The investigation into the Massachusetts Crime Lab scandal involving Annie Dookhan has revealed that there was an inappropriate and unethical relationship between her and a prosecutor in the district attorneys office. It appears that for the last two to three years, prosecutor George ­Papachristos had direct personal communication with Dookhan who was the chemist on some of his cases. This communication was very unusual. So much so, that even Dookhan’s husband thought his wife might be having an affair with Papachristos and he tried contacting Papachristos about the relationship numerous times. It also appears that Dookhan tried to get cases from the jurisdiction where Papachristos prosecuted and likely even preformed favors for that jurisdiction.

This is not a huge surprise to The Truth About Forensic Science. We have warned before that without meaningful oversight of forensic science laboratories by all concerned parties – DAs, Judges, Defense Attorneys, and Laboratory Supervisors – this type of thing will happen. There is no excuse for it and it should not be something that goes on for years without being caught. The sad thing is that the only reason this is not still occurring is that Dookhan broke down and confessed to her own actions. No one caught it for years. Appropriate procedures were not implemented and followed to prevent this from happening. The system is broken.

The Boston Globe has continued to provide great coverage of this scandal. Here are their two most recent articles on the subject.

Chemist often called, wrote to prosecutor

The chemist at the center of the state drug lab scandal carried on an unauthorized, sometimes personal, e-mail and phone correspondence with a prosecutor whose drug evidence she analyzed, a violation of office protocol that may give defense attorneys even more ammunition to throw out drug convictions involving Annie Dookhan’s work.

Though State Police have concluded that Dookhan was not romantically involved with Norfolk Assistant District Attorney George ­Papachristos, Dookhan’s husband was suspicious. At one point, Dookhan’s husband tried repeatedly to contact a startled Papachristos, according to someone involved in the investigation, apparently out of concern that the two were having an affair.

The tone in the dozens of e-mails between the two was sometimes quite familiar, according to the person who has read them. Dookhan opened up about her life, confiding in one ­e-mail that she was unhappy in her marriage, though it is unclear from a printout of the e-mails whether she sent it. On another occasion, Papachristos reminded her that their relationship was strictly “professional” in ­response to something Dookhan wrote.

The correspondence, which dates back to 2009, was unusual enough that State Police inves­tigating drug lab misconduct recently interviewed ­Papachristos about their relationship. Lab protocol calls for prosecutors to communicate through lab supervisors to avoid any question about the integrity of drug evidence, something Dookhan has acknowledged she should have done.

The American Civil Liberties Union has asked Attorney General Martha Coakley and the district attorneys to agree to throw out all drug cases “involving a police officer or prosecutor who, at any time, communicated directly with Annie Dookhan.”

“Chemists aren’t supposed to be doing favors on a case-by-case basis for a particular police officer or prosecutor,” said ­Matthew R. Segal, legal director of the ACLU Foundation of Massachusetts. “That’s a good rule, no matter who the chemist is.”

Dookhan wrote e-mails and spoke on the phone with other prosecutors, the person involved with the investigation said, but the correspondence with Papachristos stood out.

Papachristos declined to ­answer questions, but his boss, Norfolk District Attorney Michael W. Morrissey, said ­Papachristos told him that he and Dookhan had no personal relationship.

“George never socially met her or had a relationship with her,” said Morrissey, who took office in 2011. “He met her once in court, and she never testified in any of his cases.”

However, Morrissey admitted that he has seen only a few e-mails, and he has refused ­repeated efforts by investigators to provide him with copies of the rest of the correspondence, because they are “the subject of an ongoing investigation” by Coakley and “I don’t want to interfere.”

Several state officials and prosecutors expressed confusion over Morrissey’s refusal to accept the e-mails, noting that he should know if one of his subordinates had an inappropriate relationship that could jeopardize cases in his office.

Morrissey also declined to give the Globe the handful of Dookhan-Papachristos e-mails in his possession on the grounds that the case is under investigation.

Dookhan analyzed drug evidence for numerous cases in Norfolk Superior Court in ­Dedham where Papachristos was assigned, including an Oxycodone-­dealing conviction obtained by Papachristos that was one of the first to be overturned after allegations against Dookhan became public. It is unclear exactly how frequently Dookhan analyzed evidence for Papachristos, but Papachristos refers to several different cases in his e-mails.

Dookhan’s lawyer, Nicolas Gordon, declined to comment, saying he had not seen the ­e-mails.

As much as anything, the ­e-mails may offer insight into the mind of Dookhan, who has admitted to State Police that she falsified and mishandled drug evidence, potentially jeopardizing up to 34,000 drug cases she took part in during her nine-year career at the Jamaica Plain lab. She faces criminal charges on accusations of stating that a drug sample contained cocaine when it did not, resulting in the defendant’s conviction. She is also accused of falsely claiming she had a master’s degree in chemistry.

Many have wondered what would possess the bright, hardworking 34-year-old mother of a young son to behave so recklessly.

In the e-mails, Dookhan sent Papachristos chatty messages punctuated by exclamation points, according to the person involved in the investigation who has read the messages.

There is no suggestion in the correspondence that he asked her to alter results or provide other favors, but Dookhan had a reputation in the lab for being especially close to Norfolk prosecutors.

Gloria Phillips, an evidence officer, told police that Dookhan “always wanted ­Norfolk County” cases to analyze.

Dookhan appeared to be doing a favor for Norfolk law enforcement officials when she was caught in June 2011 taking evidence from 60 Norfolk drug cases out of a storage area without authorization. Her former supervisor, Elizabeth O’Brien, told State Police Dookhan had taken cases out of order and did not sign them out as required.

Dookhan’s co-workers told State Police that she was going through a “long divorce” from her husband, though the two still live together in Franklin. O’Brien added that Dookhan was “going through some personal problems.”

In summer 2009, Papachristos told Dookhan with some alarm that her husband had tried to contact him repeatedly, though they did not speak.

“I have to tell my bosses,” ­Papachristos told Dookhan. “Tell him not to call again.”

US Representative William R. Keating, who was Norfolk district attorney at the time, ­declined comment, citing the ongoing investigation.

However, Morrissey said ­Papachristos raised concerns to his supervisor at least once about one e-mail he received from Dookhan.

Dookhan and Papachristos continued to correspond for two years after that, including for five months after June 2011 when Dookhan’s supervisors say they removed her from ­doing drug analysis because of questions about her handling of evidence. At one point, Papachristos asks Dookhan how she likes her “promotion,” apparently unaware that she has been removed from drug analysis because of questions about her integrity.

Later in the year, Dookhan asked Papachristos about his Thanksgiving celebration.

Dookhan stressed that she worked alone and that no prosecutors urged her to break the rules.

Nonetheless, Segal said Dookhan’s direct contact with prosecutors, without following proper protocol, should be grounds for dismissal of cases, suggesting the prosecutors knew that she would do what they wanted — give them the evidence they needed for drug convictions — without even asking.

“Would they have called if they had any doubt about what her answer would be? She reportedly was the only person at the lab who would take these calls” from prosecutors and ­police, said Segal in an interview. “You’ve seen the TV shows. Everyone else says, ‘I can’t get you that result right away, there’s a procedure.’ She alone says, ‘I can get you these results right away.’ The reason was reportedly by making [the results] up.”

Link to Boston Globe Article

Prosecutor with ties to drug lab chemist resigns

The Norfolk County prosecutor who carried on an unusual and sometimes personal e-mail correspondence with controversial state chemist Annie Dookhan abruptly resigned Wednesday, saying he did not want to be “a further distraction” from the investigation into criminal misconduct in the state drug lab in Jamaica Plain.

The Globe reported Wednesday that George Papachristos, an assistant district attorney who prosecuted numerous drug cases in which Dookhan provided the drug analysis, exchanged dozens of ­e-mails with Dookhan, some veering into personal subjects. At one point during the correspondence that spanned at least two years, Dookhan’s husband tried to contact Papachristos directly, apparently out of concern that the two were having an affair.

State Police have concluded that the two were not romantically ­involved, but that their relationship raised even more questions about the integrity of Dookhan’s drug analysis. She is already facing criminal charges of falsifying evidence and lying about her resume.

On Wednesday afternoon, ­Papachristos, 37, submitted his resignation to Norfolk District Attorney Michael W. Morrissey.

“The long and short of it is he reached a conclusion that I concurred with, that he’s a distraction to the bigger issue: the operation and supervision of the lab and the alleged illegal conduct of the lab chemist, Annie Dookhan,” Morrissey said in an interview. “He reached the conclusion that it would be difficult for him to continue his employment. He’s a good prosecutor.”

The resignation of Papachristos marks the first time a prosecutor has paid a price in connection with the scandal at the state drug lab, which has jeopardized up to 34,000 drug cases and has already resulted in release of scores of drug defendants. Until now, the focus has been on Dookhan, who worked at the state lab for nine years, and the failure of her supervisors to rein her in despite warning signs that she was rampantly violating lab protocol.

But the State Police report into misconduct at the lab makes it clear that Dookhan commonly spoke directly to both police and prosecutors without following the normal procedure of going through her supervisors. Co-workers told police that Dookhan had a particular affinity for Norfolk County law enforce­ment officials. Her undoing came when supervisors caught her improperly removing evidence for 60 Norfolk County drug cases from the secure storage area.

However, Dookhan told investigators that no prosecutors or police pressured her to alter drug tests on their behalf. Prosecutors say that not all contact with Dookhan or other chemists is improper, noting that it is important for prosecutors to speak with drug analysts about their testimony or analysis for upcoming trials.

But Dookhan’s chatty e-mails, including one in which she laments her unhappy marriage, were unusual enough that State Police interviewed Papachristos about the relationship with Dookhan. Although most of the e-mails discuss drug cases, Dookhan also opened up personally to Papachristos, accord­ing to two people who have read the e-mails, prompting him to remind Dookhan that their relationship was only professional.

However, Dookhan’s husband apparently was not convinced. He called a startled Papachristos several times at one point, leaving messages on his voicemail. The two men never spoke directly.

Norfolk County officials say that nothing Papachristos did with Dookhan violated the law, and he told Morrissey he met her only once.

However, as the controversy around his relationship with Dookhan intensified Wednesday, ­Papachristos decided to resign.

“This is not about prosecutors; it’s about the lab,” said Morrissey. “He doesn’t want to be that distraction. He wants the criminal justice system to work appropriately. The two of us came to the same conclusion. He offered his resignation, and I accepted.”

Link to Boston Globe Article

Tagged with:
 

Annie Dookhan, the Fukushima of Foren­sics, has been cov­ered here before:

Like spokes on a wheel, this disaster will continue to spread….

Apparently for years even before Annie Dookhan worked in the lab, the bench areas in the laboratory were artifically divided up by this:

That’s right. Technicians and “scientists” set up faux cubicles of a sort. All of this done in a crime laboratory???

Why do you have to hang up brown construction paper up to prevent others from seeing what you do in the laboratory? 

Amazing stuff.

Here are some direct source materials (reprinted from Camen Drahl and CE&N magazine who assembled this list)

Tagged with:
 

The Fukushima of Foren­sics: Annie Dookhan has been cov­ered here before:

Now Chemical & Engineering News is weighing in on this disaster.

Chemist Charged In Crime Lab Scandal

Forensics: Thousands of drug samples tested by Annie Dookhan could be in question

Police last Friday arrested a Massachusetts forensic chemist who allegedly tampered with drug evidence in criminal cases, forged colleagues’ signatures, and faked her academic credentials while working at a state crime lab. The unfolding investigation, which could upend thousands of narcotics convictions, has already led to the shutdown of the lab and the resignation of the state public health commissioner who oversaw it.

Annie Dookhan, 34, was charged with obstructing justice by lying about the integrity of evidence as well as about her academic qualifications. She is thought to have tested some 60,000 drug samples during her career at theWilliam A. Hinton State Laboratory Institute, a state crime lab. “Annie Dookhan’s alleged actions corrupted the integrity of the entire criminal justice system,” Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said at a press conference.

According to a police report obtained by the Boston Globe, Dookhan told investigators that she forged coworkers’ initials on calibration reports for mass spectrometers, intentionally contaminated samples, and engaged in “dry-labbing”— identifying narcotics by sight rather than by chemical analysis. In interviews with police, several colleagues said they’d expressed concern to supervisors about Dookhan’s unusually high productivity. Her résumé lists a master’s degree in chemistry from the University of Massachusetts, Boston, but she does not hold that credential according to school officials.

“This is a calamity,” says Justin J. McShane, a defense attorney in Harrisburg, Pa. Because the evidence Dookhan allegedly mishandled was more than likely destroyed in the normal course of business, no traceable information exists to correctly characterize samples in thousands of drug cases, he explains.

“I don’t think this is going to end with a single chemist,” adds Edward P. Ryan Jr., former president of the Massachusetts Bar Association. Dookhan’s supervisors at best signed off on her work and at worst were complicit in her alleged crimes, he says. “This is an ever-expanding spider web, and I don’t know where the end is going to lie.”

Dookhan is an ACS member and a member of several ACS divisions, including the Division of Chemistry & the Law. Sarah P. Hasford, chair of the division, tells C&EN that it is a policy of the division not to comment on any pending litigation matters.

Dookhan pleaded not guilty in Boston Municipal Court Friday and was released on $10,000 bail. E-mails and phone calls to Dookhan have not been answered. Another hearing is scheduled for Dec. 3.

Tagged with:
 

It is unprecedented in this blog to report so many times on one event. However, this type of event needs constant and repeated discussion.

The Fukushima of Foren­sics: Annie Dookhan. Has been covered here before:

Do you know why convenience stores have security cameras?

  • to deter crime against the store;
  • to catch those who have taken money from the register;
  • to catch shoplifters;
  • to catch employees who steal from the company;
  • to see when employees leave early or come in late;
  • to record when crime happens; and
  • to aid in the prosecution of those who cheat the store or rob the store.

It seems like such a basic safeguard that there would be no legitimate argument against having it. Who would want to work in a convenience store without it? By having it there, legitimate customers feel safer and are in truth safer.

High definition and high quality cameras are around

High definition and high quality cameras are around

How about banks? They have security cameras for the same reasons.

Motion activated cameras are inexpensive.

Memory is dirt cheap.

Who can legitimately argue against these omnipresent fixtures in our lives?

In a FaceBook world, our expectation of privacy is less and less and less.

As a society, why do we have better safeguards against fraud and against crime at a 7-Eleven than we do in a crime laboratory?

The simple salient take away fact from the Annie Dookhan situation that we can all appreciate is that the traditional safeguards such as human integrity, and the Confrontation Clause will not stop the Annie Dookhans of this world. She was willing to put her hand on the Bible, swear an oath and repeatedly lie in Court about her credentials. She was willing to forge documents of her coworkers. She was willing to purposefully contaminate samples to change the results to suit her own meaningless selfish agenda. When someone is willing to do all of this and goodness knows what else, the traditional safeguards are worthless.

Confrontation cannot stop all of that. Human integrity is not a sufficient check against these transgressions.

It’s time that we just put an end to it all. It’s time we call for the ultimate forensic safeguard. Let’s video tape the labs.

I beg you to give me a legitimate reason why we should not be taping the laboratory.

Please educate me to the contrary.

Tagged with: