 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
case
FRENCH
trial
testimony
witness
new
JD
JD2
affaire french
proces french
temoin french
craig
nouveau
press
presse
page 1
P1
|
|
| MARCH 27 PRESS CONFERENCE AND NEW EVIDENCE |
 |
| Errors, Doubts, Hidden evidence: a Police plot? |
| ||||||
  In a very intense press conference prepared by Philip Workman's attorneys with the support of Amnesty International, we had definitive proof that the fatal bullet that killed Lt Oliver Workman can't come from Workman's gun. Attorney Jefferson Dorsey began with a question Governor Sundquist might listen to: " Is the goal of our system of justice to seek Finality, or isthe goal Certainty? With a human life at stake, I believe that justice demands CERTAINTY as the standard we work towards. And unless we achieve certinty, we cannot take a human life." Then Jefferson Dorsey explained again how they discovered the Lt Oliver's X-ray, how they had to cancel the hearings (only two hours allowed with no cross-examination): "We cancelled, Jefferson Dorey said, because we saw a chance to finally have the hearings that we have pleaded and fought for, for 10 years. In a federal court, with no time limits, and the right to cross-examine the people whom we contend committed perjury and who covered up the facts about the shooting that occurred two decades ago in Memphis. The prosecutors who clamor for finality, and for Philip Workman's death, have used procedural rules to block any hearing of this evidence. For 10 years they have fought bitterly to keep this out of court. Instead, they now support a two hour chance to parade their witnesses before the public, safe from any questions about their testimony. The truth can not be told in two, unchallenged hours. Nevertheless, we intend to re-submit our application for commutation, should the courts turn us away again. At this late hour, it is unlikely that we will even have the two hour hearing, so again we turn to the citizens of Tennessee to ask that they call for an end to this race to the execution chamber." Decribing the evidence, Attorney Jefferson Dorsey showed several photos of the crime scene, the bullets and the description of the shooting. Then we had NEW BALLISTICS EVIDENCE: As everybody must know by now, police testified at trial that only Lt Oliver and Philip Workman did exchange gun shots. Other witnesses had other stories to tell, but were unable to testify at trial. Looking at a video-capture photo of a bullet hole in a truck that was parked exactly where the shooting occurred, the attorneys saw that it was apparent that the video camera was placed at the same angle as that from which Lt Oliver would have been firing. AND IT CLEARLY SHOWED THAT THE BULLET STRUCK THE TRUCK FROM A RADICALLY DIFFERENT ANGLE. This bulet hole in the truck has been identified by the police crime scene analysts as having been caused by a .38 caliber projectile. The police ammunition. But Lt Oliver could not have fired this bullet. We can see that from the angle the bullet entered the panel. Lt Ronald Oliver canot be the source of the fire. Philip Workman was firing .45 caliber projectiles. SO WHO FIRED THIS BULLET? QUESTIONS: Why didn't the police unlock the door, pick the lock or seize the vehicle? They had a bullet that was fired in a homicide, a police homicide. Reports state that the door was locked, explaining why they did not retrieve the bullet. One report even says the bullet exited the rear of the truck, but the crime scene analysts who looked at the truck in brad daylight the next morning didn't see an exit, and the photographers didn't see one, and the crime scene diagram does not metion one. So why didn't police retrieve the bullet from the truck? Why didn't they photopgraph the hole so we can see it? Why did a policeman claim there was an exit, despite the investigation that showed there was no exit? Why did a policeman erroneously claim the angle came from Lt Olivers's direction? The simple, truthful answer to all of these questions is that Lt Ronald Oliver was killed by friendly fire, and Philip Workman is innocent of murder.  Two young women appeared at the press conference creating an incredible partnership: Michele and Paula, the daughter of Philip Workman and the daughter of Lt Oliver just joined in a common cause: saving Philip Workman from execution. One is blond, the other darker. They have almost the same age and did share the same story. Those two sisters of a dramatic night have this in commom: they both had to live without a father. Paula's father had been killed, and Michele's father, sentenced to death for this murder and then, on death row. Paula and Michele never met before. Overcoming fear, they showed a strong determination. Noone who has listened to their message can now forget it. "Taking Philip's life will not bring my father back," Oliver's daughter, Paula Oliver-Dodillet, said in front of news cameras at the Sheraton Nashville Downtown. Citing questions about whether Workman fired the shot that killed her father in August 1981, Paula Oliver-Dodillet said Tennessee authorities "should know for sure the whole story before they execute this man." Paula Oliver-Dodillet said her meeting with Workman's daughter, Chrystal Michele, was "very emotional for both of us." "I held her hand this morning and apologized to her," Paula Oliver-Dodillet said. "We suffered the same loss. ... She's had to go through a lot of the same things I have." Paula Oliver-Dodillet added her mother, Naomi Oliver, who was married to Oliver for 15 years, shares her feelings that Workman should not be executed until the truth is found. Michele Workman-Burnham thanked Paula for "rising above revenge" and joining in the effort to save her father from execution. " I thank her for supporting my daddy and myself. I know it must take a lot of courage for her to be here. She must have a huge capacity for compassion. It's people like her who are willing to forgive and rise above revenge who make this world a better place." Special thanks to attorney Jefferson Dorsey, Richard Locker from the Comercial Appeal and Tim Chavez from The Tennessean   By Laura Frank / Staff Writer -The Tennessean Attorneys for death row inmate Philip Ray Workman say Shelby County officials withheld from them and from the court vital evidence that could prove Workman did not commit the murder for which he is scheduled to die April 6. The lawyers asked a federal appeals court yesterday to reopen the case based on the new evidence, which was uncovered late last week. The evidence is an X-ray taken during the autopsy of Memphis police Lt. Ronald Oliver, who was shot and killed while trying to apprehend Workman after a 1981 robbery. The X-ray is significant because it shows the bullet that killed Oliver passed through his body without fragmenting, the attorneys said in the motion. Experts have testified on Workman's behalf that the .45-caliber silvertip, hollow-point bullets he fired that night would have expanded on impact. His attorneys say that because the exit wound on Oliver was actually smaller than the entrance wound, Workman could not have fired the fatal bullet. In denying an appeal from Workman in 1998, the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals theorized that Workman's bullet fragmented in Oliver's body, causing a relatively small exit wound. The Shelby County medical examiner said last week he believes the wound could have been made by Workman's bullet. Workman's defense theory is that "friendly fire" from another police officer actually killed Oliver. Yesterday's motion was the second time Workman's defense attorneys have alleged misconduct in the prosecution of their client. In November, they videotaped Harold Davis, the only eyewitness who claimed to see Workman shoot Oliver, recanting his previous testimony. On the tape, Davis said he did not see the shooting but was coerced and coached by Memphis police and prosecutors. Workman's attorneys and prosecutors are scheduled to meet with the state parole board Thursday. The board will decide whether to issue a nonbinding recommendation that Gov. Don Sundquist commute Workman's sentence to life in prison. Workman's attorneys hope the 6th Circuit court will decide before then whether to reopen Workman's case. They are asking the court to set Workman free or to order a new hearing in the case. They are accusing the Shelby County medical examiner of purposefully withholding evidence that could have helped them defend Workman. "That X-ray was absent from the record for one reason: the Medical Examiner's Office suppressed it," the attorneys wrote yesterday in the motion to reopen the case. Dr. O.C. Smith, Shelby County medical examiner, did not return a request for comment yesterday. John Campbell, assistant district attorney general in Shelby County, said his office was not responsible for the X-ray and that questions about why it was not turned over should be directed to Smith. Campbell said, to his knowledge, prosecutors were unaware of the X-ray until recently. Neither of Workman's attorneys, Jefferson Dorsey and Chris Minton, would comment on the matter. A spokeswoman for the state attorney general's office would not comment, saying only that state lawyers would be responding to Workman's motion within the next 10 days. In 1995, Workman's attorneys got the federal court's authorization to subpoena information from the Shelby County medical examiner's office. The attorneys specifically asked for X-rays, among other information. The medical examiner turned over charts and reports, but did not share the X-ray. "If it was in the medical examiner's files, it seems to me a good argument can be made that it was the prosecutor's duty to comply with any request, if the prosecutor was working with the medical examiner to prepare the case," said Nancy King, Vanderbilt law professor. Campbell disagreed, saying his office has no control over the medical examiner's office and that he had no responsibility to inquire about an X-ray. The 1995 request was not the first time Workman's defenders asked for all relevant evidence concerning his case. • Nearly 20 years ago, before Workman's original trial, his public defenders asked for any medical or scientific evidence that the state of Tennessee knew about -- or should have known about -- that might be material to his defense. The request stated that if the prosecutors could not determine whether such evidence might point toward Workman's innocence, they were supposed to have brought it to the court to decide. • In 1990, Workman's attorneys made a request under the state public records law for any document of any kind -- including photographs or "filmed matter" -- that pertained to his case. In neither case did the medical examiner or prosecutors turn over the X-ray, nor is there any evidence they let Workman's attorneys know the X-ray existed. However, the question arose when Workman appealed his conviction to the 6th Circuit, when one of the judges in the case asked specifically if Oliver's body had been X-rayed, since the evidence indicated it had not. The court went on to say: "If a .45-caliber hollow point bullet had gone all the way through Lt. Oliver's chest and emerged in one piece, we have no doubt that the exit wound would have been larger than the entry wound. It hardly follows, however, that Lt. Oliver could not have been shot with the type of ammunition Workman was firing because the record in no way compels the conclusion that the bullet which killed the officer emerged from his body in one piece." Campbell said even if the court had known that the X-ray showed the bullet did emerge in one piece, it probably would not have mattered. "I don't really think this is that critical a point," he said. The X-ray evidence inadvertently came to light when the Memphis prosecutors and medical examiner gave the state parole board a report last week in support of Workman's execution. In it, the medical examiner said he reviewed Oliver's chest X-ray. Workman's attorney Dorsey then went to Memphis to obtain a copy of it. "Suppressing evidence that a man is innocent of capital murder while preparing a report for use against him meets any definition of egregious that one consults," the attorneys wrote in yesterday's motion. |
 Sign Guestbook |
 View Guestbook |
 |
|
. |
| Visitors: 01703 |