Archive for October, 2009

Ex-Lab Employee Accuses Dallas Crime Lab of Sloppiness

Thursday, October 29th, 2009

A disgruntled ex-employee of the Southwestern Institute of Forensic Science, Dallas County’s crime lab, has filed suit against his past employer, accusing the institute of “slip-shod analysis” and “sloppy science.” Dr. Chris Nulf, a forensic biologist, claims the labs use expired chemicals in testing procedures, that the lab failed to secure case files, and that a box fan blew over lab areas where evidence was examined. Nulf was fired in May, for what the SWIFS claimed to be “unsatisfactory performance.” However, he says he was let go after repeatedly pointing out problems with the laboratory to his superiors.

lafaesofaDallas County District Attorney Craig Watkins says prosecutors will be required to re-examine a number of closed cases if Nulf’s accusation’s are correct. “Our ultimate goal is to seek the truth. If there’s an indication that something was done improperly, then we will take the appropriate measures to make sure we rectify it.”

The lab is not the first to be in the line of fire over the last few years. Crime labs in Houston, Fort Worth, and the Texas Department of Safety’s lab have all been accused of shoddy practices in the past. Experts believe it is most likely due to the relative lack of regulations over the labs themselves. There is no government body to oversee or inspect them and a proposed law requiring spot checks on the labs recently died in the legislature. Still, Nulf’s lawsuit could prove to have an immediate effect on labs throughout the state as Houston criminal attorneys and others begin to question the credibility of the lab evidence itself.

To read more about Nulf’s lawsuit, see the article on WFAA. Image Via lofaesofa [Flickr]

Ex-Enron Chief Appealing Court Decision

Thursday, October 22nd, 2009

Benjamin ChunJeffrey K. Skilling, the former chief executive of Enron is appealing his conviction to the Supreme Court on the grounds that he had not received a fair trial and the law he was sentenced under was too vague. He believes his trial was impartial because it took place in Houston, the city where Enron was located, and, as such, the city that played home to the majority of the victim’s of the company’s demise.

The law Skilling is challenging states it is illegal to “deprive another of the intangible right of honest services.” It has so far been used by prosecutors to fight corruption and fraud, as it can be used even in cases where no theft is involved. But according to Skilling and his Houston criminal lawyer, the law is too broad to be enforceable. They also believe the law should only be used against those who have made some measurable gain. The brief filed in the courts explained that Skillet’s action “even if wrongful in some way, was not the crime of honest-services fraud, because the government conceded that his acts were not intended to advance his own interests instead of Enron’s.”

He has already appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of appeals, who accepted many of his arguments, but refused to add a “private gain” rule to the law. The court did, however, vacate his existing sentence of 24 years in prison and $45 million in restitution. He has not yet been resentenced.

The Supreme Court will hear arguments on the case in December.

To learn more about this case, read the article in the New York Times. Image Via Benjamin Chun [Flickr]

Convicted Rapist Given New Trial

Monday, October 19th, 2009

ynseA convicted rapist from Harris County will be given a new trial for his crimes based on the destruction of DNA evidence by the Houston police crime lab. Lawrence J. Napper was arrested for the raping a six year old boy in 2001 after already having three rape convictions on his record. When the child was asked to identify Napper in a line up, he was able to, but when he was asked to do so in the courtroom, he was unable to identify the suspect.

DNA evidence was said to have pointed to Napper’s guilt, but his court-appointed defense attorney was unable to independently test the evidence because the Houston police had used the entire sample in their lab. While it seems the crime analysts had a lack of understanding of DNA evidence, his attorney at the time was not knowledgeable enough about the subject to thoroughly cross examine the lab technicians.  Napper was sentenced to life in prison without parole, but has continued to maintain his innocence. His chance at a new trial may exonerate him for the crime.

Napper’s current Houston criminal lawyer, BobWicoff said, “This is what we had hoped for, Judge Barr recognized the injustice of a crime lab destroying the only available forensic evidence in the case before Napper was even arrested, much less being given an attorney or his own expert.”

To read more, see the article in the Houston Chronicle. Image via ynse [Flickr]