The other day the morning paper contained a short version of an article by AP writer Andrew Welsh-Huggins titled "New Science being used to fight arson conviction." It's not available at the MyWestTexas.com website, but the extended version is available at Guardian.co.uk.
The gist of it is that some arson convictions in the past were obtained with testimony of expert witnesses whose conclusions were based on theories have since been shown to be invalid. For example, a V shaped pattern on a burned wall was thought to be evidence of arson because it pinpointed the spot where the fire started. Newer theories suggest that the V might indeed point to the starting place, but they don't prove the fire was deliberately started. Additionally, the experts might have testified that certain patterns on the floor proved that an accelerant was used. Newer theories hold that such patterns can develop without the use of accelerants.
There's no reason why Mr. Welsh-Huggins should have mentioned any local cases, but there was such an arson/murder case in Midland, Texas, roughly 14 years ago involving a defendant named Garland Leon Martin.
According to a case summary at InnocenceProject.org, Mr. Martin was charged with murdering his common law wife Marcia Pool, her three year old son, and their 20 month old daughter who died in a fire in Midland County on 2/25/1998. At the trial, Fire Marshal Dale Little testified that he found a pattern on the floor which he said was evidence of the use of an accelerant. Samples were tested, and Armstrong Laboratories director John Corn testified that they tested positive for Norpar and deparaffinated kerosene. "Based on Armstrong’s results, Little testified that he believed the cause of the fire was arson and that the liquid poured in the house was lamp oil."
The defense countered that there were 268 patents for common household items containing Norpar other than lamp oil. Defense experts testified that Mr. Little was wrong about the pour patterns and the location of the starting point of the fire, and further, that Mr. Little neglected to investigate a possible accidental cause.
There was other circumstantial evidence, and the jury was ultimately convinced that Mr. Martin was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and he is currently serving a sentence of life times three.
Post script. Info about this case has been in my "pending" file for a few years. And one of the initial web searchs pulled up a page for Mr. Martin at Writeaprisoner.com where prison inmates advertise for pen pals. His listing is no longer there, but at the time it contained a photo of a rather handsome man. However, it was not a complete photo, someone had been cut out of it. Yet all we could see of that other person was part of an arm that appeared to belong to an adult female. Draw your own conclusions.
Comments