http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/aplocal_story.asp?category=6420&slug=MT%
20Supco%20Crime%20Lab

Wednesday, August 25, 2004 · Last updated 7:33 p.m. PT

Supreme Court asked to order probe into state crime lab

By BOB ANEZ
ASSOCIATED PRESS WRITER

HELENA, Mont. -- An advocacy group for the wrongly convicted asked the
Montana Supreme Court on Wednesday to order a sweeping investigation into
whether more than two men may have been convicted based on faulty analysis
conducted at the Montana State Crime Lab.

The New York-based Innocence Project, along with defense attorneys and
others, asked the high court to conduct a hearing and ask Attorney General
Mike McGrath why he has not ordered such an investigation on his own.

Specifically, the court was asked to find out why McGrath has not scoured
the cases handled by former crime lab director Arnold Melnikoff, whose work
came under fire in 2002, when Jimmy Ray Bromgard was freed after 15 years in
prison when DNA analysis proved he did not rape an 8-year-old girl.

In early May 2003, DNA evidence also exonerated Paul Kordonowy of a rape,
though he remains in prison on a separate rape conviction.

Melnikoff provided hair analysis in both cases and testified at both men's
trials that there was less than a 1-in-10,000 chance that hair found at the
crime scenes belonged to someone other than the defendants. He used a
probability theory on hair comparisons that critics say has no scientific
basis.



Melnikoff headed Montana's state crime lab from 1970 to 1989, when he went
to work for the Washington State Patrol's crime lab in Spokane

End Quote

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email nutteing@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.

And back to Houston.
Perhaps boxes were removed from under the leaking roof
http://www.click2houston.com/news/3684366/detail.html
Quote

Hundreds Of Forgotten Evidence Boxes Found In Crime Lab
8,000 Boxes Of Evidence To Check

POSTED: 3:08 pm CDT August 26, 2004
UPDATED: 3:45 pm CDT August 26, 2004

HOUSTON -- Hundreds of boxes of evidence were mislabeled and improperly
stored in the Houston Police Department's Crime Lab, Chief Harold Hurtt told
Local 2 Thursday.

About 280 boxes of evidence, dated from the late 1970s to the early 1990s,
are involved.

The boxes were likely mislabeled during resubmissions to the property room
from the crime lab, he said.

Named "Project 280," Hurtt ordered each box be opened and the contents
inventoried, catalogued and linked to the appropriate case.

Officials have examined 5 percent of an estimated 8,000 cases that may have
been improperly stored. In order to prevent cross-contamination or
degradation, and to ensure proper documentation, the process is very
methodical and deliberate, police said.

A staff is working on the project two shifts a day, seven days a week.

The entire process is expected to take about a year.

"This is exactly what I asked the Chief to do -- a thorough review of issues
related to forensic evidence and how we address them," Mayor Bill White
said. "The chief got right on it and we're seeing the results. Our system of
archiving evidence is unacceptable and he is addressing it. He has my full
support and confidence."

The city shut the police department lab's DNA section in 2002 because of
possible evidence contamination and improper employee training.

Houston's DNA section has remained closed since an audit revealed its
analysts lacked training, insufficiently documented cases and may have
allowed evidence to be exposed to contaminants. Hundreds of DNA cases where
analysis originally performed by the police department have been undergoing
retesting since March 2003.

End Quote

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email nutteing@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.

More on Houston cock-up
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/27/national/27lab.html
Quote
Lost Evidence Is Found in Houston Crime Lab
By RALPH BLUMENTHAL

Published: August 27, 2004


OUSTON, Aug. 26 - Internal police investigators looking into the already
discredited Houston police crime laboratory have found 280 boxes of lost
evidence that include a fetus and body parts and involve some 8,000 cases,
including murders, going back to the 1970's, the Houston police chief
announced Thursday.


The unexpected disclosure by Chief Harold Hurtt that the items were found a
year ago, before his arrival, staggered defense lawyers and criminal justice
officials, who said they could not begin to assess the effect on an already
overworked criminal justice system.

The cases affected date from about 1979 to 1991, Chief Hurtt said. "Some of
them are open cases, open murder cases," he said.

After his announcement, at downtown Police Headquarters, reporters were
shown to a 24th-floor office where cartons stacked from floor to ceiling
were being opened, emptied and cataloged by a half-dozen laboratory workers
in face masks and rubber gloves.

Chief Hurtt said it could take up to a year to sort out the material and
match it to inmates in prison or suspects in other cases. Some of the
evidence, he said, may be linked to the 379 cases in which prisoners
convicted in Harris County have requested the retesting of DNA evidence to
establish their innocence.

Chief Hurtt, who arrived from Phoenix in February with a mandate to clean
house, said the boxes, mislabeled with case numbers that did not reflect the
evidence workers had been "shoveling" inside, were found last August in a
police property room where they had been sent by the laboratory. He said
that the significance of the discovery had not been immediately recognized,
that he had been made aware of it only in April or May and that the
inventorying of the contents did not begin until last week.

Capt. Mark Curran of the inspections division said the items included "a
fetus that had been tagged and brought back" and "some other body parts from
different homicide cases."

Asked how the department could have lost track of so much evidence, Chief
Hurtt cited unnamed laboratory staff members and said, "What we know right
now has happened because of poor work habits and sloppy efforts." The
laboratory's toxicology division, which tested DNA, blood and hair evidence,
was shut down in January 2003 after an audit found that technicians there
were poorly trained, kept shoddy records and misinterpreted data. One
prisoner, Josiah Sutton, convicted of rape at 16 in 1999, was released last
year and pardoned after DNA retesting showed the Houston crime laboratory's
results implicating him had been faulty.

The Harris County district attorney, Chuck Rosenthal, whose prosecutorial
district is the third-largest in the country, after those of Los Angeles and
Chicago, said his felony trial bureau and writs section took the news hard.
"I thought they were going to cry," Mr. Rosenthal said.

Defense lawyers voiced amazement. "This is in a league by itself," said
Barry Scheck, a defense lawyer and director of the Innocence Project, which
represents prisoners claiming to have been unfairly convicted. He called the
mishandling of evidence "unparalleled in the Houston police lab's legacy of
fraud, incompetence and confusion."

Earlier this month, the group attacked as faulty the testimony of the former
supervisor of the laboratory's DNA section, James Bolding, that sent a
Houston man, George Rodriquez, to prison for 17 years for rape. The real
evidence, Mr. Scheck said, pointed to another man.

Chief Hurtt, in a written statement Thursday, noted that Mr. Bolding had
"inappropriately documented" property in another case. Mr. Bolding, who
resigned in June 2003 in the face of a recommendation by the chief at the
time that he be fired, did not respond to a telephone message left at his
home.

Mayor Bill White, who took office this year succeeding Lee P. Brown, a
former New York City police commissioner and a three-term occupant of City
Hall, called the mishandling of evidence intolerable, adding, "It's hard to
get away from the fact that sloppiness in anything of this matter is
inexcusable." But he said he had confidence in Chief Hurtt, whom he
appointed.

Mr. White said that while no current prosecutions seemed affected by the
misplaced evidence, he was hopeful that the recovered evidence could
establish the innocence of wrongfully convicted prisoners.

Mr. Rosenthal, the district attorney, said that in some of the 379 cases in
which prisoners had filed for the retesting of DNA evidence that convicted
them, the police reported that the evidence had been destroyed or lost, and
so prosecutors told the courts that it was unavailable. Now, he said, his
lawyers may have to go back to court to say some of the evidence, if found,
is available after all.

Chief Hurtt said there were more questions than answers at this point. He
said he was in the process of hiring outside investigators and a project
manager to conduct the inquiry. "We don't know what we have in these boxes,"
he said.

Asked if anyone should be held accountable, he said, "If we need to conduct
further investigations, whether administrative or criminally, we will do
that."

Captain Curran said he and the chief were themselves astonished at the
multitude of boxes. "Yes, they're bigger than I thought," he said, "and the
chief, when he saw them, he said, 'Wow, they're big.' "


Maureen Balleza contributed reporting for this article.

End Quote

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email nutteing@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.

http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=75230&ran=232650
Quote
Warner weighs plan to test crime DNA

Gov. Mark R. Warner


By MICHELLE WASHINGTON AND TIM MCGLONE, The Virginian-Pilot
© September 4, 2004

NORFOLK — Gov. Mark R. Warner is considering testing DNA
evidence from a random sample of criminal cases after a third man was
exonerated based on evidence found in the files of a state lab
analyst.

Warner asked the state lab for a DNA testing plan on Aug. 25, two days
after Arthur Lee Whitfield was freed from prison, said Dr. Paul
Ferrara, director of the state Division of Forensic Science. DNA tests
showed that Whitfield, who served nearly 22 years, did not commit the
two rapes he was convicted of in Norfolk in 1982.

The evidence that cleared Whitfield came from the files of Mary Jane
Burton, a serologist who worked at the lab from 1974 until 1988.
Evidence she saved also cleared two other men convicted of rape,
Julius Earl Ruffin and Marvin L. Anderson.

Ruffin was convicted in Norfolk in 1981 and served 21 years in prison
before his name was cleared. The DNA results implicated another man in
the crime. Anderson was convicted of a July 1982 rape in Hanover
County and served 15 years before being paroled. DNA cleared him after
his release.

Whitfield’s exoneration has raised questions about what’s
inside the files of the Division of Forensic Science, which runs four
labs that conduct DNA testing and other lab work in criminal cases,
said Ellen Qualls, a spokeswoman for Warner.


Warner asked Ferrara to outline how such a random sample could be
undertaken, and how much it would cost. Ferrara submitted his plan to
the governor Tuesday. The governor and his legal counsel are reviewing
Ferrara’s proposal and are expected to approve it, possibly with
changes, early next week, Qualls said.

It is unclear how long the research would last or how many files would
be searched. As many as five serologists may have saved samples of
biological evidence they worked with, Ferrara said Friday.

Michael F. Fasanaro Jr. , the attorney who represented Whitfield,
praised the governor’s request.

“It can’t hurt,” Fasanaro said. “What can they
lose? If something turns up positive or negative, they may say we have
to test everything.”

Andrew Sacks, a vice president of the Virginia Trial Lawyers
Association, has arranged a conference call for Wednesday to discuss
DNA testing in light of Whitfield’s release. Since the law
changed in 2001 to allow requests for post-conviction DNA testing, the
petitions of most Virginia inmates who have sought the tests have been
denied.

In Hampton Roads, circuit court judges rejected at least 29 of the
approximately 48 requests filed . Of those who were granted the
testing, only Whitfield and Ruffin were exonerated and released from
prison.

Statewide, eight men have been cleared of rape or murder charges
through DNA testing. Those cases have caused many in the legal
community to question how DNA petitions and criminal evidence are
handled.

While some commonwealth’s attorneys don’t oppose testing,
others work vigorously to prevent it.

Charles Fox Urquhart, the deputy commonwealth’s attorney who
handles DNA test requests in Suffolk, said his policy is to
“oppose them all.”

Eight people have filed for the testing in Suffolk, and all but one
was denied. In the case where testing took place, results were
inconclusive.

Urquhart said if he saw a case such as Whitfield’s or
Ruffin’s, he would probably agree to the test.

“But in a lot of them, it just doesn’t make sense,”
he said.

In Virginia Beach, prosecutors opposed six of the seven DNA test
requests that have come in, said Commonwealth’s Attorney Harvey
L. Bryant III.

Norfolk prosecutor Philip G. Evans II said that when he opposes DNA
testing or preservation, it is usually because evidence has been
destroyed or was never collected. In some cases, Evans opposes testing
because both the evidence and the DNA methods were available at the
time of trial.

“For most cases we’ve been impartial,” Evans said.

In the Ruffin and Whitfield cases, the Norfolk prosecutor’s
office acted quickly to free the men once tests showed they were not
guilty.

Commonwealth’s Attorney John R. Doyle III learned on a Friday
that DNA evidence had cleared Whitfield. The next Monday, Whitfield
took a bus home.

A spokesman for Portsmouth Commonwealth’s Attorney Earle C.
Mobley said the office has received two or three requests –
there was no record of the exact number – for testing and none
were opposed.

Representatives from organizations that work to free wrongly convicted
people argued that prosecutors should not oppose requests for DNA
testing.

“DAs and prosecutors are like little children with their hands
over their ears and eyes,” said Jim McCloskey , executive
director of Centurion Ministries in Princeton, N.J.

Norfolk prosecutor Evans disagreed.

“The bottom line for most prosecutors, at least for myself and
the people in this office, is that our fundamental obligation is to
the truth,” Evans said. “If we find the truth, we have
upheld justice in each case.” Some of the people who have sought
testing were convicted based on overwhelming evidence against them.

For example, Curtis Lee White II confessed and pleaded guilty in 1998
to rape, murder and sodomy at a back-to-school slumber party in the
Camelot section of Chesapeake. Four people placed him at the scene of
the crime – his former girlfriend’s house – and DNA
in semen found in one of the victims matched White’s genetic
code. White’s motion for DNA retesting was denied. He is serving
life plus 113 years.

A man convicted of two Norfolk murders asked for testing despite
testimony at trial that one of the victims named him as her killer
with her dying breaths.

In some cases, testing reaffirmed a defendant’s guilt.

Ronald W. Hockman was convicted of rape in Virginia Beach. Hockman
maintained he had nothing to do with the crime. But the test showed
the presence of his DNA in crime scene material.

Defense attorneys and at least one state senator said Virginia needs
to ensure that post-conviction DNA testing is fair, that evidence is
properly maintained and that someone keeps track of such cases.

Vanessa Potkin, a lawyer with the Innocence Project in New York, said
in many cases there is “no rhyme or reason” why judges
order the destruction of evidence.

Court clerks rely on the state code to determine what evidence should
be kept and what should be discarded. The code allows clerks to donate
or destruct evidence after a defendant’s appeals have been
exhausted, or when time to file an appeal runs out.

In Norfolk, police destroy evidence when the lead investigator in a
case says it is OK to do so, said Lt. Paul Midgett, who runs the
department’s evidence storage.

McCloskey from Centurion Ministries said biological evidence should be
preserved indefinitely.

“I can’t tell you how many cases of strong possible
innocence we take on … and when we come along, lo and behold, it
cannot be found,” he said. “There’s no paper trail.
It drives me nuts.”

Norfolk Commonwealth’s Attorney Doyle said the current system
provides a way for any person convicted of a felony to ask for the
storage of evidence after trial. Prosecutors now ask for DNA testing
before trial in nearly every case in which it is available.

“I just don’t think it makes sense in every single
case,” to keep all evidence indefinitely, Doyle said. “In
the vast majority of cases, the defendant did it and pleads
guilty.”

Some lawyers also question how the DNA petition process works.

P otkin argued that the state should give defendants access to lawyers
before they attempt to file for DNA testing. She has found defendants
who can’t write a motion because they are mentally unfit or
illiterate.

Some of the petitions filed in Norfolk were nearly indecipherable
scrawls, or mere hand-written copies of the state code. Most
defendants who seek DNA testing are indigent and unable to hire a
lawyer because they have been in prison for years.

“These are the most vulnerable people,” Potkin said.
“How are they supposed to make sure that their evidence still
exists? It’s very impractical and it leaves a big
loophole.”

In light of the Whitfield case, the General Assembly will need to
revisit the DNA issue next session, said Kenneth W. Stolle, the
Virginia Beach state senator who chairs the Courts of Justice
Committee.

He predicted legislators will reduce the number of “hoops”
defendants have to jump through to DNA testing.

Whitfield’s case also calls into question the law that forbids
DNA tests for someone who pleads guilty, Stolle said. Whitfield
originally pleaded innocent, but after being convicted by a jury in
one case, he pleaded guilty to another rape in exchange for a reduced
sentence.

“I think that’s something that ought to be
revisited,” Stolle said.

Staff writer Bill Burke contributed to this report. Reach Michelle
Washington at 446-2287 or michelle.washington @pilotonline.com. Reach
Tim McGlone at 446-2343 or tim.mcglone@pilotonline.com.



End Quote

What they aren't telling you about DNA profiles
and what Special Branch don't want you to know.
http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htm
or nutteingd in a search engine

Valid email nutteing@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)
Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -
it is defunct due to spam.

In message <1622f08.0409032318.51ed7eb1@posting.google.com>, paul
nutteing <nutteing@quickfindit.com> writes

(MAKES)

In the below VASTLY the most far-reaching input ever to uk.legal!!

What will happen when Sir Robert Megarry and then Mr Justice Peter
Gibson in defence of the British Establishment against me in person
having been denied legal aid, are exposed as wicked defenders of
Corrupted Government Ministers namely Reginald Eyre (Con) and Stanley
Clinton Davis (Lab)?
http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=75230&ran=232650 QuoteWarner weighs plan to test crime DNAGov. Mark R. Warner By MICHELLE WASHINGTON AND TIM MCGLONE, The Virginian-Pilot© September 4, 2004NORFOLK — Gov. Mark R. Warner is considering testing DNAevidence from a random sample of criminal cases after a third man wasexonerated based on evidence found in the files of a state labanalyst.Warner asked the state lab for a DNA testing plan on Aug. 25, two daysafter Arthur Lee Whitfield was freed from prison, said Dr. PaulFerrara, director of the state Division of Forensic Science. DNA testsshowed that Whitfield, who served nearly 22 years, did not commit thetwo rapes he was convicted of in Norfolk in 1982.The evidence that cleared Whitfield came from the files of Mary JaneBurton, a serologist who worked at the lab from 1974 until 1988.Evidence she saved also cleared two other men convicted of rape,Julius Earl Ruffin and Marvin L. Anderson.Ruffin was convicted in Norfolk in 1981 and served 21 years in prisonbefore his name was cleared. The DNA results implicated another man inthe crime. Anderson was convicted of a July 1982 rape in HanoverCounty and served 15 years before being paroled. DNA cleared him afterhis release.Whitfield’s exoneration has raised questions about what’sinside the files of the Division of Forensic Science, which runs fourlabs that conduct DNA testing and other lab work in criminal cases,said Ellen Qualls, a spokeswoman for Warner.Warner asked Ferrara to outline how such a random sample could beundertaken, and how much it would cost. Ferrara submitted his plan tothe governor Tuesday. The governor and his legal counsel are reviewingFerrara’s proposal and are expected to approve it, possibly withchanges, early next week, Qualls said.It is unclear how long the research would last or how many files wouldbe searched. As many as five serologists may have saved samples ofbiological evidence they worked with, Ferrara said Friday.Michael F. Fasanaro Jr. , the attorney who represented Whitfield,praised the governor’s request.“It can’t hurt,” Fasanaro said. “What can theylose? If something turns up positive or negative, they may say we haveto test everything.”Andrew Sacks, a vice president of the Virginia Trial LawyersAssociation, has arranged a conference call for Wednesday to discussDNA testing in light of Whitfield’s release. Since the lawchanged in 2001 to allow requests for post-conviction DNA testing, thepetitions of most Virginia inmates who have sought the tests have beendenied.In Hampton Roads, circuit court judges rejected at least 29 of theapproximately 48 requests filed . Of those who were granted thetesting, only Whitfield and Ruffin were exonerated and released fromprison.Statewide, eight men have been cleared of rape or murder chargesthrough DNA testing. Those cases have caused many in the legalcommunity to question how DNA petitions and criminal evidence arehandled.While some commonwealth’s attorneys don’t oppose testing,others work vigorously to prevent it.Charles Fox Urquhart, the deputy commonwealth’s attorney whohandles DNA test requests in Suffolk, said his policy is to“oppose them all.”Eight people have filed for the testing in Suffolk, and all but onewas denied. In the case where testing took place, results wereinconclusive.Urquhart said if he saw a case such as Whitfield’s orRuffin’s, he would probably agree to the test.“But in a lot of them, it just doesn’t make sense,”he said.In Virginia Beach, prosecutors opposed six of the seven DNA testrequests that have come in, said Commonwealth’s Attorney HarveyL. Bryant III.Norfolk prosecutor Philip G. Evans II said that when he opposes DNAtesting or preservation, it is usually because evidence has beendestroyed or was never collected. In some cases, Evans opposes testingbecause both the evidence and the DNA methods were available at thetime of trial.“For most cases we’ve been impartial,” Evans said.In the Ruffin and Whitfield cases, the Norfolk prosecutor’soffice acted quickly to free the men once tests showed they were notguilty.Commonwealth’s Attorney John R. Doyle III learned on a Fridaythat DNA evidence had cleared Whitfield. The next Monday, Whitfieldtook a bus home.A spokesman for Portsmouth Commonwealth’s Attorney Earle C.Mobley said the office has received two or three requests –there was no record of the exact number – for testing and nonewere opposed.Representatives from organizations that work to free wrongly convictedpeople argued that prosecutors should not oppose requests for DNAtesting.“DAs and prosecutors are like little children with their handsover their ears and eyes,” said Jim McCloskey , executivedirector of Centurion Ministries in Princeton, N.J.Norfolk prosecutor Evans disagreed.“The bottom line for most prosecutors, at least for myself andthe people in this office, is that our fundamental obligation is tothe truth,” Evans said. “If we find the truth, we haveupheld justice in each case.” Some of the people who have soughttesting were convicted based on overwhelming evidence against them.For example, Curtis Lee White II confessed and pleaded guilty in 1998to rape, murder and sodomy at a back-to-school slumber party in theCamelot section of Chesapeake. Four people placed him at the scene ofthe crime – his former girlfriend’s house – and DNAin semen found in one of the victims matched White’s geneticcode. White’s motion for DNA retesting was denied. He is servinglife plus 113 years.A man convicted of two Norfolk murders asked for testing despitetestimony at trial that one of the victims named him as her killerwith her dying breaths.In some cases, testing reaffirmed a defendant’s guilt.Ronald W. Hockman was convicted of rape in Virginia Beach. Hockmanmaintained he had nothing to do with the crime. But the test showedthe presence of his DNA in crime scene material.Defense attorneys and at least one state senator said Virginia needsto ensure that post-conviction DNA testing is fair, that evidence isproperly maintained and that someone keeps track of such cases.Vanessa Potkin, a lawyer with the Innocence Project in New York, saidin many cases there is “no rhyme or reason” why judgesorder the destruction of evidence.Court clerks rely on the state code to determine what evidence shouldbe kept and what should be discarded. The code allows clerks to donateor destruct evidence after a defendant’s appeals have beenexhausted, or when time to file an appeal runs out.In Norfolk, police destroy evidence when the lead investigator in acase says it is OK to do so, said Lt. Paul Midgett, who runs thedepartment’s evidence storage.McCloskey from Centurion Ministries said biological evidence should bepreserved indefinitely.“I can’t tell you how many cases of strong possibleinnocence we take on … and when we come along, lo and behold, itcannot be found,” he said. “There’s no paper trail.It drives me nuts.”Norfolk Commonwealth’s Attorney Doyle said the current systemprovides a way for any person convicted of a felony to ask for thestorage of evidence after trial. Prosecutors now ask for DNA testingbefore trial in nearly every case in which it is available.“I just don’t think it makes sense in every singlecase,” to keep all evidence indefinitely, Doyle said. “Inthe vast majority of cases, the defendant did it and pleadsguilty.”Some lawyers also question how the DNA petition process works.P otkin argued that the state should give defendants access to lawyersbefore they attempt to file for DNA testing. She has found defendantswho can’t write a motion because they are mentally unfit orilliterate.Some of the petitions filed in Norfolk were nearly indecipherablescrawls, or mere hand-written copies of the state code. Mostdefendants who seek DNA testing are indigent and unable to hire alawyer because they have been in prison for years.“These are the most vulnerable people,” Potkin said.“How are they supposed to make sure that their evidence stillexists? It’s very impractical and it leaves a bigloophole.”In light of the Whitfield case, the General Assembly will need torevisit the DNA issue next session, said Kenneth W. Stolle, theVirginia Beach state senator who chairs the Courts of JusticeCommittee.He predicted legislators will reduce the number of “hoops”defendants have to jump through to DNA testing.Whitfield’s case also calls into question the law that forbidsDNA tests for someone who pleads guilty, Stolle said. Whitfieldoriginally pleaded innocent, but after being convicted by a jury inone case, he pleaded guilty to another rape in exchange for a reducedsentence.“I think that’s something that ought to berevisited,” Stolle said.Staff writer Bill Burke contributed to this report. Reach MichelleWashington at 446-2287 or michelle.washington @pilotonline.com. ReachTim McGlone at 446-2343 or tim.mcglone@pilotonline.com.End QuoteWhat they aren't telling you about DNA profilesand what Special Branch don't want you to know.http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htmor nutteingd in a search engineValid email nutteing@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -it is defunct due to spam.

--
Roger J. P. Jones

In message <lk+JoLD2zuOBFwJf@lawyers-corrupt.demon.co.uk>, Roger J. P.
Jones <roger@lawyers-corrupt.demon.co.uk> writesIn message <1622f08.0409032318.51ed7eb1@posting.google.com>, paulnutteing <nutteing@quickfindit.com> writes(MAKES)In the below VASTLY the most far-reaching input ever to uk.legal!!What will happen when Sir Robert Megarry and then Mr Justice PeterGibson in defence of the British Establishment against me in personhaving been denied legal aid, are exposed as wicked defenders ofCorrupted Government Ministers namely Reginald Eyre (Con) and StanleyClinton Davis (Lab)?http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=75230&ran=232650 QuoteWarner weighs plan to test crime DNAGov. Mark R. Warner By MICHELLE WASHINGTON AND TIM MCGLONE, The Virginian-Pilot© September 4, 2004NORFOLK — Gov. Mark R. Warner is considering testing DNAevidence from a random sample of criminal cases after a third man wasexonerated based on evidence found in the files of a state labanalyst.Warner asked the state lab for a DNA testing plan on Aug. 25, two daysafter Arthur Lee Whitfield was freed from prison, said Dr. PaulFerrara, director of the state Division of Forensic Science. DNA testsshowed that Whitfield, who served nearly 22 years, did not commit thetwo rapes he was convicted of in Norfolk in 1982.The evidence that cleared Whitfield came from the files of Mary JaneBurton, a serologist who worked at the lab from 1974 until 1988.Evidence she saved also cleared two other men convicted of rape,Julius Earl Ruffin and Marvin L. Anderson.Ruffin was convicted in Norfolk in 1981 and served 21 years in prisonbefore his name was cleared. The DNA results implicated another man inthe crime. Anderson was convicted of a July 1982 rape in HanoverCounty and served 15 years before being paroled. DNA cleared him afterhis release.Whitfield’s exoneration has raised questions about what’sinside the files of the Division of Forensic Science, which runs fourlabs that conduct DNA testing and other lab work in criminal cases,said Ellen Qualls, a spokeswoman for Warner.Warner asked Ferrara to outline how such a random sample could beundertaken, and how much it would cost. Ferrara submitted his plan tothe governor Tuesday. The governor and his legal counsel are reviewingFerrara’s proposal and are expected to approve it, possibly withchanges, early next week, Qualls said.It is unclear how long the research would last or how many files wouldbe searched. As many as five serologists may have saved samples ofbiological evidence they worked with, Ferrara said Friday.Michael F. Fasanaro Jr. , the attorney who represented Whitfield,praised the governor’s request.“It can’t hurt,” Fasanaro said. “What can theylose? If something turns up positive or negative, they may say we haveto test everything.”Andrew Sacks, a vice president of the Virginia Trial LawyersAssociation, has arranged a conference call for Wednesday to discussDNA testing in light of Whitfield’s release. Since the lawchanged in 2001 to allow requests for post-conviction DNA testing, thepetitions of most Virginia inmates who have sought the tests have beendenied.In Hampton Roads, circuit court judges rejected at least 29 of theapproximately 48 requests filed . Of those who were granted thetesting, only Whitfield and Ruffin were exonerated and released fromprison.Statewide, eight men have been cleared of rape or murder chargesthrough DNA testing. Those cases have caused many in the legalcommunity to question how DNA petitions and criminal evidence arehandled.While some commonwealth’s attorneys don’t oppose testing,others work vigorously to prevent it.Charles Fox Urquhart, the deputy commonwealth’s attorney whohandles DNA test requests in Suffolk, said his policy is to“oppose them all.”Eight people have filed for the testing in Suffolk, and all but onewas denied. In the case where testing took place, results wereinconclusive.Urquhart said if he saw a case such as Whitfield’s orRuffin’s, he would probably agree to the test.“But in a lot of them, it just doesn’t make sense,”he said.In Virginia Beach, prosecutors opposed six of the seven DNA testrequests that have come in, said Commonwealth’s Attorney HarveyL. Bryant III.Norfolk prosecutor Philip G. Evans II said that when he opposes DNAtesting or preservation, it is usually because evidence has beendestroyed or was never collected. In some cases, Evans opposes testingbecause both the evidence and the DNA methods were available at thetime of trial.“For most cases we’ve been impartial,” Evans said.In the Ruffin and Whitfield cases, the Norfolk prosecutor’soffice acted quickly to free the men once tests showed they were notguilty.Commonwealth’s Attorney John R. Doyle III learned on a Fridaythat DNA evidence had cleared Whitfield. The next Monday, Whitfieldtook a bus home.A spokesman for Portsmouth Commonwealth’s Attorney Earle C.Mobley said the office has received two or three requests –there was no record of the exact number – for testing and nonewere opposed.Representatives from organizations that work to free wrongly convictedpeople argued that prosecutors should not oppose requests for DNAtesting.“DAs and prosecutors are like little children with their handsover their ears and eyes,” said Jim McCloskey , executivedirector of Centurion Ministries in Princeton, N.J.Norfolk prosecutor Evans disagreed.“The bottom line for most prosecutors, at least for myself andthe people in this office, is that our fundamental obligation is tothe truth,” Evans said. “If we find the truth, we haveupheld justice in each case.” Some of the people who have soughttesting were convicted based on overwhelming evidence against them.For example, Curtis Lee White II confessed and pleaded guilty in 1998to rape, murder and sodomy at a back-to-school slumber party in theCamelot section of Chesapeake. Four people placed him at the scene ofthe crime – his former girlfriend’s house – and DNAin semen found in one of the victims matched White’s geneticcode. White’s motion for DNA retesting was denied. He is servinglife plus 113 years.A man convicted of two Norfolk murders asked for testing despitetestimony at trial that one of the victims named him as her killerwith her dying breaths.In some cases, testing reaffirmed a defendant’s guilt.Ronald W. Hockman was convicted of rape in Virginia Beach. Hockmanmaintained he had nothing to do with the crime. But the test showedthe presence of his DNA in crime scene material.Defense attorneys and at least one state senator said Virginia needsto ensure that post-conviction DNA testing is fair, that evidence isproperly maintained and that someone keeps track of such cases.Vanessa Potkin, a lawyer with the Innocence Project in New York, saidin many cases there is “no rhyme or reason” why judgesorder the destruction of evidence.Court clerks rely on the state code to determine what evidence shouldbe kept and what should be discarded. The code allows clerks to donateor destruct evidence after a defendant’s appeals have beenexhausted, or when time to file an appeal runs out.In Norfolk, police destroy evidence when the lead investigator in acase says it is OK to do so, said Lt. Paul Midgett, who runs thedepartment’s evidence storage.McCloskey from Centurion Ministries said biological evidence should bepreserved indefinitely.“I can’t tell you how many cases of strong possibleinnocence we take on … and when we come along, lo and behold, itcannot be found,” he said. “There’s no paper trail.It drives me nuts.”Norfolk Commonwealth’s Attorney Doyle said the current systemprovides a way for any person convicted of a felony to ask for thestorage of evidence after trial. Prosecutors now ask for DNA testingbefore trial in nearly every case in which it is available.“I just don’t think it makes sense in every singlecase,” to keep all evidence indefinitely, Doyle said. “Inthe vast majority of cases, the defendant did it and pleadsguilty.”Some lawyers also question how the DNA petition process works.P otkin argued that the state should give defendants access to lawyersbefore they attempt to file for DNA testing. She has found defendantswho can’t write a motion because they are mentally unfit orilliterate.Some of the petitions filed in Norfolk were nearly indecipherablescrawls, or mere hand-written copies of the state code. Mostdefendants who seek DNA testing are indigent and unable to hire alawyer because they have been in prison for years.“These are the most vulnerable people,” Potkin said.“How are they supposed to make sure that their evidence stillexists? It’s very impractical and it leaves a bigloophole.”In light of the Whitfield case, the General Assembly will need torevisit the DNA issue next session, said Kenneth W. Stolle, theVirginia Beach state senator who chairs the Courts of JusticeCommittee.He predicted legislators will reduce the number of “hoops”defendants have to jump through to DNA testing.Whitfield’s case also calls into question the law that forbidsDNA tests for someone who pleads guilty, Stolle said. Whitfieldoriginally pleaded innocent, but after being convicted by a jury inone case, he pleaded guilty to another rape in exchange for a reducedsentence.“I think that’s something that ought to berevisited,” Stolle said.Staff writer Bill Burke contributed to this report. Reach MichelleWashington at 446-2287 or michelle.washington @pilotonline.com. ReachTim McGlone at 446-2343 or tim.mcglone@pilotonline.com.End QuoteWhat they aren't telling you about DNA profilesand what Special Branch don't want you to know.http://www.nutteing2.freeservers.com/dnapr.htmor nutteingd in a search engineValid email nutteing@fastmail.....fm (remove 4 of the 5 dots)Ignore any other apparent em address used to post this message -it is defunct due to spam.
Quote
Lost Evidence Is Found in Houston Crime Lab
By RALPH BLUMENTHAL

Published: August 27, 2004


OUSTON, Aug. 26 - Internal police investigators looking into the already
discredited Houston police crime laboratory have found 280 boxes of lost
evidence that include a fetus and body parts and involve some 8,000
cases,
including murders, going back to the 1970's, the Houston police chief
announced Thursday.


The unexpected disclosure by Chief Harold Hurtt that the items were
found a year ago, before his arrival, staggered defense lawyers and
criminal justice officials, who said they could not begin to assess the
effect on an already overworked criminal justice system.

================
================
Am I to understand that the USA learnt other than English from the
British

Jones.
--
Roger J. P. Jones