Current:Home > reviewsSupreme Court refuses to hear bite mark case -MacroWatch
Supreme Court refuses to hear bite mark case
View
Date:2025-04-19 00:35:22
MONTGOMERY, Ala. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court declined Tuesday to review the case of an Alabama man who has spent decades in prison for a murder conviction supported by recanted and discredited testimony about bite marks.
Charles M. McCrory was convicted of murder for the 1985 killing of his wife, Julie Bonds, who was found beaten to death in her home. Key evidence against him was the testimony of a forensic odontologist who said that two small marks on the victim’s left shoulder matched McCrory’s teeth. The odontologist later said he “fully” recants that 1985 testimony. He wrote in an affidavit that modern science has exposed the limitations of bite mark evidence and that there is no way to positively link the marks to any one person.
Lawyers with the Innocence Project and the Southern Center for Human Rights, which are representing McCrory, had asked the Supreme Court to review an Alabama court’s decision denying his request for a new trial. Justices turned down the petition mostly without comment.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a statement that the case raises “difficult questions about the adequacy of current postconviction remedies to correct a conviction secured by what we now know was faulty science.”
“One in four people exonerated since 1989 were wrongfully convicted based on false or misleading forensic evidence introduced at their trials. Hundreds if not thousands of innocent people may currently be incarcerated despite a modern consensus that the central piece of evidence at their trials lacked any scientific basis,” Sotomayor wrote.
Sotomayor wrote that she voted against reviewing the case because the constitutional question raised by McCrory has not “percolated sufficiently in the lower courts.” But she urged state and federal lawmakers to establish paths for inmates to challenge “wrongful convictions that rest on repudiated forensic testimony.”
The Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, in rejecting his bid for a new trial, ruled that McCrory had failed to show that result of his 1985 trial “probably would have been different” if the new forensic guidelines regarding bite marks had been used.
The Innocence Project says that least 36 people have been wrongfully convicted through the use of bite mark evidence. A Florida man was freed in 2020 after spending 37 years in a Florida prison for a 1983 rape and murder he did not commit. The conviction was based partly on faulty bite mark analysis.
Bonds was found beaten to death May 31, 1985, in the home she shared with her toddler son. The couple were divorcing and lived separately at the time. McCrory has maintained his innocence. He told police that he had been at the home the night before to do laundry and say goodnight to his son. His attorneys argued that there was no physical evidence linking McCrory to the crime and that hair found clutched in the decedent’s hand did not belong to McCrory.
Bonds’ family, who believed McCrory was responsible, hired private prosecutors for the case against McCrory. They hired Florida forensic dentist Dr. Richard Souviron, who gained fame as an expert after testifying in the trial of serial killer Ted Bundy. McCrory was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
Souviron later recanted his testimony. McCrory’s attorneys said two other forensic experts disputed that the marks were bite marks at all.
McCrory’s attorneys wrote in their petition that that the current district attorney had offered to resentence Mr. McCrory to time served, which would allow him to immediately leave prison, in exchange for a guilty plea.
“Mr. McCrory declined, unwilling to admit to a crime he did not commit,” his attorneys wrote.
McCrory was denied parole in 2023. He will be eligible again in 2028.
veryGood! (49692)
Related
- Sam Taylor
- Hawks select Zaccharie Risacher with first pick of 2024 NBA draft. What to know
- NASA taps Elon Musk’s SpaceX to bring International Space Station out of orbit in a few more years
- Valerie Bertinelli is on 'healing journey' after past 'toxic' relationships
- Paula Abdul settles lawsuit with former 'So You Think You Can Dance' co
- Boebert will likely fill the House seat vacated by congressman who criticized the GOP’s extremes
- 'The Bear' Season 3 is chewy, delicious and overindulgent: Review
- Historic Midwest floods swamp rivers; it's so hot Lincoln melted
- Bodycam footage shows high
- iPhone got too hot? Here’s how to keep your device from overheating in scorching temps
Ranking
- Intel's stock did something it hasn't done since 2022
- Family that lost home to flooded river vows to keep store open as floodwaters devastate Midwest
- Watch: Las Vegas Sphere sweats profusely with sunburn in extreme summer heat
- Squid Game Actress Hoyeon Addresses Devin Booker Dating Rumors
- Average rate on 30
- Judge upholds North Carolina’s anti-rioting law, dismisses civil liberties suit
- Democrats and their allies sue to keep RFK Jr. off the ballot in several states
- Go for the Gold with the SKIMS for Team USA Collab Starring Suni Lee, Gabby Thomas & More Olympians
Recommendation
Intel's stock did something it hasn't done since 2022
He flipped off a trooper and got charged. Now Vermont is on the hook for $175,000
Two pandas are preparing to head to San Diego Zoo from China
Chaotic Singles Parties are going viral on TikTok. So I went to one.
Who are the most valuable sports franchises? Forbes releases new list of top 50 teams
California dad who drove family off cliff will get mental health treatment instead of trial
New Jersey police officer honored for rescuing pair from burning building
Jeopardy! Has Fans Buzzing Over Zendaya Question