Texas Forensic Science Commission accepts investigations into analyst misconduct, opens panel on magazine-mark comparisons and clears multiple disclosures
Loading...
Summary
At its Jan. 30 meeting the Texas Forensic Science Commission accepted staff investigations into an admitted DNA-data manipulation case and an analyst'inmate relationship, formed an investigative panel to study magazine-mark comparisons, and voted to take no further action on multiple lab disclosures.
The Texas Forensic Science Commission on Jan. 30 accepted staff recommendations to investigate two recent forensic disclosures, formed a specialist panel to review long-standing magazine-mark comparison practices and approved dismissals or corrective-action outcomes for numerous lab self-disclosures.
The commission voted to accept for staff investigation a self-disclosure from the Southwest Institute of Forensic Sciences after the lab reported that an analyst manipulated an electropherogram printout to conceal a DNA contamination event; the analyst admitted the manipulation and was terminated in October, and the lab has reviewed a selection of cases and reanalyzed where necessary. Staff recommended an investigation to determine whether formal findings of misconduct are warranted; the commission approved the motion to investigate.
The commission also accepted a Jefferson County Regional Crime Lab self-disclosure for investigation after staff reported that a seized-screening analyst had a messaging relationship with a federal inmate and sent money to the inmate's commissary. The lab removed the analyst from casework, reanalyzed in-progress cases (staff cited a review of roughly 139 cases), and notified prosecutors and law-enforcement partners; commissioners voted to open a staff investigation to assess conflict-of-interest implications.
Separately, the commission voted to accept a complaint from the federal public defender's office alleging issues with magazine-mark comparison testimony from a 1999 case and formed an investigative panel (named were Dr. Buscemi, Mister Mark Daniel and a third commissioner) to review the reliability and practices of magazine-mark comparisons and report best-practice recommendations.
Throughout the meeting staff presented many lab self-disclosures and complaint reports (labeling and packaging errors, missed evidence, misinterpretations of tests and notification lapses). For several items (including Brazoria County seized-drug labeling issues, a Missouri County mislabeling incident, and multiple crime-scene and evidence-handling disclosures) staff concluded corrective actions had been taken and recommended no further action; commissioners approved those recommendations by voice vote.
Several complaints alleging broader casework problems were tabled pending additional records or responses from laboratories (including a multi-issue complaint related to a capital-murder case submitted by Gretchen Swayne). In several other matters staff recommended dismissal on jurisdictional or evidentiary grounds and the commission carried those dismissals.
The commission's actions were procedural and investigative: where staff found root causes and corrective steps had been taken, the panel authorized no further disciplinary action; where staff found admissions of potential misconduct or unresolved conflicts, the panel authorized further investigation. Commissioners repeatedly emphasized parallel reporting to oversight bodies and asked staff to request supplemental disclosures if other affected examiners or cases are identified.
The meeting closed after adopting multiple other agenda items.
The commission did not announce deadlines for completion of the newly opened investigations; staff said they would report back as inquiries progress.
