George Perrot was convicted in 1992 for the rape of an elderly woman. The rape occurred in 1985 when he was 17 years old and the evidence used in this case focused on a single stand of hair found at the crime scene (Stumpf, 2016). Perrot spent 30 years of his life in jail prior to being released in 2016 because the FBI analysis was based on flawed science , which focused on a single hair that contained the victim’s blood (Pleasance, 2016). During the trial the microscopic analysis of the hair was described by the FBI agent who indicated that the hair came from Perrot and boasted his authority as a trained person in reaching this conclusion(Pleasance, 2016). The prosecutor in the case indicated this strand of hair was evidence, which proved
Imagine spending a quarter of one’s life in prison for a crime one didn’t commit. This is what happened to Michael Morton back on February 17, 1987, when he was sentenced to life in prison for the murder of his wife even though there wasn’t real evidence linking him to the murder. There was no scientific evidence, no eyewitness, no murder weapon, or a believable motive. He was their only suspect, and the only thing they had on him that made him look guilty was the statement of the medical examiner Dr. Roberto Bayardo who placed Christine Morton’s time of death at 1:15 AM that morning before Michael left for work. The medical testimony had convinced the jurors that the wife had died while Michael was still in the house. Christine died of eight
When Wayne Williams was trialed for the death of two victims, DNA testing was not a reliable source in courtrooms as evident (Polk, 2015). A conviction could have been rendered without the fiber evidence in this case. The prosecution had a strong case in providing the evidence from the DNA of the hair obtained from the crime scene. On February 13, 1981, when Patrick Baltazar's body was found dumped down a wooded slope behind an office park (Polk, 2015). A forensic scientist discovered two human scalp hairs inside Baltazar's shirt. The DNA sample was tested under a microscope by both the FBI and Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Polk, 2015). The hair sample was consistent with Wayne William's DNA. This placed William at the scene of the crime. The
In McClure, Weisburd and Wilson (2008) summary article arguing that in addition to bench science, field experimentation involving forensic methods is key to assess the utility of various methods to solve crimes. The study reflected that there is a need for more research into many aspects of forensic science, criticizing the strength of scientific evidence that’s collected at a crime scene and interpretations of most forensic methods while omitting DNA testing. McClure et al’s (2008) explains that in sexual cases and homicides, the presence of DNA evidence actually increased the likelihood of prosecution and a conviction. According to the article “…the case of convictions, the odds-ratio for the presence of DNA evidence was 33.1 for sexual offenses and 23.1 for homicides” (McClure et al., 2008). Subsequently, the research shows that there was a consistent gradual decline in the national homicide rates that began in the 1900s and continued through into the 21st century. The decline of homicides in the US has dropped by from more than 90% in the 1960s to 62% in 2003. Even though this significant drop has occurred during the introduction of the new DNA testing
Steven Avery did not give up and tried to prove his innocence. He tried in 1995 with some evidence under Beersten’s fingernails. While it revealed that it matched an unknown assailant, it didn’t eliminate Avery (Weghorst & Warden). In 2002, an attorney from Wisconsin Innocence Project got a court order to analyze the pubic hair collected in the rape kit, which was submitted to be compare to FBI databases. The hair did not match Avery, but did match Gregory Allen, who also lived around the area (Davey, 2005). In an article written by Susan Smith, she described this revelation as a “Cold Hit” because neither the scientist nor the police were looking for Gregory Allen despise the fact that there were several factors that would make him a suspect (Smith, 2006). On September 11, 2003, this revelation also made a joint motion by Manitowoc District Attorney’s Office and the Wisconsin Innocence Project to dismiss all the charges against Avery. The motion was granted and Steven Avery was released (Possley).
Spohn, Beichner, and Davis-Frenzel do not conduct a field study as Frohmann does, instead they examined all sexual assault cases cleared by arrest in Miami Florida in 1997. They did however replicate Frohmann’s design of interviewing a sample of the prosecutors who handled the cases. By using this different method of research, Spohn, Beichner, and Davis-Frenzel’s are able to show the frequency in which prosecutors used discrepant accounts and ulterior motives to reject cases. This extends upon Frohmann’s research. Their findings that, “charging decisions primarily reflect the prosecutor’s assessment of the likelihood of conviction” (Spohn, et al. 2001, p. 206) is consistent with Frohmann 's Findings. They also agreed with Frohmann’s categories of typifications, however they found that a substantial amount of cases were rejected for reasons other than discrediting the victim such as, the victim’s failure to appear for a pretrial interview, refusal to cooperate in the prosecution of the case, or admission that the charges were fabricated (Spohn, et al. 2001).
Cotton Mather had an issue with how Bishop’s case was handled, and how the court proceeded with other cases much like hers during this time. He sought to purge the court system of the use of spectral evidence as grounds for conviction. He felt like a man’s word was not enough to prove someone innocent or guilty, but that one needed hard evidence in order to ensure that the ruling was just. Mather’s “call[ed] for caution in his publications
One of several errors in the trial was a reckless omission by a forensic scientist who testified for the prosecution. Semen was found on the victim’s body, the scientist testified, and Dominguez’s blood type matched the semen sample, meaning he could have been the perpetrator. The scientist did not tell the jury, however, that two-thirds of men in America would have matched that sample. Dominguez was convicted and sentenced to nine years in prison. He was released after serving four years and sought DNA testing at his own expense. The tests proved his innocence. His case is one of many in which limited forensic science or wrong forensic testimony has led to wrongful convictions.
I. Before the 1980’s, courts relied on testimony and eyewitness accounts as a main source of evidence. Notoriously unreliable, these techniques have since faded away to the stunning reliability of DNA forensics.
False confessions have been a leading factor in destroying the lives of many innocent people. Since the advances of technology, victims of false confessions have been exonerated from the charges previously placed on them while others are still fighting for innocence or died a criminal. One technological advance that has exonerated many individuals is DNA testing. According to Randy James, DNA testing was discovered in 1985 and was first used in court to convict Tommie Lee Andrews (Time, 2009). Today many Americans are convicted because of false confessions that have not yet been overturned with new evidence (Kassin, 2014). Although DNA testing has led to freedom for many innocent Americans, there are still many innocent people who are locked
With the number of DNA exonerations growing in the recent years, wrongful convictions reveal disturbing trends and fissures in the justice system. It shows how broken the system is, and why it needs urgent fixing. According to Huff (1996), over ten thousand people are convicted wrongfully for serious crimes each year. This study established that factors leading to wrongful convictions are false eyewitnesses, a prejudiced jury, incompetent prosecutors, and suspects’ ignorance. Where DNA evidence clears a suspect, array of reasons emerge; misconduct, mistakes, to race and class factors. It is important to make DNA data available to attorneys in order to enable them mount a strong
Miscarriages of justices occur due to many variables including faulty or wrong confessions, faulty identifications, wrongful DNA evidence, and the police’s overreach of power. On February 9, 1978, a student from the College of William and Mary, located in Williamsburg, Virginia was sexually assaulted at gunpoint. When the police arrived at the scene, she described her assailant as an African-American male about 5’6 in height and weighing around 145. Having gathered this information, the victim agreed to identify her assailant through photo arrays at the police station. Bennett Barbour was identified arrested and in the span of about two months was charged with rape on April 14, 1978. Despite having an alibi, not matching the victim’s description, and having brittle bone disease Barbour was declared guilty by a jury. Barbour’s case is representative of the many cases in which wrongful eyewitness testimony produces miscarriages of justice. Bennett Barbour served 5 years in prison and 29 years of parole until he was cleared of his charges due to DNA evidence when the Virginia Supreme Court cleared his charges.
The DNA from the saliva was a perfect match with the DNA from the semen collected from the rape victims. Puetz, the investigator on the case defends the constitutionality of his evidence-gathering methods; the courts, he says, have held that once you've put out your trash, you've waived your right to keep the contents private, and "I don't see why the same wont hold true for saliva."(Adler).
A review of false convictions that involved forensic science and can help identify critical lessons for forensic scientists as they perform testing, interpret results, render conclusions, and testify in court from the national institute of justice.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss and analyze the practices conducted by law enforcement during the investigation of the murder of Ashley Smith. The following pages will discuss the crime scene investigation, the evidence collection, the investigative steps following the initial crime scene investigation, the interviews of witnesses and suspects, and other strategies performed by the acting case investigators. Constitutional challenges have surfaced regarding specific pieces of critical evidence and a section of this paper will analyze the admissibility of this evidence. Lastly this case’s law enforcement processes will be contrasted with textbook processes in an effort to determine the validity of the case’s outcome.
In 1987 in Texas, a prosecutor was faced with this dilemma. Michael Morton was convicted of murdering his wife based on circumstantial evidence. Morton’s defense attorney was never told about, or given access to, the police report in which Morton’s three year old son had told police that his daddy had not killed his mommy. After serving 25 years for murdering his wife, Morton was exonerated after attorneys were finally given access to the police report and DNA testing of a bloody bandana found at the scene of the murder matched a man who was serving a sentence for the murder of another woman.