- Paperback: 106 pages
- Publisher: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform (February 2, 2008)
- Language: English
- ISBN-10: 1434843254
- ISBN-13: 978-1434843258
- Product Dimensions: 8 x 0.2 x 10 inches
- Shipping Weight: 10.4 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
- Average Customer Review: 4 customer reviews
- Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #9,556,866 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Kirstin Blaise Lobato's Unreasonable Conviction: Possibility Of Guilt Replaces Proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
About the Author
Hans Sherrer is publisher of Justice:Denied -- the magazine for the wrongly convicted. He has written more than one hundred articles about wrongful convictions. Mr. Sherrer first began investigating Kirstin Blaise Lobato's case in 2002.
Showing 1-4 of 4 reviews
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
A few weeks after the murder (July 20, 2001) Laura Johnson, a Lincoln County juvenile probation officer, called the Las Vegas police and told them that a teacher related to her Ms. Lobato used a knife to fend off a sexual assault in Las Vegas. Due the presence of presumed knife wounds in both cases and the stabbed individual was an African American male, Las Vegas detectives immediately assumed that Ms. Lobato killed Duran Bailey. They perversely gathered no more evidence on the case except to try to prove the involvement of Ms. Lobato in this crime. They detectives immediately drove to Panaca where Ms. Lobato was presently staying, questioned her, and arrested her.
During the questioning Ms. Lobato thought the detectives were asking about the incident that occurred around May 25 when she repelled an attempted sexual assault using a butterfly knife. The details of this incident differed sharply from those of Duran Bailey's murder. Among those details was that the attacker of Ms. Lobato got away alive. Also Ms. Lobato's assailant was stabbed while above her. Expert testimony demonstrated Mr. Bailey was stabbed in a prone position.
The investigation into Baileys' death was flawed. Ms. Lobato was suggested as a perpetrator by a double hearsay evidence. Investigators did not investigate the two people involved in this hearsay testimony. Detectives ignored differences between Ms. Lobato's account of her repelled rape and the murder scene of Mr. Bailey. Detectives did not investigate the people who had conflicts with Mr. Bailey. In fact Mr. Bailey was murdered eight miles from where Ms. Lobato repelled her assailant.
Ms. Lobato was in Panaca, Nevada, at the time of the murder. Many eyewitnesses from the town testify to this fact. Contrary to prosecutors, Ms. Lobato was not in Las Vegas to purchase methamphetamine, which she used around that time. Methamphetamine was easily available in the Panaca area. Moreover there is no evidence that Mr. Bailey sold drugs, or that Ms. Lobato and Mr. Bailey met or even knew each other. Mr. Bailey occasionally used cocaine but not amphetamine.
Moreover no physical evidence links Ms. Lobato to the murder of Mr. Bailey. Evidence gathered from Ms. Lobato's apartment and car demonstrate no blood or link to the murder scene of Mr. Bailey. Shoeprints found at the scene of the murder of Mr. Bailey conclusively are not those of Ms. Lobato. Tire tracks at the Bailey murder scene did not match the tire tracks's of Ms. Lobato's car. DNA on cigarette butts found at the Bailey murder is conclusively not that of Ms. Lobato, but of Duran Bailey and an unknown person.
Even the wound patterns are inconsistent with Ms. Lobato's knife. Examination by forensic evidence demonstrates the wounds on Mr. Bailey were made by a barber shop scissors and not by Ms. Lobato's butterfly knife.
The prosecutors claim Ms. Bailey was killed in the early morning hours of July 8. Otherwise Ms. Lobato has an airtight alibi. Yet medical examiner M.E. Simms provided testimony that reveals that the probability Mr. Bailey died in the early morning of July 8 extremely improbable. The normal distribution of the medical time frame of Mr. Bailey's death provides a probability of under 0.01 per cent that Mr. Bailey died before dawn.
Moreover the time frame of Mr. Simms was based on the average decomposition of dead bodies. In the hot dry day of July 8 a dead body would decompose faster. Thus the presence of Ms. Lobato at the murder scene is not only improbable but impossible.
The trials of Ms. Lobato were biased and tainted in extreme. The judge Ms. Valorie Vega excluded relevant defense evidence while permitting the prosecution to present highly dubious evidence. The judge also permitted hearsay prosecution witnesses while denying defense witnesses who spoke to Ms. Lobato around the time of the Bailey murder from testifying to everything they knew. The prosecutor William Kephart was permitted to give a loud hypothetical hysterical and emotional closing argument to imply the guilt of Ms. Lobato without the existence of evidence. Mr. Kephart and the other prosecutor essentially only argued for the possibility of the guilt of Ms. Lobato ignoring gigantic holes in this case.
The injustice to Ms. Lobato is a dark spot on the Nevada and American system of justice. This spot will only get bigger until Ms. Lobato is released from her unjust incarceration.
This book by Hans Sherrer is a must read for every American concerned about justice.
The police have an idea of who committed the robbery but prefer not investigate a tough gang. You get a little bit of hearsay about a suspect who was 170 miles away from the scene at the time of the incident. And the suspect is an 18 year old female, hardly the description of a twisted male homosexual. You arrest her and try to improve the case. When it is time to go to trial, you have no forensic evidence, eye witnesses, or confession. Can you win the case?
The answer, quite shockingly, is yes. This what to do:
1) Inflame the jury. Human beings , first and foremost, are emotional creatures. Appealing to passion will usually override logic and facts.
2) Make deals with witnesses. Suspects charged with crimes will be happy to lie in return for leniency. Use a jail house snitch. Our nation's jails are full of innocents who allegedly confessed their crimes to complete strangers while in custody. Some of the more notable wrongful convictions have included Kerry Max Cook and Ron Williamson.
3) Try the case in front of a former prosecutor. All know that the criminal element deserves punishment, to hell with the facts. And if the judge is a former colleague from the same office, a sweet result is nearly guaranteed.
4) Create the possibility of guilt. Of course, guilt is supposed to proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but so what? When the jury is inflamed, jail house snitches sing, accused witnesses testify, and the judge is a former chum, the high standard of doubt can be decreased to "it's possible she did it."
The above scenario is the unexaggerated and sorrowful story of the conviction of Nevada native Kirstin Blaise Lobato. Lobato was convicted in the May, 2002 of murdering a homeless man and sexually assaulting his corpse in Las Vegas. While CSI and many other TV dramas focus on the scientific methods used for capturing criminals, much less is said about the emotional and inflammatory modus operandi utilized for convicting the innocent. This short work is an easily readable yet shocking introduction into the realm of prosecutorial malfeasance.
This book should be mandatory reading for introductory criminology courses, and anybody with a budding interest in wrongful arrest and miscarriages of justice. It is another fine work from the editor of "Justice: Denied! The Magazine for the Wrongfully Accused."
by Michael Fox
Japan Institute for the Study of Wrongful Convictions
This book is a great read and well worth the time taken to read it.