Hank Skinner says he’s innocent.  He’s asking for DNA testing to be done.  Seems there were knives and things at the scene of the crime that hold DNA evidence — but no one has ever checked that evidence against Skinner’s DNA to confirm his claim of innocence. 

Right now, there is a request pending before the United States Supreme Court, based on this evidence issue, which would get Skinner a stay.  As this is being typed, there’s no news from Washington, D.C. that Skinner’s getting a response from them. 

There’s also a request setting on Governor Rick Perry’s desk.  Skinner is asking the Governor to give him a 30 day reprieve, so this DNA testing can be done.  Again, checking the news as this post is being typed — zip from Austin.

However, there has been one bit of news:  the Ambassador of France — yep, FRANCE — has officially asked Governor Perry to grant the reprieve or just go ahead and pardon Skinner.  It gets better.  Seems Skinner is married to a French woman, and the PRESIDENT of France has also offered his support to Mrs. Skinner, Sandrine Ageorges-Skinner.   Wow.

You’d think that if the idea that an innocent man might be fixin’ to die at the hands of a Texas executioner would be enough for Governor Perry to halt things and do some DNA testing.   Here it is, lunchtime on Execution Day and we’re hearing zip.  So, maybe the fact that an entire country is asking for a double check to be done might sway things. 

Of course, they can’t vote in November.  They’re French. 

Our thoughts and prayers go to Hank Skinner, his legal team, and his family.  May God bless you all on this terrible day.

1. EDUARDO “WALO” BAZAN, Hidalgo County constable, convicted of felony theft (probated) for taking a seized, stolen truck for his personal use. He’s been reelected to office, though this case was affirmed on appeal. Who knows whether he’s acting with authority right now; and  
2. LARRY DALE FLOYD, Denton county constable, removed from office after he faced accusations of child pornography here in Texas and something more sinister, trying to have sex with an eight year old, up in Colorado.

Now, reading the first two in this list, you’d think maybe the News was just organizing county constables who got into some trouble, since there’s also coverage in the News on the Dallas County Constable Cortes controversy.

You’d be wrong.

The next two in their list are ERNEST GERARD MIRELES, formerly the Maverick County attorney, who resigned after allegations wree filed against him that he wasn’t even in the county for months; and SAUL OCHOA, another constable.  Ochoa, out of Cameron County, was busted for selling marijuana that had been seized in drug busts – he was convicted and sentenced to prison.  

And then their list ends.  Wassup with that?

Here on this blog (both here and in our Blogger version), we’ve made it a raison d’etre to keep watch on Texas officials — whether they’re judges, prosecutors, or law enforcment officials, that are doing Bad Things. 

And our list (if you’d like to surf thru the categories over there to the right, categories like “Judge Watch” and “Cop Watch”) is a WHOLE LOT LONGER THAN FOUR NAMES.  These folk not only faced removal, they’ve faced serious jail time. 

1. For example, what about federal district judge Samuel Kent, the first federal judge ever accused of sex crimes, and who is now serving time in the pen?
2. Former state district judge and Ombudsman of the Texas Youth Commission, Cathy Evans, who faced a felony indictment for smuggling stuff into a prison facility?
3. Texas district judge Manuel Barraza, busted by the FBI last spring for taking bribes?
4. Montague County Sheriff Bill Keating, who copped a plea to get 10 years in a federal pen?
5. Refugio’s Chief of Police Chris Brock indicted last fall for felony theft (among other charges)?

There’s lots more.  We’d be happy to compare notes with the Dallas Morning News, if they’re interested.  Because there’s a lot more corruption in our state than that piddly little list of four names would lead you to believe, sad to say.

For example, just last month the Houston Chronicle reported that the fingerprint comparison unit of the Houston Police Department was being investigated for untrustworthy results, “shoddy” work, and a backlog of over 600 cases.  (We’ve already reported on how FINGERPRINTS just aren’t reliable anymore.) 

Forensic Lab Oversight Agency Efforts are Being Questioned

However, the media spotlight on the execution of an innocent man here in Texas, Cameron Todd Willingham, really fueled the fire — why wasn’t the “arson” evidence refuted as faulty back at trial time?  Suddenly, the little known Texas Forensic Science Commission (an agency established to oversee the state’s crime labs) was in the hot seat. 

And the Texas Forensic Science Commission doesn’t appear to like this much. 

Under the Texas Open Records Act, the news media can gain access to all public information held by the Texas Forensic Science Commission.  However, it’s been easier said than done since the FSC has used the lingo within that statute to try and hold onto its files, holding on hard.  The Fort Worth Star Telegram asked for information, and the FSC fought against turning stuff over to the paper. 

The Commission’s white-knuckled grip did get released a bit, after the Texas Attorney General (yep, the state’s highest attorney had to get involved) ruled that the FSC had to release some of the info that the newspaper requested, as it was indeed, “public” information.  The Fort Worth Star Telegram finally got a part of what it asked for — a week after the AG said they had to do it.

Forensic Science Commission’s Revelations Are Serious and Worrisome

What was included in the information that the FSC was forced to release?  Well, of immediate interest to those of us practicing in the Dallas area, the revelation that someone who used to work at the Southwestern Institute of Forensic Sciences was a whistleblower, telling the FSC all about faulty DNA analysis, tainted rape kits, and unreliable blood stock.  That’s right — bad forensics right here, at the Dallas crime lab.  

This is all very, very scary and should be concerning all of us.  Both the police and the state prosecutors as well as  juries and the public at large tend to bow down to Forensic Evidence as if it were, indeed, revelations from On High.  Don’t forget that the Austin Police are going so far as to use DNA evidence to track down burglars these days ….

What Can We Do?  Criminal Defense Lawyers Can Fight Back Now – Thanks to the United States Supreme Court

Meanwhile, the United States Supreme Court is getting involved.  As we’ve discussed, whether or not police lab experts can be cross-examined by criminal defense counsel was decided this summer in Melendez-Diaz v. Massachusetts, 129 S.Ct. 2527 (2009).  The highest court in the land opined that it is a violation of the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment not to allow the defense attorney to examine the forensic scientist who created the analysis or report that the state has placed into evidence.

Of course, this is far from enough to solve this problem — the ability to cross-examine forensic scientists on their analysis in the witness stand means an innocent defendant has already undergone investigation, arrest, and has been forced to trial in order to vindicate himself from bad science.   We need more. 

However, between the media’s efforts and a strong defense attorney there’s more hope now than ever before.  Certainly more now that there was years back, for Cameron Todd Willingham.

Meanwhile, the Texas Moratorium Network posted a notice on its website that it’s planning on having around 1900 protesters in front of the Bexar County Courthouse to voice opposition to “Sharon Killer” … and earlier today, they were already being heard pretty loudly down in the Alamo City, since they had set up nice big speakers to voice their opposition to the Chief Justice remaining on the court.

For many folk, this controversy surrounds Justice Keller failing to allow a last minute filing on behalf of Michael Richard, who died by execution later that same evening.   But it’s more than that.  Flying around these proceedings are two other big controversies:  the financial transparency (or lack thereof) by Justice Keller in her public filings – and the use of capital punishment overall.

Because this week, down in San Antonio, make no mistake about it:  not only is Justice Keller going to be tried in that courtroom, there’s going to be plenty of talk about whether or not the death penalty is cruel and unusual, especially given the very bureaucracies that have created this unique and rare hearing of our state’s highest criminal court’s chief judge.

First one: The Cops Can Arrest You if You Don’t Evacuate Your Home on Their Order – The Lemming Law

That’s right. Starting 09/01/09, cops are allowed to use “reasonable force” on anyone in this state that doesn’t meekly abide by an evacuation order — you know, those orders to leave town because a fire is coming, or a tornado, or a hurricane. Remember all those stalled highways in Houston with everyone in a panic trying to escape a disaster that never happened? Well, now the cops can add to this ARRESTING anyone who doesn’t jump on the bandwagon ….

Maybe they should call this the Lemming Law. Act like a lemming or get busted.

Second one: The Cops Can Take Blood Tests Without Court Order When They Suspect DWI – The Skip-the-Judge Law

What a doozy. As you know, right now the police cannot take a blood sample from someone they think may be a DWI suspect and who refuses a breath test unless the cops get a search warrant for the blood test from a judge. To do this, the cops have to show the judge that they have probable cause to justify the search warrant.

Well, forget the judge as of 09/01/09. As of September 1st, the new Texas law allows Texas police to order blood tests without a warrant — in certain circumstances. Those circumstances include: (1) when the DWI suspect is a repeat offender, (2) a passenger died in an accident involving the DWI suspect; and (3) a child who is under 15 years old is a passenger in the suspect’s vehicle.

The new law also allows magistrates, who only have to be licensed lawyers, in all the other blood test situations — which means lots more power to someone who’s not an elected official in signing their okey-dokey on a DWI search warrant. So, let’s just call this second law the “Skip the Judge Law.”

Have Texas cops demonstrated themselves worthy of this level of trust and respect?

Is anyone else wondering about giving Texas police MORE power these days? This drunk driving law is letting law enforcement step around judicial review in many a DWI case … have the police in this state really demonstrated themselves worthy of that much trust and respect?

Do we really need to go and re-read all the Taser stories accumulated here before we answer this question? Does anyone remember good old due process??

Investigation Discovery, a part of the Discovery Channel, is focusing upon the efforts of the Innocence Project in Dallas County because our local county has had more exonerations than any other county in the country. Surprise.

The show will follow the efforts of those seeking to use DNA testing to prove the innocence of men and women wrongfully convicted. Like Johnnie Lindsay.

It is not, however, a documentary. It is an entertainment show, and makes no efforts to claim otherwise.

“Dallas DNA” stars Dallas DA Craig Watkins

DA Craig Watkins will appear in the show. It’s a given, since he’s been involved in the exoneration of ten men in the past two years. Watkins says the show is a good thing, telling the media it will help to “make justice better by showing the good, the bad, and the ugly.”

Many are concerned about the ethics of this reality-TV show

Not everyone is happy about this new summer series. Some pretty big players have taken a stand against it.

Rob Warren, the executive director of the Center for Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University has been quoted in USA Today as having misgivings about “Dallas DNA,” saying he finds the show “troubling” and he is quoted by Entertainment Weekly as saying that he’s concerned the show will “exploit the suffering of victims – including the wrongfully convicted – in the name of entertainment. “

Jeff Blackburn, the chief lawyer for the Innocence Project of Texas, has just come right out and said that this television show is a blatant vehicle to boost Craig Watkins’ political career. Blackburn has also reported that the Innocence Project was contacted about doing a show focusing upon its efforts, but they couldn’t reach an agreement because they were going to have to “stage things” and the Innocence Project couldn’t agree to that.

What does Watkins say in response? According to USA Today, his response is that his critics are unhappy because they couldn’t make their own media deal. According to Watkins, it’s all sour grapes.

Sour grapes? Really?

Reality television isn’t real, we all know that it’s staged and manufactured for entertainment purposes.

Many also recognize that reality television is more profitable than other forms of entertainment, because it avoids the costs of employing lots of creative folk — like writers for scripts — that more traditional shows require. In fact, reality-TV can thank rising writers’ salary demands as well as things like the recent writers’ strike for its upsurge in popularity today.

So, when revered organizations say no to reality television because they don’t want to be … well … phony with things being staged by Hollywood money, while others think this is just fine to do…. Well, doesn’t sound like sour grapes to some.

Sounds like it’s something else entirely, doesn’t it? And, people can get hurt here.

Let’s Hope Nothing Bad Happens Here

Let’s hope that doesn’t happen. Let’s hope no privilege is violated, no due process is harmed, no exploitation of innocent people happens here, in all this Hollywood production zeal. Let’s hope.

Because the only one apparently double-checking to insure that everything’s going along according to the Law is DA Watkins. He’s supposed to be insuring that privilege is protected, etc. Not a defense attorney, nope. The lead prosecutor.

Sure, there’s nothing but sour grapes in the ethical concerns voiced by people like Blackburn. Right.

Sources:

USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/life/television/2009-04-12-reality-dna_N.htm

Entertainment Weekly
http://popwatch.ew.com/popwatch/2009/04/dna-exoneration.html

Investigation Discovery – Dallas DNA
http://investigation.discovery.com/tv/dallas-dna/dallas-dna.html

Wikipedia – Reality Television
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_television