Monday, October 25, 2010

The Grainy Case of Kia Levoy Johnson

Three people claimed they knew the man on the grainy security camera video. A San Antonio police officer identified the robber by his distinctive clothing. Two others identified their long time friend / recent acquaintance as the man who shot and killed the store clerk. Coupled with a matching shoe print and a court-appointed attorney who met with his client for only three minutes before trial, those three video witnesses were more than enough to convict Kia Levoy Johnson of capital murder.

Throw in Kia's criminal record and the death penalty was a done deal. Add a pinch of rubber-stamp appellate system and a dollop of incurious Rick Perry, and Texas had another notch in its handle. At 6:18 PM on June 11, 2003, Kia Levoy Johnson would become the 305th person executed by Texas in the modern era.

Rick Perry's Attorney General, Greg Abbott, provided the following description of the crime and the evidence against Johnson.
In the early morning hours of Oct. 29, 1993, Kia Levoy Johnson entered a Stop 'N Go convenience store and approached the counter. When store clerk William Matthew Rains came to the counter, Johnson pulled a gun from his waistband and fired one shot. Rains fell on the floor. Johnson then demanded that Rains give him the register key. Rains threw a key to Johnson who attempted to use it to open the cash register. When the key broke, Johnson took the contents portion of the register and exited the store. For approximately 45 minutes after the robbery Rains attempted to reach a phone but was unable to do so because he had lost his motor skills. Rains' body was discovered in the early morning hours of Oct. 29, 1993, when another customer entered the Stop 'N Go. 
The details of the offense were captured on a store security camera. When the local news broadcast the video, a longtime friend identified Johnson and called Crime Stoppers. An officer of the San Antonio Police Department and another of Johnson's acquaintances also recognized Johnson from the videotape. The videotape was admitted into evidence and played for the jury.
Abbott’s summary of the three people who recognized Johnson on the video is at odds with most other reports. The witnesses are more frequently described as the uncle of Johnson’s common law wife (who admitted his loathing for Johnson while on the stand), a drug addict who had not seen Johnson in fifteen years, and a jailhouse snitch who had previously testified for Texas for reduced sentences. Apparently, the uncle must have been a San Antonio Police officer, though not involved in the case in any official capacity. Apparently Abbott chose to describe a drug addict that Johnson had not seen for fifteen years as “a longtime friend.” And apparently Abbott chose to describe a serial jailhouse snitch as an “acquaintance.”

Abbott apparently believed the case was sufficiently strong that he did not need to mention that a sneaker found in Johnson's closet matched a shoe print left on cash register receipt paper that had fallen on the convenience store floor. Perhaps Abbot felt that if he mentioned the discovery of the shoe, he would be obliged to mention that the police failed to find the murder weapon, or similar ammunition, or  even the cash register the shooter took from the store. The police found a shoe that allegedly matched a partial print, but they couldn't find a cash register, and they couldn't find the murder weapon.

Abbott’s summary does not mention that the FBI was unable to match Johnson’s photo with the person on the videotape. Nor did Abbott mention that the video was of such poor quality that  even Johnson's common-law uncle identified him by his clothing rather than his facial features.

The video, however, was clear enough to definitively show that the shooter placed his hands on the counter when he entered the store. And while the police were able to match a sneaker found in Johnson's closet with a partial shoe print left at the store, they were not able to match any prints from the counter with Johnson's fingers or palms.

To justify and expedite the killing of Kia Levoy Johnston, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott mis-characterized the primary witnesses and excluded compelling exculpatory evidence. In Texas, that's close enough for government work.

Johnson would be the 65th person executed during Rick Perry's 903 days in office. For those of you undaunted by long division, that's one person every two weeks.

<<>>

I've completed an Actual Innocence Scorecard for this case. I scored Johnson at 87. That means I estimate there is an 87% chance that Johnson was factually innocent compared to a 13% chance he was factually guilty.

Click on the scorecard to view it enlarged. Once the image appears, click again to view it in a still larger, more clear format.

I've included Johnson in the list of those executed by Texas that I have already scored. I include the current list below.

The addition of Kia Levoy Johnson brings the current total to 10.6 people wrongfully executed by Texas.

And counting.

Saturday, October 23, 2010

The Untold Story of Cameron Todd Willingham

Until now, no one has written of The Trial of Cameron Todd Willingham. Many have written about the discredited arson evidence used against him, but no one has written on the trial. Few writers have noted that the jurors maintain still today that they would have convicted Willingham even in the absence of the arson evidence.

There are multiple tragedies in this story. One of them is that had the jury deliberated more carefully and more skeptically, Willingham might not have been even convicted, much less executed.

The defense put on almost no case of its own. A babysitter testifed that Todd would never have done such a thing, An inmate was called to rebut the State's snitch, but was not allowed to testify. Other than those two less-than-impressive witnesses, Willingham's defense called no one to testify in his defense.

Despite the lack of an affirmative defense, and despite inadequate confrontation of the State's witnesses, the trial testimony still had buried within it an explanation of the fire that undermined the State's case. The jurors failed to see it. 

Will you, as a skeptical juror, see what they missed? 

<<>>

Thank you for your patience while I was distracted by the writing The Skeptical Juror and The Trial of Cameron Todd Willingham. The book is now available on Kindle. It will soon be available in print, hopefully this week. Click the book cover at the upper right purchase from Amazon.

Regular blogging will resume on Monday. Learn why Kia Levoy Johnson may be another person wrongfully executed under the watchful eye of James Richard "Rick" Perry.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Death By Fire

The Skeptical Spouse / Editor / Publisher and I just watched the Frontline presentation of Death By Fire. It told the story of Cameron Todd Willingham's conviction and execution for an arson / murder that never happened. Well done, but short. They had only an hour. Anyone who would like to watch it online can do so here.

We finished proofing our book The Skeptical Juror and the Trial of Cameron Todd Willingham just hours earlier. We were watching the show with special interest to see if the book was solid or if it contained a factual error. We both decided the book was good to go.

It will be off to our printing firm and to Kindle first thing in the morning. The Skeptical Spouse / Editor / Publisher believes the Kindle version may be available as early as this weekend and the print version may be available as early as next Wednesday.

Our work is definitely not a rehash of the Frontline show. The show barely touched on the primary focus of the book. As a reader, you'll have a chance to see if you, as a juror, could have stopped the tragedy before it began. No fire experts were needed to see that the State's case was simply not possible.

So it looks as if we can turn out a book in four weeks from first keystroke to availability on Amazon. I probably won't be trying it again any time soon, though. It's pretty hard on everyone involved. Tomorrow, I can start digging through the backlog of things left undone.

Good night.

Learn From Rob

Brandi Grissom of The Texas Tribune has a good interview with Hank Skinner's attorney. You can pick up some tips on how you might prepare for your next case before the U.S. Supreme Court. You can learn a little constitutional law. You might even learn something about the death sentence.

It's quite a good interview, actually. View it on YouTube if you wish, or on the Texas Tribune site.

Monday, October 18, 2010

Three-fer Update on Cameron Todd Willingham

Item First:

Watch the Frontline show on Cameron Todd Willingham. It will be air on PBS tomorrow, October 19, at 9 PM (check local listings and all that.)

Preview Part I on YouTube.
Preview Part II on YouTube

Now Item Second:

I finished The Skeptical Juror and The Trial of Cameron Todd Willingham. It's been through a couple of edits, and I have another pass to make through it to incorporate some more changes I've already decided upon. With those qualifications, the book is complete from beginning to end. I challenged myself to write it in one week. It took me three. Though it took me three times as long as I had aimed for, I'm pleased with my effort and the result.

We plan to release the book to our printing firm on Wednesday. It would be foolish of me to turn it out before the Frontline show. I would rather discover an error just before sending the book out rather than just after. The book should be available on Kindle within a week or so, and hopefully available in print from Amazon in less than two weeks.

The book will tell the story as it's never been told before, and as it is unlikely to be told again. It tells the story from the perspective of the jury room. You will get to examine the evidence just as it was presented to the actual jury. You will have an opportunity to find the flaws in the evidence, even if you are not a fire expert. The flaws were there. The actual jury did not notice them. A skeptical jury might have. I argue that not only should Willingham never have been executed, I argue he should not have been convicted.

Now Item Third:

I present this article from AP reporter Jeff Carlton. I've certainly seen his name around as I've been working on the Willingham book. This article is about the behavior of Rick Perry's hand-picked chairman for the Texas Forensic Science Commission that is to look into, among other cases, the case of Cameron Todd Willingham. Sometimes, as in this case, it is simply best to allow those you disrespect to dig their own graves.
A Texas prosecutor accused of bias for describing an executed man as a "guilty monster" defended his comments Friday, while his colleagues on a commission investigating the case said he might have jeopardized the integrity of their inquiry.
Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley said lawyers trying to clear Cameron Todd Willingham's name are using the case to further their effort to abolish the death penalty. He also argued that he has a First Amendment right to state his opinion.
"We are being used, and we should recognize that," Bradley said. "When do we get to respond to those lies? Who is going to correct the record?"
Willingham was convicted in 1992 of capital murder in the deaths of his three daughters and executed in 2004.
Bradley chairs the Texas Forensic Science Commission, which is investigating whether fire investigators committed professional misconduct in determining arson caused the 1991 Corsicana house fire that killed Willingham's daughters. At least nine fire experts have said the fire was an accident, not arson.
Other commission members said Bradley's remarks to The Associated Press, in which he described Willingham as a "guilty monster," raise questions about the impartiality and integrity of their inquiry.
"There is a difference between correcting the record and making the type of statement we are talking about," said Sarah Kerrigan, the laboratory director at the Sam Houston State regional crime lab.
But Bradley then referred to the Innocence Project's effort to clear Willingham as "politics and a circus sideshow."
"Texans deserve to have a prosecutor's voice included in the discussion of forensic science, a voice that can include concern for the victims of crime and not just the perpetrators of crime," said Bradley, who was appointed to the chairmanship last year by Gov. Rick Perry.
Stephen Saloom, the policy director of the New York-based Innocence Project, said Bradley shows "a critically important lack of objectivity" in his approach to Willingham.
"His job here is not to be the DA and the friend of the governor," Saloom said.
Bradley, who raised his voice repeatedly, dismissed Saloom as a "New York lawyer" making "personal attacks rather than legal arguments."
Bradley's leadership has been questioned since last year, when the governor sacked three members of the forensic commission just days before it was to review reports that cast doubt on the arson finding. Perry installed Bradley, a conservative ally, as the new chairman. Bradley canceled the subsequent meeting and since has sought to close the inquiry.
On Thursday, two fire experts testified at a special court of inquiry hearing unrelated to the forensic panel's inquiry, saying the Willingham fire was an accident. The judge overseeing that hearing has the power to declare Willingham innocent.
An Austin appeals court, however, granted an emergency stay that will prevent the judge from ruling for at least one week and could end the proceeding altogether.
If the judge clears Willingham, it would mark the first time an official in the nation's most active death penalty state has formally declared that someone was wrongfully executed.
The commission took no action Friday on Willingham. However, members are trying to arrange a November meeting that would hear live testimony from fire experts who have studied the case. Bradley continued to criticize the effort to clear Willingham after the meeting.
"I think it's pretty ridiculous to have this court of inquiry at the same time we're doing this," Bradley told reporters. "I think the public can see it for the sham that it is."
Click here to see Rick Perry's reaction on how things are working out with respect to keeping the Willingham case under wraps.