Here’s a new decision from a Texas appellate court finding actual innocence based on a Brady violation (the police withholding exculpatory evidence) and the fact that the Gun Shot Residue “expert” testimony that convicted the defendant has now been undermined by newer advances in the field. The well-reasoned and well-written decision is here…. Ex Parte Miles, Tex-1.Crim.App. Nos. AP-76 488, 489 (Feb. 15, 2012). Media coverage of case here. Miles contacted me via email after seeing our new blog, and we corresponded a little. He said, “Word can’t express the victory.” Congrats, Miles, to finally having this behind you….
Blog Editor
Mark Godsey
Daniel P. & Judith L. Carmichael Professor of Law, University of Cincinnati College of Law; Director, Center for the Global Study of Wrongful Conviction; Director, Rosenthal Institute for Justice/Ohio Innocence Project | Email | ProfileContributing Editors
Justin Brooks
Professor, California Western School of Law; Director, California Innocence Project | Email
Cheah Wui Ling
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore Email | Profile
Daniel Ehighalua
Nigerian Barrister; Project Director, Innocence Project Nigeria Email
C Ronald Huff
Professor of Criminology, Law & Society and Sociology, University of California-Irvine Email | Profile
Phil Locke
Science and Technology Advisor, Ohio Innocence Project and Duke Law Wrongful Convictions Clinic Email
Dr. Carole McCartney
Reader in Law, Faculty of Business and Law, Northumbria University Email
Nancy Petro
Author and Advocate
Kana Sasakura
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law, Konan University; Visiting Scholar, University of Washington School of Law; Innocence Project Northwest (IPNW)
Dr. Robert Schehr
Professor, Department of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Northern Arizona University; Executive Director, Arizona Innocence Project Email | Profile
Shiyuan Huang
Associate Professor, Shandong University Law School; Visiting Scholar, University of Cincinnati College of Law Email | Profile
Ulf Stridbeck
Professor of Law, Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Norway
Martin Yant
Author and Private Investigator Email | Profile-
Mark,
I’ve been waiting for this one. The GSR analysis was done in 1994, when AAS (atomic absorption spectrometry) was still used. AAS was proven unreliable in determining GSR, and is also a destructive test.
The ASTM E1588 standard for GSR analysis wasn’t published until 1995, specifying SEM/EDS as the method for identifying GSR.
SEM/EDS can reliably identify gunshot residue, but the samples acquired should then be compared with samples from known case-specific durable items (weapon, shell casings, victim’s clothing, etc.) to confirm the source of the GSR. Lacking that, the question that cannot be reliably answered is - where did the GSR come from? Issues with sample collection protocols and the LIKELIHOOD of contamination from law enforcement and environmental sources overwhelm all other factors.