Author Archives: Mark Godsey

Friday’s Quick Clicks…

  • In the UK, bid to overturn arson convictions due to police misconduct
  • In Texas, exoneree Anthony Graves seeks a court of inquiry to examine alleged misconduct by the prosecutor who wrongfully convicted him

New Scholarship Spotlight: The Banality of Wrongful Executions…

Virginia professor Brandon Garrett has posted the above-titled article, reviewing several important books, on SSRN.  Download here.  The abstract states:

What is so haunting about the known wrongful convictions is that they are the tip of the iceberg. Untold numbers of mundane errors may escape notice while sending the innocent to prison and even to the death chamber. That is why I recommended to readers a trilogy of fascinating new books that look into the larger but murkier problem of error. In this article for Michigan Law Review’s annual book issue, I review three books: Los Tocayos Carlos, by James Liebman, Shawn Crowley, Andrew Markquart, Lauren Rosenberg, Lauren Gallo White and Daniel Zharkovsky; Anatomy of Injustice: A Murder Case Gone Wrong, by Raymond Bonner; and In Doubt: The Psychology of the Criminal Justice Process, by Dan Simon. Each of these books brings important new perspective and understanding to the reasons why our criminal justice system can make terrible mistakes.

Monday’s Quick Clicks…

  • Birmingham Six member Paddy Hill has claimed that police sent secret letters promising immunity to two of the men responsible for the 1974 pub bombings.  The miscarriage of justice campaigner, who received a life sentence for the terrorist atrocity but was released from prison and cleared after his conviction was quashed, believes two of the pub bombers were told they would not face prosecution for IRA crimes.  The 68-year-old, who now lives in Scotland, said he has been told IRA members previously admitted that five people carried out the bombings at the Mulberry Bush and the Tavern in the Town.  He said that two of the five have since died, two were promised immunity – but a fifth bomber has not received any assurances that he could escape prosecution.  Nobody has ever been brought to justice for the mass murder of 21 innocent people on the streets of Birmingham on November 21, 1974, which left 182 injured. Full article here
  • Nebraska exoneree Troy Hess has compensation claim rejected by Nebraska Supreme Court
  • In Canada, a judge has allowed former Vancouver real estate developer Tarsem Singh Gill to withdraw his guilty pleas in connection with a $40-million mortgage fraud.  In a ruling Friday, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Terry Schultes said that the possibility of a “miscarriage of justice” loomed large if he denied Gill’s application to withdraw his pleas to two counts of fraud.  Full story here….
  • Exoneree Edgar Coker discusses life on the sex offender registry.
  • Article about the Uriah Courtney exoneration in California

Friday’s Quick Clicks…

click

New Scholarship Spotlight: The Need for Defense Access to the Law Enforcement DNA Database

Jason Kreag has posted Letting Innocence Suffer:  The Need for Defense Access to the Law Enforcement DNA Database on SSRN.  Download here.   The abstract states:

Law enforcement has gradually amassed a sizable DNA database that holds considerable promise for solving cold cases and identifying suspects. The Supreme Court has blessed this effort, allowing investigators to include profiles of arrestees as well as convicted persons in the database. At present, though, law enforcement has a near monopoly on use of the DNA database, leaving defendants at the whim of the law enforcement officials who control access to this tool. Legal scholars have alternatively praised and decried the database, but none has examined its prospects for proving defendants’ innocence post-conviction. This Article fills that void by identifying a limited due process right to defense-initiated DNA database searches. The Article argues that the database is a powerful truth-promoting tool that should be available to law enforcement and defendants alike. Because legislators have failed to promote the search for actual offenders through statutory rights of access, this Article presents the constitutional authority for defense-initiated searches to vindicate the rights of innocent defendants.

Wednesday’s Quick Clicks…

  • Is forensic odontology too unreliable?
  • Exoneree Johnathan Montgomery takes it one day at a time
  • Missouri considers eyewitness identification reform and DNA preservation bill
  • Greg Wilhoit, a former Oklahoma death-row inmate from Tulsa and nationally-known anti-death penalty advocate whose story was included in author John Grisham’s “The Innocent Man,” died Feb. 14 in Sacramento, Calif., family members said. He was 59.  Full article here
  • Upcoming symposium at the Penn Quattrone Center:  A Systems Approach to Conviction Integrity

Interesting SCOTUS Forensics Case….

Today, in Hinton v. Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court found the trial attorney’s failure to request funding for a sufficient expert to challenge the State’s ballistics experts constituted ineffective assistance of counsel.  Opinion here.

Monday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • Exoneree Lana Canan sues Elkhart, Indiana police
  • A man convicted of rape nearly four decades ago should be allowed to seek new DNA testing, the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled Friday, upholding an earlier Nebraska Court of Appeals ruling.  Juneal Pratt, 58, is serving 32 to 90 years for the rape, sexual assault and robbery of two Iowa sisters at an Omaha motel in 1975.  He was 19 when he was arrested days after the August 1975 assaults on suspicion of purse-snatching at the same hotel, then quickly charged with the rapes. Several witnesses said Pratt was at home at the time of the attacks, but Pratt was convicted just two months later after the sisters picked him out of a police lineup — a practice that’s increasingly under fire.  Full article here….
  • A man who was wrongly convicted of a 2006 shooting in Oakland has filed a $32 million federal civil rights lawsuit against the city, alleging that he was maliciously prosecuted.  The lawsuit by Ronald Ross, filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, accuses Oakland police of conducting a faulty photo lineup that ended with his being improperly identified by the shooting victim, Renardo Williams, as the shooter. Ross spent nearly seven years behind bars before being released last February.  Full article here…

Friday Quick Clicks…

  • A Final Farewell to Greg Wilhoit, Who Survived Oklahoma’s Death Row
  • New book released:  I am Troy Davis
  • A Pittsburgh man serving three life terms deserves a new trial in the death of three city firefighters, but the retrial will be delayed while prosecutors appeal the judge’s decision.  When Greg Brown was convicted of arson in a 1995 blaze that killed three Pittsburgh firefighters, prosecutors said no witnesses were promised money in exchange for testimony.  Allegheny County Judge Joseph Williams on Wednesday ruled 36-year-old Gregory Brown Jr. deserved the new trial because prosecutors didn’t reveal that the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms paid one witness a $5,000 reward.  That witness testified he wasn’t promised any money for his testimony, which Williams said could have been used to impeach his credibility had Brown’s defense known about the reward.  Full story….

Wednesday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman plans to unveil legislation Wednesday that would make it easier for people wrongfully convicted of crimes to recover damages from the state.  Schneiderman’s Unjust Imprisonment Act would strip away restrictions in state law that block claims from people who were coerced into false confessions or who pleaded guilty to crimes they did not commit.  Full article here.
  • Pennsylvania Innocence Project hiring an investigator
  • Another chance for the U.S. Supreme Court to say no to prosecutorial misconduct
  • Missouri considers eyewitness id and videotaped interrogations reform
  • Opening of sealed records in Orange County, CA shows improper use of informants

Forensic Science Reform Bill Introduced in U.S. Congress

Press release:

Senator John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV, Chairman

For Immediate Release
http://commerce.senate.gov                                              Contact: Kevin McAlister, 202-224-8374
February 12, 2014

ROCKEFELLER INTRODUCES BILL TO ADVANCE FORENSIC SCIENCE REFORM

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Chairman John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV today reintroduced legislation to strengthen the criminal justice system, by prioritizing scientific research and supporting the development of science-based standards in the forensic disciplines.

Rockefeller’s bill, The Forensic Science and Standards Act of 2014, aims to bolster forensic science reform efforts and to maintain long-term cooperation between scientists, the legal community, law enforcement, forensic practitioners, and advocacy groups.

“We’re making real progress toward strengthening forensic science, but more must be done,” said Rockefeller. “My bill would formalize collaboration between scientists and the criminal justice system, which is the only way to put our forensic evidence standards on a solid scientific footing. This important work will help convict the guilty and protect the innocent.”

The Forensic Science and Standards Act of 2014 continues Rockefeller’s work from a related 2012 bill introduced in response to the 2009 National Academies report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward.  The report found that the interpretation of forensic evidence can be severely compromised by the lack of supporting science and standards.

Since the report’s release, Rockefeller has focused on supporting basic research in forensic science and on improving standards of practice. Rockefeller has convened three Commerce Committee hearings to highlight the need for scientific research, for enforceable national standards, and for Federal government leadership to validate and standardize forensic disciplines nationwide. The recently established National Commission on Forensic Science implements a provision in Rockefeller’s original bill, which calls for the creation of this entity.

A wide range of organizations have supported the need for basic research and standards development in the forensic sciences. Reform advocates have included the Innocence Project; the National Association of Medical Examiners (NAME); the American Statistical Association (ASA); the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL); and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), which is particularly concerned about the potential for bias in the criminal justice system.

A copy of the bill is available here.

To implement needed reforms, the Forensic Science and Standards Act of 2014 would:

         Require standards development: NIST would be directed to develop forensic science standards in consultation with standards development organizations and forensic science stakeholders. NIST would also be permitted to establish and solicit advice from discipline-specific expert working groups to identify standards development priorities and opportunities.

         Implement uniform standards: The bill would direct a national commission on forensic science – chaired by the Director of NIST and the Attorney General and comprised of research scientists, forensic science practitioners, and legal and law enforcement professionals – to recommend new science-based standards.  It would also require the Attorney General to implement these standards in Federal forensic science laboratories and to encourage standards adoption in non-Federal laboratories.

         Promote research: A National Forensic Science Coordinating Office would be established to develop a forensic science research strategy and to support the implementation of that strategy across relevant Federal agencies. The National Science Foundation would be directed to support forensic science research and the creation of forensic science research centers. All agencies with equities in forensic science would be encouraged to stimulate innovative and creative solutions to satisfy the research needs and priorities identified in the research strategy.

Wrongful Prosecution of Innocents in Qatar?

The California Innocence Project and the David House Agency are working on the following case in Qatar, summarized below by the David House Agency.  Media reports here and here.

Matthew and Grace Huang are an American couple from Los Angeles who moved to Qatar with their three young children in 2012.  Matthew’s American employer had asked Matthew, a Stanford-trained engineer, to go to Qatar to help oversee a major infrastructure project related to the 2022 World Cup improvements.  On January 15, 2013, the Huangs’ eight year-old daughter, Gloria, died unexpectedly in Doha. Gloria had not been ill, at least not outwardly so.  Her body showed no signs of trauma or other violence.  Nevertheless, the Qatari police immediately suspected foul play.  They arrested the Huangs the next day and put the Huangs’ other two children in an orphanage.  Qatari officials subsequently charged Matthew and Grace with murdering Gloria, concluded the murder may have been done in order to harvest her organs or to conduct medical experiments on her, and accused the Huangs of obtaining all three of their children via human trafficking.  As their trial started and stopped, the Huangs spent nearly a year in a Qatari jail, before recently being released on their own recognizance.  Despite this being a capital case, and despite having already denied multiple requests by the Huangs to be released on bond, the judge suddenly ordered the Huangs released from custody after the evidence portion of their trial concluded in November 2013.  They remain barred from leaving Qatar while they await the outcome of their trial.  And the prosecution has made clear that it continues to seek the death penalty.

Quite simply, there is no evidence whatsoever that the Huangs harmed Gloria, let alone murdered her as part of an effort to harvest her organs or perform medical experiments on her.  Instead, the case against the Huangs is rooted in transparently racial and cultural prejudice by the Qatari police and prosecutor and has been perpetuated at trial by fraudulent evidence and testimony about what anonymous sources supposedly told police.

The Huangs are an unconventional family, particularly by Qatari standards.  Matthew and Grace are of Asian descent.  Their three children all are black and were adopted by the Huangs from Africa. The Qatari officials found the Huangs’ family situation inherently suspicious.  And it is clear that these racially motivated suspicions are what led to the Huangs’ arrest and subsequent prosecution.

Within two days of Gloria’s death, police accused Matthew and Grace of engaging in human trafficking.  During the investigative proceedings, the prosecutor asked a police investigator to describe the “intent” of Matthew and Grace “in buying the children.”  The investigator responded:

The investigations established that “the two defendants,  Matthew  and Grace Huang, participated with others in child trafficking, most likely to either sell their organs or to conduct medical experiments on them.”

Police have never offered any actual evidence to support these false and vile accusations.  Instead, they accused Matthew and Grace of the most deplorable conduct imaginable based on their bigoted belief that an Asian-American couple’s adoption of African children is inherently suspicious.  According to the Qatari investigators:

“The adoption process consists of searching for children who are good-looking and well-behaved, and who have hereditary features that are similar to those of the parents.  But the children connected to this incident are all from Africa and most of the families there are indigent.”

On the very first day of trial, the prosecutor asked the very fist witness whether there was a connection between the murder charge and the allegation that “the Accused starved the Victim for the purpose of human trafficking and human organ trafficking.”  The witness responded:

“There could be a connection. . . . The deceased girl was black from Africa with a plump figure, while the parents have wheaten or white complexion.  Those who adopt for adoption normally choose beautiful children.”

To be very clear, in all the adoptions, the Huangs utilized a respected adoption agency and obtained all the proper visas from the U.S. State Department.  Even after being presented repeatedly with the adoption paperwork, the Qatari prosecutor and police at trial persisted in accusing the Huangs of human trafficking and claiming the Huangs “bought” the children.  Of course, if Qatari officials truly believed the Huangs were engaged in human trafficking, then it is hard to explain their decision in September 2013 to allow the children to return to America and reside with Grace’s mother and father and to not call them as witnesses.

The prosecution’s case against the Huangs has steadily crumbled, yet the case continues.  Rather than present actual proof that the Huangs were engaged in human trafficking or that Gloria was mistreated, the prosecution instead called police investigators as witnesses who testified that “anonymous sources” told them the Huangs were mysterious, stingy, kept to themselves, and that Gloria had “vanished” in the days leading up to her death.  The Huangs, by contrast, presented live witnesses from Doha who knew the Huangs and who testified how they had traveled with the Huang family, attended church, parties and meals with them, and about how lovingly the Huangs treated all their children.  The police further testified about how their examination of the Huangs’ home showed only the bare essentials in Gloria’s room and no toys.  The Huangs produced pictures proving that Gloria had her own fully furnished room with an adjoining bathroom, a wide wardrobe of clothes, and a dedicated playroom full of games and toys.  Every testifying witness who knew the Huang family prior to Gloria’s death testified that the Huangs loved Gloria and that Gloria appeared healthy and well treated.

Similarly, no science or forensic evidence supports the charge that the Huangs murdered Gloria. Again, Gloria’s body showed no signs that she had been abused. She was, however, very thin, so Qatari investigators have speculated that she died of starvation or dehydration, even though the medical examiner at trial disputed that he could say that she had died of starvation.  In any event, the Huangs have shown this theory to be objectively false.

Gloria was born into extreme poverty in Ghana and was not adopted until she was four years old.  We thus do not have the benefit of any family medial background or genetic history.  When she arrived in America she had Giardia, a parasitic condition that can be difficult to eradicate and can cause a nutritional problem — i.e., impair the body’s ability to absorb nutrients from food.  She later tested positive for Vitamin D deficiency and had other unusual blood work that, in retrospect, indicated a continuing malabsorption problem.  From time to time she would exhibit an eating disorder — common among children with backgrounds similar to hers — where she would refuse food for days at a time and then eat more than an adult.  Other times she would eat food from the garbage even when she had healthy food available.  Yet most of the time she was vibrant and seemingly healthy.  She then died suddenly in the midst of one of her cycles of refusing to eat.

But Gloria clearly was not starved to death.  A human body does not starve to death very easily.  It takes significant time for the body to break down all its resources.  A few days of not eating would not cause a child to starve.  At trial, independent witnesses testified they saw Gloria eat on January 11, 2013, four days before she died.  In addition, independent witnesses visited the Huangs’ home on the evening of January 14, 2013, the evening before Gloria died.  They saw Gloria sitting with the family that night at their dinner table and walking around, including up the stairs to her room to go to bed.  They swear she appeared happy and healthy.  As a matter of medical science, a child who is one day away from starvation almost certainly would not be able to walk and would appear gravely ill.

There is no basis for the allegation that dehydration caused Gloria’s death.  Gloria had urine in her bladder at autopsy.  She had a bathroom with a working sink in her bedroom where she was found after collapsing.  Photos of her room taken after she died show that she had bottles of water in her room.  Both parents swear she drank fluids even when fasting.  Her brother, Emmanuel, told police that on the day of Gloria’s death, her mother gave her a bottle of water and made her drink.  The medical examiner did not test her fluids, urine or blood at autopsy to assess her level of dehydration.

The medical examiner was not aware of Gloria’s medical history when he conducted his autopsy.  He did not have her medical records from America.  He also did not seem to be aware of or consider her cyclical eating problems.

The Huangs presented their expert reports to the Qatari court and prosecutor in June 2013.  The reports criticized the autopsy for not doing proper laboratory analyses of fluids, blood and tissue.  The Qatari prosecutor responded by filing with the court a highly suspicious laboratory report dated January 23, 2013, which purported to reflect that analysis was done on tissue taken from Gloria’s heart, brain, liver, kidneys, and lungs at autopsy.  The report is very strange in that it does not contain any data (e.g., test results) about what such analyses showed.  The prosecution nevertheless claims that conclusory language in the report somehow proves that Gloria had no diseases or other conditions that may have contributed to her death.

The Huangs dispute the authenticity of the late-disclosed laboratory report.  The autopsy report records that samples of her blood and vitreous humor were sent to be tested for drugs and common poisons, but no mention is made in the her autopsy report of any tissues taken from her organs. Moreover, when Gloria’s body was returned to the United States, an American pathologist examined her remains and specifically noted in his report that tissue samples had not been taken from Gloria’s brain or major organs:

[T]here is no evidence that any tissue has been removed from the brain for microscopic examination. . . . Individual organs lay free within the body cavity; examination reveals no evidence of sectioning or cutting into, or through, the organs. . . . Since the organs have not been cut, there can be no tissues taken for microscopic examination at the first autopsy. . . . The failure to perform a complete autopsy, which would include taking samples of organs for microscopic examination, obtaining samples and submitting them for bacterial and viral cultures, and testing the eye fluids for electrolytes, means that many possible causes of death have not been ruled out. . . . The only cause of death [that can be] ruled out is trauma.

When an organ, such as a liver or kidney, is sampled as part of a post-mortem cause of death, the organ is typically sliced all the way through and often multiple cuts are made.  There are different protocols for different organs, but the important point is this:  if samples had been taken of Gloria’s organs, there is no chance that the American pathologist would have seen “no evidence” of such sectioning and cutting.

No tissue samples have been preserved.  No photographs of the autopsy appear to exist.  Obtaining and keeping such samples and photographs would be standard procedure in a child death case.

The Huangs have obtained an extensive report from one of the foremost pediatric forensic pathologists in the world. (See attached Exhibit #5).  This physician confirms that the medical evidence does not support a medical conclusion that Gloria starved to death or was otherwise abused.  We do not currently even know what the Qatari officials believe to be the cause of Gloria’s death.

This case has been infected from the beginning with cultural prejudices, reliance on anonymous sources, false testimony, missing documents and evidence, the appearance of a very suspicious medical report, and the prosecutor’s inexplicable invocation of Islamic religious references as a substitute for proof of guilt.  This case fails to satisfy basic due process requirements and violates several provisions of the U.N. Charter on Human Rights.

The Qatari police were fully justified in investigating Gloria’s death.  But facts refute the charge that the Huangs starved their daughter or that they had adopted her for illegitimate reasons.  The continued detention of American citizens Matthew and Grace Huang should end immediately.

Woody Allen and the Virtual Lynch Mob…

Two weeks ago, after An Open Letter From Dylan Farrow hit the press, a virtual village of millions lit their torches, grabbed their pitchforks, and carried a tarred-and-feathered film legend Woody Allen through cyberspace to the nearest tree for a public hanging.

As is often the case with notorious lynch mobs, however, things are not always what they seem, and a careful examination of the facts calls for more restraint. Such is the case, I believe, with the lynch mob that would condemn Woody Allen.

I see the allegations by Dylan Farrow quite differently than do the social media masses. I have spent the past twenty years working first as a prosecutor and then for the past decade running the Ohio Innocence Project. Through the Ohio Innocence Project, I have investigated many, many cases involving alleged false child molestation accusations. I’ve studied the psychological research and worked with some of the nation’s top experts regarding the conditions that can give rise to false allegations, the susceptibility of children to suggestion, implanted false memories, and the zeal with which we humans typically cling to false memories once implanted.

While I, of course, cannot be certain about what happened any more than those who would condemn Allen on the spot, I can say this: Some of the earmarks of a false allegation can be seen in this case. There are reasons to be concerned, just as many of the investigators and child psychologists were so gravely concerned when they closely interviewed the seven-year-old Dylan Farrow back in 1992 and told the authorities they believed the allegations were false.

Human Memory: If the Abuse Didn’t Happen, Does This Mean that Dylan is Lying?

Many of the Woody Allen critics have asked the question, “Why would Dylan lie after all these years? She has nothing to gain at this point.” This type of question completely misses the point.

Contrary to popular belief, human memory is not like a video camera, which records what happens and then plays it back verbatim later. Rather, our memories are like quicksand, constantly shifting and moving underneath us. Cognitive psychologist and leading memory expert Dr. Elizabeth Loftus makes the analogy to Wikipedia. Not only do we constantly edit our own memories (usually without realizing that we are doing so), but others edit our memories as well, even implanting false ones without us knowing it. Study after study shows how easy it is for false memories to be implanted, particularly in children. Anyone who doubts this phenomenon should watch this 15-minute video, and read the sources here,herehereherehere and here.

Once a false memory is implanted, the subject cannot tell the difference from a real one, and will often “remember” intricate details that did not happen. The subject will typically cling to the false memory with confidence throughout his or her lifetime.

The prevailing belief in the early 1990s, when this story first broke, was that children would not make up false allegations of sexual abuse. We have subsequently learned after uncovering hundreds of wrongful convictions in this area, however, that children typically don’t “make up” false charges, but rather, can have false memories implanted merely by the suggestion of well-meaning but over-excited adults. The environment where this occurs typically includes certain common factors, such as the parent who “discovers” the abuse is in a state of extreme anger or a panicked state as a result of a dispute with the adult who is later accused (such as when a divorce or custody battle is brewing); the interviewing process is not conducted by a professional trained in protecting child memory, but rather, by someone who is excited, suspicious, or paranoid, and who asks leading questions and inadvertently makes suggestions to the child; or the questioning occurs in a hysterical or “witch-hunt” type environment.

There is evidence to support the idea that Dylan Farrow’s allegations against Woody Allen may have arisen in circumstances where these factors were present. The allegations arose months after Mia Farrow learned thatWoody had started a relationship with Mia’s adopted daughter Soon-Yi (who was either 19 or 21 at the time–her birth in Korea was undocumented). Mia was reportedly beyond enraged with Allen, and became quite unstable at the time as well (she allegedly repeatedly threatened Allen’s life and even staged her own fake suicide).

This is not to take shots at Mia Farrow. She was understandably extremely distraught and had good reason to hate Woody Allen. I bring this up simply to describe the atmosphere under which the allegations may have arisen, because they mirror the atmosphere that is present in many false allegation cases. Indeed, in a staggering 81% of the documented wrongful convictions in child sexual abuse cases listed in the National Registry of Exonerations, false accusations arising under such circumstances were the cause of the wrongful conviction.

Later, the Connecticut State Police brought in a team of psychiatrists and child molestation investigators from Yale-New Haven Hospital, who after a six-month investigation determined that Dylan had not been molested byWoody Allen. Why? It appears that Dylan could not tell a consistent story when not being coached by her mother (a big red flag), and many signs pointed to the fact that the original allegations had come about as a result of coaching (including a video recording of the allegations that Farrow allegedly directed by stopping and starting the tape and “coaching up” a disinterested young Dylan).

Since then, various witnesses have described the pressure that Mia Farrow brought to bear on all of the children–and even nannies–to go along with the story. Mia’s son Moses, now tellingly a family therapist, described what he called “brainwashing” by Farrow, adding:

“Of course Woody did not molest my sister. My mother drummed it into me to hate my father for tearing apart the family and sexually molesting my sister. And I hated him for her for years. I see now that this was a vengeful way to pay him back for falling in love with Soon-Yi.”

Even nannies have discussed how they were pressured by Farrow to go along with the story, even though important parts of the story perhaps weren’t true.

Additional details about some of the incongruities that caused investigators to doubt the truth of the allegations are set forth here.  Another interesting article here.

Mia Farrow’s apparent zeal has not fully let up after two decades, as she and her son Ronan (a small child when all this went down) have made a cottage industry out of blasting Woody Allen at every opportunity. Interestingly,Woody Allen almost never responds, other than to occasionally deny the allegations for the umpteenth time. When asked about Mia Farrow through the years, he typically responds with comments about her excellent acting abilities and leaves it at that. Woody Allen did decide to respond, however, to the recent “open letter” to him by Dylan Farrow, which he calls his final word on the subject.

Some who have supported the allegations as valid have pointed to findings by the judge who granted custody of the children to Mia Farrow. And, of course, as in any complicated case, there will be conflicting evidence on nearly every point.

Regarding the custody decision, the judge did not find that Woody Allen abused Dylan, but he was very critical of Allen and discounted his claims that Mia Farrow had coached Dylan into making false allegations. A few points need to be made about this, if one wants to be open about looking at both sides. First, the decision was issued in 1993. Some of the evidence of coaching outlined above–including clear statements by one of the children who now calls Mia Farrow’s conduct “brainwashing”–had not come out yet, and thus, were not known or considered by the judge. Also, as stated above, the common belief in 1993 was that children did not make up sexual abuse allegations, and in fact, many believed children were incapable of doing so. The explosion in the field of child memory and susceptibility to suggestion that has occurred since 1993, however, can shed a completely different light on that decision.

Woody Allen has alleged that politics played a role in that decision (which, in my experience, is often the case). Even if Allen’s claim is not true, the decision is just what it purports to be–a decision from 1993 that reflects incomplete facts and scientific understandings from more than two decades ago.

Second, and most importantly, Woody Allen and Soon-Yi have adopted two children. Their suitability as parents has subsequently been examined in light of modern scientific understandings and the current state of the evidence. They were found to be good candidates for adoption and now have their own children. Those who point to an outdated decision from a bygone scientific era need to consider the full story before reaching a conclusion.

There are two sides to every story. If the allegations happen to be false, does this mean that Dylan is lying? Of course not. Of course she believes it happened. She was seven years old when this took place. Given the way it may have gone down, and the zeal with which all the children were pressured for decades to believe the allegations and hate Woody Allen, if true, it would be surprising if not shocking if she could separate real from false memories at this point.  The article here demonstrates how it is not uncommon for false memories to be created in alleged child abuse cases.

Indeed, Dylan sadly is a victim regardless of whether the allegations are true or not. The mere fact that sibling Moses–now a family therapist presumably trained to deal with issues like this–can untangle himself from that pressure as an adult, and recognize that the allegations raise serious questions, is the truly surprising thing given how we now know that memory works.

Contrary to Popular Belief, Allen’s Relationship With Soon-Yi Does Not Support the Notion that He is a Pedophile

Another point the lynch mob has brought up on Facebook or Twitter typically goes something like this, “He married his own adopted daughter, Soon-Yi, who was originally adopted by his own wife. What a creep. Of course he molested Dylan. His relationship with Soon-Yi tells you all you need to know about his pedophilic tendencies.”

A couple points need to be made here. First of all, as the article here does a great job of detailing, Woody Allen was not married to Mia Farrow, nor did he live with Mia and her kids. Soon-Yi was not Woody’s daughter–Soon-Yi had her own dad. As documentary filmmaker Robert Weide has said:

“If anyone is creeped out by the notion of a 55-year old man becoming involved with his girlfriend’s 19-year old adopted daughter, I understand. That makes perfect sense. But why not get the facts straight? If the actual facts are so repugnant to you, then why embellish them?”

Again, whether Soon-Yi was 19 or 21 when their relationship started, Woody Allen is famous for dating younger women, including Mia Farrow, Stacey Nelkin (who strenuously defends Allen against these charges) and others. He also has had many long relationships with women closer to his own age, such as Diane Keaton. But this penchant for much younger women does not support the notion that Woody Allen has a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent seven-year-olds.

Indeed, pedophilia is a specific sexual orientation known for its high level of recidivism. Pedophiles who act on their attractions typically prey on many, many children over their lifetimes. Although many sexual assaults by pedophiles unfortunately go unreported, the pattern is that other victims will come out of the woodwork when the first allegation goes public (like we saw with the Jerry Sandusky case).

Some may dislike Woody Allen for being attracted to younger members of the opposite sex. That is their prerogative, of course, and they presumably also dislike Paul McCartney, Demi Moore, Katie Couric, Madonna, Jennifer Lopez and Frank Sinatra (who, in his late 40s, began dating Mia Farrow when she was only 19).

Some may also dislike Woody Allen for dating–and then marrying and adopting children with–the adopted daughter of his former girlfriend. That view is also entirely reasonable. I am not condoning Woody Allen’s judgment on this score, or claiming that his actions were appropriate.  I would not criticize anyone who dislikes or is “creeped out” by Woody Allen for this reason.  That is their prerogative.

But those who cite to Woody Allen’s 20-plus-year relationship with Soon-Yi as a basis for the validity of Dylan’s claims should at least be intellectually honest and recognize that his well-established pattern of being attracted to physically mature women tends to undermine–rather than support–the notion that Woody Allen suffers from the specific sexual disorder of pedophilia and is therefore attracted to seven-year-olds.

Annie Hall

Woody Allen has not been the only victim of the lynch mob. Many have turned their aggression towards actress Diane Keaton for presenting the Cecil B. Demille Award to Woody Allen at the 2014 Golden Globe Awards. She has been lambasted for such things as “supporting an abuser” and “spitting in the face of the many, many victims of child sex abuse.”

It is widely known that not only was Diane Keaton Woody Allen’s girlfriend for many years, but that she has remained one of his closest friends for decades. It is amazing to me that the virtual villagers, most of whom know nothing of the actual facts of the case, would presume to know more about the situation than a woman who knew the various players in the drama, including Mia and Dylan Farrow. As Alec Baldwin tweeted back when he was similarly attacked by the lynch mob for appearing in Allen’s movies:

“So you know who’s guilty? Who’s lying? You, personally, know that?”

Diane Keaton likely would have extensive knowledge of the dynamics that produced the allegations. The attacks on Diane Keaton are patronizing and dismissive, suggesting that she is not capable of forming her own well-educated opinion on a matter that she likely knows more about than anyone else in the world save a few people.

It takes considerable courage to stand up to a nationwide lynch mob. Diane Keaton’s bravery should be admired.

The Takeaway Lesson

In the end, I can’t say with certainty whether or not Allen is innocent. For every piece of evidence cited by either side, someone can point to a conflicting piece of evidence. There are often two sides to stories. But I can say that there is evidence here to raise serious doubt as to the reliability of the allegations. I would go so far as to say that I believe anyone who has spent years investigating allegedly false child molestation charges, and who has studied the research regarding implanted memories in children, would look at this case and say just what the Yale-New Haven Hospital child psychiatrists said all the way back in 1992–that these allegations are problematic. In other words, there is another side to the story.

I wonder if those who condemn Woody Allen have ever stopped to consider the other possibility. That perhaps Allen is innocent. That perhaps one of the greatest filmmakers of all time has withstood years of deep sadness and anguish (and lower box office revenues and occasional snubs at the Oscars, etc.), as a result of being wrongfully convicted in the court of public opinion and having his beloved children brainwashed to hate him. And that just when he has started to recover from this tragedy, and his movies have returned to their earlier form (causing him to receive a major award), the attackers have come back out of the woodwork to stir up the lynch mob once again.

Those who would condemn Woody Allen–or condemn anyone for that matter–should, of course, always do some homework before they judge. They also should consider the repercussions of reacting with vitriol and aggression before they know the facts. Indeed, to condemn in kneejerk fashion could be to unknowingly grab a torch and pitchfork and hang an innocent person.

It should be clear that I have concerns, based on my experience, that the allegations against Woody Allen could be false, and, if so, arose from a perfect storm of unfortunate circumstances that have, in similar cases, resulted in false allegations of this kind. But does this mean I should freely attack Mia Farrow? No. Why? Because I could be wrong.

The takeaway lesson from the Innocence Movement and all the wrongful convictions it has uncovered is that we humans see and interpret facts in a skewed manner according to our own deep biases, that we are much worse than we admit at uncovering the truth, and that, in the end, we must be very careful before we judge and condemn. Things are not always what they seem.

Although I believe, based on studying the case for years and my experience in these matters, that the allegations against Woody Allen may very well be false, I recognize that I can never really know with certainty what happened here. But the hysterical lynch mob currently carrying Woody Allen to the nearest tree frighteningly knows even less.

Thursday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • In Florida, bill to compensate death row exoneree James Joseph Richardson passes first test in the Senate
  • Despite request of Senators from both parties, Obama Administration says it is unlikely to posthumously pardon heavyweight boxing champion Jack Johnson for racially motivated conviction
  • During the full-day workshop held Monday, February 17, 2014 at the 66th Annual Scientific Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) in Seattle, Washington, Andrew Sulner, Barry Scheck, and other distinguished experts will provide attendees with concrete examples and a clear picture of how cognitive and motivational bias can affect the outcome of forensic investigations and lead to miscarriages of justice in both criminal and civil cases, and how lawyers can exclude or impeach expert testimony that may have been tainted by bias.  More here….
  • Edgar Coker Jr. exonerated by U of Virginia clinic
  • Exoneree Ryan Ferguson talks about adjusting to normal life

New Scholarship Spotlight: Cognitive bias in forensic anthropology

Itiel Dror and others have posted the newest piece on the issue of confirmation bias in forensics.  If you haven’t been introduced to Dror’s body of work yet, check it out here.  The abstract of the newest paper, which can be downloaded in full here, states:

An experimental study was designed to examine cognitive biases within forensic anthropological non-metric methods in assessing sex, ancestry and age at death. To investigate examiner interpretation, forty-one non- novice participants were semi randomly divided into three groups. Prior to conducting the assessment of the skeletal remains, two of the groups were given different extraneous contextual information regarding the sex, ancestry and age at death of the individual. The third group acted as a control group with no extraneous contex- tual information. The experiment was designed to investigate if the interpretation and conclusions of the skeletal remains would differ amongst participants within the three groups, and to assess whether the examiners would confirm or disagree with the given extraneous context when establishing a biological profile. The results revealed a significant biasing effect within the three groups, demonstrating a strong confirmation bias in the assessment of sex, ancestry and age at death. In assessment of sex, 31% of the participants in the control group concluded that the skeleton remains were male. In contrast, in the group that received contextual information that the remains were male, 72% concluded that the remains were male, and in the participant group where the context was that the remains were of a female, 0% of the participants concluded that the remains were male. Comparable results showing bias were found in assessing ancestry and age at death. These data demonstrate that cognitive bias can impact forensic anthropological non-metric methods on skeletal remains and affects the interpretation and con- clusions of the forensic scientists. This empirical study is a step in establishing an evidence base approach for dealing with cognitive issues in forensic anthropological assessments, so as to enhance this valuable forensic sci- ence discipline.

Tuesday’s Quick Clicks…

click

Insane DNA Testing Decision in Texas…

Decision here

How can you prove that biological material exists to text on the items in question unless you do the testing?  Boggles the mind…

From the Austin Chronicle, by Jordan Smith…

Death row inmate Larry Swearingen cannot prove that biological materials exist on evidence connected to the 1998 murder of Melissa Trotter – including on the alleged murder weapon – and therefore is not entitled to DNA testing of those items, the Court of Criminal Appeals ruled this morning.

Swearingen was convicted and sentenced to die for the 1998 murder of 19-year-old Trotter, a Montgomery County community college student who disappeared from her college campus on Dec. 8, 1998. Her body was found several weeks later, by a group of hunters, in the Sam Houston National Forest near Lake Conroe.

Swearingen was seen with Trotter on campus not long before she disappeared. He has maintained his innocence and has been seeking DNA testing for a decade. Among the never-before-tested items of evidence are two lengths of pantyhose – one used to strangle Trotter, found around her neck, the other later found by Swearingen’s former landlord inside a house Swearingen and his wife had previously rented from the man.

The state maintains that visual comparison proves the two pieces came from a single pair of hose. Neither piece has ever been subjected to DNA analysis.

In ruling against Swearingen on Wednesday, Judge Paul Womack wrote for the unanimous court that a district court ruling that last year approved the requested DNA testing would be overturned because Swearingen “cannot prove the existence of biological material” that could be tested. Although the defense presented to the district court expert testimony that biological evidence would “likely” be found on the pantyhose that is not enough to secure testing, the court ruled. “[W]e have explicitly held that appellee must prove biological material exists and not that it is merely probable.”

In other words, without testing, there can be no testing.

The court’s conclusion also precludes any testing of cigarette butts found near Trotter’s body or of Trotter’s clothes, absent a showing that biological material exists on each item.

Only finger nail scrapings taken from Trotter are considered “biological evidence per se” and thus not restricted by the need to prove DNA exists before testing can be done. Only some of the collected scrapings were tested, and material found from under one of Trotter’s fingernails produced DNA from an unknown male.

Still, that result is not enough to convince the court that if additional testing were to be performed it would do anything to convince a jury of Swearingen’s innocence. “In order to be entitled to DNA testing,” Womack wrote for the court, “[Swearingen] must show by a preponderance of the evidence (51%) that he would not have been convicted if the exculpatory results were available at trial.”

Indeed, the unidentified profile previously identified was presented to Swearingen’s jury, the court notes, apparently without effect. “Since the jury already was aware that an unidentified male’s DNA was found under the victim’s fingernails, we fail to see how other such results would have changed its verdict,” Womack wrote. “The jury chose to believe that the foreign DNA either was contamination or that it came rom outside the context of the crime.” In short, the court concluded, Swearingen “cannot show that new testing would lead to a different result.”

During a December hearing on the matter before the CCA, Montgomery County prosecutor Bill Delmore told the court that the mountain of circumstantial evidence against Swearingen is insurmountable and that even if further DNA testing revealed additional evidence from another male – even from a known “serial killer” – that he would conclude only that Swearingen had an accomplice. “Nothing will ever convince me of his innocence,” Delmore said.

 

 

Taiwan Association for Innocence Wins First Case….

Taiwan High Court Granted Retrial Based on New DNA Evidence

by Yu Ning Chen

In December 2013, Taiwan High Court granted Chen Long-Qi. a retrial based on new DNA Evidence. Chen became the first person to be granted retrial since the Taiwan Association for Innocence was founded in 2012.

On March 24, 2009, two escorts were raped between 4 to 6 AM in a warehouse that Chen and his friend rented for agricultural products distribution. The victims failed to identify the assailants due to alcohol intoxication.

Chen always maintained his innocence during the investigation and trial. He claimed that he left before the crime to pick up his wife, Ko, at her workplace. Ko’s timesheet corroborated Chen’s words. An eyewitness also testified that Chen was not at the scene. Despite no testimony linking Chen to the crime, the district court and high court found him guilty of gang rape with the other two co-defendants. The decision was solely based on a DNA test which concluded  that Chen “cannot be excluded “ from the semen stain found on one of the victims’ underwear . Chen was convicted of gang sexual assault and was sentenced to 4 years in March, 2013.

With help from the Taiwan Association for Innocence, Chen filed a motion for retrial in June, 2013 seeking to retest the DNA evidence. The court authorized a 23 loci STR test on the original mixture DNA sample. The new test result showed that Chen “can be excluded” from the DNA sample. Based on this new piece of evidence, the court granted his motion in December 2013. The retrial will begin this month.

Wednesday’s Quick Clicks…

click
  • The unintended consequences of compensating the exonerated
  • Canada’s system for reviewing alleged wrongful convictions “failing miserably”
  • West Virginia University Law Innocence Project pushes interrogation recording bill
  •  What does a record number of U.S. exonerations in 2013 tell us?
  • ESPN video on the wrongful accusation against Richard Jewel for the 1996 Atlanta Olympics bombing
  • Ex-cop exonerated after 20 years in prison awarded $9 million
  • Mexican lawyers turned filmmakers win civil suit against them brought by family of victim in wrongful conviction case they exposed through the documentary Presumed Guilty
  • Planned changes in UK’s compensation laws for exonerees will make it nearly impossible to obtain compensation after wrongful conviction
  • New Zealand Innocence Project re-ignites debate about the need for a wrongful convictions commission
  • Idaho Innocence Project client Sarah Pearce may soon be released—settlement discussions ongoing

Last Meals of the Wrongfully Executed…

Moving photo display of the last meals of wrongfully executed inmates here