News 09.01.17

This Week in Innocence News – September 1, 2017

By Innocence Staff

Here are some of this week’s news highlights:

Detroit police chief will reopen cases worked by officers who helped convict innocent man 
Detroit Police Chief James Craig says he plans to reopen every case worked by David Pauch and Donald Stawiasz, two officers who sent Desmond Ricks to prison for 25 years by fabricating ballistic evidence. The Detroit Free Press

Editorial calls for comprehensive review of drug convictions involving Amherst Crime Lab
In an editorial on Wednesday, the Daily Hampshire Gazette urged Massachusetts lawmakers to allocate funds for a comprehensive review of drug convictions based on evidence processed in the now-defunct Amherst Drug Lab, where a chemist was found to have been tampering with evidence for as long as eight years. The Daily Hampshire Gazette

Prosecutor in 1978 murder case now doubts defendant’s guilt
Kevin Brinkley was only 15 years old when he was convicted of a 1977 murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole. Gerald Dugan, the former assistant district attorney who prosecuted Brinkley, now says he has long had doubts about the case. The Philadelphia Inquirer

Book about Willie Grimes’ wrongful conviction becomes Amazon bestseller 
Willie Grimes spent 24 years in prison for a rape he did not commit before he was exonerated in 2012. A book about his wrongful conviction is now an Amazon best-seller. NPR
Leave a reply

Thank you for visiting us. You can learn more about how we consider cases here. Please avoid sharing any personal information in the comments below and join us in making this a hate-speech free and safe space for everyone.

  1. Jackie Bell says:

    Is there any information on the process for getting a case reopened that David Pauch testified in? Is there a form or application of some sort? Do you have to contact DPD?

  2. Linda Modrow says:

    My son is serving a life sentence for allegedly lending his car to a killer. The killer was found not guilty in a dual jury trial that went on for many weeks (in 1990). Does this make any sense?
    Worse yet was my son’s incompetent defense lawyer who refused to call his alibi witnesses to the stand to testify that the car could not have been used because my son drove it to his sister’s house that night. We all asked the lawyer why he didn’t allow those witnesses to testify and the reason given was: “The State hasn’t proven its case so there is no need to present alibi witnesses….we are resting our case.”

Thanks for your comment

Featured news

Press "Enter" or click on the arrow to show results.

Search