The cops said the same thing when DNA proved Ray Krone didn't commit the murder the Phoenix PD framed him for. He must be guilty even if his DNA doesn't match.

But what are the cops going to say when they find out that they framed an innocent man and caused him to spend 7 years in prison for a crime he didn't do? Will they say "Yea we f*cked up royal and should be fired"? Or say the guy is guilty anyhow and insist that the guy is guilty for other reasons and more importantly that the cops are right?

Source

Rape case spurs debate about DNA

Man who served 7 years in prison released

by JJ Hensley - Jan. 23, 2011 12:00 AM

The Arizona Republic

When a Gilbert police detective interviewed John Watkins as a suspect in a 2003 rape investigation, his message to Watkins was clear.

"There was DNA recovered," the detective told Watkins. "What I'm getting at is: DNA is black and white."

It took nearly seven years for that DNA to be tested - years Watkins spent in prison.

Last month, about halfway through a 14-year sentence, Watkins was released from prison in part because the test results showed the DNA did not belong to him. Nonetheless, police and prosecutors are not convinced they charged the wrong man, and they now insist that DNA evidence is not "black and white," but more a shade of gray.

Watkins' release, which came after his case was put under a microscope by the Arizona Justice Project, has rekindled the debate over police interrogation tactics and whether DNA testing is an infallible criminal investigative tool.

The case involved a 48-year-old Gilbert woman who was raped in a public greenbelt near Val Vista Drive and Baseline Road while walking at night with a friend.

Recent testing showed that Watkins did not contribute the male DNA recovered from the victim, according to an analysis by the Arizona Department of Public Safety's lab. But Watkins, now 27, has registered as a sex offender as part of his lifetime probation for child-pornography materials investigators found in his parent's home. The discovery of the pornography was what led investigators to identify Watkins as a suspect in the assault, which took place in his neighborhood.

There is little physical evidence left that connects Watkins with the crime. [This is typical in these cases, absolutely no physical evidence linking the person to the crime. But lots of circumstantial evidence. The rapist was white! The rapist was a man. The rapist was wearing clothing dark or light colored clothing...]

Though the DNA found on the victim was not Watkins', prosecutors claim he still could have committed the crime without leaving a genetic print. They say the DNA is irrelevant because the rapist never penetrated the victim. Of more importance, they say, are his substantial admissions. [If the DNA is irrelevant why did they waste their time doing the test? Probably cuz they figured he was guilty and the DNA would match]

Watkins generally matched the description of the suspect and confessed to the crime during his interrogation. He wrote letters expressing remorse to the judge and the victim. He gave a detailed account of the assault to an expert his attorneys hired. He failed a "voice stress test" and later a polygraph test. [Lie detectors test are not admissible in court because they are unreliable. So this means nothing.]

Watkins' attorneys, however, offer a different view of his confessions.

The confession was coerced, they say, the result of a 20-year-old spending more than four hours being grilled by seasoned interrogators. Watkins readily admitted to crimes involving child pornography but adamantly denied the rape nearly 60 times during the interrogation. Then, he acquiesced. [Cops can use the good old "9 Step Reid Method" to get a false confession out of anybody. It is a mental version of beating a person with rubber hoses to get the confession. Innocent people routinely make false confession when questioned using the "9 Step Reid Method"]

Watkins' subsequent admissions of guilt, meanwhile, came at the recommendation of his parents and an attorney who told Watkins those admissions were the key to a more lenient sentence, his current attorneys said.

"It's very easy for prosecutors to say, 'You know, he admitted to a police officer,' and, 'You know, he wrote the letter,' " said Ulises Ferragut, Watkins' current attorney. "Look at the context."

To Watkins' defenders, the context of the crime is equally important.

The victim was drunk and walking through a park with her friend when they separated. When the friend turned around to look for the victim five minutes later, she found the victim's legs sticking out from a bush with a young man in a white T-shirt and jogging shorts on top of her. The friend slapped the assailant's rear and he ran off.

Neither the victim nor the witness got a good look at the assailant. [He was White/Black/Mexican, and this guy is White/Black/Mexican so he must be guilty]

The rape occurred along a Gilbert greenbelt where gated communities abut neat apartment homes and standard suburban stucco fare. Gilbert police records show residents were anxious for the crime to be solved.

Neighbors provided police with a videotape of area teens believed to be mischievous. The victim and her friend viewed the tape, initially identifying a 17-year-old as the rapist.

About a week later, after viewing a photo lineup in which Watkins was the only one wearing a white T-shirt, the victim and witness positively identified him. Both victim and witness identified him "with no uncertainty."

When Watkins was taken to a police station on June 3, 2003, his interview began with questions about a collection of child pornography, which included movies and 12,000 images, according to court records. Watkins admitted to a self-described "addiction" to child porn but denied involvement in the sexual assault.

He offered his blood, which a police specialist took for DNA evidence, and agreed to a voice-stress analysis.

That's where the interrogation began to turn.

"You're being extremely deceptive with me," the detective told Watkins. "There's no doubt in my mind." [Again sounds like the good old "9 Step Reid Method"]

By the end of the interrogation, Watkins admitted to assaulting the woman. His attorneys claim the admission was made under duress, in hopes of getting a more lenient sentence. Watkins was 20 at the time and facing 120 years in prison for the pornography.

"That's real," said Lindsay Herf, a Justice Project attorney. "We recognized the fact that this could be a false plea."

While coercion is a possibility, police point to other troubling discrepancies in Watkins' story. He initially told them he was home with his family the night of the assault. Yet he later told an analyst hired by his defense that he had gotten into a fight with his father and left home "to cool down." Now, Watkins says the leaving-home story was, like other admissions, an attempt to get a lenient sentence from a judge.

Watkins wanted to get out of jail, into prison and on with seeking the type of post-conviction relief that would ultimately free him from prison.

"It really was a business decision," Watkins said of his guilty plea. "I regretted it from the moment I made the decision." [Which is what plea bargains are]

With all the shifting theories and stories, the DNA evidence was thought to be vital.

However, there is not enough DNA to positively identify the victim's attacker, said DPS lab superintendent Todd Griffith. There is only enough to lead investigators to a male lineage they determined is not connected to Watkins or the other juvenile police initially considered a suspect.

"They like DNA (evidence) when it's in their favor," Watkins said. "On the one occasion when it proves them wrong, they don't like it."

So, nearly a decade after the crime, the technology that resulted in the rape charge against Watkins being dismissed has led to only one point of agreement: that the attacker is still on the loose.

Police and prosecutors believe it was Watkins. The assault case is now listed as "closed by arrest." [Translation - cops refuse to admit they f*cked up and arrested the wrong guy. Of course this means the ral rapist is still loose]

Watkins' attorney wants the case reopened to find another suspect.

"The only logical conclusion of how that DNA ended up on her was as a result of the attack," Herf said. "In my opinion, they need to reinvestigate this case."