The Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project (MAIP) will be hosting its second annual awards luncheon on July 15, 2009.  This year, MAIP will be presenting John Grisham with its Champion of Justice Award.  In addition to honoring Mr. Grisham, we also will be presenting our Defender of Innocence award to the legal teams that represented Marty Tankleff and Aaron Michael Howard. (more…)

But Will Have Limited Impact, Innocence Project Says

(WASHINGTON, DC; June 18, 2009) – Today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision denying post-conviction DNA testing to an Alaska prisoner is flawed and disappointing but will have a limited impact on cases across the country, according to the Innocence Project. (more…)

Thomas Haynesworth has been maintaining his innocence of a 1984 rape for nearly 25 years, and now it appears DNA may prove his case. (more…)

Beverly Monroe spent 11 years trying to prove her innocence after being convicted of a crime she did not commit.  In March of 1992, Monroe found her long time boyfriend dead with a pistol in his hand.  Because prosecutors withheld evidence showing the likely cause of death to be a suicide, Monroe was found guilty of both first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony.  Monroe was sentenced to 22 years in prison.

Convinced of her mother’s innocence, Monroe’s eldest child, a lawyer, quit her job and spent the next six years trying to find evidence to prove it.  Kate Monroe assembled a team of lawyers to take on her mother’s case.  Due to her tireless efforts, Beverly Monroe was released after 11 years’ imprisonment. However, Monroe was never compensated for the time she spent in prison. (more…)

A new study published in the Virginia Law Review found that forensic experts gave flawed testimony in the trials of 82 men, including four men convicted in Virginia in the 1980s.  Brandon L. Garnett, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law, and Peter Neufeld, cofounder of the Innocence Project, examined the trial transcripts of 137 people during whose trial’s forensic experts had testified on behalf of the prosecution and who were later exonerated through testing of DNA evidence. In these 137 trials, Garnett and Neufeld found that 60 percent contained flawed forensic expert testimony. However, Garnett and Neufeld’s study did not suggest that the flawed testimony was necessarily the source of the wrongful convictions.

The four Virginia men whose trial transcripts were examined in the study are Willie Davidson II, who was cleared of a 1980 rape; Earl Washington Junior, cleared of capital murder and a 1982 rape; Edward Honaker, cleared of a 1984 rape; and Tony Webb who was cleared of a 1988 rape.
 
One of the most common errors that can lead to a wrongful conviction is mistaken eyewitness identification.  Mistaken eyewitness identification coupled with flawed forensic expert testimony results in many wrongful convictions.  One possible solution that Peter Marone, the Director of Technical Services at the Virginia Department of Forensic Science, offers is the standardization of methods and technology.   

For a more detailed summary of the report, please click here .

To read the full text of the report, please click here .  Once the page has loaded, click download and follow the instructions to save it to your computer.

     In an article published in the March 2009 issue of the Virginia Law Review, Brandon L. Garrett and Peter J. Neufeld conclude that in the majority of trials of innocent people who were later exonerated by post-conviction DNA testing, forensic analysts testifying for the prosecution provided invalid testimony at trial. Garrett and Neufeld located and reviewed trial transcripts for 137 of the 156 DNA exonorees in whose trials forensic analysts had testified. They found that in 82 cases or 60% of the trials, forensic analysts provided “invalid” testimony, meaning they had presented conclusions that either misstated empirical data or that were entirely unsupported by empirical data. This invalid testimony did not come from a small group of analysts –not just the “bad apples”–but from 72 different analysts from 52 laboratories, practices, or hospitals in 25 states.
    
      Garrett and Neufeld’s study revealed that the analysts’ invalid testimony fell into two basic categories. The first is “the misuse of empirical population data” by presenting non-probative evidence as inculpatory, by discounting exculpatory evidence, or by presenting inaccurate statistics. For example, in the case of Gary Dotson, who was wrongly convicted of rape and aggravated kidnapping, the analyst presented inaccurate statistics when he testified that Dotson was included in 11% of the population that could have been the source of the semen found on the victim, whereas in reality 100% of the population could have been the source of the semen. The second main type of invalid testimony is “making conclusions regarding the probative value of evidence that are unsupported by empirical data.” This includes the presenting of statistics or other statements without backing them up with data or making a conclusion that evidence originated from the defendant even if there is no empirical data to permit such a conclusion. In the case of Timothy Durham, who was wrongly convicted of rape and robbery, the analyst said that the specific color of hair found at the crime scene belonged to “about 5 percent of the population” when in reality no empirical data exists on the frequency of hair color.
    
      In their study of the trial transcripts, Garret and Neufeld found that defense counsel rarely cross-examined analysts concerning invalid testimony and rarely retained their own experts, because funding is often denied for defense experts. Prosecutors presented the invalid accounts of forensic evidence during their closing arguments. If the defense challenged the evidence, judges seldom provided relief. Garrett and Neufeld believe that our criminal justice system is simply not well suited to preventing this kind of unscientific testimony. Based on the results of their study, they recommend that the scientific community issue nationally enforceable standards for written reports and testimony to ensure that forensic science in criminal cases is presented in a way that maintains the integrity and fairness of the criminal process.

On July 15, 2008, MAIP hosted its first annual awards luncheon.  The winner of our Champion of Justice award was former Virginia Governor Mark Warner.  MAIP honored Governor Warner for his extraordinary contribution to the cause of justice.

[Click here photographs from the event]

The Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project (MAIP) commends Governor Tim Kaine on his decision to grant full pardons to Arthur Lee Whitfield and Victor “Bo” Burnette.  

“We are relieved that the governor recognized the need to correct the miscarriage of justice that occurred in these two men’s cases,” said Shawn Armbrust, Executive Director of MAIP. (more…)

MAIP To Represent Haynesworth 

Twenty-five years ago the Richmond area was shaken by a series of robberies and rapes.  On the strength of eye witness identification, Thomas Haynesworth was sentenced to seventy-four years in prison.  Though Haynesworth never stopped maintaining his innocence, he was unable to prove that he had been wrongfully convicted.  Now, after having spent more than two decades in prison, DNA evidence may exonerate him. 

In 2005 Commonwealth Governor Mark Warner launched a project that would re-examine DNA evidence from convictions that occurred between  1973 and 1988.  A semen sample from Haynesworth case was among the evidence being retested.  The Department of Forensic Science failed to find a genetic profile that matched his.

Shawn Armbrust, the Executive Director of the Mid-Atlantic Innocence Project, met with Haynesworth and believes this is a case of mistaken identity.  Armbrust and MAIP have agreed to represent Haynesworth.

If succesful, Haynesworth will become the eleventh Virginian to be exonerated of rape by DNA evidence.

Click here to read the Richmond Times-Dispatch's coverage. 

On March 2, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the matter of District Attorney's Office v. William G. Osborne.  Peter Neufeld, co-founder of the Innocence Project at the Cardozo School of Law, argued on behalf of Mr. Osborne.  The case raises questions over the existence of a constitutional right to post-conviction DNA testing.

In 1994 an Alaska state court found Osborne guilty of kidnapping and sexual assault.  Osborne subsequently sought access to evidence for DNA testing, but was denied by the District Attorney's Office.  The D.A.O.'s decision was reached despite their admission that testing could exonerate him and that the testing would come at no cost to the state.  In response to their refusal, Osborne filed a lawsuit in federal district court, alleging that his due process rights had been violated.  After a favorable decision for Osborne by the Court of Appeals, the DAO appealed the case to the Supreme Court. (more…)