"A
Massachusetts man imprisoned 30 years for rape has been granted a
retrial, marking the first conviction in the country overturned solely
because of recent FBI admissions that its evidence experts for decades
overstated forensic hair links to crimes. Previous exonerations
based on flawed hair evidence — including several in the District —
included new DNA results or came in appeals launched before the FBI and
Justice Department confirmed in April that FBI lab reports and testimony
incriminating hundreds “exceeded the limits of science.” The federal review of convictions
including FBI hair matches began in 2012 and has uncovered errors in
more than 1,300 cases, including many in which defendants pleaded
guilty. Flaws have been identified in 33 of 35 death
row cases, including 14 cases in which the defendant was executed or
died in prison. Defenders and prosecutors are being notified to
determine whether there is other evidence of guilt or grounds for
appeal. One notice went in 2014 to George Perrot, 48, a
Springfield, Mass., man who was 17 when he accused of rape during a
burglary and later convicted by a jury that heard now-recanted FBI
testimony matching Perrot to hair found on a bedsheet. In
a 79-page opinion filed Jan. 26, Hampden County Superior Court Judge
Robert J. Kane found that the FBI acknowledgment of errors on its own
constituted newly discovered evidence regarding evolving science and
granted Perrot a retrial. “Justice may not have been done’” in
Perrot’s conviction for the Nov. 30, 1985, rape of a 78-year-old woman
in Springfield, Kane wrote, because of errors “not authoritatively
recognized and addressed” earlier. Had “any” of that hair evidence been offered today, the judge wrote, “it would have been excluded.” Some
legal observers called the ruling a milestone in how courts tackle
questions about final convictions involving later-disputed or debunked
forensic practices. “This decision, although it does
not represent precedent elsewhere, can be a very persuasive analysis to
other trial judges facing similar questions,” said Kirsten Mayer, a
partner with the Ropes & Gray law firm in Boston that represented
Perrot pro bono..........The
Innocence Project and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers —
two outside legal groups assisting the FBI review — said Perrot’s was
the first retrial granted and that it would help speed greater scrutiny
of flawed techniques. They praised the FBI for acknowledging a “duty to
correct” scientific errors and said they hoped state labs whose
examiners were trained by the FBI would join that effort. .........Texas, North Carolina and Massachusetts are reviewing their hair-examiner cases..........Federal authorities
began their investigation after The Washington Post reported in 2012
that flawed forensic hair matches might have led to convictions of
hundreds of potentially innocent people since at least the 1970s,
typically for murder, rape and other violent crimes. Perrot
was among the first to ask for new trial without DNA evidence in a
contested proceeding. Prosecutors raised procedural objections and
argued there was other evidence of guilt, although in his ruling, the
Massachusetts judge noted the defense had also countered there may have
been police misconduct. Perrot, 17 at the time with multiple
burglary arrests, was identified in a purse-snatching in December 1985.
After lengthy interrogation, Perrot confessed to burglarizing the homes
of two elderly women but denied attacking one who said she also had been
raped. The victim, since deceased, testified
that although she was not wearing her eyeglasses the bearded Perrot
could not have been her clean-shaven attacker. But at trial, an FBI
examiner testified that a bedsheet hair matched Perrot’s, and said that
it would be “extremely rare” for the examiner to be unable to
distinguish hair samples from different people. The Hampden
District Attorney’s Office said it was weighing whether to challenge the
judge’s decision or retry Perrot and oppose his attorneys’ request to
have him released. A bail hearing is set for Feb. 8."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/in-a-first-judge-grants-retrial-solely-on-fbi-hair-match/2016/02/02/e3adcc96-c49b-11e5-9693-933a4d31bcc8_story.html