Alan Newton was arrested in 1985 for rape and robbery. He was convicted based on eyewitness testimony, and spent more than twenty years in prison. Four years ago, he was exonerated. This week, Newton was awarded $18 million in his civil suit against the city.
Newton and his lawyers spent five years trying to locate the rape kit to send for more extensive DNA testing. The sample was finally tested in 2006, leading to Newton's exoneration.
The jury found that Newton's constitutional rights were violated, and found two police officers liable for intentional infliction of emotional distress by not producing the rape kit sooner. John F. Shutty III, Newton's lawyer, argued that the system in place for tracking post-conviction evidence was unacceptable and violated his client's constitutional rights.
Since his release from prison, Newton has attended college and now works for the Black Male Initiative of the City University of New York to ensure that students graduate. Newton also took the law school admissions test and plans to apply to law school.
“I want to work with people that really need that legal assistance that’s just not there for them,” he said. “There are so many issues where people need competent counsel, and it’s just not out there. I think I’ll jump into it with both arms.”
O'Connor, Anahad. "$18 Million to Man Wrongfully Imprisoned." October 18, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/20/nyregion/20award.html?_r=2
NEIP provides pro bono legal assistance to inmates who have claims of actual innocence. NEIP's mission is to represent persons wrongly convicted in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island or Vermont and to advocate for the reform of our criminal justice system.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Thursday, September 30, 2010
NEIP Hosts Conviction Screening
This week, NEIP and Fox Searchlight hosted an advanced, pre-screening of Conviction, a major motion picture about the life of Betty Anne Waters and her brother, Kenny. Conviction chronicles Betty Anne's journey to proving Kenny's innocence after he is incarcerated for a murder he did not commit.
Tony Goldwyn, the director of the film, was joined by Sam Rockwell (who plays Kenny) and Betty Anne Waters. After the screening, they answered questions from the audience. The event was mediated by Scott Feinberg, a prominent film and Oscar blogger. Click here to see Scott's summary of the event, including videos of the Q&A following the film.
Two exonerees attended the event and spoke during the Q&A. Dennis Maher, a NEIP exoneree was in attendance, along with Fernando Bermudez, who was exonerated by the Innocence Project in New York.
The movie opens in theaters nationwide on October 15th. Click here to view the trailer!
Tony Goldwyn, the director of the film, was joined by Sam Rockwell (who plays Kenny) and Betty Anne Waters. After the screening, they answered questions from the audience. The event was mediated by Scott Feinberg, a prominent film and Oscar blogger. Click here to see Scott's summary of the event, including videos of the Q&A following the film.
Two exonerees attended the event and spoke during the Q&A. Dennis Maher, a NEIP exoneree was in attendance, along with Fernando Bermudez, who was exonerated by the Innocence Project in New York.
The movie opens in theaters nationwide on October 15th. Click here to view the trailer!
Friday, September 24, 2010
Texas Forensic Science Commission Discusses Willingham Case
After nearly two years, the Texas Forensic Science Commission (TFSC) has still yet to reach a decision about the Cameron Todd Willingham case, which has been pending since 2008. In 1992, Willingham was convicted of setting a fire in his home that caused the death of his two daughters. Willingham never stopped proclaiming his innocence. He was executed in 2004.
Members of the commission were reluctant to adopt the findings of the draft report, which states that the fire investigators were not negligent because they used fire investigation standards that existed at the time. One member, Sarah Kerrigan, thinks there is a disconnect between the standards used in the investigation and the ones widely accepted now. Another member, Garry Adams, said he was “not completely convinced that the science wasn’t available to the analysts” at the time of the Willingham investigation.
The commission will meet again on November 19th to hear expert testimony about the investigation standards then and now.
Click here to see video of Barry Scheck speaking in front of the TFSC last week.
Smith, Morgan. Forensic Science Commission Takes up Willingham. http://www.texastribune.org/texas-dept-criminal-justice/death-penalty/forensic-science-commission-takes-up-willingham/
Members of the commission were reluctant to adopt the findings of the draft report, which states that the fire investigators were not negligent because they used fire investigation standards that existed at the time. One member, Sarah Kerrigan, thinks there is a disconnect between the standards used in the investigation and the ones widely accepted now. Another member, Garry Adams, said he was “not completely convinced that the science wasn’t available to the analysts” at the time of the Willingham investigation.
The commission will meet again on November 19th to hear expert testimony about the investigation standards then and now.
Click here to see video of Barry Scheck speaking in front of the TFSC last week.
Smith, Morgan. Forensic Science Commission Takes up Willingham. http://www.texastribune.org/texas-dept-criminal-justice/death-penalty/forensic-science-commission-takes-up-willingham/
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
New England Exoneree Featured at Maine's Red Mass
NEIP exoneree Dennis Maher will be speaking at this year's Red Mass, an annual event for the legal community in Maine. The Red Mass is held for all those involved in the administration of justice.
Maher was convicted in 1984 of two counts of sexual assault and one count attempted sexual assault in Ayer, MA. He spent 19 years in prison before DNA evidence exonerated him. Maher was an army sergeant before his arrest. He had a clean criminal record and was convicted without any physical evidence linking him to the crime. Maher was finally exonerated in 2003. He now lives in Tewksbery with his wife and two children.
Maher's speech will be a departure from the normal Red Mass speakers, who are usually judges or prominent attorneys.
Harrison, Judy. "Wrongfully convicted man to speak after Red Mass." http://dailyme.com/story/2010091300000137/wrongfully-convicted-man-speak-red-mass.html
Maher was convicted in 1984 of two counts of sexual assault and one count attempted sexual assault in Ayer, MA. He spent 19 years in prison before DNA evidence exonerated him. Maher was an army sergeant before his arrest. He had a clean criminal record and was convicted without any physical evidence linking him to the crime. Maher was finally exonerated in 2003. He now lives in Tewksbery with his wife and two children.
Maher's speech will be a departure from the normal Red Mass speakers, who are usually judges or prominent attorneys.
Harrison, Judy. "Wrongfully convicted man to speak after Red Mass." http://dailyme.com/story/2010091300000137/wrongfully-convicted-man-speak-red-mass.html
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Arson Convictions in Massachusetts Coming Under Fire
In the past few months, three different arson convictions in Massachusetts have been challenged by nationally recognized fire scientists. These scientists point out that certain patterns thought to be present only in intentionally set fires are now known to occur in accidental fires as well.
In 1991, a scientific manual was published that pointed out these misconceptions. Ever since, the number of fires determined to be arson steadily declined in Massachusetts. Between 1984 and 2001, the number of fires ruled arson declined by 70%,while the total number of fires stayed relatively the same.
State Fire Marshall Stephen D. Coan credits this noticeable decrease to better fire science education and increased visibility of law enforcement.
John Lentini, one of the nation's most prominent fire scientists, says "there were a lot of accidental fires determined to be arson that weren't. I don't know any other way to interpret this dramatic decline."
Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, has urged prosecutors to go back and examine their old arson cases. Sheck believes that this obligation arises from knowing about the unreliabitliy of arson science. However, Coan says such reviews would be unnecessary.
One of the cases currently being questioned is the Lowell fire of 1982, for which Victor Rosario is serving a life sentence. NEIP has previously posted a blog detailing the problems with Rosario's conviction.
Another case is the conviction of James Hebshie in 2001. Hebshie ran a convenience store within an office building in Taunton, Massachusetts. After a fire consumed the whole building, Hebshie was convicted of the crime. Lentini has reviewed Hebshie's case and believes that the fire investigator got it wrong. He points out that Trooper David Domingos's determination that the fire started in Hebshie's store is inconsistent with the fact that the fire was blazing behind the walls on the opposite side of where the fire allegedly started. Lentini states, “The methodology used to determine the [fire’s] origin was outdated.’’
NEIP attorneys worked in conjunction with Hebshie's private counsel on his motion for a new trial, which is currently awaiting a decision in US District Court.
Nicas, Jack. "Scientists challenge Massachusetts arson convictions." September 8, 2010. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/09/08/scientists_challenge_massachusetts_arson_convictions/
In 1991, a scientific manual was published that pointed out these misconceptions. Ever since, the number of fires determined to be arson steadily declined in Massachusetts. Between 1984 and 2001, the number of fires ruled arson declined by 70%,while the total number of fires stayed relatively the same.
State Fire Marshall Stephen D. Coan credits this noticeable decrease to better fire science education and increased visibility of law enforcement.
John Lentini, one of the nation's most prominent fire scientists, says "there were a lot of accidental fires determined to be arson that weren't. I don't know any other way to interpret this dramatic decline."
Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project, has urged prosecutors to go back and examine their old arson cases. Sheck believes that this obligation arises from knowing about the unreliabitliy of arson science. However, Coan says such reviews would be unnecessary.
One of the cases currently being questioned is the Lowell fire of 1982, for which Victor Rosario is serving a life sentence. NEIP has previously posted a blog detailing the problems with Rosario's conviction.
Another case is the conviction of James Hebshie in 2001. Hebshie ran a convenience store within an office building in Taunton, Massachusetts. After a fire consumed the whole building, Hebshie was convicted of the crime. Lentini has reviewed Hebshie's case and believes that the fire investigator got it wrong. He points out that Trooper David Domingos's determination that the fire started in Hebshie's store is inconsistent with the fact that the fire was blazing behind the walls on the opposite side of where the fire allegedly started. Lentini states, “The methodology used to determine the [fire’s] origin was outdated.’’
NEIP attorneys worked in conjunction with Hebshie's private counsel on his motion for a new trial, which is currently awaiting a decision in US District Court.
Nicas, Jack. "Scientists challenge Massachusetts arson convictions." September 8, 2010. http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/09/08/scientists_challenge_massachusetts_arson_convictions/
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Connecticut Supreme Court Declines to Rule on Important Innocence Issue
This week, the Connecticut Supreme Court unanimously upheld J'Veil Outing's 2005 murder conviction. Outing was linked to the murder by two eyewitnesses, who have both since recanted. No scientific or ballistic evidence links Outing to the crime.
Outing wanted to introduce expert testimony about the unreliability of eyewitness identifications. The testimony would have focused on recent scientific studies pointing out why witnesses sometimes erroneously identify the wrong people as suspects.
The four-justice majority believes that this case is not the right one to introduce such testimony, because other factors were more important to the verdict. The court said the exclusion of the testimony was "harmless error", because the jury could use their common sense to make the determinations themselves about the unreliability of the eyewitness. The majority relied on a 25-year old precedent holding that such testimony is not mandatory.
Three justices challenged the majority's view, claiming that relying on such an old ruling was potentially prejudicial to defendants. Justice Flemming Norcott Jr. wrote, "I simply do not think it appropriate or wise to wait for the 'right' record to come before us before we act to correct this dangerously outmoded body of case law."
The unreliability of eyewitness testimony has recently been gaining media attention. Some attorneys believe the Supreme Court will address this issue sometime in the near future.
Reitz, Stephanie. "Conn. high court upholds murder conviction" http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2010/08/20/conn_court_to_rule_on_witness_ids_of_suspects/?page=full
Outing wanted to introduce expert testimony about the unreliability of eyewitness identifications. The testimony would have focused on recent scientific studies pointing out why witnesses sometimes erroneously identify the wrong people as suspects.
The four-justice majority believes that this case is not the right one to introduce such testimony, because other factors were more important to the verdict. The court said the exclusion of the testimony was "harmless error", because the jury could use their common sense to make the determinations themselves about the unreliability of the eyewitness. The majority relied on a 25-year old precedent holding that such testimony is not mandatory.
Three justices challenged the majority's view, claiming that relying on such an old ruling was potentially prejudicial to defendants. Justice Flemming Norcott Jr. wrote, "I simply do not think it appropriate or wise to wait for the 'right' record to come before us before we act to correct this dangerously outmoded body of case law."
The unreliability of eyewitness testimony has recently been gaining media attention. Some attorneys believe the Supreme Court will address this issue sometime in the near future.
Reitz, Stephanie. "Conn. high court upholds murder conviction" http://www.boston.com/news/local/connecticut/articles/2010/08/20/conn_court_to_rule_on_witness_ids_of_suspects/?page=full
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
NEIP Board Member Discusses Wrongful Convictions
This week Stanley Z. Fisher, a NEIP founding member and trustee, participated in a Boston University Law School/Legal Talk Network Podcast. Fisher, a professor at BU law, teaches classes on criminal law and wrongful convictions. Listen below to hear him speak about the causes of wrongful convictions, specific cases in New England, and what can be done to help reform the justice system.
Listen to the podcast here!
Listen to the podcast here!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)