31 July—Corollary to the forensic science embarrassment saga Finding Henry Lee, it turns out I knew some of the police detectives who stand to be embarrassed along with Dr. Lee about the alleged mishandling of the 38-year-old murder case. They’ve been retired for some time, of course. They’re good people, so I shouldn’t have expected them to fabricate evidence or build a case around a need to get a conviction rather than hard evidence. But I’m not a cop.

In all events, the police and the town of New Milford now face their own civil litigation. It remains to be seen just how that will be accomplished—individual trials or a mass execution, as it were—and how they’ll make out.

It seems the investigation and forensic testimony were at the very least sloppy—“false and misleading,” according to the state Supreme Court. But the jurors can’t be faulted for taking Dr. Henry Lee’s word as gospel, as they evidently did, because that’s precisely what good witnesses—especially expert witnesses—are for.

On the other hand, it’s the assertion or admission of one juror in the trial of one of the defendants (the two were tried and convicted separately) that although he was never really confident of the defendant’s guilt, he nevertheless agreed to go along with the majority. Why? Because it was a Friday night and the judge had offered or threatened to keep the courtroom open for deliberations over the weekend. Having known the late judge, I’d say it was the latter.

Moreover, according to the doubtful but agreeable juror, two other jurors also had their doubts and had been holding out. But they were ultimately convinced to go along with the guilty verdict by a fourth juror (who obviously wanted to get it over with) who assured them there would be an appeal. Indeed there was an appeal, but it was unsuccessful.

But are those valid reasons for agreeing to verdicts the jurors considered false and therefore unjust? Those four jurors should be sued for damages along with Henry Lee, the police, and New Milford. But of course jurors are immune from civil and criminal prosecution except for criminal acts. And although I consider their behavior criminal, the law doesn’t.

In all events, the four jurors as well as the prosecution team sadly brought shame and disgrace to what passes as American justice . . .