|
|
Pending the "validation" of Dr. Blake’s finding that the biological material he analyzed from the crime scene is not a match with Yarris, a new trial will be set for sometime in the next 90 days.
But I am getting ahead of myself. As Dr. Blake would say, "Let’s slow down a bit."
First of all, Blake does not like the use of the word "validation" to describe what he has now been asked to do.
"Why people insist on using these hackneyed buzz words is beyond me," he says irritably. As if the tests that have already been done may not be "valid."
He explains that all that needs to be done is to test a new sample of Yarris’ saliva to make sure it matches an old sample that was not directly given to Dr. Blake for testing.
He says it isn’t validation, it’s "double-checking." There is a difference.
"People are being cautious," he says, as they should be in a capital murder case.
But make no mistake, the chances of Yarris’ new sample not matching his old one AND matching the genetic markers of the man Dr. Blake calls "Unidentified Male Number 1" are remote in the extreme.
It started with the gloves found in murder victim Linda Craig’s car after she disappeared. They sat in an evidence room for years before anyone thought to test them for biological material.
When Dr. Blake finally examined them he was able to dig out enough genetic material to test it.
He looked where anybody using their common sense would to find such material, between the forefingers and thumbs.
Think about it, he said, that’s where all the action is. That’s where the most "dermal cells" would likely be rubbed off. And that’s where he found them. Enough to come up with a "very complete genetic profile."
Clever?
No, just common sense, says Dr. Blake.
"Science is the disciplined exercise of common sense," he says, though he admits that common sense is not nearly common enough these days.
And by the way, he doesn’t call the person whose dermal cells he found the owner of the gloves. He calls him the "habitual user."
The next step was to try to match that profile with a small semen stain found on the victim’s underwear. Unfortunately, the main semen samples from the original trial back in 1982 were lost or discarded. ("Bad professional practice," Dr. Blake called it.)
But the new test, thanks to the tiny sample, showed only a "genetic compatibility" with the habitual user of the gloves, nothing conclusive.
It wasn’t until Blake was able to test the fingernail clippings taken from Mrs. Craig as part of the original investigation that he found enough foreign genetic material to test it against the stuff found in the gloves.
When he did, Voila! A match. And none of it matched the Yarris sample.
"We know this male biological material common to the gloves and her fingernails is not Nick Yarris," Blake said.
They also know that it is not the victim’s husband because they checked.
"The only logical inference to be drawn at the end of the day," Blake told me, "is (that it belongs to) the bad guy, an assailant in this case."
Given that a possibility that an innocent man may have spent the last 23 years on death row, it is interesting that Blake makes it a big point to say an incredible number of nice things about our county prosecutor’s office.
In fact, he goes so far as to call ADA Sheldon Kovach, who has been handling this case since 1996, a "hero" for working so diligently with the Federal Defenders working on Yarris’ appeal.
"He (Kovach) has been doing his job correctly for the people of Pennsylvania by exercising his responsibility to seek the truth rather than obstruct justice," said Blake. Obstruct justice?
Is Dr. Blake suggesting there are prosecutors in this country who intentionally break the law to preserve convictions of innocent men?
Find out Sunday.
Gil Spencer’s column appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. E-mail him at gspencer@delcotimes.com
