Few inmates make requests for DNA testing

[softheart]

OHIO:


Sometimes DNA evidence won't prove innocence or guilt. In other cases, the
evidence, compiled years earlier, has disappeared.

Jerome Campbell, spared execution Thursday by Gov. Bob Taft, remains the
only convicted killer to take advantage of a state program that offers DNA
testing under limited circumstances.

More Ohio death row inmates want to accept the state's offer to test DNA
but in many cases aren't able to, David Bodiker, the state public
defender, said Friday.

"In many of the cases it wasn't a factor and the evidence is not
available," he said.

For example, DNA evidence once existed in the case of Anthony Apanovitch,
sentenced to die in the 1984 rape and strangulation of a Cleveland woman.

Laboratory slides with samples from swabs of the victim were discovered
and tested in 1991, then destroyed. A prosecutor's report on the tests
exists, but there are too many questions about the reliability of the
evidence, said Dale Baich, a public defender representing Apanovitch.

In Campbell's case, defense attorneys wanted to test gloves, a hat and
shoes.

The shoes were tested but the gloves and hat were missing, Bodiker said.

Former Attorney General Betty Montgomery created Ohio's program in 2000,
modeling it on similar programs in several other states.

To qualify, inmates cannot have had an earlier test with a definite
result, must have taken advantage of DNA testing at trial and must show
that the testing could exonerate them.

A bill on its way to Taft would make such testing part of state law.

26 states have passed laws or have pending legislation that allow inmates
to have DNA tested and have the evidence reviewed, said Richard Dieter,
executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Death Penalty Information
Center.

Since 1973, 108 death row inmates nationally have been exonerated. Of
those, DNA was a substantial factor in establishing innocence in 12 cases,
according to the center.

DNA evidence is only available in about 10 % of criminal cases, Dieter
said.

"States differ in how restrictive the testing is but it at least sends the
signal to police departments that this evidence has to be preserved
because it might be requested under this law, and that alone may help,"
Dieter said.

Campbell initially did not meet the requirements set by Montgomery, since
he couldn't prove that testing his evidence - blood on his shoes - would
exonerate him.

Evidence from the DNA test ultimately showed that blood on the gym shoes
was his blood, not that of his victim, John Henry Turner.

Campbell was convicted of stabbing Turner to death in 1988.

Montgomery made an exception because Campbell was the 1st to make a
request and had a pending execution date, said Montgomery spokesman Joe
Case.

"In the pursuit of justice we allowed the test to be conducted," Case said
Friday.

(sources: Akron Beacon Journal & Associated Press)

[antnee]

Anthony Apanovitch is my father. I'd like to know as much as possible about his case and what I could do to help.

[rstoner10]

Sorry, I don't know about this DNA developement, the DNA laws and decisions regarding DNA. It is extremely important to Anthony case & justice for all to get the system right!

I testified for your father's defense. Over the years I have stayed in contact with his most recent attorney: Dale Baich.

Neither of the 2 men I saw Mary Ann on the porch with was your dad (note, she didn't have a boyfriend either). I'd bet a million bucks the hair belongs to one of them.

The guys who I saw on the porch with her had only lived in the house for 4/5 days. During this short time they had started to say nasty things directly to me. Mind you I was married & had a toddler too. Found out later, supposedly that 1 of them had had a twin brother shot dead in a bar. A wild bunch! Our tenants could hear 1 of them, throwing up/heaving in the toilet (really loud) every morning from drinking so much. Point is this is the type of people we are dealing with. I know that it does not make them murderers but you get the pic. Before and at the time of the trial, I was scared for my own life!

The law/justice dept. totally missed that the house had a "common" basement. In other words, If I rented from the landlord, I could access the landlords house from the basement & visa versa. I believe this is exactly why the pics of the basement window has a bunch of undisturbed stuff under it.

Why didn't your uncle (Tony's brother) tell you about me?? I've talked to him on the phone, he knows exactly how I feel about this case & poor Mary Ann.

Sorry to say sweetheart, sometimes our justice system does not always work too great. Pls email me & we can talk.

Hope to hear from you soon.

Never give up!!

Sorry not sure how this web site works & for the spelling errors

[SouthernGyrl]

If they have condemned someone to death, that they should preserve all evidence in said case. Things like this make me upset. They should also allow testing in any case where DNA is present.

[JJS811]

I couldn't agree more. Why DNA is not tested as routine especially when there is a possibility the convicted person could be put to death is beyond me. How can anyone agree to killing someone if all the evidence is not present? I have a PP with a case in court (the ruling is due any day) this evidence could clear him, yet he has been on DR almost 14 years, with his appeals running out fast. The DA holds custody of all the evidence, so why will they not agree to this testing as a right? Surely in a country like the US you would think ALL evidence would be tested and re-tested before an execution warrant is even printed - Not so!

Originally Posted by addykea

If they have condemned someone to death, that they should preserve all evidence in said case. Things like this make me upset. They should also allow testing in any case where DNA is present.

[rstoner10]

JJS811: Thank you for your post - you nailed it (lol). In Anthony's case, he voluntarily gave DNA at the police station which did not match the crime scene DNA. I re-read the prev. post & don't know what DNA was discovered in 1991. I believe there was one police/detective blunder after the other.

Why would me seeing these men on the porch with her the night she was murdered mean nothing to the justice system?!!

It's a long story. Literally, the July 4th weekend b4 she was murdered she told me that she was afraid for her life because some guys on the other side of town had stolen her purse from her car. She was prosecuting them and they had her contact info from her purse.

The night Mary Ann was murdered; I saw her standing on the 2nd floor porch being "hugged" by one of the new tenant’s relatives. She made DIRECT deliberate eye contact me as to say I'm in trouble! After them saying sexual things to me within the short 4/5 days they lived there, I was immediately afraid of these men. I felt immediate danger and fear for her.

I was only 21 years old at the time and followed my instincts but unfortunately not fast enough & not thoroughly enough! Before my husband & I took off to the movies, I deliberately circled around the block to check on Mary Ann because it was just SO strange. My husband yelled at me when I took the wrong direction. I told him to be quite that I wanted to see something. Afterwards I explained to him how afraid I became for Mary Ann because of those 2 guys & I was watching out for her. In the newspapers, I was accused of being a nosey neighbor by Mary Ann's family. This hurt my feeling because I'm very much the opposite. I love people and care deeply for others.

No one even brought these folks in for questioning & DNA testing either. It took the tenants a 1 1/2 hours to "figure" out who was on the porch that night - 1st sign something may be getting covered up. The woman they said I saw on the porch was the tenant’s brother's girlfriend. I never saw her again nor did anyone ask me to identify her.

Where is common sense in this criminal case investigation? I was only 21 years old at the time and know better than the police on the scene. I suspect one of these guys entered into Mary Ann's house from the COMMON basement. The house is designed so the landlord could go into the tenant’s house from the basement & visa versa. Back after WWII it was common to convert single houses into double houses. This was probably a cost savings at the time. The police dept. again had a gigantic blunder here. No one finds it relevant & I guess it does not warrant a re- trial. This justice system just does not work sometimes.

If the DNA from a murder case mysteriously disappears for let say 5 years & reappears. Would you ask yourself if the DNA has been tampered with - inside job?? Would you trust a DNA test then??

It is all too sad. Personally I believe the murderer was somehow connected with the tenant.

Again, thank you for your post & caring for authentic justice.
DNA at the police station which did not match the crime scene DNA. I re-read the prev. post & don't know what DNA was discovered in 1991. I believe there was one police/detective blunder after the other.

Why would me seeing these men on the porch with her the night she was murdered mean nothing to the justice system?!!

It's a long story. Literally, the July 4th weekend b4 she was murdered she told me that she was afraid for her life because some guys on the other side of town had stolen her purse from her car. She was prosecuting them and they had her contact info from her purse.

The night Mary Ann was murdered; I saw her standing on the 2nd floor porch being "hugged" by one of the new tenant’s relatives. She made DIRECT deliberate eye contact me as to say I'm in trouble! After them saying sexual things to me within the short 4/5 days they lived there, I was immediately afraid of these men. I felt immediate danger and fear for her.

I was only 21 years old at the time and followed my instincts but unfortunately not fast enough & not thoroughly enough! Before my husband & I took off to the movies, I deliberately circled around the block to check on Mary Ann because it was just SO strange. My husband yelled at me when I took the wrong direction. I told him to be quite that I wanted to see something. Afterwards I explained to him how afraid I became for Mary Ann because of those 2 guys & I was watching out for her. In the newspapers, I was accused of being a nosey neighbor by Mary Ann's family. This hurt my feeling because I'm very much the opposite. I love people and care deeply for others.

No one even brought these folks in for questioning & DNA testing either. It took the tenants a 1 1/2 hours to "figure" out who was on the porch that night - 1st sign something may be getting covered up. The woman they said I saw on the porch was the tenant’s brother's girlfriend. I never saw her again nor did anyone ask me to identify her.

Where is common sense in this criminal case investigation? I was only 21 years old at the time and know better than the police on the scene. I suspect one of these guys entered into Mary Ann's house from the COMMON basement. The house is designed so the landlord could go into the tenant’s house from the basement & visa versa. Back after WWII it was common to convert single houses into double houses. This was probably a cost savings at the time. The police dept. again had a gigantic blunder here. No one finds it relevant & I guess it does not warrant a re- trial. This justice system just does not work sometimes.

If the DNA from a murder case mysteriously disappears for let say 5 years & reappears. Would you ask yourself if the DNA has been tampered with - inside job?? Would you trust a DNA test then??

It is all too sad. Personally I believe the murderer was somehow connected through the tenant.

Again, thank you for your post & caring for authentic justice.

[DaveMoff]

Francis Newton was executed in 2005 after evidence released for new testing was found to have been "improperly stored" and "contaminated", making the testing impossible. She was, therefore, executed because the authorities had, by intention or by negligence, made it impossible for her to prove her innocence.

[JJS811]

Quite right Dave. I researched her case, before she died, and although the custody of the DNA was with the DA, it was un-usable. Certainly stops any come backs once Francis died. This case was anything but a solid safe conviction in my opinion, but now, with no DNA there is no way ever to know for sure!

I always wonder how this kind of evidence becomes "contaminated" once an inmate asks for testing? Either I am very cynical or... I will leave you to guess the rest!

Originally Posted by DaveMoff

Francis Newton was executed in 2005 after evidence released for new testing was found to have been "improperly stored" and "contaminated", making the testing impossible. She was, therefore, executed because the authorities had, by intention or by negligence, made it impossible for her to prove her innocence.

[mel39]

Can't the defendant's attorney have DNA testing done on his/her client? Or even have a family member send off their DNA to be tested at an independent lab, some are expensive some are not they send you a swab and you have to rub it on the inside of the person's mouth then place it in a secure bag that they provide hand it off to your lawyer or trusted family if your allowed and have them mail it out for the defendant. Just a suggestion.

[JJS811]

I suppose the defence could have a DNA profile of the accused done, but it would have to be paid for by the inmate/defence, and sadly most people are represented by PD's with a limited budget. This wouldn't really help as the DA holds all the evidence in any case and without that, there is no controlled comparison sample. In other words, if for example the victim has DNA and or biological matter (skin cells) under their finger nails, there is nothing to compare with, unless the DA releases custody of the evidence. There is also the problem with rape kits, again the DA holds those and unless the inmate can persuade the court to force the DA to release the evidence there is no sample to compare with. Even if the inmate is given leave by the court to have the testing done, they then have to pay for it, and there are very few on death row who could afford such expensive testing.

DNA, if available should ALWAYS be tested, especially in capital cases, or where there is a likelihood if convicted, the inmate will receive LWOP. However as many people now sitting on DR's can testify too, this is anything but the case!

Originally Posted by mel39

Can't the defendant's attorney have DNA testing done on his/her client? Or even have a family member send off their DNA to be tested at an independent lab, some are expensive some are not they send you a swab and you have to rub it on the inside of the person's mouth then place it in a secure bag that they provide hand it off to your lawyer or trusted family if your allowed and have them mail it out for the defendant. Just a suggestion.

[sweetnina]

I have just heard that Alabama often dont allow DNA testing in the appeals. There is no rule for that so it can be denied for no reason, even when it would proove the innocence.
Does this is called justice?

[lisainengland]

seems to me that an awful lot of evidence goes "missing" when it comes to DNA testing. I agree with JS811 EVERYONE should be entitled to DNA testing. Its terrifying to think how many innocent people are sitting on d/r or have even been executed !!!!