PUBLISHER'S NOTE: "WORDS TO HEED: FROM OUR POST ON KEVIN COOPER'S APPLICATION FOR POST-CONVICTION DNA TESTING; CALIFORNIA: (Applicable wherever a state resists DNA testing): "Blogger/extraordinaire Jeff Gamso's blunt, unequivocal, unforgettable message to the powers that be in California: "JUST TEST THE FUCKING DNA." (Oh yes, Gamso raises, as he does in many of his posts, an important philosophical question: This post is headed: "What is truth, said jesting Pilate."...Says Gamso: "So what's the harm? What, exactly, are they scared of? Don't we want the truth?")
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
QUOTE OF THE DAY: "“I think it should all be tested,” Jared Bradley, president and CEO of M-Vac Systems, told Forensic. “The evidence was submerged, and only touch DNA on a relatively small surface makes for a very difficult collection. The M-Vac will collect the vast majority of whatever DNA is present because the solution will get down into the fibers of the material and help the cells be vacuumed up, whereas less aggressive methods like swabbing might miss it.”
—————————————————————
PASSAGE ONE OF THE DAY: "Since the release, Echols has been the most vocal about testing what evidence is left to get to the truth. At the time of the murder, Echols was 18 and the only one sentenced to death. He was on death row, locked down 23 hours per day in a supermax unit. In early 2020, Echols’ legal team was told that the remaining evidence was lost or destroyed in a fire. This turned out to be untrue and in December 2021, Echols' team was able to review remaining evidence and move forward with new testing. However, in June 2022, a judge rejected the request for DNA testing of the evidence.Echols's lawyers appealed the case to the Arkansas Supreme Court in January 2023. In April, the state supreme court ruled in favor of Echols's appeal for DNA testing. A year later, in April 2024, the Arkansas Supreme Court again reversed a lower court's order denying Echols' postconviction motion for DNA testing for lack of jurisdiction. This action sent the decision of DNA testing back to Crittenden County court, which officially gave the green light for testing on Friday."
-----------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "The M-Vac utilizes wet vacuum principles to release and capture cells. It aggressively sprays a sterile solution onto a surface and simultaneously applies vacuum pressure to collect the solution and whatever DNA material is present on the surface. The solution and DNA material are then run through a filter or a microcentrifuge."
----------------------------------------------
STORY: "M-Vac to be Used on Evidence from West Memphis Three Murders," by Editor-in -Chief Michelle Taylor, published by Forensic Magazine, on August 6, 2025.
GIST: "A court order issued Friday begins a new chapter in the infamous West Memphis Three murders—this one marked by the major advancements in DNA analysis the forensic industry has seen since the murders took place in 1993.
The order, from Crittenden County (Arkansas) court, allows DNA testing of evidence from the original crime scene. The order specifically calls for the use of the M-Vac system.
The M-Vac utilizes wet vacuum principles to release and capture cells. It aggressively sprays a sterile solution onto a surface and simultaneously applies vacuum pressure to collect the solution and whatever DNA material is present on the surface. The solution and DNA material are then run through a filter or a microcentrifuge.
The crime and evidence to be tested
On May 5, 1993, 8-year-old friends Steve Branch, Michael Moore and Christopher Byers were reported missing in West Memphis, Arkansas. The next afternoon, police found the boys’ bodies in a muddy creek that led to a major drainage canal in Robin Hood Hills.
All three boys had been stripped naked and were hogtied with their own shoelaces. Their clothing was found in the creek, some of it twisted around sticks that had been thrown into the muddy ditch bed.
At minimum, the M-Vac will be used on the shoelaces used to tie the boys’ ankles and wrists behind their backs. It’s possible the system will also be used on other evidence, like their clothing and the sticks used to push the clothing into the muddy creek.
“I think it should all be tested,” Jared Bradley, president and CEO of M-Vac Systems, told Forensic. “The evidence was submerged, and only touch DNA on a relatively small surface makes for a very difficult collection. The M-Vac will collect the vast majority of whatever DNA is present because the solution will get down into the fibers of the material and help the cells be vacuumed up, whereas less aggressive methods like swabbing might miss it.”
The Crittenden County court order asks the West Memphis Police Department and the Arkansas State Crime Lab to turn the evidence over to a courier, who will take it to Bode Technology for processing with the M-Vac.
While Bode has been processing M-Vac filters for quite a while, the private forensic lab only recently acquired an M-Vac system for their own use. In fact, Bradley says he flew to Virginia to train Bode scientists on the system just a couple months ago.
“They are all competent, confident DNA analysts so I'm hopeful in the outcome,” the CEO says. “Bottom line: is if there is DNA on those items, the M-Vac should get it.”
The court order, issued on August 1, says the evidence must be sent to Bode within 10 days—although it did not list a stipulation as to when testing must be commenced/completed.
According to Bradley, Bode is now one of about 250 agencies/labs that possess their own M-Vac system, although the number of agencies that have processed cases using the device is in the thousands.
Appeals timeline
Friday’s order builds on previous appeals by the three convicted teenagers—Damien Echols, Jessie Misskelley Jr. and Jason Baldwin.
In 2007, Echols petitioned for a retrial, based on a statute permitting post-conviction testing of DNA evidence. However, the petition failed when the original trial judge, David Burnett, disallowed presentation of the information in his court. This ruling was in turn thrown out by the Arkansas Supreme Court in November 2010, and sent back down to the Crittenden County court.
In the meantime, based on newly produced evidence, potential juror misconduct and potential police coercion, the convicted men were released from prison. All three entered Alford pleas, which allowed them to assert their innocence while acknowledging that prosecutors have enough evidence to convict them.
Since the release, Echols has been the most vocal about testing what evidence is left to get to the truth. At the time of the murder, Echols was 18 and the only one sentenced to death. He was on death row, locked down 23 hours per day in a supermax unit.
In early 2020, Echols’ legal team was told that the remaining evidence was lost or destroyed in a fire. This turned out to be untrue and in December 2021, Echols' team was able to review remaining evidence and move forward with new testing.
However, in June 2022, a judge rejected the request for DNA testing of the evidence.Echols's lawyers appealed the case to the Arkansas Supreme Court in January 2023. In April, the state supreme court ruled in favor of Echols's appeal for DNA testing. A year later, in April 2024, the Arkansas Supreme Court again reversed a lower court's order denying Echols' postconviction motion for DNA testing for lack of jurisdiction. This action sent the decision of DNA testing back to Crittenden County court, which officially gave the green light for testing on Friday.
While no timeline has been provided for the testing, given the notorious nature of the murders, public pressure and missteps along the way, DNA extraction and analysis may be sooner rather than later.
In a 2020 study published in the Journal of Forensic Sciences, FBI forensic researchers found that the M-Vac yielded consistently greater nDNA yields than the wet‐swab method on 18 of 20 porous substrates tested (cinderblock and unpainted drywall being the exceptions). The vacuum system also yielded an average of 12 times more nDNA and 17x greater mtDNA compared with the traditional wet-swab method.
Additionally, the FBI researchers used the M-Vac on 10 previously swabbed substrates to potentially recover any uncollected DNA. The M-Vac recovered additional DNA on 9 out of 10 substrates, the only exception being satin-painted drywall. At minimum, the M-Vac recovered at least as much as swabbing, but at maximum, the vacuum system recovered 46x more.
“Considering the age, the crime scene, the evidence conditions, and the importance of collecting every cell possible, I think the M-Vac is the only appropriate tool,” concluded Bradley."
The entire story cannot be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
-------------------------------------------------------------------
