“Famed Forensic Scientist Henry Lee Defends Reputation in Fabricated Evidence Lawsuit”

Forensic scientist Henry Lee defended himself after a federal judge found him liable for fabricating evidence in a murder trial that led to the wrongful convictions of two men. Ralph Birch and Shawn Henning were convicted in 1985 based on Lee’s testimony about bloodstains on a towel. However, tests conducted later showed that the stain was not blood. Lee denied fabricating evidence and suggested that the blood traces may have degraded over time. The judge ruled that a jury will determine the amount of damages against Lee, while the cases against other defendants will proceed to trial. PAT EATON-ROBB, Associated Press reported

Forensic scientist Henry Lee, known for his work in high-profile cases such as the O.J. Simpson trial, is defending his reputation after a federal judge found him liable for fabricating evidence in a murder trial that led to the wrongful conviction of two innocent men. Ralph “Ricky” Birch and Shawn Henning were convicted in 1985 based partly on Lee’s testimony about bloodstains on a towel found at the crime scene. However, tests conducted after the trial showed that the stain was not blood.

In response to the judge’s ruling, Lee expressed disappointment and denied fabricating evidence. He suggested that the traces of blood may have degraded over the 20-year period between the crime and when the towel was tested by defense experts. Lee maintained that his testing of the towel did not directly implicate Birch and Henning in the crime and that he provided exculpatory evidence during their trial.

The wrongful conviction lawsuit filed by Birch and Henning also named eight police investigators and the town of New Milford. The judge’s ruling against Lee means that the only outstanding issue for a jury in his case will be determining the amount of damages. The cases against the other defendants will proceed to a full trial.

While Lee’s work in high-profile cases has brought him fame, it has also faced scrutiny. He was accused of taking evidence from the crime scene in the murder trial of record producer Phil Spector. However, Lee asserts that he only presents his scientific findings in court and does not determine what evidence to introduce or what questions to ask witnesses.

The ruling against Lee raises questions about the reliability of forensic evidence and emphasizes the importance of thorough investigations and proper handling of evidence. It serves as a reminder that even renowned forensic scientists can face scrutiny and challenges to their credibility..

1. Henry Lee forensic scientist
2. Fabricated evidence lawsuit
3. Wrongful conviction lawsuit.