A report com­piled by five of the nation’s top arson experts has con­clud­ed that Texas exe­cut­ed a man based on faulty sci­ence and unre­li­able evi­dence. Cameron Todd Willingham was exe­cut­ed in Texas in 2004 for a crime of arson in which his 3 chil­dren died. Based on inde­pen­dent reviews of the evi­dence used to con­vict Willingham, the experts called for a re-inves­ti­ga­tion of the case after find­ing that it was based on inter­pre­ta­tions by fire inves­ti­ga­tors that have been sci­en­tif­i­cal­ly dis­poved. The experts not­ed that these same faulty find­ings led to the 2004 exon­er­a­tion and par­don of a sec­ond Texas man, Ernest R. Willis, who was freed from death row after serv­ing 17 years for a 1986 arson-mur­der of two women. According to the report, pros­e­cu­tion wit­ness­es in both cas­es inter­pret­ed fire indi­ca­tors like cracked glass and burn marks as evi­dence that the fires had been set, when more up-to-date tech­nol­o­gy showed that the indi­ca­tors could just as well have indi­cat­ed an acci­den­tal fire.

These two out­comes are mutu­al­ly exclu­sive. Willis can­not be found actu­al­ly inno­cent’ and Willingham exe­cut­ed based on the same sci­en­tif­ic evi­dence,” not­ed attor­ney Barry Scheck, who heads the New York-based Innocence Project, which request­ed this most recent inde­pen­dent inves­ti­ga­tion of the two cas­es by five unpaid arson experts. Their report echoed the find­ings of a 2004 Chicago Tribune inves­ti­ga­tion that also con­clud­ed that arson experts who tes­ti­fied against Willingham based their find­ings on faulty sci­ence and dis­proven arson the­o­ries.

In their find­ings, the experts stat­ed that many of the faulty the­o­ries used by state arson inves­ti­ga­tors, includ­ing deputy state fire mar­shal Manuel Vasquez, were sim­ply lore and had been hand­ed down by sev­er­al gen­er­a­tions of arson inves­ti­ga­tors who relied upon what they were told. Each and every one of the indi­ca­tors’ list­ed by Mr. Vasquez means absolute­ly noth­ing,” the experts not­ed. They fur­ther con­clud­ed that the evi­dence was con­sis­tent with indi­ca­tors rou­tine­ly cre­at­ed by acci­den­tal fires.” The report also revealed that many arson inves­ti­ga­tors are self-taught and inept,” adding, There is no crime oth­er than homi­cide by arson for which a per­son can be sent to death row based on the unsup­port­ed opin­ion of some­one who received all of his train­ing on the job.’ ”

Texas cur­rent­ly leads the nation in the num­ber of peo­ple serv­ing time for arson. The Innocence Project plans to turn over the report’s con­clu­sions and find­ings to the Texas Forensic Science Commission, which state law­mak­ers cre­at­ed in 2005 to over­see the integri­ty of crime laboratories. 

(Chicago Tribune, May 2, 2006 and New York Times, May 32006). 

See Innocence.

Citation Guide