Forensic Evidence From Crime Labs Is Not Scientifically Sound: Will Texas Judges Take Note of Latest Warning From Experts?

Forensic evidence isn't scientifically sound and this is a truth that has been heralded for years by criminal defense attorneys - but maybe this cruel reality will get more attention in 2013 after a major editorial was published in the newspaper serving the state capitol this past weekend.  In the Sunday edition of the Austin American Statesman, a former forensic guru with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a professor at Texas A&M joined together in an editorial entitled, "Make forensic evidence meet standards of science."


What is forensic evidence? 

Forensic evidence is essentially the stuff that comes out of a crime lab and is used by prosecutors to put people behind bars as they argue that the forensics are reliable and sound evidence in their case.  It's what makes up television shows like the CSI series and it's what has convicted many men and women who were unwavering in their protests that they were innocent. 

Forensic evidence includes things like:

• fingerprint evidence
• glove print analysis
• ballistics
• bloodstain pattern analysis
• footprint evidence
• facial reconstruction
• video analysis 
• trace evidence
• profiling.

Forensic evidence is not trustworthy nor is it scientifically sound

Scientists have already warned that DNA evidence can be fabricated. Fingerprints are not reliable either as evidence in a criminal case seeking conviction with jail time or worse.

Crime labs across the country are notorious for being "seriously deficient," to quote a study performed by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in 2009.  The American Bar Association has joined in the concern that bad evidence is being used by prosecutors to convict people and that American crime labs are not to be trusted. 

The Innocence Project has delved into the failure of forensic science as it has exonerated innocent victims of bad evidence and finds that in:

"...90-95% of crimes, DNA testing is not an option - so the criminal justice system relies on other kinds of evidence, including forensic disciplines that may not be scientifically sound or properly conducted....[M]any forensic testing methods have been applied with little or not scientific validation and with inadequate assessments of their robustness or reliability.  Furthermore, they lacked scientifically acceptable standards for quality assurance and quality control before their implimentation in cases. ...." 

The 2013 Warning to Texas Judges and Texas Courts

This week's editorial comes from Professor Cliff Spiegelman and FBI veteran forensic scientist William A. Tobin. These two men are well known for their expertise in forensic circles and their joint effort is slowly spreading over the web (Grits for Breakfast picked it up  already, so has Charles Smith).

What are Professor Spiegelman and FBI scientist Tobin warning?  From their editorial:

For decades, largely unrealized by judges, many of the forensic practices admitted into judicial proceedings have been without scientific foundation or any other logically acceptable basis other than observational (inductive) study by experimenters untrained in experimental process.

Most troubling are the declarations of certainty associated with proffered expert opinions in those unfounded practices as expressed by examiners in criminal proceedings, such as in firearm/toolmark identification....

When examiners confidently declare individualizations (specific source attributions) between crime scene evidence and evidence seized from an eventual defendant without adequate foundational statistical studies, the testimony constitutes nothing more than intuited opinion or speculation, even if an educated guess, rather than evidence-based testimony.

Let's hope that some judges read the newspaper or surfed the web this week.  And perhaps the public at large will gain more insight into the dangers of forensic evidence that criminal defense attorneys know all too well:  those TV shows aren't reality, and stuff coming out of crime laboratories here in Texas isn't beyond suspicion.

Prosecutorial Misconduct in Michael Morton Case: Judge Ken Anderson Faces Court of Inquiry and Now State Bar of Texas Disciplinary Proceedings, Too

Among the instances of prosecutorial misconduct that we've monitored, the continuing saga of Williamson County Prosecutor Ken Anderson (later Judge Kenneth Anderson) is one of the most shocking.  So much so that an official Court of Inquiry has been ordered by the Texas Supreme Court upon recommendation of State District Judge Sid Harle.

For details on that recommendation, read our earlier post.  Suffice to say, Judge Harle found probable cause that District Attorney Ken Anderson illegally withheld evidence in the murder trial of Michael Morton.

For all the details, check out the Report to Court filed by Gerry Goldstein of San Antonio, John Wesley Raley of Houston and Barry Scheck of New York City on behalf of the Innocence Project.  It's around 150 pages and provides the details that went into the Texas Supreme Court's decision to move forward with a Court of Inquiry.

What Happened to Michael Morton - The Withheld Evidence

As you'll recall, Mr. Morton was unjustly convicted of killing his wife, Christine, and as an innocent man spent 25 years of his life in a Texas prison.  Most agree that Michael Morton is a free man today because of the continued efforts of the Innocence Project, and now Mr. Morton is dedicating his efforts to help others who have been victims of prosecutorial misconduct.

What happened to Mr. Morton?  You can read the full opinion of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals here, where they overturned his 1987 conviction.  DNA evidence convinced the CCA that another person, not Michael Morton, was responsible for the death of his young wife.

The key to the pending Ken Anderson proceeding is the allegation that Morton would not have been convicted in the first place if the evidence held by the District Attorney's Office had been revealed.  This included (1) the Mortons' young son eyewitness account that the man who killed his mother was not his dad; (2) the bandanna found at the scene with DNA evidence (this proved to be someone else's DNA, not Mr. Morton's DNA; (3) the victim's credit card found at a store in San Antonio; and (4) a forged endorsement on a check payable to the victim that was cashed almost two weeks after Mrs. Morton died.

State Bar of Texas Files Disciplinary Action Against Anderson - Fight For His Bar License

The State Bar of Texas investigated the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct against Ken Anderson and after 10 months, a formal grievance was filed against him.  This is another lawsuit.

You can read the Disciplinary Petition filed against Ken Anderson here.  This was filed in September 2012.  The Texas Supreme Court has appointed State District Judge Kelly G. Moore (of Yoakum and Terry Counties) to preside over the trial, which will be a public proceeding at the Williamson County Courthouse.  

On Monday, Judge Ken Anderson filed affirmative defenses in that case, arguing the statute of limitations has run in this case against him by the Bar.  That's right: he's arguing that the State Bar filed its case too late, under the State Bar of Texas' own Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. 

 Court of Inquiry Into Morton Prosecutor Ken Anderson Begins December 10, 2012 - Fight Over Evidence Tampering Charges / Contempt

Meanwhile, Tarrant County Judge Louis Sturns is presiding over the Court of Inquiry where the issues involve whether or not Ken Anderson should face evidence tampering charges and contempt of court charges for withhold evidence that led to the conviction of an innocent man and his incarceration for over two decades.

Discovery fights are ongoing in that matter, with the expected "shield and sword" arguments being used by Anderson's attorneys to try and get past Michael Morton's lawyers' claims of attorney-client priviledge, among other things.  Rusty Hardin is acting as Special Prosecutor in this case.

Dallas Police Officer Shoots Man 41 Times, Other Officers Investigated for Taking and Trying to Destroy Witness's Video and Photo Evidence

Last month here in the Dallas area -- actually, in the city of Mesquite, which sets smack dab inside Dallas' city limits -- a man named Michael Vincent Allen got into a high speed car chase with the police and it's reported that there were times that speeds exceeded 100 mph as police cars from various law enforcement jurisdictions joined in the chase.

Police Officer Crashes Patrol Car Into Suspect's Vehicle - And Shoots Him 41 Times

It lasted around 30 minutes, according to news reports - Mr. Allen behind the wheel of a pickup, speeding along - and it ended when Mr. Allen turned into a cul-de-sac and, according to the police officers that were there, then tried to exit the cul-de-sac by slamming his pick up through two police sedans that had slammed into position, blocking the cul-de-sac's exit.   Mr. Allen's truck didn't push aside the two patrol cars, and the chase was over.  However, other reports are that after Mr. Allen turned the truck around in the cul-de-sac, a Garland police officer named Patrick Tuter slammed into the pickup to prevent Allen from driving any further.

This second version of things has been verified by the police in an updated version of events issued several days later, with confirmation that Tuter's dashcam video confirmed the patrol car crashed into the pick up truck to stop it, and that Allen didn't try to slam his GMC pickup into the police car.


That was not the end of the story.  Because then Mr. Allen died - died after being shot there in the driver's seat of his pick-up truck, blocked by the patrol cars in a Mesquite cul-de-sac.  He was shot by Officer Tuter who fired over and over and over again: Mr. Allen was shot with police bullets FORTY-ONE TIMES.  (You can see video of the truck in the aftermath online here.)

41 times: it means that the police officer had to stop, think, reload his weapon, and keep shooting.  Some reports are that this took three clips from Officer Tuter's gun to achieve.  Which means he reloaded TWICE.   It's not disputed that Mr. Allen was not armed.  There was no gun in the pickup truck.  No one shot first at an officer. 

Officer Tuter defends his actions as not being excessive force but instead a reasonable response as he feared for his life.  (Read about Texas law and excessive force on our web site reference pages.)  Right now, he's on restricted duty.

However, as bad as this story is - and it's very bad - it gets worse.

Police Officers Take Mobile Phone From Witness -- and Destroy Video/Photos On It

Because other police officers on the scene are alleged to have tried to destroy evidence of what happened on that cul-de-sac.  Seems a man who lived in that cul-de-sac not only watched what was going on, but took video and photographed the event.  According to this man, Mitchell Wallace, he didn't see the shooting but he did see the female passenger (who was not hit by the bullets, wow) being pulled from the truck's cab by the cops and he did see the police send their dog into the cab, where the dog bit Mr. Allen on the neck and then drug him out of the truck to lay face down on the street.  Wallace documented all of this, plus the police turning the body over to check for a pulse.

Here's the thing:  Wallace's mobile phone video and photos were taken by law enforcement at the scene, and when the phone was returned to him, this stuff was missing from it.  Gone.  Erased. 

So now there are other law enforcement officers being investigated for messing with evidence.  As well as destroying property that didn't belong to them.  (There's some stories that the evidence may still be available and some investigator just took the SIM card out of Mr. Wallace's phone.)

Under Texas law, the police do not have the right to take personal property like Mr. Wallace's phone or anything inside it unless there is probable cause to believe it's been part of a crime that has been committed.  No one is arguing that Mitchell Wallace, using his phone from his own home to document what was happening on the street outside, was committing any crime.

It's being called not only a case of Excessive Force against a Texas citizen on a summer night here in Dallas that ended in a man dead on the street, but a cover up by his colleagues who didn't want to have filmed evidence of what happened that night. 

For more information, read our posts:

• Dallas Has Record Number of Police Shootings in 2012
• Dallas County Sheriff Arrests Motorcyclist For Refusing to Turn Over His Helmet Cam Video of Police

Do not let these stories stop you from using your phone to document things that you believe are important to record.  

Dallas 911: How Reliable Is It and What's Dallas Police Department Doing About Making 911 More Reliable

911.  We depend upon those numbers, and we teach our kids to call 911 in case of emergency almost as soon as they learn to tie their shoes.  However, the reality is that calling 911 may not bring much, if any help, in today's real world.  Particularly here in Dallas, as the tragedy of Deanna Cook's death is still being grieved here in our community.

A few weeks ago, a young and pretty woman named Deanna Cook called "911" from her apartment here in Dallas.  It wasn't a short call:  Deanna was on her cell phone with 911 Dispatch for 11 minutes.

Eleven minutes.  That's a long time.

The 911 recording has been played over and over again now: even Cook's family has had the opportunity to hear it.  Had to have been very difficult for them: Deanna Cook can be heard to be screaming, terrified, as her ex-husband, a man named Delvecchio Patrick, is heard telling Deanna that he is going to kill her.  Cook tells the 911 operator the name of her attacker.  Cook is obviously in fear of her life and her attacker can be heard on the call as well.  

Sadly, no one came to rescue Deanna Cook from her attacker and she died that day.  Dallas Police did show up at her door, though.  They knocked.  They left. 

Dallas Police Department: Acknowledges Mistakes Were Made 

According to Dallas PD, there were problems. (Obviously.)  First, since Cook called from a cell phone there was no automatic identification of Cook's location and it took nine minutes for her location to be pinpointed by the police officers en route.  

Question: why didn't the 911 operator get the address of Cook's apartment during those 11 minutes she was on the phone with the murder victim?

Another problem according to Dallas police: no one answered the door.  That's right: when they arrived and they knocked and Deanna didn't welcome them into her home, they left.  (They did peek in the windows.)  According to the officers, this was because they understood this to be a domestic disturbance call - a spat - and the silence meant to them that the disturbance had been resolved.  (Yes.  It had been resolved in bloodshed.)  Dallas PD explains that the 911 Operator never explained that Deanna Cook was being attacked to the officers who were responding.  

Victim's Family Came to Her Rescue, Not Police: They Were Too Late

When did Deanna Cook's murder get discovered?  Two days later - when water was gushing out of her apartment and her family couldn't get inside because the doors were locked.  The police were called a second time to Cook's home: the family was told that the police couldn't help them - that they needed to call the hospitals and the jails to find Deanna. So, Deanna's family broke down her door and found her body laying in the bathtub.  Cook had been dead for two days.

Understandably upset, Deanna Cook's family is asking a lot of questions about the Dallas 911 service -- as are a lot of other people.  Dallas Police Chief David Brown told the public that the event would be investigated.

Dallas Police Chief Responds to Public Concern: Hire More 911 Operators

At an August community meeting held to address a number of community concerns about the Dallas Police Department, Chief Brown said that the 911 Call Operator's actions did fail to prevent this crime - if the 911 operator had told the police that the caller was being attacked, things would have been different.  

So, what's being done?  Yesterday, Dallas PD posted job wanted ads on Facebook for more 911 Call Operators.  That's right: they are going to hire more people to handle 911 calls here in Dallas.  No details on how these new hires will be trained.  Or how those 911 Operators already on the job, like the one who answered Deanna Cook's distress call, will be trained in the future.  

Feel safer?  

Texas Crime Labs Are Not Trustworthy And Texas Crime Lab Evidence Still Needs To Be Questioned

Back in January 2010, we published a post that still ranks very high in Google results which discussed some of the reasons why Texas criminal defense attorneys cannot trust the test results that come out of Texas crime labs to be presented as forensic evidence against defendants in Texas criminal cases.  You can read that post here.

Here it is, 18 months later, and Texas crime labs are still a hot spot of controversy and national news media are still finding news stories in the testing being done in crime labs across our state.  It's only those who aren't following these stories and those who aren't involved in criminal justice or criminal defense across the state of Texas that assume laboratory work in Texas crime labs are scientifically accurate and as trustworthy as the work being done in TV labs like those on CSI, Rizzoli & Isles, or Law & Order (pick a version).

Massive 2012 Federal Investigation Into Crime Lab Errors in Hair Samples

This month, the Department of Justice and the FBI issued a joint statement that their offices will be reviewing "thousands" of cases where people have already been convicted of crimes based upon forensic evidence because the federal government now has reason to believe that the crime lab testing of hair samples was flawed.   The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Innocence Project are working with the feds here, with the Innocence Project double-checking the FBI's findings when they arrive.

 Tarrant County Crime Lab Turns Itself Into Authorities

Yesterday, it was reported that the Tarrant County Crime Lab got a pat on the back from the Texas Forensic Science Commission because the Tarrant County Crime Lab turned itself into the oversight commission (filed a "self-complaint") after one of the lab supervisors found that two rape kit tests that had been tagged as tested ("screened") never, ever had their seals broken.  No one had opened up the packaging in order to test a darn thing.

You would think that a lab would rarely have something fall through the cracks as being tested while it hadn't been opened, right?  You'd be wrong. It is such a commonplace occurrence that it has a nickname: they call it "dry labbing."

Fort Worth Crime Lab Back at Work After Doors Shut for 10 Years 

Meanwhile, the Fort Worth Police Department Crime Lab just got the okay to start up its DNA testing once again, after the police crime lab had been sending out its DNA testing since October 2002 (that's right, almost 10 years ago) because there were concerns that the Fort Worth Crime Lab wasn't releasing accurate and valid DNA test results.  

Austin Crime Lab Okayed After Complaints From Lab Employee and Dallas-area Lab

And, down in Austin, the Austin Police Department Crime Lab just got the go-ahead from the Texas Forensic Science Commission to ramp up its testing again, after the commission cleared the lab of any errors after two separate complaints were filed against it: one, by a Dallas-area lab that tested the same stuff and found different results and two, by a former employee at the Austin Crime Lab who reported that the Austin lab was cutting corners in its testing.

Bottom line:  criminal defense attorneys still have to be skeptical of any evidence that is coming out of a government crime lab these days because this stuff just isn't trustworthy and reliable simply because a "lab" has reported they've tested the stuff.  Crime lab results in Texas criminal defense cases still have to be questioned. 

No Refusal on Fourth of July 2012: Pulled Over in Dallas or Fort Worth for DWI Does Not Mean You Have No Defense: You May Have to Fight for Your Rights

It's the Fourth of July and that means law enforcement is working today, working hard to pull over and arrest people for suspicion of driving while intoxicated or distracted driving.  So be careful today, if you're out on the roads. 

In fact, in the Dallas - Fort Worth area, the "No Refusal" campaigns are in place at the Dallas Police Department along with Arlington Police Department, Irving Police Department, and other municipalities as well as the State of Texas Department of Transportation and the counties themselves (Dallas, Tarrant). 

What is a "No Refusal" Campaign?

The No Refusal Campaign is the brainchild of the federal government via its National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.  It's when the Powers that Be have a judge setting at a desk, on stand-by, to immediately sign a warrant that will approve the taking of your breath in a breathalyzer test or your blood with a needle even if you have exercised your constitutional rights and initially declined testing of blood, breath, or any other human body part.  

If the Breathalyzer reports a blood alcohol level of .08 or more, then it's most likely that you will arrested on the spot.

Tarrant County Goes One More With Its New Website Campaign

Over in Fort Worth, citizens face even more challenges to their rights.  It seems that the Tarrant County District Attorney, Joe Shannon, has announced that his office will publish online the full names and the ages of everyone arrested and charged with DWI on its website,  www.tarrantda.com. 

Things To Know About No Refusal DWI Campaigns: Fight for Your Individual Rights

Many challenge these No Refusal campaigns as well as the publication of names of citizens who have been arrested as being in violation of their legal rights under the constitution and both state and federal law.  The Tarrant County publication list is another, separate constitutional argument involving civil rights. 

Additionally, there are several things to remember about these law enforcment sweeps over holidays, including:

• searches and seizures of the vehicles must follow state law as always, this doesn't change the protections given to people from police searching their cars (read our article on searches and seizures here for details); 
• it's not illegal to drive below the speed limit, just not over it (read our 10 Things To Know When the Police Pull You Over for more details); 
• it's important to act fast if you are arrested for DWI, because not only will the police take your driver's license but you have only 15 days before the ALR Hearing (read here on details about the ALR Hearing and how important it is).  

Finally, you can call your lawyer when you are arrested in a No Refusal campaign, and it's a good idea to have legal representation on board as soon as possible in these kinds of Drunk Driving cases. You will have legal defenses to assert, and you will have big risks in front of you: loss of license, fines, jail time, impact on your public record, and more.  

It's not over till it's over and a No Refusal DWI arrest in Texas does not mean that you have no criminal defense.  Lawyers experienced in drunk driving defense cases in Dallas, Fort Worth, and other parts of Texas are ready to help you protect your future.

Dallas Police Department : 6th Officer - Involved Shooting in the Past 5 Months as Oak Cliff Traffic Stop Ends With Driver Shot in the Back

Today, the Dallas Morning News is wondering about what is going on with the Dallas Police Department -- as a lot of people are these days -- but according to reporter Tanya Eiserer, Dallas Police Chief David Brown isn't talking to the press right now. 

Maybe Chief Brown needs time to get his ducks in a row, since Dallas seems to be having more and more shootings involving the police shooting citizens.  Like the officer-involved shooting this past Saturday in Oak Cliff, where the Dallas Medical Examiner has confirmed that the man was shot in the back by the Dallas police officer.

That's right.  Shot in the back.  

Dallas Police Traffic Stop for Failure to Use Turn Signal Ends Up With Driver Dead

John Robert Husband died on Saturday from a Dallas police officer's bullet after the police pulled his car over because Husband reportedly didn't use his turn signal.  He was 21 years old. 

So, in a routine traffic stop someone died.  [Read more about traffic stops on our web site resources page.]

The reports thus far are that Dallas police officer Leland Limbaugh smelled marijuana as he approached the vehicle and accordingly ordered Husband to get out of the car.  The passengers, Xavier Bryant and Derrick Epps, remained inside.  

Conflicting Stories on What Happened in Saturday Night's Officer Involved Shooting

As Dallas officer Limbaugh patted down Husband, the officer's story goes, Husband started to resist when Limbaugh tried to cuff him and tried to pull a pistol from his belt.  Limbaugh feared for his life, and accordingly drew his weapon and shot Husband in the back, the bullet entering his body via his left shoulder blade.

The two passengers don't agree with this version of events. Their story is that Husband got scared and started to run from the car, and the Dallas police officer pulled his gun and shot the young man in the back as he ran away.  No struggle.  No reason for the police officer to "fear for his life."

What about the electric eye, the dashcam video?  Wouldn't it solve the conflict between the officer's version of events and the witnesses' accounts?  Sure it would: but this police car didn't have a dash cam installed.  

On Monday, the Dallas Police Department published its official statement of these events on the DPD Facebook page.  The Dallas Observer provides that statement online in its coverage here, for those who don't access Facebook. 

Husband's Death is Sixth Fatal Officer-Involved Shooting in Dallas in 2012: What's Going On?

Saturday's shooting brings the tally of Dallas Police Department officer-involved shootings of citizens to six (6) since this year began -- a ratio of someone dying from a Dallas law enforcement bullet approximately every 2.5 weeks in 2012. 

That's unacceptable.  That's scary.   

When is Dallas Police Chief Brown going to talk to us about this?  

Hank Skinner Goes Before Texas High Court for DNA Testing Request the Same Week that Two More Men Exonerated in Dallas Based on DNA Testing of Trial Evidence After Serving 30 Years on Wrongful Conviction

Innocent men and women set convicted in Texas jails and prisons: it's a harsh reality that serves to fuel the passions of criminal defense attorneys everywhere, since defense lawyers know better than most how unfair and frustrating the criminal justice system can be.

Today, for example, Hank Skinner will be arguing his case before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.  Oral arguments, in fact, may be happening as this post is being typed but it will be months from now before the High Court issues its opinion.  (You can follow Hank Skinner's case via its online docket here, as Cause No. AP-76,675 styled Henry W. Skinner v. State of Texas.)

Will a Hank Skinner DNA Test Prove His Innocence?

Hank Skinner sets on Texas Death Row, a man who has consistently claimed his innocence.  During his criminal trial, it is admitted that his criminal defense lawyers made the strategy decision to NOT ask for Mr. Skinner's DNA to be compared to all the evidence.  Why the prosecutors didn't bother to check this out long ago, well that's a different story. 

Since then, it's been found that there were several pieces of evidence that did indeed have DNA from an unknown source -- NOT Mr. Skinner (for details, read here.).  Who was this unknown person at the crime scene?  Good question. 

Understandably, Hank Skinner has been fighting hard for that DNA testing and we've been monitoring his fight.  For details, check out our earlier posts including:

• Hank Skinner Execution Still Set 4 Today – France Is Asking for Delay. That’s Right. France.
• Hank Skinner Wins Again: US Supreme Court Grants Cert in His Quest for Post-Conviction DNA Testing
• Texas Prosecutors Come Under Increased Scrutiny in Texas: Hank Skinner Stay Within Weeks of Michael Morton Release 

Exonerations of James Williams and Raymond Jackson: This Week's Examples of Innocent Inmates and Justice Denied

Within days of the Hank Skinner oral argument before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, here in Dallas there was a victory for which Mr. Skinner and his supporters can perhaps take some comfort and hope:  Judge Susan Hawk found both Raymond Jackson and James Williams innocent of crimes for which they had been wrongfully convicted almost 30 years ago, having been found guilty and imprisoned for rape and kidnapping back in 1983.

On April 30, 2012, Raymond Jackson and James Williams appeared before Judge Hawk at their exoneration hearing and were officially declared innocent on the public record. 

What happened here?  DNA testing revealed not only that Mr. Jackson and Mr. Williams were innocent of this crime, but that two other men were involved - and these two men have now been arrested and all these years later, are facing charges of attempted murder.  

Former Texas Death Row Inmate Kerry Max Cook's Case Continues to Expose Texas Prosecutors Gone Wild (In a Bad, Bad Way)

The story of an innocent man who spent over 20 years on Texas Death Row is far from over, even though Kerry Max Cook has not only been released, he has become a well-respected author and activist for ending capital punishment worldwide.

Back in 2008, Kerry Max Cook wrote a book, Chasing Justice: My Story of Freeing Myself After Two Decades on Death Row for a Crime I Didn't Commit, that detailed what happened to him in the criminal justice system and how he was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and killing of Linda Jo Edwards back in 1977.

A big part of that book: all the misconduct by the prosecution in his case. Surprise, surprise.

The book, published by HarperCollins, got excellent reviews and got some very big names giving it praise, including Sister Helen Prejean, former FBI director William Sessions, and actor Richard Dreyfuss. This seems like a lot of exposure on how prosecutorial misconduct works in Texas.

But the Kerry Max Cook story isn't over yet.

Now, one of the journalists that covered his story long ago - former Dallas Morning News reporter David Hanners - is stirring things up. And Hanners may know a lot more about the extent of the evildoing that took place during the Smith County criminal trial and subsequent appellate process of Kerry Max Cook's case than Mr. Cook ever did.

Here's what is happening: Kerry Max Cook is in the process of seeking a full legal exoneration via DNA testing. This isn't being done without static from the prosecution, and the conflict is hitting the media. In particular, Cook's story made it to Texas Monthly and in response to that coverage (in a blog post, notice blogs at work for justice again) the old Dallas reporter David Hanners wrote a long comment that gave some very, very interesting tidbits.

You can read the full text of what Mr. Hanners wrote online here, and here are some of the shockers that you'll find there:

• It took the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals nearly eight years to rule in his case because his file was "basically lost."
• After reading the entire trial documentation (transcripts and exhibits), and without going into the story with any clue or care whether or not the man was guilty or not, the reporter determined that not only had there not been a fair trial - he determined that this man had not killed the victim. In fact, he believes it reveals who the real killers are and it's not Mr. Cook.
  
• There was no basic - much less competent - police investigation, and he gives examples. With details.
• In charging Mr. Cook and get this homicide to a capital murder charge, the police department created "theft" from a fantasy sock (yes, sock) and then alleged that body parts had been removed from the crime scene by Cook in this sock. Nevermind that the body wasn't disturbed: there were no body parts removed here. The body had not been cut up. How was this ignored? But it was ....
  
• The prosecution planned on doing DNA testing; semen was found at the scene. It was tested, and lo and behold: it was not that of Mr. Cook. So instead of investigating further, the prosecution changed their case to keep Cook in their crosshairs. This, even though they knew the identity of the semen source. Amazingly blind, isn't it?

This case may end up being the example used in future classrooms of how ruthless and evil it can be when prosecutorial misconduct exists in our criminal justice system. Expect to hear more about this travesty of justice: not only from David Hanners (by the way, a Pulitzer Prize winner) but from Mr. Cook.

If Mr. Cook can win his latest efforts to obtain full exoneration through DNA testing, then he will be eligible to receive $80,000 from the State of Texas for each year he sat behind bars as an innocent man.

Here's the bigger question: what happens to the prosecutors and the police officers who were committing those injustices back in the mid-1970s? Where's the justice there?

Is the lesson for bad apple prosecutors that if they do bad things, by the time the system gets around to pointing the finger at them, decades and decades of time will have passed?

Texas Rangers Investigating Another Case of Police Brutality and Excessive Force

The news started trickling out over the Labor Day Weekend that the Texas Rangers had been contacted by the family of a South Texas man who was comatose in a Corpus Christi hospital, another victim of excessive force by law enforcement.  Sure enough, the Rangers are on the job, investigating the family's belief that their loved one, Martin Garcia Ortiz, had sustained his injuries in a vicious beating by a Texas law enforcement officer.

That's right:  another case of police brutality in Texas.  And another instance where either the FBI or the Texas Rangers has had to come into the area to find out the truth of things.  It's something that happens far too often here in Texas: law enforcement using excessive force against people - something that we report about regularly. 

What happened in this case of alleged police brutality?  

According to news reports, 48 year old Martin Ortiz had been at a local bar in Aransas Pass.  No worries about a DWI arrest here:  Mr. Ortiz left the bar on his bicycle, to ride his way home.  It wasn't far.  He had no weapon, unless you are afraid of bicycles. 

Things took a bad turn around midnight on August 10th.  Seems Mr. Ortiz, there on the roadside on his bicycle, was stopped by an Aransas Pass police officer  -- and according to family members, the cop pushed Ortiz off the bike only to then beat Ortiz after the man was laying on the ground beside (some reports say underneath) the bicycle.

The Texas Rangers have reported that their investigation reveals three police cars zipped to the scene (that must have been a very scary bicycle) and that some of these officers are now witnesses to the incident.  They also report that Ortiz was purportedly stopped because he was weaving as he rode the bike, and his bike didn't have a headlight. 

Guess what?  All this may be on video.  Seems that Aransas Pass police cars are equipped with dash cams, so sooner or later, some member of the press is going to get ahold of those videos and we'll all see what happened.

Right now, we know that Martin Ortiz lies, seriously injured, in Corpus Christi's Christus Spohn Hospital where he spent ten days on life support in a coma before starting to come out of it.  It's not known at this time whether or not he will suffer permanent harm from this attack -- like traumatic brain injuries or spinal injuries.

The Texas Rangers are asking anyone who may have information about what happened to Martin Ortiz to come forward, and if you have any information about the Martin Ortiz case, you can call the Texas Rangers directly at 361-364-6239 or 512- 424-2160. 

Get Ready for Statewide Click It or Ticket Campaign: May 23 - June 5, 2011

The State of Texas versus your individual right to choose how you live.  It's an ongoing fight.  There's the No Refusal Campaign, where you're forced to give your blood in a blood test or your breath at the scene anytime a cop pulls you over for suspicion of drunk driving.  

There's also the Click It or Ticket campaign, where your choice on whether or not to wear that seat belt is taken away.  Well, not taken: you're just gonna get a ticket whenever you get caught.

Civil Liberties Versus Police Power

Lots of folk believe that it is unduly intrusive for the state government to force individuals to wear seat belts. And these aren't just zanies -- they include respected safety professionals like Peter Thompson, who served as the State of New Hampshire Safety Chief, and in that official capacity was against New Hampshire's implementing forced seat belt laws back in 2005.   

The argument against these types of law is simple:  seat belt laws invade your freedom unnecessarily.  These laws are not protecting the public at large - if you fail to wear one, the risk of harm is borne by you.  Therefore, forcing citizens under the police power to wear their seat belt crosses over the line of legitimate police power.   Not that this argument has stopped these laws from being passed in Texas and other states. 

May 23 - June 5, 2011: Texas Click It or Ticket Campaign Covers the Memorial Day Holiday

Here in Texas, it has been announced that Texas law enforcement are going to be on the lookout for drivers that are operating a motor vehicle without a seat belt over the Memorial Day Weekend in the latest Click It or Ticket Campaign. 

But be careful out there -- because Click It or Ticket goes to more than just a driver not wearing a safety belt: even those folk setting in the BACK SEAT can be ticketed because they aren't buckled up.

Other ways to get a ticket during the Click It or Ticket campaign?  

Not having kids younger than 8 years old buckled into either a child safety seat or booster seat unless they've grown past the legal limit of 4 feet 9 inches in height. 

What's the cost of not obeying the law?  A ticket totaling $250 plus court costs. 

Cornelius Dupree Freed as Innocent Man after 30 Years in Texas Jail: The Unreliability of Eyewitness Testimony

This week, a fifty-one (51) year old man walked out of a Texas courtroom a free man, after serving over 30 years behind bars for a crime he did not commit. Cornelius Dupree was officially exonerated on Tuesday by Dallas County Judge Don Adams with the simple sentence from the bench, "you're free to go."

What Got Dupree Behind Bars

Mr. Dupree was arrested in 1979 on rape and abduction charges for a sexual assault involving two men that happened on IH30 near Dolphin Road, where a man and woman were forcibly taken from a liquor store and the woman later raped. Dupree and his pal, Anthony Massingill, 49, were going to a party when the cops stopped them because the police thought these two guys matched the description given in another rape case.

Both victims would later give eyewitness testimony that Dupree and his friend were the perpetrators of the crime. And yes, Mr. Dupree is African American.

What Got Dupree Released

DNA cleared Mr. Dupree. Through the efforts of the Innocence Project and with the support of local D.A. Craig Watkins, DNA testing was done on old evidence in the case, which resulted in scientific proof that Dupree was not guilty.

According to the Innocence Project, Mr. Dupree is third in line for the dubious record of having spent time behind bars before being exonerated: only 2 men in the United States spent more time in jail than he did before being proven innocent via DNA testing. In Texas, Dupree is the 41st individual to be freed based on DNA evidence since 2001.

Lesson Learned, Again: Eyewitness Testimony Isn't Reliable

Once again, we have another example of how eyewitness testimony should not be considered as quality evidence in any case -- but particular the key evidence used to put an individual behind bars.

Photo lineups and the like are not good tools toward finding the truth, regardless of how they appear on Law And Order (pick your version). People just don't remember things accurately. Emotions get in the way. Victims want to catch the perpetrator and are understandably influenced to a rush to judgment. Police officers, however innocently, can suggest who to pick in a lineup and many victims are scewed to pleasing the police, however unconcious that predisposition may be.

When are we going to learn in this country that eyewitness testimony isn't trustworthy?

One last thing: As for Mr. Dupree's friend that day back in 1979, Mr. Massingill has already been cleared in the present case via DNA testing; however, he is not free today. Massingill is still incarcerated, and serving a life sentence, based on another crime.  Let's hope that this conviction was based on more than finger-pointing.

Did Texas Execute an Innocent Man? Court of Inquiry Into Execution of Cameron Todd Willingham Starts Today - Maybe

A two-day hearing is scheduled to start this afternoon in our state capital - actually in the 299th District Court in Travis County Courthouse down in Austin - and it's not your usual weekday hearing.  Today, an official Court of Inquiry is set to begin, brought pursuant to  Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 52.01(b)(2) and the motion filed by District Attorney R. Lowell Thompson of Corsicana. 

The purpose of the action?  To review the case of convicted arsonist/murderer Cameron Todd Williams in order to determine whether or not an innocent man was killed by lethal injection by the State of Texas back in 2004.

This is a big deal.  Of course, it's a big deal if an innocent man was executed -- but it's also a big deal that the Texas criminal justice system appears to be grading its own papers, instituting its own investigation into the matter.  Wow. 

Motion to Recuse the Presiding Judge Also Set to be Heard Today

Before you get ready to drive to Austin, wait a minute.  A challenge to the presiding judge has been filed, too.  Sometime this morning, it's expected that State District Judge Charlie Baird will rule on whether or not he'll preside over the Inquiry.  There are those that argue he shouldn't be involved - including the Navarro County District Attorney, who is seeking the recusal of Judge Baird. (Willingham was convicted in Navarro County - the prosecutor responsible for the conviction is seeking the recusal.)

However, it's curious because Judge Baird's role is not fact-finder: under Article 52.01(b), he must request that the district's presiding judge appoint another judge to review the evidence.  Baird doesn't have that job.

The recusal motion is set for 10:30; the inquiry, at 1:30 this afternoon.  Many are expecting a delay due to the recusal request. 

Of particular note:  Judge Baird has experience in handling a court of inquiry.  He oversaw the court of inquiry into the conviction of Tim Cole (of Fort Worth). 

Result:  Tim Cole was exonerated, posthumously.  (For details on Tim Cole's case, check out our earlier post.)

Was Cameron Todd Willingham Innocent?

Mr. Willingham went to his death never veering from his claim of being innocent of the murders of his three children, Amber (2 years old) along with 1 year old twins Karmon and Kameron, by arson in a fire that killed all three of them as they slept in their Corsicana home back in 1991.  Willingham was tried, convicted, and executed in 2004. 

Numerous respected experts have reviewed the arson investigation and determined that the case against Willingham was filled with errors and based upon outdated methodology. 

What Does This Mean for Us? 

This level of public scrunity into the justice system doesn't happen everyday - grading the papers long after the case is over, and in this instance, the man is dead.   If the State of Texas executed an innocent man, it's a travesty.  However, the fact that it isn't been swept under a rug -- that the system is checking itself -- this is a good thing for Texas. 

Cop Watch: Dallas County Constable's Computers Taken Over, What About Our Privacy Rights?

First, there were rumors that employees of a Dallas County Constable were forced to work for free on the job as well as on the constable's re-election campaigns. Then, some of these employees told their stories to FBI agent Danny Defenbaugh and that's when You-Know-What hit the fan.

Right now, Dallas County Constable Jaime Cortes has his lawyers filing arguments with the court that the Dallas County Commissioners don't have the legal right to investigate Cortes or his fellow law enforcer, Constable Derick Evans. (There are rumors that Craig Watkins is behind the scenes with his own investigation, but the District Attorney's Office isn't confirming that they're doing anything here.)

Right before Thanksgiving, a retired district judge is going to have a hearing and sort out this mess -- but there's already a lot of mud that's been slung and probably lots more will get thrown before that November 23rd court date.

Why should we care?

Well, regardless of all this employment hooplah, the bottom line is that the computers used by the constables were taken by the investigators, and presumably they've been through all those stored files. In fact, we've got no idea who all has been combing through those computer files.

Plus, we don't know what all those law enforcement files contained on the Constable's databases, but any Average Joe citizen out there probably had a right to privacy expectation that their personal information wouldn't be tossed around like this.

Today, the Dallas County Constables do lots of police-type work -- long gone are the olden days, where their primary job was serving subpoenas and the like. Now, Cortes and his brethren are involved in things like (1) finding dads who aren't paying their child support and forcing the deadbeat dads to pay up; (2) searching out and closing down crack houses and other drug sales shops in their area; (3) watching schools for dealers trying to sell drugs like heroin to the kids there; (4) impounding cars and other vehicles for various law violations, etc.

There's nothing to shield totally innocent folk from the stigma of being revealed as someone once considered as a druggie, etc. by the free for all use of the Constable's computer files here.

Let's hope the Judge on the November 23rd hearing puts a stop to this -- although, it's probably like shutting the barn door after the horse is gone by now ... right? How many copies of those hard drives have been made? Who got sent what as email attachments?

Cop Watch: Dallas Cop Tasers Himself, Goes to Hospital, Becomes Hit on Digg.Com

Last week, the video of a Dallas cop tasering himself was one of the Top Videos at Digg.com with over 1100 hits. The video itself (you can watch it below) is from a local TV newscast that starts out giving a map of the Dallas metroplex, just in case folk around here needed a visual to understand one of local law enforcement officers was the one involved.

Now, this isn't the first time we've blogged on Texas cops misusing tasers. Just check out this list of prior posts:

August 2009: Taser Death of Michael Jacobs

July 2009: Two Taser Stories ("Take it!!! Take it!!!" the cop cried while repeatedly using the Taser)

July 2009: Cops Taser the Pastor -- in the Church Parking Lot

June 2009: Cops Taser a 72 Year Old Grandma -- twice.

May 2009: Cops Taser the Town Drunk and Kill Him

April 2009: Cop Tasers His Own Wife

March 2009: Cops Taser the Father of the Bride at the Wedding Reception

Texas Cops Use of Tasers is a Serious Situation becoming a National Joke

It's becoming more and more serious when cops are actually hurting themselves (note from the video, the cop was taken to the hospital to get treatment for his injuries), websites like Digg.com are gathering an audience based upon the humor in the situation, and still -- nothing is being done to deal with TEXAS LAW ENFORCEMENT MISUSING STUN GUNS AND HURTING -- SOMETIMES KILLING -- PEOPLE.

When is the Texas Legislature going to take notice?????

Cop Watch: Beaumont Cops Dash Cam Video Released of 2007 Arrest

Listen.

Listen carefully, as well as watch this video captured by the dashboard camera of a Beaumont, Texas, patrol car. It was released by the Jefferson County District Attorney this week.

It is two years old, and the public is just now privy to this video.

What you are seeing - and hearing - is the recording of events on August 24, 2007, when Darrick Newmann was arrested by Beaumont police after a routine traffic stop. It's not pretty. In fact, it may well cause an emotional response and you should be prepared for that before you hit that play button.

Indictments and a Civil Lawsuit are Pending

Two of the cops seen in the video, Officers David Todd Burke and James Cody Guedry, are facing criminal charges for official oppression (one count each). In a related civil action, Darrick Newman is suing for damages based upon their use of excessive force.

Excessive force. What do you think?

DA Watch: El Paso District Attorney Investigates Potential Jurors Including Expunged Records

Over in El Paso, the district attorney's office is using its government databases to investigate ordinary citizens who show up for jury duty -- including going through past records that the citizens may believe to be secret or expunged.

And they're not telling the defense attorneys about this, at least they haven't been until they were caught doing this recently. Of course the defense bar is calling foul here.

What is an expunged record?

When someone pays to have their record "expunged," then they are taking action to have their record cleared of something -- an arrest, etc. -- and they believe that the expungement removes all trace of that particular event.

And it does. Public records do not provide any reference to something that has been expunged.

However, in the government databases, the expungement can remain these days -- all because of modern technology. The expungement is stored on the governmental records, archived in a database somewhere instead of the old school method of physically removing a file from the filing cabinet, stamping it "expunged," and either destroying it or sealing it in a box for storage offsite.

Where's the unfairness? First, it's unfair to the citizen whose record was expunged.

The first unfairness is to the citizen whose record has been expunged. An expunged record should mean that there has been a destruction of the event. For example, someone who is innocent was arrested for a crime. Three days later, the true evildoer was found.

It is blatantly unfair for that erroneous arrest to follow the innocent person into his or her future, tainting their personal and professional reputations. The mere reference to an arrest might cost them a job, for example. So, an expungement occurs.

The citizen believes that the horror of that event is gone and forgotten. But not with the El Paso District Attorney's office, apparently. They'll use the governmental databases and they'll look up that faulty arrest. All because the citizen has done his civic duty and shown up for jury duty.

That's not right. That's unfair.

It's also unfair to the valid and full defense of the current criminal defendant.

Remember now: the El Paso district attorney's office can access a national crime database -- just like any government prosecutor in this country -- and here, there's an unabridged listing of arrests and convictions that have been expunged from the public records.

Meanwhile, the defense attorney can only have access to the public records, not the SuperSecret national crime database.

So, the defense attorney is hampered in choosing a jury because the prosecutor is privy to information that the defense attorney is not. This is not the way that the jury selection process is supposed to occur.

What if the defendant going to trial is arguing that he was wrongfully arrested? We all know that the district attorney is going to strike the man or woman from the jury pool who they know from their SuperSecret database has an expunged record of a wrongful arrest. The prosecutor won't want that citizen on the jury, he (or she) may side with the defendant.

Which is exactly why the defense WILL argue for that citizen to be on the jury. And why this prosecutorial tactic is blatantly wrong.

Is this happening in places other than El Paso?

Sure it is. That governmental database is national in scope, and it would be absurd to think that only the El Paso district attorney's office is sniffing around its archieved expungements.

Cop Watch: KopBusters Traps Corrupt Odessa Cops and You Can Watch on YouTube

Barry Cooper used to be a cop. Now, he's a KopBuster.

Barry's big on civil liberties and he's making a living these days by exposing corruption - you can peruse his site, Never Get Busted Again, where products like the DVDs "Never Get Raided" and "Never Get Busted Again" are sold for $24.95 (they're even cheaper now, apparently Barry's got a Christmas special going on this month).

Barry Cooper and KopBusters Set Up Corrupt Odessa Cops

This Odessa story began when Barry Cooper and his company, KopBusters, were contacted by the father of Yolanda Madden, name of Raymond Madden, who was trying hard to free his daughter from prison. Seems Yolanda Madden, who hails from Odessa, Texas, had been convicted back in 2005 for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute.

Yolanda's dad reports that a key witness in her case admitted in court to planting the drugs -- didn't matter. Yolanda got convicted and was sent off to the Big House.

Seems that Raymond Madden learned of Barry Cooper and asked him to help. And, Barry Cooper and KopBusters said they'd be happy to do what they could.

What did KopBusters Do? Here's the Story, in Barry's Own Words

Barry gave the details of his operation on his website, explaining:

"KopBusters rented a house in Odessa, Texas and began growing two small Christmas trees under a grow light similar to those used for growing marijuana. When faced with a suspected marijuana grow, the police usually use illegal FLIR cameras and/or lie on the search warrant affidavit claiming they have probable cause to raid the house. Instead of conducting a proper investigation which usually leads to no probable cause, the Kops lie on the affidavit claiming a confidential informant saw the plants and/or the police could smell marijuana coming from the suspected house.

"The trap was set and less than 24 hours later, the Odessa narcotics unit raided the house only to find KopBuster's attorney waiting under a system of complex gadgetry and spy cameras that streamed online to the KopBuster's secret mobile office nearby."

Watch it Yourself



What Happens Now?

What happens now for Yolanda Madden? For the Odessa Police Department? For those cops on the video? For Barry Cooper and KopBusters?

Well, let's all watch and see.

Source:

Houston Examiner

http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Liberties-Examiner~y2008m12d6-Trap-springs-on-corrupt-cops-in-Odessa-Texas

JUDGE WATCH: Austin Judge Thinks His Power Includes Ordering Woman Not to Get Pregnant

Here in Texas, even a state district judge can be a man with a hat and no cattle ....

Last month, Travis County Judge Charlie Baird faced off against 20-year-old Felicia Salazar, who admitted to the court that she had failed to properly protect her 19-month-old daughter from the child's father - who had beat the baby, breaking bones and causing other injuries.

Felicia and the baby daddy both had their parental rights to the child terminated, and the little girl was placed in foster care. Meanwhile, the father was sentenced to 15 years in prison.

When it came time for Felicia Salazar to face the music, she stood before Judge Baird with no prior criminal history and an acknowledgement that she'd failed her daughter -- and with her defense attorney, she'd entered into a plea bargain with prosecutors, where she would get 10 years probation. It was time for the Judge to impose conditions upon that probation, and usually judges require things like community service and mental health treatment.

Judge Baird did impose standard conditions to Felicia's probation: she has to perform 100 hours of community service, and she's got to undergo a mental health assessment. But Judge Baird went one further: he ordered Felicia NOT TO HAVE CHILDREN FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS.

Can a judge really order a woman not to have a child? Really???

Nope. Of course, the Judge thinks so. He's told the media that it's a reasonable condition of her probation. And, there are those who would argue that it's all too often that parents who have had parental rights terminated just repeat the abuse cycle when they bear new offspring. They'd see this as avoiding a tragedy, and applaud Judge Baird's efforts.

They'd be wrong. This just isn't constitutional, period. A trial court judge can't tell someone that they can't have children. It's exceeding his power. Blatantly.

1. A man elected to preside over criminal proceedings doesn't have the authority to tell a 20 year old woman that she can't have a baby at any time, much less until she's 30 years old.

2. Even assuming that somehow this action could be justified, this would still be overreaching in this situation -- the woman has no prior history with criminal authorities or Child Protective Services, and she herself was not the one who committed the violent acts. I believe we can all read between the lines here: she looks to be a woman who cowered before an abusive boyfriend, and was too weak to stop him. What about getting her classes in parenting? life management? individual counseling?

3. How enforcable is this? What if she does get pregnant - is the Judge going to order that she have an abortion, in addition to revoking her probation and sending her to jail? Ridiculous.

Dangerous precedent being set here -- and in Wisconsin.

As much as this sounds like some story out of the annals of Judge Roy Bean, it appears that Felicia may be stuck with Judge Baird's ruling. Her attorney hasn't filed an appeal. Heck, Felicia may be counting her blessings that she's not behind bars, and she's happy enough right now.

If so, Felicia's challenge may come up later -- when she gets pregnant, and some probation officer tries to throw her in jail for violating a condition of her probation. Then, her lawyer will get this arrogant, unconstitutional ruling overthrown -- hopefully.

Why hopefully? Because up in Wisconsin, there sits on the books a case where a father of 10 kids got caught for not paying child support. As a condition of his probation, he was ordered not to father any more children. The Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld that decision.

Criminal Defense is all about Protecting Our Rights

Every single criminal defense attorney in this country gets questioned on almost a daily basis with a version of the same query: 'how can you represent those bad, guilty people who did horrible things to good folk?'

And, every single criminal defense attorney in this country has to remind people on almost a daily basis that those accused clients, in each and every case, are testing the strength of our judicial system -- a system of rights that serves to provide justice and freedom for each and every one of us.

The System of Rights that Protects All of Us is Weaker Today Because of this Decision

Felicia Salazar admitted to not being a good mother. Judge Baird thinks he's doing the right thing by keeping her from becoming a mother again. But, to you and to me, a constitutional right has been disrespected and weakened here and we should all be very concerned about this.

Any time the rights of any single individual are denied, one brick in that system of freedoms we all hold dear falls away.


Source:

Austin American Statesman
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/news/stories/local/09/12/0912salazar.html

Crime News: Brain Scan as Truth Test Sends Woman to Life Imprisonment

Sit down for this one.

This is scary, scary stuff - even for Hallowe'en ... because what has been reported is true, not just some science fiction story or horror movie or boring lab report.

"Experiential knowledge of the crime" - an Automatic Guilt Machine

Technology now exists where some lab worker in a white coat can attach wires to your head, and then decide whether or not you have "experiential knowledge" of a crime -- as in, you really remember doing it -- and if you do, voila -- you're guilty!

That's right. Let's ponder this again: there's a gizmo that is supposed to conclusively know if you're guilty of a crime or not by monitoring your brain waves with wires.

How's this supposed to work?

Well, the guy in the white coat takes an electroencephalogram, or EEG -- in other words, he places electrodes on your head that will measure electrical waves.

You set there, silent, with your eyes shut tight. Wires on your head.

Then, white-coat guy starts reading aloud the details of the crime (and you can bet, this is a script written by the prosecutor). As he reads, and you just set there, the EEG machine is recording all your brain images.

Using this new gizmo software. the brain is said to purportedly "light up" in certain areas that store memories, lighting up when past experiences are recognized.

Oh, and sure, the gizmo software is supposed to be able to clearly, easily, and conclusively be able to determine whether or not your brain is "lighting up" because you witnessed, or saw, something happen, as opposed to whether or not you committed the act yourself.

Right.

I cannot even begin to describe the horrific affront this is to the most basic human rights, much less those constitutional rights like due process .... Heck, we know lie detectors are not accurate. We still have some problems with fingerprint analysis. And, this testing of air in the Casey Anthony case is getting lots of skeptical responses.

But, some machine can not only report that you have a memory of an event, but that you committed a crime, based upon whether or not your brain "lights up" -- this would be hilarously stupid to consider, if it weren't being taken so very seriously.

Surely this isn't being taken seriously, you ask? Wrong.

Over in India, a young woman was accused of poisoning her fiance by putting arsenic in his McDonald's meal. It's apparently understood by everyone that in India "police interrogation" is synonimous with "torture," so when the woman had the choice between the "interrogation" or undergoing this new Gizmo Guilt Test, she chose the brain scan. Who wouldn't?

She claimed she was innocent. She probably hoped science would be her friend in ways that law enforcement would not.

No such luck. The woman purportedly "failed" the brain scan, was found guilty of murder based upon the brain scan, and sentenced to life imprisonment - because of this scary, scary brain scan.

Just think what an overzealous Dallas County prosecutor could do with this thing.

Check out this YouTube video that shows the CNN report on Aditi Sharma's murder conviction and life sentence, ordered by a judge (no jury), based upon a brain scan.

For more information:

International Herald Tribune
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/09/15/asia/15brainscan.php?page=1

Neuroscience
http://io9.com/5050009/indian-court-accepts-brain-scans-as-evidence-of-murder