Iran: Annual report on the death penalty 2017

IRAN HUMAN RIGHTS (MARCH 13, 2018): The 10th annual report on the death penalty in Iran by Iran Human Rights (IHR) and ECPM shows that in 2017 at least 517 people were executed in the Islamic Republic of Iran. 
This number is comparable with the execution figures in 2016 and confirms the relative reduction in the use of the death penalty compared to the period between 2010 and 2015. 
Nevertheless, with an average of more than one execution every day and more than one execution per one million inhabitants in 2017, Iran remained the country with the highest number of executions per capita.
2017 Annual Report at a Glance:
At least 517 people were executed in 2017, an average of more than one execution per day111 executions (21%) were announced by official sources.Approximately 79% of all executions included in the 2017 report, i.e. 406 executions, were not announced by the authorities.At least 240 people (46% of all executions) were executed for murder charges - 98 more than in 2016.At le…

In a Landmark Decision, Texas Forensic Science Commission Issues Moratorium on the Use of Bite Mark Evidence

Today the Texas Forensic Science Commission issued a landmark decision recommending a moratorium on the use of bite mark evidence in future criminal prosecutions in Texas until the technique can be scientifically validated. The Commission also and ordered a review of every conviction in Texas where the unreliable forensic technique was used. The decision was in response to a request by the Innocence Project to investigate the forensic practice that has contributed to at least 24 wrongful convictions or indictments.

“For far too long courts have permitted this incredibly persuasive evidence that is cloaked in science, when in fact there has been no scientific research to substantiate the practitioners’ claims that it is possible to identify someone from a bite mark,” said M. Chris Fabricant, Director of Strategic Litigation for the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with Cardozo School of Law. “By recommending a moratorium on further use of this unscientific evidence in Texas prosecutions, the Texas Forensic Science Commission has taken a giant step in purging unscientific and unreliable bite mark evidence from court rooms nationwide.”

Before reaching its decision, the Commission conducted six-month investigation and a held day-long hearing in November where it heard from experts on all sides of the debate. During the hearing, it was revealed that Dr. Adam Freeman, the president-elect of the American Board of Forensic Odontologist (ABFO), and Dr. Iain Pretty conducted a study of board certified forensic dentists where they asked to analyze photographs of 100 injuries, and in most cases, the practitioners were unable agree on which injuries were even bite marks.

Despite the fact that for decades courts have permitted forensic dentists to testify in criminal trials, there is a complete lack of scientific support for claims that a suspect can be identified from an injury on a victim’s skin. This was noted in the National Academy of Science’s groundbreaking 2009 report, Strengthening Forensic Science in the United States: A Path Forward, which found, “no evidence of an existing scientific basis for identifying an individual [through bite mark comparison] to the exclusion of all others.” Unlike the National Academy of Sciences’s report, however, the Commission specifically found that bite mark evidence should not be admitted as evidence.

In addition to recommending a moratorium barring prosecutors from using bite mark analysis in future prosecutions, the Commission ordered a review of past cases where the forensic practice was used. The Commission will appoint a panel of experts, including forensic dentists, to review transcripts of the cases. The American Board of Forensic Odontology pledged to help identify these convictions and stated that there are nine ABFO members practicing in Texas who will assist in this process.

The Innocence Project urged the Commission to investigate the use of bite mark analysis on behalf of Steven Mark Chaney. After a thorough investigation by the Dallas District Attorney’s Conviction Integrity Unity, Chaney was released in October after wrongly serving 28 years for the murder of John Sweek based on the discredited testimony of two forensic dentists. The case is now before the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, which must review the uncontested findings of the lower court reversing Chaney’s conviction. In addition to the Innocence Project, Chaney is represented by Julie Lesser, exoneration attorney of the Dallas Public Defender’s Office and the Southern Methodist University Innocence Clinic.

Source: Innocence Project, February 12, 2016

- Report an error, an omission: deathpenaltynews@gmail.com - Follow us on Facebook and Twitter

Most Viewed (Last 7 Days)

Singapore: Drug trafficker hanged after last-ditch bid to reopen case fails

Missouri inmate Russell Bucklew receives reprieve before execution

Iran: Two Brothers Hanged in Public over Armed Robbery Charges

Saudi Arabia beheads Indonesian worker despite Jokowi’s pleas for clemency

Texas: Court findings offer hope for death row inmate in case tainted by 'Dr. Death'

20 Minutes to Death: Record of the Last Execution in France

Gov. Kasich, heed Ohio Parole Board and don't execute William Montgomery

Alabama executes Michael Eggers

Death sentence reinstated for Mississippi's only woman on death row

Supreme Court refuses to reconsider death penalty in Arizona case