Barbs fly over Rick Perry's foray into forensics

[white cloud]

Elbows are flying in the aftermath of yesterday's legislative hearing on Gov. Rick Perry's shakeup of the Texas Forensic Science Commission.

This morning, former commission chairman Sam Bassett, an Austin criminal defense lawyer, sent reporters an email warning that new chairman John Bradley's desire for comprehensive written rules and standards for the fledgling panel could unduly delay a pending review of science used to send convicted arsonist Cameron Todd Willingham to his death in Huntsville in 2004. A complaint by the Innocence Project, a New York-based group, has been before the panel since 2006 and Bradley's rule-making could stretch the review into 2011 "or beyond," Bassett wrote.


http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2009/11/barbs-fly-over-rick-perrys-res.html

[sonias]

1. It's still an issue

The Texas Senate can certainly keep it alive and going;

Yesterday, Senate Criminal Justice Committee Chairman John Whitmire, D-Houston, pressed Bradley about whether it's a conflict for him to be a prosecutor and the chairman of the forensics panel. Bradley conceded it'll be tricky. "I have to make sure I have my commission hat on when I do commission work," he testified.

Hank Gilbert attended the hearing.

State Democratic Chairman Boyd Richie and Democratic gubernatorial candidate Hank Gilbert also leapt into the fray yesterday. Richie said "Perry's politically motivated cancellation of an essential review" puts everyone charged with a crime at risk of being a victim of junk science. Gilbert trained fire on Bradley's remarks this week that he'd like to see some of the commission's preliminary communications and discussions of cases exempted from public meetings and records laws.

Gilbert said it fits a concerted effort by Perry to "promote secrecy in every corner of Texas government."

I'm seeking a response from Perry's office.

Sonia

[sonias]

2. Another take of the hearing from GritsForBreakfast blog

Grits for Breakfast blog 11/11/09
Defiant John Bradley rebuffed on secrecy pleas

(snip)
Mr. Bradley was the sole witness at the hearing. He seemed to thrive in the limelight with his ego swelling more and more as his performance wore on, to the point at the end of near-open defiance toward Sen. Rodney Ellis and state Rep. Tommy Merritt, the chairman of the House Law Enforcement Committee who sat in on the hearing. In many ways, it was quite an arrogant performance - answering nothing concretely and accusing (implicitly or explicitly) anyone who disagreed with him of bias. Several times Bradley spoke of the Innocence Project with a disdainful sneer as a "New York nonprofit," as though Jeff Blackburn of the Innocence Project of Texas weren't sitting just six feet behind him in the audience. As though Texans don't really care about innocent people locked up in prison.

(snip)
Bradley's main theme, to which he returned several times, was that the Forensic Science Commission had been "hijacked" by people with anti-death penalty agendas. I kept wondering which statewide GOP official who makes appointments to the commission - Rick Perry, David Dewhurst, or Greg Abbott - does he believe aided and abetted this "hijacking"? Apparently Gov. Perry's original appointees were to blame, since getting rid of them, we're now told, will somehow result in depoliticizing and professionalizing the commission. Sen. Whitmire and others reminded Bradley that those "third parties" of whom he was so dismissive were actually representatives of the public, but that did nothing to mitigate the DA's disdain.

(snip)
Steve Saloom of the national Innocence Project said at a press conference after the hearing that the commission's enabling legislation does not authorize it to create rules. He later elaborated that former Chair Sam Bassett asked the Attorney General's representative who attended every FSC meeting whether or not they should create written rules, and the AG said they weren't authorized to do so. The reason, said Saloom, was that "The Legislature didn't want to create a behemoth bureaucracy. They wanted it to be composed of experts, and they wanted it to be lean."

Saloom added, "Does want to add a layer of bureaucracy? ... or is he just doing this to stall?" Whatever his intent, there can be no argument that the outcome is to stall.

Very good read. Scott, although not a lawyer is well versed in the Texas Criminal law and legislation. Grits for Breakfast is always a good perspective on anything in Texas dealing with criminal law.

Sonia

[tammywammy]

3. We just have to make sure this issue doesn't die n/t