Forensic scientist Henry Lee on Wednesday defended his 1985 examination of proof in a homicide case wherein two convictions have been later overturned, stating that he didn’t fabricate proof about blood discovered on a toilet towel.
In 2019, the state Supreme Court threw out the 1989 homicide convictions of two New Milford youngsters, Ricky Birch and Shawn Henning, within the homicide of Everett Carr and ordered a brand new trial. They then filed a wrongful-conviction go well with in opposition to Lee, eight police investigators and the city of New Milford.
On Friday, U.S. District Judge Victor Bolden dominated that Lee fabricated proof within the homicide case and is responsible for probably tens of hundreds of thousands of {dollars} in damages of their wrongful-conviction go well with.
“I have no motive nor reason to fabricate evidence,” Lee wrote in his assertion. “My chemical testing of the towel played no direct role in implicating Mr. Birch and Mr. Henning or anyone else as suspects in this crime. Further, my scientific testimony at their trial included exculpatory evidence, such as a negative finding of blood on their clothing that served to exonerate them.”
Bolden’s uncommon pretrial ruling signifies that Birch and Henning’s go well with will go to trial except there’s a settlement.
Lee mentioned he was “disappointed” in Bolden’s ruling.
“In my capacity as head of the Forensic Science Laboratory, my colleagues and I were called to the homicide scene in New Milford on the night of December 2, 1985, to conduct field chemical tests and perform initial crime scene reconstruction,” Lee wrote.
“Hundreds of areas were tested for the presence of fingerprints, footprints and biological evidence including the upstairs bathroom, sink and the towel in question. I did not participate nor was involved in any of the subsequent criminal investigations.”
Lee mentioned he examined a “light red smear” on a towel with tetramethylbenzidine, “a chemical test for blood used during the 1980s. A smear on the towel and some spots in the sink gave a positive chemical reaction.”
While the objects have been positioned in proof baggage by a state police detective, “For unknown reasons, the towel was never submitted to the Lab for a confirmatory blood test at that time,” Lee wrote.
Lee has develop into world famend for his forensic work, testifying about his findings in analyzing proof, together with the homicide trial of O.J. Simpson and the killing of JonBenét Ramsey. He is a former commissioner of the state police and founding father of the Henry C. Lee Institute of Forensic Science on the University of New Haven.
“I am a forensic scientist and I only present my scientific findings in the court of law,” Lee wrote within the assertion. “It is not my role to determine what evidence to introduce and what questions to ask a witness during the trial. I was not responsible for the documentation, collection of evidence, and for photographing the scene.”
He added, “Mr. Birch and Mr. Henning did not become suspects until weeks after my December 2, 1985 crime scene visit. My scientific findings at the crime scene were completed well before they became suspects.”
Lee mentioned the proof may have degraded within the years after he examined it.
“A negative finding for blood on the towel 20 years later should not be interpreted as fact that there was never a positive test for the presence of blood on this towel nor should a quantum leap in thinking be made that this was an attempt to fabricate evidence,” Lee wrote.
“It is not only against the scientific principle but also without any logical reason. This towel was stored at an evidence room for 20 years. It is not unusual for biodegradation, decomposition, or denaturation to occur. … In addition, the small amount of blood-like smear evidence may even be consumed during testing or have fallen off the surface of the towel.”
Lee identified that the proof label on the bag containing the towel, which reads: “Exhibit 16, Date seized 12-2-85, Time 2305 … Item white towel with pink/green (illegible) pattern w/ blood like smear on same … Location 2nd floor bathroom sink rack.”
“This evidence tag clearly shows that a blood like smear was identified on the bathroom towel when the (state police Major Crime Squad) and lab personnel were at the scene,” Lee wrote. “It is clear and direct evidence that I did not fabricate evidence. The towel was tested, identified as blood like smear on that towel and collected at the scene on 12/2/1985 at 23:05.”
Carr’s homicide, at his daughter’s home, was extraordinarily bloody. His head was smashed and he was stabbed 27 occasions, severing his jugular vein. Blood was spattered everywhere in the hallway homicide scene. However, Henning, then 17, and Birch, 18, had no blood on them.
The towel was used as proof of their trial to clarify why the 2 males had no blood on them.
Bolden’s selections imply that, with no settlement, a sensational wrongful conviction go well with in opposition to Lee, eight police investigators and the city of New Milford will go to trial. In addition to discovering in opposition to Lee, the court docket dominated {that a} jury may fairly discover that state and New Milford police fabricated or hid proof that will have undermined the case in opposition to the youngsters.
In Lee’s case, it will be a listening to in damages somewhat than a trial. Jurors might be instructed that, due to Bolden’s ruling, Lee has been discovered responsible for fabricating the essential proof and the jurors want solely determine how a lot he owes Henning and Birch in damages.
Bolden’s ruling additionally was important of the workplace of state Attorney General William Tong, which is defending Lee and several other former state police detectives within the case. Bolden mentioned there’s an immunity protection that would have been exercised in an effort to guard Lee from a pretrial legal responsibility judgment, however Tong’s workplace inexplicably failed to take action.
Tong’s workplace mentioned Wednesday, “We disagree with Judge Bolden’s decision, and we will appeal. We stand by our lawyers’ strong work in this case. They offered a vigorous and legally correct defense.”
Craig Raabe and Jim Cousins of West Hartford, who’re representing Henning, issued an announcement Wednesday, saying, “Judge Bolden’s thoughtful decision was based on undisputed evidence, which included the sworn testimony of Henry Lee’s co-defendant who collected the towel. Shawn Henning is looking forward to trying this case as he seeks some form of justice for 30 years of wrongful incarceration.”
According to the transcript of the listening to earlier than Bolden, Detective Michael Graham testified that he didn’t see Lee on the scene after the killing and was unaware whether or not the towel had been examined earlier than he collected it as proof.
Reporting by Edmund H. Mahony is included on this story. Ed Stannard may be reached at [email protected].
Source: www.bostonherald.com”