Downloadable documents; Q4.1 Hair Root Evidence; read 2nd

Continued Release of Documents Corroborating Unreliability of Forensic Evidence

In an effort to substantiate the allegation I have made in this blog and in court appeals, I have started compiling record proof that the physical evidence in this case has been mishandled, contaminated and tampered with. The previous posting detailed the mishandling of the #19 blood sample. In this update I will address a hair root known as “Q4.1” that played a pivotal role in my wrongful arrest and conviction. 

Facts and Documents Relating to Q4.1 Hair Root. 

1.       After Corey Parkers' body was discovered November 27, 1998, Evidence Technician James Choate began collecting potential evidence from the scene. Of particular importance, Choate collected a pair of blue panties found balled up next to the victim. The panties were sent to the FBI laboratory in Washington DC.

2.       An FBI technician examined the underwear noting that it was “saturated in blood”.

Exhibit A

3.       The panties were labeled “Q4”. Several hairs and fibers were removed from the panties and were mounted on a microscope slide also labeled Q4. The slide was then sent to FBI Trace Analyst Max Houck.

4.       Houck examined the Q4 slide under a microscope and noted it contained several human head hairs. All but one of the hairs had been dyed an artificial brown color and were microscopically the same as Corey Parkers hair. These hairs had blood on them.

5.       The one odd hair was a brown Caucasian hair with a “follicular tag” commonly referred to as a root. Houck opened the slide and cut the root from the hair to be tested for DNA. This single undyed hair did not have blood on it. The root was labeled “Q4.1”

Exhibit B

6.       FBI DNA analyst Anthony Onorato received the Q4.1 hair root and was asked to compare the DNA profile from my spit collected out of rain puddle (Q28), to any profile he obtained from Q4.1

7.       On August 2000, Onorato issued a report stating that Q4.1 yielded a partial, mixed DNA profile, and that my DNA was a “major contributor” to the mixture.

Exhibit C

8.       It was later learned that this DNA soup contained DNA from up to 5 or more different people.

 Exhibit D

9.       After my arrest it was discovered that the FBI had destroyed / consumed the Q4.1 hair root in testing and failed to take any pictures of it. Thus it could never be retested.

Exhibit E

10.   Years later it was also discovered that the Q4.1 hair root was tested at the same time, and in the same place, just millimeters apart from Q28, my spit sample. The 2 specimens were tested simultaneously at all stages. This is a gross violation of laboratory protocol designed to prevent contamination.

Exhibit F

11.   In 2015 FBI analyst Anthony Onorato shocked my attorney when he admitted he was NOT the examiner who conducted the DNA testing of Q4.1, even though he led everyone to believe he had for over 14 years.

12.   Onorato informed council that another analyst named “Mackenzie” performed the testing and that he no longer works for the FBI. The FBI refuses to help my lawyer locate Mackenzie and Onorato refuses to write an affidavit

13.   In addition, Onorato conceded that Mackenzie tested Q4.1 and Q28 simultaneously, including placing the samples in a water bath overnight. 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.

Onorato Weblinks

Onorato Weblinks 2 

14.   The Q4.1 hair root was the only hair root associated with any hair found at the crime scene. The state theorized that it was yanked out during the murder. A single forcibly removed hair is inconsistent with that theory because more than one hair would be pulled out during a struggle.

Exhibit G

15.   Former FBI analyst Max Houck left the FBI to become the Director of Forensic Sciences at the University of West Virginia. From there Houck became the Director of the National Laboratory in Washington D.C. Mr. Houck has since been forced to resign amidst numerous testing blunders that have placed his reputation and credibility in doubt.

Forced resignation

Continued resignation

Continued web links #3

***Next post – Hair & Microscope Slides Evidence

Downloadable documents; #19 blood sample; read 1st

Documents proving contamination, mishandling and tampering available for download.

Recent events have made me realize the importance of proving the unreliable nature of the  physical evidence in this case. Words are not enough. Over the next few weeks I will post several updates summarizing every piece of physical evidence used to convict me and will make available the reports, logs and statements that corroborate the problems with each.

Please also refer to the original June 18, 2013 blog post for an entire case history.

Due to the enormous size of the case file, it is impossible to upload every document in this case so I have focused on only pertinent material facts. However, should any reader want a specific or entire document not available, please email a request and every effort will be made to provide it. Because I am in prison this may be a slow process since all requests will be handled by a third party. Requests for crime scene photos, medical examiner files, and any documents relating to personal information of the victim, victims family or my family will be denied.

Beginning with what many might consider as the most damaging evidence against me, I offer the following proof that the #19 blood sample was contaminated and / or tampered with.

1.      Jacksonville Beach Police Department Evidence Technician, James Choate, collected 4 presumptive blood samples from, in and or around the kitchen area at the crime scene. They were labeled:

a.       18A scrapping from outside kitchen window

b.      18B swabbing from outside kitchen window

c.       18C swabbing from outside kitchen window

d.      19 scrapping from inside kitchen cabinet

2.     Although #19 was labeled “inside kitchen cabinet”, E.T. Choate testified at trial that he actually collected it from the lip of the kitchen counter near the sink but did not photograph the collection.

Exhibit A

3.     Sample #19 was collected by Choate November 28, 1998, the second day of processing the scene, after the sample was covered in fingerprinting chemicals and powder, and was exposed to outside elements from the open kitchen window for over 24 hours.

Exhibit B

4.     E.T. Choate scrapped samples 18A and 19 from their surfaces using an exacto-type scalpel that was not sterile and had been used at other crime scenes.

Exhibit C

5.     Samples 18B and 18C were swabbed using distilled water, but packaged wet, molding the specimens into mold.

Exhibit D

6.     On April 12, 1999; before I became a suspect, all four samples were tested by FDLE DNA analyst Jeffery Fletcher. 18A matched Corey Parker’s DNA. 18B, 18C and #19 gave “no reaction”.

Exhibit E

7.     In November 2000, after I became a suspect and police collected my spit out of a rain puddle; FDLE DNA examiner, Timothy Petree, agreed to “re-test” the 4 samples using the PCR-STR method of testing.

8.     On November 27, 2000 Petree reported that, all of the sudden #19 produced a full, unmixed profile that matched my DNA. 18A still matched Corey Parkers’ DNA. 18B still contained no DNA.

Exhibit F

9.     In a pretrial deposition, Petree reluctantly admitted that although 18A matched the victims DNA, it contained a mixture that excluded me!

Exhibit G

10.   The sample was described by analyst Petree as a minute amount of flakes that resembled paint chips. Samples #19 was destroyed/consumed during testing without Petree gaining permission to consume it. In a pre-trial deposition Petree arrogantly stated that it did not concern him if the sample was destroyed, or if anyone can verify his results.

Exhibit H

11.  There are no pictures of #19 and the defense was unable to retest the original sample. #19 was the only specimen consumed.

Exhibit I

12.  It was also discovered that Petree tested my spit sample 3 times over a 72 day period, during which time the #19 sample was also tested. This is a violation of laboratory protocol which states that known DNA standards should never be tested at the same time or place as unidentified crime scene samples. Also, crime scene samples should always be tested before known standards to prevent the known DNA from contaminating the unknown specimen. That was not done in this case.

Exhibit J

13.  Amazingly, at trial analyst Petree committed perjury by stating that he got results from my spit standard (Q28) after just a couple of days, instead of testing it 3 times in a 72 day period.

Exhibit K

14.   Finally, former FDLE analyst John Fitzpatrick was one of several analysts who double checked the work performed by Petree. In 2002 Fitzpatrick was forced to resign from FDLE after it was discovered he faked test results in unrelated work.

    Exhibit L     Exhibit M     Exhibit M2     Exhibit N

These are unrefuted facts, brought to your attention by myself, that were not substantiated proof by the prosecution to warrant my incarceration; surrounding arguably the strongest evidence against me. The evidence speaks for itself.

Next post …Q4.1 hair root.

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.