FOLIO WEEKLY writes about my case on their cover page!

Things here in Jacksonville are really heating up in the State Attorneys race.  Every single day the corruption is making headlines in the local media regarding Angela Corey, police brutality and even decades old rape kits not being tested or funded. I have sat here hoping this day would come when people finally start to wake up and apathy from the people fade. Last week my case made a pretty big landing in the cover page of FOLIO weekly. Datelines underwhelming episode "Rear Window" is mentioned. Please follow the link to read, my case is mentioned near the end.

Truth, Justice OR the ANGELA COREY Way?

Downloadable documents; Hair & Microscope Slides Evidence; read 3rd

Proof of Evidence Tampering continued….

While it may be difficult to believe that law enforcement officials would tamper with evidence in order to wrongfully convict a person-it is a fact of life that can no longer be ignored nor covered up. Every time you turn on the television and learn of yet another person being released from prison after a wrongful conviction; remember that man or woman was framed for a crime they did not commit. In 2015 this occurred on an average of 3 a week. How many innocent people remain who will never prove their innocence, or will languish in prison for decades until the right attorney, advocate or organization takes up their cause? Americans have been desensitized and come to expect stories and images of police beatings, murdering and yes framing suspects. Before you discard my story of police misconduct, reconsider.

The first 2 posts detailed the problematic nature of samples #19 and Q4.1, along with corroborating documents. This update will focus on crime scene hairs and laboratory microscope slides.

1.       Investigators testified when examining the victim’s body they spotted several hairs that were collected by peeling them off the body because they had dried in blood.

Exhibit A

2.       A pair of panties was found next to the victim’s body which the FBI described as “saturated in blood”.

3.       In 1999 all of the evidence in this case was sent to the FBI in Washington D.C., including the victims’ underwear and hairs from the underwear, placing them on small microscope slides. The slides  were labeled as follows:

a)      Q4-Victims Panties

b)      Q20-Q21-Debris paper bags on hands

c)       Q22 #1-Victims torso

d)      Q22#2-Victims torso

e)      Q23-Victims left hand

f)        Q24-Victims right hand

4.       Former FBI trace Analyst Max Houck examined all 39 slides made in this case. Several contained hairs that were dissimilar to Corey Parkers’ hair samples.

5.     Of particular note, slide Q4 contained several hairs, of which only one was not dyed an artificial color. This single hair had a root attached that was tested for DNA in August 2000 (see previous post on hair root Q4.1)

6.      In February 2000, before I became suspect, the FBI returned the microscope slides to the Jacksonville Beach Police Department.

7.      On November 28, 2000, I was arrested based off the DNA results from samples #19 and Q4.1 (see previous 2 posts)

8.      In early 2002 my attorney had the Q4 slide sent to a defense laboratory, Microtrace, to compare my hair sample to the one unidentified on the slide. Of importance, Microtrace noted the Q4 slide held 14 hairs! This count became very important later in the case.

Exhibit B

9.     After nearly 3 years in jail the prosecutors recognized the unreliable nature of the evidence against me. In early 2003, 5 years after Parkers’ murder, the state decided to reexamine the hair slides.

10.   Detective Billy Carlyle, accompanied by an FDLE technician, my attorneys and a defense investigator came to the Duval County Jail to collect a hair sample from  me. Detective Billy Carlyle refused to allow me or my attorneys to count, measure or photograph the collected hairs and my lawyer stopped the collection.

11.   The next day the Judge assigned to the case ordered Detective Billy Carlyle to permit my council to count, measure and photograph the hairs collected.

12.  In April 2003, Detective Billy Carlyle mailed my hair samples and the original 39 FBI slides to Max Houck who left the FBI to become the Director of Forensics at the University of West Virginia.

13.  Upon reviewing the slides, Houck identified 4 hairs that he felt should be tested for mitochondrial DNA.

14.   Interestingly, Max Houck counted only 12 hairs on slide Q4, whereas Microtrace counted 14 hairs on it a year earlier. Also Max Houck counted that slide Q22 #2 contained 5 hairs and slide Q24 held 3 hairs. Max Houck returned the slides to Detective Billy Carlyle.

Exhibit C

15.   In January 2004, the slides were mailed to a laboratory in Pennsylvania, called Mitotyping, so the 4 hairs identified by Houck could be tested for mtDNA.

16.   Mitotyping received and testing one hair each from slides Q4, Q22 #1, Q22 #2 and Q 24. On March 1, 2004, Mitotyping reported that one hair each from slides Q4, Q22 #1 and Q24 matched my DNA.

Exhibit D

17.   A review of Mytotypings’ notes revealed that upon receipt of the slides, Q22 #2 contained 7 hairs, whereas it only had 5 hairs when examined by Max Houck. In addition, slide Q24 contained 5 hairs rather than 3 hairs as counted by Max Houck.

Exhibit E

18.   Mitotyping returned the evidence to the Jacksonville Beach Police Department. Shortly after, defense council requested that all original 39 slides be returned to Max Houck in West Virginia to identify additional hairs for testing.

19.   Max Houck re-examined the slides and marked 12 more hairs for DNA testing. Most surprisingly is the fact that Houck marked a second hair on slide Q4 for testing. However, during Houcks’ previous 2 examinations, he only noted 1 hair not artificially dyed/colored and dissimilar to Corey Parkers’ hair. (Exhibit lettering out of order from this point on).

Exhibit J

20.   Max Houck then sent the slides to a private lab in North Carolina called LapCorp.

21.   LapCorp tested 12 hairs from various slides which had been marked by Houck. Several matched Corey Parkers’ boyfriend. One matched Corey Parker. 4 were unidentified, including one found in Coreys’ right hand. Finally 3 hairs matched my mtDNA. One each from slides Q4, Q20 –Q21 and Q24.

Exhibit F

22.   In light of the new incriminating evidence, yet questionable evidence, Max Houck was deposed and surprised everyone when he admitted that none of the 6 hairs matching my DNA had blood on them when he examined them under a microscope. Yet, had these hairs been collected from the victims’ body or blood saturated panties, they should have been covered in blood like all the other hairs collected.

Exhibit G

23.   In all 16 hairs from various slides were tested for mtDNA. Six of the hairs reportedly matched my DNA.

a)      2 from Q4-victims panties

b)      2 from Q24-victims right hand

c)       1 from Q20-Q21-paper bags, hands

d)      1 from Q22 #1-victims torso

24.   Each of the hairs matching my DNA were not tested until nearly six years after the murder, and after my hairs were collected, and after gross discrepancies in hair counts occurred.

25.   The Jacksonville Beach Police Department did not maintain a complete chain of custody for the hair slides. Approximately 10 property logs exist (that I know of) for the slides when there should have been one. Each of the 10 logs is different and not a single one is complete or 100% accurate. Normally a chain of custody log would document each time a piece of evidence comes or goes, who signed it in or out, and for what reason. That did not happen here. E.T. Choate, however claimed at trial that all evidence was properly tracked.

Exhibit H                    Exhibit I             Weblinks

There can be only one explanation for the absence of blood on hair, count discrepancies, and inadequate chain of custody logs – evidence tampering. Is this the type of evidence we allow to convict people?

*** Next Post – Zippo Lighter and Blue Shirt

Judge Mallory Cooper denies me help and Making of a Murder sparks new controversy in the legal system

Former Judge Appeals Court Denies Appointment of Experts; Amended Motion Filed Alleging New Evidence.

 It has been nearly 3 years since the first post of this blog, and over 80,000 viewers later the results have been favorable. Thanks to everyone who believes in me and supports my cause, especially to those who have come forward with new information and or evidence. In 2015, 149 prisoners were exonerated, an all time high, and it is promising to see the public has interest in preventing wrongful convictions like mine.  Shows like making of a murderer on Netflix and its coverage of the Steven Avery case in Wisconsin have opened Americans eyes.

There have been 2 specific developments in my case in the last couple of months. Most recently my attorney filed an "Amended Motion for Post Conviction Relief" raising several new issues. The motion explains how the FBI and possibly the State Attorney Angela Corey misled my defense by failing to disclose the identity of an analyst who performed the blood DNA testing early in the case.
Instead my attorneys and I were lead to believe for over 14 years that another analyst was responsible for contaminating the blood DNA evidence. This topic is covered in detail in the June 6, 2015 post. If you will recall, this blood DNA tested negative for any blood DNA the first time and then miraculously contained 5 peoples blood DNA after my samples were taken.

Most importantly is the motion includes the issue of Angela Corey purposely withholding information relating to a confession of sorts made by another suspect. This was covered in the July 30, 2015 post. The seriousness of potentially allowing a man to continue walk the city speaks for itself.

If you are interested you can read the originals by clicking here on the county court house website. You will need to create an account and search my name "Robert Denney".

In other news, another legal battle has come to an end in my case. Considering the fact this case, and the current appeal revolves around DNA evidence; my attorney Rick Sichta filed for a "Motion for Appointment of Experts" asking the courts to appropriate the necessary funds to retain experts in DNA crime scene analogy and forensic pathology. Although the law favors the appointment of experts, Judge Mallory Cooper denied the motion. This means we will not be allowed the less than $5,000 needed for retesting. This may be due to the misappropriations of funds already spent on my case which total somewhere in the 5 million dollar range.

This is a major blow to my case. Even though there is a significant amount of evidence to suggest tampering and contamination, without the experts to corroborate the evidence the court will likely deny relief.  Fortunately Judge Cooper has retired and I have faith the new Judge will more fairly consider any new requests my lawyer has. Regardless after quite a bit of litigation I am left without experts needed to prove my claims simply because I am unable to afford them myself.

I expect the case to progress a lot more in 2016. Currently there is no date set for the post conviction evidentiary hearing, but there continues to be meaningful investigation into multiple leads and facets of the case. As they unfold and develop I will update every one as soon as it becomes public records. 

Newly Discovered Evidence

FBI admits to junk science possible evidence contamination and misleading the defense.

 Junk science:

 Recently the FBI admitted to America that its microscope hair comparison techniques used for decades was misleading and that its forensic scientists purposely over stated forensic results in a way that unfairly favored the prosecution in hundreds if not thousands of cases. Since admitting microscopic hair comparison science is essentially worthless, the FBI has been forced to confess that its scientists contributed to hundreds of thousands of Americans being unfairly prosecuted, over 30 of which were given death sentences. It is unknown how many of these convictions were of innocent individuals.

This now debunked science was used extensively in my case by the FBI and by the University of West Virginia forensic director who was formerly employed by the FBI. The analyst in this case was Max Houck.  Mr. Max Houck performed several rounds of microscopic hair comparisons spanning a five year period in order to “screen” which hairs may be suitable for subsequent DNA testing.

Ultimately analyst Max Houck testified at trial, giving an extensively detailed explanation of the microscopic structure of human hair and how he was able to determine whether specific hairs may have come from certain individuals. At my trial, the testimony given by Mr. Max Houck is exactly the type of testimony the FBI now admits is fraudulent and misleading.

It is disturbing that the FBI and analysts like Max Houck operated for decades providing juries with obviously junk science and testimony knowing the lives of the accused hangs in the balance. In this case there is no question the jury was persuaded to believe that several hairs collected from the crime scene originated from me due in part to the misleading evidence of Max Houck. Mr. Max Houck has recently resigned, (per google weblinks and weblinks #2) over lab testing blunders which had apparently continued up until 2015. Incidentally Washing DC does not like multiple peoples DNA in one sample but in Florida this is ok? Does anyone else notice some inconsistencies in policy. 

How the FBI’s revelation will affect my current appeal is unknown but it will certainly be a compelling piece of information for the court to consider, and I for one am confident it will contribute to proving my innocence.  LINK: FBI ADMITS TO DECADES OF JUNK SCIENCE!

Previously Unknown and Missing Expert;

Many of you know or remember from previous readings that the state’s first piece of evidence was a single hair root that produced a partial, mixed DNA profile containing as many as 5 peoples DNA. The FBI reported that my DNA was a major contributor to the mixture.

For nearly 14 years everyone believed that the FBI DNA Examiner Anthony Onorato was the scientist whom conducted the DNA testing of the hair root. While investigating claims for appeal my attorneys spoke to Mr. Anthony Onorato and were shocked when he confessed he was not the expert who did the testing, and that it was another analyst by the name of “Mackenzie”.

Anthony Onorato admissions are especially bothersome considering that a review of his depositions, reports, and trial testimony indicate that he was responsible for the testing. Anthony Onorato repeatedly, and in great detail testified to the various steps he took while examining the hair root. Yet it was really a mysterious analyst name “Mackenzie”. One has to wonder why Mr. Anthony Onorato would wait 14 years to disclose this information and also why he would intentionally mislead everyone concerning his involvement.

Since interviewing Mr. Anthony Onorato, my attorney has learned that “Mackenzie” no longer works for the FBI and has been unable to locate him. A request was made for the FBI to assist in locating Mackenzie but with no results. Mackenzie’s name was never known or disclosed since my arrest in 2000 and until Anthony Onotato had a new interview in 2014.

My attorney has also asked Mr. Anthony Onorato to provide a sworn affidavit attesting to what he admitted. He refused. It is amazing to me that it took nearly a decade and a half for the FBI or Anthony Onorato to come forth with the name of the scientist (who can’t be found) that supposedly tested what is arguably the most pivotal piece of evidence against me. Yet another important bit of information the jury never heard.

Contaminated DNA Evidence;

In addition to Anthony Onorato admitting he did not conduct the actual DNA testing for the FBI; he concedes that the analyst “Mackenzie” handled the crime scene hair root at the same time, and in the same place, as my known saliva standard. Anthony Onorato admits that if this type of handling caused contamination, there would be no way to tell, and the safe-guards in place at the time would not have detected it. Mr. Anthony Onorato further conceded that my saliva standard was placed in the same “waterbath” as the crime scene sample overnight, in addition to several other instances of contact between the samples.

Alarmingly, Anthony Onorato states that this was common practice at the FBI back in 2000. Common practice or not, there is no denying that evidence handling like this is likely to have led to contamination in this case. Unfortunately Mr. Mackenzie cannot be found to determine if any other procedures he utilized caused contamination of the evidence.  

In light of everything Anthony Onorato has admitted my attorneys have amended the pending “Motion for Post conviction Relief” (see downloadable pdf link below for the original) to include grounds detailing how the FBI’s failure to disclose Mackenzie’s identity or prevent contamination of DNA evidence has violated my US Constitutional rights.

I am relieved after all these years that I am finally beginning to prove the governments misconduct and mishandling of evidence. I hope this helps convince some of my readers that I did not commit this horrible crime.

Coming in the next post;  Now Office Of The State Attorney - 4th Judicial Circuit of Florida and former prosecuting attorney of my case; Angela Corey (who unbelievably has recently announced a 3^rd term run for office); withholds evidence of a possible suspect and confession for at least 3 years.