October 13, 2010 - PRESS

PRESS

IS DNA TESTING A FEDERAL CIVIL RIGHT? JUSTICES ASKED TO RULE AS SKINNER'S LIFE HANGS IN THE BALANCE

MEDILL INNOCENCE PROJECT OCTOBER 13, 2010

Is DNA testing a federal civil right? Justices asked to rule as Skinner's life hangs in the balance

By Alex Johnson – Medill Innocence Project October 13, 2010 Washington D.C. In 2000, Medill senior Emily Probst asked a crucial question through a thick glass partition, setting off a decade-long chain of events that led all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. Would Hank Skinner, a Texan convicted of a triple homicide in 1995 and sentenced to death, be willing to test the remaining physical evidence in his case, regardless of the outcome? "Yes," he emphatically answered.

"I think we knew then that we had our work cut out for us," Probst, now a CNN producer, told the Medill Innocence Project today. "It’s hard to believe that ten years later, [the process to test the remaining DNA] still hasn’t happened completely."

Skinner was convicted of murdering his live-in girlfriend and her two adult sons in their home in Gray County, Texas, on New Year’s Eve, 1993. At his trial, bloodied knives, a blood-stained windbreaker, vaginal swabs, fingernail clippings, and hair found in the victim’s hand went untested for DNA. Still, he was found guilty two years later and has been on Texas' death row ever since.

Back in 2000, Northwestern University journalism students, including Probst, began re-investigating his case.

Another group of student-journalists resumed the investigation in 2010. Their findings, including the recantation of the state’s star witness and evidence strongly implicating an alternative suspect, raised doubts about Skinner’s guilt. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether Skinner can sue for access to the untested biological evidence under Federal Civil Rights Law and finally put those doubt to rest.

"The truth is sitting right there, and it’s like we’re afraid of finding out what it is," said Probst. "Why not test the evidence and find out the real truth?"

The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments today to decide whether Skinner’s right to due process under federal law was violated when Gray County District Attorney Lynn Switzer refused to test the remaining DNA evidence after Skinner’s conviction. Skinner’s attorney, Rob Owen, argued that he should have the right to sue for the tests, and was optimistic after the hearing.

"Hopeful is the word of the day," Owen told the Medill Innocence Project following the arguments. "Waiting for the decision is going to be nerve-wracking, but the question is still open."

Skinner came within an hour of his scheduled March 24 execution before being issued a temporary stay; two months later, the justices decided to hear his case. Owen prepared for the arguments in part with his University of Texas law school students, who delved deeply into the legal issues of the case and grilled Owen with questions he might expect from the justices. To the students' amazement, little about the arguments surprised them.

"We put in so much time prepping, we anticipated most of what happened if not individually, then between the ten of us," said law student Darren Donahue. "It seemed very well argued on both sides. Obviously, I’m biased, but it was a clash of the titans, as far as I’m concerned."

One of those "titans" was Greg Coleman, DA Switzer's attorney. "The Court was well prepared and asked insightful questions of both sides," Coleman reflected after the hearing. "They have a lot to think about, and I, like everyone else, will be anxiously awaiting the outcome."

Meanwhile, standing in the shadows of the giant columns of the Supreme Court building, Owen offered a reminder that a man’s life lies at the heart of the vigorous academic debate. "It’s hardest on Hank and his family," Owen said. "I complain about the delay, but I’m not the one sitting in a cell."

Skinner’s wife, Sandrine Ageorges-Skinner, sat quietly at the back of the stately courtroom and listened to the justices level questions toward each side. "The justices seemed very curious, and I hope that curiosity leads to a meaningful decision, she said afterward. I’m confident that they are listening to both sides of the argument, and they will do what they think is best."

Still, the wait has been a long one, and it could be months before the high court issues its decision. "You look at the front of the Supreme Court building, and it says ‘equal under law,’" Ageorges-Skinner said. "But right now, it’s not."

Skinner’s daughter Natalie, who was fourteen at the time of her father’s conviction, also maintains a cautious optimism. "I’m just happy he’s still alive in October, considering he was supposed to be executed in March. I’m just grateful he has this opportunity."

Alex Johnson is the Staff Reporter for the Medill Innocence Project. http://www.medillinnocenceproject.org/Skinner_SCOTUS_oral_arguments