STORY: "Under scrutiny: Bite mark testimony in death row cases," by reporter Jimmie E. Gates, Published by The Clarion Ledger on November 10, 2017.
PHOTO CAPTION: "Jackson resident Cedric Willis discusses his life since being released from prison after serving 12 years for a crime he didn't
commit. DNA evidence exonerated Willis 10 years ago."
GIST: "Decades
after controversial bite mark testimony by then-forensic dentist
Michael West helped send many defendants to death row, courts in the
state are still wrestling with what action to take in the cases of those
convicted. Bite mark forensic
dentistry has been discredited over the years, and even West has
testified that DNA evidence should be used instead of bite mark
evidence. Last month, the Mississippi Supreme Court
ordered a new trial for a former death row inmate convicted in part
because of West's testimony and the court is awaiting a ruling by a
circuit judge in another case in which West testified. Over
the years, several men, including Kennedy Brewer and Levon Brooks, convicted at trials in which West's testimony or opinion was used
have been declared wrongly convicted and released from prison after
serving lengthy sentences. No
one knows for certain how many post-conviction cases there are
involving the testimony of West, said Tucker Carrington, director of
Mississippi Innocence Project at the University of Mississippi in
Oxford. Carrington said West also testified in cases in Arkansas, Louisiana and Ohio. Westlaw,
the online legal research service, shows 17 results in Mississippi
where West's bite mark evidence was questioned. However, some of the
results involved the same defendants. The
Innocence Project is representing Sherwood Brown, 49, whose capital
murder conviction and death sentence were thrown out and a new trial
ordered by the state high court. Brown was
convicted and sentenced to death in 1995 in DeSoto County for the 1993
hacking deaths of Betty Boyd, 82, and her daughter-in-law, Verline Boyd,
49. He also was convicted and sentenced to death in the killing of
Verline's daughter, Evangelo Charmain Boyd, 13. The teen was
also sexually assaulted. In
2012, the state high court ruled Brown could try to prove he didn't
commit the crimes through biological evidence if any existed. The court
said if DNA evidence existed, the lower court judge could order DNA
testing. The
main evidence the state used against Brown were two partial bloody shoe
prints found in the home where the three were murdered. When Brown was
arrested, a pair of his Fila sneakers was confiscated. The sneakers was
sent to the FBI for analysis and the FBI found traces of blood on the
front portion of the left sneaker's sole. The prosecution alleged Brown
had left the partial bloody shoe prints at the crime scene. Also,
the prosecution used West, then a Hattiesburg forensic odontologist,
who determined during the investigation that a large cut on Brown's
wrist was a bite mark from Evangela Boyd. West was unavailable to
testify at Brown's trial because he was testifying at another high
profile trial — that of Kennedy Brewer in Lowndes County. Another
odontologist testified at Brown's trial based on the earlier analysis
by West that the cut was a bite mark left by Boyd, according to court
records. DNA
testing of Evangela's saliva sample taken during her autopsy concluded
Brown's DNA wasn't in her saliva sample. Also, DNA testing of the blood
on the shoe determined it was male blood and didn't correspond to any of
the blood in the bloody shoe print from the crime scene that was
tested. All the victims were female. In last
month's opinion, Justice Josiah Coleman wrote that "Having considered
all pertinent materials, including the motion and attached exhibits, the
state's response, Brown's rebuttal, and the record filed and opinion
issued in Brown's direct appeal, the court finds the motion is
well-taken and should be granted." Coleman wrote the case should be reversed and the case remanded to DeSoto County Circuit Court for a new trial. "The
relief afforded herein is extraordinary and extremely rare in the
context of a petition for leave to pursue post-conviction collateral
relief, and we limit the relief we today grant to the facts of the
above-styled case," Coleman noted. Another case is
death row inmate Eddie Lee Howard Jr., 64. The state Supreme Court
recently asked for an update on the status of Howard's post-conviction
appeal in Circuit Court. The
Mississippi Innocence Project is also representing Howard in the
appeal. The Innocence Project argues Howard deserves a new trial, that
DNA evidence excludes Howard in the 1992 rape and stabbing death of an
84-year-old woman in Columbus. It was West's testimony that bite marks on the 84-year-old woman's body after it was exhumed matched Howard's teeth. Special Assistant Attorney General Jason Davis argued in court papers that Howard wasn't innocent. He
said Howard now comes to the court once again challenging the
reliability of the bite mark testimony of West, under the guise of
newly discovered evidence based upon the deposition transcript in which
West is questioned regarding bite mark evidence. "While
Dr. West states therein, that he no longer offers testimony regarding
bite mark evidence, deferring to DNA testing instead, he expressly
rejects any suggestion that his prior testimony in cases in which he
gave such testimony was incorrect," Davis wrote. Davis
said the deposition transcript doesn't constitute evidence that if at
the initial trial, would have caused a different result in the
conviction or sentence. Carrington said it will be after Jan. 1, when written court briefs are filed in the case. In
2009, the National Academy of Sciences issued a report, concluding
there was no basis in science for forensic odontologists to conclude
someone is "the biter," excluding all other suspects. Four years later,
the American Board of Forensic Odontology changed its guidelines to bar
such testimony."
http://www.clarionledger.com/story/news/2017/11/10/death-row-cases-bite-mark-testimony-under-scrutiny/839634001/
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/c
The entire story can be found at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/c
