Quantcast
Channel: the charles smith blog
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 8456

Patrick Pursley; Illinois; Forensic scientist (Ballistics expert) Daniel Gunnell revises testimony that helped convict man of murder, The RRStar reports..."Daniel Gunnell, now an assistant director of the Illinois State Police Joliet Forensic Science Laboratory, worked as a state crime lab firearms and toolmark scientist at the time of the murder trial. Gunnell concluded that bullets and two spent shell casings found at the crime scene had come from a Taurus 9 mm semiautomatic pistol recovered from the apartment of Patrick A. Pursley - a man sentenced to life in prison but who has for years proclaimed his innocence. Gunnell testified at the time that microscopic markings on the recovered bullets and shell casings, compared with test-fired bullets and casings, showed they had been fired by Pursley's Taurus handgun "to the exclusion of all others." New tests have called Gunnell's 1994 testimony into question. Gunnell today said he had revisited the evidence himself in 2012. He still maintains the shell casings were more than likely fired by that particular gun. But his new review of the bullets - which is consistent with the conclusions of a new court-ordered examination of the evidence by the state crime lab - were inconclusive; Gunnell now says there is not enough evidence to prove conclusively that the Taurus fired the bullets, but neither could the gun be eliminated as the weapon that fired them. And Gunnell said that even if he had reached the same conclusions as he did in 1994, he would no longer describe the evidence the way he did then because of changing industry standards. Instead, he would tell jurors that his tests had concluded the bullets matched to a "reasonable degree of scientific certainty." The testimony was so strongly worded in 1994 that it denied Pursley a fair trial and "turned a weak and collapsing case based on circumstantial evidence into a case purportedly built upon a solid forensic foundation," Pursley's lawyers, Steven Drizin and Andrew Vail, told McGraw in their written post-conviction petition."

Next: Prof. Brandon L. Garrett: Potential ground rules for addressing unreliable forensic evidence: University of Virginia Law School, recommends a few - an an article published by The American Bar Association; (Which does not seem to be available for public access); Thnks to the Forensics Forum for drawing this article to our attention; (It's most unfortunate that we are considering potential ground rules now for a problem that has resulted in wrongful convictions in the U.S.A. and elsewhere for decades - but I will fall back on 'better late than never.' HL)...". Professor Garrett recommends the following measures should be taken if an area of forensic science is found to be unreliable: Statutory triggers to require audits of tainted crime lab evidence; Vigorous affirmative efforts to notify clients of the unreliable forensic evidence; Meaningful access to discovery including transcripts, lab notes, etc.; Allowing DNA testing when samples are available in a case; Hearings in which the burden is shifted to the government to prove that the case was not affected by tainted forensic evidence; Waiving procedural barriers to appeals;
Previous: Tyra Patterson: Ohio: Bulletin: False confession case; Multitiude of voices - including a woman who saw her sister shot to death in 1994, actors and politicians - being raised for Governor John Kasich to grant clemency, The Dayton Daily News reports..."She was convicted of aggravated murder and initially sentenced to 43 years in prison — longer than the shooter — but departing Gov. Ted Strickland commuted her sentence on his last day in office in 2011, making her eligible for parole. Patterson later said that she picked up the necklace from the ground after someone else ripped it off during the fight, and ran off with it after the shooting started. She said her videotaped confession followed hours of non-videotaped interrogation that threatened to charge her with murder if she didn’t confess to the robbery. Several of the jurors from the case said they would not have voted to convict Patterson if they knew she had been the one to call 911 after the shooting. One of the jurors, Nancy Day, has gathered 236,000 signatures for an online petition urging Kasich to grant clemency." (December 5, 2016); Reporter Josh Sweigert;
$
0
0

STORY: "Gun expert revises testimony that helped convict Rockford man of murder," by reporter Jeff Kolkey, published by RR.Star on December 12, 2016.

GUST: "A forensic scientist, during a hearing today before Winnebago County Chief Judge Joseph McGraw, backed off testimony from 1994 credited with convicting a Rockford man on charges of first-degree murder. Daniel Gunnell, now an assistant director of the Illinois State Police Joliet Forensic Science Laboratory, worked as a state crime lab firearms and toolmark scientist at the time of the murder trial. Gunnell concluded that bullets and two spent shell casings found at the crime scene had come from a Taurus 9 mm semiautomatic pistol recovered from the apartment of Patrick A. Pursley - a man sentenced to life in prison but who has for years proclaimed his innocence.
Gunnell testified at the time that microscopic markings on the recovered bullets and shell casings, compared with test-fired bullets and casings, showed they had been fired by Pursley's Taurus handgun "to the exclusion of all others." New tests have called Gunnell's 1994 testimony into question.
Gunnell today said he had revisited the evidence himself in 2012. He still maintains the shell casings were more than likely fired by that particular gun. But his new review of the bullets - which is consistent with the conclusions of a new court-ordered examination of the evidence by the state crime lab - were inconclusive; Gunnell now says there is not enough evidence to prove conclusively that the Taurus fired the bullets, but neither could the gun be eliminated as the weapon that fired them. And Gunnell said that even if he had reached the same conclusions as he did in 1994, he would no longer describe the evidence the way he did then because of changing industry standards. Instead, he would tell jurors that his tests had concluded the bullets matched to a "reasonable degree of scientific certainty." The testimony was so strongly worded in 1994 that it denied Pursley a fair trial and "turned a weak and collapsing case based on circumstantial evidence into a case purportedly built upon a solid forensic foundation," Pursley's lawyers, Steven Drizin and Andrew Vail, told McGraw in their written post-conviction petition. Pursley insists he is innocent in the slaying of 22-year-old Andrew Ascher, who was shot and killed during an attempted armed robbery.........Pursley for years unsuccessfully appealed his conviction. Then, after a 2007 change in the law, an appellate court finally sided with Pursley and ordered the ballistic evidence be re-examined. Now, with the help of the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University and lawyers from the Chicago-based law firm Jenner & Block who took his case for free, Pursley is asking McGraw to overturn his conviction and set him free or order a new trial. Vail said that a third day of testimony would proceed Wednesday. McGraw is then expected to set a date for closing arguments."

The entire story can be found at:
http://www.rrstar.com/news/20161213/gun-expert-revises-testimony-that-helped-convict-rockford-man-of-murder

PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy; Publisher; The Charles Smith Blog.

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 8456

Trending Articles