to refute forensic testimony despite the fact that money had been allotted by the court. Lichtman called that "a lethal default" and went on to state: "There was no excuse for counsels'...failing to put on a forensic rebuttal case."

Original report here



(And don't forget your ration of Wicked Thoughts for today. Now hosted on Wordpress. If you cannot access it, go to the MIRROR SITE, where posts appear as well as on the primary site. I have reposted the archives (past posts) for Wicked Thoughts HERE or HERE