Innocence Project client Anthony Wright has been in Pennsylvania prison for 15 years for a murder he has always said he didn't commit. He is seeking DNA testing on evidence in the case, but the Philadelphia District Attorney is fighting his requests for testing and courts have denied his appeals. This week, the Philadelphia Inquirer said "the best and only way to resolve the dispute is to proceed with the DNA test."

DNA tests in the Norfolk Four case have already implicated the real perpetrator of the crime, but three men who say they had nothing to do with the murder are still behind bars. More than two dozen FBI agents called for a pardon last week, and the New York Times joined them this week.

A federal appeals court will hear arguments in the case of Troy Davis on December 9, and former FBI Director William Sessions wrote in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution this week that Davis deserves another day in court.

Police interrogation of juveniles was in the news this week, with the high-profile case of an eight-year-old boy charged with shooting his father and a neighbor. Prosecutors released the videotaped interrogation of the boy, and experts around the world are saying that the police procedure in questioning an eight-year-old without a parent or lawyer was inappropriate.

A federal appeals court yesterday tossed out the conviction of a man found guilty in 1994 of killing nine people at a Buddhist temple in Arizona. Jonathan Doody was 17 when arrested, and his conviction rested on his alleged confession after 12 hours of interrogation.

"In short," the ruling says, "Doody paints an overall picture of downplayed warnings, a softly induced waiver of rights and conduct conveying the message that Doody would not be left alone until he confessed, all targeted at an unsavvy, increasingly sleep-deprived teenager."

And innocence organizations around the world held events and rallies in the last week:

The Center on Wrongful Convictions in Chicago celebrated its tenth anniversary. The group is one of the pioneers of the innocence movement and has exonerated dozens of wrongfully convicted Americans across the country. The Chicago Tribune calls the group the "the heroes of the wrongfully convicted." Watch a video looking back at the Center's incredible first 10 years here.

William & Mary held its first annual Innocence Symposium and students from the University of Bristol Innocence Project in the United Kingdom took to the streets to educate the public about the problem of wrongful convictions.

Finally, we extend a warm welcome to the Montana Innocence Project, which opened its doors this year.

The journalism students were working on McKinney's case under the direction of David Protess, director of the Medill School of Journalism Innocence Project.

"Anthony's plight is about the most tragic I've ever seen," Protess said. "He not only has been locked up for almost two-thirds of his life for a crime he did not commit, but the actual perpetrators were known right from the start."

Read the full story here. (Chicago Sun-Times, 11/20/08)

Read more about the case at the Medill Innocence Project website.

Other exoneration anniversaries this week:

Donald Wayne Good, Texas (Served 13.5 Years, Exonerated 2004)

Ronnie Bullock, Illinois (Served 10.5 Years, Exonerated 1994)

After serving 27 years in Florida prison for a murder he says he didn't commit, William Dillon was freed last night in Florida on bond after a judge ordered a new trial in his case. He will wear an electronic monitoring bracelet and may face another trial in the case.

The Innocence Project of Florida has worked on the case with Dillon's lawyers, who say DNA testing on a T-shirt from the crime scene proves Dillon's innocence. We'll post updates here on the Innocence Blog as the case develops.

"Well I'll tell you what, we didn't think we'd be living to see him come home," said Amy Dillon, William's mother. Dillon said he's not at all bitter about spending a large portion of his life in prison.

"I'm not going to sit here and dwell on anything that's missed or passed or anything. I'm just going to move ahead right now from this day forward," Dillon said.

Watch video of Dillon's release and press conference. (Channel 13, Central Florida)

Dillon's conviction was based partly on the testimony of dog handler John Preston, a retired Pennsylvania State Trooper whose methods have since been discredited. Preston was also involved in the wrongful conviction of Wilton Dedge, an Innocence Project client who served 22 years in prison before he was exonerated by DNA testing in 2004.

This overall lack of sound, scientifically-based policy indicates that the State of Texas must pass legislation that requires departments to adopt written policies that implement best practices for the conduct of eyewitness identification procedures.

Download the full report here.

"I think they want it to be biased, and they see that she's fair," Charles, 58, said from his mother's house in the South End. "They thought they would get a judge who's pro-government because I'm suing the government. But she's extremely familiar with the underhanded tactics of the Boston Police Department."

Read the full story here. (Boston Globe, 11/17/08)

Thomas Winslow, Joseph White and JoAnn Taylor were cleared in recent weeks in Nebraska after DNA testing pointed to another man in the 1985 murder for which they were convicted. Three other co-defendants were released from prison in 1994 after serving their complete sentences.(The Innocence Project is currently reviewing the cases of all six defendants to determine whether they can be included in our database of DNA exonerations nationwide.)

Nebraska is one of 25 states without an exoneree compensation law, so there are no state services available to the exonerated.

Innocence Project spokesman Eric Ferrero said compensation for wrongful convictions is needed because re-entering society after serving prison time is difficult, even with an exoneration.

"Some people don't have family support or any network of supports when they get out," he said. "They often get out with no money, no job experience - other than prison jobs - and they often lack the skills to get reintegrated into society and rebuild their lives."

Read the full story here. (Associated Press, 11/18/08)

"Many times, you bring these cases to district attorneys and they say, 'You can't go see my file. I won't do anything.' There's a knee-jerk reluctance to revisit anything," says Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project. He thinks this will eventually change, and that Dallas County's aggressive approach will serve as a model for others. "Watkins takes the view that if he can correct a wrongful conviction, that's a good thing."

Read the full story here. (Watt Street Journal, 11/15/08)

"We are just exhilarated. It's a new chapter now," said Dillon's brother, Joe, of Palm Bay. "The whole family is really excited."

Read the full story here. (Orlando Sentinel, 11/15/08)

As evidenced by The Dallas News' series...which did the state a great service by investigating the causes of Dallas County's 19 DNA exonerations, eyewitness identification procedures must be overhauled, with the goal of making evidence as reliable as possible. Under my proposal, police departments must adopt procedures based on science and proven best practices and train detectives in these methods.

Eyewitness identification reform is being embraced in municipalities, counties, and states across the country, but there is still a long way to go before the most accurate eyewitness identification practices are standard practice. These bills in Texas, and other reforms set to be introduced across the country in 2009, are a sign that critical reforms to aid law enforcement and prevent wrongful convictions could be on the horizon.

Learn more about the Innocence Project's recommended policy reforms here.

While Robinson worked on parole in order to pay for DNA testing, many others are unable to pay for the expensive tests. Make a donation today to help the Innocence Project pay for DNA testing for our current clients.

Other exoneration anniversaries this week:

David Brian Sutherlin, Minnesota (Exonerated 2002)

Paula Gray, Illinois (Served 9 years, Exonerated 2002)

Donald Reynolds, Illinois (Served 9.5 years, Exonerated 1997)

Billy Wardell, Illinois (Served 9.5 years, Exonerated 1997)

"They can't find any of the evidence," Cooley told those at the luncheon who included prosecutors as well as criminal court judges. "I have five cases in Shelby County. In two cases, we found it. In three cases, we can't find anything. ... Evidence preservation is a huge issue that we are trying to change."

"While most of the discussion here today is likely to focus on payments to jurors for their time, jury recruitment and other such measures, we cannot forget that some of the worst juror experiences come not from waiting in long lines or losing time at work but participating, unknowingly, in the false conviction of an innocent person."

"I don't have a firm opinion on the morality of the death penalty," said Civiletti, who served as attorney general under President Jimmy Carter (D) and was tapped by O'Malley (D) last summer to lead the panel. But he said he opposed execution for "pragmatic" reasons, among them that "it's haphazard in how it is applied."

Read the full story. (Washington Post, 11/13/08)

"They stand falsely convicted and imprisoned for a crime they did not commit," Cochran said. "Our members are not bleeding hearts. We do not have an interest in the outcome. Our only interest is in serving the interests of justice." ...

Delacey Skinner, a Kaine spokeswoman, said Monday that the governor is "committed to giving the case thorough and thoughtful consideration" but has made no decision and has not established a deadline for doing so. Lawyers for three of the Norfolk Four, working for free on behalf of the Virginia Innocence Project, first filed clemency petitions ... when Mark Warner (D) was governor.

Read the full story here. (Washington Post, 11/11/08)

Read more:

The Disturbing Case of the Norfolk Four (Time Magazine, 11/11/08)

Visit the Norfolk Four website for a complete background on the case.

The case, at its core, is simple: is a crime lab report a form of testimony, so that the prosecution may not use it at trial to buttress its case unless the technician or chemist who prepared it is at the trial to defend the test results under cross-examination?

Kennedy initially saw a potential problem if the Court were to answer yes to that question. He foresaw "a very substantial burden" on the prosecution and on the courts, and told counsel advocating for confrontation that he was significantly underestimating the impact. But, as the hearing moved along, Kennedy saw as "a very important point" that California has not experienced such a burden and "gets along all right" with summoning lab analysts to the stand with some frequency. He faulted the two lawyers arguing against confrontation for lacking a rationale that would keep the prosecution's use of unexamined lab reports in check.

The 6th Amendment protects the right of criminal defendants to confront their accusers. It's obvious that an eyewitness who will testify he saw you commit the crime is an accuser as is the police officer who found the baggie of white powder in your coat pocket. But what about the lab tech who tested that white powder and decided it was cocaine? Well, isn't the person who says the stuff you had is illegal just as much of an accuser as the person who says you had it? Like I said, it seems pretty obvious to me.

Justice Scalia was the most ardent champion of requiring confrontation, reports Denniston, while the main concerns were pragmatic: Would the requirement overburden crime labs that in most cases (as in Texas) already experience significant backlogs? Even so, Scalia agreed with the argument put forward by Melendez-Diaz's attorney, as quoted in USA Today:

"Introducing forensic laboratory reports (without live witnesses) is the modern equivalent of trial by affidavit," said Stanford University law professor Jeffrey Fisher, representing Luis Melendez-Diaz

Police in Douglas, a border town in southeastern Arizona, owe about $23,000 in lab fees. To pay the Department of Public Safety would mean Douglas police could not hire an officer or buy a squad car, Chief Alberto Melis said. The department has four vacancies.

Melis of Douglas said, "For me to come up with this money, I'm going to have to do without something. In a profession where 95 percent of your cost is personnel, I might not be able to hire somebody."

Officers in Payson, Arizona, said they are sending less evidence for testing, which is slowing down investigations.

Detective Matt Van Camp said he uses every aspect of the crime lab, from firearm testing to its criminalists.

"We used to send everything, but now we have to screen what we send out automatically," Van Camp said. "This limits the tools available for the prosecutor and police."

Prosecutors may now have to decide if they want to go to trial before they have the necessary evidence in hand.

"This makes the prosecutor's job harder," he said. "Crime labs also prove people innocent, not just guilty."

Read the full story here. (Payson Roundup, 11/4/08)

Lab backlogs are hurting police investigations in Texas, as well. Results from state labs can take months.

Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley explains that in today's 'CSI world' where jurors see scientific evidence easily gleaned from most crime scenes in TV dramas, they expect to see the same in court cases. But because there are so many requests for testing, and too few state technicians to keep up with demand, he says, "When you ask for DNA testing and results, you're buying in to a six month to one year delay in your case."

Read the full story here. (Key TV, 11/06/08)

Federal assistance should help to defuse the crisis somewhat in Arizona and Texas. The two states, along with Washington, Kentucky and Virginia, recently received a combined $7.8 million in grants from the U.S. Department of Justice to help with DNA testing in serious felony cases. The DOJ's grant program requires states to comply with standards for storage and testing of evidence, and also to significantly reduce backlogs through improved training and technology. Read more about the DOJ grant program here.

'A month before I came into the case and 27 years after the crime, the evidence custodian had petitioned the district attorney to destroy the evidence in 100 old cases, including our guy's,' McCloskey said.

"In any type of civilized society based on fairness and justice, it's inconceivable that states are allowed to throw away evidence while a person is still in prison," Potkin said.

Read the full story here. (Newark Star-Ledger 11/03/08)

Ohio has the technological tools to help victims and put away dangerous criminals. It just has to find the will to use them.

"It's an issue of fairness, when the state wrongfully jails someone, it should compensate that person for the loss of their freedom. Simple justice would indicate that something ought to be done for someone who's gone through this."

Meanwhile, politics bumped news on wrongful convictions and forensics from the national radar for a few days. Here are some of the stories you might have missed:

A panel discussion last night at Southern Methodist University in Dallas brought together exonerees and officials from all corners of the criminal justice system. Innocence Project client James Waller told the audience why he kept his anger at bay while appealing his conviction. "If I were to stay angry," he recalled, "I wouldn't have been able to work on my case. Bein' angry wouldn't do me no good." Blogger Bethany Anderson covered the event here.

At several other events around the country this week, exonerees told their stories and discussed the reforms that can prevent wrongful convictions in the future.

Florida prosecutors said they have new "people of interest and new DNA tests" in the case of William Dillon, who has served 27 years for a murder he says he didn't commit.

And a new innocence organization will open its doors in Glasgow on November 12.

Imagine the horror of being wrongly accused of rape or murder, being arrested and tried and found guilty. Imagine the devastation of being sentenced to life in prison or death by lethal injection when you had absolutely nothing to do with the crime involved. Literally hundreds - perhaps thousands - of individuals are experiencing just that in this country today.

Read his full column. (Utica Post-Dispatch, 11/05/08)

Miller, who served nearly 25 years in prison before DNA proved his innocence, is one of four exonerees recently pardoned by Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich. The pardons allow their criminal records to be expunged and pave the way for compensation.

Among those pardoned based on innocence were Marlon Pendleton and Jerry Miller, who were falsely convicted of sexual assault charges before DNA evidence exonerated them. Also pardoned was Luis Ortiz, convicted of a torture-murder in 1997 and exonerated in 2002, and Robert Wilson, pardoned after nearly a decade in prison for an attempted murder after he was falsely identified.

Read the full Chicago Tribune article here. (10/31/08)

Blagojevich had been heavily criticized by local press for delaying the pardon process. Pendelton was exonerated on Dec. 8, 2006 and immediately applied for a pardon, but faced a backlog of 16,000 other pardon applicants.

Since Pendelton's original request, Illinois lawmakers passed legislation that allows exonerated individuals to seek certificates of innocence and immediate compensation as soon as courts find them innocent. The law had been vetoed by Blagojevich last September, but was overridden by the Illinois House and Senate to become state law.

What's the compensation law in your state?

On February 23, 1983, Jeanine Nicarico disappeared from her Chicago home. The police discovered her body several days after she had gone missing. After months of investigation, Alejandro Hernandez became a suspect, and he directed police to Rolando Cruz in exchange for a reward. The two men incriminated each other in exchange for cash rewards.

Since the police had no physical evidence linking the men to the crime, the case against them was based on the men's alleged statements. Witnesses testified that Cruz and Hernandez seemed to have intimate knowledge of the crime. The most incriminating evidence came from the sheriff's detectives who testified that Cruz had confessed to having "visions" of the murder that closely resembled the details of the crime. Despite no record confirming these visions, it was used as evidence and a jury convicted them.

Cruz's conviction was overturned on appeal, but he was retried and convicted again. Then, with the help of professors and students at Northwestern University, Cruz was finally able to overturn his conviction and secure DNA testing on sperm cells found near the crime scene. The results proved the men could not have committed the crime, but prosecutors retried Cruz again. On November 3, 1995, Cruz was finally acquitted after his the third trial. Charges against Hernandez were dropped a month later.

If DNA evidence from the crime scene had not been preserved in this case, Cruz and Hernandez may have been executed for a crime neither of them committed.

What's the evidence preservation law in your state?

Other exoneration anniversaries this week:

David A. Gray, IL, (Served 20 years, Exonerated 1999)

Bruce Dallas Goodman, UT, (Served 19 years, Exonerated 11/3/2004)

Walter Smith, OH, (Served 10 years, Exonerated 11/8/1996)

Bernard Webster, MD, (Served 20 years, Exonerated 2002)

The men came from across the country (including Ray Krone of Arizona, Juan Melendez of Florida and Clarence Brandley of Texas) and were joined by former Bexar County District Attorney Sam Millsap and Texas State Representative Elliott Naishtat.

Milsap, who took personal responsibility for the 1993 execution of San Antonio man Ruben Cantu that was based on one (later recanting) eyewitness and no physical evidence, said that he was "no longer convinced that our courts will in fact guarantee the protection of the innocent."

"It's a national problem, but a problem that has a distinct Texas face," state Rep. Elliott Naishtat, D-Austin, told the members of Witness to Innocence. Naishtat said he will introduce a bill next session to give the governor the power to declare a temporary moratorium on executions. He also promised to work on behalf of a bill by state Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, to create a Texas innocence commission.

However, any bill to halt executions stands no chance of passing the Texas Legislature, Naishtat said. Capital punishment has substantial support in Texas. The 2007 Texas Crime Poll by Sam Houston State University found 74 percent of Texans support the death penalty. And 66 percent said they were confident that innocent people are protected from execution.

Read the full article here. (Austin American Statesman, 11/01/08)

Click here to watch the first of five videos covering the press conference.

Listen to local coverage from KUT online or download an mp3.

Click here to visit the Witness to Innocence Web site.

The Innocence Project represents William Osborne, who was convicted of rape and related charges in 1994. The state has fought motions for DNA testing that could prove Osborne's innocence. Earlier this year, a federal appeals court ruled that Osborne has a constitutional right to DNA testing, but the state appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court.

If the new testing shows that Mr. Osborne was indeed guilty, prosecutors should be pleased, the Ninth Circuit said. And if the testing points to his innocence, prosecutors should still be pleased, because the state's paramount interests are in "seeking justice, not obtaining convictions at all costs," and the tests will yield better evidence to catch and convict "the real perpetrator."

Read the New York Times report on the Supreme Court's decision to review the case here.

Innocence Project Co-Director Barry Scheck said today that the state has no justification to deny DNA testing when it can prove guilt or innocence. In a statement issued today, Scheck said:

"The State of Alaska concedes that DNA testing could prove William Osborne's innocence, while fighting his right to testing. Why would anyone be afraid to learn the truth in this case? There is no rational reason to deny DNA testing that could prove innocence or confirm guilt.

"We believe that people clearly have a constitutional right to post-conviction DNA testing when it can prove innocence. Many courts have recognized this right, and we're optimistic that the Supreme Court will affirm it if they reach that question in this case."

Learn more about access to post-conviction DNA testing.

A column by Bob Ray Sanders in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram considers the prospect of innocent people on death row, and agrees with Witness to Innocence.

More and more leaders are recognizing that we do have a broken system in the Lone Star State.

Last summer the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals announced the creation of a Texas Criminal Justice Integrity Unit to examine weaknesses in the criminal justice system. And, Chief Justice Wallace Jefferson of the Texas Supreme Court is among those calling for a statewide innocence commission.

It makes sense that while we recognize an imperfect system with weaknesses that must be examined and corrected, there ought not to be any more executions in Texas until those issues have been fully addressed.

The Star-Telegram is on record supporting a moratorium on executions.

Read Sanders' column here. (Fort Worth Star-Telegram, 10/29/08)

Watch the press conference live here (on LiveStream 8) at 2 p.m. Central Time.

And visit the Witness to Innocence website here.

Meanwhile, the Texas Criminal Justice Integrity Unit held hearings yesterday on problems with eyewitness identification procedures in the state. Richardson Police Chief Larry Zacharias and Iowa State Psychology Professor Gary Wells were among the speakers.

Jeff Deskovic was exonerated on November 2, 2006, after spending half of his life in prison for a crime he didn't commit. Sunday marks the second anniversary of his exoneration.

On November 15, 1989, a teenage girl was out taking pictures for her photography class in Westchester County, New York. Two days later her body was found by police dogs, and she appeared to have been raped. Sixteen-year-old Deskovic first became a suspect because he was late to school the day of her disappearance. Although he was a classmate of the victim and they shared two classes together, police grew more suspicious when Deskovic began his "own investigation" of the case.

Detectives asked him to submit to a polygraph test, and they brought the young Deskovic to a private polygraph business run by local officers. During the test, no lawyers or parents were involved, and he was only given coffee. He spent over six hours inside the small room as detectives continued to interrogate him, claiming he failed the tests. By the end of the interrogation, Deskovic was crying and curled up under the table. After six hours of questioning and three polygraph tests, Deskovic allegedly confessed to committing the crime.

At the trial the police misconduct was ignored, and details were distorted by the state. While DNA tests on the rape kit excluded Deskovic as a source of the semen, the state argued the victim had consensual sex before the crime and that Deskovic murdered her in a jealous rage. The jury was also told that he had confessed to the crime. Deskovic was convicted and sentenced to 15 years to life.

In January 2006, the Innocence Project took on Deskovic's case, and sought to retest the biological evidence using newer technology, making it eligible for the state DNA database. The results matched a man already in prison for another murder.

Deskovic was 33 when he was released. Upon his release he spoke of the bond he felt with the victim, "We had a commonality. We were both victims of the man who killed her - in different ways, obviously. She is more of a victim than I am, but I am still a victim."

Since his exoneration, Deskovic has fought to ensure that others do not become victims of wrongful convictions. He speaks to high schools, churches, and colleges, and fights for legislative reform to prevent other wrongful convictions. Visit his personal website here.

Other exoneration anniversaries this week:

Steven Linscott, Illinois, (Served 3 years, Exonerated 7/15/92)

"I cannot have anybody convicted based on this kind of evidence that's inaccurate," said Worthy, who received the report Wednesday. "An error rate of zero is the only acceptable rate."

Council members called for an independent audit of the entire lab and five years of cases, a review that Worthy said would cost $800,000. And a Detroit police commander said the problems found in the ballistics section were "indicative of a systemic problem."

Read the full story here. (Detroit Free Press, 10/30/08)

Veteran forensic specialist Danielle G. Wieland made the charge last month during a civil deposition related to the December 2005 wrongful conviction and imprisonment of James Ochoa, according to documents obtained by the Weekly.

In a civil deposition taken last month for Ochoa's wrongful-prosecution lawsuit, Ochoa attorney Patricio A. Marquez of Morrison & Foerster asked Wieland, "Did anyone ever exert pressure on you to change your [DNA] conclusions?"
"Yes," Wieland replied. "Camille Hill from the DA's office ... She called me and asked me to change the conclusion that Mr. Ochoa was eliminated from [DNA found on] the left cuff of the shirt."

Before its vote yesterday, the board received a letter from Ochoa, who served nearly two years in California prison for a carjacking he didn't commit. He wrote:

The fact that the prosecution proceeded with my case in order to protect their image when they knew they had insufficient evidence demonstrated to me that the District Attorney's office is willing to go too far. After what happened to me, it is pretty clear that the District Attorney doesn't care about guilt or innocence; he cares about his career.

Read Ochoa's full letter here.

Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas disputed the allegation of impropriety at Tuesday's hearing:

Rackauckas explained to the board that his prosecutor merely questioned the analyst about her conclusion and did not try to influence her.

"(But) once an allegation is made, it can be pretty hard for the other party to disprove it," Rackauckas said.

Read the full article here. (OC Register, 10/28/08)

And an editorial in the OC Register before the board meeting said "Orange County's efforts to safeguard the public and protect the innocent have been caught up in an ugly turf war between the District Attorney's Office and the Sheriff's Department"

Officials at the Innocence Project, which uses DNA evidence to free the wrongly convicted, rightly told the newspaper that it's a conflict of interest for district attorneys to control DNA and other forms of evidence. "Just like we wouldn't want a defense attorney to call the shots in a lab, we wouldn't want a prosecutor," said one Innocence Project spokesman.

That's exactly right. Prosecutors are interested parties in legal proceedings. They are seeking convictions, so it would be unwise to let any D.A. control such important evidence. In fact, as the Register also reported, "A senior [Orange County]prosecutor is alleged to have pressured a sheriff's analyst to change her conclusion in a carjacking case that kept an innocent man imprisoned for 16 months." That's chilling.

Read the full editorial here. (OC Register, 10/23/08)

"After a lengthy evaluation, I am satisfied that there are no defendants convicted in the Eighth Judicial District serving time in the Colorado State Penitentiary who would benefit from current advances in DNA technology," Abrahamson wrote in a press release.

Read the full press release here.

The fact that the prosecution proceeded with my case in order to protect their image when they knew they had insufficient evidence demonstrated to me that the District Attorney's office is willing to go too far. After what happened to me, it is pretty clear that the District Attorney doesn't care about guilt or innocence; he cares about his career.

Read Ochoa's full letter here.

Zacharias lays it on the line: Law enforcement professionals have an "ethical obligation" to upgrade procedures when justice hangs in the balance.

Amen.

His department learned the lesson a tough way. In 1985, the Richardson PD produced a rape suspect for prosecutors based on a lineup of photos shown to the victim. She picked out a 26-year-old man who was later convicted and sent to prison.

There Thomas McGowan Jr. sat for 22 years, until DNA tests sought by the Innocence Project of New York exonerated him this spring.

Read the full editorial here. (Dallas Morning News, 10/28/2008)

The first thing you notice is the eyes-they all have the same look in them, the look of men accustomed to waking up every morning in a prison cell. These 37 men spent years, and in some cases decades, staring through bars at a world that believed they were guilty of terrible crimes. But they weren't. Each was convicted of doing something he did not do. It's hard to characterize the look in their eyes. There's anger, obviously, and pride at having survived hell, but there's also hurt, and a question: "Why me?"

The short answer is simple: People make mistakes. Most of these cases share a common story line: A woman, usually a traumatized rape victim, wrongly identifies her attacker. Sometimes her testimony is backed by rudimentary serology tests. Sometimes the cases are pushed too hard by aggressive police officers or prosecutors.

Visit the Texas Monthly website for video of a photoshoot with 21 exonerees and audio slideshows telling the stories of more than a dozen.

"This is the first step toward a court hearing to consider the new evidence something we have been asking for for almost a decade now," attorney Jason Ewart said.

And Innocence Project Co-Director Barry Scheck wrote this morning in the Huffington Post that an extreme and arbitrary law prevents defendants like Davis from presenting evidence of innocence in court.

Many wrongful convictions have been overturned because a recanting witness, testifying in person and under oath before a judge, is found to be credible and the reason for the recantation - often a claim that the original trial testimony was coerced - is found to be persuasive. But in Georgia the recanting witnesses don't get to testify because the state's courts have created an extraordinary Catch-22 rule -- the "purest fabrication" doctrine - that arbitrarily denies evidentiary hearings even when extremely persuasive recantation affidavits have been submitted.

Read the full post here. (Huffington Post, 10/24/08)

Read more about today's stay here. (Atlanta Journal Constitution, 10/24/08)

Innocence Project Staff Attorney / Mayer Brown Eyewitness Fellow Zeke Edwards spoke about eyewitness identification issues in the Davis case this morning on Democracy Now! Watch here.

Read more about Davis' case here.

Seven years after his exoneration, Piaskowski recalls how his elation quickly evolved into frustration because of insufficient support from the state after his release.

"I lost everything I worked 46 years of my blue-collar life to achieve," said Piaskowski, now 59. "And I have received nothing from the state. Zero."

The current Wisconsin compensation law grants only $25,000 in total compensation to those who qualify as wrongfully convicted. It ranks last among the 25 states that offer compensation. In addition, Wisconsin provides no educational, professional or emotional assistance to exonerees.

State Sen. Lena C. Taylor, who chairs the Wisconsin Senate Judiciary and Corrections Committee, said the time has come for lawmakers to improve exoneree compensation.

"A review of the compensation levels for persons wrongfully incarcerated is certainly past due. The Judiciary Committees in both houses will need to commit themselves to a serious review of those statutes, and be prepared to have a constructive dialog on the subject, including its implications for the state's budget."

Read the full story here. (Wisconsin Law Journal, 10/20/08)

The Wisconsin Innocence Project is a member of the Innocence Network.

I've been a police officer for 25 years, and I never understood why someone would admit to a crime he or she didn't commit. Until I secured a false confession in a murder case.

I stepped into the interrogation room believing that we had evidence linking the suspect to the murder of a 34-year-old federal employee in Washington. I used standard, approved interrogation techniques -- no screaming or threats, no physical abuse, no 12-hour sessions without food or water. Many hours later, I left with a solid confession.

Then we discovered that the suspect had an ironclad alibi. We subpoenaed sign-in/sign-out logs from the homeless shelter where she lived, and the records proved that she could not have committed the crime... Even though it wasn't our standard operating procedure in the mid-1990s, when the crime occurred, we had videotaped the interrogation in its entirety. Reviewing the tapes years later, I saw that we had fallen into a classic trap. We ignored evidence that our suspect might not have been guilty, and during the interrogation we inadvertently fed her details of the crime that she repeated back to us in her confession.