Nov. 30
OKLAHOMA----impending execution
Attorneys seek to halt Oklahoma man's execution
Attorneys for an Oklahoma man scheduled to die next week are trying stop his
execution on the grounds that he is mentally unfit to be put to death.
George Ochoa's attorneys filed a motion for a stay of execution Wednesday in
federal court in Oklahoma City. Attorney James Hankins argues in the motion
that Ochoa is "suffering from mental instability" and that to execute him would
be unconstitutional.
The state had not filed a response on Thursday to the motion and no ruling was
handed down.
The 38-year-old Ochoa is to be put to death Tuesday for the 1993 shooting
deaths of 2 people in their Oklahoma City home while three of the couple's
young children were present. Ochoa maintains he is innocent.
(source: Associated Press)
MISSISSIPPI:
Despite Evidence From Discredited Medical Examiner, Mississippi's Jeffrey
Havard Nears Execution
Last year, NPR looked at two dozen cases in which adults had been convicted of
killing infants or young children, then later exonerated or given commutations.
The investigation found a number of common themes in those cases. One of them
was that prosecutors often relied on the subjective opinions of a medical
examiner. Another was the understandable sorrow and anger a community feels
when a child dies, which can nudge law enforcement officials and forensic
specialists to see crimes in what may have only been accidental deaths.
Jeffrey Havard, 34, has been on death row in Parchman Penitentiary since 2002.
He was convicted of murdering Chloe Britt, the 6-month-old daughter of his
girlfriend at the time. Havard claims he was giving the child a bath when, as
he was lifting her from the tub, she slipped from his hands and fell, hitting
her head on the toilet on the way down. By the time paramedics arrived with her
at the hospital, Britt's eyes were fixed and dilated, and she had turned blue.
She died a short time later.
Dr. Steven Hayne, a Mississippi medical examiner in private practice, performed
an autopsy on the infant. He claimed to have found the symptoms of Shaken Baby
Syndrome (SBS), a diagnosis that comes with the implication that the last
person to be alone with the child was the one who killed her. Because the
symptoms can only be produced by violent shaking, the diagnosis also comes with
a built-in indictment of the suspect's state of mind. It's a diagnosis that
does much of the prosecutor's work for him.
But SBS has come under fire in recent years. A number of experts have begun to
question the validity of the diagnosis and how it's used in court, pointing
out, for example, that a number of other factors could cause the symptoms that
experts have been telling juries could be caused only by shaking. But even if
one were to accept SBS as a sound and legitimate diagnosis, other forensic
pathologists say Hayne shouldn't have found it in this case.
Shaken baby convictions rarely result in the death penalty, which requires
premeditation or other aggravating circumstances. But in Chloe Britt's case,
Hayne concluded that she likely had been sexually abused. In his autopsy, he
found that her anus had dilated to about the size of a quarter, and there was
also a small contusion on her rectum. The sexual assault component allowed
prosecutors to seek the death penalty. They advanced the theory that Havard had
abused the girl, then shaken her to death.
From the early 1990s until 2007, Hayne performed 80-90 percent of the autopsies
in Mississippi. By his own testimony in depositions and criminal trials, that
amounted to between 1,200 and 1,800 per year. (The National Association of
Medical Examiners suggests that MEs perform a maximum of 325 autopsies per
year.) For much of this time, he shouldered this workload while also holding
down one, sometimes two full-time jobs at a local hospital and a kidney
research center.
Hayne's testimony helped put thousands of people in prison, mostly in
Mississippi, but also in Louisiana and Alabama. Critics say he was able to
monopolize autopsy referrals from the state's prosecutors because he told them
what they needed to hear in order to ring up convictions. He also testified in
numerous lawsuits for medical malpractice and wrongful death.
Hayne's domination of the autopsy business in the state was particularly
impressive given that he had never been certified in forensic pathology, at
least not by the American Board of Pathology, universally recognized as the
only reputable accrediting body for medical examiners. Hayne had actually taken
the American Board of Pathology exam in the 1980s. He failed it. When asked
about this in court or in sworn depositions over the years, Hayne has said that
he walked out on the test because he found the questions insulting to his
intelligence. He claimed, for example, that 1 question asked about colors
associated with death. Recently, however, the American Board of Pathology
produced the test Hayne took. There were no such questions.
I first reported on Hayne in a 2006 expose for Reason magazine. Since then, he
has been implicated in the wrongful convictions of 2 men who were later
exonerated by DNA evidence. In both of those cases, Hayne (and his sidekick,
the disgraced, self-proclaimed "bite mark expert" Michael West) gave testimony
that was critical to convicting the men of killing the daughters of their
girlfriends.
The Mississippi Supreme Court also dismissed Hayne's testimony in a 2007 case
where he preposterously claimed that he could tell by a murder victim's wounds
that there were two people holding the gun that fired the fatal bullets. The
Innocence Project filed a complaint against Hayne with the Mississippi State
Board of Medical Licensure in 2008 seeking to revoke Hayne's medical license.
Hayne responded with a defamation suit, which the organization settled earlier
this year for $100,000.
Hayne has since been barred from performing any more autopsies in Mississippi.
In 2008, the state's Department of Public Safety ruled that any doctor
performing an official autopsy for the state must be certified by the American
Board of Pathology, a move the DPS director at the time has since acknowledged
was directed at Hayne. The state's prosecutors mounted a campaign to bring
Hayne back, but the state legislature thwarted them by codifying the DPS rule
into law in 2010.
Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, who frequently used Hayne when he was a
district attorney, aggressively lobbied against the bill. And Hood's office
continues to defend questionable convictions won on the testimony of Hayne and
West, even after both have been discredited.
By the time Jeffrey Havard went to trial in 2002, Hayne's credibility issues
were well known in the state's legal community and among his fellow medical
examiners (although they yet to be reported in the media in any comprehensive
way). Knowing of Hayne's issues, Havard's public defender asked the trial judge
for funding so Havard could hire an independent medical examiner to evaluate
Hayne's autopsy. The judge turned down the request. Havard was convicted and
sentenced to death, almost entirely because of Hayne's testimony.
Once Havard was convicted, his case was kicked up to the Mississippi Capital
Post Conviction Office, a well-funded state legal defense agency that was
started after several federal court decisions pretty much demanded it. That
office hired former Alabama State Medical Examiner Jim Lauridson to review
Hayne's autopsy in the Havard case. Lauridson found it lacking.
He found that there was no physical evidence to state conclusively that Chloe
Britt had been shaken to death instead of dying from hitting her head, as
Havard claimed. He also explained that the small bruise near the girl's anus
could have come from hospital staff inserting a rectal thermometer in the
emergency room. Moreover, Lauridson found that anal dilation like that observed
in Britt was common in infants post-mortem.
When Havard's attorneys took Lauridson's review to the Mississippi Supreme
Court in 2006, however, the justices summarily dismissed it. In a ruling Franz
Kafka and Joseph Heller could have conspired to write, the court found that
Lauridson's opinions on Hayne's testimony did not qualify as new evidence.
Rather, the justices said, it was evidence Havard should have produced at his
initial trial. Of course, Havard couldn't have produced such evidence, because
the trial court refused to give him funding to hire his own expert.
Havard's attorneys then found some new and potentially exonerating evidence. At
his initial trial, Rebecca Britt, Havard's ex-girlfriend and Chloe Britt's
mother, testified that Havard paid little attention to the child. She couldn't
recall him ever bathing Chloe or changing her diapers, she said. That testimony
cast doubt on Havard's story that he dropped Chloe after bathing her. Havard's
attorneys, however, discovered a videotape of Rebecca Britt's initial statement
to police, in which she said that Havard loved the little girl, fed her and
changed her. She didn't seem at all surprised at the time that he had bathed
her the night of Chloe's death.
In March, the Jackson Clarion-Ledger showed Hayne's autopsy report to renowned
forensic pathologist Michael Baden. Like Lauridson, Baden found that Chloe
Britt's injuries were consistent with "the baby being accidentally dropped and
striking her head on the toilet tank as the father described." Like Lauridson,
Baden also said there were many possible causes for the sort of anal bruise
Hayne found, including constipation, diarrhea or friction from a diaper.
Remarkably, even Hayne himself backed off from the testimony he gave at trial,
conceding to Havard's legal team that a rectal thermometer could have caused
the bruise (though he maintained that it wasn't likely). He also conceded that
there was no anal tearing, and that what he had found in his autopsy was not
necessarily conclusive of sexual assault. (Neither hospital staff nor Hayne
found semen or any of Havard's DNA in or near the girl's rectum.)
All of that still wasn't enough to convince the Mississippi Supreme Court.
Earlier this year, the court again denied Havard's appeal. The justices ruled
that Havard had failed to convince them that Rebecca Britt's statement shortly
after the crime would have affected the jury's opinion. The court also
dismissed Lauridson's statement about post-mortem anal dilation, because
emergency room nurse initially discovered the dilation while Britt was still
alive. But such dilation can start to set in before death if a child's brain
function has already begun to slow down. When Chloe Britt arrived at the
hospital, her symptoms suggested someone in that condition.
At this point, Havard's legal team may have exhausted their options in the
Mississippi courts. His case is now before U.S. District Court Judge Keith
Starrett.
Meanwhile, the Mississippi Innocence Project is taking another crack at getting
the state's supreme court to finally acknowledge Hayne's credibility problems.
Even after the 2-hands-on-the-gun case, the court has consistently refused to
entertain further challenges to Hayne's practices and credentials. Over the
past year, the Mississippi Innocence Project has dedicated staff to
investigating Hayne's background, methods, and history of questionable
testimony. They have filed or plan to file pleadings in several cases --
including Jeffrey Havard's -- citing the new information they've uncovered.
Ironically, their investigation began with documents the team found during the
discovery phase of Hayne's defamation suit against the Innocence Project. What
they've found since implicates not only Hayne, but a host of police officials,
prosecutors, even judges who knew Hayne was deficient and offering dubious
testimony, but did nothing to stop it. "We've known for a while that there was
a problem here," says Tucker Carrington, the director of the project. "But I
really had no concept of the depth and breadth of the malfeasance. This isn't
just Hayne. It's ... well, it's almost everybody. The state has known all along
that it was pulling the wool over everyone's eyes."
Currently, there are other men on death row -- including Devin Bennett and
Eddie Lee Howard in Mississippi, and Jimmie Duncan in Louisiana -- who were
convicted based on testimony from Hayne and West that other forensic
pathologists have since found uncredible.
Like Jeffrey Havard, Bennett and Duncan were convicted of killing the child of
a girlfriend. In all three cases, there will never be a DNA test to establish
guilt or innocence with absolute certainty. The question in these cases is
whether the child's death was an accident or a murder.
The testimony of forensic specialists in cases like these is especially
important. Unfortunately, that sort of testimony can often be subjective. 2
specialists can look at the same injuries and draw different conclusions about
what caused it, or even about what conclusions can be drawn from it. The jury
then decides which expert is more credible. But performing well enough on
witness stands to consistently convince juries isn't the same thing as actual
credibility. Brilliant experts can be terrible witnesses, and vice-versa.
There are some important discussions to be had about these kinds of cases, such
as whether, given their inherent subjectivity, they should ever be death
penalty cases; whether we should have bifurcated trials, one to determine if a
crime has been committed at all, then another to determine who committed it;
and how much more convincing we should be required to find one expert over
another before we're willing to let a possible killer walk free, or possibly
send an innocent man to his death.
What shouldn't be up for debate is that the experts who are allowed to testify
in these cases be qualified, accredited and meet a minimum set of standards
with respect to their practices, methods and professionalism. Steven Hayne
fails on all counts. At the first indication that an expert has given testimony
that is demonstrably false, is misleading about his credentials or indicates a
disregard for scientific integrity, that expert should be found no longer fit
to testify.
Despite all the evidence that has come out over the last several years, the
Mississippi courts have not only refused to entertain challenges to Hayne's
credibility in appeals and post-conviction petitions, they've allowed Hayne to
continue to testify in civil cases, for defense attorneys and in the legacy
cases in which he performed the autopsy.
The only person who knows for certain whether Jeffrey Havard killed Chloe Britt
is Jeffrey Havard. But at this point, it ought to be clear to just about
everyone else that the state of Mississippi has no moral justification to kill
Jeffrey Havard.
(source: Radley Balko; Senior Writer and Investigative Reporter, The Huffington
Post)
ARIZONA:
Psychiatrist to examine Arizona serial killer
A judge has appointed a Phoenix-area psychiatrist to examine a convicted serial
killer who has asked to be executed quickly.
Judge Roland Steinle of Maricopa County Superior Court appointed Dr. Gwen
Levitt is to conduct a mental competency examination of Dale Hausner.
He was sentenced to death for 6 murders that were among random shootings that
terrorized the Phoenix area in 2005 and 2006.
Steinle says Levitt will determine whether Hausner is competent to skip further
appeals.
A similar review found he was competent to be sentenced.
The Arizona Supreme Court decided Hausner's 1 automatic appeal by upholding his
convictions and sentences.
Hausner didn't acknowledge guilt during his trial, but he said before being
sentenced that death should be his penalty to help the surviving victims and
victims' relatives heal.
(source: Associated Press)
_______________________________________________
DeathPenalty mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.washlaw.edu/mailman/listinfo/deathpenalty
Search the Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A free service of WashLaw
http://washlaw.edu
(785)670.1088
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
