1
   

Houston Crime Lab - probe urged

 
 
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 07:42 am
Officials urge special probe of crime lab
Famed attorney weighs in on call for major reforms at HPD facility
By STEVE MCVICKER


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Audio: Irma Rios, the new director of HPD's crime lab, talks about:
• Her background and the new job
• What she plans to do in the position


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© HoustonChronicle.com
In the wake of new allegations of problems at the Houston Police Department crime laboratory, politicians, activists and a nationally known defense lawyer urged local officials Friday to appoint a special master to conduct a large-scale review of evidence processed by HPD analysts.

"What we need here in Houston is the appointment of a special master, an independent person ... just to see if any mistakes in those cases might have led to wrongful convictions," said attorney Barry Scheck, co-founder of the Innocence Project in New York City.

"What we're talking about is 25 years of bad science (at the HPD lab)," said Scheck.

Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal, who has consistently opposed the appointment of a special prosecutor to conduct a grand jury investigation independent of his office, says that he would not oppose the appointment of a special master.

"It's OK with me," he said, if the city agrees to pay for it.

Through a spokesman Friday, Mayor Bill White said he wants Police Chief Harold Hurtt to confer with Rosenthal before making a decision about a special master. However, at a press conference earlier in the day, when asked about a special master, Hurtt deferred to his crime-lab chief, Irma Rios.

When asked about the possibility of another massive retesting effort, Rios said it should be up to anyone with questions about his or her case to request retesting in accordance with state law.

As the result of an audit that found shoddy science and substandard working conditions at the facility, the lab was closed in December 2002. The closure triggered the retesting of DNA evidence in about 375 cases. Still looming is an even more massive retesting effort at the HPD toxicology lab, which also was closed for several months last year.

In one case, defendant Josiah Sutton was freed from prison last year after DNA retesting cleared him of rape.

Earlier this week, the Chronicle reported that questionable crime-lab practices in two cases cast some doubt on the convictions of Lawrence Napper, who was found guilty of kidnapping and rape, and Frank Fanniel, convicted of aggravated robbery.

That news was followed by the Innocence Project filing a motion Thursday to vacate the conviction of George Rodriguez, who in 1987 was sentenced to 60 years in prison for aggravated sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl. DNA testing conducted for the first time on pubic hairs found on the victim's panties now point to a man who was also a suspect during the original investigation, according to court documents.

The motion to vacate Rodriguez's conviction was also based on the findings of six forensic experts who issued a report stating the conclusions reached in the case by the HPD crime serology division were "scientifically unsound."

The serology analysis was performed by James Bolding, the former DNA lab chief who left the job to avoid being fired, and Christy Kim, whom the city attempted to fire.

Hurtt, who took over as police chief earlier this year, said Friday his department has launched a review of the Rodriguez case.

Scheck suggested that Houston would be well-served to model a special master system after one in Cleveland, which is facing its own crime-lab controversy. Under the Cleveland plan, findings of the special master are passed on to the mayor, district attorney, trial court judges and the local defense bar.

Scheck also believes that hair and fingerprint analysis by the HPD lab should be included in any review.

The New York lawyer expressed concern that some of Houston's problems may have involved capital murder defendants who have already been executed.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,039 • Replies: 4
No top replies

 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 07:44 am
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2723370

Here is one example of humankind's fallability which turned me against the death penalty.
0 Replies
 
Montana
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Aug, 2004 10:48 am
This is the main reason why I'm against the death penalty.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 22 Aug, 2004 06:13 pm
Here is another example of how the system wrongly convicts people.

DNA casts shadow of doubt on conviction
Review suggests HPD mishandled George Rodriguez's 1987 case, in the lab and elsewhere
By STEVE MCVICKER
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle
• • • • •
"The DNA has already proved my innocence, so why are they still holding me?"

George Rodriguez,
sentenced to 60 years in prison for the rape and kidnapping of a 14-year-old girl

• • • • •

Laughter doesn't come easily to George Rodriguez. Although still a large man, he carries less weight and less of his dark hair than he did when he entered prison 17 years ago.


A Houston native with a sixth-grade education, Rodriguez grew up in Denver Harbor with six brothers, two sisters and a stepbrother. His father was a truck driver; his mother a homemaker. Twice married, Rodriguez has four daughters and a son ?- who is serving a 20-year sentence in a Texas prison for murder.

Rarely, says Rodriguez, do any of his relatives make the almost 400-mile round trip to Beeville to visit him.

"I've lost everything," he said recently. "I got accused of a crime and I didn't know nothing about it."

In 1987, Rodriguez was sentenced to 60 years in prison for the rape and kidnapping of a 14-year-old girl because of evidence analysis that some experts now say may have been botched by the Houston Police Department crime laboratory.

In addition, court documents show that the lab mishandled new DNA tests on the evidence years later, further delaying Rodriguez's effort to clear his name.

RESOURCES
• Pauline Louie's letter
• E-mail correspondence between prosecutors about crime lab concerns

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Audio: Irma Rios, the new director of HPD's crime lab, talks about:
• Her background and the new job
• What she plans to do in the position

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Extra: Archive of HPD crime lab coverage.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Some files require Acrobat Reader; audio requires the free RealPlayer.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© HoustonChronicle.com
Although the victim identified Rodriguez three separate times as one of her attackers, HPD's own records of the original investigation indicate police discounted evidence that not only pointed to another suspect, but strongly suggested that the other suspect had a history of sexual assault.

Meanwhile, Rodriguez remains in a South Texas prison.

"The DNA has already proved my innocence," he said. "So why are they still holding me?"


'Scientifically unsound'
As he sits in a break room at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice's Garza Unit West near Beeville, Rodriguez's tattooed forearms ?- a naked woman on the right, a serpent on the left ?- protect an envelope filled with documents generated during his almost two-decade battle to prove his innocence.

Under fluorescent lights, he sips a soft drink and stares at the blue-and-white linoleum floor as he wrestles with questions about his case and how DNA might help him finally win his freedom.

"I was trying to find some help to prove my innocence," Rodriguez said, "and I finally came across an organization that was willing to take on my case."

He found that help at the Innocence Project, a legal aid group in New York, in 2001.

This month, the organization released a report by six national forensic experts who reviewed the crime lab's original analysis of the evidence. The panel found that the lab's conclusions in the case were "scientifically unsound."

Although no DNA testing was available for the case in 1987, it had become a forensic mainstay by August 2002, when state District Judge Belinda Hill ordered the Houston police lab to conduct DNA testing on any remaining evidence in the case.

But the lab was shut down in December of that year when an independent audit raised questions about the integrity of the lab's work in thousands of cases.

Hair evidence was sent to ReliaGene Technologies in New Orleans. Analysts there, blaming HPD's lab, reported that not enough evidence remained for a very precise form of DNA testing they thought was necessary.

The remaining evidence was sent to another lab for a less-exact procedure that only links individuals through a common maternal ancestor and does not require as much DNA material.

The testing, conducted in April, ruled out Rodriguez as the source of the pubic hair and instead implicated Isidro Yanez, a convicted criminal with a violent reputation who also had been a suspect in the rape investigation in 1987.

"If (the hair) had been sent to another lab in the first place, we could have gotten a profile nailing Yanez to the wall," said Innocence Project lawyer Vanessa Potkin. "But what we have is still extremely powerful."

But a review of written reports filed by police who originally worked the case suggests that mistakes by the HPD lab may not have been the only flaws in the investigation.


Horror for teen
On the evening of Feb. 24, 1987, a 14-year-old girl was visiting a 16-year-old male friend outside her home in the 7900 block of Kerr in the rough-and-tumble Ship Channel neighborhood of Pleasantville when two men pulled up in a green-and-white Chrysler Cordoba.

They asked for directions and help with a flat tire, but the teenagers saw that there was no flat tire and tried to flee, police said. The heavier man grabbed the girl and forced her into the car.

The girl told police that as the men took her to a house in nearby Denver Harbor, one of them called the other man George.

However, she said she didn't believe that was actually the man's name because she'd also heard them tell each other not to use their real names in front of her.

The girl said she was forced into a house where a third man was watching television. He did nothing to help her as the kidnappers dragged her into a bedroom and slapped her around. After threatening to kill her and ordering her to undress, they raped her.

Afterward, she said, they told her to get dressed and put a ski mask over her head as a blindfold. She said they then drove to a dirt road behind a Mobil station along the East Freeway, where they pulled her out and one of them handed her a dollar.

"This is for your trouble," he told her.

The girl said that, as she removed the ski mask, he warned her not to look at them or they would kill her.


Tracking suspects
Based on the girl's description of the house where she was raped, police zeroed in on a one-story, white house with red trim on El Paso in Denver Harbor ?- three blocks from Rodriguez's house on Abilene. According to a police report, Officer Eddie Rodriguez informed the other officers that he was familiar with the location and the likely suspects: Manuel Beltran and George Rodriguez, who was on probation for burglary. The two Rodriguezes are not related.

Police showed the victim two photo spreads. From the first group, she pointed to a photograph of George Rodriguez as one of her attackers. From the other spread, she selected Beltran.

Two days after the attack, during a raid on the suspects' house, Houston police detained Beltran and his older brother, Uvaldo.

The officers questioned the brothers in separate rooms. Manuel confessed to taking part in the rape but said Rodriguez had not.

"During the processing and discussion, it was learned from Manuel (that) the suspect believed to have been George Rodriguez ... was in fact a man by the name of Isi," wrote officer M.D. Tobar.

As the conversation with Manuel progressed, Tobar wrote, "when the full weight of the situation was explained to Manuel he broke down into tears and explained that he was afraid of Isi because Isi had a gun and threatened to shoot him if he did not 'get him that girl.' "

Manuel also told police that Isi and Rodriguez resembled each other and were heavyset.

Meanwhile, police said, Uvaldo was verifying his brother's story. According to the police report, he gave a written statement saying that he had been watching television when "Manuel, EZ and the girl came in through the kitchen door. That while they were bringing in the girl, she was crying and that EZ had the girl around the neck and (she) was acting like she did not want to be inside."

Although Uvaldo referred to his brother's accomplice as "EZ" instead of Isi, Rodriguez's attorneys contend that Uvaldo and Manuel obviously were talking about the same man: Isidro Yanez.

Indeed, in a later report, Tobar wrote that "it should be noted that the wanted suspect's first name is Isidoro (sic) and the nickname in Spanish for Isidoro is Isi. This could have easily been confused and changed to EZ due to the similar sound."

The arrest warrant for Rodriguez was withdrawn, but police continued looking at him as the second rapist. They did not even question Yanez until almost a month after the attack.

When investigators located Yanez at his mother's home, he identified himself as his own brother. Only through fingerprint records did police learn his true identity. He then told officers that he knew nothing about the assault and kidnapping but had allowed Manuel Beltran to borrow his car.

"Yanez seemed fairly well informed about what had been said to officers about him," the police report said.


Weighing the evidence
In the meantime, the foreman at the factory where Rodriguez worked had told police that Rodriguez was on the job at the time of the rape. Time cards supported his statement, although police noted that workers often punched in and out for each other.

But in March 1987, police persuaded Rodriguez to take part in a lineup. According to another report by Tobar, the victim identified Rodriguez as one of her attackers "by the way he stood."

Rodriguez was arrested and voluntarily gave police hair samples. HPD crime lab analyst Reidun Hilleman's preliminary microscopic review failed to match Rodriguez to any of the hairs found at the crime scene. Rodriguez was released without charges.

Police reports show that investigators and prosecutors then chose to wait until all crime lab analysis was completed before deciding what to do next.

About that same time, one Harris County prosecutor began cautioning the police about zeroing in on Rodriguez.

According to the HPD's own investigation reports, Assistant District Attorney Edward Porter informed Sgt. S.L. Clappart in April 1987 that he was investigating a case involving a double kidnapping and sexual assault with details similar to the attack on the 14-year-old girl. One similarity, the prosecutor said, was that Yanez had been implicated as not only a suspect but the driving force behind the crime.

Even though the victim in Clappart's investigation had identified Rodriguez as one of her attackers, Porter urged the police "not to rush into an indictment situation," according to the report.

His concern was based on the claims of Frank Campos, who recently had been arrested in connection with the abduction and rape, about a year earlier, of two Houston women in the Denver Harbor area.


A history of assault
In an interview with the Houston Chronicle last week, Campos, who served three years of a 15-year sentence for his part in the rape, reiterated his claim that, despite his guilty plea, it was Yanez who insisted on grabbing the women at gunpoint. He added that only Yanez raped the women, although Yanez was never charged.

"Everybody knew he was a rapist," Campos told the Chronicle.

That apparently included Yanez's mother. In July 1987, Yanez was accused of sexually assaulting and beating his mother's pregnant live-in maid.

"She wants charges filed against her son because he, on several other occasions, had assaulted women and nothing has ever been done to him," the police report states.

"She thinks her son is mentally ill and needs to be arrested before he hurts someone else."

Yanez pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of attempted sexual assault and was sentenced to one year in the county jail, according to court records. He declined to be interviewed for this story.

On April 30, 1987, the crime lab's Hilleman informed police detective Clappart that "she had located one hair from the (victim's) panties that was consistent with the hair sample from George Rodriguez."

The next morning, aggravated kidnapping and aggravated sexual assault charges were filed.

Another factor in their decision was an April photo spread. Out of 100 photographs, according to the police report, the teenage victim picked out both Yanez and Rodriguez.

"The (victim) stated they both look close to each other but she insisted George Rodriguez was the man (who assaulted her)," said the report.

The conclusions of the HPD crime lab cemented the decision to prosecute Rodriguez.

In addition to the hair comparison evidence, at trial prosecutors also presented testimony from James Bolding, the head of the crime lab's serology division, who analyzed semen evidence for blood type against samples from both Yanez and Rodriguez.

But according to the six forensic experts who reviewed the work this year, Bolding's analysis wrongly excluded Yanez as a possible source.

Combined with this year's first-time DNA testing of the pubic hair, which now indicates Yanez as the likely source, the Innocence Project's Potkin says the Rodriguez case is a classic example of the criminal justice system gone wrong.

"It's just amazing when you think about the amount of time it takes for someone to get exonerated," she said.

"It's just indicative of the fact that the system doesn't really care about these cases."

Hilleman and Eddie Rodriguez, Clappert and Porter declined to comment for this article. Tobar and Bolding could not be reached. Through a representative, HPD crime lab Director Irma Rios said her office is reviewing the evidence in the Rodriguez case but has nothing to report.


'I'm not really angry'
Despite the news about the DNA evidence, Rodriguez tries not to get too excited. Still, he can't help thinking about possibly returning to the free world.

As he prepared to return to his cell, he gathered his legal papers, then paused to reflect on the people and circumstances that led to his 17 years in prison.

"I'm not really angry," he said. "I just can't believe it happened."

As for Isidro Yanez, he was arrested and accused in September 2002 of abducting his estranged wife, whom he allegedly assaulted the day before.

"The (victim) stated that she's afraid (Yanez) will hurt her again or kill her," the arresting officer wrote in his report.

In July 2003, Yanez pleaded guilty to kidnapping and was sentenced to two years in prison. Because of credit for time served before his plea, he is scheduled to be released next month.

According to state law, however, there is no statute of limitations in sexual cases in which new forensic DNA evidence is discovered.

The Harris County District Attorney's Office on Monday plans to file its response to Rodriguez's motion to have his sentence vacated.

District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal told the Chronicle last week that he was not yet convinced that analytical mistakes were made in the case. Friday, however, Assistant District Attorney Jacky Roady, who is preparing his office's response, said prosecutors "are keeping an open mind."

[email protected]
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Aug, 2004 02:41 pm
© HoustonChronicle.com
A Houston crime lab supervisor interpreted similar scientific evidence in opposite ways in two rape cases, offering testimony each time that bolstered the prosecution's case.


During the trial of George Rodriguez, convicted of a 1987 rape on what some consider scientifically unsound evidence, Jim Bolding testified that tests excluded another man as a possible suspect in the crime.

Six years later, Bolding came to the opposite conclusion under apparently identical circumstances, testifying that Abe McFarland could not be excluded as a contributor to biological samples from another rape.

The inconsistency troubles forensic experts and Rodriguez's lawyers. They say it may point to a pattern of scientists from the Houston Police Department crime lab manipulating their findings to fit prosecutors' theories of various crimes.

"The two situations are the same, and there is nothing that should have made him testify differently," said Libby Johnson, a forensic expert and HPD crime lab critic, after the Houston Chronicle detailed the two cases for her. "He should have testified in both cases that he would not have been able to exclude either suspect."

Barry Scheck, one of the founders of the Innocence Project, which represents Rodriguez, noted that Bolding's testimony worked against the defendant in each case.

"He spoke the truth when it helped the prosecutor, but when it came to the defense using the same science, he testifies to the opposite," Scheck said. "What he is saying in the Rodriguez case directly conflicts with what he is saying in the McFarland (case), which is what is scientifically correct.

"Bolding is moving back and forth and saying whatever is convenient."

Bolding did not return phone calls for comment Saturday. He retired from HPD in June 2003 before he could be fired as head of the lab's troubled DNA division.


Questionable results
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said he would review Bolding's testimony in the Rodriguez and McFarland cases.

The discrepancies in Bolding's testimony and other issues in the Rodriguez case will be the subjects of a hearing Monday before state District Judge Belinda Hill regarding the 1987 case, in which a 14-year-old girl was kidnapped and raped by two men.

Rodriguez became a suspect shortly after the girl was attacked. He lived several blocks from the house where she was attacked, and the victim picked him out of a police lineup.

But there also was significant evidence that pointed to Isidro Yanez, whom the girl also picked out of a lineup. The second man charged in the crime, Manuel Beltran, named Yanez as his accomplice when he confessed. A prosecutor warned investigators that Yanez had been implicated in several other rapes.

Rodriguez's lawyers built his trial defense around the possibility that Yanez may have committed the crime. But when Bolding took the stand, he told jurors that it would be scientifically impossible.

The sample of semen collected from the victim contained antigens from someone with type A blood, which would contain A and H antigens. But someone with type O blood, such as Yanez, cannot be excluded from such a sample because their antigens, H, could also be included in such a sample, experts said. Yet Bolding testified that Yanez was excluded.

"Is it possible to determine whether or not Isadora (sic) Yanez is one of the donors to the semen found on the panties, pantyhose and rectal swab and smear of (the victim)?" prosecutor Bill Hawkins asked Bolding.

"It is possible to make a determination," Bolding replied.

"OK," Hawkins said, "and is he a possible donor of the semen?"

"No, sir, he is not," Bolding testified.

Rodriguez was convicted and sentenced to 60 years in prison.

In the McFarland case, the defendant had the same profile as Yanez ?- an O blood type with H antigens. The sample collected from that victim had the same makeup as the sample in the Rodriguez case ?- an A blood type with A and H antigens.

But Bolding's testimony was different.

"There are so many variables in this particular scenario that it would be unwise to exclude Mr. McFarland," Bolding testified during McFarland's trial.


Discrepancies

Bolding's testimony in the McFarland case is correct, experts say ?- someone with blood type O cannot be excluded. But it directly conflicts with his statements about Yanez.

Rosenthal said he was unfamiliar with the McFarland case but said Saturday, after the discrepancy was explained to him, that it is possible that there is a difference between the cases.

"There could be an explanation," Rosenthal said, but he could not elaborate.

Johnson, the DNA expert, said she finds it hard to believe that the cases are any different based on the blood-type tests conducted.

"Unless they had done some enzyme test and excluded (Yanez) that way, then there is no reason it should be different," she said. "Even then, if those tests were not revealed to the defense, then that is not kosher either."


Getting another look

Rosenthal explained that HPD analyst Christy Kim, who worked on the Rodriguez case with Bolding, said in an affidavit this week that the lab did some work on the case that was not reflected in their bench notes. He said he intends to take new samples from Yanez and process them in the same manner to replicate HPD's results.

Scheck asked what the new tests would accomplish.

"We already have the results from 1987," he said. "I question whether she can remember this case from 20 years ago and that she didn't write something down. It is highly unscientific."

Six forensic experts who reviewed Bolding's testimony in the Rodriguez case called his conclusions "egregious misstatements of conventional serology" in a report submitted with Rodriguez's motion to vacate his sentence. "These statements reveal that either the witness lacked a fundamental understanding of the most basic principles of blood typing analysis or he knowingly gave false testimony to support the state's case against George Rodriguez."

Additional evidence also has surfaced in the Rodiguez case that points to Yanez, the other suspect.

New DNA tests ruled out Rodriguez as the source of a pubic hair from the crime and instead implicated Yanez, a convicted criminal with a violent reputation.


Judge backs lab review

Rosenthal has said he is unswayed by the new evidence and is "moving toward a position that HPD was correct."

But Rosenthal cited the testimony issues as another reason for an independent review of the crime lab, which he offered support for the first time this week.

Earlier this year, state District Judge Jan Krocker ruled that there was probable cause to think Bolding committed aggravated perjury in a 2002 sex-assault trial, and a special court of inquiry was convened. It was dismissed, however, after another judge ruled that the two-year statute of limitations had expired.

"I am hoping that when people testify in court they testify consistently about situations," he said, "and if they don't, obviously that is another reason for HPD to allow a thorough investigation of everything done at that lab."

[email protected]
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Houston Crime Lab - probe urged
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/12/2026 at 12:26:54