Author Archives: Martin Yant

Questionable conviction gains more attention

In 2005, I edited and published the book Who Killed Sarah? about the questionable murder conviction of Penny Brummer in Madison, Wisconsin. Co-authors Sheila and Doug Berry make a strong case in the book that Brummer didn’t commit the 1994 murder of Sarah Gonstead for which Brummer was sentenced to serve at least 50 years in prison. They also show that prejudice against Brummer because she is a lesbian had a lot to do with her becoming a suspect, defendant and ultimately an inmate.

A few months ago, the Berrys asked if I would allow them to republish Who Killed Sarah? as an e-book as a way to raise money for DNA tests that might help prove Brummer’s innocence, and I happily said yes. The e-book is now available online at www.whokilledsarah.com, and it has gained the attention of David Protess, who writes about wrongful convictions for The Huffington Post. Protess quotes Sheila Berry as saying, “The most important evidence that led to Penny’s conviction was that she is a lesbian. If she had been straight, she wouldn’t have been a suspect at all.” You can read the whole Protess piece here.

Bill proposed to clear way for pardon of Scottsboro Boys

From Mike Cason at al.com

MONTGOMERY, Alabama — Some Alabama lawmakers, attorneys and others say it’s time for Alabama to officially pardon the Scottsboro Boys, nine African-American youths convicted of raping two white women in a case that became a landmark example of racial injustice.

Sen. Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, joined other legislators, civil rights attorney Fred Gray Sr., and others to announce a bill today that would establish procedures to allow the pardons. Legislation is needed because state law does not allow posthumous pardons.

“It is never too late to right a wrong, never, ever too late,” Birmingham defense attorney Richard Jaffe said. “And in fact, by not righting this wrong, we would be making a huge mistake because the stigma that attached to Alabama and its legal system was beyond measure and to some extent it still exists. And it was international.”

“To me, this case was nothing more than a real life “To Kill a Mockingbird” times nine.”

On March 25, 1931, the nine youths were riding a freight train through north Alabama when a deputized posse stopped the train at Paint Rock. The posse was investigating a fight between black and white passengers and questioned two women aboard the train, who eventually claimed they were raped by the men.

All nine of the youths were convicted by an all-white jury after a brief trial.

One of the women later said they had concocted the rape story to avoid charges for vagrancy.

The state pardoned one of the nine, Clarence Norris, in 1976. Norris was the only one of the nine known to be alive at the time.

Richard Cohen, president of the Southern Poverty Law Center, said the Scottsboro Boys case twice went to the U.S. Supreme Court and set important precedents.

“Those two cases are in many ways a monument to the injustice the state of Alabama inflicted on the Scottsboro Boys,” Cohen said today. “The first case said that the state had an obligation to provide effective assistance of counsel to criminal defendants. The second case said that juries had to be chosen in a manner that was free of racial bias.”

Cohen said exoneration of the Scottsboro Boys was “incredibly important,” but added that it was also important to ensure that the principles set by the case are followed.

“Today, are criminal defendants always provided with effective assistance of counsel? Today, are our juries chosen free of racial discrimination? Until we can answer yes to both of those questions, the shadow of the Scottsboro Boys will continue to linger.”

How psychological research can decrease defective verdicts

The current issue of Scientific American has an excellent article, titled ”Your Brain on Trial,” about how psychological research can help prevent flawed verdicts. Unfortunately, authors Scott O. Lilienfeld and Robert Byron note, ”Many well-established psychological findings have yet to exert much influence on the legal system, in part because of a resistance to change and in part because of differing traditions. Whereas science tends to question common intuitions regarding human nature, the legal system tends to embrace them.”

Lilienfeld and Byron give many examples of how relatively minor reforms based on scientific research could help prevent wrongful convictions. Some of the reforms concerning eyewitness identification and false confessions have received a great deal of attention on this blog. One that hasn’t concerns the futility of a judge telling jurors to disregard inadmissible statements or questions.

Once the cat’s out of the bag, they write, the judge can’t put it back all that easily. ”False beliefs often persist long after they have been discredited,” they write. They say research has shown that such ”belief perseverance” is less likely to persist if the judge explains why the stricken statement is unfair to the prosecution or defense. But judges rarely do that.

Lilienfeld and Byron also point out that, while videotaping interrogations is a good thing, the way police set the cameras up to focus on the person being questioned ”engenders bias against the suspect, probably because observers are prone to attributing cause — and blame — to whatever is most visually salient.” They say that researchers at Ohio University found that ”broadening the camera angle to include both interrogator and suspect diminishes this bias.”

Simple reforms like these could help ensure valid verdicts. Unfortunately, nothing is simple when it comes to rigid criminal-justices systems. You can read the whole article here.

Vigilante justice goes high-tech in Ohio

Emotions often run high in criminal cases, and the higher they run the greater the likelihood that a defendant may be wrongly convicted.

History is replete with news-media fueled hysteria leading to false allegations and convictions. The 1915 lynching is Leo Frank is one early example. More recently, we saw that in 1989 wrongful convictions explored in the searing new Ken Burns documentary, The Central Park Five, and in the false rape charges filed against three members of the Duke University lacrosse team in 2006.

Another possible injustice is currently unfolding in the Steubenville, Ohio, rape case of two members of the popular Steubenville High School football team. The alleged alcohol-fueled rape of an unconscious 16-year-old girl at a party while other boys supposedly watched and did nothing, has set off an international firestorm.

What makes the media conflagration different in this case is that it has been fueled by bloggers and hackers who contend that other boys should be charged and that authorities are trying to cover up other wrongdoing by people associated with the football team.

Contrary to the narrative perpetrated in the cybersphere, law enforcement was not dismissive of the allegations. The alleged rape occurred on August 11. The girl’s mother reported it to police on August 14. Charges were filed on August 27, the same day that local authorities requested the assistance of the Ohio attorney general’s office for additional investigation.

But that wasn’t good enough for some, particularly a purported local member of the international hacker collective Anonymous who calls himself K.Y.

K.Y. has released a lot of information (and some misinformation) on his LocalLeaks web site. He also has threatened to release the social security numbers and other personal information of people he believes have information on the rape if they don’t come forward.

While some of the information K.Y. has thus-far released might be helpful, much of it seems to be fueled by personal animosity and to have been obtained illegally. (Like some cops and prosecutors, K.Y. apparently feels it’s OK to break the law to make others pay a price for breaking the law.)

This is a new frontier in media-fueled rushes to judgment. While some, including Erika Christakis have expressed concern about this new form of vigilante justice, many in the traditional media have followed the social media’s lead.

What makes this particularly frightening is the instant worldwide distribution via social media of unproven allegations by a masked man who doesn’t mind destroying the reputations of teenagers who may have had nothing to do with the rape in question.

To anyone who cares about justice and the rights of the accused to a fair trial, CNN correspondent Gary Tuchman’s interview with K.Y. should be a cause concern. ”We aren’t the judge nor the jury, but it’s fair to say we are the executioner,” K.Y. said of Anonymous. The hacker added that, because some of the people have ”incriminated themselves” in online tweets and postings, there is no real need to wait for the courts to decide on their guilt or innocence. ”If you think they are guilty, that’s because your conscience is telling you they are guilty,” K.Y. said. Case closed.

Trials often lead to unjust results, particularly in emotionally charged cases. But trials sure beat having the accused subjected to a high-tech lynching by a self-anointed ”executioner” hiding behind a Guy Fawkes mask.

False confessions no relic of past

Joshua Tepfer, a staff attorney with the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University and co-director of the center’s Youth Project, presents a powerful argument in today’s Chicago Sun-Times that false confessions remain a serious problem in Chicago. (Things aren’t much better in the rest of the United States, but Chicago always seems to lead the way.)

You can read Tepfer’s commentary here.

Crime labs need greater scrutiny, discipline

Forensic fraud and error are major causes of wrongful convictions, and that’s not likely to change without a lot more housecleaning at the nation’s crime labs.

As The Washington Post reports here, the U.S. Justice Department’s current review of over 21,000 cases handled by the FBI Laboratory’s hair and fibers unit before 2000 to determine whether improper lab reports or testimony might have contributed to wrongful convictions doesn’t cover the work of the 600 to 1,000 state and local examiners the FBI trained to use the same problematic standards.

But the problem with crime labs goes far beyond bad theory and training. As law professor Alicia Hilton, a former FBI agent, points out in this Rutgers Law Review commentary, ”Scientific evidence is like eyewitness testimony — evidence can be tainted by mistakes, prejudice, and corruption.” Hilton offers an excellent review of how and why this happens and advocates enhanced background checks, ethics training and oversight to rein in bad crime-lab employees before their misconduct helps put innocent people in prison.

Plea bargains deserve greater attention

A 60 Minutes report Sunday on the prevalence of false-confession cases in Chicago has garnered the issue renewed and much-deserved attention, as reported by Mark Godsey here and Phil Locke here.

Questions about how false confessions happen — and continue to happen no matter how many cautionary cases are brought to light, is an ongoing mystery. As noted in this excellent explanation of the issue in The Jury Expert, false confessions in North America date back to at least 1692 and the Salem Witch Trials.

Unfortunately, a more prevalent form false confession — guilty pleas by innocent defendants — gets far less attention. Some nations prohibit plea bargains to prevent this problem, but they are integral part of the criminal-justice system in the United States, where more than 90 percent of cases end with guilty pleas. As Danny Weil argues in a pointed essay here, the growth of pea bargains in the Unites States has become ”a historical canker sore on the judicial system” that has helped foster America’s mushrooming incarceration rate over the past three decades.

Even worse, when evidence of innocence of a person who pled guilty later surfaces, court rules make it extremely difficult to get a conviction reversed. For every guilty person like former football star Brian Banks who is allowed to clear his name, dozens of others are denied the opportunity because of the system’s strict rules against reopening cases that ended in guilty pleas. This is an issue that deserves much more attention.

Former death row inmate finally declared innocent

Thirty years after the murders that put him on death row, 22 years after his conviction was overturned and four years after another man confessed to the murders, an Ohio court has finally declared Dale Johnston an innocent man. It’s certainly about time.

In a ruling issued yesterday, Franklin County Common Pleas Judge Richard A. Frye said that the state’s attempt to thwart Johnston’s effort to clear his name was “illogical … absurd (and) mean-spirited.” The story about Frye’s ruling is here. A previous post about Guilty by Popular Demand, Bill Osinski’s excellent new book about Johnston’s case, is here.

Exoneree Deskovic wins round in suit against polygraphist

In February, I posted an article here about how the polygraph is often used to induce false confessions. One of the most outrageous examples of that was the case of Jeffrey Deskovic. Deskovic spent almost 16 years in prison before he was released in 2006 after testing matched DNA found on the victim identified the real killer, who pleaded guilty to the crime in 2007.

As reported here, Deskovic has already donated about $1.5 million from the money he was awarded in two court cases he filed after his release to start the Jeffrey Deskovic Foundation for Justice to promote awareness of wrongful convictions and related issues.

Now Deskovic is focusing attention on the misuse of polygraphs in criminal investigations, starting with his own case. As reported here, a federal judge has refused to dismiss Deskovic’s claim that the investigator who administered the lie-detector test that prompted his false confession violated his rights.

According to Deskovic, the investigator told him that he had failed the polygraph test and then said, “You just told me within yourself, through the polygraph results, that you committed (the murder). All we want you to do is verbalize it.” After more intimidation and manipulation, Deskovic acceded to the investigator’s request.

Sadly, investigators still use the polygraphs in this fashion to get confessions. I am currently investigating a case in which a high-school dropout with a low IQ confessed to a crime after being told the polygraph proved he was guilty. No matter how many false confessions involving the polygraph are exposed, police continue to use it as a tool to obtain confessions from young or easily manipulated individuals.

False confessions continue to taint justice system

The recent exoneration of Damon Thibodeaux in Louisiana and overturned conviction of Richard Lapointe in Connecticut are two new reminders of the devastating effects of false confessions induced by overzealous interrogators.

Thibodeaux was sentenced to death and spent 15 years in prison for the murder of his half-cousin before his exoneration by DNA testing on September 28. Lapointe, a mentally disabled dishwasher convicted of murder in 1989 was granted a new trial on On October 1. Both men claimed they were manipulated into falsely confessing to the crimes.

You can read about Thibodeaux’s exoneration — the 300th achieved by DNA testing —here and here.

While Thibodeaux is now a free man, Lapointe still faces the possibility of a new trial. The state’s top appeals court only ruled that prosecutors had denied him access to notes by a police detective that tend to support his alibi defense. But longtime innocence advocate Donald S. Connery makes a compelling case of Lapointe’s innocence in this opinion column.

Forensic psychologist Karen Franklin gives an excellent explanation of how a false confession “contaminates everything and everyone in touches — from the prosecutor, the judge, and even the suspect’s own attorney” on her informative blog here.

Human lie detectors are wrong as much as they are right

While investigating my first wrongful conviction case after my book Presumed Guilty was published in 1991, I was shocked to learn that the FBI “expert” who polygraphed defendant Paul Ferrell was allowed to testify that Ferrell had given a nonverbal confession. According to the agent, Ferrell nodded his head as the agent discussed why investigators believed Ferrell had killed a missing woman. Although Ferrell insisted he was innocent, the agent said his slight head nod was an admission of guilt.

Ferrell’s appeals attorney argued in his brief that this was apparently the first time such testimony had been admitted in American court and should have been disallowed. The appeals court agreed, but called the admission “harmless error.”

When I called Paul Ekman, the leading authority on nonverbal communication, to discuss the FBI polygraphist’s testimony, he expressed dismay. Ekman said the body-language interpretation of FBI polygraphists had been repeatedly shown in studies to be wrong about half the time. Even worse, he said, head nods are the most difficult of all body motions to interpret.

Ekman sounded like the voice of reason then. Unfortunately, a few years later, Ekman developed the Facial Action Coding System, which he claimed can be used to determine whether someone is lying with 95 percent accuracy. Law enforcement quickly moved to adopt the system, which was featured on the American TV series, Lie to Me, whose main character was an expert on divining deception based on Ekman.

But as Sue Russell points out in an article that’s part of her excellent series on wrongful convictions in Pacific Standard magazine, that’s bad news for innocent suspects. Regardless of the training people use to convince themselves that they can tell when someone is lying, Russell says, “research repeatedly shows that confidence to be misplaced.” You can read her story here.

Sports world’s justice system often unfair to the accused

As hard as the presumption of guilt can be to overcome in the world’s court systems, it apparently is even harder in the international anti-doping bureaucracy headed by the Court of Arbitration for Sport, where even high-profile athletes like Lance Armstrong don’t stand a chance.

As Sally Jenkins of The Washington Post notes:

“Anyone who thinks an athlete has a fair shot in front of CAS should review the Alberto Contador case. Contador was found to have a minuscule, insignificant amount of clenbuterol in his urine during the 2010 Tour de France. After hearing 4,000 pages of testimony and debate, CAS acknowledged that the substance was too small to have been performance-enhancing and that its ingestion was almost certainly unintentional.

Therefore he was guilty. He received a two-year ban.”

Even worse, Jenkins said, one year of that ban was exacted because the prime minister of Spain dared to defend Contador’s innocence. You can read Jenkins’ full commentary here.

West Memphis Three case taking ugly turn

Wrongful conviction cases are often emotional minefields. This is particularly true when the case gets national media attention or it has multiple defendants and legal teams. So it’s not surprising that divisions are surfacing in the high-profile case of West Memphis Three, who were released last year after entering guilty pleas while asserting their innocence.

Evidence of rift between Damien Echols, Jason Baldwin and Jessie Misskelley surfaced last week, when The New York Times reported here that Baldwin and Echols weren’t speaking because of Echols’ criticism of Baldwin for allegedly delaying their release in his forthcoming book, Life After Death.

Yesterday, the Arkansas Times went into greater detail, reporting that “Echols unceremoniously throws fellow WM3’er Jason Baldwin and Baldwin’s defense team under the bus.” You can read the actual quotes and reactions here.

All of this upsets noted forensic scientist Brent Turvey, who helped turn the WM3 case around in the early stages.

“There are many rifts and divisions, some created by misinformation and some created by egos, that exist with the WM3 camps,” Turvey wrote on Facebook today. “The attorneys have been among the worst of these — each clamoring for publicity and credit. It is a strange and perverse thing to bear witness to. . . . When the films start rolling out, it will only get more obscene. It saddens the soul.”

Errol Morris examines Jeffrey MacDonald case in new book

Academy Award-winning director Errol Morris, who convincingly documented the innocence of Randall Dale Adams in his 1988 film The Thin Blue Line, has now tackled the bizarre 1970 murder case of Jeffrey MacDonald. Morris’ weapon of choice in this case, though, is a book rather than a movie. In A Wilderness of Error, Morris’ goal isn’t so much to prove MacDonald’s innocence but to indict the legal system that has made it virtually impossible to reach a sound conclusion because of the way the investigation was handled and the subsequent trial and appeals distorted the facts. Wendy Kaminer writes about the book here.

Ohio death-row exoneration featured in new book

One of the most clear-cut non-DNA exonerations in a death penalty case — that of Dale Johnston in Ohio — is now receiving some much-deserved attention in a new book, Guilty by Popular Demand by Bill Osinski.

Although Johnston’s 1984 convictions in the dismemberment murders of his step-daughter and her boyfriend were overturned and Johnston was released in 1990, many in law enforcement still insisted on his guilt. That changed in 2008, when Chester McKnight confessed that he and an early suspect in the case, Kenny Linscott, had committed the murders. McKnight later changed his story to say he committed the murders by himself and that Linscott only helped him dismember the bodies. McKnight pleaded guilty to the murders and Linscott to abuse of corpse charges, removing all doubt that Johnston was involved.

Osinski documents in his book how hysteria created by ill-founded reports of incest and Satantic sacrifices; the misuse of hypnosis on witnesses, and the bogus testimony of a forensic fraud — in this case alleged footprint expert Louise Robbins — can lead to a horrible injustice.

You can read more about the case here and a review of Osinski’s book here.

Johnston is still fighting to win compensation for the years he spent on death row while fighting to prove his innocence. If there is any justice, Osinski’s book will help spur his case to a successful conclusion.

Wrongly convicted women get much-needed attention

Women are mostly forgotten victims in the scourge of wrongful convictions. For the most part, women are convicted of committing crimes in which there is no biological evidence. Hence, wrongly convicted women are rarely exonerated by the type of indisputable DNA testing that garners wrongly convicted inmates publicity and sympathy.

As noted on http://www.womenandinnocence.com, “Female clients in innocence work represent a different population. That is, they are not more apples, they are oranges, and categorically divergent in some ways from men. By so being they require a body of research and attention particularized so that defense efforts can be most efficiently strategized.”

Zieva Dauber Konvisser has made a significant contribution to that body of research with her article “Psychological Consequences of Wrongful Conviction in Women and the Possibility of Positive Change” in the spring 2012 issue of DePaul Journal for Social Justice. You can read it here.

Justice Department to review forensic evidence used in thousands of cases

Great reporting by The Washington Post on flawed forensic evidence has prompted the U.S. Justice Department to review thousands of cases in search of possible wrongful convictions. The Post’s latest story is here.

Prosecutors misuse DNA evidence to get convictions

Prosecutors always push the envelope to win convictions, so this Chicago Tribune story about how they are misusing DNA evidence in criminal cases is no big surprise.

Are one out of every 10 rape convictions wrong?

Forensic psychologist Karen Franklin presents an interesting anaylysis on false accusations, false convictions and false recantations here.

High-schoolers develop oral history project on wrongful convictions

Rob Warden, executive director of the Northwestern Center on Wrongful Convictions, shared this good news in an email:

Six Chicago high school students—five from Francis W. Parker and one from Whitney Young—recently completed an impressive oral history project focusing on clients and staff of the Center on Wrongful Convictions.

The interviews, both transcribed and video-taped, are posted here.

The project was led by Jeanne Polk Barr, chair of the Department of History & Social Studies at Parker, and Cliff Mayotte, director of Educational Programs for the Voice of Witness Program.

Cliff is a colleague of Parker alumnae Lola Vollen, who co-authored with David Eggers a remarkable book titled Surviving Justice, containing interviews with exonerated defendants.

The oral history project was done in cooperation with Facing History & Ourselves.

The Parker students who conducted interviews were Madison Mullen, Sydney Bronstein, Becca Lewis, Henry Cutler, and Willy Byrne Vogt. The Whitney Young student was Grace Zelle.

Please share this with anyone you think might be interested.