Suggestive Photo Array Leads to Wrongful Conviction

By TChris, Section Innocence Cases
Posted on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 11:15:41 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Cody Davis had nothing to do with the robbery of the Foster's Too pub in West Palm Beach, but witnesses identified him as the robber. Why?

Witnesses said the robber had a tattoo on his neck. One witness described the tattoo as resembling "Chinese characters." Davis had his name -- "Cody" -- tattooed on his neck, and an informant told the police they should take a look at him. That was good enough for the police.

Investigators put together a photo lineup. Six mug shots included Davis, who was the only one with a tattoo distinctly visible on his neck.

A judge who cared about fair play would have tossed the tainted identifications, given the suggestiveness of the photo array. That didn't happen, and jurors convicted Davis, despite his alibi, despite the dissimilarity of his appearance to witness descriptions of the robber. [more ...]

So how was the mistake uncovered? A police detective sent a ski mask, found in an alley near Foster's at the time of the robbery, to the crime lab for a DNA analysis. The analysis came back four months after Davis' conviction. DNA on the mask came from Jeremy Prichard, who was in the state's DNA database. Prichard had a tattoo on his neck, printed in jagged letters that could have been mistaken for Chinese characters.

Detective Kyle Haas cared about the fact that Davis was probably innocent, so he interviewed Prichard, who confessed to the Foster's robbery, among others. Davis walked free shortly thereafter, and Haas decided his department needed to learn a lesson about suggestive photo arrays.

The sheriff's investigators made some new lineups for the Foster's robbery victims. This time, everyone in the lineup had a tattoo on his neck. The bartender picked out Prichard as the robber.

It's amazing what happens when the police play fair.

Haas, now a road patrol sergeant, said the wrongful conviction of Davis has led him to caution the deputies he trains about eyewitness identification and to give long pause in cases where the only evidence is one person identifying another.

Everyone should give "long pause" before concluding that someone is guilty based only on an eyewitness identification.

< Illinois Ges Tougher DUI Law | Drug Cop Misconduct Leads to Vacated Convictions >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Suggestive Photo Array Leads to Wrongful Conviction | 11 comments (11 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

good for the cop (5.00 / 1) (#5)
by txpublicdefender on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 12:33:16 PM EST

Too often, police officers, especially those involved in the original investigation, don't want to do any follow-up after a conviction, even when evidence shows the wrong person was behind bars. Good for this officer for not only following through on the testing, but the whole investigation. And especially good for him for taking what was learned from this case and implementing changes in his training to try to prevent future wrongs.

I hope the fact that he is now a road patrol sergeant is not a demotion for doing the right thing. I know sometimes officers/detectives will go to patrol if they can be a sergeant as that can actually be a promotion. I'd hate to see someone who did the right thing be punished for it.

Fair play? Yup... (none / 0) (#1)
by tokin librul on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 11:45:30 AM EST

It's amazing what happens when the police play fair.
Haas, now a road patrol sergeant, said the wrongful conviction of Davis has led him to caution the deputies he trains about eyewitness identification and to give long pause in cases where the only evidence is one person identifying another.

And they put the whistle-blower back in "traffic" division, a career killer...
yup them cops are sumpin, ya-betcha...

Good result after (none / 0) (#2)
by oculus on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 11:56:49 AM EST

seriously lacking investigation. Query: did the defense counsel know the ski mask DNA results were pending? Apparently not, as otherwise the attorney would have requested a continuance.

I gather (none / 0) (#3)
by TChris on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 11:58:58 AM EST

from the article that the ski mask wasn't disclosed to the defense because it wasn't known to be connected to the robbery until the DNA test results came back long after the trial ended.

[ Parent ]

: Sounds like a Brady violation (none / 0) (#4)
by oculus on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 12:10:20 PM EST

to me.

[ Parent ]

One Question (none / 0) (#6)
by CDN Ctzn on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 03:34:47 PM EST

Was Haas demoted from Detective to Road Patrol Sergeant? I'm not sure how it all works but it sounds like a step backwards to me. Just wondering if it had anything to do with essentially embarassing the department?

: Sorry Tokin (none / 0) (#7)
by CDN Ctzn on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 03:36:38 PM EST

Just noticed you basically addressed the question above. OOPS!

[ Parent ]

I was being considered for a jury (none / 0) (#8)
by Chatham on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 05:43:15 PM EST

I was up for jury duty in a murder case where there was only eye witness evidence. I told the judge I would have a problem with that, and the prosecutor said, "What if you're told by the judge to give eye witness testimony the same weight as physical evidence?" It also amazed me that the whole trial was slated to take no more than a few days. Pretty disturbing.

same weight? (none / 0) (#9)
by txpublicdefender on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 06:54:42 PM EST

That's a ridiculous question by the prosecutor. No judge would instruct a jury to give the same weight to eyewitness testimony as to physical evidence, or to give one more or less than the other. It is always up to the jury to decide how much weight to give any evidence. To say otherwise is a complete misstatement of the law.

[ Parent ]

: Should the judge have said something then? (none / 0) (#10)
by Chatham on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 08:18:51 PM EST

It was just me, the prosecutor, the judge, and the two defense attorneys (they called us up one by one to talk privately). The judge didn't say anything when the prosecutor asked the question (I actually brought up some cases I had heard about here to the group).

[ Parent ]

yikes (none / 0) (#11)
by Nasarius on Mon Dec 29, 2008 at 09:25:20 PM EST

It should be self-evident that no eyewitness testimony is worth a DNA match, fingerprints, possession of the murder weapon, etc. Even if you're unaware of all the scientific evidence that we're lousy witnesses even in mundane, stress-free circumstances.

But let's say we have...three witnesses, all of whom independently picked out the same suspect in a large lineup of very similar-looking people. That to me would be compelling evidence, but the whole process would have to be documented and presented, not just the witnesses saying "yeah, that's him."

[ Parent ]