OK, I will post the email I sent to the Governor of Louisiana...there have been no objections to my intention to post so it's probably OK:
"I found this case whilst searching the internet and was amazed at the content.
Please see the link below:
216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:iAeSNK_3vrYJ:www.lasc.org/opinions/2005/01ka2730.opn.pdf+clarence+harris+jr+louisiana&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1In the transcripts it is stated that the assailant had a skeleton tattoo on his forearm - Clarence Harris Jr does not have a skeleton tattoo or in fact anything resembling a skeleton: "Although the record contains no picture of the defendant’s actual tattoo, it is clear that the defense’s argument was that the defendant’s tattoo of writing alone did not resemble a skeleton with a banner and writing. However, the defendant was asked to exhibit his tattoo to the jury in court andthe jury could consider K.’s testimony in conjunction with their viewing of the defendant’s tattoo."
K also testified that the car of the assailant had a badge with S-A-A-B or S-A-B-B...Clarence Harris Jr had a Toyota Corolla - the badge bears little or no resemblance to a SAAB badge and the letters are certainly different. "Defense counsel asked the detective about (1) K.’s description of theperpetrator’s tattoo in comparison to the defendant’s tattoo; (2) K.’s recollection of22the letters on the perpetrator’s vehicle as S-A-A-B or S-A-B-B when the defendantdroveaToyotaCorolla"
K's testimony over height also must throw in some doubt as to whether Calrence Harris Jr was the perpetratorof the horrific crime.
I believe also that the forensic/DNA information and samples preserved for use as evidence and precluded any attempt to recover a DNA specimenfor purposes of identifying the defendant as her assailant."
Other pertinent excerpts from the Appeal hearing:
"Destruction of DNA Evidence - The defendant raises several alleged errors concerning the destruction of the DNA evidence,consisting of semencollected fromK.after therape and seminal fluidon the defendant’s seized bed sheet, which violated his rights to due process, a fair trial, and a reliable sentencing. He further states that this error was compounded by the trial court’s refusal to instruct the jury on the impact of the state’s destruction ofthe evidence."
The question that has to be asked is why the evidence was destroyed?
The question also has to be asked as to why without this evidence in hand it was allowed to be introduced?
I also fail to see how a jury can use "lost" evidence that they have had no sight of as a means of convicting this man.
In essence there are 4 point that I can see so far that give reasonable doubt to the conviction and sentencing of Clarence Harris Jr:
1. The tattoo or more significantly the lack of resemblance to a skeleton as per K's testimony.
2. The car - K testified it was a S-A-A-B or S-A-B-B when the defendant drove a Toyota Corolla.
3. The destruction of forensic evidence. Althought this may be seen as not affecting the defendants case as such, it is a major factor when he was convicted by use of the DNA evidence and the appeal hearing nor the defence were not able to have sight if this evidence which couold be deemed to make the appeal hearing unfair.
4. The question of height. Height is very subjective and a child judging the height of somebody taller than her is unreliable - certainly unreliable enough for this to form one of the main factors in jusging the defendants guilt.
With regards to the parking space at the apartment complex, what is to stop anybody parking in a slot normally used by the defendant?
I am opposed to the death penalty, moreso after reading such cases as Clarence Harris Jr's where there is sufficient lack of corroboratiive and key evidence(key meaning the salient points he was convicted/sentenced on). I do not believe that this man can be justifiably sent for execution with so many anomolies in the key evidence.
I admit I am not a legal professional, let alone qualified in United States Law. I have merely looked at this and applied a common sense, logical, methodical and totally objective approach, looking at the evidence given in the statements and testimony of K and the reality of it as documented in the Appeal transcript.
I would be grateful if you could take a look at the case and apply the same objective approach I have in seeing that this conviction is wholly unreliable with enough doubt to make the conviction and sentencing unsafe.
Many thanks"
