WEBVTT - The Forensics Are In 0:00:02.600 --> 0:00:06.000 Just before nine o'clock last night, the jury returned guilty 0:00:06.120 --> 0:00:10.000 verdicts against all three defendants. It was absolute shambles, to 0:00:10.039 --> 0:00:12.160 tell you the truth. Just actually really pain of. 0:00:12.200 --> 0:00:14.840 Blood on his clothing the day after the alleged attamp 0:00:14.880 --> 0:00:16.880 on a shallow mud bank and it fits through a river. 0:00:17.000 --> 0:00:19.160 Basically, I think most of the people are used to me, 0:00:19.239 --> 0:00:20.520 there are good people. 0:00:20.560 --> 0:00:23.200 I think a really important question we need to ask 0:00:23.400 --> 0:00:26.279 is how many Indigenous prisoners in Australia are innocent. 0:00:27.200 --> 0:00:29.800 This is Curtain, a podcast where we pulled back the 0:00:29.840 --> 0:00:32.360 blinds to shine a light on the darkest parts of 0:00:32.400 --> 0:00:35.320 our justice system and ask who are the victims. 0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:38.520 I'm Amy Maguire and. 0:00:38.440 --> 0:00:42.040 I'm Martin Hodgson, a senior advocate for the Foreign Prisoner 0:00:42.080 --> 0:00:46.400 Support Service. And a warning. This series contains the names 0:00:46.440 --> 0:00:50.760 of deceased peoples and has distressing content that might upset 0:00:50.880 --> 0:00:51.960 some listeners. 0:00:52.880 --> 0:00:56.840 In nineteen eighty seven, Ron Williamson and Dennis Fritz were 0:00:56.880 --> 0:01:00.480 tried separately in Oklahoma and convicted of a brutal rape 0:01:00.520 --> 0:01:04.240 and murder. Questionable forensic evidence tied them to the scene 0:01:04.280 --> 0:01:08.120 of the crime. Williamson received the death penalty. Fritz was 0:01:08.120 --> 0:01:12.240 sentenced to life in prison. Fritz and Williamson were innocent, 0:01:12.760 --> 0:01:16.640 and they were exonerated by DNA evidence. In over fifty 0:01:16.640 --> 0:01:21.920 percent of DNA exonerations, the forensic evidence was unvalidated or improper. 0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:25.400 There were a host of problems with the forensics used 0:01:25.400 --> 0:01:29.800 to convict these innocent people. Analysts testifying as experts at 0:01:29.800 --> 0:01:34.320 criminal trials made invalid claims, false claims unsupported by science. 0:01:35.120 --> 0:01:38.920 They made serious errors because they used unreliable methods which 0:01:38.959 --> 0:01:42.720 were either error prone or lack repuatability. They also engaged 0:01:42.760 --> 0:01:48.080 in scientific negligence, even outright misconduct. They concealed evidence of innocence, 0:01:48.560 --> 0:01:51.120 and they used vague and confusing terms that jurors could 0:01:51.120 --> 0:01:54.960 not be expected to understand. In the Fritz and Williamson case, 0:01:55.480 --> 0:01:59.440 two types of forensics were presented, blood and hair analysis. 0:02:00.320 --> 0:02:03.640 Blood or a cyological analysis has sound science to back 0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:07.200 it up, but in this case, the analyst reached exaggerated 0:02:07.200 --> 0:02:11.440 and false conclusions that made totally inconclusive eb L blood 0:02:11.440 --> 0:02:16.000 taping seem like evidence of their guilt. Fretz and Williamson 0:02:16.400 --> 0:02:19.840 each served twelve years for a crime they did not commit. 0:02:20.639 --> 0:02:23.960 At one point, Williamson was only five days from execution. 0:02:25.720 --> 0:02:29.919 That was Brandon ell Garrett, author of Convicting the Innocent, 0:02:30.160 --> 0:02:33.880 Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong. He works for the Innocence 0:02:33.960 --> 0:02:38.600 Project and teaches law at the University of Virginia Law School. 0:02:39.080 --> 0:02:42.040 You've heard him on this podcast before, but there he 0:02:42.120 --> 0:02:45.839 was explaining the importance of forensic evidence and that when 0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:51.360 it's used poorly, collected, poorly, or mishandled in over fifty 0:02:51.400 --> 0:02:55.280 percent of cases where people are exonerated, it was because 0:02:55.320 --> 0:02:59.399 of this poor use of forensic evidence. This week, we've 0:02:59.400 --> 0:03:02.960 got a bigger episode for you because we've been waiting 0:03:02.960 --> 0:03:06.480 on information that's been a long time coming. We told 0:03:06.520 --> 0:03:10.360 you late last year that we had grave concerns about 0:03:10.400 --> 0:03:14.840 the forensic analysis brought at the trial of Kevin Henry, 0:03:15.800 --> 0:03:19.000 and because of this, we sent this data away to 0:03:19.080 --> 0:03:23.160 an international expert in the United Kingdom. This week we 0:03:23.320 --> 0:03:27.560 finally received this independent analysis back and we can tell 0:03:27.600 --> 0:03:34.640 you it's explosive. It confirms our previous suspicions on several aspects. 0:03:34.120 --> 0:03:34.880 Of this case. 0:03:35.920 --> 0:03:39.360 Now, before we outline this information, I want to extend 0:03:39.360 --> 0:03:41.960 a huge thank you to our listeners, especially those of 0:03:41.960 --> 0:03:43.880 you who've stuck it out with us over the past 0:03:43.960 --> 0:03:48.880 few weeks while we've revisited certain information, we have been 0:03:48.920 --> 0:03:51.920 waiting on the outcome of Kevin Henry's parole hearing, and 0:03:51.960 --> 0:03:52.840 we are still waiting. 0:03:53.480 --> 0:03:54.120 Because of that. 0:03:54.160 --> 0:03:58.000 We had a few quiet episodes this week, though we'll 0:03:58.040 --> 0:04:00.960 begin to go into detail about the FORENDS analysis in 0:04:01.040 --> 0:04:05.200 this case. We've told you before preliminary assessments from experts 0:04:05.240 --> 0:04:09.240 had already raised concerns it was overly simplistic. This new 0:04:09.280 --> 0:04:10.640 analysis confirms this. 0:04:11.440 --> 0:04:15.080 But first we have to warn our listeners, especially our 0:04:15.120 --> 0:04:19.640 Aboriginal and Torres Straight Islander listeners, that this episode will 0:04:19.680 --> 0:04:26.160 contain distressing content. It contains the names of deceased people. Now, 0:04:26.160 --> 0:04:29.040 we've taken a great deal of care in this podcast 0:04:29.080 --> 0:04:33.080 series not to be gratuitous. Out of respect for Linda's 0:04:33.120 --> 0:04:35.040 memory and her family. 0:04:35.680 --> 0:04:37.880 We've tried our best to censor some of the more 0:04:37.920 --> 0:04:41.680 disturbing aspects of Linda's death. This is largely because, as 0:04:41.680 --> 0:04:44.760 an Aboriginal woman, she was victim not only to this crime, 0:04:45.160 --> 0:04:47.160 but to so many others in her short time on 0:04:47.160 --> 0:04:50.080 this earth. We don't want to add to that disrespect, 0:04:50.240 --> 0:04:52.479 and we don't want to further the trauma and hurt 0:04:52.480 --> 0:04:53.560 felt by her family. 0:04:54.120 --> 0:04:58.200 But this week, we unfortunately do have to outline the 0:04:58.200 --> 0:05:02.720 more distressing details of her death. This is because the 0:05:02.720 --> 0:05:06.320 information we will provide you with is critical to Kevin 0:05:06.320 --> 0:05:11.279 Henry's case. It's critical to understanding why an innocent man 0:05:11.480 --> 0:05:14.719 has been sitting in jail for the past twenty five years. 0:05:15.160 --> 0:05:19.400 But as we outline these details, never forget that Linda 0:05:19.480 --> 0:05:24.039 was an accomplished, smart, strong mother of four. She was 0:05:24.080 --> 0:05:28.880 loved by her immediate and large extended family, and deserves 0:05:28.920 --> 0:05:32.000 to be remembered as the brilliant person she was in life, 0:05:33.160 --> 0:05:36.359 rather than the tragic circumstances of her death. 0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:40.839 We believe that a graver injustice has been committed against Linda. 0:05:41.080 --> 0:05:43.159 It was because she was Aboriginal, and it was because 0:05:43.160 --> 0:05:46.000 she was a woman that police failed to investigate this properly, 0:05:46.440 --> 0:05:48.960 that media failed to follow up and hold them accountable, 0:05:49.440 --> 0:05:51.400 and why her name was lost to the events of 0:05:51.440 --> 0:05:54.760 nineteen ninety one, forever tied to a tragedy when her 0:05:54.760 --> 0:05:56.400 life was worth so much more. 0:05:56.920 --> 0:05:59.400 Now, we have told you several times before in this 0:05:59.480 --> 0:06:03.440 podcast series that Linda's official cause of death was drowning, 0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:05.599 But let's go back. 0:06:05.440 --> 0:06:09.760 A bit so before we bring in the new information 0:06:09.920 --> 0:06:12.719 that we've received. We actually have to go back to 0:06:12.839 --> 0:06:17.039 the transcript. Now, Martin, when you look at the trial, 0:06:17.400 --> 0:06:21.600 when did the pathology report and the expert testimony actually 0:06:21.680 --> 0:06:22.480 come into play? 0:06:23.640 --> 0:06:26.920 Well, it came in two parts by two witnesses, and 0:06:26.960 --> 0:06:31.400 it was fairly scattered. One was called early on and 0:06:31.480 --> 0:06:34.719 one was called almost at the end of the trial. 0:06:35.560 --> 0:06:41.680 I think that's problematic because it can be quite complex information. Generally, 0:06:41.680 --> 0:06:45.240 you would hope if you have two expert witnesses, as 0:06:45.360 --> 0:06:48.479 they did in this case, they'd be called one after 0:06:48.560 --> 0:06:51.479 the other so that the jury has a chance to 0:06:51.720 --> 0:06:57.480 understand what's being said. But that wasn't done. The pathologist, 0:06:57.560 --> 0:07:02.000 who will be predominantly speaking about today, was called in 0:07:02.080 --> 0:07:06.760 between two witnesses who happened to be at Tanuba House 0:07:06.839 --> 0:07:10.760 that evening. So I think that also might go to 0:07:11.040 --> 0:07:15.280 why some of the jurors were clearly or had to 0:07:15.320 --> 0:07:19.920 be confused about some of the information. And it did 0:07:19.960 --> 0:07:23.240 seem a slightly bizarre time in the trial to introduce 0:07:23.320 --> 0:07:24.040 that information. 0:07:25.120 --> 0:07:28.160 So when you talk about those two experts, what testimony 0:07:28.240 --> 0:07:31.520 are we going to talk about today and where did 0:07:31.840 --> 0:07:33.680 those reports come from? 0:07:34.440 --> 0:07:39.280 Okay, So the testimony itself is what we call forensic pathology, 0:07:39.920 --> 0:07:44.520 and that basically gives an understanding of the medical issues 0:07:44.560 --> 0:07:49.280 as to what occurred that night and that day, and 0:07:49.320 --> 0:07:54.040 it tries to explain how a person died, the injuries 0:07:54.080 --> 0:08:00.160 they might have suffered beforehand and after their death. It 0:08:00.200 --> 0:08:05.760 also looks at any blood toxicology and that information came 0:08:05.920 --> 0:08:11.840 from a laboratory expert in Brisbane who analyzed things like 0:08:12.120 --> 0:08:18.360 blood alcohol level samples and also a medical practitioner. And 0:08:18.840 --> 0:08:22.440 that person is the one that acted as the specialist 0:08:22.440 --> 0:08:26.480 pathologist in the trial, and it was that person that 0:08:27.200 --> 0:08:30.480 produced a cause of death for Linda. And I'll just 0:08:30.600 --> 0:08:35.679 quickly read from the transcript that the cause of death 0:08:35.840 --> 0:08:39.000 was determined and this is what the pathologist, who was 0:08:39.040 --> 0:08:44.040 a medical practitioner said. I made to support the diagnosis 0:08:44.160 --> 0:08:47.000 of drowning as the cause of death. 0:08:48.080 --> 0:08:50.080 So what did they base that cause of death on? 0:08:51.800 --> 0:08:56.600 Okay, So, as we've discussed in the podcast, Linda sustained 0:08:56.640 --> 0:09:00.840 a huge number of injuries during the assault took place 0:09:01.120 --> 0:09:03.800 against her by the three women who were convicted of 0:09:03.880 --> 0:09:08.199 grievous bodily hal but the cause of death is given 0:09:08.240 --> 0:09:13.480 as drowning and that was because when Linda was found 0:09:15.040 --> 0:09:18.840 and the examination of her body was done. There was 0:09:18.960 --> 0:09:24.080 water in the lungs, there was some watery fluid in 0:09:24.160 --> 0:09:28.480 the stomach, and there was a small amount of froth 0:09:28.800 --> 0:09:32.319 in the airway. This is what led to the diagnosis 0:09:32.360 --> 0:09:34.280 of drowning as the cause of death. 0:09:35.240 --> 0:09:38.000 So at the time and on the stand, was it 0:09:38.040 --> 0:09:40.439 contested this cause of death, that it was drowning. 0:09:41.800 --> 0:09:45.520 No, And despite this being a murder trial and that 0:09:45.640 --> 0:09:48.600 being given as the cause of death, there was really 0:09:48.640 --> 0:09:52.480 no challenge to that being the case at all, and 0:09:52.559 --> 0:09:56.880 no challenge to the forensic evidence that allegedly supported it. 0:09:57.760 --> 0:10:01.560 And I should say that one of the issues is 0:10:01.600 --> 0:10:05.040 that not only with Kevin on trial, but the women 0:10:05.080 --> 0:10:10.800 were on trial alongside him. So a large percentage of 0:10:10.840 --> 0:10:15.120 the forensic information presented a trial was not in relation 0:10:15.280 --> 0:10:18.160 to Kevin at all. It was in relation to the 0:10:18.200 --> 0:10:23.200 assault perpetrated by the women, and so almost all of 0:10:23.240 --> 0:10:27.840 the forensic information given at trial relates to that assault. 0:10:29.120 --> 0:10:32.920 There's no link of Kevin's at all in that assault, 0:10:33.559 --> 0:10:39.120 either in the pathology that is, there's no connection with Kevin, 0:10:39.800 --> 0:10:44.880 and also by witnesses own statements that Kevin actually told 0:10:44.880 --> 0:10:47.360 the women and was the only person to speak up 0:10:47.400 --> 0:10:51.280 and tell them to knock it off. So it's important 0:10:51.280 --> 0:10:55.000 to understand that the vast bulk of the forensic information 0:10:55.640 --> 0:11:01.720 presented was about the assault on Linda, and it was 0:11:01.800 --> 0:11:05.760 some of this information that was challenged by the lawyers 0:11:05.800 --> 0:11:11.200 representing the three women. But in terms of Kevin Henry, 0:11:12.000 --> 0:11:14.160 the cause of death was never challenged. 0:11:14.960 --> 0:11:17.840 And why is it important to look back at the 0:11:17.880 --> 0:11:20.839 cause of death and consider whether she had drowned when 0:11:20.840 --> 0:11:21.800 we look at this case. 0:11:22.880 --> 0:11:27.199 Okay, So for the prosecutors to convince a jury beyond 0:11:27.200 --> 0:11:31.520 a reasonable doubt that Kevin Henry was responsible for the 0:11:31.600 --> 0:11:36.000 murder of Linda, the only way they could do that 0:11:36.360 --> 0:11:40.680 was drowning, because there was no other forensic evidence that 0:11:40.880 --> 0:11:45.200 supported her death in a way that Kevin could have 0:11:45.280 --> 0:11:50.840 contributed to. Now we've already gone through why even Kevin 0:11:50.920 --> 0:11:55.200 being involved is simply inaccurate. But I think they chose 0:11:55.280 --> 0:11:59.360 this largely because there was simply no other way to 0:11:59.480 --> 0:12:04.080 link to the death. So, to give an example, if 0:12:04.080 --> 0:12:08.920 they suggested that Linda had been strangled, they would have 0:12:09.000 --> 0:12:11.760 had to prove that it was Kevin Henry who did it, 0:12:12.040 --> 0:12:16.720 and you would expect to find his tissue samples his skin, 0:12:17.640 --> 0:12:22.120 perhaps his hair or blood as part of the crime scene, 0:12:22.240 --> 0:12:25.400 and none of that was found. So it was important 0:12:25.440 --> 0:12:29.240 that they determine drowning as the cause of death because 0:12:29.640 --> 0:12:33.160 there was no other way that they could even reasonably 0:12:33.320 --> 0:12:36.800 argue that Kevin had committed murder. 0:12:37.679 --> 0:12:42.080 And Kevin was charged, just to remind our listeners before 0:12:42.840 --> 0:12:46.640 this determination of drowning was actually handed. 0:12:46.320 --> 0:12:50.800 Down, that's right. So it's important to remember that Kevin 0:12:50.920 --> 0:12:54.880 was charged on the fifth of September with murder and 0:12:55.120 --> 0:12:58.440 the three women had been charged earlier in that day 0:12:59.160 --> 0:13:03.160 with murder, but under different circumstances. And as you say, 0:13:03.200 --> 0:13:07.920 this was before any cause of death was known to police. 0:13:08.640 --> 0:13:13.440 So how they made that determination in relation to Kevin 0:13:13.480 --> 0:13:18.320 Henry is quite bizarre. When it relates to the women, 0:13:19.280 --> 0:13:22.880 it can be understood they had committed a vicious assault 0:13:23.040 --> 0:13:28.120 against Linda. There was up to thirty witnesses. The forensic 0:13:28.360 --> 0:13:33.280 evidence as to their involvement had already been discovered and 0:13:33.360 --> 0:13:36.840 while it was still being tested, it was very obvious 0:13:36.960 --> 0:13:40.280 as to their involvement and there was no doubt about that, 0:13:40.679 --> 0:13:44.000 and they would be convicted of that later on. But 0:13:44.360 --> 0:13:48.240 as you say, Kevin was charged with murder before any 0:13:48.320 --> 0:13:54.000 understanding was known of how Linda died, and certainly before 0:13:54.080 --> 0:13:56.640 there was any understanding of how he could have been 0:13:56.679 --> 0:13:58.079 involved in that death. 0:13:59.280 --> 0:14:05.160 So we saw this forensic analysis, why did you decide 0:14:05.200 --> 0:14:07.440 to then get a second opinion and actually send it 0:14:07.480 --> 0:14:11.360 to an independent person and an independent expert to have 0:14:11.400 --> 0:14:11.880 a look at. 0:14:13.280 --> 0:14:16.800 Well? When I read the trial transcripts when we finally 0:14:16.840 --> 0:14:21.720 received them, I expected to find in their damning evidence 0:14:21.920 --> 0:14:27.960 against Kevin Henry, and I expected to find fairly comprehensive 0:14:29.240 --> 0:14:35.720 forensic evidence of the way Linda died, particularly the drowning aspect, 0:14:36.320 --> 0:14:40.560 because if they couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that 0:14:40.640 --> 0:14:45.000 Linda had indeed drowned, then the murder charge against Kevin 0:14:45.560 --> 0:14:51.040 simply couldn't be upheld. But when I read that trial transcript, 0:14:51.840 --> 0:14:58.520 not only was the forensic evidence presented very simplistically, it 0:14:58.640 --> 0:15:03.520 was not at all comprehend and in no way did 0:15:03.560 --> 0:15:07.920 it link Kevin Henry to the crime. So I felt 0:15:07.960 --> 0:15:12.600 it was vital that we understand the forensics further and 0:15:12.840 --> 0:15:16.920 try to discover if we could learn more about the 0:15:16.960 --> 0:15:20.840 way Linda died and if we could potentially find any 0:15:20.920 --> 0:15:26.240 more information out about if Kevin wasn't involved, who might be, 0:15:26.920 --> 0:15:30.760 and also if there could be links to Kevin Henry. 0:15:31.400 --> 0:15:35.240 But those links just didn't show up, and they would 0:15:35.240 --> 0:15:39.440 have been shown at trial if they did. But my 0:15:39.600 --> 0:15:44.640 main concern was the simplistic nature of the forensics and 0:15:44.720 --> 0:15:48.920 also the fact that there was no direct link to 0:15:49.040 --> 0:15:50.440 Kevin Henry provided. 0:15:51.320 --> 0:15:54.840 So this is actually a big question, Martin, because really 0:15:54.880 --> 0:15:58.720 the question centers around was Linda alive before she was 0:15:58.760 --> 0:16:02.200 put in the water or she'd actually been put in 0:16:02.240 --> 0:16:04.120 the water and she died beforehand. 0:16:04.160 --> 0:16:06.120 So that's quite a critical question, isn't it. 0:16:06.160 --> 0:16:11.320 In the sole case, absolutely for them to convict Kevin 0:16:11.360 --> 0:16:16.640 Henry or proved that he had committed murder, they needed 0:16:16.680 --> 0:16:19.160 to prove and the judge made this clear. 0:16:20.520 --> 0:16:24.400 That Linda was still alive when she was placed in 0:16:24.440 --> 0:16:28.200 the water, because that would be the only way Kevin 0:16:28.240 --> 0:16:31.480 could be found guilty of murder by drowning was that 0:16:31.520 --> 0:16:36.240 Linda was still conscious and alive before she was placed 0:16:36.280 --> 0:16:39.640 in the water, and that it was indeed Kevin Henry 0:16:39.720 --> 0:16:43.200 who did place her body in the water with the 0:16:43.240 --> 0:16:48.120 intent of committing murder, That is, that he deliberately placed 0:16:48.120 --> 0:16:51.280 her body in the water for the purpose of drowning her, 0:16:52.800 --> 0:16:57.680 yet virtually no evidence as to this is presented, and 0:16:57.960 --> 0:17:01.760 will break down the evidence that was presented and why 0:17:01.800 --> 0:17:05.920 that fails to convict and should have failed to convict 0:17:06.080 --> 0:17:07.679 Kevin Henry of the crime. 0:17:08.640 --> 0:17:11.080 Now, before we get into what we're going to talk 0:17:11.119 --> 0:17:13.560 for the majority of this program about, which is the drowning, 0:17:14.160 --> 0:17:18.120 was there any other forensic evidence that could have pointed 0:17:18.160 --> 0:17:20.159 to this crime being committed by Kevin Henry. 0:17:21.240 --> 0:17:26.320 Yes, So, the crime scene examiner and the pathologist examines 0:17:26.400 --> 0:17:30.400 the many large patches and pools of blood that were 0:17:30.440 --> 0:17:35.560 found at the scene. Upon analysis, this showed that it 0:17:35.640 --> 0:17:39.359 was Linda's blood and that of at least one or 0:17:39.440 --> 0:17:44.359 more other people, but it was not a match for 0:17:44.520 --> 0:17:49.440 Kevin Henry. The blood's often mixed when people fight, when 0:17:49.480 --> 0:17:55.040 someone struggles against their attacker. But Kevin also did not 0:17:55.200 --> 0:18:02.000 have any of Linda's blood on him, no blood on 0:18:02.119 --> 0:18:07.040 Winder's clothing or body that was Kevin's, and there was 0:18:07.200 --> 0:18:12.040 no match for any other biological material on either Winder's 0:18:12.080 --> 0:18:16.680 clothing or body that was from Kevin. Now, it's also 0:18:16.840 --> 0:18:21.440 important to point out one last thing. There was hair 0:18:21.640 --> 0:18:26.359 found in some of the pools of the blood that 0:18:26.560 --> 0:18:31.400 was not tested and it should have been, and one 0:18:31.440 --> 0:18:35.000 of the experts was asked why they didn't do that, 0:18:35.960 --> 0:18:41.120 and basically they said that it wouldn't have provided any 0:18:41.280 --> 0:18:46.720 further information. But when challenged that if there could show 0:18:47.200 --> 0:18:51.760 that other people were involved, they had to concede that 0:18:51.760 --> 0:18:55.760 that was a possibility, but we would never know because 0:18:55.800 --> 0:19:00.960 those tests were not done, and because those samples were 0:19:01.040 --> 0:19:06.600 kept or taken, that information is lost forever, and that 0:19:07.040 --> 0:19:10.680 hair could have very well led to someone else who 0:19:10.760 --> 0:19:14.119 was involved ultimately in the death of Linda. 0:19:15.160 --> 0:19:16.720 That seems like a huge oversight. 0:19:16.760 --> 0:19:19.719 I'm just wondering back in nineteen ninety one, whether it 0:19:19.760 --> 0:19:22.920 was common for them to test hair and do those 0:19:22.960 --> 0:19:24.560 sort of DNA. 0:19:24.280 --> 0:19:28.720 Tests at the time of the trial. In nineteen ninety one, 0:19:28.880 --> 0:19:34.840 this was largely before DNA was used in murder trials 0:19:34.960 --> 0:19:39.119 or any type of criminal trial, So testing of things 0:19:39.240 --> 0:19:43.600 like blood and hair was very common because this is 0:19:43.640 --> 0:19:47.320 what they had available to them, and it allowed them 0:19:47.359 --> 0:19:53.040 to narrow down suspects link people to crimes purely by 0:19:53.080 --> 0:19:57.280 taking hair samples and matching it to what was found 0:19:57.280 --> 0:20:01.680 at the scene. And it's not the just hair was found. 0:20:02.560 --> 0:20:05.320 It's very important at a crime scene as to where 0:20:05.440 --> 0:20:10.639 these things such as blood, hair, skin matter are found. 0:20:11.520 --> 0:20:14.080 And the hair that was found was found in a 0:20:14.119 --> 0:20:18.520 pool of blood, so we know that more than likely 0:20:18.680 --> 0:20:23.560 it was linked to the assault on Linda, and yet 0:20:23.640 --> 0:20:28.720 it was not tested. Now, had it been linked to 0:20:28.800 --> 0:20:33.920 Kevin Henry, and had it been Kevin's hair, there's no 0:20:34.000 --> 0:20:36.600 doubt they would have tested it because they were trying 0:20:36.640 --> 0:20:40.760 to find anything that linked him to Linda's death. But 0:20:41.240 --> 0:20:44.480 because it was quite obvious and known to all were 0:20:44.480 --> 0:20:47.600 the police and the witnesses and everyone that Kevin was 0:20:47.640 --> 0:20:51.679 in no way involved in the assault, they simply didn't 0:20:51.760 --> 0:20:57.320 test it. But it also means we'll never find out 0:20:57.520 --> 0:21:00.320 who that hair belonged to, and it could very well 0:21:00.400 --> 0:21:05.120 point to the person directly responsible for Linda's ultimate death. 0:21:06.080 --> 0:21:07.239 So that's pretty amazing man. 0:21:07.320 --> 0:21:10.320 And there was no blood linking even though there was 0:21:10.320 --> 0:21:12.000 blood all around the crimes, and there was none that 0:21:12.040 --> 0:21:15.480 linked Kevin to this assault. I'm wondering if there was 0:21:15.520 --> 0:21:18.040 anything else that was found that could have potentially pointed 0:21:18.040 --> 0:21:18.840 to Kevin Henry. 0:21:19.800 --> 0:21:23.280 Yeah, so that was examined by the crime scene examiner 0:21:23.960 --> 0:21:27.120 as to if Linda was placed in the water, what 0:21:27.160 --> 0:21:31.760 would you expect to find. And as we've discussed previously, 0:21:32.920 --> 0:21:37.840 the riverbank is very muddy, and so immediately what they 0:21:37.920 --> 0:21:42.160 expected to find was mud on the clothing of whoever 0:21:42.480 --> 0:21:49.040 committed the crime. And no mud, not even a microscopic 0:21:49.320 --> 0:21:52.720 dot of it, was found on the clothing of Kevin Henry. 0:21:53.560 --> 0:21:56.760 And it should be known that the clothing he was 0:21:56.800 --> 0:22:04.000 wearing that night was recovered voluntarily by Kevin. There's no 0:22:04.119 --> 0:22:08.440 doubt that the clothing he wore that night was tested 0:22:08.880 --> 0:22:12.320 and he did nothing to impede any of this forensic 0:22:12.960 --> 0:22:17.120 evidence being gathered, and that was never suggested, and that's 0:22:17.240 --> 0:22:23.639 very important. And the forensic expert who examined the crime 0:22:23.680 --> 0:22:28.040 scene was asked about that river bank and the fact 0:22:28.119 --> 0:22:31.320 that you would have to go into the mud to 0:22:31.400 --> 0:22:34.119 place a body in the water, And this is what 0:22:34.200 --> 0:22:38.200 they were asked on the stand by Kevin Henry's barrister, 0:22:38.359 --> 0:22:45.080 mister Murray, did you go down into the mud? Not myself? No, 0:22:46.920 --> 0:22:50.640 Did you see any of the officers who did? Yes, 0:22:50.760 --> 0:22:57.000 I did. Did they come back very much mud stained? Answer? 0:22:57.359 --> 0:23:04.320 They sure did. Now Kevin again had no mud on him. 0:23:04.720 --> 0:23:08.679 And this is from the examiner of the crime scene 0:23:08.840 --> 0:23:13.560 saying those officers that did go down into the mud 0:23:13.560 --> 0:23:18.480 came back covered in mud, with a lot of mud stains. Now, 0:23:18.720 --> 0:23:22.199 I should also point out that both officers and the 0:23:22.240 --> 0:23:27.320 forensic experts stated that although the crime happened at night, 0:23:28.080 --> 0:23:31.680 they did not go down into the mud at night 0:23:31.840 --> 0:23:36.800 when they examined the scene at night themselves. That was 0:23:36.840 --> 0:23:40.600 for a number of reasons, and we've touched on this before. 0:23:41.440 --> 0:23:45.600 That's because the river has crocodiles, That's because the mud 0:23:45.800 --> 0:23:50.680 becomes very deep, very quickly, and that's because the river 0:23:50.760 --> 0:23:55.400 bank is very unstable. It's very easy to slip and fall, 0:23:56.320 --> 0:23:59.440 to get stuck in the mud, to fall in the water. 0:24:00.680 --> 0:24:04.240 And the officers simply didn't want to end up at 0:24:04.320 --> 0:24:07.679 night covered in mud or stuck in the river with 0:24:07.800 --> 0:24:12.960 a bunch of crocodiles around. And yet they would claim 0:24:13.200 --> 0:24:18.000 that a very intoxicated Kevin Henry managed to carry the 0:24:18.040 --> 0:24:24.359 body of an individual down this unstable bank, willingly go 0:24:24.520 --> 0:24:27.960 into the water where there was crocodiles and large snakes 0:24:28.000 --> 0:24:31.560 as known to all, and be able to place that 0:24:31.680 --> 0:24:35.639 body in the water without getting a sceric of mud 0:24:35.640 --> 0:24:40.960 on his body or his clothes or his shoes. This 0:24:41.240 --> 0:24:43.399 tests credulity completely. 0:24:44.960 --> 0:24:47.760 He would have to be the world's most lucky criminal, 0:24:47.840 --> 0:24:50.840 I would say, to get away from it without completely 0:24:50.920 --> 0:24:53.520 clean clothes and no evidence completely. So I guess it 0:24:53.560 --> 0:24:59.240 gives you a sense of how important the drowning analysis 0:24:59.400 --> 0:25:02.600 was to the prosecution's case against Kevin Henry. 0:25:03.720 --> 0:25:08.560 That's right. So now they had no forensic evidence whatsoever 0:25:08.880 --> 0:25:14.400 linking Kevin to the death itself and to any assault. 0:25:15.160 --> 0:25:20.560 They had no forensic evidence or eyewitness evidence that showed 0:25:20.680 --> 0:25:24.600 Kevin placing the body in the water. All they could 0:25:24.640 --> 0:25:27.159 rely on was the drowning itself. 0:25:27.680 --> 0:25:31.080 So we've been moting on this forensics report from overseas 0:25:31.080 --> 0:25:33.320 for a very long time and it's only come back. 0:25:33.520 --> 0:25:37.639 Just this past week. What does it actually say about drowning? 0:25:39.280 --> 0:25:42.879 Okay, so at the trial it was stated that the 0:25:42.960 --> 0:25:47.119 cause of death was drowning, and less than a paragraph's 0:25:47.119 --> 0:25:50.720 worth of evidence was presented about that, just that there 0:25:50.880 --> 0:25:55.040 was the watery fluid in the lungs, the stomach and 0:25:55.200 --> 0:26:00.520 some of the airways. But from the report, this is 0:26:00.520 --> 0:26:05.280 what it states in forensic terms. There is nothing whatsoever 0:26:05.400 --> 0:26:11.880 deemed classic about any drowning, No one particular physical characteristic 0:26:12.520 --> 0:26:17.160 manifesting in the body that would aid in expediating such 0:26:17.200 --> 0:26:21.840 a ruling. So because of this, the methodology for reaching 0:26:21.880 --> 0:26:25.400 a determination that it was a water death a drowning 0:26:26.880 --> 0:26:30.919 is chiefly focused on excluding other forms of foul play. 0:26:32.359 --> 0:26:35.000 This place is a great deal of importance on the 0:26:35.040 --> 0:26:40.600 initial investigative role of police personnel who could inform or 0:26:40.800 --> 0:26:46.280 misinform a medical examiner with their on site reports and 0:26:46.440 --> 0:26:47.959 early conclusions. 0:26:49.000 --> 0:26:52.399 So we've already shown that we have a lot of 0:26:52.440 --> 0:26:56.800 concerns with how this police investigation was actually carried out. 0:26:57.040 --> 0:26:59.560 Could that have potentially happened in this case? 0:27:01.280 --> 0:27:05.520 Were it certainly the case that a large amount of 0:27:06.080 --> 0:27:13.400 forensic evidence that was collected was not secured properly by police. 0:27:13.960 --> 0:27:17.640 So we've spoken previously about the fact that people were 0:27:17.680 --> 0:27:21.640 allowed to walk through the crime scene all day on 0:27:21.680 --> 0:27:27.200 the Sunday. We also know that the body or that 0:27:27.480 --> 0:27:33.320 was first discovered by fishermen was secured by police, and 0:27:33.680 --> 0:27:37.840 so a lot of those early reports that they would 0:27:37.880 --> 0:27:42.239 have given information to the medical examiner about where and 0:27:42.320 --> 0:27:47.400 how the body was found in what position. All that 0:27:47.440 --> 0:27:51.760 sort of thing influences the ability of the examiner to 0:27:51.920 --> 0:27:54.040