His column in today's Houston Chronicle is, "Let's have a cheer for small victories." It's a must-read of the back-and-forth of the Commission meeting.
Williamson County District Attorney John Bradley, who was dispatched last September by Gov. Rick Perry to take control of the troublesome set of scientists known as the Texas Forensic Science Commission, continued to pursue his mission on Friday.
It was just one round in what promises to be a protracted fight over whether the body will become a national model of how to improve the use of science in fighting crime, or just another secretive, bureaucratic body perceived as protecting licensed professionals rather than policing them.
Bradley struck the first blow immediately upon his appointment by shutting down the commission for nearly four months, saying he needed to develop proper procedures to be used by the scientists in their investigations of complaints of bad science being used in criminal investigations and prosecutions.
Much attention has focused on the side-effect of delaying work on a probe into the apparently pathetic excuse of an arson investigation used to convict Cameron Todd Willingham of burning down his house to murder his children. Despite questions raised about that investigation before Willingham was put to death in 2004, Perry refused to delay the execution so the questions could be examined.
Friday's meeting made it clear that Bradley will succeed in delaying any final report on the Willingham matter until after the November election.
And:
Bradley had named Kerrigan, one of those most vocally resistant to his proposed policies, as a member of the Willingham committee.
But Bradley announced that she had asked to be replaced “for personal reasons,” a common euphemism. He also indicated that she thought the committee ought to be bigger and include the commission's only defense attorney to balance DA Bradley, a hint at the tension between the two.
Bradley named Fort Worth defense attorney Lance Evans to replace Kerrigan, but Evans noted that this resulted in a committee made up entirely of new appointees. He suggested that a member who had been part of the investigation from the beginning should be added or they could “perhaps meet as a committee of the whole (commission).”
Bradley resisted, saying the committee could invite another member to attend a meeting. But Peerwani said he thought Kerrigan should be added as a member. Bradley once again said she could be invited, but Peerwani persisted and won.
It was a small victory — the notion that the committee investigating the forensic science that helped lead to a man's execution should include as many scientists as lawyers — but I'm afraid these days we have to celebrate even the small victories.
Earlier coverage begins with the preceding post.
Comments