We welcome your feedback Please contact us at the address below. Cases for review must be submitted via postal mail.

Louisiana inmate finally secures DNA testing

The person who broke into a woman’s Baton Rouge, Louisiana, home and attacked her in 1982 left behind biological evidence that could now be tested for the perpetrator's DNA. This week, after a quarter-century in prison and more than ten appeals for testing, a state appeals court finally granted DNA testing to Archie Williams, who was convicted of the attack based on circumstantial evidence.

The victim viewed 17 photo lineups – at least three of which included Williams – before she identified Williams as the attacker. Prosecutors told the jury at his trial that the blood type of biological evidence from the crime matched Williams’s blood type, but now that more advanced DNA testing is available, they have fought testing again and again. When Williams first requested testing 11 years ago, prosecutors argued that he had no legal right because he had exhausted his appeals. Then, after state lawmakers passed a statute granting access to DNA testing, prosecutors argued that the tests wouldn’t prove innocence.

Innocence Project Co-Director Barry Scheck said today that “nobody – not Archie Williams and his family, nor the victim and her family and not the community at large – is served by continuing the unprecedented obstacles to DNA testing.”

DNA testing has exonerated nine people in Louisiana in the last eight years, and in four of those cases the testing also helped identify and apprehend the actual perpetrator.

Read more about this case and other Louisiana exonerations.

Keeping the truth out of the trash

In the photo above, a New Orleans official searches for evidence in the attic above the courthouse.

Officials nationwide are examining the practice of collecting and storing biological evidence this month, sparked by a major series of articles in the Denver Post, called "Trashing the Truth." The investigative reports uncovered shocking stories, like the case of Clarence Moses-El, in which Denver officials threw boxes of crime scene evidence into a dumpster despite a clear "Do Not Destroy" label. Moses-El has proclaimed his innocence for 19 years but is still in prison today with no chance at DNA testing.

Shortly after the series ran, Colorado's governor created a task force to examine evidence preservation statewide, and Denver District Attorney Don Quick was recently appointed to head that panel. A Colorado lawmaker has also said she plans to introduce a bill requiring police to preserve evidence in violent crimes. And in a Kentucky death row case set for a hearing tomorrow, prosecutors have said they can't find clothing evidence that the defendant sought to test for the perpetrator's DNA.

Twenty-three states require preservation of evidence in criminal cases, is yours one? View our map to find out.

After 21 years, Dallas man nears freedom

Innocence Project client Clay Chabot has been in prison for 21 years for a murder he has always maintained he didn't commit. This month, the case finally broke when DNA results from evidence at the crime scene matched only Gerald Pabst, Chabot's brother-in-law, whose testimony was the backbone of the state's case against Chabot. Pabst had claimed that he and Chabot broke into a woman's home together, but that Chabot raped and murdered her. Chabot says he had nothing to do with the crime; other than Pabst's testimony, there is no credible evidence suggesting Chabot was involved. Just days after Chabot was sentenced to life in prison, a murder charge against Pabst was dropped. Now, as prosecutors prepare a murder case against Pabst, Chabot's fate hangs in the balance. The Innocence Project is working to vacate his conviction.

"The new DNA testing shows Pabst was a perjurer who, at the very least, lied to the jury when he denied raping the victim and only got 30 days in jail after he testified against Clay," Innocence Project Staff Attorney Nina Morrison told the Dallas Morning News in an article this week detailing prosecutorial misconduct in the case. "No reasonable jury today would believe a word he says, and without him, there's no case against Clay Chabot."

Read the latest news about Clay Chabot's case in today's Innocence Blog post.

Why I Give: Kathy Handley
Blogger. Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

Several years ago, I became aware of The Innocence Project and the hundreds of people they have helped. Their results speak for themselves. For the last two years I have participated in the Blogathon on behalf of the Innocence Project. The Blogathon is an annual event in which hundreds of people post their writings online every 30 minutes for a full 24 hours, and sponsorships help to raise money and awareness for a cause. I matched the first $200 donated and we raised nearly $500 for the Innocence Project this year.

I know I alone am not able to follow the ins and outs of every case, but my time and contributions can help them do exactly that. And even more than time or money, I spread the word. I talk to everyone I meet about the work The Innocence Project is doing because I want everyone to be aware of how important it is. Judges and juries are human, and mistakes will always be made — but until the Innocence Project stepped in, there was often no way to right them. And now that we've found a way, I want to be part of it — I want to help.