Justin Brooks
Professor, California Western School of Law; Director,
California Innocence ProjectOrder his book
Wrongful Convictions Cases & Materials 2d ed. here
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore
Daniel Ehighalua
Nigerian Barrister
Associate Professor of Justice Studies, Montclair University
Carey D. Hoffman
Director of Digital Communications,
Ohio Innocence Project@OIPCommunicati1
Shiyuan Huang
Associate Professor, Shandong University Law School; Visiting Scholar, University of Cincinnati College of Law
Professor of Criminology, Law & Society and Sociology, University of California-Irvine
Phil Locke
Science and Technology Advisor, Ohio Innocence Project and Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic
Dr. Carole McCartney
Reader in Law, Faculty of Business and Law, Northumbria University
Nancy Petro
Author and Advocate
Order her book
False Justice here

Professor, Faculty of Law, Konan University Innocence Project Japan
Professor, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Northern Arizona University; Executive Director, Arizona Innocence Project
Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway
Author and Private Investigator
Order his book
Presumed Guilty here
I found the article about eyewitness ID very interesting. Jason Young was recently convicted of murder here in NC. They had no evidence linking him to the murder but presented the theory that he “could have” left his hotel in VA, drove back to NC, killed his wife and then returned back to the hotel. They have an eyewitness who places him at a VA gas station at 5:30AM (the clerk). She was shown just one photo of him and said “yes, that man threw a $20 at me and cursed at me to turn the pump on”. Nothing was recorded. The police claim that the video cameras at the station weren’t working at the time. Convenient. At the trial she described him as short and with thinning hair. He was tall, no thinning hair. He was convicted partially due to this. The jurors found her credible somehow. The thing that I don’t understand is that NC has guidelines for witness ID. They apparently aren’t following them. It’s troubling to see the same “errors” occur over and over when we now know how unreliable witness ID can be.