- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Judge grants bail to Louisiana death row prisoner with vacated conviction
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:05 pm
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:05 pm
Haven't seen anything posted about this.
LA Illuminator
LA Illuminator
quote:
This week’s ruling is yet another chapter in a nearly three-decade legal odyssey that has spotlighted Louisiana’s troubling history with wrongful convictions, as well as its long-held reputation as one of the country’s most punitive states.
As ProPublica and Verite News reported in March, Duncan’s conviction was based largely on now discredited bite mark evidence presented by forensic dentist Michael West and pathologist Dr. Steven Hayne, whose longtime partnership as state experts has been questioned following concerns about the validity of their techniques.
Over the past 27 years , nine prisoners have been set free after being convicted in part on inaccurate evidence given by West and Hayne. Three of those men were on death row. Duncan was the last person awaiting an execution based on the pair’s work.
Duncan, 56, has maintained his innocence since first being arrested in 1993 after Haley’s death. In the ensuing years, Haley’s mother, Allison Layton Statham, has come to support Duncan’s release. At Duncan’s first bail hearing in July, Statham testified that she believes Duncan to be innocent and demanded his release from prison.
Efforts to free Duncan have become even more urgent given the state’s recent moves, under conservative Gov. Jeff Landry, `to restart executions following a lapse of more than a decade.
Louisiana had not carried out a death sentence since 2010 as it has been unable to procure the drugs necessary for an execution. To overcome that obstacle, the state Legislature, at Landry’s urging, recently approved an alternative method: the use of nitrogen gas, a controversial method allowed in only three other states.
That opened the door to Louisiana’s first execution in 15 years. And on March 18, the state used nitrogen gas to put Jesse Hoffman Jr. to death.
To criminal justice reformers, Landry’s execution push is even more concerning given the state’s history in convicting and sentencing to death people later found to be innocent. In the past three decades, the state has exonerated 11 people facing execution, among the highest such numbers in the country, according to The National Registry of Exonerations.
Despite Sharp’s finding in April that Duncan is factually innocent, Ouachita prosecutors continue to insist that Duncan raped and murdered Oliveaux and should be executed without delay. The district attorney’s office, in urging Sharp to keep Duncan locked up, has argued that Duncan is “a safety risk to not only the victim’s family, but also the general public.” The office has appealed the decision to the Louisiana Supreme Court.
Duncan was arrested Dec. 18, 1993 after he reported finding Haley’s lifeless body floating in the tub of the home he shared with the girl’s mother in West Monroe. Duncan, who was babysitting that night, told authorities he had put the toddler in the tub to take a bath, then went downstairs to wash dishes. When he heard a noise coming from the bathroom, he rushed upstairs to check on her and found Haley floating face down in the water. She was pronounced dead a few hours later.
Prosecutors enlisted the assistance of Hayne, who had worked on hundreds of criminal cases in Mississippi and Louisiana over his decades-long career. Hayne conducted Haley’s medical exam and claimed he found evidence that she was sexually assaulted and intentionally drowned. He also claimed he found bite marks on her body.
Hayne’s frequent partner, Michael West, then analyzed the marks and found that they were a match for Duncan’s teeth. Based in part on those findings, Duncan was charged with first-degree murder. After about two weeks of testimony in 1998, the jury found Duncan guilty and sentenced him to death.
Duncan’s post-conviction attorneys, however, later uncovered a trove of evidence which, they said, proves he is innocent and was wrongfully convicted, the most damning of which calls into question whether the bite marks Hayne said he found on Haley’s body were manufactured.
In a video of West’s 1993 examination of Haley — which was not shown to jurors at the trial — the dentist can be seen taking a mold of Duncan’s teeth and grinding it into the girl’s body. (West has previously said he was simply using what he called a “direct comparison” technique — in which he presses a mold of a person’s teeth directly onto the location of suspected bite marks.)
In his April ruling vacating Duncan’s conviction, Sharp said the work Hayne and West did on Duncan’s case was “no longer valid” and “not scientifically defensible.” Sharp also stated in his ruling that he found “very compelling” the September testimony of an expert medical witness who said that the child’s death was not the result of a homicide but of an accidental drowning. Prior to her death, Haley suffered several head injuries that could have caused seizures resulting in her drowning, according to the testimony.
Robert S. Tew, district attorney for Ouachita and Morehouse parishes, has argued that despite experts now dismissing bite mark evidence as “junk science,” it was an accepted methodology at the time of Duncan’s trial and that some experts still consider it to be valid. He has also noted that Hayne, who died in 2020, served as the pathologist for the district for over a decade and during that time “there has been no cases overturned because of Dr. Hayne’s autopsy.”
Tew’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
An initial bail hearing for Duncan held in July was delayed after prosecutors filed a motion to recuse Sharp, claiming he was biased given his earlier decision to set aside Duncan’s conviction. Sharp declined the request. In an October ruling, the Louisiana Supreme Court rejected the state’s appeal in a 6-1 vote. The court has yet to take up the state’s appeal of Sharp’s decision to set aside Duncan’s conviction.
As of publication time, it was not clear when Duncan may be released.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:09 pm to Jebadeb
Some say bite marks and fire evidence really aren’t up to the standard of actual science.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:12 pm to Jebadeb
Appeal it just like Defendants do.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:13 pm to Jebadeb
quote:
The district attorney’s office, in urging Sharp to keep Duncan locked up, has argued that Duncan is “a safety risk to not only the victim’s family, but also the general public.”
quote:
In the ensuing years, Haley’s mother, Allison Layton Statham, has come to support Duncan’s release. At Duncan’s first bail hearing in July, Statham testified that she believes Duncan to be innocent and demanded his release from prison.
Some of these DAs are almost too stupid to insult.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:13 pm to Jebadeb
quote:
Duncan was arrested Dec. 18, 1993 after he reported finding Haley’s lifeless body floating in the tub of the home he shared with the girl’s mother in West Monroe. Duncan, who was babysitting that night, told authorities he had put the toddler in the tub to take a bath, then went downstairs to wash dishes. When he heard a noise coming from the bathroom, he rushed upstairs to check on her and found Haley floating face down in the water. She was pronounced dead a few hours later.
he deserved prison for this
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:15 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
he deserved prison for this
Not the death penalty.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:16 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
he deserved prison for this
I'd say 25 years is probably sufficient, wouldn't you?
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:18 pm to Topwater Trout
Agreed. There also need more information about this
How bad do the head injuries need to be to cause seizures. I am sure they try to "sell it" as it's a clumsy toddler learning to walk, be more mobile, independent...; but I couldn't count the number of times my kids bumped their heads that never resulted in concussion or seizures.
quote:
Prior to her death, Haley suffered several head injuries that could have caused seizures resulting in her drowning, according to the testimony.
How bad do the head injuries need to be to cause seizures. I am sure they try to "sell it" as it's a clumsy toddler learning to walk, be more mobile, independent...; but I couldn't count the number of times my kids bumped their heads that never resulted in concussion or seizures.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:23 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
I'd say 25 years is probably sufficient, wouldn't you?
i could agree and disagree my gut reaction is frick that dude for leaving a toddler alone in the tub to do dishes
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:29 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
i could agree and disagree my gut reaction is frick that dude for leaving a toddler alone in the tub to do dishes
For context, Negligent Homicide when the victim is under the age of 10 carries 2 to 10 years.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:29 pm to Jebadeb
Of those 9, how many have ended up back in jail?
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:33 pm to Jebadeb
I remember reading the story of a guy serving a life sentence for aggravated rape of a child where the only evidence against him was the testimony of the step daughter. The step daughter later recanted and was remorseful. Said she made it all up bc she was mad at him. She was willing to be prosecuted for perjury to set things right. And yet the prosecutor was like nah, you’re lying now and he remains in prison.
It’s so scary that a man can go to prison on absolutely nothing more than the bare accusation of a teenage girl. No other evidence is needed.
It’s so scary that a man can go to prison on absolutely nothing more than the bare accusation of a teenage girl. No other evidence is needed.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:34 pm to Jebadeb
What gets me about these cases is why they’re in such a hurry to kill the guy when there are real doubts about the evidence. Why don’t those doubts give them pause? Why try to move even faster with the ultimate irreversible act?
I understand the more general frustration with how long capital appeals take. I’m not talking about that. We have specific facts here suggesting the linchpin “scientific” evidence is bunk. Shouldn’t anyone with integrity slow down a bit in unusual circumstances like these?
It really makes it hard to believe they’re acting in good faith.
I understand the more general frustration with how long capital appeals take. I’m not talking about that. We have specific facts here suggesting the linchpin “scientific” evidence is bunk. Shouldn’t anyone with integrity slow down a bit in unusual circumstances like these?
It really makes it hard to believe they’re acting in good faith.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:34 pm to Weekend Warrior79
Yeah, seems like the prior head injuries are an important part of this
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:37 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
For context, Negligent Homicide when the victim is under the age of 10 carries 2 to 10 years.
if he had left the toddler in a hot car would the penalties be the same? i don't see much difference
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:39 pm to OKBoomerSooner
quote:
What gets me about these cases is why they’re in such a hurry to kill the guy when there are real doubts about the evidence. Why don’t those doubts give them pause? Why try to move even faster with the ultimate irreversible act?
I understand the more general frustration with how long capital appeals take. I’m not talking about that. We have specific facts here suggesting the linchpin “scientific” evidence is bunk. Shouldn’t anyone with integrity slow down a bit in unusual circumstances like these?
It really makes it hard to believe they’re acting in good faith.
People hate admitting they are wrong. But you would think almost 30 years later most of those responsible are gone. Is it so hard for the DA's office to say they got that one wrong from years ago?
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:43 pm to Topwater Trout
quote:
if he had left the toddler in a hot car would the penalties be the same? i don't see much difference
I think that might have a better argument for Second Degree Cruelty to a Juvenile, which carries up to 40. I think a prosecutor could argue for that in this case, but I think it would be a stretch.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:44 pm to Jebadeb
I doubt he's "innocent".
you're the only person in a home where a 2 year old drowns in a tub. Yeah you're responsible for their death, intentional or not. You shouldn't have left the child alone, and if you were going to, then you put like 4 inches of water in the tub.
I don't understand what a bite mark on the kid even proves. It's one thing if there were bruises from being beaten, but a bite mark? Why is that even relevant? Either a ton is being left out of this trial, or the jury are a bunch of dumbasses if they were convinced he murdered the kid b/c of a bite mark.
you're the only person in a home where a 2 year old drowns in a tub. Yeah you're responsible for their death, intentional or not. You shouldn't have left the child alone, and if you were going to, then you put like 4 inches of water in the tub.
I don't understand what a bite mark on the kid even proves. It's one thing if there were bruises from being beaten, but a bite mark? Why is that even relevant? Either a ton is being left out of this trial, or the jury are a bunch of dumbasses if they were convinced he murdered the kid b/c of a bite mark.
Posted on 11/25/25 at 1:47 pm to Joshjrn
quote:
I think a prosecutor could argue for that in this case, but I think it would be a stretch.
2-10 yrs for this just seems so light
Popular
Back to top

8








