Go to Homepage
330 East Kilbourn Avenue, Suite 1170
Milwaukee, WI 53202
Gimbel, Reilly, Guerin & Brown, LLP



Subscribe to this list via RSS Blog posts tagged in forensic evidence

Steven Avery, criminal defense, illusion of justice,  post-conviction attorney, forensic evidence  Steven Avery’s request for a new trial was again rejected November 28, 2017, by Sheboygan County Circuit Judge Angela Sutkiewicz. Avery had asked the judge to reconsider her October 3rd decision rejecting his request for a new trial.

Avery’s current post-conviction attorney said that she had new testimony and evidence to present to the court, which warranted a new trial. However, Judge Sutkiewicz found that she had no basis for reconsideration and reversal of her October 3rd decision denying such relief. Avery’s attorney is seeking an appeal of the ruling with the Wisconsin Court of Appeals.

An excellent, inside view of Steven Avery’s case, his trial and the disputed forensic evidence used to convict him is found in Jerry Buting’s 2017 book, Illusion of Justice. The review of this book written by Ray Dall’Osto in the recent NACDL Champion magazine, can be read at https://www.nacdl.org/Champion.aspx?id=48930.


Wisconsin defense attorney, Wisconsin criminal lawyerIf you ever watch popular crime and police shows on television or streaming internet, you would assume that forensic scientific evidence is irrefutable. The experts speak with certainty, and the test results and staggeringly high probabilities of correctness overwhelm, and suspects are convicted based upon this evidence so provided.

While this happens more often than not in real life, the American public would be surprised to learn that the science behind the supposedly definitive forensic opinion which seals the case on the TV show is not as clear-cut and certain. And sometimes, the scientific opinion is later called into question and is shown to be invalid. This is not all that uncommon, as many people in the criminal justice system have been wrongfully convicted of serious crimes. Based on little more than a hair, tool mark or fingerprint comparison, some have spent years of their lives behind bars. 

Mistaken Forensic Evidence Opinions Have Serious Consequences

Back to Top