TheAgitator.com
Back to Mississippi
Friday, December 21st, 2007A circuit court judge in Mississippi has refused to let defense attorneys hire their own expert to review two autopsies done by medical examiners hired by the district attorney:
A Hinds County Circuit Court judge Thursday denied an accused murderer’s request to preserve the body of slain Jackson State University student Latasha Norman and hire an outside expert to examine her body.
A motion filed Wednesday by defendant Stanley Cole’s attorney questioned the accuracy of earlier autopsies, including the one performed by the state’s chief pathologist, Dr. Steven Hayne.
"Steven Hayne was unable to determine a cause of death. Consequently, at the behest of the state, the body was examined by a forensic anthropologist at the University of Southern Mississippi, and a cause of death was supposedly determined," the motion said.
District Attorney Faye Peterson said she aggressively fought the request because it would have been "cruel" to Norman’s family.
"This family has been through so much for so long. They have a right to bury their daughter," she said.
Cole’s attorney, public defender Matthew Eichelberger, said he sympathized with the family but that access to an independent examination is Cole’s right.
"We understand that this is painful for the family, but we still have to protect the rights of our client," he said. "We feel that it is important to have an independent examination of the evidence."
I’m a little surprised Dr. Hayne didn’t provide prosecutors with the results they were looking for. Either he’s being more cautious since my expose of him in our November issue, or the prosecution’s theory about what happened in this case is so unsupported by the victim’s body, even Hayne couldn’t bring himself to give them what they were looking for. My guess is the latter. My sources in Mississippi have told me that since my story came out, Hayne has only grown defiant, and has actually increased his break-neck autopsy workload.
But Hayne is really only the manifestation of the real problem in Mississippi—a corrupt system that allows prosecutors to shop bodies to friendly "experts," and denies indigent defendants the opportunity to have independent experts to evaluate their findings. Though I’ve heard there may be some eventual movement toward reform down there, it looks like for the short-term at least, it’s business as usual.
Assuming that the prosecution is truly speaking for the family, it amazes me sometimes that the victims’ families are so eager to jump to conclusions so that they can have “closure”. I’ve never been in the situation where a loved one was murdered, but I’m pretty sure I’d rather know for a fact that the actual perpetrator was caught, even if it takes a long time to do that. Without diminishing the harm caused by wrongful convictions to the accused, it seems like we also need to emphasize that this is a disservice to the victims’ families as it means real criminals are walking the streets.
Just curious — where are the “victim’s rights” folks on this issue?
CL
CL has a good point. You’d have to be one trusting parent to not let your daughter’s body be properly examined in this case. After all, it’s just a body now–an empty shell. If you are going to get justice done to the perpetrator, there must be no doubt that the person who does time or is put to death for the evil done to your child. The family also has a moral obligation to do its part to ensure that justice is done, in order to help ensure that the perpetrator never has a chance to murder another person.
Victim’s rights people piss me off. If you are going to feel better because the person who is accused of harming your loved one suffers, then you are almost as bad as they are. Even worse if you won’t allow a proper investigation to happen.
This is truly disgraceful. what a dishonest and pathetic argument by a prosecutor who has clearly never read the ethical obligations that apply to his position. Clearly the defendant has a due process right to have his own expert examine the body, otherwise the evidence is not exposed to the light of day, as the medical expert who is the only gateway to that evidednce once it is disposed of is an agent of the state.
Moreover, there is no question that the right to challenge and test the evidence against you at your criminal trial outweighs the right of a family to bury their loved ones in a timely manner (or even at all). I know this is so because only one of those rights is, you know, ETCHED IN THE FRICKIN’ CONSTITUTION!! Just unreal.
Anyway, I am off to court to file a motion to get state funds to hire a psychological expert in my client’s family 9civil) case. The judge will look at it for 4 seconds and grant it. That’s Mass for ya. Our system is far from perfect but at least we try to give poor people quality representation.
“Assuming that the prosecution is truly speaking for the family, it amazes me sometimes that the victims’ families are so eager to jump to conclusions so that they can have ‘closure’.”
This is exactly what happened in the Vince Foster case. Allan J. Favish FOIA petitioned for death-scene photographs. The OIC (Ken Starr) fought him all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court largely on the grounds stated here, and won.
Oh and as for victim’s rights people… Next time you hear them pipe up, ask them exactly what rights a victim should have. The only one I can think of would be a very vague and broad “right to particpate in the prosecution of the crime.” But a right to testify? No. A right to have SOMEONE convicted? obviously not. A right to be made whole? Impossible. A right to direct the prosecution to the point of determining who gets prosecuted, or what theories are employed? Hahahaha.
Of course they should be involved in the process and assisted but what exactly would their RIGHT be?