False Positive

When I sat down with Janine Geske, former Milwaukee County judge and Wisconsin Supreme Court justice, to ask her about the trial of Robert Lee Stinson, she said, “I think I did everything right at the time. But that’s not to say that I don’t feel terrible.”

Daniel Blinka, the former assistant district attorney who brought the charges against Stinson, said, “The sobering fact is, no matter how careful you are, how cautious you are, how objective you think you are in these cases, you can still be wrong.”

Both Geske and Blinka defended Stinson’s trial attorney, Steven Kohn, as an “excellent” and “top shelf” lawyer.

So who is responsible?

Stinson’s 1985 trial ended with a guilty verdict and a life sentence for the murder of his neighbor, 63-year-old Ione Cychosz. The only evidence tying Stinson to the crime was the testimony of two forensic odontologists who claimed that his teeth matched the bite marks on her body. The advent of DNA profiling would reveal that Stinson was innocent, but only after he had spent 23 years of his life in prison.

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel/USA Today/Associated Press

Those forensic dentists, L.T. Johnson and Raymond Rawson, are now defendants in a civil case alleging that they violated Stinson’s right to a fair trial. They maintain that they gave a good-faith expert opinion based on the state of the science at the time.

If this story sounds familiar, it’s because several forensic disciplines have fallen into disrepute after contributing to wrongful convictions. The Innocence Project estimates that faulty forensic science was involved in more than 40 percent of DNA exoneration cases.

The 30-minute documentary above is our best effort at piecing together how this happens. It shows how cultural and structural norms in our judicial system leave criminal trials vulnerable to unreliable but persuasive scientific evidence. And it explains why progress has been slow to fortify many of the forensic sciences despite dozens of wrongful convictions.

After he was released in 2009, Stinson received only $5,000 for every year he spent in prison. His civil trial is scheduled for June 2019.

You can find this video and all of Vox’s videos on YouTube. And if you’re interested in supporting our video journalism, you can become a member of the Vox Video Lab on YouTube.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via