Posts tagged "murder"

Prosecutors dropped charges against a famous California tennis referee last week, saying that they had received more information in the case. The defendant, a 70-year-old California woman, has always maintained her innocence.

Authorities charged the referee with homicide after her 80-year-old husband died last year. While prosecutors accused her of fatally bludgeoning the man with a coffee cup, other evidence suggested that the man actually suffered from a severe heart attack as he was walking down the stairs. Some medical evidence from a well-regarded physician supported this defense.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled at the end of June that it was unconstitutional to impose mandatory life sentences without the possibility of parole on juveniles convicted of murder. The justices said that mandatory life sentences are cruel and unusual punishment because they do not take into account extenuating circumstances around the crime or give the juvenile the chance to reform.

Children and teens are different than adults because their brains are still developing. The ruling by the Supreme Court does not say that judges cannot impose life sentences without parole on juveniles, but that these sentences cannot be mandatory. A judge can use his or her discretion in sentencing the juvenile following a murder conviction. Factors that could be taken into account include the juvenile's home environment and the possibility for rehabilitation.

Other posts on this blog have discussed how the death investigation system in the U.S. contains many troubling flaws that could lead to the wrongful prosecution and wrongful conviction of innocent people for serious violent crimes, such as murder, sex crimes and child abuse.

The journalists at ProPublica have been investigating the death investigation system and have noted in many articles on their website the ways in which the death investigation system may lead to faulty conclusions by forensic pathologists, coroners and medical examiners and could lead to innocent people ending up behind bars.

The governor of California recently commuted the sentence of a grandmother who had been convicted of felony child endangerment in the death of her grandson. There was debate in the coroner's office about how the child had died. Some said it was shaken baby syndrome, but others said there was not enough evidence to conclude that the grandmother had abused the baby.

As discussed on other posts, a man had his conviction for the sexual assault of a 6-month-old child voided by an appeals court in his state, and the man returned home recently after serving 9 years of his 60-year sentence.

The man, however, will face a new trial by the prosecutor in his town. The prosecutor still believes that the man caused the baby's death through sexual assault even though there is strong evidence that the baby actually suffered from a bleeding disorder and died from natural causes.

The man has always said he was innocent. His conviction was voided because the appeals court thought that a reasonable jury may not have decided to convict if they had been provided with this medical evidence at the time. The man's defense attorney at the time had not attempted to refute the medical evidence of the prosecution.

The former LAPD detective who was on trial for a 1986 cold case murder was found guilty by a California jury last week. The former detective was convicted of the murder of a woman who was married to her former boyfriend. The prosecution portrayed her as a woman who was enraged after being jilted by her former lover.

The detective had built a successful career as an art theft and fraud detective. She had a husband and an adopted daughter. Her defense attorney tried to create a parallel story for the murder, saying that the husband committed the murder and that he was the one who was actually still interested in the police officer at the time of the murder, not the other way around. The jury ultimately believed the prosecution's version.

As discussed in the previous post, an ongoing investigation by ProPublica and other news organizations has uncovered serious flaws in the death investigation system in the U.S. The most difficult death investigations often involve the unexpected deaths of children.

Children's bodies are different than adults and many coroners and medical examiners might not have the training to know how a child's body looks in death or what diseases a child may suffer from that cause bruising and bleeding. A coroner who concludes without question that a bleeding and bruised child was abused may be very wrong.

This is because children can suffer from a number of different natural conditions that lead to bruising and bleeding. The signs and symptoms of these diseases may look like abuse to even the most skilled doctor. This doctor would know, however, to examine blood tests before reaching conclusions.

ProPublica, along with other news organizations, has been conducting an ongoing investigation into the death investigation system in the U.S. and has discovered that it contains many flaws. These flaws lead to faulty conclusions during autopsies in unexpected deaths and can lead to false sexual assault, murder and child abuse allegations as well as wrongful convictions.

The unexpected deaths of children are among the trickiest and most emotionally charged investigations. This blog covered the case of a man who was convicted of sexually assaulting a 6-month-old in his care. The child died soon after he was the last to be alone with her.

The man, however, denied hurting the child and said she had showed signs of deteriorating health for days. His conviction was voided by an appeals court that said his defense attorney had not adequately challenged the prosecution's expert medical testimony that had concluded sexual abuse had occurred.

As discussed in the previous two posts, the murder trial has begun in the case of the ex-LAPD detective who has been accused of killing the wife of an ex-boyfriend in 1986. The crime happened in Los Angeles in the late 80s when law enforcement was overwhelmed with the numbers of homicides at the time.

Initially, the lead detective theorized that the crime was done by burglars who had been targeting the area because some electronic equipment had been stacked by the door and the woman's BMW was stolen.

Later, law enforcement officers took up the case again and a break came when they discovered that the DNA showed that the DNA in the saliva meant that a woman had bit the victim not a man. At the time of the murder, the victim's father had told police that the defendant had threatened his daughter and she was afraid of her.

As discussed in the previous post, a former LAPD detective is currently on trial for a 1986 cold-case murder. Prosecutors say that a DNA sample taken from her matches the DNA in a saliva sample taken in 1986 on a bite wound on the victim and stored for more than two decades.

The case has gained international attention because of its strange circumstances, including the fact that a respected police officer promoted over the years to an art theft detective position and with a husband and child has been accused of a brutal crime committed years ago.

The case is also interesting because the saliva was collected at the scene before DNA analysis was available to prosecute violent crimes. It was saved on the cusp of that possibility and not actually used to charge anyone with murder until more than 20 years had gone by.

The murder trial is underway for a former LAPD detective accused of the 1986 killing of the wife of her former boyfriend in Los Angeles. The detective was charged in 2009 with the murder after prosecutors say a DNA sample taken from the detective matched a sample of saliva taken from a bite wound on the victim in 1986 and stored in the cold case files.

Prosecutors accuse the former detective of murdering the 29-year-old wife of her former boyfriend because she was broken-hearted and enraged. At the time of the murder, the detective had been with the LAPD for a few years after graduating from UCLA. Prosecutors portray her as a jilted lover seeking revenge on her former boyfriend.

As discussed in the previous post, the news organization ProPublica has been working on an ongoing investigation into the death investigation system in the U.S. One of the areas where the death investigation system in the country can have flaws is in the investigation into the deaths of children.

A recent post discussed how a California grandmother is hoping that Governor Jerry Brown will grant her clemency for her conviction for shaking her grandson to death, which many experts now believe was not how the baby even died.

In addition, a Texas man recently had a conviction for child sexual assault and murder voided by the appeals court of his state because the court said his original defense attorney had failed to do enough to challenge the medical experts testifying on behalf of the prosecution.

Several posts on this blog have discussed some of the in-depth investigations done by the news organization ProPublica into the criminal justice system. A couple of recent posts discussed how ProPublica has looked into the death investigation system in the U.S. and found serious flaws. Some of the hardest cases to determine a cause of death and, therefore, more likely to result in faulty conclusions are investigations into the sexual assault and deaths of children.

Children's bodies are different than adults, which is why there is a whole field of medicine dedicated to children: pediatrics. Children are also more fragile so clues as to how a child died can be more subtle but could also leave bigger marks on the body. Some diseases, such as the blood disorder sickle cell anemia, can look like child abuse in a deceased child if the examiner does not have the expertise to find the right signs and know the difference.

As discussed in the previous two posts, sometimes people can be wrongfully accused of child abuse, sexual assault and homicide because of flaws in the death investigation and misinterpretation of medical evidence gathered. According to an ongoing investigation by ProPublica, NPR and other news organizations into the death investigation system in the U.S., at least 23 people in the U.S. and Canada have been accused falsely of killing children.

The man discussed in the previous post who had his conviction for the sexual assault of a six-month-old girl he was babysitting voided by an appeals court will face another trial. The baby died shortly after prosecutors allege the assault happened.

As discussed in the previous post, a grandmother who was sentenced to 15 years in prison in California for causing a fatal injury in her grandson's brain by allegedly shaking him is hoping Governor Jerry Brown will grant her clemency. 

In the years since her conviction, controversy and questions have arisen around the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome. It was once thought to be a sure diagnosis if certain symptoms were present, but different illnesses have since been found to cause some of the signs that can also be taken for child abuse, casting doubt on some child abuse convictions of the past.

The news organization ProPublica partnered with other news organizations to do an in-depth study of possible wrongful child abuse convictions. One man they profiled recently had his conviction for sexual assault of a child voided.

A recent investigation by the journalism organization ProPublica has revealed severe deficits in the death investigation system in the U.S., which have led to wrongful convictions of child abuse, sexual assault and murder and could lead to more. According to ProPublica, at least 23 people have faced wrongful accusations that they killed children based on questionable medical evidence in the case.

One of the problems with the system is that there are not enough medical examiners who are fully certified in forensic pathology or who understand what happens to a child's body when a child dies from disease or other causes. The system is also underfunded and lacks government oversight.

As discussed in a previous post, a grandmother who had been serving a 15-year-prison sentence in California for causing a fatal brain injury in her grandson through shaking him but was released by U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was ordered back to prison by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The California Supreme Court on Monday overturned two murder convictions for which two gang members had been sentenced to death. The two men have been on death row for 15 years.

One of the men headed the 89 Family Bloods gang during the 1980s and early 1990s. He was charged and convicted with ordering another gang member to kill two rival gang members. Both were sent to death row and both convictions are now overturned.

The Supreme Court ruled that the trial judge presiding over the 1997 trial had improperly dismissed a juror who was critical of the prosecution's homicide case against the two defendants.

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to decide whether the constitutional rights of two teens were violated when they were sent to prison without the possibility of parole after being convicted of murder. The Supreme Court consolidated two separate cases that involved the same question of constitutionality and heard the arguments for the cases earlier this month.

At issue is whether is cruel and unusual punishment to send juvenile offenders to prison for life without the possibility of parole. This sentence does not leave room for rehabilitation as the teen ages and matures in a correctional facility. The justices will decide whether it violated the juvenile offenders' rights to not have the chance or possibility for rehabilitation, and whether this should be a key component to be kept in mind when sentencing minors for violent and other crimes.

The defendants were both 14 at the time of their crimes and both note in their cases that only 73 people are currently serving life sentences for crimes committed at that age.

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals was wrong in overturning a grandmother's conviction for murder in her grandson's death. A jury believed that the baby died from "shaken baby syndrome" at the hands of the grandmother in 1996. The medical examiner found blood inside the baby's skull and concluded that the grandmother had shaken the baby. The grandmother must now return to California to finish her jail sentence.

Death investigations into finding cause of death of children have been under greater scrutiny in the media lately because the conclusions of these investigators can lead to people being wrongly convicted of homicide, child abuse and other crimes.

The mental competency of Jared Lee Loughner continues to be in dispute. In order to stand trial on murder charges, Loughner must be declared mentally competent. In order to help Loughner become mentally competent, he has been forcibly medicated at a prison hospital against his will. However, Loughner's attorneys won a temporary victory at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit this week that may change that.

Loughner suffers from various psychological issues and is being housed at a prison hospital until he is deemed mentally capable of standing trial. He has met with a court-appointed psychologist a number of instances in March, but on two occasions, Loughner grew angry and heaved a chair at the individual. Two medical experts confirmed at a competency hearing that Loughner suffers from both schizophrenia and delusions.

In order to stand trial for a crime, a defendant must be mentally competent. Broadly defined, mental competency includes a defendant's ability to understand the nature of the charges against him and the ability to assist his attorneys in presenting his defense.

Jared Loughner stands accused of the attempted murder of U.S. Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the killing of six others, including a U.S. Federal Judge. However, there are serious questions about his competency and his ability to stand trial.