tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23835411492983242122024-03-18T20:55:11.430-07:00The Skeptical Jurortsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18026505524737868846noreply@blogger.comBlogger605125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-62378254132568846622022-01-21T09:50:00.000-08:002022-01-21T09:50:03.418-08:00The Serial Case of Adnan Syed<p> I have a two part series about Adnan Syed that is now available at my Substack account.</p><p>Syed was the subject of the <i>Serial</i> podcast that drew 80 million listeners.</p><p><a href="https://skepticaljuror.substack.com/p/the-serial-case-of-adnan-syed-part" target="_blank">Part 1</a> provides the background of the case.</p><p><a href="https://skepticaljuror.substack.com/p/the-serial-case-of-adnan-syed-part-33f" target="_blank">Part 2</a> provides my analysis of the case.</p><p>Please join me there.</p><p><br /></p>tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-1360647300986500072019-08-25T16:20:00.001-07:002019-08-25T16:23:01.852-07:00Swearingen Executed<div style="text-align: justify;">
I received an email asking me if I was going to post something about the Execution of Larry Swearingen. I said I would. This is the post.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rather than argue his innocence yet again, I'll simply link to <a href="https://reason.com/2019/08/21/tonight-texas-is-executing-a-man-for-a-murder-and-rape-experts-say-he-didnt-commit/"><span style="color: blue;"><b>the <i>Reason</i> article</b></span></a>, which is professionally written.</div>
<br />
I've not been blogging for what I consider to be many good reasons.<br />
The sun was in my eyes.<br />
The dog ate my last post.<br />
My type of blogging demands nearly all my time.<br />
As a blogger, I've not made any impact. I've done no quantifiable good.<br />
I have finite time left to me, less than most.<br />
I want to help free someone who has been wrongfully convicted.<br />
Blogging won't cut it.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I've blogged. I've written books. I've visited governors. I've visited prosecutors. I've filed informal and formal complaints of misconduct. I've prepared habeas corpus petitions, motions for DNA testing, and civil suits. In all those efforts, I've failed.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Recently, I've turned to testing, attempting to recreate critical aspects of possible wrongful convictions. It started when I obtained exculpatory photographs intentionally withheld from the defense in a case of considerable interest to me. Those photographs prompted me to conduct my own ballistic testing. The test results have helped advance the case to the point that I'm now hopeful that the inmate will eventually be freed.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'm trying to <strike>expedite</strike> <strike>accelerate</strike> miniscully increase the speed of the process by publishing the results and conclusions in a book, tentatively entitled <i>Gunshot Residue Suppressed and A Case of Wrongful Conviction.</i> I offer the tentative abstract as the image below. Click to enlarge.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiFis7mj6jwlxHCF-OZ6YC_swQVJCLxg4MxHZX2D7RGmeFGoVWF1NjGBe5WoQY5lXEEemG_PWAQz9KVb5HFBmkjH8bhdBZV8m8fsBWtMObXQBIohdU4epntr3zZVslDn4XJLkcItHkeh4/s1600/Screen+Shot+2019-08-25+at+3.35.00+PM.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiFis7mj6jwlxHCF-OZ6YC_swQVJCLxg4MxHZX2D7RGmeFGoVWF1NjGBe5WoQY5lXEEemG_PWAQz9KVb5HFBmkjH8bhdBZV8m8fsBWtMObXQBIohdU4epntr3zZVslDn4XJLkcItHkeh4/s400/Screen+Shot+2019-08-25+at+3.35.00+PM.png" width="380" /></a></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: start;">In the case just abstracted, I've been fortunate to work with two weapons experts who have volunteered their time.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I will self-publish the book, purchase copies, and distribute them to the governor, the prosecutors, the state attorney general, the state public defender, various reporters and others. Even though I have yet to finish the book, the information that we have learned has already helped advance the case considerably.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If this recreate-and-reveal process works, then I will consider applying it to other cases of interest to me.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If I pursue the Preston Hughes case in similar fashion, I might be stabbing analog necks with various blades. I might perhaps be compiling a database of survival times of people with severed carotids.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If I pursue an alleged arson-murder case of interest to me, I might be recreating a home electrical circuit that catches fire.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If I purse the Swearingen case, I might be testing the rate at which stomach contents decay, in December, in a Texas forest. Alternatively, I might be cutting one leg from many pairs of panty hose.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
If there is any reader out there who might be skilled in such testing, or skilled in obtaining case documents, and interested in volunteering multitudinous hours in a probably futile effort to correct or expose an injustice, feel free to contact me at the Skeptical Juror email address.<br />
<br />
I'll prepare for the deluge.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-24893670639729882892018-05-22T11:12:00.004-07:002018-05-28T11:11:11.863-07:00Bees Gotta Buzz<div style="text-align: justify;">
Bees gotta buzz, something's gotta something, and prosecutors gotta prosecute. That was going to be my clever introduction to this august post in which I planned to vent against prosecutorial misconduct. All I needed was a quick Google search to figure out what followed "Bees gotta buzz," and I'd be off to the races. Instead I'm left with another mixed metaphor that stinks like fish in a barrel.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It took me only a couple minutes to find the source of the quote I was going to leverage. It comes from Annie Dillard and her novel <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilgrim_at_Tinker_Creek"><span style="color: blue;"><b>Pilgrim and Tinker Creek</b></span></a></i>.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="Book cover showing two photographs of trees blended together in the darkroom - the upper image is in North Carolina and the bottom image are yellow pines in Florida and upside down and was meant to be interpreted by the viewer . . . floating forest, etc." src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/05/Pilgrim-at-Tinker-Creek.jpg/220px-Pilgrim-at-Tinker-Creek.jpg" /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There's a Wikipedia article about the book, from which I obtained the cover image and to which I've hyperlinked the title. It is from that Wikipedia article that I learned once again how wrong I can be. I now excerpt from that article:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><i>Pilgrim at Tinker Creek</i> is a 1974 nonfiction narrative book by American author Annie Dillard. Told from a first-person point of view, the book details an unnamed narrator's explorations near her home, and various contemplations on nature and life. The title refers to Tinker Creek, which is outside Roanoke in Virginia's Blue Ridge Mountains. Dillard began writing Pilgrim in the spring of 1973, using her personal journals as inspiration. Separated into four sections that signify each of the seasons, the narrative takes place over the period of one year. [...]</span> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
A passage in the second chapter of the book describes a frog being "sucked dry" by a "giant water bug" as the narrator watches; this necessary cruelty shows order in life and death, no matter how difficult it may be to watch. The narrator especially sees inherent cruelty in the insect world: "Fish gotta swim and birds gotta fly ... insects, it seems, gotta do one horrible thing after another. I never ask why of a vulture or a shark, but I ask why of almost every insect I see. More than one insect ... is an assault on all human virtue, all hope of a reasonable god."</blockquote>
I thereby stumbled into an even more clever introduction to this august blog post, though the time for introduction is nigh past. That bus has sailed, as the Skeptical Spouse once so wisely said. So I'll get on with it.<br />
<br />
Fish gotta swim and birds gotta fly. Prosecutors, it seems, gotta do one horrible thing after another.<br />
<br />
It is not my intention to equate prosecutors with insects. But, like any other collection of humans, prosecutors can be either good, bad, or ugly, to borrow from another masterpiece.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="Good the bad and the ugly poster.jpg" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/45/Good_the_bad_and_the_ugly_poster.jpg" /></div>
It is bad prosecutors of whom I will be writing, the ugly ones, the ones that gotta do one horrible thing after another.<br />
<br />
Over the last decade, I've come to realize that prosecutors are the primary cause of wrongful convictions. Certainly there are enough wrongful convictions to go around, some to attribute to the police, some to attribute to mistaken identity, some to attribute to insufficiently skeptical jurors. But the primary cause of wrongful convictions, I now maintain, is, far and away, those prosecutors that gotta do one horrible thing after another.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.innocenceproject.org/causes-wrongful-conviction./"><b><span style="color: blue;">The (national) Innocence Project</span></b></a>, long long ago in a place far far away, used to report that prosecutorial misconduct is responsible for 25% of wrongful convictions. I state that not as a fact, but as a recollection, and concede I might be wrong. I've checked again just now, and I find only a handy dandy colorful bar chart, which I've embedded below for your viewing convenience.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="CausesGraph325" src="http://www.innocenceproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/CausesGraph325.png" height="225" width="400" /></div>
Well I guess I'm wrong about claiming most wrongful convictions stem from prosecutorial misconduct. Even the (national) Innocence Project, which keeps records on such matters, and which is the most respected name in such matters, cannot find sufficient evidence of prosecutorial misconduct to justify even a tiny bar in in its colorful bar graph. My only hope for neurological redemption is in the note that the (national) Innocence Project adds beneath its bar chart.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<em style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #2a2d32; font-family: Roboto, sans-serif; font-size: 17px; text-align: start;">Contributing causes confirmed through Innocence Project research. Actual numbers may be higher, and other contributing factors to wrongful convictions include government misconduct and bad lawyering. </em></blockquote>
In other words, results may vary, contents may have settled during shipping.<br />
<br />
It suddenly seems that the (national) Innocence Project seemingly did find at least one possible case of government misconduct that led to a wrongful conviction, but they chose not to quantity how many. Maybe my memory was not so faulty after all. Maybe they did indeed previously claim that 25% of wrongful convictions stemmed from prosecutorial misconduct, but they now choose to mask that number, as a convenience to the readers.<br />
<br />
I now turn to the <a href="https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/causes-wrongful-convictions"><b><span style="color: blue;">Death Penalty Information Center</span></b></a>, an organization and web site not so politic in its quantified reporting. It offers its own handy dandy colorful bar chart and its own textual description, which I embed below for your viewing convenience.<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img height="305" src="https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/images/Wrongful_Convictions_Contributing_Factors" width="400" /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-align: start;">Many factors contribute to wrongful convictions, and it is no different in capital cases. But the most recent data from the </span><a href="https://www.law.umich.edu/special/exoneration/Pages/ExonerationsContribFactorsByCrime.aspx" style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-align: start;"><b><span style="color: blue;">National Registry of Exonerations</span></b></a><span style="background-color: white; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 14px; text-align: start;"> points to two factors as the most overwhelmingly prevalent causes of wrongful convictions in death penalty cases: official misconduct and perjury or false accusation. As of May 31, 2017, the Registry reports that official misconduct was a contributing factor in 571 of 836 homicide exonerations 68.3%, very often in combination with perjury or false accusation, which also was a contributing factor in 68.3% of homicide exonerations.</span></blockquote>
Holy conflicting data, Batman! We now have evidence that official misconduct justifies either no bar in a colorful bar chart OR an 80% bar in a colorful bar chart. I suspect it might be difficult to rationalize those two results as consistent. Instead, I suspect it more likely that one site is downplaying the problem of official misconduct, for whatever reason, and/or the other site is exaggerating the problem, for whatever reason.<br />
<br />
As The Skeptical Juror, and as this site's duly elected contrarian, I take a third position. I suggest that both sites are understating the contribution of prosecutorial misconduct to our country's abysmal rate of wrongful conviction. You might therefore anticipate that I am not done pontificating on the subject.<br />
<br />
Stay tuned.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-11487378484398841402018-05-17T22:37:00.002-07:002018-05-17T22:38:42.662-07:00Beware the Noble Prosecutor<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I have an old case for your consideration, one that maintains a certain currency. It involves the wrongful conviction of four men for murder, two of whom survived long enough to be exonerated, and who were awarded one hundred and one million, seven hundred and fifty thousand dollars in their lawsuit against the FBI.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The story is best told by the judge who awarded the money. That would be United States District Court Judge Somebody Somebody Gertner in the case of <span style="color: blue;"><b><a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13004460483691174578&q=Joseph+Salvati,+Louis+Greco,+Henry+Tameleo+and+Peter+Limone+&hl=en&as_sdt=2006"><span style="color: blue;">Limone v. United States of America</span></a>.</b></span> At more than 250 pages, the decision is too long to include in its entirety. I therefore limit my excerpt to his introduction. Yes, his ruling is so large that it has an introduction. It even has a table of contents.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Buckle up. Here we go. The emphasis is mine.</div>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Peter Limone ("Limone"), Enrico "Henry" Tameleo ("Tameleo"), Louis Greco ("Greco"), and Joseph Salvati ("Salvati"), made extraordinary and troubling accusations in this case. They claimed that thirty-nine years ago, virtually to the date of this decision, on July 31, 1968, they were convicted of a crime which they did not commit — the murder of Edward "Teddy" Deegan ("Deegan"). Limone, Tameleo, and Greco were sentenced to die in the electric chair, a sentence reduced to life imprisonment whey the death penalty was vacated. They accused the United States, specifically, the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") of framing them for Deegan's murder, and then, by covering up FBI misconduct, ensuring their imprisonment over the next three decades. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
This trial, however, was not about securing the plaintiffs' release. Salvati was freed in 1997; Limone in 2001. Tameleo and Greco died tragically as prisoners — Tameleo in 1985, Greco in 1995. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Rather, the plaintiffs sought a different form of redress, which the law allows — damages for their loss of liberty, for their pain, and the pain of their loved ones. They brought this lawsuit ... on a number of grounds, including malicious prosecution. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
The bench trial was lengthy. It took twenty-two days and involved hundreds of exhibits, thousands of pages. There were comparatively few live witnesses; this story had to be painstakingly pieced together through documents, many of them heavily redacted, particularly at the outset of the proceedings. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
<b>Despite the complexity of the record, this decision is far, far, longer than I would have wished. It has taken much more time to complete than I had predicted. But there was no other alternative. The conclusions that the plaintiffs have asked me to draw — that government agents suborned perjury, framed four innocent men, conspired to keep them in jail for three decades — are so shocking that I felt obliged to analyze this complex record with special care in order that the public, and especially the parties, could be fully confident of my conclusions. </b></blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
I have concluded that the plaintiffs' accusations that the United States government violated the law are proved. In the pages that follow, I will describe why in detail. This introduction summarizes some of those findings. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
The plaintiffs were convicted of Deegan's murder based on the perjured testimony of Joseph "The Animal" Barboza ("Barboza"). The FBI agents "handling" Barboza, Dennis Condon ("Condon") and H. Paul Rico ("Rico"), and their superiors — all the way up to the FBI Director — knew that Barboza would perjure himself. They knew this because Barboza, a killer many times over, had told them so — directly and indirectly. Barboza's testimony about the plaintiffs contradicted every shred of evidence in the FBI's possession at the time — and the FBI had extraordinary information. Barboza's testimony contradicted evidence from an illegal wiretap that had intercepted stunning plans for the Deegan murder before it had taken place, plans that never included the plaintiffs. It contradicted multiple reports from informants, including the very killers who were the FBI's "Top Echelon" informants. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
And even though the FBI knew Barboza's story was false, they encouraged him to testify in the Deegan murder trial. They never bothered to tell the truth to the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office. Worse yet, they assured the District Attorney that Barboza's story "checked out." </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
The FBI knew Barboza's testimony was perjured because they suborned that perjury. They met with Barboza long before the state authorities ever did. They coddled him, nurtured him, debriefed him, protected him, and rewarded him — no matter how much he lied. When Barboza told them he would not accuse the man they knew to be one of Deegan's killers, his friend and FBI informant, Jimmy Flemmi, they urged Barboza to testify nonetheless. And when he announced that he would accuse four men who had never been linked to this murder, they were undaunted. They continued to press for his testimony. Indeed, they took steps to make certain that Barboza's false story would withstand cross-examination, and even be corroborated by other witnesses. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
In word and in deed, the FBI condoned Barboza's lies. FBI agent Dennis Condon even told the Deegan jury that he was "always concerned with the purity of testimony on the part of his witnesses, referring to Barboza, the perjurer. When Tameleo, Greco, and Limone were sentenced to death, Salvati to life imprisonment, the FBI did not stand silently; they congratulated the agents for a job well done. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Nor did the FBI's misconduct stop after the plaintiffs were convicted. The plaintiffs appealed, filed motions for a new trial, one even took and passed a polygraph test on public television — over and over again protesting their innocence. They sought commutations, appeared before parole boards, seeking clemency from the governor, even appealing to the press. On each occasion, when asked about the plaintiffs, on each occasion when the FBI could have disclosed the truth — the perfidy of Barboza and their complicity in it — they did not. This was so even as more and more evidence surfaced casting more and more doubt on these convictions. In the 1970s, for example, Barboza tried to recant his testimony, not in all cases in which he had participated, but only as to the plaintiffs in this case — the very men the FBI knew to be innocent. <b>In the 1980s, Agent Rico was found by a court to have suborned the perjury of another witness under similar circumstances. Yet, there was still no FBI investigation, no searching inquiry to see if an injustice had been done in this case.</b></blockquote>
I interrupt here to suggest that you remember what happened beginning in the 1980s. There will be a pop quiz later. Now back to the introduction.<br />
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Rather, while Salvati and Limone languished in jail for thirty-odd years, and Greco and Tameleo died in prison, Barboza and his FBI handlers flourished. The FBI agents were given raises and promotions precisely for their extraordinary role in procuring the Deegan convictions. Even when Barboza, the "poster boy" for the new federal witness protection program, committed yet another murder, three federal officials testified — now for the second time on his behalf. FBI officials up the line allowed their employees to break laws, violate rules and ruin lives, interrupted only with the occasional burst of applause. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
The FBI knew Barboza's testimony was false, that the plaintiffs' convictions had been procured by perjury, that critical exculpatory information had been withheld — but they did not flinch. After all, the killers they protected — Jimmy Flemmi, along with Barboza, and Jimmy's brother, Stephen — were providing valued information in the "war" against the Italian Mafia, La Cosa Nostra ("LCN"). The pieties the FBI offered to justify their actions are the usual ones: The benefits outweighed the costs. Put otherwise, in terms that are more recently familiar, these four men were "collateral damage" in the LCN war. To the FBI, the plaintiffs' lives, and those of their families, just did not matter. As Agent Rico put it in his testimony before the United States House of Representatives Committee or. Government Reform, when asked if he had any remorse that four innocent men went to prison, he replied: "Would you like tears or something?" </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Now is the time to say and say without equivocation: This "cost" — to the liberty of four men, to our system of justice — is not remotely acceptable. <b>No man's liberty is dispensable. No human being may be traded for another. Our system cherishes each individual.</b> <b>We have fought wars over this principle. We are still fighting those wars.</b> </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Sadly, <b>when law enforcement perverts its mission, the criminal justice system does not easily self-correct.</b> We understand that our system makes mistakes; we have appeals to address them. But this case goes beyond mistakes, beyond the unavoidable errors of a fallible system. This case is about intentional misconduct, subornation of perjury, conspiracy, the framing of innocent men. While judges are scrutinized — our decisions made in public and appealed — law enforcement decisions like these rarely see the light of day. <b>The public necessarily relies on the integrity and professionalism of its officials.</b> </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
It took nearly thirty years to uncover this injustice. It took the extraordinary efforts of a judge, a lawyer, even a reporter, to finally bring out the facts. <b>Proof of innocence in this democracy should not depend upon efforts as gargantuan as these.</b> </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
The claims of the plaintiffs or their estates fit into four categories: malicious prosecution, civil conspiracy, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and negligent selection, supervision, and retention. Their spouses and children have each brought loss of consortium and bystander intentional infliction of emotional distress claims as well. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
The federal government has fought hard. The legal doctrines on which it has relied are important ones. They are doctrines designed to give law enforcement room to make critical policy decisions. They are intended to insulate those who bring information in good faith to the authorities, even if the information is later disproved. All the FBI did, the government argued, was exercise their discretion about whom to offer deals, and how to conduct an investigation. All they did was to present their cooperating witness to the state authorities who independently prosecuted the crime. In effect, what they are saying is that it was the state's fault — not theirs — for not doing a better job. If the FBI erred at all, it was in not turning over information exculpatory to the defense — nothing more — and that violation is not actionable ... </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
The government's position is, in a word, absurd. The law they cite does not apply to the extraordinary facts of this case. The issue here is not discretion but abuse, not independent charging decisions but the framing of four innocent men, not the failure to produce exculpatory evidence but procuring convictions by misrepresentation, not letting perjured testimony proceed uncorrected but facilitating it. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
<b>The FBI, and not the state, developed Barboza as a witness, knowing that his false testimony would be used to prosecute the plaintiffs for a crime they did not commit. They, and not the state, kept their conduct from being discovered by failing to disclose exculpatory evidence, before, during, and after the trial. They, and not the state, vouched for Barboza to law enforcement and to the very jury hearing the murder case, even when all the information they had flatly contradicted his account.</b> ...</blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
In the end I conclude that the defendant is liable to these men and their families. As to damages, plaintiffs' loss of liberty, and, in effect, a lifetime of experiences, is obviously not compensable. To the extent that damages can approach this task, my total award is One Hundred One Million, Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand, And 00/100 (<b>$101,750,000.00</b>) Dollars.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now for the quiz. Who was the U.S. Attorney who, throughout the 1980s, wrote letters to the parole and pardons board opposing clemency for the four men the Feds had wrongfully convicted?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll give you a hint. This U.S. Attorney was also the acting U.S. Attorney in Boston while, in another disturbingly similar case, Whitey Bulger was helping the FBI cart off his criminal competitors even as he buried bodies in shallow graves.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It's a tough one, I know, so I will give you four lines to contemplate your answer before I reveal it.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One line.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Two lines.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Three lines.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Four lines.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/1970/01/19/one-lingering-question-for-fbi-director-robert-mueller/613uW0MR7czurRn7M4BG2J/amp.html"><span style="color: blue;"><b>Robert Swan Mueller III.</b></span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In 2007, when asked about about the FBI corruption in Boston, Robert Muller offered this pearl of wisdom: "I think the public should remember what happened, happened years ago."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-44053525959784189212018-05-16T11:18:00.001-07:002018-05-16T11:39:30.434-07:00The Lenny Bruce Cautionary Tale<div style="text-align: justify;">
Being older than most other people in this world, a claim that can be made by only some 3.8 billion others, I remember Lenny Bruce. What I knew of him came from the eponymous 1974 movie <i>Lenny</i> starring Dustin Hoffman and Valerie Perrine.</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<img alt="LennyOScheck.jpg" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/66/LennyOScheck.jpg/220px-LennyOScheck.jpg" /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Since I made a point of my imperfect recollection in my last post, I'll admit to being surprised to learn (or re-learn, as the case may be) that Dustin Hoffman starred as Lenny Bruce. That came as a surprise to me when I glanced over the Wikipedia article for the movie. Then I saw that Valerie Perrine co-starred in the movie, and I was not so surprised by that. That fact seemed somehow familiar to me, though I wouldn't have thought of her name in response to a Jeopardy question. Maybe the movie poster created a few more neurons of her than of him.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
But I meander.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For those not familiar with Lenny Bruce, I'll excerpt from the Wikipedia article on him.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: inherit;">Leonard Alfred Schneider (October 13, 1925 – August 3, 1966), better known by his stage name Lenny Bruce, was an American stand-up comedian, social critic, and satirist. He was renowned for his open, free-style and critical form of comedy which integrated satire, politics, religion, sex, and vulgarity. His 1964 conviction in an obscenity trial was followed by a posthumous pardon, the first in the history of New York state, by then-Governor George Pataki in 2003.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: inherit;">Bruce is renowned for paving the way for future outspoken counterculture-era comedians, and his trial for obscenity is seen as a landmark for freedom of speech in the United States. In 2017, Rolling Stone magazine ranked him third (behind disciples Richard Pryor and George Carlin) on its list of the 50 best stand-up comics of all-time.</span></blockquote>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="color: #222222;">The Wikipedia article provides a long list of cultural references to Lenny Bruce, some of which I recognize after the fact. Simon and Garfunkel incorporated him into several variations of their songs. Bob Fosse, who directed </span><i style="color: #222222;">Lenny</i><span style="color: #222222;">, incorporated Lenny into </span><i style="color: #222222;">All that Jazz</i><span style="color: #222222;">. And, my favorite, Lenny Bruce is pictured on the top row of the cover of the Beatles 1967 album </span><i style="color: #222222;">Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band</i><span style="color: #222222;">. He's on the top row, fourth from the left, at least according to </span><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_images_on_the_cover_of_Sgt._Pepper%27s_Lonely_Hearts_Club_Band"><span style="color: blue;"><b>this site</b></span></a><span style="color: #222222;">:</span></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: center;">
<img alt="Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band.jpg" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/50/Sgt._Pepper%27s_Lonely_Hearts_Club_Band.jpg" /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">I guess that is Lenny Bruce, top row, fourth from the left. I'll provide his mug shot and let you decide for yourself.</span></span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: center;">
<img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c3/Lenny_Bruce_Mugshot_4-27-63.jpg" /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">In summary, Lenny Bruce was a comic who told dirty jokes, was convicted of obscenity for them, and thereby became famous. And with that astoundingly well-organized background out of the way, I'm ready for the cautionary tale portion of this post. I excerpt now from the Wikipedia article for <i>Lenny.</i></span></span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: inherit;">The film jumps between various sections of Bruce's life, including scenes of when he was in his prime and <b>the burned-out, strung-out performer who, in the twilight of his life, used his nightclub act to pour out his personal frustrations.</b> We watch as up-and-coming Bruce courts his "Shiksa goddess", a stripper named Honey. With family responsibilities, Lenny is encouraged to do a "safe" act, but he cannot do it. Constantly in trouble for flouting obscenity laws, Lenny develops a near-messianic complex which fuels both his comedy genius and his talent for self-destruction. <b>Worn out by a lifetime of tilting at Establishment windmills, Lenny Bruce dies of a morphine overdose in 1966.</b></span></blockquote>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: inherit;">I've emboldened two cautionary notes in the excerpt, both of which I take to heart. Dealing with the second one first, I don't want to be worn out tilting at Establishment windmills (interesting capitalization) and die of a morphine overdose <strike>in 1966</strike>. Second, I don't want to become a burned-out, strung-out blogger who uses his writing to pour out his personal frustrations.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: #222222; font-family: inherit;">Many of the events that have taken place over the last four years are of intense interest and importance to me, but I suspect my august readers have their own issues to fret over. I feel the urge to rapidly pour out all that has happened, but I must resist the temptation.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">What I remember most from my viewing of <i>Lenny</i> was how he had turned his nightclub act from one of fantastic comedy in which he made fun of the human condition, to one in which he literally read from the legal documents in his case. Since I've been known to quote from a legal document or two, I see the parallel and suddenly seem one step close to dying of a morphine overdose <strike>in 1966</strike>.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Now for the happy ending.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Because of Lenny and <i>Lenny</i>, I realize that I should not use my return to this august blog to tell only of matters of great importance to me. I need to write more broadly, of wrongful convictions beyond my immediate interest, perhaps even of other aspects of the human condition.</span></div>
<div style="background-color: white; line-height: inherit; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-top: 0.5em; text-align: justify;">
That way, I might not only recover some of my readership, I might also not die of a morphine overdose in 1966.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-86709394794322980942014-05-14T19:12:00.001-07:002014-05-27T10:27:38.243-07:00The Extent of Framing the Innocent in Texas<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;">This is the eleventh post in the series </span><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a><span style="text-align: justify;">. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the </span><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html" style="color: black; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a><span style="text-align: justify;">.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;">In this post, I will calculate how many innocent people have been framed and executed by the State and People of Texas. It might be interesting. Stay tuned.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;">I'll begin not in Texas, but Virginia. I'll begin not with a prisoner, but with a serologist. Mary Jane Burton worked for Virginia's Department of Forensic Science from 1973 to 1987. (She died in 1999.) As a serologist, she determined blood type and other identifying information from biological samples. </span>DNA identification was never a part of her job. Even by the end of her career, DNA technology was still in its infancy.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Burton had a habit of taping cotton swab heads and textile clippings to the worksheets in her case notebooks. She used the swabs and clippings while testifying to show the jury the exact piece of evidence she tested. While Virginia routinely destroyed biological evidence from old cases, Mary Burton's swabs and clippings remained tucked away well preserved in her notebooks.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Advancements in DNA technology, coupled with Virginia's routine destruction of its DNA evidence, eventually led to the discovery of Mary Burton's treasure trove of well-preserved, well-documented DNA samples. The first person to be exonerated by Burton's diligence was Marvin Anderson. He had spent 15 years in prison for a rape he did not commit. The next to be freed was Julius Earl Ruffin. He had spent 21 years behind bars for a rape he did not commit. Then came Arthur Lee Whitfield (22 years), Phillip Thurman (20 years), and Willie Davidson (12 years).</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After a long and inexcusable delay, the five exonerations led to a thorough review of all the DNA evidence that Burton had so carefully preserved. The results of that review were finally published just recently by the Urban Institute, working under contract to the U.S. Department of Justice. Their thrilling report, <a href="http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412589-Post-Conviction-DNA-Testing-and-Wrongful-Conviction.pdf" style="color: blue;"><span style="color: blue;">Post Conviction DNA Testing and Wrongful Conviction</span></a>, has not been as widely read as <i>The Hunger Games</i> or <i>Fifty Shades of Grey</i>, so I'll summarize the results for you, right here and now.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
A total of 715 convictions were reviewed based on Burton's samples and other case evidence. (293 homicides, 375 sexual assaults, and 47 sexual assault homicides)</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
For 465 of the convictions, Burton's samples provided no additional insight into actual guilt or innocence. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
For 194 of the convictions, Burton's samples substantiated the guilty verdict. (For my analysis, these are the confirmed guilty.)</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
In 18 of the convictions, Burton's data provided exculpatory evidence, but the evidence was insufficient to support exoneration. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
In 38 of the convictions. Burton's samples provided exculpatory evidence that supported exoneration. (For my analysis, these are the confirmed innocent.)</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Using the Urban Institute results, it is now easy to calculate a rate of wrongful conviction. I'll ignore the cases in which the review provided no additional insight into actual guilt or innocence. I'll also ignore the convictions that suggested innocence but did not firmly establish it. That leaves me with 236 convictions in which the Urban Institute confirmed guilt (194 cases) or discovered innocence (38 cases). The rate of wrongful conviction is 38 cases of wrongful conviction divided by 236 cases of confirmed guilt or innocence. That equals 0.161. That is 16.1%.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Holy Cow!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Even I'm shocked, at least I was when I first performed this calculation. I had previously argued that our rate of wrongful conviction is around 11%. (See for example <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/11/on-rate-of-wrongful-conviction-chapter.html"><span style="color: blue;">On the Rate of Wrongful Conviction: Chapter 10.6</span></a> and <span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/09/on-rate-of-wrongful-conviction-chapter_07.html"><span style="color: blue;">On the Rate of Wrongful Conviction: Chapter 11.1</span></a></span>) Most everyone else who attempts to determine the rate of wrongful conviction concludes that the number is somewhere between zero and 3%. A few venture as high as 5%. My 11% number stuck out like a sore thumb, and now I discover that I may have been too kind to our justice system.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Holy Cow!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I hereby admit that I started with the Virginia DNA database because I wanted to soften you up. To further prepare you for the number of innocent people framed and executed by Texas, I'm now going to calculate a rate of wrongful conviction for capital murder for all states other than Texas. Whatever you may think of our capital punishment system, it provides a handy basis for estimating a wrongful conviction rate.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Every capital murder conviction in this country is reviewed over and over again for a decade, or two, or three. Prosecutors and appellate attorneys and innocence projects and lay citizens attempt to persuade appellate judges and the public that the convicted party is truly guilty or actually innocent. Eventually, some of the convictions are irrevocably resolved by either an execution or an exoneration. It is the irrevocably resolved cases that provide a solid basis for estimating a rate of wrongful conviction.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here are the inputs for my calculation:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there have been <a href="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/views-executions"><span style="color: blue;">1001 executions</span></a> in all states other than Texas since 1976 when the Supreme Court lifted its ban on the death penalty. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, there have been <a href="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/innocence-list-those-freed-death-row?scid=6&did=110"><span style="color: blue;">125 exonerations</span></a> of death row prisoners in all states other than Texas since 1976 when the Supreme Court lifted its ban on the death penalty.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll be quick. As a country, excluding Texas, we have reviewed 1126 death sentences carefully enough to make an irrevocable decision about actual guilt or innocence. In 1001 of those cases, we confirmed the jury verdict and we executed the prisoner. In 125 of those cases, we determined that the jury got it wrong and we exonerated the prisoner. The rate of wrongful conviction is therefore equal to 125 cases of wrongful conviction divided by 1126 convictions irrevocably resolved. That equals 0.111. That equals 11.1%.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's bad. That's really, really bad. It is substantially lower than the 16% rate calculated from the Urban Institute report, but it is still really bad. I believe I know why it is lower. The data from the Urban Institute are more heavily populated with cases of sexual assault. My previous work in this area has convinced me that juries wrongfully convict in rape cases substantially more frequently than they do in murder cases. (As an aside, juries wrongfully convict most frequently in child molestation cases, and least frequently in drug cases.) Whatever the reason for the disparity, I'll use the 11.1% number as I continue to calculate how many innocent Texans have been framed and executed.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll now calculate the exoneration rate for Texas, again using data from the Death Penalty Information Center. Texas has executed 515 prisoners since 1976. On the other hand, Texas has exonerated only 12 of its death row inmates.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's right. You did the math correctly in your head. Even though Texas has performed a third of all the executions nationwide, it has exonerated less than 9% of those saved from the needle. By comparison to the rest of the country, Texas is execution happy and exoneration resistant.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Texans and pro-death-penalty advocates may claim that the numbers only prove that Texas is better than the rest of the country at getting it right, that Texas makes fewer errors, that Texas has a lower rate of wrongful conviction. I suspect that's not the case. I'm going to instead assume the following:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
1. The jury members in Texas are neither brighter nor dimmer than their fellow jury members across the country. They are just people suddenly asked to make sense out of a complicated, obfuscated, tragic mess. (I'm fairly confident that this assumption is reasonable.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
2. The police, prosecutors, medical examiners, and forensic specialists in Texas are no better or worse at framing defendants. They are no better or worse with respect to fabricating inculpatory evidence or withholding exculpatory evidence. (I'm less confident with this assumption.) </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
3. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the agency primarily responsible for the low rate of exonerations in Texas. They allow cases to stand even when based on a confession extracted by a viable threat of torture. They forgive police for planting evidence and fabricating dying declarations, prosecutors for withholding evidence, medical examiners for prosecution friendly times-of-death, and serologists for cheap magic tricks in lieu of science. (I'm really confident of this assumption.)</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Using those three assumptions and the 11.1% wrongful conviction rate for the rest of the country, I can now calculate how many Texas death row inmates should have been exonerated rather than executed. Out of 527 death penalty cases irrevocably resolved in Texas, 11.1% of them, 58 of them, should have been exonerations. Only 12 of them were exonerated. 46 of them were instead executed when they should have been exonerated.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
To be clear, to be absolutely clear, I am indeed suggesting that Texas may have executed 46 innocent people. I can't identify all of them by name, but I can identify many of them. A few of the people likely innocent but certainly executed by the State and People of Texas are:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/10/hughes-petition-for-habeas-corpus-_-working-draft.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">Preston Hughes</span></a><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Skeptical-Juror-Trial-Cameron-Willingham/dp/0984271627"><span style="color: blue;">Cameron Todd Willingham</span></a>
<br />
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/11/three-gun-monte-sack-o-fertilizer.html"><span style="color: blue;">Frances Elaine Newton</span></a><br />
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/04/fine-folks-of-amarillo-wanted-justice.html"><span style="color: blue;">Johnny Frank Garrett</span></a></span><br />
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/08/lamont-reese-speaks-from-grave.html"><span style="color: blue;">Lamont Reese</span></a><br />
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/04/actual-innocence-scorecard-what-good-is.html"><span style="color: blue;">David Wayne Spence</span></a><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/10/grainy-case-of-kia-levoy-johnson.html" style="color: blue;">Kia Levoy Johnson</a></span><br />
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/04/actual-innocence-scorecard-for-robert.html" style="color: blue;">Robert Nelson Drew</a><br />
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/05/case-of-carlos-deluna.html"><span style="color: blue;">Carlos DeLuna</span></a><br />
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/09/unslam-undunk-case-of-richard-wayne.html" style="color: blue;">Richard Wayne Jones</a><br />
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/05/case-of-ruben-cantu.html"><span style="color: blue;">Ruben Cantu</span></a><span style="color: blue;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgU0t4QMEZY3EHFOZQRzhcbBQ9aqbnETJULaV5qwtlemh7q8fRFve_j_Q0AkLbd6We7IJt-eA-Jfw9NYFEwyU5E2Jth99kqjYoGF45cdd3F6rYfuH4A6r9JELX1n8J8ptfYO5ZLQUcy03M/s1600/Cantu_ActualInnocence.png"><br /></a></span><span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/07/truly-shocking-case-of-davis-losada.html" style="color: blue;">Davis Losada</a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgBRlDsy5f1an3qHhIsK1wpgn7X9zzWRtMyRvDr8zHb3pl1ORvHU5Aj43cr_E5uEcHiHO_eFMdsknSYPwJgbnq2V-rJntAbObuN3XbfD_OBo82qTK43BW1evYY9W1T3Mh778PVD93QMiGM/s1600/AI_Scoring_Losada.png" style="color: blue;"><br /></a></span><span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/09/truly-shocking-case-of-jesse-romero.html" style="color: blue;">Jesse Romero</a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNzbq8FtL7fze1yBYAhR66msGu-qfYU77oEmzfcju6wv-jR0ihCCE_jGutVOjbFkqYFme6qXA5zj6y5Ez_cbP1s3LJ2ihr0cgmV0XLfddLjR4PzFv62nwJyJGf6sMzQnojMCG18v0eGcM/s1600/Actual+Innocence+Scorecard+Romero.png" style="color: blue;"><br /></a></span><span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2010/08/well-orchestrated-trail-and-execution.html" style="color: blue;">David Wayne Stoker</a></span></span></blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Now for the final part of my post: the determination of how many of the innocent people executed by Texas were framed. I'll concede that I cannot make that determination without identifying and researching each case of wrongful execution in Texas. I will, however, make this observation. No one is ever accidentally, unintentionally, inadvertently convicted of a capital murder he did not commit. There is always someone working for the State to help things along.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-39920349826093304962014-05-13T18:21:00.000-07:002014-05-14T19:01:38.292-07:00The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 4<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;">This is the tenth post in the series </span><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a><span style="text-align: justify;">. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the </span><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html" style="color: black; text-align: justify;"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a><span style="text-align: justify;">.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
For a thorough overview of the case against Larry Swearingen, see <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/this-is-second-post-in-series-framing.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 1</span></a>. To understand how Larry Swearingen was framed with planted evidence, see <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-larry-swearingen-part-2.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 2</span></a>. To understand how Larry Swearingen was framed by the prosecution-friendly, medically unsound testimony of the Dr. Joye Carter, see <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-larry-swearingen-part-3.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 3</span></a>. In this post, I will discuss who might have killed Melissa Trotter.<br />
<br />
When Melissa Trotter was murdered, there was a serial ligature killer working the area. The police would not manage to capture him until three years after Larry Swearingen was convicted of the ligature strangulation of Melissa Trotter. Had they caught the serial killer sooner, Melissa Trotter might be alive today.<br />
<br />
The serial killer, the one who used ligatures to murder his victims, is Anthony Allen Shore. Shore currently resides not too far from Larry Swearingen. They are both in the Allan B. Polunsky Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. They are both on death row.<br />
<br />
The Polunsky Unit is located in West Livingston, Texas, just to the west of the Sam Houston National Forest where the body of Melissa Trotter was discovered on 2 January 1999. The State and People of Texas believe that Larry Swearingen strangled Trotter with one leg from a pair of pantyhose, then dumped her body in a remote area. So convinced are they that they hope to execute him as soon as possible.<br />
<br />
Given the rarity of ligature killings, I suggest it is more far more likely that Anthony Allen Shore strangled Melissa Trotter with one leg from a pair of pantyhose, then dumped her body in a remote area, as he was apt to do. I suggest further that DNA testing might prove that Anthony Allen Shore or some other individual murdered Melissa Trotter. The State of Texas doesn't care for the idea of any DNA testing.<br />
<br />
Not a bit.<br />
<br />
I became aware of Anthony Allen Shore only after my failed effort to save Preston Hughes from being wrongfully executed. Since the evidence showed that Hughes did not murder 15-year-old Shandra Charles and 3-year-old Marcell Taylor, I wanted to know who might have. I was surprised to learn that a serial killer of young women was working the area at the time of the murders, that the serial killer lived less than two miles from the crime scene, and that the serial killer confessed to killing his first victim nearby, two years to the day before the murders of Charles and Taylor.<br />
<br />
That serial killer was Anthony Allen Shore. I researched him and wrote extensively about him in this blog. I suspect that he has not yet confessed to all of his murders. I conclude nonetheless that he was not the person who killed Charles and Taylor. They were stabbed, each in the same precise manner; Shore strangled, usually with a ligature. The murders of Charles and Taylor were cold, deliberate, and professional. Shore murder's were uncontrolled, poorly planned, and clumsy. The murders of Charles and Taylor were probably related to drugs. Shore's murders were related to something more primitive.<br />
<br />
As I investigated Shore's murders, it occurred to me that he may have killed Melissa Trotter. I wrote of that possibility in my series "Who Murdered Melissa Trotter?", specifically the final post of that series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-anthony.html"><span style="color: blue;">Who Murdered Melissa Trotter? Anthony Allen Shore</span></a>. I'll attempt to be brief as I summarize that post here. I'll probably fail, at least with respect to being brief.<br />
<br />
<div class="p1">
If Melissa Trotter was murdered by Anthony Allen Shore, she was the victim of a fatally unfortunate string of coincidences. Such is the case of almost all those who fall prey to predatory serial killers. The victim's physical characteristics match those sought by the serial killer. The victim's behavior, while perfectly innocent, makes her vulnerable. Finally, and most coincidentally, the victim just happens to be in a specific place at a specific time when the serial killer is also there, at that specific time, at that specific place, searching for prey.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Shore preyed on young, thin, small women. By his own admission, he was particularly drawn to young women with long flowing hair, dark eyes, a nice smile, and an athletic build. Consider the image below:</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEio3of6x5N7pJ_iCC09cpr-PQbtTYKHZToMOZKgCQ7DzCx3GgJ749kZoboyqbLj4rHy8VBgf1ujPq0IubRNDmZo4bvSEJ2EGa79Zv-n53Ncp27ikbBJAoBOQaA6mSBGM1pG0KIADSJ9rG4/s400/Shores+Victims.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEio3of6x5N7pJ_iCC09cpr-PQbtTYKHZToMOZKgCQ7DzCx3GgJ749kZoboyqbLj4rHy8VBgf1ujPq0IubRNDmZo4bvSEJ2EGa79Zv-n53Ncp27ikbBJAoBOQaA6mSBGM1pG0KIADSJ9rG4/s400/Shores+Victims.jpg" height="400" width="292" /></a></div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.215999603271484px;">
From left to right, top to bottom, Shore's confessed victims plus Melissa Trotter.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.215999603271484px;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/12/who-killed-melissa-trotter-laurie-lee.html" style="color: #999999; text-decoration: none;"><span style="color: blue;">Laurie Tremblay</span></a></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.215999603271484px;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-carmen.html" style="color: #999999; text-decoration: none;"><span style="color: blue;">Carmen Estrada</span></a></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.215999603271484px;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-selma-janske.html" style="color: #999999; text-decoration: none;"><span style="color: blue;">Selma Janske</span></a> (pseudonym)</div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.215999603271484px;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-diana.html" style="color: #999999; text-decoration: none;"><span style="color: blue;">Diana Robellar</span></a></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.215999603271484px;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-dana-sanchez.html" style="color: #999999; text-decoration: none;"><span style="color: blue;">Dana Sanchez</span></a></div>
<div style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.215999603271484px;">
Melissa Trotter (possible victim)</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
At 19 years old, Melissa Trotter would have been neither the oldest nor the youngest of Shore's victims. At 5 feet 3 inches tall, she would have been neither the tallest nor the shortest of his victims. At 108 pounds, she would have been neither the heaviest nor the lightest. Melissa Trotter, tragically, seems to have been the very sort of person that Anthony Shore preyed on.</div>
<br />
Trotter's lifestyle also increased the odds that Shore would be drawn to her. Shore believed, with some justification, that women would be drawn to him. Before killing his victims, he attempted to establish a consensual sexual relationship. When quickly or eventually rejected, he used a ligature to forever silence the young woman (or young girl) who shamed him.<br />
<br />
<div class="p1">
Melissa Trotter was sexually active. Based on police investigations soon after her disappearance, she had sexual relationships with at least 18 men. I find no fault in that. I do note, however, that the behavior made her more susceptible to the superficial charms of Anthony Allen Shore. Regarding Shore's charm, I offer several quotes from <i><span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Strangler-Corey-Mitchell/dp/078601850X"><span style="color: blue;">Strangler</span></a>,</span></i> Corey Mitchell's book about Shore:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
From Gina Lynn Worley, Shore's first wife: "I was checking the mail in my mailbox and he ran down the stairs all flustered and introduced himself, saying, 'Hi! I'm Tony Shore! I'm the nicest guy you'll ever meet. I thought he was charming. He is a charming guy. He was really a nice, open genuine person." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
From the waif-like Amy Lynch, Shore's second wife, fourteen years his younger: "It was a small ceremony. I was young and naive, and he was really charming. ... He's creative. He's smart. he's talented. He's brilliant and he's charming." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
From the waif-like Shore Pauline Cody, Shore's third wife, also fourteen years his younger. "He swept me off my feet, ... he was very charming. There was a lot about him that seemed attractive. he was really smart. He was very articulate and musically inclined and just opened up my world to a lot of new things."</blockquote>
<div class="p2">
Shore had already charmed his way into the life of women even younger than Melissa Trotter. Second wife Amy Lynch moved in with Shore when she was still in high school. A chance encounter between Trotter and Shore could have led to a dating relationship that turned deadly.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
Melissa Trotter disappeared from Montgomery College. The school is located in The Woodlands, just off the I-45 interstate running north out of Houston. At the time of Trotter's disappearance, Shore was also living just off the I-45, on the 700 block of East 18th Street north of downtown Houston. The distance between Melissa's school and Shore's house was 31 miles.<br />
<br />
Shore picked up his last confessed victim, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-dana-sanchez.html"><span style="color: blue;">Dana Sanchez</span></a>, from a convenience store near his home. He drove her north on I-45, towards. Somewhere along the way he strangled her with a segment of nylon rope and dumped her body in a field half-way between his house and Montgomery College. He then continued to drive north, towards and perhaps past Montgomery College, until he found another field in which to dispose of Sanchez' clothes and personal effects.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
Not only did Shore dispose of Sanchez and her effects near where Melissa Trotter disappeared, the two bodies were laid out, possibly posed, in similar fashion. So similar is the body positioning that I have decided to show the two corpses as they were discovered. On one hand, I am reluctant to present them. They are gruesome, and there is no way that they cannot be painful to friends and family. On the other hand, a man's life is at stake.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2UjA9joquIhrTdfwxAZpnfQ7_uOZibiLr5ixI3q2GLm7xFHvPkGpzTQHLdzbxRWAr8ppH14B-ak7O0TRDT7XSqKpEZeTTwEEopWDcaWaM0_SOYYTt0hPfAdbksvz6TGk2Qq5q1GJ-HSQ/s400/Shore_Sanchez_Trotter_corpse_comparison.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2UjA9joquIhrTdfwxAZpnfQ7_uOZibiLr5ixI3q2GLm7xFHvPkGpzTQHLdzbxRWAr8ppH14B-ak7O0TRDT7XSqKpEZeTTwEEopWDcaWaM0_SOYYTt0hPfAdbksvz6TGk2Qq5q1GJ-HSQ/s400/Shore_Sanchez_Trotter_corpse_comparison.jpg" height="146" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
That is Dana Sanchez' body on the left, Melissa Trotter's body on the right. I previously used this composite image in my post on Dana Sanchez to reinforce the argument that Trotter's body had not long been in the forest. Sanchez' body had been exposed for only 8 days. Trotter's body clearly had not been exposed for 25, despite Joye Carter's ever-wavering opinion to the contrary.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
I reuse the image here to make a point that only recently occurred to me. Shore not only confessed to disposing of a body near Melissa Trotter's last known location, the two bodies ended up in nearly identical positions. Each was on her back. Each had her right arm raised above her head. Each had her left arm by her side. Each had a ligature about her neck.<br />
<br />
Not only does the composite photo provide powerful evidence of Swearingen's innocence, it might provide evidence of Shore's guilt.<br />
<br />
A month before her disappearance, Melissa Trotter was trying to extract herself from a horrifying relationship. Whomever she was seeing had begun to stalk her, frighten her, and threaten her life. The police had been told about the stalker who threatened Melissa's life, but they kept that information from Swearingen's defense team. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals declared that withholding to be nothing more than a harmless error.<br />
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
I include below portions of a post-conviction affidavit that I presented elsewhere in <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/12/the-most-innocent-man-on-death-row_6452.html"><span class="s1"><span style="color: blue;">its entirety</span></span></a>.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
My name is Lisa Roberts. I swear to the best of my knowledge, the following is true and correct: </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
1. In 1998, I was employed at League Line Marina Resort on Lake Conroe, Conroe, Texas. I was working in the phone room or call center. My job was to try to call possible customers and get them interested in the resort. About ten people worked in the phone room at this time, including Melissa Trotter. Robert Graham was our supervisor. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
2. Around November of 1998, Melissa began receiving phone calls that seemed to upset her. At first, she would hang up real abruptly. I'd ask her during a break what was going on, and she'd say something like, "men." I was pretty sure the problem wasn't customers, but Melissa did not say who was bothering her. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
3. As I recall, it was not too long before the time Melissa disappeared, she got phone calls that really upset her. Cora, who also worked in the call center, would patch the phone calls through to Melissa. Melissa broke down and started crying. She said "he won't quit calling." Cora patched another call through, and I picked up Melissa's phone. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
4 The caller thought Melissa was on the line and started saying completely foul things. He said: "You're a fucking bitch," and swore he was "going to choke the life out of me," meaning Melissa. He went on, saying that he was going to get her back for what she did to him. I remember him saying, "I'll strangle you: I'll choke the life out of you. I'm going to fuck you while you die." I started yelling back and he realized Melissa was not on the phone. That was the first phone call I took.</blockquote>
<div class="p2">
"I'll strangle you: I'll choke the life out of you. I'm going to fuck you while you die." That is exactly what Anthony Shore (nearly) did to Amy Lynch about the time of Melissa Trotter's disappearance. Amy Lynch left Anthony Shore because he nearly strangled her to death during sex.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br />
Later in Lisa Robert's affidavit:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
8. While Melissa was working at League Line, this one guy picked her up three times, as I remember. The first time Melissa seemed O.K. about it. The second time he came to get her, Melissa said "Oh god, oh god." Nickie Mains and I confronted her as the guy was pulling up. I said she did not have to get in the car with anyone she did not want to. I told her I'd get my boyfriend. Melissa said, "You don't know what that will do: that'll cause problems." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
9. The night guard would not let the guy past, so he parked on the side of the road outside the entrance. The first two times he came to get Melissa, he parked in the dark. The third time he came to get Melissa, she was scared to death. We told her not to go, and when she insisted she had to, we made her promise to call us when she got home. She called forty-five minutes later. On this third occasion, this man parked in the light and I was able to see him and his car. He was driving a pick-up, full size, and older model, light blue in color. I did not know who the person was and Melissa did not tell us his name. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
10. I know who Larry Swearingen is. I went to school with him. I had at least five classes in junior high and high school with him, including auto repair and a math class. The man who picked Melissa up was not Larry Swearingen. The voice on the phone was not Larry Swearingen's voice.</blockquote>
<div class="p2">
The police decided that the scary guy who picked Melissa up from work was Robbie Grove, who is Larry Swearingen's cousin. When, much later, Lisa Roberts was shown a picture of Robbie Grove, she identified him as the scary person who picked up Melissa from work that night. It was dark outside, but she said the scary guy was standing in the light. The police dismissed Robbie Grove as a suspect. The DNA on the blood flakes found under Melissa's fingernail did not match Grove's DNA.<br />
<br />
Perhaps it was not Robbie Grove that Lisa Roberts saw picking Melissa up that night. Perhaps it was instead someone who looked quite a bit like Robbie Grove. Someone, for example, like Anthony Shore.</div>
<div class="separator" style="background-color: white; clear: both; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAoM6K9xKppa-rr_j8Ix5EJV1F5EKCX44hhnuqXYZZP-0tFC8FqF4mNBnpP03HmJP9iE2-VaZaBsugicDm0lcJD6Mp9ZlIqOmGxIL4uIE58zlGkRSIpJs3M7AXeJUJIQBhnZ2S_wSlOck/s1600/Shore+and+Grove+comparison.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="color: #999999; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-decoration: none;"><span style="font-family: Times, Times New Roman, serif;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAoM6K9xKppa-rr_j8Ix5EJV1F5EKCX44hhnuqXYZZP-0tFC8FqF4mNBnpP03HmJP9iE2-VaZaBsugicDm0lcJD6Mp9ZlIqOmGxIL4uIE58zlGkRSIpJs3M7AXeJUJIQBhnZ2S_wSlOck/s320/Shore+and+Grove+comparison.jpg" height="184" style="border: 0px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 4px;" width="320" /></span></a></div>
<br />
That's Anthony Shore on the left, around the time of his arrest. That would be five years after Lisa Roberts saw the scary guy who waited for Melissa outside her place of work. That's Robbie Grove on the right. The picture is from his MySpace page. You need to mentally remove a decade or so from his image for a temporally-unbiased, head-to-head comparison with Anthony Shore.<br />
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
It seems to me that Anthony Shore and Robbie Grove could easily be confused in the dark. Lisa Roberts may have seen Anthony Shore. I can understand why, when shown a picture of Robbie Grove years later she thought he could have been the man she saw that night.</div>
</div>
<div class="p2">
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
One of the mysteries surrounding the murder of Melissa Trotter is her location between the time of her disappearance on 8 December 1999 and the dumping of her body within days of its discovery. Someone had held her captive for two to three weeks. During that time, she had been well fed. Beyond the ligature around her neck, there was no evidence she had been bound. Her body showed no obvious sign of injury other than those associated with the strangulation.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Whoever murdered her possessed her for two to three weeks, and Shore liked to possess his victims. From his confession to the rape of Selma Janske:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Hell, I did this, at this time I, it's a sexual union, had something to do with it. The more I'm thinking in retrospect, that it's having to do with possession of a person. Making them ... do ... things.</blockquote>
<div class="p1">
Anthony Shore had engaged in several behaviors consistent with possessing someone in the fashion that Melissa was held captive.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
He left his daughters alone in the house. To insure they did not leave, he installed deadbolts on the doors, requiring keys both inside and out. He glued the windows shut.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
He routinely drugged his daughters by putting Benadryl in their hot chocolate.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
He bound Selma Janske, Diana Robellar, and Dana Sanchez with duct tape. Such a binding would not leave ligature marks.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
On multiple occasions he drugged his first wife, Gina Worley, with Rohypnol, the date rape drug.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
On one occasion, his third wife, Pauline Cody, found a suspicious powdery substance in the refrigerator. Shore told her the drug belonged to a friend and that Shore was going to help that friend use it on "a woman they all knew" so that Shore could "take advantage of her." That was the night Pauline awoke to find Shore choking her as he was raping her. She left him after that.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Given his experience with jailing his daughters, binding his victims, and drugging women, Shore was well experienced and well equipped to keep Melissa Trotter captive for several weeks.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
The question naturally arises as to where Shore may have held her captive. Assuming he killed Melissa Trotter, I believe I know where. I believe he kept her in his own house on the 700 block of East 18th Street, slightly north of downtown Houston. I realize that Amy Shore was living there around that time, but I wonder if she was actually there at that specific time. I note this paragraph from <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Strangler-Corey-Mitchell/dp/078601850X"><span class="s1">Strangler</span></a>, discussing Shore's dejection after Amy left him because he attacked her.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Tony Shore's downward spiral continued unabated. He spent Christmas alone, he had not heard from either of his daughters, and his divorce from Amy was pending.</blockquote>
<div class="p1">
So neither Amy or either of Shore's daughters was with him around Christmas of 1998 when Melissa Trotter was missing. Shore's daughters had gone to California earlier and would never return to him. I don't know where Amy was, but she was apparently not at home around Christmas of 1998.</div>
<div class="p2">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
</div>
<div class="p1">
Possibly relevant also is what Pauline Shore found when she moved into the house after Amy Lynch moved out for good. Some of the walls inside the house had been recently repainted, and brown paper was on all the windows. Shore explained that he was repainting the house in exchange for rent and that the brown paper was to keep the paint off the windows.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1">
Perhaps.<br />
<br />
(To be continued)</div>
</div>
</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-89141602806261717132014-05-12T20:10:00.000-07:002014-05-12T22:35:51.020-07:00The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 3<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is the ninth post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a>. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html" style="color: black;"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;">For a thorough overview of the case against Larry Swearingen, see</span><span style="text-align: justify;"> </span><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/this-is-second-post-in-series-framing.html" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 1</span></a><span style="text-align: justify;">. To understand how Larry Swearingen was framed with planted evidence, see <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-larry-swearingen-part-2.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 2</span></a>. In this post, I will discuss how Larry Swearingen was framed by the prosecution-friendly, medically unsound testimony of the Dr. Joye Carter.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;">Joye Carter assumed the role of Chief Medical Examiner for Harris County in June of 1996. That was six years after <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-preston-hughes-part-2.html"><span style="color: blue;">Dr. Robert Jordan</span></a> (of that same office) participated in the framing of Preston Hughes. She replaced the legendary </span>Dr. Joseph Jachimczyk, aka Dr. Joe, who had held the office for the prior 37 years. Dr. Carter would serve for six years, leaving the office in 2002. That was two years after she participated in the framing of Larry Swearingen.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Her six years as Chief Medical Examiner were not without controversy. Consider, for example the case of <span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=13141207315192172183"><span style="color: blue;">Neal Hampton Robbins</span></a>.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In 1999, Robbins was tried for the capital murder of his girlfriend's 17-month-old child, Tristen Rivet. The State's case depended almost entirely on the expert medical opinion of Dr. Patricia Moore. Just as had Joye Carter, Patricia Moore joined the Harris County Medical Examiner's Office (HCMEO) in 1996 and left in 2002. During that time, Carter supervised the relatively inexperienced Moore, and Carter approved Moore's autopsy reports. Though Carter at least once formally chastised Moore for providing prosecution-friendly findings, Carter approved several of Moore's autopsy reports that were later re-examined and revised. One of those later-revised reports related to the case of Neal Hampton Robbins.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
At Robbins trial, Dr. Moore testified that the 17-month-old child died from asphyxia due to compression of the chest and abdomen. The defense argued that the injuries described by Dr. Moore resulted from <span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; line-height: 18px; text-align: start;">aggressive adult-type CPR performed by persons untrained in infant CPR. The jury agreed with Dr. Moore, convicted Robbins based on her testimony, and sentenced him to life imprisonment.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In 2007, Dr. Dwayne Wolf of the HCMEO re-evaluated the autopsy report of Drs. Moore and Carter. After reviewing the autopsy report, the police reports, the medical records, and the trial testimony, Dr. Wolf concluded that the office could not stand by report. Consequently, he amended it to reflect that both the cause and manner of death were undetermined.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Joye Carter, who had left the office in 2002, was also asked to reconsider the autopsy report. In a letter to the district attorney, she wrote, "Upon my review of this case I would not concur with the opinion on the manner of death as a homicide but would reconsider this case as an undetermined manner." She added "If the Harris County Medical Examiner intends to re-rule this case as an undetermined manner of death I would agree with that change."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Patricia Moore, who had also left the office in 2002, was also asked to reconsider the autopsy report. She also wrote a letter to the district attorney. It read in part:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I believe that there are unanswered questions as to why the child died, and I still feel that this is a suspicious death of a young child. Given my review of all the material from the case file and having had more experience in the field of forensic pathology, I now feel that an opinion for a cause and manner of death of undetermined, undetermined is best for this case.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After a post-conviction hearing, the judge heaped praise on the work of Dr. Wolf and heaped scorn on the work of Drs. Moore and Carter. Regarding Joye Carter, the judge wrote that Carter's original opinions were "not true," and that her new opinions lack credibility. "They are not stated with or grounded in any scientific or pathological reasoning. Her statement that she would now defer to a hypothetical `re-rule' made by the HCMEO, while at the same time not giving any medical or other bases to support her opinions, is disturbing."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Despite the post-conviction findings of Dr. Wolf and multiple other experts, and despite the recantations of Drs. Moore and Carter, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Robbins a new trial since he had "failed to prove that the new evidence unquestionably establishes his innocence."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That would not be the only case in which the Patricia Moore / Joye Carter combination resulted in autopsy reports that led to questionable convictions. In the case of Brandy Biggs, Drs. Moore and Carter concluded that 2-month-old Daniel Lemons had died of Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS). Brandy Briggs was charged with the murder. She could not afford the experts needed to refute Moore's impending testimony and, on the advice of her attorney, she pled guilty to a lesser charge of child endangerment. She was sentenced to 17 years in prison.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The autopsy report was later reviewed by Dr. Carter's replacement, Dr. Louis Sanchez. He reviewed the medical findings and found no evidence of SBS or any other form of abuse. Instead he learned that when the baby had been taken to the hospital, the medical personnel had inadvertently inserted the breathing tube into the stomach rather the a lung. The baby was left without oxygen for 40 minutes. Dr. Sanchez changed the cause of death to asphyxia. Briggs was eventually exonerated and released.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There were also the infant-death cases of Ruth Ann Gilliam, Franck Chavez, and Cynthia Cash. In fact, Patricia Moore had an unusual penchant for finding cases of SBS, at least according to Dr. Jim Bromberg. He points out that, based on numbers from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Houston metropolitan area should see two fatal cases each year. Dr. Moore by herself found seven during an 18-month period. Some or all of the resulting autopsy reports were approved by Joye Carter, only later to be revised by her replacements only after convictions for murder.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The problems under Joye Carter's leadership of the HCMEO were not limited to the suspicious autopsies of Patricia Moore. Dr. Carter herself faced revocation of her medical license and loss of her job for allowing an unlicensed pathologist to perform autopsies. The Texas Board of Medical Examiners filed a formal complaint against Carter and recommended that she be formally reprimanded and fined up to $50,000. In the end, she was fined only $1,000.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Two wrongful-termination civil suits, however, cost the people of Harris County far more than $1,000. Though Joye Carter never got around to firing Patricia Moore for providing prosecution-friendly autopsy reports and trial testimony, she did fire Drs. Elizabeth Johnson and Marilyn Murr.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Dr. Carter fired Dr. Johnson allegedly for working at unauthorized times. Johnson claimed that she was fired because she refused to modify her scientific conclusions to correspond with the State's theory of a specific case. The jury agreed with Dr. Johnson and awarded her $315,000.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Dr. Carter fired Dr. Murr because Murr had secretly recorded some of their conversations about the unlicensed pathologist. In the whistle-blower suit to follow, one of Murr's claims was that Carter had instructed her to modify autopsy findings to make them more favorable to the State. According to Murr, Joye Carter wanted some foreign hairs found on a corpse to be classified as contamination, since the hairs exculpated the State's primary suspect.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Holy Similarities, Batman!</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The jury awarded Murr $250,000, but that verdict was later set aside by an appeals court.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Another instance, minor in comparison to the problems mentioned above, highlights Joye Carter's defensive, "it's not my fault", "I'm a victim too" attitude towards her job. Under her supervision, bodies were being stacked one on top another, and even on top of two others, due to a shortage of metal trays. One photograph, for example, showed an infant's body between two adult bodies. The risks of contamination are obvious.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Carter at first denied that such body-stacking was taking place. She then conceded that it did indeed happen, but offered an interesting excuse. In a bit of spectacular irony, she claimed that the photographs were staged by disgruntled employees. In other words, she claimed she was framed. Regarding the photographs and five anonymous letters sent to county officials about the office, Joye Carter told a reporter: "We've had enough, and it needs to be known that the office is being harassed."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
This incident blew up in the three-week window between Larry Swearingen's arrest and the discovery of Melissa Trotter's body. At Swearingen's trial, Dr. Carter conceded that she took a special interest in his case. She normally conducted 40 to 50 autopsies a year, compared to 500 a year for the other pathologists in the office. She reserved for herself the autopsies in high-profile cases, and the Swearingen case had certainly become high-profile. The police had their suspect behind bars before the body was found, and that made news.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Dr. Carter conducted the autopsy of Melissa Trotter on 3 January 1999. That was one day after Melissa's body had been discovered, 25 days after Trotter had disappeared, and 22 days after Larry Swearingen had been arrested. Though Dr. Carter was perhaps lethally slow to acknowledge the point, her autopsy proved that Larry Swearingen could not have been the person who killed Melissa Trotter.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The body had started to decompose. It had suffered some early insect habitation and rodent predation. The internal organs nonetheless revealed that the body had only recently been deposited in the forest. Within days of death, internal organs begin to liquify. Trotter's internal organs were in such good shape that Dr. Carter was able to slice them and preserve them as microscope slides.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The body weight was also a powerful indication of Trotter's recent demise. As bodies decompose, they quickly loose weight due to desiccation, decomposition, and predation. After three weeks, a body may lose as much as 90% of its body mass. So fresh was Melissa Trotter's body that it had lost less than 4% of its weight.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
You need not take my word for these insights into pathology. Dr. Carter herself made these points as part of an affidavit she signed after Larry Swearingen had been convicted of killing Melissa Trotter. From her affidavit.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Pancreas, spleen and liver tissues is [sic] known to autolyze [liquify] quickly. At room temperature, it is not unusual for these organs to liquefy within days. ... The presence of these organs in the condition described at autopsy supports a forensic opinion that the body of Ms. Trotter was not exposed in the Sam Houston National Forest until some time after December 12, 1998. These internal findings support a forensic opinion that the body had not been exposed more than two weeks in the forest environment. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The weight of the Trotter's corpse at autopsy increases the level of confidence that can be placed in the forensic conclusions drawn from findings made during the internal examination of the body. Whether the process of decomposition results in liquification or in desiccation of body tissues, substantial weight loss will normally occur in bodies left for a three week period in the type of environment in which Ms. Trotter's body was found. In this case, the weight of the body nude at autopsy (105 lbs) was only four pounds less than her weight at her doctor's office (109 lbs) two weeks before her appearance. ... This indicates that Ms. Trotter's body lost less than 4% of its weight from the time the body was left in the woods to the time it was autopsied, and supports a forensic opinion that Ms. Trotter's body was left in the woods within two weeks of the date of discovery on January 2, 1999.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Had Dr. Carter included such an unambiguous forensic conclusion in her autopsy report, Larry Swearingen would never have faced trial for the murder of Melissa Trotter, I would not be writing this series, and you would not be reading this post. Instead, Dr. Carter made no mention whatsoever of the time or date of death in the autopsy report.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After having remained mute on the subject in her autopsy report, Dr. Carter then framed Larry Swearingen at his trial. I present the critical portion of her testimony below.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Q. Based on the evidence that you saw and the evidence you've since gathered, do you have an opinion as to how long that body had been there? The rate of decomposition and all that, do you have an opinion as to the time of death?</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A. Yes, I did form an opinion. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<blockquote>
Q. What was that? </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<blockquote>
A. I arrived at the opinion of the body being dead for approximately 25 days or so, based upon the appearance. </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<blockquote>
Q. So if a person disappeared on December the 8th of 1999 and the body was recovered on January 2nd of 1999, that would be consistent with your findings? </blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin: 0px; text-align: justify;">
<blockquote>
A. Yes, it would.</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Holy Prosecution-Friendly Testimony, Batman!<br />
<br />
Despite the inability of any other pathologist to determine the precise date of death of a decomposing body, and despite the nearly pristine state of the Trotter's internal organs, and despite the undiminished weight of Trotter's corpse, and despite the fresh blood flake found under one of Trotter's fingernails, Dr. Joye Carter was able to magically determine that Melissa Trotter died on the very day when she was supposed to meet the defendant.<br />
<br />
That is absolutely incredible, in the strict sense of "not believable".<br />
<br />
With Dr. Carter's testimony, coupled with the testimony that the pantyhose remnant was found at the defendant's trailer, Larry Swearingen became a dead man walking. It makes no difference to the State and People of Texas that Joye Carter's testimony has been impeached ten times over by ten scientists and medical experts. It makes no difference that Joye Carter herself was one of those ten experts, that she recanted her trial testimony. This entire case comes down to the disturbing fact that Joye Carter testified in front of a jury, under oath, that Melissa Trotter had been murdered 25 days before her body was discovered. Everything else is judicial fluff.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="text-align: justify;">I have previously discussed the affidavits of the experts who have thoroughly impeached Joye Carter's testimony. You can find them buried within two series I have already written on this case: <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2011/08/absolutely-astounding-case-of-larry.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Absolutely Astounding Case of Larry Swearingen</span></a> and <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/12/the-most-innocent-man-on-death-row.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Most Innocent Man on Death Row</span></a>. I suggest that the second of the two series provides the better summary. I'll not discuss the affidavits again here. Instead, I choose to discuss Joye Carter's willingness to swear to whatever may be convenient for her at the moment.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In her autopsy report, Joye Carter took no position regarding the date of Melissa Trotter's death. At trial, the DA never got around to asking her about her professional medical opinion about the date of death.<br />
<br />
No, he did not.<br />
<br />
He asked her a much different question. Again from the transcripts, emphasis mine:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Q. Based on the evidence that you saw and <b>the evidence you've since gathered</b>, do you have an opinion as to how long that body had been there?</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He asked for her opinion, not for her professional medical opinion. Furthermore, he did not ask for her opinion based solely on the autopsy that she performed; he asked her for her opinion based on the autopsy plus the evidence she had gathered since the autopsy. I suspect that other evidence included learning that the pantyhose remnant of the murder weapon was conveniently discovered three days after the autopsy in a trashcan near Swearingen's home.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Dr. Carter's answer was too specific and too vague at the same time. It was far too specific in that she opined that the murder took place on a specific day, the day Swearingen was scheduled to meet Trotter. It was too vague with respect to any explanation for the basis of her opinion.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A. I arrived at the opinion of the body being dead for approximately 25 days or so, based upon the appearance. </div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
She gave her opinion, not necessarily her professional medical opinion. She based her opinion on the appearance of something she did not specify. It could not have been the appearance of the body, since it had lost almost no weight. It could not have been the appearance of the internal organs, since they were nearly pristine. Perhaps it was the general appearance of Swearingen's guilt. The pantyhose remnant had, after all, been discovered outside his home. It would certainly look foolish to claim the body had been deposited in the Houston National Forest well after he was jailed. Dr. Carter therefore gave a convenient answer, one in line with that desired by the police and the district attorney.<br />
<br />
Well after her testimony had been instrumental in convicting Swearingen, Drs. Glenn Larkin, Lloyd White, Louis Sanchez (Carter's replacement), and others explained to the courts and the public that her autopsy report actually exculpated Swearingen. Swearingen's appellate team tracked Joye Carter. down, provided her with the expert opinions, and asked her if she would also prepare and sign an affidavit. To her credit, she agreed to do so.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After a brief introduction, she blamed others for her fatally flawed estimate of Melissa Trotter's date of death. She blamed the attorneys for not asking her the right questions, and she blamed unnamed sources for not providing her with valuable information. From her affidavit:
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Review of my testimony reveals that I was not asked by prosecutors, or by defense counsel, to address the significance of my internal examination of Ms. Trotter's body. Nor was I asked to address in detail the question of how long Ms. Trotter's body had been left exposed in the Sam Houston National Forest. ... I have also reviewed several pieces of forensically important information that, to the best of my recollection, were not made available to [me] during trial or pretrial proceedings. This information includes a video of the crime scene dated January 2, 1999, the date the body of Melissa Trotter was recovered from the Sam Houston National Forest, medical records giving Melissa Trotter's weight before she was reported missing, and temperature data showing daily high, low and average temperatures in the Conroe, Texas area for the period December 8, 1998 through January 2, 1999. ... </blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The forensic opinions, herein [in this affidavit] ... represent what I would have testified to at trial if I had been provided this information and if attorneys for the state or defense had asked me to address the significance of findings made pursuant to the internal examination of Ms. Trotter's body.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After blaming the living in her affidavit, Dr. Carter blamed the dead. She claimed there was something unusual about Melissa Trotter's body. Dr. Carter suggested that the body's external decomposition indicated an earlier date of death, but the body's internal decomposition indicated a date of death no more than two weeks earlier. It was this "strikingly uneven" decomposition, coupled with the inadequate questioning of counsel, that caused her to testify to a date of death that only coincidentally corresponded with the State's theory of the case. Again from her affidavit:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Decomposition in this case was strikingly uneven. The decomposition seen in during [sic] the external examination of the body, particularly of the head and neck region, was substantial. ... The amount of decomposition described pursuant to the internal examination of the body appears less advanced. The autopsy report reflects that internal organs were in their usual anatomic positions. Several of these organs, including the pancreas, the spleen and the liver, were dissected out, sectioned, examined for pre-existing pathology, photographed and described. Organ weights were near or within normal range. </blockquote>
</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Pancreas, spleen and liver tissues is [sic] known to autolyze [liquify] quickly. ... The presence of these organs in the condition described at autopsy supports a forensic opinion that the body of Ms. Trotter was not exposed in the Sam Houston National Forest until some time after December 12, 1998. These internal findings support a forensic opinion that the body had not been exposed more than two weeks in the forest environment.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the last paragraph of her affidavit, Dr. Carter addressed the awkward issue of the body's weight.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The weight of the Trotter's corpse at autopsy increases the level of confidence that can be placed in the forensic conclusions drawn from findings made during the internal examination of the body. Whether the process of decomposition results in liquification or in desiccation of body tissues, substantial weight loss will normally occur in bodies left for a three week period in the type of environment in which Ms. Trotter's body was found. In this case, the weight of the body nude at autopsy (105 lbs) was only four pounds less than her weight at her doctor's office (109 lbs) two weeks before her appearance. ... This indicates that Ms. Trotter's body lost less than 4% of its weight from the time the body was left in the woods to the time it was autopsied, and supports a forensic opinion that Ms. Trotter's body was left in the woods within two weeks of the date of discovery on January 2, 1999.</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That affidavit, if allowed to stand, may have freed Larry Swearingen. Joye Carter, however, was not finished waffling. She was not finished bending whichever way the wind was blowing. The prosecutors, realizing the devastating effect of Joye Carter's recantation of her trial testimony, convinced her it would be best to distance herself from her affidavit. From <i><a href="http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/courier/news/defense-attacks-examiner-s-flip-flop-in-swearingen-case/article_39e644bf-8707-5fca-aa9b-dcdc94d5c1fb.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Courier of Montgomery County</span></a></i>:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-top: 0px;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Dr. Joye Carter, former medical examiner for Harris County, vehemently stood by [her trial] testimony Tuesday in the 9th state District Court of Judge Fred Edwards, despite repeated attempts by defense attorney James Rytting to hold her to an affidavit she signed and had notarized Oct. 31, 2007, which secured, in part, Swearingen’s August 2011 stay of execution. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-top: 0px;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The affidavit, Rytting noted in his cross-examination, states that the significance of the internal autopsy findings support a forensic opinion that Trotter’s body could not have been exposed longer than two weeks in Sam Houston National Forest where she was discovered Jan. 2, 1999. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-top: 0px;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
“I did not at any time say I recanted my original comments in trial – and I didn’t say it afterward,” Carter said. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="margin-top: 0px;">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
“It’s possible,” Carter responded frequently to Rytting’s string of hypothetical questioning on whether Trotter’s body could have been exposed less than six days.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not surprisingly, Joye Carter blamed someone else for her affidavit. She blamed Swearingen's appellate attorney, James Rytting.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Rytting submitted that Carter’s affidavit conflicted with her testimony, citing examples from the affidavit as evidence. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From the affidavit: “The forensic opinions, herein, address the significance of autopsy findings made during the internal examinations of Ms. Trotter’s body in the context of the foregoing information. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
“They represent what I would have testified to at trial if I had been provided this information and if attorneys for the state or defense had asked me to address the significance of the findings made pursuant to the internal examination of Ms. Trotter’s body.” </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Carter argued that the wording in the affidavit did not belong to her, explaining to Edwards that it was written by Rytting. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
“I could not force you to sign an affidavit that you don’t believe in,” Rytting said. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
“Yeah you could,” Carter replied. “It is not that I didn’t believe in it. The initial conversation we had, information was not brought up. There was not a pretrial discussion that I recall with the other attorney. I said there is a possibility and I distinctly told you I would not agree to two or three days postmortem interval. I absolutely would not and that was why I believe this wording was in this way.” </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Chief Prosecutor Warren Diepraam said he thinks Carter made a mistake by signing the affidavit but is confident she will not be signing any attorney-written affidavits anytime soon.</div>
</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I suspect the Chief Prosecutor Diepraam is correct. Joye Carter will no longer lift a finger to save Larry Swearingen. She will unwaveringly stand by her medical opinion, what it may be at the moment.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In 2000, the same year in which she participated in the framing of Larry Swearingen, Biblical Dogs Press published Joye Carter's autobiography. At the ripe of age of 43, she titled her autobiography <i><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Strength-Comes-Within-Joye-Carter/dp/0970372264"><span style="color: blue;">My Strength Comes from Within</span></a></i>.
</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-26357051804783065862014-05-11T09:39:00.000-07:002014-05-11T09:39:25.403-07:00Mother's Day 2014<div style="text-align: justify;">
The year 2012 was a difficult year for me, for many reasons. One of the reasons was that my mother died. She died before Mother's Day 2012, so this will be the third that I cannot wish her a happy Mother's Day.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Even when my mother was alive, Mother's Day meant something different to me than most people. I've noticed that most (not all, but most) of the people who fight stubbornly to free loved ones are mothers. On Mother's Day, therefore, I find myself thinking of those who have lost children for crimes they did not commit.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It seems inappropriate to wish them a happy Mother's Day as their children languish in prison, or lie in a grave, for crimes they did not commit. Furthermore, it seems insensitive to merely ignore them for fear of not having the right words. I therefore want to take this opportunity to offer my best wishes to some of those mothers, to those I have worked with and continue to work with.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I offer my best wishes to Evelyn Case. Her son Byron is serving two life sentences without possibility of parole for a murder he did not commit. Byron's petition to Governor Nixon for an absolute pardon is <a href="http://freebyroncase.com/documents/ByronPetition.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. My two letters to Governor Nixon in support of that petition are <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/12/case-letter-to-governor-nixon-2011-09-23.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a> and <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/12/case-letter-to-governor-nixon-2012-05-10.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. My book on the case is <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Skeptical-Juror-Trial-Byron-Case/dp/0984271600"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. The free PDF version is <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2013/05/case-trial-of-byron-case.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. Byron's case is gaining some traction, but I'll discuss that no further here.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I offer my best wishes to Pat Ledford. Her son Michael is serving 50 years without the possibility of parole for a murder he did not commit. Michael's petition to Governor McDonnell, which I prepared with the help of his mother, is <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2013/05/ledford-petition-absolute-pardon.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. Michael's case is gaining some traction, but I'll discuss that no further here.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I offer my best wishes to Brenda Johnson. Her son Preston Hughes III was executed for a crime he did not commit. Preston's application for Writ of Habeas Corpus, which I prepared, is <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/10/hughes-petition-for-habeas-corpus-_-working-draft.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. I continue to work with Brenda on her son's case, but I'll discuss that no further here.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I also offer my best wishes to Alice Jackson. Her teenage daughter, Monalisa Espinosa, was murdered. The case remains unsolved. Last year I was contacted by Victor Jackson. Victor and I have built a working relationship that has led to some new discoveries in several cases of interest to us both.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
On this Mother's Day, 2013, I offer my best wishes to Evelyn Case, Pat Ledford, Brenda Johnson, and Alice Jackson.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-34693715431973874782014-05-07T12:07:00.001-07:002014-05-11T11:16:56.957-07:00The Framing of Preston Hughes, Part 2<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is the eighth post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a>. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html" style="color: black;"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
During the night of 26 September 1988, fifteen-year-old Shandra Charles and her 3-year-old cousin Marcell Taylor died along a narrow dirt trail passing through a dark, overgrown field west of Houston. Each child was stabbed in the same, precise manner: once in the upper left chest, once through the left side of the neck. Marcell Taylor suffered a perforated carotid artery and a perforated jugular vein. Though it would seem impossible, Shandra Charles' neck wound was even more serious. Both her carotid and jugular had been completely severed.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Without immediate medical attention, people cannot long survive a severed carotid. With each beat of the heart, blood spurts from the carotid rather than delivering its oxygen to the brain. The victim loses consciousness within a minute and dies within another.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Six months after Shandra Charles bled out on that lonely dirt trail, hockey goaltender Clint Malarchuk had his carotid artery severed by a skate blade. He instinctively applied pressure to his wound and skated immediately towards his team's trainer. "All I wanted to do was get off the ice," he later explained. "My mother was watching the game on TV, and I didn't want her to see me die."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The photograph below shows just a bit of the blood Malarchuk spilled while trying to keep his mother from seeing him die.</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p4" style="text-align: center;">
<span id="docs-internal-guid-8ca14ff3-d7b9-ea6e-5e49-3e9708b281cb"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img height="268px;" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/tMFJoI-46xn9r5emMO-QQRhvdz1cGM7fJa865PjkCGCfqrkpKwnMwc2IJStd6fLrMjJxhKKIPwr8Stbk9Lj61JCLfdsusf08LH2TBfzK8lfF4NtE1USPSn3rpiDGkivNIg" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0rad); border: none;" width="407px;" /></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The photograph below shows some of the blood Shandra Charles spilled during the last two minutes of her life.</div>
</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p5" style="text-align: center;">
<span id="docs-internal-guid-8ca14ff3-d7ba-4b5d-7b55-3899d6035c7b"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img alt="CrimeScene9 elongated blood stain.png" height="215px;" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/7swPbQxnE69FZtPbA-vBAqMBqyxmmg7-K63KqcGCk2YPUC2uuGpBKofbquHgv46ALuT1YEjcvOtzVfACBhni75snxMo1XYb-FHg-GyoYJceifKgqwUcZ5qaIkQruFsHbFw" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0rad); border: none;" width="432px;" /></span></span></div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Clint Malarchuk survived because team trainer Jim Pizzutelli had been an Army medic in Vietnam. Pizzutelli reached into Malarchuk's neck and pinched the carotid closed until doctors could stitch the ends back together.</div>
</div>
<div class="p1">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Jim Pizzutelli was not around to save Shandra Charles. No one was. Of the many police officers who arrived before the paramedics, not one of them attempted to save her. Not one of them applied pressure to either of her wounds. Not one them tried to compress her heart. Not one of them attempted to breathe life into her. It was obvious that she was dead and beyond saving.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Houston Police Patrol Sergeant Donald L. Hamilton was one of those police officers who made no effort to save Shandra Charles. Though he arrived late on the scene, he claimed she was still alive and conscious, but bleeding badly from both her chest and neck. He did not, however, insert his fingers into her neck and pinch closed her severed carotid. He did not even apply pressure to either of her wounds. Instead, he claims he interviewed her, that she responded clearly and precisely, and that she told him that the person who attacked her was "Preston."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sgt. Hamilton explained all this during his trial testimony, while under oath, while speaking to the jury that was to decide Preston Hughes' fate. In an affidavit prepared shortly before the execution, retired medical examiner Dr. Robert Lloyd White signed an affidavit substantiating the point I had been making for months and months: Shandra Charles could not have provided a dying declaration to anyone. From that affidavit.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
[I]t is neither anatomically nor physiologically possible that Ms. Charles could've been conscious for more than 30-60 seconds given the expected rate of blood loss when a common carotid artery is cut. The electric activity in the brain simply stops after even a short interruption in blood flow. ... [I]t is simply not medically feasible that this young woman ... could have spoken to the officers as they claimed.</blockquote>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Dr. White is hardly the only medical professional to explain that people rapidly lapse into unconsciousness after suffering a severed carotid. Various appellate court decisions preserve similar opinions from at least eight medical experts who testified under oath during criminal trials. <span class="s1">Of those eight medical experts, each testified that a person would lose consciousness within minutes of experiencing a severed carotid. A summary of their estimates follows.</span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
People v. Mayfield, CA, 1997 – "immediately"<br />
State v. Penley, TN, 2003 – "within seconds"<br />
State v. Henretta, TN, 2009 – "30 seconds"<br />
Cooper v. Brown, CA, 2007 – "within 60 seconds"<br />
People v. De Sarno, NY, 1986 – "60 seconds"<br />
State v. Bonds, TN, 2010 – "a few minutes"<br />
Jefferson v. State, AL, 1984 – "several minutes"<br />
Commonwealth v. Lambert, 2000, PA – "3 minutes"</blockquote>
<div class="p5" style="text-align: justify;">
Police officers, such as Sergeant Hamilton, have long known that they can quickly render people unconscious by use of a carotid control hold. The hold compresses both carotid arteries and thereby prevents blood from reaching the brain. <span class="s2">If the hold is properly applied, unconsciousness follows quickly. If the hold is not promptly relaxed, death follows.</span></div>
<div class="p5" style="text-align: justify;">
<span class="s2"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In 1982, six years before Shandra Charles allegedly gave her dying declaration, the Los Angeles Police Department restricted the use of choke holds after they led to sixteen deaths in eight years. The deaths summarized below are the only three attributed to insufficient blood to the brain and accompanied by an estimated time of carotid compression:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert Cameron died on 20 December 1979 from a carotid control hold maintained for less than 90 seconds. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Luel Marshall died on 3 February 1981 from a carotid control hold maintained for approximately 5 seconds, followed later by a carotid control hold maintained for 2 to 3 seconds. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert Cousins died on 12 May 1981 from from a carotid control hold maintained for approximately 20 seconds.</blockquote>
<div class="p5" style="text-align: justify;">
Judo experts also know that opponents can be quickly rendered unconscious by constricting the carotid arteries. From "Deaths Allegedly Caused by the Use of 'Choke Holds' (Shime-Waza)":</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
The "choke holds" known as shime-waza used in the sport of judo have been taught and used by law enforcement officers to subdue violent suspects. ... If the carotid artery hold is properly applied, unconsciousness occurs in approximately 10 seconds (8-14 seconds).</blockquote>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Police and judo strangle holds deprive the brain of blood by compressing both carotids. Shandra Charles' brain was deprived of blood because way too much of it gushed from her severed carotid. She bled out. She had too little blood to maintain brain function. In medical parlance, she exsanguinated.</div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
An exsanguination study on sheep provides further insight into how long Shandra Charles could have survived after her carotid was severed. The cardiovascular system of sheep is coincidentally similar to that of a human the size of Shandra Charles, at least in terms of blood volume and pumping rate. Sheep are often slaughtered by severing one or both of their carotid arteries. To determine whether the technique is humane, the study monitored the brain function of sheep after their carotids were severed to determine how quickly they succumbed. On average, the sheep who had only one of their carotids severed lost all brain function within 70 seconds.</div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The jury was never informed that Shandra Charles would have lapsed into unconsciousness soon after her carotid was severed, nor were they informed that she would have died soon after losing consciousness. Instead the jury was told that Shandra Charles could have lived for more than four hours after suffering her injuries. From the trial testimony of Assistant Medical Examiner Robert Jordan, under the tailored questioning of Assistant DA Chuck Noll:</div>
<div class="p6">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Q. Let me ask you this, Doctor. Would it have been possible, based on her injuries, for her to have been stabbed as early as 8:30 in the evening on September 26th of 1988, if she died from these injuries at 12:58, I believe you said, in the a.m. on the following day? … <span class="s1">Can you tell?</span> </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A. Not with any certainty. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Q. Okay. Is it difficult to pinpoint times of injuries and times of death when cutting and stabbing injuries are involved? </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A. Yes, sir. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Q. Is that because -- why is that? </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
A. The determination of the time of death is difficult, at best. With cutting and stabbing injuries, it is even more difficult because one has to consider the loss of blood and people bleed at different rates from different sharp trauma wounds. One cannot be sure, either, of the amount of medical support the decedent received in the interval from injury to death.</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="p1">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Instead of hearing medical evidence that Shandra Charles died so quickly that she could not have provided anyone with a dying declaration, the jury heard that Shandra Charles could have lived for four and a half hours, from 8:30 PM on Monday to 12:58 AM on Tuesday. I will explain how the prosecutor and his prosecution-friendly witness executed this slight-of-hand and thereby helped execute Preston Hughes.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
First, Shandra Charles did not die at 12:58 AM, as Chuck Noll suggested in his hypothetical question. Chuck Noll loved hypothetical questions. They allowed him to solicit answers to questions that misstated the evidence. The witness didn't commit perjury and Noll didn't suborn perjury, because he said "if." He did not say that Shandra Charles died at 12:58 AM; he instructed his witness to assume that Shandra Charles died at 12:58 AM. "If" the jury misunderstood, then that was their problem.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
The facts are:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Shandra Charles died shortly before 11:30 PM on a lonely trail crossing a dark, overgrown field. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
None of the many police officers to arrive on the scene lifted a finger to save her or revive her. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The paramedics attempted to resuscitate her and rushed her to a nearby hospital. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The hospital refused to admit her and sent her instead, along with the paramedics, to the distant Ben Taub Hospital. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Shandra Charles was declared dead on arrival at Ben Taub at 12:58 AM. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Shandra Charles did not die at 12:58 AM, even though the jury never heard any honest, straightforward medical testimony about her ability to survive her wounds.</blockquote>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Assistant DA Chuck Noll avoided suborning perjury by qualifying his questions with "if". Assistant Medical Examiner Robert Jordan avoided perjuring himself by being conveniently ignorant of the critical facts of the case. He testified that he couldn't be sure how long Shandra Charles lived because he did not know "the amount of medical support the decedent received in the interval from injury to death." Perhaps, he might have reasoned, someone stuck his fingers in her neck and pinched off her severed carotid artery. If someone had done that, she might have lived four and a half hours. She might even be alive today. Right? Who knows?</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
It seems unlikely that the prosecution could have selected any medical examiner more ignorant of the case than Robert Jordan. Dr. Jordan did not perform the autopsy on Shandra Charles, nor did he perform the autopsy on Marcell Taylor. He was not in the room when either autopsy was conducted. He apparently knew nothing about the case until shortly before trial when, presumably, Chuck Noll prepped him for his testimony. Under cross-examination, Dr. Jordan conceded that he had not even read the autopsy reports until earlier that morning, while sitting in his car.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not only was Preston Hughes framed by planted evidence, as described in the previous post, he was framed by the intentionally unrevealing, prosecution friendly testimony of a uninformed witness from the Office of the Medical Examiner for Harris County.<br />
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll not discuss further in this series the many ways in which the State and People of Texas framed Preston Hughes for a murder he did not commit. I discussed the planted eyeglasses and the scientifically unsound testimony of the medical examiner because Larry Swearingen was framed in similar fashions. Scraps of paper were planted near his parents' home and a pantyhose remnant was planted at his trailer. Dr. Joye Carter provided scientifically unsound medical testimony that led to Swearingen's conviction. Perhaps not coincidently, Dr. Carter was, at the time of her testimony, in charge of the Office of the Medical Examiner for Harris County, the same office responsible for the prosecution friendly testimony of Dr. Robert Jordan.<br />
<br />
I will discuss Dr. Carter and her role in the framing of Larry Swearingen in the next post.</div>
</div>
</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-27783753060295971222014-05-06T14:12:00.003-07:002014-05-06T14:12:50.885-07:00The Framing of Preston Hughes, Part 1<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is the seventh post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html" style="text-align: justify;"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a><span style="text-align: justify;">. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html" style="color: black;"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>. </span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the case of Robert Otis Coulson, the Houston police planted an envelope on a desk. The State and People of Texas used that planted evidence to convince a jury that Coulson was expected to be at the murder scene around the time of the murder.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the case of Larry Swearingen, the police or the person who killed Melissa Trotter planted scraps of paper near the home of Swearingen's parents. The State and People of Texas used that planted evidence to convince a jury that Swearingen had been with Melissa Trotter on the day of the murder.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Also in the case of Larry Swearingen, the police or the person who killed Melissa Trotter planted in Swearingen's mobile home a pair of pantyhose minus the leg that had been used to strangle Melissa Trotter. The State and People of Texas used that planted evidence to convince the jury that Larry Swearingen had strangled Melissa Trotter.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In the case of Preston Hughes, the most thoroughly framed man ever, the Houston police planted a pair of eyeglasses between two sofa cushions. The prosecution then used those planted eyeglasses to convince the jury that murder victim Shandra Charles had been in Hughes' apartment on the night of her murder.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll begin by recreating the HPD search of Preston Hughes' apartment. I'll rely on the police report of HPD Crime Scene Officer F. L. Hale. Officer Hale's job was to photograph and collect the evidence. In his police report, he frequently referred to himself in the third Person. The Skeptical Juror believes that writing style confuses rather than clarifies, but The Skeptical Juror had no say in the matter.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From Officer Hale's police report, the many spelling and typographical errors being in the original:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Officer Hale left the morgue and went to the CSU office. While completing the report I received a telephone call at approximately 8;30. I was advised by homcide detectives D.A. Ferguson and E.T. Yanchak that they had obtained a Consent to Search from the suspect. Officer Hale was requested to met with then at 2310 Crescent Park, which is the Lakehurst Apartments.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Hughes' apartment was on the second floor. His apartment was on the left as Hale climbed the stairs shown in the HPD photograph immediately below:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKmJhNYxD3mHjRhA-99ZLnlvsx_TgsZp-KhNff9RDzGiOAFi2e_wyijqrZVbT60LB40LePWMLWOuUIwCJx8ltU80CVjHVD_hEHNFSDtYBDq15Vzv_bhB4pVD5SuIg_q4ayEGGDmwGw7b8/s1600/PrestonsApt2.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKmJhNYxD3mHjRhA-99ZLnlvsx_TgsZp-KhNff9RDzGiOAFi2e_wyijqrZVbT60LB40LePWMLWOuUIwCJx8ltU80CVjHVD_hEHNFSDtYBDq15Vzv_bhB4pVD5SuIg_q4ayEGGDmwGw7b8/s400/PrestonsApt2.png" height="301" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Returning to Officer Hale's report, errors in the original:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Upon entering the apartment Officer Hale was lead into the living room and shown a pair of precription silver rim glasses. These glasses were found between the cushions of a three cushion couch, against the south wall of the living room.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Based on Officer Hale's description and sketch of Hughes' apartment, I prepared a series of sketches to help walk you through search. The first of those sketches follows immediately: </div>
<div class="page" title="Page 19">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
<pre></pre>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYLpQe5HM-ji20roZ40RPpzvsvNv4oFenN2r7jDEx0a032CHXvZBRbMw0iXG-jix4YzyfU9wwE2psMKVgB2qU0HB2EUXOR21dl67eWkQHVrGAmPhj8dspQCRJNzXuqEjZayn525oDaHfk/s1600/Search+01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYLpQe5HM-ji20roZ40RPpzvsvNv4oFenN2r7jDEx0a032CHXvZBRbMw0iXG-jix4YzyfU9wwE2psMKVgB2qU0HB2EUXOR21dl67eWkQHVrGAmPhj8dspQCRJNzXuqEjZayn525oDaHfk/s400/Search+01.png" height="400" width="316" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As Hale entered the apartment, one of the detectives led him directly to a "three cushion couch" in the living room and pointed to a pair of eyeglasses wedged between two of the cushions. Officer Hale took two photographs of the couch and the embedded eyeglasses. I present the first of those two photographs below. Good luck seeing the eyeglasses.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKtg5ONI0J4pvFGDL8LzQ4Nmwc2URewJw4C8UHbnoZGYDjtY0b0TSgPalMywKAcoq42rgx1G9kll29QscZIErHRjD2RAybKpYYWqb3H5TUHr1U6gv0rCO_AnSXFk_7hyWJPeqzyjqKQJo/s1600/PrestonsApt+Glasses+01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKtg5ONI0J4pvFGDL8LzQ4Nmwc2URewJw4C8UHbnoZGYDjtY0b0TSgPalMywKAcoq42rgx1G9kll29QscZIErHRjD2RAybKpYYWqb3H5TUHr1U6gv0rCO_AnSXFk_7hyWJPeqzyjqKQJo/s400/PrestonsApt+Glasses+01.png" height="281" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br />
Maybe you can see the eyeglasses if you look hard, if you squint. There they are between the center seat cushion and the one beside it, the one rightmost in the image.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here's the second shot, presumably one that Officer Hale would consider to be a closeup.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9aXPZz58Z38v7gVTp6Sbalg1hrWqLIs4DpKNaxl6g2CaGKHBcN6kOsu3mnJlHNDBsnIOAIIyIKXznBGnjaRb0M3CZmcilxRgh5XyT3tKT-M-zx8bbGKCETzWKRbdp8C9Kc7wNi1pFq6E/s1600/PrestonsApt+Glasses+03.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj9aXPZz58Z38v7gVTp6Sbalg1hrWqLIs4DpKNaxl6g2CaGKHBcN6kOsu3mnJlHNDBsnIOAIIyIKXznBGnjaRb0M3CZmcilxRgh5XyT3tKT-M-zx8bbGKCETzWKRbdp8C9Kc7wNi1pFq6E/s400/PrestonsApt+Glasses+03.png" height="280" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span><span style="background-color: white;">Perhaps you can </span><span style="background-color: white;">see the glasses if you enlarge the image by clicking on it. To simplify matters, I've cropped the photo around the glasses, enlarged the cropped segment, and rotated it. Now you can finally see the glasses.</span><br />
<span style="background-color: white;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaQ44xQkl-nQQ2p4iizjU5xDdYSql7kEI7jBu-6BFt0MUeTuNuELr_M4BBsL1poOQ5vdn8PjpVgg-sgxbtVGq5QKJMD233LSx5HEN33gl64Dkx2lpHCjRzFydFqcLBAHhcJRuoSw9Q2-w/s1600/PrestonsApt+Glasses+06.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaQ44xQkl-nQQ2p4iizjU5xDdYSql7kEI7jBu-6BFt0MUeTuNuELr_M4BBsL1poOQ5vdn8PjpVgg-sgxbtVGq5QKJMD233LSx5HEN33gl64Dkx2lpHCjRzFydFqcLBAHhcJRuoSw9Q2-w/s400/PrestonsApt+Glasses+06.png" height="283" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
During Hughes' trial, Shandra Charles' best friend testified that she last saw Shandra alive, not long before the murders, wearing those eyeglasses while standing outside Preston Hughes' apartment. That testimony coupled with those eyeglasses were damning evidence of Hughes' guilt. Both the testimony and the eyeglasses were, however, manufactured evidence. The friend's trial testimony is contradicted in all crucial details by the interview she provided to the HPD on the morning after the murders. The eyeglasses were placed in the position shown by members of the Houston Police Department. As I prove that to you, I will refer to the eyeglasses as the HPD glasses.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
The HPD glasses do not appear to me as if they simply fell into the position shown in the photograph. The glasses did not simply lay on a cushion, nor did they simply fall between the cushions. They appear to be forcefully wedged between two cushions.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
I therefore decided to see if my cheap, well-used reading glasses would fall between the cushions of my not-so-cheap but well-used couch in similar fashion. I dropped my glasses time after time. I dropped them while standing in front of the couch, while sitting on one cushion, while simultaneously pushing on the other cushion, while in the act of standing up or sitting down. As Dr. Seuss might say, I dropped them from a box, I dropped them with a fox. I was never able to approximate the arrangement recorded in Officer Hale's photographs.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Though each time I attempted to drop my glasses in the seam between my sofa cushions, they usually didn't land in the seam. Most frequently, they straddled the seam. They did, however, fall in the seam with sufficient frequency that I have no difficulty believing eyeglasses can fall between couch cushions if dropped or placed nearby. Here is a picture of one instance in which my glasses fell into the seam between the cushions.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIwvJRPVf1lo9dOIJ3VEt6tBMcj5pNwX1jt92Ce9obakM8YG4raM5uCdDmn460pqFTNR_NC3xNzmooyxMQsMoL4VgzUdEl7ZwzWsJuEUqkqZaMyOFhvgO6D478gIhosFyUxEIZyGAVUHc/s1600/Eyeglass+Drop+Test+01.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIwvJRPVf1lo9dOIJ3VEt6tBMcj5pNwX1jt92Ce9obakM8YG4raM5uCdDmn460pqFTNR_NC3xNzmooyxMQsMoL4VgzUdEl7ZwzWsJuEUqkqZaMyOFhvgO6D478gIhosFyUxEIZyGAVUHc/s400/Eyeglass+Drop+Test+01.png" height="198" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
When my glasses actually landed between the cushions, they usually (almost always) ended up with the lenses nearly vertical. This is different than the arrangement of the HPD glasses. The HPD glasses ended up with the lenses nearly horizontal. Sometimes (not very often) my glasses ended up with the lenses horizontal, just as the HPD glasses allegedly had.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmebNwOedQykQdxfU4JunFupgyPXwXQYIv-kot6QtxCgFzz887Pa-f7atxUCZSB5FQ5-tbSkMBd7R8toBnr23Hsqx5_Ivp5bCD8UqAkVLOpJQrQmdl_Elh6-JFylrWFxW2OqHogONxlTg/s1600/Eyeglass+Drop+Test+02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmebNwOedQykQdxfU4JunFupgyPXwXQYIv-kot6QtxCgFzz887Pa-f7atxUCZSB5FQ5-tbSkMBd7R8toBnr23Hsqx5_Ivp5bCD8UqAkVLOpJQrQmdl_Elh6-JFylrWFxW2OqHogONxlTg/s400/Eyeglass+Drop+Test+02.png" height="167" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
While my glasses would sometimes land with lenses horizontal, they always ended up along the top of the seam between the cushions. They never managed to wedge themselves in between the cushions, as the HPD glasses allegedly had.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
I never really expected that they would wedge themselves in. They're eyeglasses, for gosh sakes, not anvils. I did wonder, though, if they might wedge their way in between the cushions if people sat on one or both of the cushions. So I tried repeatedly to cause them to wedge into a position similar to the HPD glasses. I arranged the glasses in many different starting positions, then I pressed on one cushion, then the other, then both. I even sat and wiggled around. No luck. No matter what I tried, I could not give my glasses a couch cushion wedgie.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
I came close a couple times. Consider the following image.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_udrQ6DAZU58vx7Pf4zteNtdZ3wnbNk5oZwIy-irWBuZgZcrPwsQ9_Ip0nYg_KNIzwZFVTAxKSTHxHD4RoxxMBNGgacfwXQ09yrJI1iwmnIHd19zr9pBDY9kIT_L1mw5VzWOGVXdC6r8/s1600/Eyeglass+Drop+Test+05.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_udrQ6DAZU58vx7Pf4zteNtdZ3wnbNk5oZwIy-irWBuZgZcrPwsQ9_Ip0nYg_KNIzwZFVTAxKSTHxHD4RoxxMBNGgacfwXQ09yrJI1iwmnIHd19zr9pBDY9kIT_L1mw5VzWOGVXdC6r8/s400/Eyeglass+Drop+Test+05.png" height="197" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Though it's somewhat difficult to see, the glasses are sorta, kinda wedged between the sides of the two cushions. It's not quite like the arrangement of the HPD glasses, but it's as close as I could get. </div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Continuing with Officer Hale's photographic stroll through Preston Hughes' apartment, I return to Hale's police statement and to my informative series of sketches. The egregious textual errors are in Hale's original.</div>
</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background-color: white;">Officer Hale was then lead into the southeast bedroom and shown a pair of blue jean, two blue shirt on the bedroom floor.</span></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhADu8JjPY2N80JVyKNa3o5nbrb-qkftGBxAwIn6uW0Qb7cSdR-Zy6eWIClC3VK2y8Dj8X6460THPYymfibLIcbnWiUeQPVlX8UXn97vakpDjKPJ-vocZmzr0LdwqPCg5HaEIk4JNaOEPU/s1600/Search+02.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhADu8JjPY2N80JVyKNa3o5nbrb-qkftGBxAwIn6uW0Qb7cSdR-Zy6eWIClC3VK2y8Dj8X6460THPYymfibLIcbnWiUeQPVlX8UXn97vakpDjKPJ-vocZmzr0LdwqPCg5HaEIk4JNaOEPU/s400/Search+02.png" height="400" width="326" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here is the photograph that Officer Hale took looking down the hallway into the master bedroom.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIbxXNnwbspZd-hDZZ17rq1CR5aGh3BRJucR2N718rZDoH64CmJlr8zvmsZI-GltpOPYtiSWuVC15XQmq52itEu96FyDXnomj5A1ajZcec0R53B7nKVS0buLool5L5IEQCOm0Xe_5Kpjo/s1600/PrestonsApt8.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIbxXNnwbspZd-hDZZ17rq1CR5aGh3BRJucR2N718rZDoH64CmJlr8zvmsZI-GltpOPYtiSWuVC15XQmq52itEu96FyDXnomj5A1ajZcec0R53B7nKVS0buLool5L5IEQCOm0Xe_5Kpjo/s400/PrestonsApt8.png" height="400" width="278" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
You can barely see a pair of pants and a shirt on the floor in front of a dresser.<br />
<br />
Stepping into the doorway, Officer Hale took following photograph:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: Times; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbQRtEZ3b0yiHKEH-eppRFZPXzqK_i5v3wzIOLxOxNaNigeZcetJPMYUJSvQJSJ_qNBO9ZxVrsmSe4XIGjEYHr1lwxdxqs2MkhQf_GS61RBdYL50TJjAwOuyvFLpo6LxieqSifLubeZVQ/s1600/PrestonsApt+Jeans+and+Shrit.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhbQRtEZ3b0yiHKEH-eppRFZPXzqK_i5v3wzIOLxOxNaNigeZcetJPMYUJSvQJSJ_qNBO9ZxVrsmSe4XIGjEYHr1lwxdxqs2MkhQf_GS61RBdYL50TJjAwOuyvFLpo6LxieqSifLubeZVQ/s400/PrestonsApt+Jeans+and+Shrit.png" height="277" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Stepping into the master bedroom and turning to his left, Officer Hale took the following photograph.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkzAx3jDfL3C7Mb-ZpA_vjoX7c4YEWqKschxvF-71s7mk4gDp_Cy9V0XOtIgk1PHm3hT0Cqum4ttrgAmdmS7FQNWpjCjnu-N6LmVQZmG-ZTkLoi0-R_7OGf6OSQN-IlUKw-KNTZvqW4DI/s1600/PrestonsApt+Shirt+01.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkzAx3jDfL3C7Mb-ZpA_vjoX7c4YEWqKschxvF-71s7mk4gDp_Cy9V0XOtIgk1PHm3hT0Cqum4ttrgAmdmS7FQNWpjCjnu-N6LmVQZmG-ZTkLoi0-R_7OGf6OSQN-IlUKw-KNTZvqW4DI/s400/PrestonsApt+Shirt+01.png" height="280" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Together, the photographs show the blue jeans and the two blue work shirts that Officer Hale secured as evidence. The clothing items would not be checked for blood until three days before the beginning of the trial. James Bolding, the notorious supervisor of the notorious serology department of the notorious HPD crime lab, would record that no blood was apparent on the clothing and that two blood-specific tests were negative for blood. James Bolding and Assistant DA Chuck Noll, however, would keep those test results from the jurors. Instead, under the carefully orchestrated questioning of Chuck Noll, James Bolding would inform the jurors that he had found blood on blue jeans and one of the blue works shirts. That, however, is a different frame for a different telling.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here, I will try to focus on the eyeglasses.</div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After photographing the clothing in the master bedroom, Officer Hale photographed a knife and sheath in the closet of the second bedroom. The knife and sheath had been located in the box nearby. The items had been removed for the purpose of photographing them. Once again, from Officer Hale's police report, followed once again by one of my ever-enlightening sketches. </div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background-color: white;">Inside the closet of the southwest bedroom Officer Hale was shown a large knife wedged inside a cardboard box, found on the floor, next to the knife was a sheath.</span></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipymYxS3hxzBUTEm3j7jQ_xbkWAxCBS-687Ej6QuebwyqErlTyKEI26w_3qYF2T0CqwQDw7p6ZPIqYu5GaJpIX1Xfcu6MmoZMJ-ajnHTxWbj6Tjhr7iSn7BKW4OyKEsLKNZkG9zTpKwGI/s1600/Search+03.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipymYxS3hxzBUTEm3j7jQ_xbkWAxCBS-687Ej6QuebwyqErlTyKEI26w_3qYF2T0CqwQDw7p6ZPIqYu5GaJpIX1Xfcu6MmoZMJ-ajnHTxWbj6Tjhr7iSn7BKW4OyKEsLKNZkG9zTpKwGI/s400/Search+03.png" height="400" width="321" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
Here's the photograph of the knife and sheath.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; color: black; font-family: Times; font-size: medium; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: justify; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;">
</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOVipYzZqOy8v00YbOKVvdrWiJyn2Gp8jNlg_ZZijJRDhcndlLiKNz3rxXheCwgBHI35XndkZ41rVnINjkNU_AKTpetPFluwqWMnpSFp3y9PzspBKfI7NQNLki-XdZyceEeZCzvw5H57I/s1600/PrestonsApt+Knife+and+Sheath.png" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOVipYzZqOy8v00YbOKVvdrWiJyn2Gp8jNlg_ZZijJRDhcndlLiKNz3rxXheCwgBHI35XndkZ41rVnINjkNU_AKTpetPFluwqWMnpSFp3y9PzspBKfI7NQNLki-XdZyceEeZCzvw5H57I/s400/PrestonsApt+Knife+and+Sheath.png" height="281" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
There is some rust on the tip of the knife. No blood was apparent anywhere on the knife or the sheath. The notorious James Bolding of the notorious serology department of the notorious HPD crime lab did not test this knife for blood until he was actually sitting in the witness box, testifying before the jury. He applied a reagent that reacts to the iron in rust as readily as it reacts to the iron in blood. Like magic, the reagent changed color right before the jurors' eyes. Under the carefully orchestrated questioning of Assistant DA Chuck Noll, James Bolding testified that the knife had just tested positive for blood. During the tepid cross-examination by Hughes' defense attorney, James Bolding conceded that a few other substances, such as turnips, might cause the reagent to change color. Bolding failed to mention that one of the substances that created false positives was rust.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
But that is a different frame for a different telling.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
As you can see from the photograph, the knife blade is single-edged: it has one sharp edge and one blunt edge. The blade measured five inches long and one inch wide. That knife, therefore, is absolutely not the murder weapon. The autopsy reports for 15-year-old Shandra Charles and her 3-year-old cousin Marcell Taylor describe lethal neck wounds that could only have been caused by a long, narrow, double-edge blade. The jurors, however, would never learn that. Instead, the last-moment, fill-in medical examiner, the one who had first read the autopsy reports that morning in his car, testified that the knife in the photograph above was consistent with the stab wounds.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
But that is a different frame for a different telling. Here, I will try to focus on the eyeglasses.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
After photographing the knife and the sheath, Officer Hale proceeded (as the police like to say) to take photographs of the items on the dining room table. Again from Officer Hale's police report:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background-color: white;">On the dining room table was a maroon pullover shirt, a clear plastic bag containing green leafy substance.</span></blockquote>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwqyWaA8HvZl7KRv3pR4cmM6lNsq1C750AVoYg7TPqgFpgU19eThNiS6c388S0RTHz9OX2hksT38gSQ-JLDUDqQhSpTA54ZS6BgJo7zTS0qcYg-yxDeU9XLYA-EBibjg-qQ2NhiCLiXfQ/s1600/Search+04.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjwqyWaA8HvZl7KRv3pR4cmM6lNsq1C750AVoYg7TPqgFpgU19eThNiS6c388S0RTHz9OX2hksT38gSQ-JLDUDqQhSpTA54ZS6BgJo7zTS0qcYg-yxDeU9XLYA-EBibjg-qQ2NhiCLiXfQ/s320/Search+04.png" height="320" width="262" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Here's the photograph.<br />
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE4EeHB8g2cW2sR6GCKzUDmy7i-K2yp57rgQYRxJM-GWHQWvXp-RTV2sEcsnVBwy-QNHZ60vz5IGpxv0-sEC2ykkwldvivIp_4CHddLeHgHBchrfBuj6B_3u_AeP7xe0juVbMVY-Ka3Qg/s1600/PrestonsApt+Sweater+and+MJ.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiE4EeHB8g2cW2sR6GCKzUDmy7i-K2yp57rgQYRxJM-GWHQWvXp-RTV2sEcsnVBwy-QNHZ60vz5IGpxv0-sEC2ykkwldvivIp_4CHddLeHgHBchrfBuj6B_3u_AeP7xe0juVbMVY-Ka3Qg/s400/PrestonsApt+Sweater+and+MJ.png" height="278" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Officer Hale took the maroon shirt and the green leafy substance into evidence. The green leafy substance, of course, turned out to be marijuana. No blood was apparent on the shirt. Testing was done to detect any unseen blood.<br />
<br />
CSU Officer Hale prepared a property invoice listing all the items that he had secured from Hughes' apartment, from the crime scene, from the hospital, and from the morgue. He typed the date of the property invoice in the appropriate box. That date was 9/27/88, the day after the murders. He typed his name and signed the document. He then delivered the items and the property invoice to the HPD property room.<br />
<br />
Property Officer F.L. Martin was on duty. He inserted the property invoice into his typewriter and typed his name and he typed the time he received the items from Officer Hale. The text that Martin typed is misaligned with the text that Hale typed. Officer Martin then signed the property invoice.<br />
<br />
As part of an open records request, Barbara Lunsford of the <a href="http://www.mystery-crime-blog.com/"><span style="color: blue;">Mystery Crime Scene</span></a> received a copy of that property invoice. She added two notes in red. She also outlined the date / time box in red. I obtained my copy of the document from her. I present my copy of the document immediately below.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div>
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipBF5Yp2pqQtk2s-AREGoUguiGjNx4xl1VxN12lKAvnMP66Oe1X_hQwxlrqZ3Jk01He2fD_LIfgHF8sSsUiBqTX4gHEDeDIwKJxYn37CtdeDaFlTxOYJpOrPm5wjWXH53ctE5Gf99hejI/s1600/hale-evidence-invoice.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipBF5Yp2pqQtk2s-AREGoUguiGjNx4xl1VxN12lKAvnMP66Oe1X_hQwxlrqZ3Jk01He2fD_LIfgHF8sSsUiBqTX4gHEDeDIwKJxYn37CtdeDaFlTxOYJpOrPm5wjWXH53ctE5Gf99hejI/s400/hale-evidence-invoice.png" height="308" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
Astoundingly, the time on the property invoice is 2:58 AM.<br />
<br />
Preston Hughes' supporters long claimed that this document is proof that the police searched Preston Hughes' apartment not after sunrise, as they claimed. Instead, the HPD must have searched Hughes' apartment sometime prior to 2:58 AM. Since the time on the Consent to Search form was 5:35 AM, Preston's supporters claim that the search was illegal, that the incriminating evidence recovered during that search was inadmissible, and that Preston therefore deserved a new trial.<br />
<br />
For a long time, this property invoice troubled me. I agreed that it proved the HPD searched Hughes' apartment without warrant or consent. The focus of my investigation, however, was whether or not Preston Hughes' was actually innocent. I was focused on the results of the search rather than on the propriety of the search. From my perspective, I didn't see how the property invoice helped me reach a decision.<br />
<br />
Until ...<br />
<br />
Like a bolt from the blue, it hit me that the HPD had searched the Hughes's apartment twice: once before 2:58 AM as evidenced by the property invoice, and once after sunset as evidenced by one of the photographs from the second search. I repeat that photo below.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIbxXNnwbspZd-hDZZ17rq1CR5aGh3BRJucR2N718rZDoH64CmJlr8zvmsZI-GltpOPYtiSWuVC15XQmq52itEu96FyDXnomj5A1ajZcec0R53B7nKVS0buLool5L5IEQCOm0Xe_5Kpjo/s1600/PrestonsApt8.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhIbxXNnwbspZd-hDZZ17rq1CR5aGh3BRJucR2N718rZDoH64CmJlr8zvmsZI-GltpOPYtiSWuVC15XQmq52itEu96FyDXnomj5A1ajZcec0R53B7nKVS0buLool5L5IEQCOm0Xe_5Kpjo/s400/PrestonsApt8.png" height="400" width="278" /></a></div>
<br />
You can see sunlight through the curtain. The lamp on the dresser is off. The hallway light is off. The hallway light switch is in the off position. This photograph and the others in the collection were taken during the second search, after sunrise. Along with the property invoice, this photograph proves that the HPD planted evidence in Preston Hughes' apartment.<br />
<br />
As a minimum, the HPD planted Preston's own clothing, knife, scabbard, and marijuana back in his apartment. Someone secured those same items during the first search, the search that took place not long after midnight. Officer Hale turned those same items into the property room at 2:58 AM. Someone removed those items from the property room and planted them back in Preston Hughes' apartment.<br />
<br />
It had been a serious mistake to search and secure items from the Hughes' apartment without a warrant or a signed Consent to Search. I suspect that, after the shift change, the incoming detectives recognized the problem and settled on a recovery plan. They recovered Preston Hughes' items from the property room, planted them right back in his apartment, and photographed the items as if nothing had ever happened.<br />
<br />
But it gets better, or tragically worse, depending on your point of view.<br />
<br />
The eyeglasses that did not show up in the first search, as per the property invoice, did show up in the second search, as per the sunlight coming through the blinds. The eyeglasses were wedged between the cushions of Preston Hughes' couch not on the night of the murders. Instead they were planted between the cushions of the couch after daylight the following morning.<br />
<br />
But it gets better still, or tragically worse still, depending on your point of view.<br />
<br />
As Ward Larkin and I, lay persons that we are, were preparing multiple legal motions to save Preston Hughes from a wrongful execution, Ward Larkin discovered that there was box of evidence still at the courthouse. Among the other startling discoveries in that box were the eyeglasses. He took a picture of them. I present a cropped version of that picture below.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjW-6Bc1pJkUNZuCV1mgwYAEhpGSPonmtQogwN8Kwp3PSwpD9q9uRogPUmI6yuX-hb5aSUOVwMjK7clSffoiWxkVsJ_KuYOitlwhd8MZ1A0crHr7HjYu1pUcR9aOn97Oq5dmWc3a21FwVc/s1600/eyeglasses+from+courthouse+01+rotated+cropped.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjW-6Bc1pJkUNZuCV1mgwYAEhpGSPonmtQogwN8Kwp3PSwpD9q9uRogPUmI6yuX-hb5aSUOVwMjK7clSffoiWxkVsJ_KuYOitlwhd8MZ1A0crHr7HjYu1pUcR9aOn97Oq5dmWc3a21FwVc/s1600/eyeglasses+from+courthouse+01+rotated+cropped.JPG" height="187" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
I compared the eyeglasses in Ward's photograph with the eyeglasses in Officer Hale's photograph, the enlargement of which I repeat below.</div>
<div style="text-align: start;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVKO6AHOmixDE9e53Y87MLxllzzirgzdiYb2EvKadCHXm0w3LI1RVrYN3qFjXxuJR-qxuxGyYL-jU3v4k2uT2L1bD1u8qiBuXdkk1aBeG2K4xDCmhYyG6Ps_m0L0Yta3453g9dQ_Gm3Ec/s1600/PrestonsApt+Glasses+07.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVKO6AHOmixDE9e53Y87MLxllzzirgzdiYb2EvKadCHXm0w3LI1RVrYN3qFjXxuJR-qxuxGyYL-jU3v4k2uT2L1bD1u8qiBuXdkk1aBeG2K4xDCmhYyG6Ps_m0L0Yta3453g9dQ_Gm3Ec/s400/PrestonsApt+Glasses+07.png" height="285" width="400" /></a></div>
<div>
<br />
I concluded that the eyeglasses in the two photos were one in the same. Still they seemed significantly different. I wasn't struck by the writing on one lens or the label on the other. I was struck instead that the temples, the arms that extend over the ears, were so obviously visible behind the lenses. I didn't recall that from the HPD photos. I didn't recall it for good reason. In the HPD photos, the temples are extended!<br />
<br />
And there it finally is. The HPD recovered Shandra Charles' eyeglasses from the crime scene. During the second search of Preston Hughes' apartment, while planting the other items back in his apartment, the HPD planted Shandra Charles' eyeglasses between the cushions of his couch. To pose the eyeglasses nicely for the impending photo shoot, the HPD extended the temples of Shandra Charles eyeglasses and shoved them between the cushions of Preston Hughes' couch until the lenses were wedged in the position shown.<br />
<br />
The State and People of Texas executed Preston Craig Hughes, III on 15 November 2012, despite clear and persistent warnings that he had been framed.</div>
</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-60569763345903733732014-05-05T12:26:00.002-07:002014-05-06T13:25:32.513-07:00The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 2<div style="text-align: justify;">
This is the sixth post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a><span style="text-align: justify;">. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html" style="color: black;"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>. For a thorough overview of the case against Larry Swearingen, see <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/this-is-second-post-in-series-framing.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 1</span></a>.</span>
</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On 8 December 1998, Melissa Trotter disappeared from Montgomery College, a community college 30 miles north of Houston.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On 11 December 1998, Larry Swearingen was jailed for charges unrelated to the the disappearance of Melissa Trotter.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On 17 December 1998, John Parsley found scraps of paper along a ditch in front of his home. The scraps turned out to be pieces of Melissa Trotter's class schedule and health insurance paperwork. </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Parsley was a neighbor of Larry Swearingen's mother and stepfather. He found the scraps as he was taking out his trash cans for pickup. Normal trash days were Mondays and Thursdays. The pieces of paper had not been there during the prior trash pickups on 10 and 14 December. The scraps appeared only after Larry Swearingen had been in jail for 9 days.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On 2 January 1999, several hunters discovered the body of Melissa Trotter in the Sam Houston National Forest, some 55 miles north of Houston. She had allegedly been strangled with one leg from a pair of pantyhose, the remainder of which was missing. The police had searched that area three times, at least once coming within 20 feet of where the hunters discovered the remains. None of the searchers noticed a dead body. None of them smelled a decaying corpse. The body appeared only after Larry Swearingen had been in jail for 22 days.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On 3 January 1999, Chief Medical Examiner Joye Carter performed the autopsy on Melissa Trotter's body. In a sworn affidavit provided after Swearingen's conviction, Dr. Carter explained that the nearly pristine state of Trotter's internal organs indicated that "the body had not been exposed more than two weeks in the forest environment." Dr. Carter affirmed also that Trotter's undiminished body mass "supports a forensic opinion that Ms. Trotter's body was left in the woods within two weeks of the date of discovery on January 2, 1999." Based on Dr. Carter's medical opinion, Melissa's body was not deposited in the Sam Houston National Forest until Larry Swearingen had been in jail for at least 8 days.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In addition to Joye Carter, ten noted scientists and doctors -- forensic entomologist and pathologists -- have signed affidavits expressing the same conclusion: Trotter's body could have been deposited in the Sam Houston National Forest no earlier than 8 days after Larry Swearingen had been jailed. Because the organs' cell walls were still intact, one of those noted scientists affirmed that the body had been in the forest no more than two days before its discovery.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Sometime after the autopsy, and examination of Trotter's fingernail scrapings revealed some "very tiny, bright red flakes." The flakes had a total size "no bigger than ... a point of a pencil." Given that the flakes were still red, they could not have been exposed to the elements for more than a few days. </span>They tested positive for human blood. <span style="font-family: inherit;">DNA testing produced a profile consistent with a male, but inconsistent with Larry Swearingen.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On 6 January, Sergeant Leo Mock dropped by the mobile home park where Swearingen had been living. The landlord had recently cleaned out Swearingen's trailer in order to rent it to another party. Mock searched the trash. He discovered a pair of pantyhose with one leg missing. A forensic specialist would determine that the ligature around Melissa Trotter's neck had been cut from the pantyhose that Mock discovered in the trash outside Swearingen's trailer. Swearingen's trailer and the trailer park, had, however, twice previously been thoroughly searched for any evidence linking Swearingen to Trotter's disappearance. The pantyhose turned up four days after the body had been discovered, only after Larry Swearingen had been in jail for 26 days.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The State and People of Texas are so confident that this string of events points to Larry Swearingen as the murderer that they want to execute him as soon as they can. A jury found Swearingen guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, the appellate courts have found no substantive error in the process whatsoever, and the State sees no reason to delay the execution any longer.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Contrarian that I am, I find the string of events to be exceptionally unlikely, a pathetic excuse for due process, and an immoral basis for an execution.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At the heart of this debate is whether or not Melissa Trotter was murdered before or after Larry Swearingen was jailed. In a subsequent post, I will discuss the means by which the State convinced a jury that Larry Swearingen murdered Melissa Trotter before he was jailed on an unrelated charge. In the remainder of this post, I will discuss the improbability of that claim. </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">One of the most obvious implications of my probability analysis is that Larry Swearingen was framed for the murder of Melissa Trotter, framed by the planting of the pantyhose remnant, and framed by the planting of </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">scraps of her paperwork.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">If Larry Swearingen is executed by the State and People of Texas, he certainly won't be the first person to succumb to planted evidence, and I expect he will not be the last.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In the case of <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-robert-otis-coulson.html"><span style="color: blue;">Robert Otis Coulson</span></a>, a federal court agreed that the Houston police planted an envelope on the desk of Coulson's father. The court agreed also that the Harris County prosecutors knew or should have known the envelope was planted. The court agreed also that the prosecutors introduced the planted envelope as inculpatory evidence while convincing the jury to convict Coulson of capital murder. The court declared, however, that the framing was nothing more than a harmless error. Robert Otis Coulson was executed on 25 June 2002.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In the case of Preston Hughes, the courts refused to even consider the multiple fashions in which the Houston police and the Harris County prosecutors knowingly used manufactured evidence to secure a conviction for capital murder. In the next post, I will address just one piece of manufactured evidence in that case: a pair of eyeglasses planted between two sofa cushions. Preston Craig Hughes, III, who was innocent and wrongfully convicted, was executed by the State and People of Texas on 15 November 2012.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In the cases of Coulson and Hughes, the Houston police planted the envelope and the eyeglasses. In the case of Swearingen, the paper scraps and the pantyhose remnant were planted either by the police or by the person who murdered Melissa Trotter. Either way, Swearingen was framed. Either way, the State and People of Texas are responsible for using false evidence to convict an innocent man.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The State's case is that Swearingen picked up Melissa Trotter at the Montgomery College and transported her to his mobile home. There, the two engaged in vaginal sex. At some point, there was a struggle that left Swearingen's home in disarray. Swearingen strangled Trotter with one leg of his wife's pantyhose, put Trotter's body in his truck, drove the body to the Sam Houston National Forest, dumped it there, then returned home.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The State's case makes absolutely no sense. It is statistically unlikely in the extreme. According to the State and People of Texas, Swearingen decided to kill Trotter for some unknown reason. To kill his victim, Swearingen didn't use a firearm, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/02/the-strangulation-of-melissa-trotter.html"><span style="color: blue;">as do 70% of the murderers in this country</span></a>. Perhaps he didn't own a firearm, or have it at the ready, or feared the noise.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Nor did Swearingen stab his victim to death, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/02/the-strangulation-of-melissa-trotter.html"><span style="color: blue;">as do 13% of the murderers in this country</span></a>. Surely he had a knife or pair of scissors in his home. He must have had something of the sort if he cut one leg from his wife's pantyhose.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Nor did Swearingen asphyxiate his victim, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/02/the-strangulation-of-melissa-trotter.html"><span style="color: blue;">as do 6.4% of all murderers in this country</span></a>. There must have been a pillow nearby.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Nor did Swearingen pummel or kick or stomp his victim to death, with his hands or feet, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/02/the-strangulation-of-melissa-trotter.html"><span style="color: blue;">as do 6.2% of murderers in this country</span></a>. I know that those makeshift weapons were handy.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Nor did Swearingen bludgeon his victim with a blunt object, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/02/the-strangulation-of-melissa-trotter.html"><span style="color: blue;">as do 4.4% of murderers in this country</span></a>. Surely he had a frying pan or a hammer laying around.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Nor did Swearingen strangle his victim with his bare hands, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/02/the-strangulation-of-melissa-trotter.html"><span style="color: blue;">as do 0.6% of murderers in this country</span></a>. Once again, I'm confident those makeshift weapons were readily available.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Instead, according to the State, Swearingen elected to manufacture and strangle his victim with a ligature, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/02/the-strangulation-of-melissa-trotter.html"><span style="color: blue;">as do only 0.2% of the murderers in this country</span></a>. Only 1 in 500 murders is committed by ligature strangulation, and the State's case is even more unlikely than that, more unlikely than 1 in 500.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In a moment of passion and panic, according to the State, Swearingen did not just grab a nearby object to strangle his victim. He did not use any of the victim's clothing, such as a sweater arm, or a brassiere, or a belt. Nor did he use a pillowcase or a lamp cord. According to the State, Swearingen </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">took the time to manufacture a ligature from his wife's pantyhose. Instead of stabbing or cutting his victim with a knife or scissors, he used a knife or scissors to stab or cut his wife's pantyhose. The State offers no explanation why Swearingen would do such a thing in such a frantic moment, nor does it explain what Melissa Trotter may have been doing while Swearingen manufactured the ligature that would be used to kill her.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">And still their case is worse than all this. According to the State, Swearingen left the remainder her of his wife's pantyhose behind when he took Melissa's body to Sam Houston National Forest. He presumably removed the body from his home so that his crime would not be discovered, but he left the obvious remnant of the murder weapon behind.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">He couldn't have left it behind carelessly or unconsciously. It must have been deliberate, because he hid the remnant of his hastily crafted murder weapon so well that the police were unable to find it on either of two thorough searches. Swearingen hid it so well that it would not be discovered for twenty-six days, in the garbage outside his home, after the police finally knew which murder weapon was used to kill Melissa Trotter.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Assuming I can model all the improbabilities associated with the pantyhose remnant by assuming the police had a 50% chance of discovering the remnant during each search of the trailer, the odds that Swearingen hid the pantyhose remnant well but imperfectly in his trailer are 1 in 8. That number, I suggest, is generous to the State's case. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Nonetheless, the combined odds of Swearingen using a ligature and hiding the panty hose well but imperfectly are 1 in 4000. (For the statistically challenged and curious, I suggest the <a href="https://www.khanacademy.org/"><span style="color: blue;">Khan Academy</span></a>. It's an amazing source of free, high-quality, online classes for a wide range of subjects.)</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The string of improbabilities in the State's case doesn't end with the use of a ligature and the surprise discovery of the pantyhose remnant. Swearingen allegedly disposed of Melissa Trotter's body so well that the police failed to find it in any one of three searches of the area, even though they came within 20 feet.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Assuming I can model all the improbabilities associated with the police failure to discover the body by assuming a 50% chance of discovery during each search, the odds of not finding the body during any of their three searches are 1 in 8. That number, I suggest, is also generous to the State's case given that they apparently came within 20 feet of the body on at least one search. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The combined odds of Swearingen using a ligature, and hiding the pantyhose remnant well but imperfectly, and hiding the body well but imperfectly are 1 in 32,000. </span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Not only must Swearingen have hidden the body well but imperfectly, he must have done something mysteriously clever to it such that its internal organs decayed so slowly that the medical examiner and ten other experts would be fooled into believing that it had only recently been deposited. On the other hand, there are two experts who maintain that Trotter's body was indeed deposited in the forest before Swearingen was jailed. Dr. Joye Carter is one of them. (She has sworn to diametrically opposite scientific conclusions in the same case, depending upon whichever way the figurative wind was blowing). For simplicity, I assume the odds that all of Swearingen's ten experts are wrong is 1 in 10. Once again, I believe that I am being generous to the State's case.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The combined odds of Swearingen using a ligature, and hiding the pantyhose remnant well but imperfectly, and hiding the body well but imperfectly, and deceiving the 10 defense experts is 1 in 320,000.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The State argued also that Swearingen took some of Trotter's personal papers, tore them to shreds, then disposed of the shreds near his parents' home in such a fashion that they would not be discovered during the first trash pickup after the murder, or the first pickup after his arrest, but would be discovered during the second trash pickup after his arrest. Assuming I can model the probability that the scraps would become exposed during any trash pickup after the murders as 1 in 2, then the odds that the scraps were exposed during the third pickup after the murders is 1 in 8.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The combined odds of Swearingen using a ligature, and hiding the pantyhose remnant well but imperfectly, </span>and hiding the scraps of paper well but imperfectly, <span style="font-family: inherit;">and hiding the body well but imperfectly, and deceiving the 10 experts is 1 in 2.5 million, or thereabouts.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
And, to add an exceptionally unlikely icing on a highly improbable cake, the State argued that a fresh blood flake belonging to a male other than Larry Swearingen innocently and accidentally found its way underneath one of Melissa Trotter's fingernails. I assume that the State would argue that they contaminate crucial evidence only on rare occasions. I'm confident that they will claim they contaminate fewer than one case in ten, probably fewer than one case in a hundred. I'll therefore assume that the chance an unrelated blood flake ended up beneath Trotter's fingernail to be 1 in 100. I suspect that the State, in this case, would claim the odds are even lower.<br />
<br />
The final combined odds of Swearingen using a ligature, and hiding the pantyhose remnant well but imperfectly, and hiding the scraps of paper well but not perfectly, and hiding the body well but imperfectly, and having 10 defense experts sign scientifically unsound affidavits, and having an unrelated blood flake land beneath Trotter's fingernails is one in 250 million, one in a quarter billion, or thereabouts.<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I acknowledge that my combined probability of all the events is no better than the individual probabilities that I assigned to each event. While I believe each of those individual probabilities were generous to the State's case, I'm confident that readers convinced of Swearingen's guilt would disagree. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Regardless of the numbers assigned, the State's case presumes a long string of improbable events. I assigned probability numbers to each event to provide some sense of how unlikely the entire string might be.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">If just one of those events did not occur as claimed by the State and People of Texas, then </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">Larry Swearingen was framed for the murder of Melissa Trotter.</span></div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-62391717513931654112014-05-02T12:15:00.000-07:002014-05-05T14:04:53.896-07:00The Framing of Robert Otis Coulson<span class="s1" style="text-align: justify;">This is the fifth post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a></span><span style="text-align: justify;">. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>.</span>
<br />
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Regarding <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/the-framing-of-cesar-fierro.html"><span style="color: blue;">the framing of Cesar Fierro</span></a>, the State and People of Texas acknowledged that they had used the threat of torture to extract a confession. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals ruled it to be a harmless error. Cesar Fierro went insane while isolated for decades in a minuscule cell.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Regarding <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-christopher-ochoa-and.html"><span style="color: blue;">the framing of Richard Ochoa and Richard Danziger</span></a>, the State and People of Texas acknowledged that they extracted a false confession from an innocent man, then coerced that innocent man to falsely implicate an innocent friend. While under the care and custody of the State and People of Texas, that innocent friend had a piece of his skull driven into his brain by the steel-toed boot of another inmate.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In the case of Robert Otis Coulson, to be discussed herein, the State and People of Texas may have coerced a false confession from one innocent man, then had that innocent man falsely implicate his innocent friend. In other words, the case of Robert Otis Coulson may be strikingly parallel the case of Richard Danziger. There are differences, of course. Significantly, no one has proven that the confession and implication in the Coulson case were false. More significantly, Robert Coulson was administered lethal chemicals to his bloodstream rather than a steel-toed boot to his brain.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
There is one other difference, and that difference is directly relevant to the framing of Larry Swearingen. Evidence was planted in both cases to help insure a conviction. I'll discuss the planting of evidence in the Coulson case in this post, and the planting of evidence in the Swearingen case in the next.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
On 13 November 1992, the Houston Fire Department responded to a residential fire. Inside the house, the firefighters discovered a total of five bodies in three different rooms. Each body had been bound at the hands and feet. Each had been asphyxiated by a plastic bag secured over the head. Each had been doused with gasoline and set on fire.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Each victim was a relative of Robert Otis Coulson. Homeowners Otis and Mary Coulson were Robert's adoptive parents. Sarah Coulson and Robin Wentworth were Robert's adult sisters. Both were pregnant. Rick Wentworth was Robin's husband and Robert's brother-in-law. Not insignificantly, Rick was a 6-foot tall, 230 pound jailer for the Harris County Sheriff’s department.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The police theorized that Robert, the sole remaining family member, had single-handedly and sequentially murdered everyone in the house to secure a $600,000 inheritance. The State built its case on the multiple, muddled confessions of Robert's roommate Jared Althaus, on Robert's alleged preoccupation with the inheritance, and on a letter discovered on top of his father's desk.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert claimed that he had been scheduled to have dinner with his family at a Luby's restaurant. Jared dropped him off at the restaurant, but his family members did not arrive as planned. Robert called the house between 5:45 and 6:00 PM to see why they were late, but no one answered. Robert assumed there was confusion over the chosen restaurant. Jared returned as scheduled around 6:30 PM, and the two of them drove as planned to the Althaus' family farm for the weekend. Only after arriving at the farm did Robert learn that his family had been murdered.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The evidence supports Robert's claim of a scheduled dinner. The Coulson's neighbor reported that the four cars of the five victims had been in the Coulson driveway since 3:30 PM, meaning that all five victims had been present in the residence from that time. A friend of Robin's had called at 4:45 PM. Robin answered in a natural and normal sounding voice and explained they were on their way out for dinner. The fire was called in at 6:17 p.m.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In his initial police statement, Jared corroborated Robert's version of events. In his second police statement, Jared recanted his first statement and claimed that he dropped Robert off at his parent's house, picked him up a few hours later, and was unaware (at least initially) that Robert had murdered his family.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Between his second and third statements, the police tracked Jared to a motel where he had gone with his girlfriend. There the police conducted an unrecorded interview with Jared in the police car. The police made no written report of that interview. Immediately thereafter, Jared paged the homicide detectives to inform them he was returning to the station. Jared reached the station even before the police officers.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In the wee hours of the morning, after an all-night interrogation, Jared finally confessed that he had helped Robert plan the murders and had helped him carry them out. Jared claimed, however, that he was not at the house while Robert was murdering his family.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
By 8:25 AM, Jared had completed a polygraph examination regarding the truthfulness of his confession. He failed that examination.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In exchange for Jared's guilty plea and testimony, the DA offered to recommend a sentence of 20 years rather than death. Jared testified so well for the State that he was sentenced to only 10 years. In fact, he testified so well that he served only 5 years for his alleged role in the brutal murders of 5 people.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Jared testified that Robert had, before the murders, called his parents and told them that he wanted to speak with them about a business deal. He arranged to have Robin and Rick Wentworth arrive around 5 PM, leaving himself enough time to kill his parents and his sister Sarah before Robin and Rick arrived.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Jared dropped Robert off near the house around 4:15 PM. He picked Robert up around 6 PM. Robert detailed the murders for him.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Soon after arriving at the house, Robert lured his mother into a garage bedroom on the pretense that he wanted to share a surprise with her about the business deal. He tried to immobilize her with a stun gun, but the stun gun didn't work. As she struggled, he assured her that he just needed money, that he was not going to hurt anyone, and that he was just going to tie her up. He smothered her with a pillow before binding her hands and feet.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert had no difficulty disposing of his father, whom he described to Jared as a "wimp".</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert then went to Sarah's room. Once again he used the stun gun in an effort to immobilize her, but once again the stun gun didn't work. As Robert was binding Sarah's hands and feet, he told her that he needed money and that nothing would happen to her. She thanked him for sparing her baby. He then put a plastic bag over her head and zip-corded it closed.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
While Robert was still in Sarah's room, Robin and Rick arrived early. Rick jimmied the locked screen door and entered. Robert attempted to speak with each of them alone, one after the other, but failed to separate them. Robert therefore threatened them with a gun. He told them that Jared was in the other room and would kill the parents if either Rick or Robin failed to cooperate.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert feared the gun would make too much noise if he used it. He therefore retrieved a crowbar from the garage. He hit each of them on the back of the head with that crowbar, striking Rick several times. He bound them, gagged them, and tied bags over their heads.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert had planned to remove all the bags and zip cords to make it appear as if each of the victims had died of smoke inhalation. However, while pouring gas over the bodies, the water heater ignited the fumes in the garage bedroom where he had doused his parents. Robert therefore lit the remaining three bodies on fire using matches.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
After Jared picked up Robert around 6 PM, Jared drove hither and yon as Robert disposed of evidence by throwing it out the passenger window. In this fashion, Robert disposed of a crowbar, a gas can, a stun gun, a pistol, a backpack, the clothing he had worn, and a pair of sunglasses.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Four days after the murders, Jared helped the police locate the evidence Robert had thrown from the car. As part of the search, the police employed helicopters, dive teams, dogs, and mounted search teams. They recovered a crowbar, a gas can, a sweatshirt, a cap, a backpack, a ski-mask, and the slide mechanism from a gun.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Forensic examinations could link none of items to either Robert or the crime. There was, for example, no blood, hair, or fingerprints on the crowbar to tie it to Robert or to any of the victims. Jared claimed that he had purchased most of those items. All efforts to confirm Jared's claims about when and where he had purchased them failed.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Other aspects of Jared's confession also failed to comport. Jared testified that Robert suffocated his mother with a pillow. No pillow as found near the body, and no fibers were found in Mary Coulson's airway. Jared testified that the water heater caused an explosion that disrupted Robert's plans. Arson investigators for both the prosecution and the defense testified that the no such explosion occurred. Jared testified that Robin and Rick surprised Robert by arriving early around 4:15 PM. The neighbor testified that all the cars were in the driveway by 3:30 PM.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Soon after the murders, the police examined Robert's person, clothing, and the alleged getaway car for any sign of a struggle, or burnt skin, or singed hair, or gasoline fumes, or anything else that might link him to the murders. They found nothing.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
I do not know whether or not Robert Otis Coulson murdered his five family members, but I believe he did not. I suspect the police extracted a false confession from Jared Althaus by threatening him with a death sentence, just as the police extracted a false confession from Richard Ochoa by threatening him with a death sentence. I suspect the police tailored Jared's confession to fit their theory of the crime, just as the police tailored Ochoa's confession to fit their theory of the crime.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
I am particularly suspicious of Jared's claim that Robert told him that Robin and Rick appeared earlier than expected, and that Rick jimmied the screen door to gain entrance. I suspect that even the police doubted that Robert could have so easily murdered all five separately and sequentially if all five had been in the house when Robert arrived. I suspect that the police discovered the screen door had been jimmied and needed an explanation for that as well. Jared's final story was the best they could manage, even though the timing conflicted with the observations of the neighbor.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
I suspect further that the gun was nothing more than an invention to make more credible Robert's ability to single-handedly murder the five victims separately and sequentially. It made no difference to the police that they could not link Robert or Jared to any purchase or ownership of a handgun. They found the slide mechanism of a pistol during their extensive search for evidence, and they incorporated that tidbit into Jared's confession.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
I suspect the murders may have instead been a case of mistaken identity. Neighbor Charlotte Diemer feared that the attack on the Coulson home may have been intended for her and her family. Four days prior to the murder, she received a death threat by telephone. She reported the threat to the police. She pointed out to the firemen that the Coulson house was quite similar to hers. The two houses were located near one another, on the same street, on the same side side of the street. Each had a "For Sale" sign in the yard. Each had a realtor lockbox on the front door. The police and arson reports indicate no follow-up on the threat against Ms. Diemer's family. The State withheld the threat from the defense for more than a year, until the trial was well under way and an arson investigator mentioned Ms. Diemer's concern.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Mass family murders are quite rare, as are death threats to an entire family. The probability is near zero that death threats against an entire family would be soon followed by murders of a neighboring family, unless those two events were related.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
I do not believe that Robert Coulson killed his family, but I cannot prove he did not. I can, however, prove that the police planted an envelope on the desk of Robert's father, and that the State and People of Texas used that envelope to help convince a jury that Robert Coulson was a murderer.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The envelope was an old Aetna letter-sized envelope with notations about a prior loan to Robert Coulson. The State claimed that the envelope was proof that Robert was expected at the house to discuss a business opportunity. Jared had incorporated this alleged business opportunity into his final confession.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
(Please keep that last point in mind, that Jared claimed Robert used an alleged business opportunity to lure his family to the house. If the envelope was planted, and I will soon show that it was, then there was no evidence whatsoever that Robert lured anyone anywhere with any business opportunity. It seems as if the State manufactured the testimonial evidence just as they manufactured the physical evidence.)</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The State argued that the father, Otis Coulson, had pulled the envelope from his other papers and placed it on the top of his desk in preparation for the impending discussion about a business opportunity. During its closing argument, the State asked the jurors to remember that the envelope was found "on the table in the den apart from anything else because [Otis] is expecting his son to come over and talk to him about a business deal."</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
It is clear that the jurors believed the envelope to be significant. During deliberations, they twice asked to see the "envelope that was on the desk." The first request was during the guilt / innocence phase of the trial. They voted guilty. The second was during the penalty phase of the trial. They voted death.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
During the appeal process, the State once again emphasized the importance of the envelope, noting that it "was discovered on top of Otis Coulson's desk on the night of the murders. As such, it corroborates Jared Althaus' testimony that the Appellant [Robert Coulson] called his father to arrange a meeting for the night of the murders to discuss his business deal."</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The Court of Criminal Appeals agreed that the envelope was significant. They wrote that the importance of the envelope was not what was written on it, but its location "on Otis Coulson's desk on the night of the murders. This fact tended to show that Otis Coulson was expecting to discuss Appellant’s business plans around the time of the murders."</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Without further ado, I will now prove that the envelope was planted. More accurately and less impressively, I will now summarize and simplify the remarkable proof developed by Robert Coulson's defense team during the appellate process.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Buckle up. Here we go.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The photo below shows the envelope resting in plain view on top of Otis Coulson's desk.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p4" style="text-align: center;">
<span id="docs-internal-guid-feb005e2-be30-514b-868c-dd7e4c0441b7"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img alt="ex1.jpg" height="297px;" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/JVVNxIHaP0_Mj9TxxP9AtXqPTw5VKS_KvxSdy-Xxn53dRK1Xbs7537SN3mJSaCWUKZzX6tRYrIGOjf_juUVRX1EB0Xs7kw4IiyyfcFeqRlQJMoHjgTblOwGf2lXyII8WGw" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0rad); border: none;" width="432px;" /></span></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
There's the envelope, just in front of the lamp, just to the left of the calculator. The yellow exhibit sticker at the lower right of the image was apparently added by Robert's defense team for their presentation of the evidence. It does not correspond with the exhibit numbering at Robert's trial.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Two of three such similar photos were shown to the jury to convince them that Robert Coulson used the ploy of a business opportunity to lure his entire surviving family to the Coulson home on the day of the murder. During the trial, Officer Halling testified that she had taken the photographs on the night of the murders. She testified further that the photographs accurately portrayed the conditions of the room as she found it.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Officer Halling would later concede, under oath during an evidentiary hearing, that neither claim was true. She did not take the photographs of the envelope on the table. The envelope was not on the table when she photographed the room on the night of the murders. She claimed during that evidentiary hearing that she did not perjure herself during that capital murder trial of Robert Otis Coulson. She claimed instead that she simply made an honest mistake.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
No harm, no foul.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The photo is suspicious on its face, and should have been noted as such by Robert's trial attorneys. Portions of the envelope are still a pristine white while most of the envelope is covered with soot. The soot pattern suggests that the envelope was elsewhere during the fire, mostly exposed, partially covered.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
After Robert's conviction and sentence of death, his appellate attorneys submitted an open records request to the Houston police department. Such requests had only recently been allowed by state law. As part of the response to that open records request, Robert's defense team received the photo below.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p4" style="text-align: center;">
<span id="docs-internal-guid-feb005e2-be30-ac7b-e163-dcb2e33c4993"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img alt="ex9.jpg" height="311px;" src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/BED3n5EuYOTsrLZhaZeJeIdR_b5biX2V1xE0V2zln_HFKzLXouxh97EcawrBm1auMeNMObUtT083UweeUB8vAQbMFyixduC5FH21Sx3Aokt3NJqFit_9e-0tnFgAsz6lGQ" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0rad); border: none;" width="432px;" /></span></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Holy withheld evidence, Batman! The envelope is not on the desk. Perhaps it was removed before this photograph. Perhaps it was added after the previous photograph.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
To help resolve the conundrum, I rotated, scaled, and cropped the two images to provide a head-to-head comparison. I provide the result below.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p4" style="text-align: center;">
<span id="docs-internal-guid-feb005e2-be31-0255-5432-d5c1799c9a25"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img alt="ex1 and 9.jpeg" height="251px;" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/qPERCwc6afhuAiOZwI7zroOiCGmSrve5OnDB23YBGd5C77TyDn8gRTWGh-Vy33kq_agXK_XgAabmGFaRc91EIvAzinfBbMs01dKJwPDGk1Ep8swHbA3dN4VxZZrjA6aalQ" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="400px;" /></span></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
As you can see, the answer is that the envelope was added after the first photograph was taken. The composite image makes clear also that the envelope was not on the desk during the fire. If the envelope had been on the desk, there would be a soot-free rectangle on the desk pad marking the location of the envelope. There is no such soot-free region on the pad.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
A video of the crime scene taken on the night of the murders confirms that the envelope was not on the desk at the time of the murders. How then did the envelope end up on the desk?</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
During an evidentiary hearing granted in response to this new evidence, Officer Verbitsky testified under oath that he had been called to the crime scene the morning after the murders to take additional photographs. He was the person who took the photograph of the envelope on the desk. As it turns out, he was also the person who took the video of the crime scene on the night of the murders. In that video, the envelope is not on the desk. The envelope appeared sometime after he took the video on the night of the murder, sometime after Officer Haller took her photographs on the night of the murder.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Sergeants Ross and Atchetee were in charge of the crime scene on the night of the murders and during the day after the murders. Sergeant Ross testified under oath at the evidentiary hearing that her partner, Sergeant Atchetee, found the envelope. She testified that she was not in the office when Atchetee found it, that she was in another room. According to the police reports, however, Sergeant Ross was the person who called Officer Verbitsky back to the house to take additional photos of the desk.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
(I have not been able to determine whether this Sergeant Ross of the Houston PD homicide squad was also the Sergeant Theresa Ross of the Houston PD homicide squad who testified that Preston Hughes' confession was freely given.)</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Sergeant Atchetee testified under oath at the evidentiary hearing that he was the person who found the envelope and placed it on the desk. He testified further that the envelope was not on the desk when he first observed the desk.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Somehow, neither Sergeant Atchetee nor Ross, nor anyone in the Houston Police Department, nor anyone working for the State and People of Texas, ever informed Robert's defense team of this clearly inculpatory evidence.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Sergeant Atchetee then claimed, for the first time ever, that he had picked up the stack of papers from on the left side of the desk, thumbed through them, found the envelope with Robert Coulson's name on it, removed that single envelope from the stack of papers, returned the stack of papers to the desk, then placed the envelope on the desk to be photographed and collected into evidence. Atchetee testified further that the envelope was not on the top of the stack; that he did not find any other papers in the stack that had any value to the case; that he did not tell Officer Verbitsky where he found the envelope; that he just showed the envelope to Verbitsky as it was sitting by itself on the desk; and that he told Verbitsky to photograph the envelope and take it into evidence.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
When asked how the envelope could have been so heavily sooted if it had been buried in the stack of papers, Atchetee testified that he had no idea.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
None whatsoever.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Sergeant Atchetee first claimed that he removed the envelope from the stack of papers during his testimony at the evidentiary hearing. He certainly did not make that claim to the defense before trial. He certainly did not make it during trial. The State and People of Texas did not make it for him in any of the many pleadings prior to the evidentiary hearing.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The first time Coulson's attorneys ever heard of Atchetee's remarkable discovery was during the evidentiary hearing. Caught off guard, the appellate attorneys were unprepared to thoroughly impeach Atchetee and his testimony.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The court ruled that Atchetee did have cause to consider the envelope as potentially significant. The court ruled that Atchetee therefore did have cause to have the envelope photographed and taken into evidence. The court ruled that the evidence had not been manufactured. The court affirmed the conviction. The court ruled that that Robert Otis Coulson must still die with a needle in his arm.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
After losing the appeal, Coulson's attorneys built an even more compelling case that Sergeant Atchetee perjured himself. (I believe the sooted nature of the envelope should have been sufficient.)</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The attorneys pointed first to the stack of papers on the left side of the desk, the stack amidst which Atchetee swore he had found the envelope. The photographs show that the stack of papers is identically situated before and after the appearance of the envelope atop of the desk. It is impossible, they argued, that Atchetee could have lifted the stack of papers from the desk, thumbed through the papers, found one document he believed to be relevant, removed the document, and returned the stack of papers to the desk without leaving nary a hint that it had been moved and manipulated.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The attorneys pointed out also that the envelope would not have been relevant if it had been found in the stack of papers. In that case, it would have been nothing more than one of many old documents. Recall that the the State and the appellate courts explained that it was the position of the envelope that mattered, not its content.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Finally, while pouring again through all the videos and photographs provided both before and after trial, they discovered the likely source of the envelope, and it certainly wasn't the undisturbed stack of papers. The envelope was almost certainly taken from a filing cabinet drawer. Consider the photograph below.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p5" style="text-align: center;">
<span id="docs-internal-guid-feb005e2-be31-5f9d-47f3-d3bd95b9acb4"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; vertical-align: baseline; white-space: pre-wrap;"><img alt="ex10.jpg" height="325px;" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/iNluF7L3YEAtP9MsRZ6M3N5CwookDLkjO8cTzEb4Rkuj8nJJERn78Z27c1JvESaY3Es2zZNFNNa1ZPDE0uMfmvjklVJI3HepV6_7IdcnDPP8Lph4e5pMWGikEskGIOtAvA" style="-webkit-transform: rotate(0.00rad); border: none; transform: rotate(0.00rad);" width="432px;" /></span></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Look inside the upper left drawer. There is a white rectangle there. The rest of the drawer is sooted. Something was covering the soot-free rectangle during the fire. That something was almost certainly the envelope that later appeared on the desk, that later proved Robert Coulson had lured his family to the house so that he could murder them. The size and soot pattern of the envelope corresponded nicely with whatever document was removed from the cabinet drawer, after the fire, while Sergeants Ross and Atchetee were in charge of the crime scene.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
With this additional evidence in hand, Coulson's attorneys appealed to the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Court found that the envelope was placed on top of the desk on the day after the murders and that the photograph of the envelope on the desk was false evidence. From their ruling: </div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
We agree that the state evidentiary hearing … sufficiently establishes that the evidence regarding the location of the envelope was “false.” We also agree that this knowledge may be imputed from the police to the prosecution.</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
Then the Court threw in their twist. They declared that the manufactured evidence was nothing more than a harmless error.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Robert Otis Coulson was executed on 25 June 2002, forever framed by the State and People of Texas. "I'm innocent," he said just before they injected the lethal cocktail into his vein. "I had absolutely nothing to do with my family's murder. I want to thank the people who supported me. I hope they will continue the fight. That's all."</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com11tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-31664861253098561302014-05-01T09:43:00.001-07:002014-05-01T10:40:36.135-07:00The Framing of Christopher Ochoa and Richard Danziger<div class="p1">
<span class="s1" style="text-align: justify;">This is the fourth post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a></span><span style="text-align: justify;">. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>.</span></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In the early morning hours of 24 October 1988, Nancy DePriest was working alone in a Pizza Hut restaurant in Austin, Texas. The 20-year-old mother of a 15-month-old baby girl was rolling dough when Achim Josef Marino used a restaurant key to let himself in the side door. Marino bound DePriest with a pair of handcuffs and her own bra, raped her, and shot her in the head.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
After a religious awakening in 1996, Marino began trying to confess to the crime. He contacted the Austin police, a local newspaper, the ACLU, and Governor George Bush, but none of them would take him seriously. He provided information to the Austin PD that led directly to the recovery of the restaurant keys, the handcuffs, and the .22 calibre Ruger pistol he used in the attack, as well as two money bags he took from the restaurant.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Rather than charge Marino for the murder, the police (and pretty much everyone else) simply ignored him and his evidence. The police conducted no DNA testing to connect the evidence to the crime. They did no ballistics comparison to match shell casing found at the scene with Marino's pistol.</div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
The State and People of Texas were uninterested in Marino because they had already framed Christopher Ochoa and Richard Danziger for the rape and murder of Nancy DePriest. So tight was the frame that<span class="s1"> the presiding judge at Danziger's trial recalled that "any jury hearing that testimony would have found those two guys guilty." So tight was the frame that </span>the jury took only seven and a half minutes to deliberate Danziger's fate.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The only evidence against Danziger was the testimony of Danziger's friend, roommate, co-worker, and alleged accomplice Christopher Ochoa. The presiding judge recalled that Ochoa's testimony was "very compelling" <span class="s2">because it "contained details police said only a witness to the crime could have known."</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Christopher Ochoa pled guilty and a jury found Richard Danziger guilty. Both young men were sentenced to life imprisonment.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
While under the care and custody of the State and People of Texas, Richard Danziger was attacked by fellow inmate Armando Gutierrez. Gutierrez threw Danziger to the floor and kicked him in the head repeatedly with a steel-toed boot. One or more of the kicks drove a segment of Danziger's skull into his brain. Danziger was taken to a nearby hospital where, during emergency surgery, a piece of his brain was removed from his shattered skull. Because of his injuries, Danziger suffered partial paralysis, seizures, anxiety, and mental problems. Frequently unable to carry on a simple conversation or recognize family members, Danziger was eventually transferred to the Skyview psychiatric prison.</div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Pleasant name, Skyview.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In 2000, under pressure from a Wisconsin innocence project, the State and People of Texas finally got around to testing Marino's pistol and the male DNA from Nancy DePriest's body. The shell casing from the crime scene matched Marino's pistol. The male DNA from DePriest's body matched Marino. The testing excluded both Ochoa and Danziger as contributors of the DNA.</div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Marino was absolutely, unequivocally guilty, despite the State's reluctance to believe so. Ochoa and Danzinger were absolutely, unequivocally innocent, despite the manufactured case of guilt that framed them so well.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
There is no doubt that Christopher Ochoa and Richard Danziger were framed by the State and People of Texas. It makes no difference if the police and the prosecutors believed Ochoa and Danziger were guilty. The case against them was manufactured out of whole cloth. Such a manufactured case is, purely and simply, a frame.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Christopher Ochoa and Richard Danziger became suspects in the case for the flimsiest of reasons. The two had also been Pizza Hut employees, though they worked at a different restaurant than Nancy DePriest. After the murder, they visited the restaurant where the crime had occurred, ate some pizza, drank some beer, and raised a toast to the murdered Nancy DePriest. An employee found this behavior suspicious and reported it to the police.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The police hauled the two in for questioning and decided Danziger knew too much about the crime. Investigator Hector Polanco homed in on Ochoa as the weak link. Polanco led a lengthy interrogation of the small, timid Ochoa.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Ochoa requested a lawyer. Polanco refused on the pretense that Ochoa had not been officially charged with a crime.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Ochoa pleaded his innocence. Polanco told him 'You're going to get the needle for this. We got you." Polanco threatened him with prison rape, telling him that he would be "fresh meat" for the other inmates.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Ochoa pleaded his innocence. Polanco threw chairs around the room and threatened to "crush his head" if he didn't confess.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Ochoa pleaded his innocence. Polanco showed him pictures of death row and pointed to the spot in Ochoa's arm where the lethal chemicals would be injected.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span class="s3">Polanco did not limit his threats to Ochoa. Donna Angstadt was the manager of the Pizza Hut where Ochoa and Danziger worked. Danziger was her former boyfriend. Polanco questioned her as well. </span>She described the event as "the most horrific, the most horrible experience I've ever been through in my life." Polanco tried to link her to the crime. He told her that she supplied the gun. He told her that she pulled the trigger as Danziger held DePriest's head. He threatened to have her children removed from her custody.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The DePriest case was, of course, not the only one in which Polanco would be accused of coercing confessions and lying about them. In 1992, the Austin PD fired him for perjuring himself during a different murder trial. Polanco was reinstated by an arbitrator who attributed Polanco's false testimony to a memory lapse.</div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Polanco, unfortunately, was not the only Austin police officer to engage in such abusive and corrupting behavior. In 1992, and investigative task force found that an excessive workload, inadequate training, and inadequate supervision resulted in false confessions. The task force observed also that the Austin PD detectives tended to leave out <span class="s3">information that was "not good for our side."</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
After a lengthy interrogation, Christopher Ochoa did what 20% of all exonerees did: he confessed to a crime he did not commit. Only then was Ochoa provided an attorney. So tight was the frame that<span class="s2"> even the attorney thought Ochoa was guilty: "There's a detailed confession, you gotta be guilty."</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In exchange for taking the death penalty off the table, Ochoa agreed to plead guilty for his role in the robbery and rape. He agreed also to testify against Danziger as the person who shot Nancy DePriest in the back of her head.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
While awaiting his sentencing and Danziger's trial, Ochoa maintained his innocence, but only when speaking with his attorney and his family. His attorney explained that if he were to publicly proclaim his innocence, the State might try to execute him. "They made me confess," he told his uncle, "and how am I going to prove my innocence now? It's my word against theirs."</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
At Danziger's trial, Ochoa provided details of the crime that he could have obtained only from the police. He and Danziger met at a McDonald's near the Pizza Hut at 7 AM. They entered the side door of the Pizza Hut using a master key that Danziger had managed to obtain. DePriest was cutting pizza dough when they arrived. They had a conversation with her. They bound her. They gagged her. They raped and sodomized her eight different times, twice after she had been shot in the head.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Ochoa departed from his confession when describing who shot DePriest. In his confession, he claimed Danziger was the shooter. At trial, he testified that he shot DePriest because she recognized him.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Danziger always maintained his innocence. He could offer no explanation why Ochoa would accuse him. He claimed that he had been with his girlfriend when the murders occurred. The jury deliberated for seven and a half minutes before convicting him.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Danziger and Ochoa were each sentenced to life imprisonment. They served 12 years behind bars before being released. Had it not been for religious conversion of Achim Josef Marino, and his persistent efforts to prove his guilt, Richard Danziger and Christopher Ochoa would be in prison today, framed by the State and People of Texas.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com28tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-63064819493762821002014-04-28T10:50:00.000-07:002014-05-14T19:15:19.004-07:00Framing The Guilty, Framing the Innocent<div style="text-align: center;">
<span style="font-size: large;">TABLE OF CONTENTS</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Introduction</span></a></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/this-is-second-post-in-series-framing.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 1</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/the-framing-of-cesar-fierro.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Cesar Fierro</span></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-christopher-ochoa-and.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Christopher Ochoa and Richard Danziger</span></a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-robert-otis-coulson.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Robert Otis Coulson</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span></div>
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-larry-swearingen-part-2.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 2</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-preston-hughes-part-1.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Preston Hughes, Part 1</span></a></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-preston-hughes-part-2.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Preston Hughes, Part 2</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-larry-swearingen-part-3.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 3</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-framing-of-larry-swearingen-part-4.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 4</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: inherit; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/05/the-extent-of-framing-innocent-in-texas.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Extent of Framing the Innocent in Texas</span></a><span style="color: #333333;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;"><br /></span></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">Later in what will be a long-running series:</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Gilbert Alejandro (coming)</span></span><br />
The Framing of George Rodriguez (coming)<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Derrick Johnson (coming)</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of David Shawn Pope (coming)</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Arthur Merle Mumphrey (coming)</span></span><br />
<span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Cameron Todd Willingham (coming)</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Frances Elaine Newton (coming)</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of James Lee Woodward (coming)</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Entre Nax Karange (coming)</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Steven Phillips (coming)</span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; color: #333333; line-height: 21.215999603271484px; text-align: center;">The Framing of Max Soffar (coming)</span></span>tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-53334845730837282412014-04-28T10:41:00.002-07:002014-05-01T09:44:00.428-07:00The Framing of Cesar Fierro<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span class="s1">This is the third post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a></span>. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>.<br />
<br />
On 27 February 1979, border patrol agents discovered the body of taxi driver Nicholas Castanon in an El Paso park. He had been shot in the back of the head.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Not long after the shooting, eyewitnesses in Juarez, Mexico identified two men exiting what turned out to be Castanon's cab. Based in part on descriptions provided by the eyewitnesses, the El Paso police soon arrested two men, neither of whom were Cesar Fierro. The El Paso district attorney declined to prosecute, and the case went cold.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Late in July, under circumstances that remain murky to this day, 16-year-old Geraldo Olague fingered Cesar Fierro as the person who shot and killed Nicholas Castanon. Olague explained to the Juarez police that he and Fierro hailed a cab with the intention of robbing the driver. Fierro surprised Olague when he shot and killed Castanon. The Juarez police promptly turned Olague over to the El Paso police.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
On 1 August, at 3 in the morning, eight heavily-armed Juarez police officers broke into the home of Cesar Fierro's parents. They took the parents to the Juarez jail. There they threatened Fierro's stepfather with an electric cattle prod placed close to his genitals. They beat Fierro's mother.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
A bit later that morning, El Paso police detective Al Medrano received a phone call from Juarez police commander Jorge Palacios. Palacios invited Medrano to breakfast in Juarez. During their meeting, Palacios informed Medrano that the Juarez police had located Cesar Fierro. Fierro, he explained, was already in the custody of the El Paso police, being held for a parole violation in an unrelated case.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Medrano quickly retrieved Fierro and began interrogating him. Fierro acknowledged that he knew Olague and conceded that they had committed robberies together. Fierro, however, steadfastly denied that he was in any way involved with the murder of Nicholas Castanon.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Medrano called Palacios and gave the phone to Fierro. Palacios informed Fierro that his parents would be tortured if he did not confess. Fierro hung up the phone and confessed to the murder of Nicholas Castanon.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
At his trial for capital murder, the case against Cesar Fierro consisted of his confession and the testimony of Geraldo Olague. Medrano testified that the confession was voluntary. Olague's testimony was a jumble. He testified that in the hours before the murder, he committed his first-ever burglary. The burglary consisted of breaking into a car and stealing a CB radio, which he later pawned. He identified one of the jurors as the pawnbroker to whom he had sold the radio.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Olague testified that Fierro had forced him to commit approximately 10 burglaries in the six months prior to the CB radio theft, despite his own testimony to the contrary. When asked how many burglaries he had committed, he estimated 40.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
To explain away the obvious inconsistencies between his trial testimony and his police report, Olague explained that he had psychological problems and that he was impaired even while testifying.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
The defense called Fierro's parents who testified to the brutal treatment they had suffered at the hands of the Juarez police. The defense called also Fierro's landlord who testified that Fierro was at home on the night of the murder. The defense witnesses were of no consequence, however, in the face of Fierro's confession.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
On 12 February 1980, the jury found Cesar Fierro guilty of capital murder and sentenced him to death.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
After Fierro had been on death row for 14 years, his appellate attorneys interviewed Al Medrano under conditions that turned out to be favorable to Fierro. Medrano was dying of cirrhosis of the liver, and he provided what was effectively a dying declaration. He signed an affidavit admitting that Fierro's confession had been coerced.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Fierro's attorney took the affidavit to the district attorney who had prosecuted Fierro. The DA signed an affidavit stating that he would not have prosecuted Fierro if he had known the confession had been coerced.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
In addition to the two affidavits, the Juarez police officer who had led the pre-dawn raid on home of Fierro's parents agreed to testify.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
That evidence in hand, Fierro's attorneys convinced a lower court to grant Fierro a new trial. The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, however, overruled the lower court decision. Each of the nine TCCA judges agreed that the confessions had been coerced. Each of the nine agreed also that Detective Medrano had provided perjured testimony during Fierro's legal proceedings. Only four of the judges, however, voted to grant Fierro a new trial. The other five ruled the coerced confession to be nothing more than a "harmless error". They ruled that the jury would have convicted Fierro on Olague's testimony alone.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
During his time on death row, Fierro has been scheduled for execution 14 different times. On 6 of those occasions he came within days of being executed. His mother died. His brother died. His wife divorced him. His daughter stopped visiting him.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
On 15 May 1986, Fierro contacted the prison's psychiatric department for the first time. He explained that he was hearing voices and feared he might harm himself.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
After March of 1999, Fierro's communications with his attorneys became increasingly irrational. He accused them of conspiring against him. He refused to meet with them. He returned their letters unopened. He refused to shower. He refused to leave his cell for any reason and had to be forcibly extracted. He spread feces on the wall.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<span style="text-align: justify;">Fierro now spends his days in the Beauford H. Jester IV Psychiatric Unit. It is unlikely he will ever be executed.</span><br />
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
He will, however, always have been framed by the State and People of Texas.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-71788789726894368392014-04-27T12:11:00.001-07:002014-05-01T09:53:35.723-07:00The Framing of Larry Swearingen, Part 1<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
<span class="s1">This is the second post in the series <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent.html"><span style="color: blue;">Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent</span></a></span>. For ease of navigation among the posts, use the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>.</div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span class="s2" style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>Introduction</u></b></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On 8 December 1998, Melissa Trotter disappeared from Montgomery College, a community college 30 miles north of Houston. Twenty-four days later, on 2 January 1998, several hunters discovered her body in a heavily wooded area of Sam Houston National Park. She had been strangled with one leg of a pair of pantyhose. The ligature was still knotted around her neck.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On the day Melissa Trotter disappeared, Larry Swearingen was scheduled to lunch with her. Swearingen quickly became the primary suspect. The police arrested him for outstanding traffic warrants on 11 December, just 3 days after Melissa went missing, 22 days before her body was discovered.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At his trial, the State presented a circumstantial, but substantial case for murder. With respect to the attempted rape and kidnapping charges, however, the evidence was gossamer thin. I summarize the State's case below.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u><span style="font-family: inherit;">The Case Against Larry Swearingen</span></u></b></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On December 6, Swearingen met Melissa Trotter and talked with her at length. She gave him her phone number, and they made plans to talk again the next day.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Later that evening, while using his truck to help transport some furniture, Swearingen commented to Bryan Foster and William Brown that he was going to meet a young lady named Melissa for lunch. He bragged that if everything went right, he was going "to have Melissa for lunch." Swearingen called Melissa from Foster's house and talked with Melissa about meeting her for lunch and helping her study for an exam.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On December 7, Melissa paged Swearingen. He called her back. She apparently canceled or postponed their lunch date. His co-workers teased him about being stood up. He explained she was taking a test. He appeared to be angry the rest of the day.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On December 8, three witnesses saw Melissa sitting with Swearingen in the Montgomery College library between 11:30 AM and 1:30 PM. The two of them were sitting by the computers and chatting amicably. Melissa's biology teacher saw her leave with a male shortly after 1:30 PM.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At 2:05, Swearingen returned a page from his friend Sarah Searle. He told her that he would have to call her back because he was having lunch with a friend.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Around 3:00, Swearingen's landlord saw Swearingen's truck arrive. Not long thereafter he saw Swearingen's truck leave. Because the truck had tinted windows, the landlord could not see who was in the truck.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At 3:03, Swearingen placed a cell phone call that utilized a cell tower near FM 1097 in Willis, Texas. The State argued the call was consistent with Swearingen driving from his rented mobile home to the Sam Houston National Forest where Melissa's body was found.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">At 4:30, Swearingen placed another cell phone call picked up by a different cell tower near Willis. The State argued the call was consistent with Swearingen returning to his home after dumping Melissa's body in the Sam Houston National Forest.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">When Swearingen returned home, he was again observed by his landlord. Swearingen in fact spoke briefly with the landlord.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">By 5:30, Swearingen left again, this time to pick up his wife Terry from his mother's house. Terry Swearingen testified that when she and her husband returned home, she noticed their home was in disarray. She noticed also a pack of Marlboro Light cigarettes and a red lighter on top of the television. Terry Swearingen testified that neither she nor her husband smoked. Melissa Trotter, however, smoked Marlboro Lights and used a lighter similar to that found in the Swearingen's home.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">That same evening, Larry Swearingen called Phyllis Morrison, an ex-girlfriend. Swearingen told her that he was in trouble and that the police might be after him. On December 11, Swearingen told an acquaintance that he anticipated being arrested by Montgomery County authorities.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Also on December 11, Swearingen noticed a patrol officer observing him. Swearingen sped away, leading the officer on a high-speed chase. The chase ended in front of the home of Swearingen's mother and stepfather. Swearingen was arrested on several outstanding warrants. While being placed in handcuffs, he asked that his hands be placed in front of him rather than behind. He explained that his wrist and ribs were sore because he had been in a bar fight the week before. Following his arrest, law enforcement authorities observed and photographed red marks on his neck, cheek, and back.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On December 17, two neighbors of his mother and stepfather collected numerous pieces of torn paper from their street. The papers turned out to be Melissa Trotter's class schedule and some health insurance paperwork her father had given her.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">On January 2, Melissa's body was discovered in the Sam Houston National Forest. The location was heavily wooded, secluded, and remote. The police had previously searched the area three times without finding the body. They explained later that they would have had to walk within twenty feet of the body before seeing it. Larry Swearingen was familiar with the area. He had driven a date around the vicinity just a few months earlier in his red pickup.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Melissa was laying on her back in a pile of bushes. Her right arm was above her head and slightly to the left. Her sweater, shirt, and bra were pulled up under her arms, exposing her breasts and back. Her jeans were still on. The fly was closed. The right rear pocket was torn downwards, exposing red underwear beneath. A note was in one pocket. The note had been given to Melissa by a friend on the day Melissa disappeared.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">A piece of hosiery was knotted around her neck, as a ligature. The hosiery was one leg from a pair of pantyhose. Swearingen's landlord testified that he found the remainder of the pantyhose in Swearingen's mobile home as he was cleaning the trailer for another tenant. The discovery occurred after the body had been found. Terry Swearingen, Larry's wife, testified that the pantyhose belonged to her.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Joye Carter conducted the autopsy on 3 January. That was one day after Melissa's body was discovered, 25 days after she had disappeared, and 22 days after Larry Swearingen had been arrested. Dr. Carter did not estimate a time of death. She did not note any evidence of sexual assault. She did not note any defensive wounds or evidence of restraint.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">During Swearingen's trial for capital murder, Dr. Carter testified that death was caused by asphyxia due to ligature strangulation. There was no evidence of penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth. The lack of defensive wounds, such as broken fingernails and the difficulty of tying an elastic nylon around a struggling victim, suggested that the Melissa may have been unconscious when the ligature was applied.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Based on the state of decomposition, including the presence of fungi that take several weeks to develop, Dr. Carter estimated Melissa Trotter's death occurred 25 days prior to the discovery of her corpse. That matched exactly the date of Melissa's disappearance. Dr. Carter had not estimated a time of death in her autopsy report.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Melissa's stomach contents included a French fry-like form of potato, some chicken, and a small amount of greenish, vegetable material. The State claimed the stomach contents were consistent with the tater tots Melissa had eaten while at Montgomery College. The State claimed further that chicken was consistent with Chicken McNuggets Melissa might have purchased at the nearby McDonald's. Dr. Carter testified that a person's stomach will usually not empty in less than two hours, and that any food within the stomach at death will remain there.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Criminalist Sandra Musialowski, from the Texas Department of Public Safety, testified that several fibers recovered from Melissa's jacket were consistent with fibers from Swearingen's jacket. Criminalist Musialowski testified also that several fibers found on Trotter were similar to seat material from Swearingen's vehicle. A few other fibers found on Trotter were similar to fibers from the headliner of Swearingen's truck and from the carpet in his home. Criminalist Musialowski testified also that three hairs found in Swearingen's truck were microscopically similar to Melissa's hairs. Those hairs still contained the anagen root, indicating they had been forcibly removed.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Officer Ivan Wilson, also from the Texas Department of Public Safety, testified regarding a paint fleck found on Trotter's clothing. He testified that the quantity was "an insufficient amount to do all the testing that I normally do." The fleck, however, was similar in appearance to paint on Swearingen's red pickup.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">A Luminol test conducted on the seats of Swearingen's truck found no blood. The investigators concluded that the truck had been wiped down with with Armor All. Two empty containers of Armor All wipes were found in the garbage at Swearingen's home.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">While Swearingen was in jail awaiting trial, a cellmate asked him whether he had committed the murder. Swearingen replied, "Fuck, yeah, I did it." Swearingen added that he was just trying to avoid the death penalty.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span class="s2" style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>Swearingen's Fabrications</u></b></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Larry Swearingen provided substantial assistance to the State of Texas in their effort to convict him. On three occasions, he clumsily attempted to fabricate exculpatory evidence. These clumsy efforts were used against him at trial.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Swearingen's first clumsy effort was claiming that his house had been burglarized. Part of the circumstantial case presented against Swearingen at his trial was that his house was in disarray when he returned there with his wife. His wife noticed the disheveled state of their home as well as the strange cigarettes and the strange lighter. Apparently in an effort to explain the tumultuous state of his home, Swearingen contacted the police and reported a burglary. He falsely claimed to have been out of town from 11:00 AM on 7 December through 7:30 PM on 8 December. He also falsely claimed that someone had stolen his VCR and his Jet Ski. The police, however, found no sign of any prying mechanism on the doors or windows to his home. His Jet Ski was located at a repair shop where Swearingen had dropped it off for maintenance.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Swearingen's second clumsy effort was asking a friend to provide an alibi for him. On 9 January, When Swearingen's friend, Elyese Ripley, visited him in jail, Swearingen asked her to say that she had been with him on the day Melissa disappeared. He asked her to say that they had gone to the Texaco-McDonald's restaurant near Montgomery College.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Swearingen's third effort was by far the most clumsy. While in jail awaiting trial, he attempted to compose an exculpatory letter from a mystery woman. Swearingen foolishly decided to write the letter in Spanish, a language with which he was clearly less than fluent. He relied heavily on an English-to-Spanish dictionary. The resulting letter was so garbled and so ungrammatical that precise translation was impossible. The narrative was of somebody name Ronnie who took Melissa Trotter to the forest and strangled her.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">According to the State, this purportedly anonymous, exculpatory letter included details of the crime that could have been known only to the person who murdered Melissa Trotter. Those details included the Dr. Carter's testimony that Melissa was injured on the left side of her face, that Melissa's neck was cut, that one of Melissa's shoes had fallen off, that Melissa was laid on her back among the bushes, and that Melissa was wearing red underwear.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span class="s2" style="font-family: inherit;"><b><u>The Defense Case</u></b></span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Larry Swearingen offered a brief affirmative defense, but need hardly have bothered. He had impeached himself so thoroughly by his efforts to manufacture exculpatory evidence that the jury was unlikely to believe anything he said. Nonetheless, Swearingen testified that he did in fact encounter Melissa Trotter that day at the college, but only briefly. She was talking to another man. Swearingen did not go to McDonald's or anywhere else with her that day. Instead he went from the college to see his grandmother.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Swearingen's grandmother corroborated his testimony. She testified that he picked her up and took her to the post office around 2:00 PM, and that he was with her until around 2:50 PM. Assuming the grandmother testified truthfully and accurately, then Larry Swearingen was probably not responsible for the disappearance and murder of Melissa Trotter. During their cross-examination of the grandmother, however, the State called into question her memory of both the date and time. They questioned her also about why she had not earlier informed the authorities of her grandson's alibi.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The most intriguing bit of exculpatory evidence was, in my opinion, the discovery of fresh blood under one of Melissa Trotter's fingernails. DNA testing of that blood excluded Larry Swearingen as the contributor.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Pre-emptive trial testimony about the blood came from Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Carter and from two employees of the Texas Department of Public Safety crime lab. Taken as a whole, their testimony was that the initial testing of fingernail scrapings revealed no human DNA. A later inspection, however, revealed some "very tiny, bright red flakes." The flakes had a total size "no bigger than ... a point of a pencil." The flakes tested positive for human blood.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Given that the flakes were blood, and given that they were still bright red, the flakes were too well preserved to have been exposed to the elements for more than a couple of days. No one disputed the conclusion that the flakes were freshly deposited, within days of their discovery.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">DNA testing of the flakes produced a profile consistent with a male, but inconsistent with Larry Swearingen. The DNA profile was run through the standard database system to search for a match, and no match was found. The DNA profile was then compared against that of six individuals identified by Swearingen's defense team. Again, no match was found.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The State argued that the blood came not from Melissa's assailant, but from contamination unrelated to the crime. State witnesses testified that the blood could have come from a deputy present during the autopsy, a deputy who claimed he had cut himself shaving earlier that morning. Alternatively, the state witnesses suggested that the flakes could have been circulating through the morgue's air conditioning system, that they wafted through a vent, and that they landed unnoticed on the exposed fingernail scrapings.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The defense refuted, effectively in my opinion, the lesser pieces of circumstantial evidence that the State amassed against Swearingen. I detail those refutations in my lengthy series</span><span class="s3" style="font-family: inherit;"> <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/12/the-most-innocent-man-on-death-row.html"><span class="s4" style="color: blue;">The Most Innocent Man on Death Row</span></a>, </span><span style="font-family: inherit;">and I will not repeat them here.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The most damning pieces of evidence against Swearingen were:</span></div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">1. the discovery of the pantyhose at his home, </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">2. the discovery of Melissa Trotter's paperwork near his parents' home, and </span></blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">3. Dr. Joye Carter's testimony that Melissa Trotter died on the day Trotter was last seen alive with Swearingen.</span></blockquote>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">When I continue with The Framing of Larry Swearingen, I will explain how each of those three pieces of evidence was manufactured. I will explain why Larry Swearingen is absolutely innocent. I will explain how he was framed for the murder of Melissa Trotter.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Before doing that, I will explain how other innocent people have been framed by the State and People of Texas.</span></div>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p3" style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Stay tuned.</span></div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-78817494546381958572014-04-26T15:39:00.004-07:002014-05-01T10:13:45.261-07:00Framing the Guilty, Framing the Innocent<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div class="p1">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">There is an all-too-common practice in our justice system known as Framing the Guilty. A police officer (or crime lab supervisor or medical examiner or district attorney) is convinced of a suspect's guilt but fears the bastard will walk free. The police officer (or other administrator of justice) will therefore bury exculpatory evidence, manufacture or plant inculpatory evidence, coerce a false confession, or provide favorable treatment to a third party in exchange for false testimony.</span></div>
<div class="p1">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Since the dirtbag being framed is guilty, no harm is done.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">A greater harm would be to allow the sleaze ball to walk free so that he could rob or rape or kill again.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">It's okay because everyone does it.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">No need to lose any sleep over it.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Right?</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Sometimes, however, the police arrest the wrong person. They are loath to admit it, but sometimes they do arrest the wrong person. Sometimes, district attorneys convict innocent defendants. They never admit it, but sometimes district attorneys do convict innocent defendants. In those cases of actual innocence, Framing the Guilty becomes Framing the Innocent.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The classic movie frame up is more fiction than reality. A bad guy wants to deflect suspicion away from himself. A vengeful partner wants to extract revenge. A mob boss wants to eliminate competition. Those evil private citizens therefore manufacture a case against an unwitting foe. The police and district attorney fall for it. An innocent man is convicted through no wrong-doing whatsoever on the part of the State.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I repeat, the classic frame up is more fiction than reality. In the real world, nearly all the framing is done by the State. In those frames, the administrators of our justice system are the bad guys, the vengeful partners, the mob bosses. They serve at our pleasure. We must therefore bear our share of the blame.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I now take another break from my blogging sabbatical to write this series about the State of Texas framing its citizens for capital murder. I do so because Larry Swearingen, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/12/the-most-innocent-man-on-death-row.html"><span style="color: blue;">The Most Innocent Man on Death Row</span></a>, has a critical hearing on 15 May. Larry Swearingen is one of those innocent people who has been framed for a crime he did not commit. The State and People of Texas still hope to execute him as soon as they can.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I will </span>intersperse<span style="font-family: inherit;"> this disturbing series with posts about the framing of Larry Swearingen. I will also discuss other instances of Framing the Innocent.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">One of those cases will be that of Preston Hughes III, the most thoroughly framed person ever executed in this country. It was my failed effort to save Hughes that led to my sudden and unannounced sabbatical from blogging. Before too long, I will publish my book revealing all of what I learned both before and after the execution. Here, in this series, I will give but a brief overview.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Another case in the series will be that of Cesar Fierro. Even the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals agreed that Fierro confessed to stop the police from physically torturing his parents. The TCCA agreed also that the police perjured themselves at his trial. The TCCA, however, ruled that the framing of Cesar Fierro was a harmless error, and they refused to grant a new trial. Cesar Fierro will not be executed, however, since he has gone undeniably insane while incarcerated on death row.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Another case in this series will be that of Robert Otis Coulson. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit found that the police had, in that case, planted an envelope on a desk. The court found also that the district attorney improperly used the envelope as evidence against Coulson. "We agree," the judges wrote in their opinion, "that the evidence regarding the location of the envelope was false. We also agree that this knowledge may be imputed from the police to the prosecution." The 5th Circuit then ruled that the framing of Coulson was a harmless error, and they refused to grant a new trial. Robert Otis Coulson was executed by the State and People of Texas on 25 June 2002.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Yet another case in this series will be that of Derrick Leon Jackson. Jackson was convicted of capital murder based on the work of the notorious HPD crime lab in general and the work of the notorious James Bolding in particular. The independent investigators hired to review the HPD crime lab saved their most scathing words for James Bolding. "We have identified three cases in which Mr. Bolding was involved in the wholly inappropriate and unethical alteration of bench notes reflecting the serology results obtained by either himself or another Crime Lab serologist. Each of these cases reflects a disturbing lack of integrity on the part of Mr. Bolding. … James R. Bolding appears to have committed scientific fraud and perjury." The investigators identified the Jackson case as one that needed to be reinvestigated. Derrick Leon Jackson was nonetheless executed by the State and People of Texas on July 20, 2010.</span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="p2">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I write this series to inform the public, and the judges who serve the public, that the State and People of Texas have framed innocent defendants all too frequently, and that Larry Swearingen is one of those innocent defendants who has been framed.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">For a status of the series and for ease of navigation, see the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2014/04/framing-guilty-framing-innocent_28.html"><span style="color: blue;">Table of Contents</span></a>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div>
</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-90327906802581172712014-03-14T15:26:00.002-07:002014-03-15T10:48:43.054-07:00Photographic Update<div style="text-align: justify;">
While I've been away from blogging, I spent some time on the northern California coast. Here's a photograph that I find to be a pleasant reminder. Click to enlarge.</div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5TjG9PrY2ammf8z4V3lCSG4mFDTmcZV8v-xxmC__PCQwmsCqnPYICsieAkU7GT7zq8ERHS2cCleayVL5Fc3GEeNwB-d21KLXKyfRnhFpPeZsYRA2riBmb0xbhUbuhTXC8NWRebdtEP9w/s1600/Haul+Road+02.JPG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg5TjG9PrY2ammf8z4V3lCSG4mFDTmcZV8v-xxmC__PCQwmsCqnPYICsieAkU7GT7zq8ERHS2cCleayVL5Fc3GEeNwB-d21KLXKyfRnhFpPeZsYRA2riBmb0xbhUbuhTXC8NWRebdtEP9w/s1600/Haul+Road+02.JPG" height="240" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I intend to return both to the coast and to blogging about wrongful convictions. I have something to complete, however, before I do either.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-50464085311328993142014-03-01T16:02:00.001-08:002014-05-10T09:05:34.379-07:00Cameron Todd Willingham: Told ya!<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I'm back for a single post, then I'll disappear for another couple months. Later I will explain my sudden departure from blogging.</div>
<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Cameron Todd Willingham was executed by the State of Texas on 17 February 2004. Willingham had been convicted of killing his three young daughters by setting fire to his house. The innocence world is now atwitter about a recent development in the case. Evidence has been uncovered that suggests the prosecution purchased snitch testimony. Color me shocked!</div>
<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I wrote extensively about Johnny Webb in my book <i>The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cameron Todd Willingham</i>. I'll provide multiple excerpts of what I wrote about him, before formally declaring "Told ya."</div>
<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
The first witness in the trial of Cameron Todd Willingham was a drug-addled snitch named Johnny Webb. I summarize Webb's testimony below:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Willingham came home to find his wife terribly distressed. His wife told him that she had accidentally killed one of their three daughters. Willingham told her he would save her from prosecution by destroying the evidence of her guilt. He would set the house on fire and make it look like the oldest of the girls, Amber, had set the fire. To do this, he somehow rendered Amber unconscious, moved her from the children's room to his room, placed her in his bed, then used a flaming roll of paper to inflict burns on her arm and face. He squirted lighter fluid on the floors and walls, and then ignited it.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In my book <i>The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cameron Todd Willingham</i>, I presented Webb's testimony. I then had the fictional jury deliberate it. I modeled my fictional jury after the fictional jury in <i>Twelve Angry Men</i>. I discussed that modeling in a special note at the end of my book, which I cleverly called "A Note on <i>Twelve Angry Men</i>". From that note:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Anyone who has watched and remembers <i>Twelve Angry Men</i> will have no doubt that my fictional jury deliberations were inspired by that movie. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I modeled eleven of my jurors on its actors. In my book, for example, Sports Fan Ward plays a similar role to that played by Jack Warden. Timid John sits in the same seat as did John Fiedler, and John Fiedler did indeed play therapy patient Mr. Peterson in <i>The Bob Newhart Show</i>. … Boisterous Lee is clearly similar to Lee J. Cobb. [Foreperson] Marti is a variant of Martin Balsam, different both in gender and competence. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I dared not assume the skeptical juror role portrayed by Henry Fonda, for he was more subtle and persuasive than I can hope to be. Instead I assigned that role to Harriet. I placed myself in the next chair, and I frequently reminded myself I needed to be more like her. ... </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I borrowed from <i>Twelve Angry Men</i> not because it made my job easier, for it certainly did not, but because I wanted to pay homage to the movie. It has special meaning for me. One prosecutor, angry that I had thwarted his conviction and wanting a retrial, compared me to Henry Fonda in the movie. He did not intend it as a compliment to me; he merely wanted to convince the judge that the State would prevail if the defendant were retried. I nonetheless accepted it as a compliment, though the parallel never occurred to me as I struggled to save a stranger, someone who turned out to be a fine and decent man. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
The movie, of course, portrays jury deliberation to be more dramatic than it really is. I've yet to see a juror threaten another with a knife, or witness one break into tears while ripping apart a photo of his own son. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
On the other hand, <i>Twelve Angry Men</i> expresses many of the concerns I have about jury behavior. Jurors tend to be insufficiently skeptical of the prosecution, too willing to convict without a thorough deliberation of the evidence. Jurors are too eager to relieve the State of its burden of proof, too willing to deprive the defendant of his presumption of innocence. Too many jurors base their votes on convenience or intimidation rather than conviction. These are not lessons I learned from the movie. They are lessons I learned behind closed jury room doors.</blockquote>
In my book, I interlace the actual testimony with the fictional jury deliberation of that testimony. Johnny Webb is the first witness, and Boisterous Lee is his biggest defender. I described Lee as follows.
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee is large, forceful, opinionated, and boisterous. He's personable enough, but when confronted with ideas other than his own, he tends to respond with volume rather than with reason, persistence rather than persuasion. I fear I see myself in him, though I'm at least conscious of my failing. I make a mental note to practice restraint and subtlety.</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I, on the other hand, was Johnny Webb's biggest detractor. In the real world, I had no doubt that Johnny Webb perjured himself in return for favors from the prosecution, even though the prosecution maintains otherwise, at least so far. In the book, I therefore made myself Johnny Webb's biggest detractor. I, my character, was so bothered by him that I several times failed to practice restraint and subtlety as I had promised to do. Lee and I naturally butted heads on several occasions over Webb's testimony. I excerpt below our first exchange on the subject:
</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Boisterous Lee: "He's no snitch. A snitch is a prisoner who lies on the stand about another prisoner in exchange for time off, or privileges. We got no evidence Webb is lying, and we have the word of the prosecutor that he's not going to get any time off, or anything else for that matter.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I decide to speak up.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"I'll give you two-to-one Johnny Webb is out in five years, no longer. He'll serve the minimum, maybe a bit more, but he won't be in fifteen years, not even half that." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ward: "I'll take a piece of that action."</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"Sorry. Offer's only good for Lee. What do you say? We get together five years from today. If your man Johnny Webb is still locked up, I write you check for two thousand dollars. If he's been sprung, you write me a check for a measly thousand."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "Get outta here."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"I'm serious. Two-to-one."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Ward: "I'm serious. I'll take a piece of that action."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"This is between Lee and me. What do you say?"</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "You'll never show."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"We'll set up an escrow account. Winner takes the proceeds and all the interest to boot." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "Give it a rest, will ya? Are you telling us the prosecutor was lying to us? Is that what you're saying?"</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"They don't have to lie. They all know how the game's played. A wink here, a nod there, some hypothetical off-the-record discussions, and somehow everyone's getting what they want, everyone that is except the poor schmuck who's going to get needles in his arms."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Bitter Ted: "So now you're saying he's not guilty too?"</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"Not saying that at all. I am saying that a snitch's testimony isn't worth a used roll of prison toilet paper. I'm saying that as far as I'm concerned Webb's testimony hurt the prosecution far more than it hurt the defense. The prosecution needs to prove to us beyond a reasonable doubt that Willingham did this crime, that a crime even occurred, and yet their very first witness is a jailhouse snitch. And we're supposed to believe him beyond a reasonable doubt?"</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Ted: "You believe what you want, I'll believe what I want."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"Lee won't even bet a thousand dollars on him. Will you bet your life on the truthfulness of Johnny Webb?"</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Ted: "That's a damn silly question."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"But you'll stake Willingham's life on his testimony, won't you?"</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I later upped the odds to four to one, then five to one. Lee and I thereafter went back at it:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "And they did prove motive, didn't they? The prison guy, what's his name Webb, he said that this guy told him he killed them because he was protecting the mother." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Everyone in the room stares at him. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "Whadda ya all looking at? What?" </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
He's squirming badly now. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "He didn't mean he was protecting her because she set the fire. That's not what he said." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Beads of sweat are forming on his reddening forehead. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "He said she had hurt the kids, that's why he killed them. He did it to protect her." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Time for me to violate my self-imposed subtlety oath. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"That's the best reason of all to arrest her, assuming they believe Webb. They're using him to get what they want, and he's using them to get what he wants. We all know that, at least most of us do. So I'm going to double my bet, and I'll give you even better odds. If Johnny Webb gets out within five years, you write me a check for one thousand. If he's still in, I write you a check for four. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Sports Fan Ward: "I want a piece of that." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"This is between me and Lee. Isn't it Lee?" </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Lee: "I don't know what you're talking about, this between you and me stuff." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"If the prosecutors believed Johnny Webb, Stacy would be sitting there next to Todd. And if they really believed the evidence about the music or the food or all the other crap they threw at us, if they believed any of that was worth a plugged nickel, Stacy would be sitting beside Todd. The prosecution doesn't believe its own evidence, but they want us to." ... </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee can't let go of Johnny Webb. He speaks to no one in particular. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "You know that thing I said about him trying to protect her, I didn't mean that she might have set the fire.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Marti: "Yes Lee. I think we all understood you."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
He points an accusing finger in my direction.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "He was just trying to bait me."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Edie: "He did a pretty good job."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee doesn't understand that he just can't win on this one any longer. The jury has grown to distrust Webb. Lee won't be able to rehabilitate him. He should let the matter drop.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
But, of course, he won't.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "Webb was right about the little girls, wasn't he? He said this Willingham guy carried one of them into another room and that's just how they found 'em. The baby twin girls were in the front bedroom and the older girl was in his bedroom. Just like he said. You've got an answer for everything. Whadda you say about that?"</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I remind myself: subtlety and restraint.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"I don't believe he's a credible witness."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "How would he get that information?"</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"I believe that's obvious." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
I restrained myself from adding "at least to everyone except you."</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Lee: "Whadda ya mean obvious?"</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
What the hell!</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"You really don't get it, do you? They fed him the information. They spoon fed it to him, bit by bit. They didn't just meet with him once and hear his story. They met with him over and over, at least four times that Webb would admit to.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"Webb only has to hear the story from Willingham once, and tell the story to the guard just once, but he has to tell it to the prosecutors four times? Of course not. He tells them a story, they go back and compare notes, and they come back a few days later. 'Did he say how he set the fire? Did he say anything about spreading lighter fluid all over?' And then Webb, who knows as well as any other snitch how the game is played, says something smart, like 'Uh, yeah, what you said. He used lighter fluid.' </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"They go away and come back a couple of weeks later. 'What about the little girl? Did he say he moved her from the bedroom or did he just leave her there with the other two?' To which Webb answers, "Uh, he left her with the others.' </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"That's a disappointment to the prosecutors of course, but they've run into this before. It's easy to fix. They just ask 'Are you sure?' </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"Webb knows those are the code words for 'try again', so he tries again. 'I mean, he said he moved one of them to another room. That's what he said.' </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"And those little meetings keep happening over and over until Webb is telling the story that the prosecutors want to hear. Then they give him a wink and a nod and say 'All we want is for you to tell the truth. We can't promise you anything, understand.' And Johnny Webb, professional snitch, winks at them and says 'I understand.' </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"Now they could have recorded every single one of their interviews with Johnny Webb, and they could have played every one of them for us during the trial. But they chose not to, and I'll tell you what. If you can lay your hands on any one of those recordings, I'll be pleased and honored to write out a check for five thousand dollars, right here on the spot. You don't even have to put any money up." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Ward: "Now I'd really like some of that action." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"Give it a rest, Ward. None of you are going to find any of those tapes because they never made them. The last thing they want is for anyone to see what goes on in those little secret meetings. They just want you to believe their snitch when he gets on the stand and talks about how awful he thought it was and how terrible he felt and how he just had to do the right thing. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"The problem is they talked to him so many times he can't keep his story straight. So when he gets up there on the stand and they ask him if Willingham said anything about moving the little girl, he says "No. I don't believe he said that.' </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"It's just like my little make-believe story of what happened in those secret meetings. He gives them the wrong answer, except this time he's on the witness stand, right in front of us. While that's a little embarrassing for the prosecutors, they never flinch. They just hand him a piece of paper and ask if he now remembers it differently. Supposedly the paper is a statement that he signed, but it may just as well read '15 years is a long time.' </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"Suddenly, and if by magic, Johnny Webb changes his testimony right there on the spot and tells us that Cameron Todd Willingham said he moved one the girls from the children's bedroom to somewhere else. So I'm sitting there in the jury box, and I sure as hell know Johnny Webb is lying his ass off. The interesting question to me now is: how did he learn that the girls were in different locations? </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"Then I give myself a metaphorical slap on the forehead and realize the information has been fed to him, and I have a pretty good guess on who did the feeding. Then I decide, right then and there, that if the prosecution is going to begin their case with this lying, son-of-a-bitch snitch, I'm going to be damn suspicious of everything they try to feed me. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The room seems to be in shock. I realize I had exhibited neither subtlety or restraint, so I try to cover it. </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
"I guess what I'm saying is that I'm pleased that we're all discussing this case together." </div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Yeah, That'll do.</div>
</blockquote>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
And I lit into Johnny Webb a third time by end of the book:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Time for another intervention. It has to do with Johnny Webb, so I'll have to try extra hard to restrain myself. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"It's a lot worse than that. A lot worse." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Marti: "Go ahead." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"Certainly. I want to talk again about the inside knowledge that Johnny Webb seems to have. If he didn't get it from Willingham, I'm guessing he got it from the prosecutors during one or more of their many get-togethers." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Boisterous Lee: "You don't know that! You can't know that. Nobody can know that. Now you're not only claiming he lied, your claiming they set him up to lie." </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
He just can't help himself. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"That's exactly what I'm saying. Are you just now figuring that out? Sure they asked him to lie. They fed him the information. I already talked about how he screwed up on the stand and couldn't remember his lines about Willingham moving Amber from one room to the other. He said he didn't recall Willingham saying that, they showed him the mystery paper, and he changed his tune. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"But that's not the only thing he forgot about. He forgot he was supposed to cover their ass in the off chance that one of the jurors wasn't completely brain dead and figured out Amber started the fire. So Assistant Prosecutor John Jackson asks him if Willingham said anything about trying to shift the blame to someone else. And what did Johnny Webb say?" </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
There's a pregnant pause. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"He said, and I believe this is an exact quote, he said 'I'm not sure.' </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"Well that answer didn't cut any mustard with John Jackson, so Jackson asks him specifically whether Willingham told him anything he did with the children. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"Martin is objecting left and right that Jackson is leading the witness, because that is exactly what Jackson is doing. He's leading the witness by a fifteen-year-long nose. Judge Douglas overrules the objection, either because he couldn't recognize a leading question if it bit him on the ass, or because he just assumes Willingham is some kind of dirt bag who deserves whatever he gets. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"And while all that objecting and overruling is taking place, Mr. Webb realizes he just screwed the pooch. So he changes his story again, and he tells Jackson just what he wanted to hear, just as they rehearsed it. Johnny Webb says, with a straight face mind you, that Willingham told him he burned one of the kids to make it look like they were playing with fire, that he wadded up some paper, set it on fire, and burned his own child on the arm and on the forehead with that burning piece of paper. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"But it gets worse, even worse, because it's not just some low-life snitch behaving badly, it's the people who are supposed to protect us that are bending and twisting the truth so that they can see one of us strapped to a gurney and shot full of chemicals. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"They are so afraid one of us will figure out that Amber started that fire, and thereby blow their precious case to kingdom come, that not only do they feed the story to a low-life snitch, they involve a well-trained, well-paid professional in the charade. Jackson asks him if he could determine whether the burns on Amber's body had been caused by super-heated air or an open flame. The doctor said he couldn't tell. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"So that's it. Case closed. We're supposed to figure Webb's story might actually be true. Marti said it exactly right. They want us to convict on the lack of evidence. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"But if Jackson really wanted to get to the bottom of it, if he wanted us to understand what really might not have happened, he could have asked somewhat more penetrating questions. For example: 'Doctor, did you find any wounds consistent with a flaming, wadded-up piece of paper applied directly to the victim's forehead?' </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"And I'm guess the good doctor would have said 'No.' </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"Then he could have asked, 'Doctor, could those generalized burns on the victim's face, neck, arms, legs, and one foot be caused by a flaming, wadded up piece of paper held close to her skin?' </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"And I'm guessing the doctor would have said 'No.' </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"But Jackson didn't ask those questions or anything like those questions because he didn't want us to believe that Amber might have started this fire. And just in case one of us turns out to be clever enough to figure out that she may have, we're supposed to remember that Willingham told upstanding citizen Johnny Webb that he framed one of his little girls for the crime. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
"So you tell me: who's the one more likely being framed here? Amber or her father?"</blockquote>
<div class="p2" style="text-align: justify;">
I included an extensive notes section at the end of the book. Regarding Johnny Webb I wrote:</div>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
In the movie, there was no snitch. During the trial of Cameron Todd Willingham, the snitch was the lead witness for the prosecution. The jurors in that trial explained they paid little attention to Johnny Webb. That is unfortunate. Johnny Webb's testimony provided evidence that Willingham's prosecutors were willing to fabricate evidence against him to win their case. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Less than five years after the jury voted to put Cameron Todd Willingham to death, the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles released Johnny Webb early. He had served only five years of his fifteen year sentence. His criminal history suggested he would likely return to a life of crime. At one time or another, he had been convicted of robbery, burglary, forgery, auto-theft, and distribution of drugs. He claimed his criminal behavior stemmed from drugs and alcohol. There was no real reason to believe he would be better able to control his addictions if released early than he had been prior to his most recent arrest. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Prosecutor John Jackson, however, spoke in favor of Johnny Webb's early release. Though Jackson considered Webb to be "an unreliable kind of guy," Jackson nevertheless troubled himself to argue in favor of Webb's early release. "I asked them to cut him loose early." </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
According to Jackson, his endorsement has nothing to do with the assistance Johnny Webb had provided him during the Willingham trial. Of course not. Jackson explained that he was merely concerned about Webb's safety and well being. He claimed that Johnny Webb had been targeted by the Aryan Brotherhood. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
A few months after his early release, Johnny Webb was caught with cocaine and returned to prison. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
In March of 2000, eight years to the month after his conviction of robbing a woman for her purse, Johnny Webb sent John Jackson a Motion to Recant Testimony. It read in part: "Mr. Willingham is innocent of all charges." </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
John Jackson apparently failed to inform Cameron Todd Willingham's defense team of this surprising turn of events. Instead, John Jackson may have explained the consequences of perjury to Johnny Webb. If the recantation were true, Jackson may have pointed out, Webb's testimony during the trial of Cameron Todd Willingham would have been false. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
Soon thereafter and without explanation, Johnny Webb recanted his recantation. </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
During an interview after his release, Johnny Webb effectively recanted the recantation of his recantation. Speaking of Willingham, he said: "It's very possible I misunderstood what he said. … My memory is in bits and pieces. I was on a lot of medication at the time." </blockquote>
<blockquote style="text-align: justify;">
He then added: "The statue of limitations has run out on perjury, hasn't it?"</blockquote>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
Now finally for the "Told Ya!" From the 27 Feb 2014 of <i><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/28/us/evidence-of-concealed-jailhouse-deal-raises-questions-about-a-texas-execution.html?_r=1"><span style="color: blue;">The New York Times</span></a></i>, emphasis and emendation mine:</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
What has changed is that investigators for the Innocence Project have discovered a curt handwritten note in Mr. Webb’s file in the district attorney’s office in Corsicana. The current district attorney, R. Lowell Thompson, made the files available to the Innocence Project lawyers, and in late November one of the lawyers, Bryce Benjet, received a box of photocopies. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
As he worked through the stack of papers, he saw a note scrawled on the inside of the district attorney’s file folder stating that <b>Mr. Webb’s charges were to be listed as robbery in the second degree, not the heavier first-degree robbery charge he had originally been convicted on, “based on coop in Willingham.”</b> </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Mr. Benjet recalled a “rush of excitement,” he said, and thought, “This is what we’ve been looking for.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
The Innocence Project submitted the note, which is not dated or signed, in a new filing to the board asking that it be included as part of its September request for a pardon. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, called the note a “smoking pistol” in the case. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
“We’re reaching out to the principals to see if there is an innocent explanation for this,” he said. “I don’t see one.” </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq" style="text-align: justify;">
Judge Jackson [the man who prosecuted Willingham and claimed he never made a deal] did not respond to several requests for comment.</blockquote>
<div class="p1" style="text-align: justify;">
</div>
<div class="p1">
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Color me shocked that such a thing might happen in our criminal justice system.</div>
</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-12216270478304155432013-07-14T23:51:00.003-07:002013-07-14T23:51:57.924-07:00Shore: The Possible Unacknowledged Victims <span style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.203125px;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/07/shore-residence-miscellaneous.html" style="background-color: white; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.203125px;"><span style="color: blue;"><< Previous Post in this Series: Residence -- Miscellaneous</span></a></span><br />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #333333; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 21.203125px;" /><div style="text-align: justify;">
In this series, I am considering the possible unacknowledged victims of Anthony Allen Shore. I am limiting the discussion to attacks prior to 16 January 1999 when Shore raped Amy Lynch and nearly strangled her to death. Since Shore tended to attack young women that he first encountered near his residence, I have presented several posts regarding his residences. In this post I will give brief summaries of possible unacknowledged victims of Anthony Allen Shore. I will not discuss herein his four acknowledged murders and his one acknowledged rape. I will simply list the names of those five victims and the dates of their attacks, providing a link for detailed information.</div>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/12/who-killed-melissa-trotter-laurie-lee.html"><span style="color: blue;">Laura Tremblay</span></a> -- 1986 09 26 (yyyy mm dd)<br /> <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-carmen.html"><span style="color: blue;">Carmen Estrada</span></a> -- 1992 05 16<br /> <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-selma-janske.html"><span style="color: blue;">Selma Janske</span></a> -- 1993 10 19 (pseudonym)<br /> <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-diana.html"><span style="color: blue;">Diana Robellar</span></a> -- 1994 08 07<br /> <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-dana-sanchez.html"><span style="color: blue;">Dana Sanchez</span></a> -- 1995 07 06</blockquote>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As I will describe in the next post, the timing of these killings indicate that list above is incomplete. When I include the cases summarized below, the time increments between attacks follow the Random Walk pattern associated with attacks of a serial killer. In other words, the timing of the attacks inform us that Shore has not acknowledged all his victims. The circumstances, locations, and dates of the following attacks suggest that Shore may have been the attacker in each case.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Shandra Charles</u></b>: 16-year-old, black, female murdered on 26 September 1986; stabbed in the throat; murdered two years to the date after the murder of Laura Tremblay, while Shore was living at the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;">Tallulah Lane</span></a> residence; murdered in a dark, vacant field located 1.6 miles from where Shore was living. Preston Hughes III was wrongfully convicted of and executed for this murder. I wrote 100,000 words on that case in this blog. I prepared an application for writ of <i>habeas corpus</i> for him, as well as a motion for DNA testing, as well as a civil suit complaint against the city of Houston. I sat by helplessly as he was wrongfully executed by the people and State of Texas. I learned of Anthony Allen Shore while trying to figure out who in fact murdered Shandra Charles. A summary and directory of my blog posts for that case are <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/07/case-of-preston-hughes-iii-plea-and.html"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. The habeas is <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/10/hughes-petition-for-habeas-corpus-_-working-draft.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. The motion for DNA testing is <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/11/hughes-chapter-64-motion-for-dna-testing.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. The civil suit is <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/11/hughes-civil-suit-against-the-city-of-houston.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Marcell Taylor</u></b>: 3-year-old, black, male, murdered on 26 September 1986; stabbed in the throat; murdered during the same attack that ended the life of Shandra Charles. Other information and links are same as above.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Monalisa Espinosa</u></b>: 16-year-old, Hispanic female; disappeared from 10120 Irvington Boulevard in North Houston on 5 February 1989. That would place the point of her disappearance 22 miles from Shore's <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;">Tallulah Lane</span></a> residence. Monalisa's body was discovered on 9 December 1991 in a wooded area behind an auto shop located at 5350 Addicks Satsuma Road in Houston. That is 10 miles from the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;">Tallulah Lane</span></a> residence. The body was decomposed: a cause of death could not be determined. Monalisa used drugs and was sexually active. She engaged in prostitution to support her habit. Shore was known to hire prostitutes, having been arrested for paying an undercover cop for sex. I wonder if Shore took Monalisa to one of his <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/07/shore-residence-miscellaneous.html"><span style="color: blue;">miscellaneous residences</span></a>, had sex with her there, kept her hostage there, strangled her there, and disposed of her body. She was found 8 miles from the apartment complex at 10438 Hammerly Blvd, where Shore had rented an apartment. I learned of Monalisa's case from Victor Jackson, who married Monalisa's mother (Alice) sometime after Monalisa's disappearance. Victor nonetheless refers to Monalisa as his step-daughter. Victor continues to search for the person who killed his step-daughter. I continue to search for the person who killed Shandra Charles and Marcell Taylor. We independently determined Anthony Allen Shore to be the likely culprit. We now work together to learn more about Shore and his possible unacknowledged victims.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<u style="font-weight: bold;">Jane Doe Westheimer</u>: a young, white or Hispanic female; unidentified body found at 5433 Westheimer Road in Houston on 29 December 1989; around 5' 3" tall; around 160 pounds; black hair, 20" long; brown eyes; small half-moon scar below right knee; wearing black corduroy pants, a white pullover shirt, black shoes, white panties, white bra, and black lace-up shoes. The body was found 9 miles from the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;">Tallulah Lane</span></a> residence, where Shore was probably living at the time. It is 9 miles also from the 10000 Hammerly Blvd. apartment complex where Shore rented an apartment. Several months before this victim was found, Shore rented yet another apartment within the complex at 10000 Hammerly Blvd. It is not certain he was renting two apartments at the complex at the same time, but it seems as if he might have been.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<u style="font-weight: bold;">Stephanie Beuhler</u>: 18-year-old, white, female. last seen on 8 September 1990. Her car was found one half mile from her home near the corner of Westheimer and Beltway 8. It had a flat tire. Police suspect that she attempt to walk back to her house but never arrived. Her car was located 4 miles from Shore's <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;">Tallulah Lane</span></a> residence, where he was probably living at the time of Stephanie's disappearance. Her car was also less than 7 miles from the apartment complexes on Hammerly Blvd. Sometime between the discovery of Jane Doe Westheimer and the disappearance of Stephanie Beuhler, Shore rented yet another apartment within the complex at 10000 Hammerly Blvd. Shore rented one house and three different apartments during that period, either sequentially or concurrently.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<u><b>Trellis Sykes</b></u>: 16-year-old, black, female; strangled manually on the morning of 13 May 1994 while taking a shortcut across an empty field (Shandra Charles was also black, and was also murdered in a empty field.) Trellis was 6 foot tall and athletic. She played for the Worthing High School basketball, volleyball, and track teams. In addition to being strangled, she was beaten about the head and face. The field was located near 3900 Redbud. That is 18 miles from Shore's <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-18th-street.html"><span style="color: blue;">18th Street</span></a> residence, where he was living at the time. It is less than 7 miles from the apartment complex at <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/07/shore-residence-miscellaneous.html"><span style="color: blue;">6363 West Airport Blvd</span></a>., where Shore had lived sometime previously.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Erica Ann Garcia:</u></b> 14-year-old, Hispanic, female; strangled with her own underwear; found inside the boarded-up and vacant Alief General Hospital. She had been sexually assaulted. The abandoned hospital was located at 11101 Bellaire, just a mile from the Dimension nightclub where she had visited the night before with friends. She told her friends that someone was going to pick her up. The hospital was 18 miles from Shore's <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-18th-street.html"><span style="color: blue;">18th Street</span></a> residence, where he was living at the time. It is only 5 miles from Shore's previous residence on <span style="color: blue;"><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;">Tallulah Lane</span></a>.</span> Erica's attack is similar to Shore's acknowledged killing of Diana Robellar. Diana was sexually assaulted, strangled, then dumped behind a large, abandoned building.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Melissa Trotter</u></b>: 19-year-old, white, female; strangled with one leg of a pair of pantyhose; discovered in the Sam Houston National Forest on 2 January 1999. According to the medical examiner, she had been dead for 25 days. According to 7 distinguished forensic medical experts, she had been dead less than one week. Since she had disappeared on 8 December 1998, it appears as if she had been held hostage for some time before she was strangled, just as several other of the unacknowledged victims may have been held hostage. Larry Swearingen was convicted of Melissa's murder, and Texas has tried to execute him several times for the crime, being thwarted each time by successful appeals based on new forensic evidence. This is another case about which I have written a substantial amount. For my explanation of why Larry Swearingen is The Most Innocent Man on Death Row, see my multi-part series beginning <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/12/the-most-innocent-man-on-death-row.html"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. To understand why I believe Melissa may have been another victim of Anthony Allen Shore, look <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-anthony.html"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<b><u>Amy Lynch</u></b>: Amy Shore was Shore's second wife, 14 years his junior. The two began living together while Amy was still in high school. On or sometime before the date of Melissa Trotter's murder, Shore came home with blood on his shirt. Two weeks after Melissa's murder, Shore choked Amy nearly to death, and had sex with her when he thought she was dead. She filed for divorce the next day that the court was open for business. For more details, see the post just mentioned, <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/01/who-killed-melissa-trotter-anthony.html"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
In the next post, I will begin using a temporal analysis to provide evidence that these victims were all victims of Anthony Allen Shore.</div>
</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-43592153994530311492013-07-07T18:44:00.002-07:002013-07-07T18:45:18.146-07:00Shore: Residence -- Miscellaneous<a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-18th-street.html"><span style="color: blue;"><< Previous Post in this Series: Residence -- 18th Street</span></a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-family: inherit;">In this series, I am considering the possible unacknowledged victims of Anthony Allen Shore. I am limiting the discussion to attacks prior to <span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.203125px; text-align: justify;">16 January 1999 when Shore raped Amy Lynch and strangled her nearly to death. </span></span>Since Shore tended to attack young women that he first encountered near his residence, I have presented one post for each of t<span style="font-family: inherit;"><span style="background-color: white; line-height: 21.203125px; text-align: justify;">he four residences that I believe were Shore's primary residences. Those four residences are.</span></span><br />
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;"><br /></span>
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;">An apartment on </span><a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-renwick-drive.html" style="line-height: 21.203125px;"><span style="color: blue;">Renwick Drive</span></a><span style="line-height: 21.203125px;"> west of downtown Houston.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;">An apartment in the <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-atrium-apartments.html"><span style="color: blue;">Atrium Apartments</span></a> complex near the Gulf Freeway and Hobby Airport.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;">A house, probably owned by a friend, on <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;">Tallulah Lane</span></a> well west of downtown Houston.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<span style="line-height: 21.203125px;">A house, rented, on <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-18th-street.html"><span style="color: blue;">18th Street</span></a>, slightly northwest of downtown Houston.</span></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Public records for the time period of interest show that Anthony Allen Shore and/or his first wife (Gina Worley Shore) resided at multiple other addresses. The beginning and end dates of the stays at these residents overlap one another as well as the dates for the primary residences. It's seemingly impossible to envision how Shore might have simply moved sequentially from one residence to the next. It seems instead that Anthony and/or Gina Shore were maintaining multiple residences. I have formed several hypotheses for the significance of the multiple residences, but my hypotheses are not well-formed or substantiated. I'll therefore leave it to you to devise your own.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
In this post, I'll simply provide the addresses of the miscellaneous residences (without the specific apartment number), then provide a map showing all of Shore's addresses in comparison to his victims, both his acknowledged victims and the others I suspect of him.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I list the miscellaneous addresses in the order of earliest-to-latest occupation date.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
10438 Hammerly Blvd, Houston 77043<br />
10438 Hammerly Blvd, Houston 77043 (same apartment complex, different apartment)</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
10000 Hammerly Blvd, Houston 77080</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
6363 West Airport Blvd, Houston 77035</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The four "primary" residences and the four "miscellaneous" residences combine for a total of eight different residences for Anthony Allen Shore after his return to Houston (sometime before April of 1981) until the time he raped and strangled (nearly to death) his live-in girlfriend Amy Lynch (in January 1999).<br />
<br />
I now present the map showing the eight possible residences (yellow house icons) of Anthony Allen Shore and the fourteen attacks (red balloon icons) for which he may have been responsible. Click to enlarge.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjk5zCaTsDAoK71EXH3UffZC4MnWwMP_eCPJ0wTPRo3VSx20naLFk7xOfVg4KX-lF3XT4nTTyMfeb3rT_n1WWOIc8Zl9E-FQbboMBCySHtvCLMfXcQm6t8s1ln3HeMHg_ey4z9J5qTltU8/s1600/Map+Shore+Residences+and+PFE.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="223" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjk5zCaTsDAoK71EXH3UffZC4MnWwMP_eCPJ0wTPRo3VSx20naLFk7xOfVg4KX-lF3XT4nTTyMfeb3rT_n1WWOIc8Zl9E-FQbboMBCySHtvCLMfXcQm6t8s1ln3HeMHg_ey4z9J5qTltU8/s400/Map+Shore+Residences+and+PFE.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
There are only seven residence icons because two residences were in the same apartment complex. There are only thirteen attack icons because two people were murdered in the same attack at the same location.<br />
<br />
Anthony Allen Shore has acknowledged five of the attacks. In the next post in this series, hopefully next before the end of next weekend, I'll summarize the cases of the nine other individuals who may have been attacked by Anthony Allen Shore.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-10122468153188706392013-06-23T22:57:00.004-07:002013-06-23T22:57:56.337-07:00Shore: Residence -- 18th Street <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-tallulah-lane.html"><span style="color: blue;"><< Previous Post in this Series Residence -- Tallulah Lane</span></a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Soon after Anthony Allen Shore separated from his first wife Gina Worley Shore, he moved from his friend's house on Tallulah Lane into a rented house on the 700 block of East 18th Street. While living there he murdered (as a minimum) Diana Robellar and Dana Sanchez. While living there he raped (as a minimum) the pseudonymous Selma Janske.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With the addition of the East 18th Street address to those already discussed, it is now possible to easily portray Shore's hunting grounds for the 13-year period of time I consider in this series. In the map below, I have connected Shore's residences by a driving path from (A) his first apartment on Renwick, to (B) his apartment off the Gulf Freeway, to (C) his friend's house on Tallulah Lane, to (D) the rented house on East 18th Street. I have also added a red marker for each PFE (point of first encounter) for the four murders and one rape to which Shore has confessed. Click on the image to enlarge.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTlNeTODnwfwdtCwLapDMMyUsNV6PbywejGBjRiM9g6k4wft1Nxnlv7p06ctA22RgD2iODA4trlvXgtrmgnB78O3-xzOhPBXxHIh2MEtngdSPNsyPbyh1-sBX29QvQGffSopWfUVxKQQg/s1600/18th+Street+Map+View+with+Markers.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="217" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTlNeTODnwfwdtCwLapDMMyUsNV6PbywejGBjRiM9g6k4wft1Nxnlv7p06ctA22RgD2iODA4trlvXgtrmgnB78O3-xzOhPBXxHIh2MEtngdSPNsyPbyh1-sBX29QvQGffSopWfUVxKQQg/s400/18th+Street+Map+View+with+Markers.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Not only did Shore hunt his victims close to home, he sometimes hunted them exceptionally close to home. Any young woman living near Anthony Allen Shore was unwitting putting her life at risk.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll soon be discussing the cases of numerous young women who were murdered (or abducted and never found) while living near Anthony Allen Shore. First though, I want to discuss something odd about Anthony Shore's residences. I'll do that in my next post in this series, probably next weekend.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-24654830930397529742013-06-17T23:00:00.002-07:002013-06-17T23:00:22.256-07:00Shore -- Residence: Tallulah Lane <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-atrium-apartments.html"><span style="color: blue;"><< Previous Post in this Series: Residence -- Atrium Apartments</span></a><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
When confessing to the murder of Laurie Lee Tremblay, Shore described his residence as: "I was living in Alfred's house at the time."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Laurie Lee Tremblay was murdered on 26 Sep 1986. According to a public records search, Anthony Allen Shore moved into a house located on Tallulah Lane in west Houston in November of 1985. The public records have him living there until October of 1999, but that can't be correct. The public records searches tend to shift the move-in date somewhat later than actual, since the searches may miss the earliest indications that the subject has moved. Furthermore, the searches tend to lengthen the stay beyond actual duration, sometimes significantly, since they do not find assertive information that the person has moved out. The public records searches do attempt to resolve suggestions that a person is living at two, or three, or more residences at the same time.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
What's clear is that Shore was living at a house at the time of the Laurie Tremblay murder. Since the public records search show him living in only in a specific house during that time frame, the one on Tallulah Lane, I'm confident that Shore was living in the house on Tallulah Lane at the time of the Tremblay murder.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I'll not give the specific address of his Tallulah Lane residence, since I do not want the current occupants to be disturbed in any fashion regarding Shore's earlier stay in their current house.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Shore first encountered Laurie Lee Tremblay at the corner of S. Dairy Ashford Road and Westella Drive. That intersection is only 0.4 miles from where Shore was living at the time. This is an extreme example of Shore seeking his prey close to his home.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Two years after the murder of Laurie Lee Tremblay, two years to the day, 16-year-old Shandra Charles and 3-year-old Marcell Taylor were murdered in a field behind the Fuddrucker's restaurant located at 2475 South Kirkwood Road in Houston. That is only 2.1 miles from Shore's Tallulah Lane residence. Preston Hughes III was executed for those murders, though he was innocent of them. I wrote 100,000 words about that case in this blog. An outline of my posts can be found <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2012/07/case-of-preston-hughes-iii-plea-and.html"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>. I also wrote an 82 page Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus for Preston Hughes. That document is <a href="http://www.skepticaljurordocs.com/documents/2012/10/hughes-petition-for-habeas-corpus-_-working-draft.pdf"><span style="color: blue;">here</span></a>.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
One of the reasons I am pursuing Shore for all his killings, not just for those to which he has confessed, is Preston's mother. I came to know her as I tried to save her son's life. I've stayed in touch with her since her son's wrongful execution. She has asked nothing of me. I am doing this of my own accord.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
There are now other reasons why I am pursuing Shore for all his killings and all his attacks. I got started, however, because of Preston's mother. </div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
So that you can get a sense of how close the three murders were to Shore's residence, I've included the three locations on a map which includes downtown Houston. Click to enlarge.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlanmMouoShJRJrPDt65vXziuIlB0shPgAptzYZBrn6onqxCLOvEzoJyf_yPuD_1efWiye-XuRBQx-SHBdzqJlLDrO3OIRXATIUaf_zqkLO-B3PtCAnQNge1wKQeQ08rdGSvgc_P0YDFA/s1600/Tallulah+Lane+Map+View.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="212" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlanmMouoShJRJrPDt65vXziuIlB0shPgAptzYZBrn6onqxCLOvEzoJyf_yPuD_1efWiye-XuRBQx-SHBdzqJlLDrO3OIRXATIUaf_zqkLO-B3PtCAnQNge1wKQeQ08rdGSvgc_P0YDFA/s400/Tallulah+Lane+Map+View.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: justify;">
As you can see, all three locations are clustered in far west Houston. The uppermost location is where Shore first encountered Laurie Lee Tremblay. The intermediate location is Shore's Tallulah lane residence. The location at the lower right is the field where Shandra Charles and Marcell Taylor were murdered two years to the day after Laurie Lee Tremblay was murdered.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
The proximity of Shandra and Marcell's murder to Shore's residence does not necessarily mean that Shore killed the two of them. It is, however, good reason to consider the possibility. I will do so later in this series, just as I will consider each of Shore's possible victims later in this series.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2383541149298324212.post-74389260190689744042013-06-11T23:55:00.003-07:002013-06-11T23:55:50.544-07:00Shore: Residence -- Atrium Apartments <a href="http://www.skepticaljuror.com/2013/06/shore-residence-renwick-drive.html"><span style="color: blue;"><< Previous Post in This Series: Residence -- Renwick Drive</span></a><div>
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
From Strangler: "One month after they were married, Gina got pregnant. After they returned from California, the couple moved into the Atrium apartment complex near the airport."</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
With no more than that to go on, I searched endlessly (or thereabouts) for any apartment complex having anything like the name Atrium near any of the numerous large and small airports in the Houston area. I came up empty. I assumed the apartment complex had been renamed or torn down.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Once Victor Jackson and I joined forces to investigate Shore, we soon figured out where Shore lived after moving out of the apartments on Renwick Drive. I had been guessing that Anthony Allen Shore had moved in with his father, Robert Shore somewhere in the League City area. I asked Victor if he could find an address for Robert Shore. Victor came up with an address of 9150 Gulf Fwy, Houston.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
After a little confusion in Google Maps, which randomly shows one of two locations for that address, I found this overhead view.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw9R0jJDuv7BsK2zxI_MiQUEIrKUObTu5rUXmvjB8p-FusCytoWiKnKoPHdDtpzkxcRflsoZYzGtyOtwokLElFCYoWjbdUXaXc3jIrNl8xWle1EY7V0rb-TganibWb9mgUG6-Bvmpt_jI/s1600/9150+Gulf+Fwy+Map+View.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgw9R0jJDuv7BsK2zxI_MiQUEIrKUObTu5rUXmvjB8p-FusCytoWiKnKoPHdDtpzkxcRflsoZYzGtyOtwokLElFCYoWjbdUXaXc3jIrNl8xWle1EY7V0rb-TganibWb9mgUG6-Bvmpt_jI/s400/9150+Gulf+Fwy+Map+View.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
That's William P. Hobby Airport nearby, so the address looked promising. I checked Google street view and found this:</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirqzXQ6ytKVAc7qkXNIycnYBDQCNQiVKIKHSb7DXrdae6CKY22-b6GI_VmkENBw6RMVl_Z9F1HJu6ZYc5aLpPkvPSITiMmf7-XMRt7WAfV4ov2Jw_jpQZoxokrroOq1TMasBraw3DkuR4/s1600/9150+Gulf+Fwy+Street+View.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEirqzXQ6ytKVAc7qkXNIycnYBDQCNQiVKIKHSb7DXrdae6CKY22-b6GI_VmkENBw6RMVl_Z9F1HJu6ZYc5aLpPkvPSITiMmf7-XMRt7WAfV4ov2Jw_jpQZoxokrroOq1TMasBraw3DkuR4/s400/9150+Gulf+Fwy+Street+View.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
I suggested that this could have been the location of the Atrium Apartments. In other words, instead of finding where Robert Shore had lived, Victor may have found where Anthony and Gina Shore lived after their wedding and honeymoon.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
Victor quickly came up with this compelling bit of information.</div>
<div style="text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqPG_IIOgu8ASZg6Wwd5n9IKA6ziR-DFR-x3At8PANk7g76_ixUVE_xkF4Lmq_RBHKCq-1UHmvu_RfDzZkAQ2AHRhb6uwhja6KihBLtooOL7PCl8CA2xnVA6jslenm0JPINrmWx0NAyN4/s1600/9150+Gulf+Fwy+Property+Records.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="106" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgqPG_IIOgu8ASZg6Wwd5n9IKA6ziR-DFR-x3At8PANk7g76_ixUVE_xkF4Lmq_RBHKCq-1UHmvu_RfDzZkAQ2AHRhb6uwhja6KihBLtooOL7PCl8CA2xnVA6jslenm0JPINrmWx0NAyN4/s400/9150+Gulf+Fwy+Property+Records.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
Notice that the nearby property at 9100 Gulf Fwy is owned by Atrium Finance LLP. It is worth $19,008,940. Perhaps it is the large hotel to the north, the Houston Marriott South at Hobby Airport. In any case, I am convinced that we have located Shore's second Houston residence.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
Notice that Victor did all the real work in finding these addresses.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
I believe that Gina and Anthony Shore may have lived in the Atrium Apartments at 9150 Gulf Fwy, Houston, TX 77017 from April 1983 to October 1985. The April 83 date is based on the Gina and Anthony's wedding. The October 85 date is based on when I believe they moved into a house on Tallulah Lane, to be discussed in a separate post soon in the series. Those dates are not definite.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
This date range encompasses several unsolved strangulation murders of young women along the Gulf Freeway. These unsolved murders of young women are often referred to as the I-45 murders. The area has become known as The Killing Fields. A field near the corner of Calder Road and Ervin in League City is particularly well known, since the bodies of four female victims have been found there. Two of those victims are Jane Does. The other two were abducted 11 months apart from the were last seen at the same convenience store pay phone. That is a signature consistent with Anthony Allen Shore.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
The convenience store is 14 miles south of Shore's 9150 Gulf Freeway residence. That's substantially beyond Shore's normal prey radius. For that and other reasons, I've been disinclined to believe Shore was responsible for any of the I-45 killings. Certain recent events are causing me to reconsider. I'm not yet free to discuss those events, and I haven't yet completed enough research and analysis on the I-45 killings to justify including them in this series. I therefore intend still to limit this series to cases ranging from the murder of Laurie Tremblay (26 Sep 86) to the murder of Melissa Trotter (Dec 98).</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: justify;">
Perhaps after this series, I'll consider a series on Anthony Allen Shore and the I-45 murders.</div>
tsjhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12036155731673766485noreply@blogger.com1