More than 2,600 Florida cas­es — includ­ing at least one cap­i­tal case — may have been taint­ed by erro­neous fin­ger­print analy­sis by a long-term employ­ee of the Orange County Sheriff’s Office, accord­ing to let­ters sent to defense coun­sel by the Orange-Osceola State Attorney’s Office. The rev­e­la­tions were anoth­er in a series of events rais­ing ques­tions about the reli­a­bil­i­ty of foren­sic evi­dence that is being used in cap­i­tal pros­e­cu­tions across the United States. In ear­ly February 2017, the Orange-Osceola State Attorney’s Office con­tact­ed defense attor­neys in cas­es that involved Marco Palacio, a 17-year employ­ee of the coun­ty sher­if­f’s office, to alert the defense to a pat­tern of cler­i­cal errors, fail­ure to iden­ti­fy prints of val­ue and the mis­la­bel­ing of print cards” by Palacio. At least one death row inmate, Bessman Okafor, is among the affect­ed defen­dants. Orlando defense attor­ney Hal Uhrig said, The wrong name on the wrong card, and all the sud­den you get con­fir­ma­tion of a print that’s not there. That’s seri­ous stuff.” The integri­ty of cas­es in Arizona was also called into ques­tion a few months ear­li­er, after an inves­ti­ga­tion by KPNX found that Norman Wade, the lab direc­tor of the Maricopa County Medical Examiner’s Office, had a felony con­vic­tion for steal­ing a gun that had been entered as evi­dence at his pre­vi­ous job in Ventura County, California. The chief med­ical exam­in­er was aware of Wade’s con­vic­tion when Wade was hired, but the infor­ma­tion was nev­er pre­sent­ed to defense attor­neys in cas­es in which Wade had tes­ti­fied. Kindra Fleming, of the Arizona Justice Project, said, I think juries had the right to at least hear it to eval­u­ate for them­selves whether this goes to his cred­i­bil­i­ty. …Especially in these sig­nif­i­cant cas­es where peo­ple are now spend­ing their lives in prison or sit­ting on death row.” In 2015, The Federal Bureau of Investigation admit­ted that exam­in­ers from the agen­cy’s micro­scop­ic hair com­par­i­son unit had for decades pro­vid­ed flawed foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny, includ­ing in at least 32 cap­i­tal cas­es. A 2009 study, Invalid Forensic Science Testimony and Wrongful Convictions, found that flawed foren­sic analy­sis by pros­e­cu­tion wit­ness­es was present in 60% of the tri­als of defen­dants who were lat­er exonat­ed by DNA testing.

In 2015, Texas exe­cut­ed Lester Bower in a cir­cum­stan­tial evi­dence case in which foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny pro­vid­ed a vital link between Bower and the killings. Prosecution wit­ness­es had false­ly tes­ti­fied that the type of ammu­ni­tion used in the mur­der was extreme­ly rare. In 2016, Texas exe­cut­ed Richard Masterson despite charges that the pros­e­cu­tion had pre­sent­ed false foren­sic tes­ti­mo­ny con­cern­ing the cause of death. The defense alleged that pros­e­cu­tors had con­cealed evi­dence that the med­ical exam­in­er was unqual­i­fied to per­form the autop­sy, had fal­si­fied his cre­den­tials, and had pre­sent­ed false tes­ti­mo­ny in Masterson’s case and in a pri­or Ohio cap­i­tal case that vic­tims who may have died of nat­ur­al caus­es had been strangled.

(R. Stutzman and G. T. Lotan, More than 2,600 Orlando-area lawyers get let­ters warn­ing about fin­ger­print expert,” Orlando Sentinel, February 6, 2017; W. Halloran and E. Wiley, Lab direc­tor’s crim­i­nal record uncov­ered; what does it mean?KPNX, November 19, 2016.) See Innocence.

Citation Guide