Josiah Sutton released from prison
Josiah Sutton, 21, was convicted in 1998 for the rape of a woman taken at gunpoint and then dumped in a Fort Bend County field. Sutton, asserting his innocence throughout the investigation and his incarceration, sought independent DNA testing during the trial. In his appeal, he claimed that his attorney was ineffective for not obtaining independent testing that would have been exculpatory. Police arrested Sutton and one of his friends after the victim said she saw two men she thought had attacked her near her apartment five days after the rape was committed. The two teenage boys consented to requests by the police for blood and saliva samples to compare with evidence collected from the victim and her car.
The testing concluded that Sutton may have been an attacker, but his friend was excluded. The laboratory claimed that the semen sample from the backseat of the car contained two profiles - Sutton's and that of another, unidentified man. Moreover, a crime lab employee testified at trial that the DNA found on the victim was an exact match with Sutton. Despite the victim identifying both boys, only Sutton was brought to trial. Prosecutor Joe Owmby said eyewitnesses identified Sutton during his trial.
“The flaws in Sutton's conviction were numerous and not limited to DNA testing defects. After the rape, police were looking for a 5' 7" man who was approximately 135 pounds. Sutton was picked up despite being 6' and 200 pounds at the time. While incarcerated, he studied DNA testing and filed a hand-written request for retesting. He was denied and it was not until an independent investigation of the police crime laboratory that he got his chance to prove his innocence (The Innocence Project, n.d.).”
On March 12, 2003 a Houston, Texas judge granted bail for Josiah Sutton after an Independent DNA Lab determined that he may have been sentenced to 25 years in prison for a rape that he never committed. This assessment is based on evidence processed incorrectly at the Houston Police department crime lab. Houston police released a statement saying, "The Houston Police Department was advised by Identigene that the retesting it conducted had excluded Sutton as being a potential contributor of the DNA evidence that was analyzed." DNA expert Barry Scheck said that the government is also at fault for not providing lawyers skilled enough to fight for their wrongly convicted clients (Associated Press, 2003).
Sutton's Mom, Carol Batie, said "I just want to thank everybody for being fair and understanding and now my baby's name is cleared. That's the most important thing to me at this time." His Mom said that she never gave up on her son when she knew in her heart that he was innocent. "I know that I did not raise a rapist," Batie said.
Robert Hurst, HPD spokesman, said Sutton's case was among 22, including those of seven death row inmates, forwarded by the district attorney's office to the independent lab. Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said his office would review the case and determine what role the DNA evidence played the prosecution of Sutton.
Rosenthal said if there is a question about the conviction, his office would return it to the courts for a possible retrial or a reversal. "We'll do the right thing, whether it's with court intervention or our making a decision on our own," he said.
Josiah Sutton's attorney, Bob Wicoff, said that the new DNA results prove his client didn't commit the crime. Wicoff said that if the Harris County District's Attorney's Office agrees, he will be seeking a pardon for Sutton from the Governor.
Sutton's case went before a criminal appeals court in 2004, where judges decided dismiss his case. Josiah Sutton was exonerated, in 2004, after serving four and a half years of a 25-year sentence for a rape that he did not commit. Sutton's conviction was the result of a mistaken identity and faulty testing performed by the Houston police laboratory.
The Houston Police Department Crime Laboratory has since been subjected to an investigation that has shown a great number of problems, ranging from untrained staff to contamination of evidence, and the laboratory was shut down. Sutton's case has shed light on many other cases where potentially innocent inmates are incarcerated as a result of faulty science.
