CA CA - Claire Hough, 14, La Jolla, 23 August 1984

[Celtsleuth]

Suicide, under these circumstances is cause for suspicion as in the case of Israel Keyes and many other killers that check out when caught. I don't presume to know one way or the other whether or not he was guilty. That is why I chose F. OK, you did say suggests...I have not studied this extensively, it was basically... just throwing an idea out there...you have obviously done quite a bit of research on this case.

Celtsleuth suggests that the presumed suicide is evidence of guilt, but not enough to tilt into the guilty Camp A, B, or E.

Vote count is now 1 C and 1 F.

The presumed suicide is not really evidence of guilt or innocence. Ambiguous behavior and events 30 years after the crime is very weak circumstantial evidence. Until statistical arguments can be marshaled to show what percent of guilty people would kill themselves vs what percent of falsely accused innocents, it should be considered a toss-up. If the chances are 50:50 that the suicide is due to guilt, the chance is still 50% that the person is innocent. This is very weak evidence of guilt. Even this weak evidence is torpedoed if there was no original justification for ever considering him to be a suspect. Examples can be cited of suspects who kill themselves, such as the suspect in the recent killing of two NYPD officers in their parked car. A counter example of a criminal who not only did not kill himself, but did not want to get executed, is Ted Bundy. The fact is that innocent people, who have not murdered someone, commit suicide, and they are not considered suspects in unsolved homicides as a result. Perhaps the two most famous examples this year are Robin Williams, and Alan Turing, who died in 1954 but is in the spotlight this year because of the movie The Imitation Game.

Further, since Kevin Brown and his attorney could have made the same arguments I made, why would he assume that the jig was up if he was guilty. He should get off. In reality innocent people can get convicted, and such may have happened in some similar cases of cold DNA matches. That seems very unlikely in this case as the only evidence connecting him to the victim is the DNA match, and there is no evidence of criminal activity on his part. The evidence does not meet the criminal standard of beyond a reasonable doubt. It also does not meet the weaker civil standard of preponderance of the evidence. It is also highly doubtful that the DNA evidence even met the standard of reasonable suspicion for starting an investigation.

The argument can also be made that if he were guilty he could have sabotaged the evidence since it could have been easily accessible right there at work, and the match never would have come up.

If the investigation were to push a guilty suspect to kill himself, why would it take two years? Due to depression, which is common, some will give up where others would fight the good fight. That is a fight I would have liked to see.

There have been other examples of former government scientists named in homicide investigations but never charged. One is Steven Hatfill, who was identified by the US Department of Justice as a "person of interest" in the 2001 anthrax attacks. Hatfill sued the government and won millions. An innocent person is such a situation should elicit sympathy.

The only real evidence, forensic or otherwise, is the DNA match. Considering that it is routine at crime labs to include the employee DNA profiles for the purpose of checking for contamination, the San Diego Police Department have made a weak case for considering Kevin Brown to be a suspect in this case. When DNA contamination by an employee is found, that is usually the end of it. The case is made in news reports that the DNA evidence is more incriminating because it is from sperm. But these are all statements by police and quotes from police in the search warrant. Crime lab reports and notes are not yet available for sleuths here to peruse and analyze. Perhaps that will change if the claim by Kevin Brown's widow is denied and it proceeds on to a lawsuit. A crime lab report will state that a person's DNA profile has been found in a sample. It will not state that so and so's sperm has been found in a sample. The police have taken whatever was in the report and translated it into 'cop speak'. For all we know, there was no sperm found, or if there was, it is not from Kevin Brown. It may be that if male DNA is found on a vaginal swab, the police assume that it must be from sperm. If so, then by rewording the results they have made the evidence appear more incriminating.

The fact is that the San Diego police have been caught red handed drawing conclusions about this case that are not only unsupportable based on the forensic evidence, but also conclusions that have been shown to be incorrect.

Here is an example of an UNSUPPORTABLE CONCLUSION:

An unnamed detective states in a search warrant that he 'believes' that the DNA was deposited "contemporaneous to the murder". No forensic scientist or medical examiner can make such a determination of when DNA was deposited or put such a finding in a report. And yet there it is in the search warrant. The police have taken the facts of the case and molded them to fit certain theories. Was sperm even found? The medical examiner says no. If there was so little sperm or semen at the time of the autopsy that the medical examiner could not find any, then how could a detective draw that conclusion from lab reports based on testing 28 years after the crime? All he can do is state his opinion which is sheer speculation.

------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
“The detective writing the search warrant explained why he thinks Brown’s sperm could not have gotten into Hough through consensual sex. He said an interview with her best friend revealed Hough was faithful to her boyfriend at the time, was not attracted to older men and would not have had sex with someone she just met.”

“’I believe the sexual intercourse Brown had with Claire Hough was not consensual and appears to be contemporaneous to the murder,’ the detective wrote in the warrant.”

"A just-released warrant reveals DNA evidence links a San Diego crime lab technician to a 1984 cold case. The warrant says the technician’s sperm was found inside the victim. The suspect’s wife and attorney still maintain his innocence. NBC 7’s Dave Summers reports. (Published Saturday, Nov 1, 2014)"

FROM:
Incriminating DNA Found Inside Cold Case Victim: Warrant
By Andie Adams and Dave Summers
Friday, Oct 31, 2014 • Updated at 10:50 PM PST
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...rrant-Kevin-Brown-Ronald-Tatro-281162272.html
------------------------------------

Below is a reference that states that forensic scientists cannot say when DNA is deposited on an object.

------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
Mr [Fitzgerald’s instructing solicitor Matthew] Selley said forensic scientists cannot date when DNA made its way onto an object.

FROM:
Questions raised over DNA evidence to secure murder convictions
By Candice Marcus
Updated 13 Aug 2014, 6:12am
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-08-13/dna-evidence-not-enough-to-secure-murder-conviction/5669136
------------------------------------

Here are the quotes from news stories to the effect that the medical examiner found no sperm or semen.

NO SPERM FOUND AT AUTOPSY:
------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
“However, Rebecca’s claim says ‘the medical examiner’s microscopic examination of a fluid sample from the victim’s vaginal vault was negative for the presence of sperm.’”

FROM:
Cold Case Suspect’s Wife Files Wrongful Death Claim Against SDPD
Rebecca Brown hopes to clear the name of her husband, Kevin, who is accused of killing a teenager in 1984
By Andie Adams
Thursday, Dec 18, 2014 • Updated at 5:01 PM PST
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...ngful-Death-Claim-Against-SDPD-286177051.html
------------------------------------

NO SEMEN FOUND AT AUTOPSY:
------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
“Back in those days, criminalists often used their own blood and semen samples as a ‘standard’ to test evidence against, [Gretchen] von Helms said. Swabs being tested weren’t capped then, she added, increasing chances for contamination. She also questioned why semen wasn’t reported being found in Claire’s body during the autopsy, but was found on swabs at the police lab.”

FROM:
Warrants reveal evidence in 1984 killing
Retired SDPD criminalist’s sperm found on vaginal swab
By Kristina Davis7:27 P.M.OCT. 31, 2014
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/oct/31/warrant-brown-hough-murder-dna-photo/
————————————-

NO SEMEN RECOVERED:
------------------------------------
EXCERPTS:
“Police have not said whether either teen was raped, although both autopsy reports show the girls suffered injuries consistent with sexual assault of some kind. No semen was recovered from their bodies.”

FROM:
Were teens mutilated by same killer?
New DNA evidence questions whether 1978, 1984 murders are linked
By Kristina Davis2:15 P.M.OCT. 25, 2014
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014...tais-dna-murder-beach-police/2/?#article-copy
------------------------------------

Here is an example of San Diego police drawing an INCORRECT CONCLUSION:

San Diego police told the media on multiple occasions that Claire Hough's murder was connected to a similar crime in the same area from 6 years before.

------------------------------------
“Even though San Diego Police have told [Jim] Alt [the surviving boyfriend of murdered Barbara Nantais] and the media a number of times over the years that the two crimes are connected, Thursday’s announcement did not mention the Nantais case.”
“After some prying the lead investigator on the Hough case tells NBC7 they have no evidence connecting these murders but would not elaborate.”

FROM:
Cold Case Suspect’s Widow: SDPD “Pushed Him Over the Edge”
“He did not do this. He never would hurt anybody,” Rebecca Brown said.
By Dave Summers
Published Friday, Oct 24, 2014 • Updated at 8:25 AM PST
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...aire-Hough-Torrey-Pines-Murder-280306312.html
------------------------------------

Note that San Diego police were convinced that the two crimes were related. Now they have named two suspects in the death of Claire Hough who could not have committed the earlier crime. Ronald Tatro, who was a kidnapper and convicted rapist, was in jail in Arkansas and could not have murdered Barbara Nantais 6 years before Claire Hough was murdered. Criminalist Kevin Brown was working at a crime lab in New Mexico. Since it appears very likely that Ronald Tatro is the killer of Claire Hough, San Diego police have had to drop any speculation that the two murders were related.

It had to be pried out of the lead investigator that there is actually “no evidence connecting these murders”. The investigator did not want to admit that the San Diego Police Department was incorrect about there being a link between the two crimes. This is an example of San Diego police speculating when there is no actual evidence to support their theory.

 

[CheckYourProof]

The question of what can be sleuthed out of the presumed suicide has come up here, and in comments on some of the news stories. I am not particularly interested in this aspect of the evidence. I am more interested in the other evidence and I will be coming back to that.

But, to the issue. It is a valid point that is open to debate in this forum, from casually bringing up the idea, to more advanced research and argument. The argument for this being cause for suspicion has been made based on the fact that some killers have killed themselves. So if a suspect kills himself, is that evidence of guilt? An example brought up is Israel Keyes who committed suicide in prison while awaiting trial for the murder of Samantha Koenig.

I have argued that in a case where the suspect can expect to get off due to a weak case, it is not evidence of guilt. The suspect has nothing to worry about if he is to be acquitted. That appears to be the case with Kevin Brown. The police claim an arrest was imminent but it appears the case would have been unwinnable. It is doubtful that there was actually any plan to arrest him. The investigation went on for 2 years. No evidence came out from the search warrant. No evidence of any criminal activity came out.

As for a killer not being willing to go to prison or subject his or her family to the gruesome details of his or her crimes, Kevin managed to work with blood and gore on many crimes through the years. His wife appears to have absolute confidence in his innocence and backed him up 100%.

Here is a clarification of this sentence from post #20:
"The presumed suicide is not really evidence of guilt or innocence."

Everything is evidence. It is just a matter of how strong the evidence is. It has not been demonstrated that this evidence points towards guilt or innocence. Bringing up one or two examples is not enough. There are also notorious killers who have not killed themselves, including Ted Bundy, Theodore Kaczynski, and Dennis Rader. A list of innocent people who committed suicide while under investigation, awaiting trial, or in prison may be hard to find. It is easier to find a list of killers and look at how many committed suicide. This would help to prove or disprove the proposition that killers commit suicide, and how often.

On Wikipedia there is a list of over 600 serial killers, with at least 245 cases in the United States. Of the ones in the United States, 20 solved cases were selected at random. Of these 2 cases had a pair of killers. The status (alive/dead) was looked up on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victims
and if dead cause of death.

Here are the 20 cases with suspect names.

Altemio Sanchez
Anthony Allen Shore
Charles Schmid
Cleophus Prince Jr.
Edward Edwards
Harvey Carignan
John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo
Juan Vallejo Corona
Keith Hunter Jesperson
Larry Eyler
Linda Hazzard
Lyda Southard
Milton Johnson
Nannie Doss
Orville Lynn Majors
Raymond Fernandez and Martha Beck
Richard Kuklinski
Tillie Klimek
Vaughn Greenwood
Westley Allan Dodd

Here is the status of the 22 killers.

accident 1
alive 8
death row 2
executed 4
murdered 1
natural 6
suicide 0

The accidental death was Linda Hazzard who died while attempting a fasting cure on herself in 1938. One case happens to be the Happy Face Killer. One was murdered by other prisoners. 6 died of natural causes. There were no cases of suicide found.

This small random sample did not support the argument that killers often commit suicide.

To make progress on this question, a sleuth could go check the entire list of serial killers and a list of non-serial killers. Information of suicides of innocent suspects would also be helpful.

 

[Celtsleuth]

Suicide is a factor to consider along with the circumstances of each individual case. It can never be actually known why he committed suicide. Perhaps it was consciousness of guilt or perhaps depression and stress....no one will ever know because he is gone. To take a survey of even a million murderers would be useless because each case is different. It isn't just numbers. Also, his wife can believe that he was hounded to death and sue if she wants to but the fact remains that each person is responsible for their actions no matter what circumstances they are in as well as their perception of their circumstances. I certainly understand his wife wanting to clear his name, she loved him. That being said, it is too late, the horse is out of the barn, so to speak.... and she cannot undo what has been said nor can she prove his innocence. A trial would have done that and he made sure that would never happen. If not a trial, Kevin, himself could have sued to clear his name. Sadly, especially for his family, he chose to take the option he did take. There were other options he could have taken but apparently he could not see that or felt suicide was the best course of action, thus, we will never know.

The question of what can be sleuthed out of the presumed suicide has come up here, and in comments on some of the news stories. I am not particularly interested in this aspect of the evidence. I am more interested in the other evidence and I will be coming back to that.

But, to the issue. It is a valid point that is open to debate in this forum, from casually bringing up the idea, to more advanced research and argument. The argument for this being cause for suspicion has been made based on the fact that some killers have killed themselves. So if a suspect kills himself, is that evidence of guilt? An example brought up is Israel Keyes who committed suicide in prison while awaiting trial for the murder of Samantha Koenig.

I have argued that in a case where the suspect can expect to get off due to a weak case, it is not evidence of guilt. The suspect has nothing to worry about if he is to be acquitted. That appears to be the case with Kevin Brown. The police claim an arrest was imminent but it appears the case would have been unwinnable. It is doubtful that there was actually any plan to arrest him. The investigation went on for 2 years. No evidence came out from the search warrant. No evidence of any criminal activity came out.

As for a killer not being willing to go to prison or subject his or her family to the gruesome details of his or her crimes, Kevin managed to work with blood and gore on many crimes through the years. His wife appears to have absolute confidence in his innocence and backed him up 100%.

Here is a clarification of this sentence from post #20:
"The presumed suicide is not really evidence of guilt or innocence."

Everything is evidence. It is just a matter of how strong the evidence is. It has not been demonstrated that this evidence points towards guilt or innocence. Bringing up one or two examples is not enough. There are also notorious killers who have not killed themselves, including Ted Bundy, Theodore Kaczynski, and Dennis Rader. A list of innocent people who committed suicide while under investigation, awaiting trial, or in prison may be hard to find. It is easier to find a list of killers and look at how many committed suicide. This would help to prove or disprove the proposition that killers commit suicide, and how often.

On Wikipedia there is a list of over 600 serial killers, with at least 245 cases in the United States. Of the ones in the United States, 20 solved cases were selected at random. Of these 2 cases had a pair of killers. The status (alive/dead) was looked up on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victims
and if dead cause of death.

Here are the 20 cases with suspect names.

Altemio Sanchez
Anthony Allen Shore
Charles Schmid
Cleophus Prince Jr.
Edward Edwards
Harvey Carignan
John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo
Juan Vallejo Corona
Keith Hunter Jesperson
Larry Eyler
Linda Hazzard
Lyda Southard
Milton Johnson
Nannie Doss
Orville Lynn Majors
Raymond Fernandez and Martha Beck
Richard Kuklinski
Tillie Klimek
Vaughn Greenwood
Westley Allan Dodd

Here is the status of the 22 killers.

accident 1
alive 8
death row 2
executed 4
murdered 1
natural 6
suicide 0

The accidental death was Linda Hazzard who died while attempting a fasting cure on herself in 1938. One case happens to be the Happy Face Killer. One was murdered by other prisoners. 6 died of natural causes. There were no cases of suicide found.

This small random sample did not support the argument that killers often commit suicide.

To make progress on this question, a sleuth could go check the entire list of serial killers and a list of non-serial killers. Information of suicides of innocent suspects would also be helpful.

 

[kemo]

This is a very interesting case. There are a lot of issues raised. Going over what information is available, I am not satisfied that Kevin Brown is guilty nor am I satisfied that he is innocent.

In all probability, the killer of Claire Hough is dead and there will be no trial and SDPD may feel there is no need for further investigation. By committing suicide, Kevin, relieved himself of any chance of being tried and incarcerated for this murder (guilty or innocent), but that also relieves SDPD and the DA of any responsibility to give him any "due process. Still, I think it is worthwhile to get to the bottom of this and get some real closure for all concerned.

The obvious cause for concern in this case is that the primary evidence against Kevin is the DNA and contamination has to be ruled out. It is my understanding that the autopsy makes reference to the fact that she was "sexually assaulted" but is not clear that she was actually penetrated and no semen was found. In 2013, state of the art testing done on samples retained from the autopsy indicated the presence of Kevin's. DNA. (This was probably from a swab that was taken from Claire's vagina) What we do not know is whether it can be determined if this was definitely from semen or if this DNA could have come from some sort of contamination such a a particle of dead skin that drifted from Kevin's work station to the area where the the swab was handled. Since DNA testing was not even considered in 1984, precautions to prevent that sort of contamination probably were not taken. Still, we don't know how close he was to the swab or anything that could have been contaminated. I think a full explanation of how contamination was ruled out is warranted.

If is can be ascertained that the source of the DNA was semen, it would be very indicative of Kevin's guilt. In questioning, Kevin admitted that he had consensual sex with some girls he had met at the "photo shoots" he attended. There is no reason to believe that Claire did any modeling of any kind while in San Diego, but who knows. Since Kevin worked in the crime lab and the murder was a big local story, he most certainly would have been aware if she was a girl he had recently had sex with. If he failed to disclose this information, he would have been a fool, and a very unlucky one at that..

Because this case is close, it is my understanding that now all of the case file is subject to The
Freedom of Information Act. Perhaps the full record will be made available.

 

[CheckYourProof]

I have not seen this info:
------------------
QUOTE FROM kemo:
In questioning, Kevin admitted that he had consensual sex with some girls he had met at the "photo shoots" he attended.
------------------

Care to give a reference or link to where you found this?

kemo brought up the "Freedom of Information Act".

Maybe the California Public Records Act would apply here. Even so someone has to request the info.

We do not know for a fact that the case has been officially closed.

It may be that the agency, San Diego Police Department, would deny a request for records because it has been published in the news that Kevin Brown's widow may file a lawsuit against the police department. The agency may claim that records concerning agency litigation are exempt and this case could be subject to litigation.

We may have to wait for news from the claim filed against San Diego, and then the follow-up lawsuit.

I agree with this quote from kemo:
------------------
QUOTE FROM kemo:
"I think a full explanation of how contamination was ruled out is warranted."
------------------

The claim made by San Diego police that Kevin Brown is a suspect in the case damaged his reputation. But it also raises questions about the San Diego Police Department. A convincing case for his guilt has not been made. It raises the question whether San Diego Police jump to conclusions, get target lock and tunnel vision. Do the police simply investigate a suspect whenever there is a DNA match? The whole purpose of comparing Kevin Brown's DNA was to find contamination if it happened. It appears that the police may be motivated to avoid having to admit that DNA contamination could have happened in the lab, even 30 years ago, to the point of making one of their own walk the plank. Anyone who works or has worked at one of these labs is left to wonder if someday they will get such a knock at their door.

Things have been left up in the air. There was the DNA match which could be due to contamination, and the investigation turned up evidence which seems to be entirely composed of hearsay evidence about things that Kevin Brown supposedly said. For example it was claimed by the police that he muttered something incriminating under his breath after a polygraph test. Don't suppose they got that on tape.

Here is another point. Kevin Brown did not have to continue working at the San Diego lab, and give a DNA sample for comparison. If he was guilty, why did he not just end his employment at that lab? There is no law that said that he had to give a DNA sample. When he gave the sample he assumed that it was for elimination purposes, not to consider him as a suspect in the crime. It must have been quite a surprise when the police showed up at his door with a warrant.

There was a quote in the news from a female lab manager about the DNA contamination not being possible. This person was not named. The manager of the DNA section at that lab is male. We do not know what the lab staff think about this case. They are not authorized to talk about it.

Vote count is now 1 C and 2 F.

 

[kemo]

Checkyourproof,
I've gone over every news report I could find. Many make mention of what Kevin said during his interrogation but none are very complete. The best is probably: http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/oct/31/warrant-brown-hough-murder-dna-photo/. The picture you get is that in the early 1980's, Kevin admitted going to strip clubs, belonging to a club that hired nude models that members could photograph, having sex with some women including models and a girl named Claire he could barely remember. There was also contradictory statements that he had never had any contact with this Claire and the incriminating remark that he didn't know she was only 14. The polygraph came up with totally contradictory results. Overall, it doesn't sound like he admitted to anything. Had there been anything said that could put the case away, the information would have been released. We really don't have the full story of what he said.

There are similar confusing reports on the forensic evidence. There in one news story that claims the DNA came from "inside " Claire but the attorney claims the DNA came from a swab taken from here clothes and skin. Which is it? One report explains the small amount of Kevin's DNA to "low sperm count". I could find nothing definitive regarding penetration of the vagina at the original autopsy. The news stories I could find were just short columns without much in the way of details. Same with the possibility of contamination; the insistence that it was impossible but no explanation.

Tatro's DNA was found on Claire's broken zipper. There isn't any obvious means that this could be from contamination so he was almost certainly involved.

The crime involved forcibly removing her pants, severe beating of the face and upper torso, strangulation and the removal of one breast but, I suspect, no vaginal penetration or ejaculation. This seems to be the kind of assault that one, highly disturbed, disorganized individual would commit. Kevin would appear to have been organized and systematic and not at all the type who would you be involved with the type Totro appeared to be. But, of course you never know. However, as a Forensic Tech, he would have know that a crime scene like that was likely to yield all kinds of potential evidence.

Ironically, the SDPD could have avoided a lot of problems by hanging it all on Tatro and dismissing Kevin as just contamination. They are now going to have to deal with appeals based on the unreliability of any forensic work done by a sadistic killer. On the other hand, there would be no trial and no conviction. It would seem that they are pretty confident that Kevin is involved.

It will be interesting to see how the civil suit plays out.

Incidentally, in 1978 when Nantais was killed, Tatro was incarcerated and Kevin was living in New Mexico. It sounds like they are unconnected but they are strikingly similar.

 

[CheckYourProof]

The remark by Kevin Brown that he did not know Claire Hough's age has been called incriminating (for example in the previous post). I would tend to discount that. Consider the context of it. According to the quote from the news story below, Kevin Brown was sitting with Detective Lori Adams immediately after a polygraph test. The way that a polygraph test works is questions are asked that have simple yes or no answers. This is required for interpretation of the results. So he went through the entire test answering questions with yes or no. Then the detective asked Kevin Brown if he knew how old Claire Hough was. He said that he did not. The answer was no. It is also true that whether he knew Claire Hough or not, he did not know her age. The detective was clearly trying to trip Kevin up by asking him trick questions where she could say "Aha, gotcha!"

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/oct/31/warrant-brown-hough-murder-dna-photo/
Warrants reveal evidence in 1984 killing
By Kristina Davis Oct. 31, 2014
EXCERPT:
-------------------------------
As they were sitting after the polygraph, Detective Lori Adams told Brown: “I don’t believe for a second that you thought she was 14. I really don’t. I think she was probably a little bit more mature than most girls and probably a little bit more ... active ... probably a little more grown up than most girls. I don’t believe for a second that you would have known her age, her true age.”

Brown immediately responded, “Well I didn’t,” and several seconds later under his breath, “I had no idea,” the affidavit states.
-------------------------------

The rest of the hearsay evidence is of a similarly weak nature. I agree with kemo that the non-DNA evidence is weak. It consists of very weak circumstantial evidence that is not really incriminating or evidence of Kevin Brown's guilt in Claire Hough's murder or ay other crime.

kemo quote:
"Overall, it doesn't sound like he admitted to anything."

BELOW ARE QUOTES ON DNA CONTAMINATION:
It has been commented on in previous posts here that there was not much explanation of why DNA contamination is "not possible".

Going back and looking at the news reports again, it becomes apparent that there is a simple explanation given of why the police consider DNA contamination to be impossible. It is simply because there is no record that Kevin Brown worked on the case or handled any of the evidence. Keep in mind that police may know police procedures, but they do not know forensics. They do not have the expertise to comment on issues of DNA testing. Just because it is not known how contamination could have happened in a particular case (and there have been such cases) does not mean that it could not have happened. Contamination can happen even if a person had no direct physical contact with evidence. Below are quotes from news stories about DNA contamination not being possible, with the reason given.

The reason that San Diego police think that DNA contamination is "not possible" is in the news stories.

QUOTE FROM UNNAMED LAB MANAGER
The reason given was that Kevin "Brown had no known contact with the evidence" and "was never assigned to work with any evidence".
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...rrant-Kevin-Brown-Ronald-Tatro-281162272.html
Incriminating DNA Found Inside Cold Case Victim: Warrant
Oct 31, 2014

QUOTE FROM SAN DIEGO POLICE HOMICIDE CAPTAIN
Guaderrama said all efforts were made to determine if the criminalist’s DNA somehow contaminated the evidence mistakenly, and investigations concluded that was impossible. "Brown never worked on any part of the case", the homicide captain [Guaderrama] said.
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/oct/25/brown-tatro-hough-nantais-dna-murder-beach-police/
Were teens mutilated by same killer?
OCT. 25, 2014

Here are some DNA quotes:

"The leading cause of false DNA database matches is cross-contamination of samples."
from Professor William C Thompson in the department of criminology at the University of California Irvine
DNA: Genes as evidence
The peril of DNA: It's not perfect
Fifth and last in a series of occasional articles examining how DNA evidence is transforming criminal justice.
December 26, 2008|Maura Dolan and Jason Felch
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/dec/26/local/me-dna26

"Just because DNA is on something does not mean that it is known how it got there."
"I think that when we're dealing with very low levels of DNA we need to report that a DNA profile matches, but as to how and when it got there we just don't know."
from Peter Gill, former principal scientist at the UK's Forensic Science Service, now at Oslo University in Norway
How DNA contamination can affect court cases
13 January 2012 by Linda Geddes
Magazine issue 2847.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21328475.000-how-dna-contamination-can-affect-court-cases.html

"A correct fingerprint identification, on a fixed object, may establish that you were at a particular point, but DNA can be transferred from you to someone else and from that someone to somewhere else you may never have been."
"Combine the compelling specificity with molecular level sensitivity, and a population DNA database, and you have a potential scenario where your DNA is found at a crime scene that you have never been near."
"Inevitably, you become a suspect. Is it just possible that this apparently compelling evidence will be placed alongside some other circumstantial evidence (can YOU account for, and prove, where you are every hour of every day?) to gain a conviction?"
"Many, if not all, of these old, or “cold”, cases occurred before DNA forced a rethink of the possibilities for contamination of evidence. Exhibits were collected with little regard for who was handling them or the possibilities of cross contamination from suspects to items via the investigating officer. Even the laboratory environment or procedures would not be designed to protect against the transfer of such low amounts of material. This was not negligence; it just didn’t consider the possibility of such traces becoming important."
"These new techniques are undoubtedly of tremendous value as intelligence in criminal investigation. In cold cases the requirement for other corroborative evidence must reflect the increased uncertainty in the LCN results."
LCN DNA - devil in the detail
12 FEBRUARY 07
The advances in DNA analysis and the risks arising from the ability to work with minute quantities of DNA
by Allan Jamieson
http://www.journalonline.co.uk/Magazine/52-2/1003857.aspx

"When used improperly, scientific evidence like DNA can be manipulated and driven by prosecutors or defense attorneys to look and tell a story just like anything else."
Tampa Criminal Lawyers: What does “contamination” mean with DNA?
http://bhtampa.com/blog/tampa-criminal-lawyers-contamination-mean-dna/

I agree with kemo that if the San Diego police actually had any good evidence, it would have been released.
kemo QUOTE:
"Had there been anything said that could put the case away, the information would have been released."

 

[kemo]

I've done a little more research on this. There was definitely no semen at the crime scene. Very effective tests were available in 1984. The autopsy mentioned injuries consistent with sexual assault (but seems to leave open the possibility that no penetration occurred.). Still, there are types of sexual assault that could leave some of the perpetrator's DNA inside the victim without any semen.

In 2010, no DNA had been identified. The two matches were made in 2013. This was probably through the PCR method which can identify DNA from a minute amount of tissue, but the source can be from incidental contamination.

I don't see how any random contamination from someone working in the same room could get "inside" a victim being autopsied but the swab being used might be the explanation. If Brown were to have inadvertently touched the cotton on a swab while he was securing another for his own use, his DNA could easily have turned up on the swab he touched.

I would imagine that now, with incredibly sensitive PDR testing, swabs are covered and kept pristine, but in 1984?

 

[CheckYourProof]

It is possible that no semen is found at a crime scene but that it (sperm cells or semen) could be found later when examined more closely in a lab, looking under a microscope or made visible with a fluorescent technique.

Quote from kemo (previous post):
"In 2010, no DNA had been identified. The two matches were made in 2013."

It was reported in the news that the DNA matches were found in 2012.

Was there another news story that had a different date?

------------------------
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/oct/25/brown-tatro-hough-nantais-dna-murder-beach-police/
Were teens mutilated by same killer?
New DNA evidence questions whether 1978, 1984 murders are linked
By Kristina Davis2:15 P.M.OCT. 25, 2014

QUOTE:
"In November 2012, the database got a hit on both Tatro and Brown on samples taken from Claire’s body, launching an exhaustive follow-up investigation."
------------------------

Quote from kemo (previous post):
"...random contamination from someone working in the same room could get "inside" a victim..."

Of course any DNA, sperm, or semen was found on a swab. How it got on the swab is another question. If it is contamination it is not from inside the victim. Reporters sometimes try to write salacious headlines.

In the last post kemo brought up the idea that in 1984 the cotton swabs may have been kept unpackaged in a container where they could pick up DNA contamination when someone grabs one, touching another swab at the same time. Today these swabs are individually packaged, or there may be a pair in a pack.

Contact does not have to happen for contamination to happen. A person walking through a room can leave DNA from cells or saliva on bench or counter tops, on the floor, especially if talking, sneezing, or coughing. If DNA can get on a bench top, it can get into evidence on a bench top.

I asked for a reference to this info, but I still have not seen a news story with this info from kemo's Post #26:
"...having sex with some women including models..."

This suggests a club with models who were photographed nude and also had sex with the photographer. I have seen no news stories that report this in this case.

Of course there is the famous case of Linda Sobek who was slain by Charles Rathbun, a freelance photographer.

 

[kemo]

I can't find a specific article that sums it all up but their were several references to some photo club he was in where nude models were hired so members were able to make their own art/*advertiser censored*. Apparently Brown was asked if it was possible that Claire was working as a model. Brown replied that he "didn't think so". The point in releasing that information was to make him look like a player in some disreputable sexual activities.

For what ever it is worth, this crime did no fit TZt

 

[CheckYourProof]

Indeed it appears San Diego Police not only wanted to "make him look like a player in some disreputable sexual activities" [kemo quote] but make Kevin Brown himself appear disreputable. Whether he is guilty or innocent, either way there could be blow-back on the police department itself. If guilty, what kind of people do they employ and why did it take 28 to 30 years to figure out? If innocent, there has been a knee jerk reaction to a report of the cold case DNA matches that demonstrates a lack of scientific ability to interpret the results and a lack of investigative ability to judge the quality of the so called supporting evidence, or if the supporting evidence is even real. When the San Diego Police claim that Kevin Brown muttered somthing under his breath, how real is that?

The San Diego Police may actually be convinced of the guilt of Kevin Brown. Just look how easily they could convince some citizens of San Diego of his guilt with their press releases. Zealous prosecutors have prosecuted and convicted innocent people. Police can also single-mindedly pursue evidence and charges against someone. It is often not a fair fight.

The San Diego Police claim mistakes do not happen. The ones making these claims were not there 30 years ago. Mistakes do happen. A blanket statement that mistakes do not happen is not very credible. Here is a rather embarrassing story from this week. The wrong body was buried after autopsy in Georgia. But in their defense, it only took them a couple months to figure this out.

------------------------
http://www.wjbf.com/story/28139331/wrong-body-buried-in-martinez-after-crime-lab-error
Wrong Body Buried In Martinez After Crime Lab Error
Posted/Updated:
Wednesday, February 18, 2015 12:44 PM EST
By WJBF StaffCONNECT
Burke County, GA -
WJBF News Channel 6 has learned of an ongoing investigation of the Georgia Bureau of Investigation Crime Lab in Decatur, Georgia.

According to Burke County Coroner, Susan Salemi, the body of Johnny Morgan Lowe III, a Burke County resident remained in the GBI crime lab after an autopsy while another unidentified body was buried in his place in error.

Lowe, died on Dec. 1, 2014 after suffering a cervical neck injury from falling down on the backdoor steps of his home in Burke County.

Details are limited at this time.
------------------------

------------------------
http://www.thetruecitizen.com/news/2015-02-18/News/CRIME_LAB_MIXUP.html
CRIME LAB MIX-UP
Wrong body was buried after autopsy
By Elizabeth Billips
lizbillips@yahoo.com
It was the wrong body. A burial vault will be exhumed following a recent mix-up at the Georgia Bureau of Investigation Crime Lab in Decatur. Dr. Kris Sperry, the head medical examiner for the lab, contacted Burke County Coroner Susan Salemi last week after realizing the body of Blythe resident Johnny Morgan Lowe III had not been released following his autopsy in late 2014.
------------------------

If the San Diego police have not comported themselves according to the highest standards of justice in this matter, then perhaps their new crime lab director will get them straightened out.

Nick Stokes has done some good work at CSI Las Vegas. He is moving to take the position of Director of the San Diego PD Crime Lab. Like Dr. Jekyl, Mr Stokes also has an alter ego, where he is known as George Eads. No word yet on whether Nick will also be starring in a new show that would be called CSI San Diego.

------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Stokes
"In "The End Game" (season 15, episode 18), Nick left Las Vegas when he was named the Director of the San Diego PD Crime Lab."
------------------------

According to Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr, the more things change, the more they stay the same. But this does not apply very well to technology. Today's standards and technology has been applied to yesterday's crime. They did the best they could at the crime scene 30 years ago. But what could they have done with a state of the art mobile crime lab like Pinellas County, Florida is getting?

------------------------
http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/region-pinellas/rare-look-inside-pinellas-mobile-crime-lab-specilaized-unit-like-no-other-in-state
Rare look inside Pinellas Mobile Crime Lab, a specialized unit like no other in the state
by Sarina Fazan
8:02 PM, Feb 17, 2015
------------------------

I have argued in favor of Kevin Brown's innocence. For one thing he is innocent until proven guilty. More importantly, the scenario presented by the San Diego Police is preposterous. Further, Tatro is good for it. There was no need to throw Kevin Brown to the wolves. Along those lines, Occam's razor can be applied to the case. The simple solution is that a known criminal, working alone, committed this crime. To suppose that a criminalist teamed up with such a criminal to commit such a crime, and that there would be no supporting evidence of this, or evidence that he knew or associated with Tatro, and there would also be no evidence of any other criminal activity whatsoever, is much more complicated, to the point of being preposterous.

------------------------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor
Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a problem-solving principle devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347), who was an English Franciscan friar and scholastic philosopher and theologian. The principle states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.
------------------------

Sherlock Holmes had a saying that is very similar to Occam's razor, where the improbable corresponds to simple, and the impossible corresponds to complicated.

------------------------
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Sherlock_Holmes
How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?
------------------------

 

[kemo]

If there is no evidence on Brown except the DNA hit, I am inclined to believe he is innocent. If the lawsuit goes to trial, it will all come out. If there is a settlement, it may not. Of course, the issue would be their treatment of Brown during the questioning and not his guilt or innocence. I suspect the SDPD was using the Reid Method of interrogation which involves convincing the suspect that his case is hopeless but encouraging him to mitigate his guilt. I doubt anyone would ever believe Brown had consensual sex with Claire before someone else killed her but getting him to claim it would be the first step in getting a full confession. Hinting that he was about to be arrested when it was not true would be a classic. Reid tactic. I think they would not take it to trial without some other evidence since the burden of proof is pretty high.

The case against Tatro is not as solid as one may think. He was convicted in 1974 of abducting a young woman outside a store, putting he in his trunk, driving somewhere else to assault her and then releasing her more or less unharmed. There was no unnecessary injury inflicted. In 1985 he was convicted of attempting to abduct a teenager by pulling her into his van and driving away. She got away and memorized his license plate. I am not aware that he has been implicated in any other crimes.

His "known" sexual assaults are very different from what happened to Claire. Her assault (and the assault on Nantais in 1978) is typical of of a highly disturbed individual with a hatred of women. Tatro was a "control" type rapist. There is no rule that says rapists never change their style, but this would be unusual.

The Hough and Nantais crimes are very similar but there is no certainty that were done by the same perp. I can't help wondering if there was some contamination involving hid DNA. Presumably no one is coming to his defense so we will never know.

 

[CheckYourProof]

An update in this case:
The attorney for Kevin Brown's widow Rebecca has filed a federal lawsuit against the San Diego Police Department.


Dastardly allegations were made against a respected retired veteran crime lab employee. Some have cried foul and pointed out that the so called 'evidence' is the flimsiest of the flimsy. The San Diego Police then proceeded with what appears to be full double-shotted broadsides of copious slander after the sad demise of Kevin Brown. Talk about kicking someone when they are down! Did they forget that this man had a loving widow who still believed him and believed in him? "He was a teddy bear and a sweetheart" said widow Rebecca Brown on Thursday (1).


Now said widow has filed a federal lawsuit against the San Diego Police Department "alleging homicide detectives drove her husband to commit suicide" (1).


"The lawsuit also alleges a SDPD homicide detective made false statements to obtain search warrants during the investigation (1)."


The news story does not elaborate what the alleged false statements were. It has been suggested previously in the comments on these pages that events could have been misinterpreted. The detective may have only thought that she heard Kevin Brown mutter something incriminating under his breath after the polygraph test. But could she have just made it up instead? If she actually had it on tape, that could be very incriminating, as in the case of Robert Durst, who was caught on tape muttering, "Killed them all, of course". But there was no tape produced at the news conferences held by San Diego police, after the death of Kevin Brown, where allegations against Kevin Brown were made.


San Diego detectives have claimed that Kevin Brown's sperm was found inside the victim Claire Hough. This in spite of the fact that no sperm was found (see previous comments). The fact that Kevin Brown's DNA was allegedly found in a sample was translated into 'cop speak' as "sperm" found.


"The widow's attorney also claims there is no evidence that Claire Hough was raped" (1).


"Rebecca Brown’s lawsuit claims Kevin Brown's semen found on a vaginal swab was actually the result of contamination in the SDPD lab. (1)"


It appears that Rebecca Brown's attorney is conceding that Kevin Brown's semen was found on the swab. This may be a mistake. It is definitely possible for DNA to contaminate an item without it being from semen. And the fact remains that is has been reported that no semen was found in the evidence.


It appears that the San Diego police department's entire case is composed of flimsy evidence that could result either from DNA contamination, misinterpretation of events or manufacturing of evidence.


There is an interesting theory brought up in the comments in the news story at cbs8.com (1), that the suspect Tatro could still be alive:


-----------------
COMMENT
Prescott Auburn · University of California, Los Angeles
"I still suspect that Tatro staged his death using someone else's body, knowing that DNA might soon connect him to the crime. Neither DNA or dental records have been confirmed to have been used to identify his body. Only the ID card that he left for Police to find. Contact the Coroner there and ask them."
-----------------


-----------------
(1)
http://www.cbs8.com/story/29569783/widow-of-ex-sdpd-crime-lab-employee-files-wrongful-death-lawsuit


http://www.760kfmb.com/story/295697...ime-lab-employee-files-wrongful-death-lawsuit


Widow of ex SDPD crime lab employee files wrongful death lawsuit
Posted: Jul 17, 2015 12:54 AM MDT
Updated: Jul 17, 2015 1:29 AM MDT
By David Gotfredson, Investigative ProducerConnect
Video Report By Carlo Cecchetto, AnchorConnect


Brown wrongful death complaint
SAN DIEGO (CBS 8) -- The widow of a San Diego Police Department crime lab employee filed a lawsuit Thursday alleging homicide detectives drove her husband to commit suicide.
-----------------

 

[CheckYourProof]

Regarding the theory that Tatro staged his death: This kind of thing has been done before. I think it gives Tatro too much credit to figure out that someone would soon be after him for a cold case. Still, it might be worth verifying that Tatro's body was properly identified. The manner in which he disappeared off of a boat is consistent with previous staged deaths. Then a body was found in the river.


Here is an example of staging a death:
--------------------
TITLE:
Arthur Bennett commits suicide in jail cell
by Robert Macy
Tuesday, July 13, 1999 | 2:10 a.m.


http://lasvegassun.com/news/1999/jul/13/arthur-bennett-commits-suicide-in-jail-cell/


A Marine accused of faking his own death in a trailer fire five years ago apparently committed suicide in his jail cell, where he was awaiting court-martial on sexual assault charges.


Arthur Gus Bennett, 45, was found dead in his cell at 10:58 p.m. Monday, police said today.


Bennett was scheduled to face a court-martial Wednesday on charges of sexually assaulting his young daughters and teen-agers of fellow Marines in Yuma, Ariz., and Okinawa, Japan.'


Bennett also faced murder and other charges in Las Vegas on allegations he faked his own death in February 1994 to escape a court-martial on charges of assaulting the teen-agers.
...
Authorities have never determined who burned to death in the trailer fire near Las Vegas.
...
--------------------

 

[CheckYourProof]

There are two more news stories about the federal lawsuit filed against San Diego police (1), (2).
There is a link to the pdf file of the complaint filed in court in the nbcsandiego.com story (1) and in the cbs8.com story listed in Post #33. This is a 57 page document. There is a separate Exhibit A listing some of the items seized in the warrant that is not included.


-----------------------
EXCERPTS FROM NEWS STORIES:
"In her most recent suit, Rebecca Brown names the city, San Diego Police Homicide Detective Michael Lambert and a District Attorney investigator as defendants." (1)


"'I wasn't believed and now I think I will be believed,' said Rebecca in an interview Thursday. 'Kevin will be believed. We will be able to show they had no right coming in this house; they had no right tormenting, us tormenting my husband until he took his life.'" (1)


"The 67-page lawsuit, filed in San Diego federal court, claims cross-contamination at the police lab explains why Kevin Brown’s DNA showed up years later in the investigation into the mutilation murder of 14-year-old Claire Hough. It further alleges police — specifically Detectives Michael Lambert and Sandra Oplinger — ignored such common sense evidence and instead blindly pursued Brown in an investigation that ended with his suicide." (2)


"A complaint filed against the city of San Diego alleges a homicide investigator resorted to false statements and left out critical facts to obtain a search warrant in a 30-year-old cold case, leading to a suspect’s suicide." (2)


"'Even though DNA extracted from blood left on Claire Hough’s clothing matched that of convicted rapist, Ronald Tatro, (homicide detective) Lambert decided to use unconstitutional methods to investigate Kevin Brown for a crime he did not commit and to attempt to connect Kevin Brown with Tatro, whom Kevin had never met nor seen,' the complaint alleges." (1)


"It is going to end up vindicating him," said Rebecca. (1)


"Lambert is accused of ignoring the possibility of contamination and instead distorting Brown’s past to suggest he had a sexual perversion." (1)
-----------------------


At the time of these stories the city attorney's office had no comment. San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman issued a statement claiming the murder solved with Kevin Brown and Tatro as suspects:
"It was based on these findings and a thorough investigation by our Homicide Unit, that we solved this murder naming Kevin Brown and Ronald Tatro as the suspects.” (2)


San Diego Police Chief Shelley Zimmerman is sticking to her guns. Her department and officers are being sued. She may even be one of the "DOES" (as in Jane Doe) listed in the civil suit. So if she messed up she feels it is not in her interest to say so. She is backing up her officers and detectives. This still leaves the embarrassing fact that one of her own, criminalist Kevin Brown, was made to walk the plank.


(1)
Cold Case Suspect's Widow Files Claim Against City, Homicide Detective
By Andie Adams
Updated at 10:28 PM PDT on Thursday, Jul 16, 2015
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...gainst-City-Homicide-Detective-316083351.html


(2)
SDPD sued in teen’s 1985 murder probe
Detectives accused of driving former criminalist to suicide with investigation
By Kristina Davis | 10:59 a.m. July 17, 2015
http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/jul/17/police-criminalist-lawsuit-hough-kevin-brown/

 

[CheckYourProof]

There are reported facts that are not in agreement, about the whereabouts of Kevin Brown at the time of the 1978 murder of Barbara Nantais


San Diego police tried to figure out if Kevin Brown could be a suspect in the 1978 murder of Barbara Nantais.


In the following story it was reported that Kevin Brown was in New Mexico at the time. He did work for the state crime in New Mexico for several years.


--------------------
QUOTE FROM NEWS STORY
Warrants reveal evidence in 1984 killing
Retired SDPD criminalist's sperm found on vaginal swab


http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2014/oct/31/warrant-brown-hough-murder-dna-photo/2/


Claire’s killing in August 1984 was particularly violent. She was strangled, her face beaten, her throat sliced, her left breast cut off.


Her murder was strikingly similar to the 1978 strangling death of Barbara Nantais, 15, on the same beach. Her right nipple had been nearly sliced off. Wet sand had been stuffed in the mouths of both girls.


The FBI and investigators had long suspected both killings were done by the same person, but Barbara’s death remains unsolved, with no genetic evidence pointing to either Tatro or Brown. Tatro was in prison during the first murder, and Brown was living in New Mexico.
--------------------


In the civil lawsuit filed by Rebecca Brown's attorney in federal court, Kevin Brown is placed in Sacramento. Either way this places him a long way from the scene of the crime. I would put more credence in the civil suit information: Sacramento.


--------------------
FROM CIVIL SUIT
[Samdra] Oplinger [an investigator for the District Attorney’s office assigned to the Cold Case Homicide Unit] omitted another critical fact - there was no evidence of any kind, testimonial, physical or scientific, that Kevin Brown was involved in any way in the death of Barbara Nantais, or the beating of James Alt - which had occurred in 1978, when Kevin Brown was attending California State University at Sacramento and living in Sacramento, California.


Oplinger’s sworn oral declaration for a telephonic search warrant was infected with the same false statements and material omissions as those which tainted Lambert’s January 2014 affidavit.
--------------------

 

[CheckYourProof]

There was a statement made in a news story in 2014 that did not make sense (1). An unnamed lab manager with the San Diego Police Crime Lab was quoted as saying that "cross-DNA contamination was not possible". A blanket statement such as this about DNA contamination does not sound like something that a crime lab scientist would say.

It appears that this is not a quote that a reporter got directly from the crime lab scientist/manager. It appears that this is information from a search warrant written by police detectives. So it appears that this could be a case of the police detectives putting words in the mouth of the crime lab scientist/manager.

There is further discussion of this quote in the federal civil suit filed against the San Diego police by Rebecca Brown's attorney.

It is stated in the civil suit:
"As a general matter, DNA cross-contamination is not only possible - it is a forensic fact of life."

In the civil suit the quote “cross DNA contamination is not possible” is attributed (by San Diego police) to "San Diego Police Department Lab Manager Jennifer Shen". In the civil suit, it is stated not only that the statement is false, but that Jennifer Shen DID NOT SAY IT!!!:

"The statement is false; the attribution of the statement to Jennifer Shen is false."

This is hearsay. Let's hear from Jennifer Shen herself, and not what San Diego police detective Michael Lambert said that she said.

(1)
-------------------
QUOTE FROM NEWS STORY
Incriminating DNA Found Inside Cold Case Victim: Warrant
By Andie Adams and Dave Summers
Updated at 10:50 PM PDT on Friday, Oct 31, 2014

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...rrant-Kevin-Brown-Ronald-Tatro-281162272.html

The manager told detectives “Brown had no known contact with the evidence relating to this case and was never assigned to work with any evidence relating to this investigation,” the search warrant states. She said cross-DNA contamination was not possible.
-------------------

(2)
-------------------
FROM CIVIL SUIT

"FALSE OR MISLEADING STATEMENTS IN LAMBERT’S AFFIDAVIT"


"Lambert included false statements in the affidavit for the search warrant, with knowledge of their falsity or reckless disregard for their truth or falsity."


B) [Michael]Lambert [a detective with the Homicide Unit of the San Diego Police Department, assigned to Cold Case Homicide Unit] recited that the San Diego Police Department Lab Manager, Jennifer Shen, stated that Mr. Brown had no access to the evidence in the Hough murder and that “cross DNA contamination (sic) is not possible.” These statements are false. Kevin Brown was working in the same lab area as Mr. Gibson, who had retrieved an oral, an anal, and a vaginal swab taken from Claire Hough from the Coroner’s office in August, 1984. Kevin Brown worked in the same room and was in close proximity to the work area of Gibson, and worked in the area where the swabs were typically dried.


C) Lambert’s claim that “cross DNA contamination is not possible” is false. As a general matter, DNA cross-contamination is not only possible - it is a forensic fact of life. If the claim is that cross-DNA contamination is not possible in the case of Claire Hough, that too is manifestly false. Cross-contamination, even in today’s labs, with careful execution of detailed protocols, is possible. In the SDPD lab of 1984, when personnel acted without awareness of DNA, and without protocols in place to avoid DNA contamination, cross-contamination was inevitable. Neither Ms. Shen, nor any competent lab manager could or would say that “cross DNA contamination is not possible”. The statement is false; the attribution of the statement to Jennifer Shen is false.
-------------------

 

[CheckYourProof]

Here is list of the legal violations in Rebecca Brown's civil lawsuit against the San Diego police department:

The complaint also lists unnamed "DOES" as in 'John Does' as defendants, presumably other employees of San Diego Police or District Attorney's office.

The complaint specifically includes:
(1) Execution of a Warrant Obtained In Violation of Franks v. Delaware (42 U.S.C. § 1983) (January, 2014)
(2) Seizure Of Property Beyond The Scope Of The Warrant (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
(3) Wrongful Detention Of Seized Property (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
(4) Wrongful Death (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
(5) Deprivation of Right of Familial Association (42 U.S.C. § 1983)
(6) Execution of a Warrant Obtained In Violation of Franks v. Delaware (42 U.S.C. § 1983) (October, 2014)
(7) Intentional Infliction Of Emotional Distress
(8) Conversion
(9) Negligence
(10) Wrongful Death CCP 377.60

The complaint demands a jury trial.

Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
1) For compensatory general and special damages in an amount in
accordance with proof.
2) For punitive damages.
3) For reasonable attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs of suit.
4) For any other relief that is just and proper.

 

[CheckYourProof]

Here are some quotes from Rebecca Brown's civil lawsuit (a link is in a reference in Post #35) against the San Diego police department in the matter of the investigation of retired San Diego Police Crime Lab criminalist Kevin Brown for the murder of Claire Hough on Aug. 24, 1984:

Note (highlighted in bold red font) that Kevin Brown's DNA was found on only a single swab, but San Diego police refer to is being found on multiple "swabs".

-------------------
QUOTES
"Tatro was a suspect in the 1984 murder of a San Diego prostitute, Carol DeFliece."


"Defendant [San Diego police detective Michael] Lambert was aware when he began the renewed investigation of Claire Hough’s death IN 2012 that cross-contamination of DNA due to handler’s contact with evidence post-homicide is a common and well documented occurrence."


"The likelihood of such cross-contamination is the reason why laboratory technicians in the S.D.P.D. are required to provide DNA exemplars which are stored in a database."


"Lambert elected not to accept that the DNA results on a single swab were the result of cross-contamination."


"To admit that such cross-contamination occurred could have, in Lambert’s view, caused the future cold case DNA analyses to be subject to question, and thus cause peril to future prosecutions."


"Even though DNA extracted from blood left on Claire Hough’s clothing matched that of a convicted rapist, Ronald Tatro, Lambert decided to use unconstitutional methods to investigate Kevin Brown for a crime he did not commit, and to attempt to connect Kevin Brown with Tatro, whom Kevin had never met nor seen."


"Lambert’s tactics included systematically distorting the information provided to the judge to whom he presented his search warrant request, and presenting false statements and omitting facts which were of utmost importance – the fact that the lab technicians dried the swabs containing evidence in open air, in a common space, without cough guards or other precautions to prevent cross-contamination; the fact that during the 1980s, the period when the Claire Hough evidence was in the common area where Kevin Brown worked, the S.D.P.D. criminalists, including Kevin Brown, commonly used their own blood and semen samples as known exemplars to verify the efficacy of chemical reagents in the lab."


"Lambert engaged in distortion of Kevin Brown’s past to suggest sexual perversion – that when he was a young, single man he went to strip clubs, took photographs of models in lingerie, and on one occasion was seen leaving a *advertiser censored* shop."


"Lambert ignored and omitted evidence that Kevin Brown’s character was non-violent, and that his friends and associates asserted that he would never have committed the violent murder of a teenage girl."


"The discovery of Mr. Brown’s DNA presented S.D.P.D. with an institutional dilemma."


"If Mr. Brown’s DNA were present as a result of contamination from contact in the lab, it could call into question the procedures employed by the crime lab in the years before DNA analysis became prevalent, which would in turn bring into doubt the reliability of S.D.P.D. DNA analysis of 'cold cases.'"


"This, in turn, could imperil the public acceptance of the Cold Case Homicide investigation program, which is premised in significant part on the reliability of DNA test results obtained thirty or more years after the evidence had been gathered from the crime scene and the decedent."


"Lambert, the lead detective assigned to investigate the homicide of Claire Hough, the 1984 victim, had the obligation to conduct a fair investigation. This he did not do. Instead, he engaged in conduct that violated the constitutional rights of Kevin and Rebecca Brown."


"Aware that Mr. Brown suffered from mental health issues related to long-standing anxiety disorder and depression, Lambert set out to deliberately cause pressure and stress to him."


"Lambert interviewed witnesses in a misleading and suggestive manner."


"Lambert was on notice that Mr. Brown was at risk of suicide, based on information Lambert had obtained from seized medical documents, personnel records, interviews with acquaintances of Mr. Brown, and statements from Rebecca Brown and John Blakely, her brother, that Kevin was in danger of committing suicide."


"Lambert refused to return illegally seized evidence to Mr. Brown, his wife, and his mother-in-law, in order to falsely suggest to him that S.D.P.D. was about to arrest Mr. Brown, and to pressure a man he knew to be suicidal by deliberately violating the law and keeping illegally seized materials."


"Lambert’s conduct, which violated clearly established legal norms, includes the following:"


A
"Defendant Lambert obtained a search warrant to search the home and cars of Mr. and Mrs. Brown by violating the legal requirement that a warrant be based on truthful evidence. In the declaration for the search warrant, Lambert, with knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for truth or falsity, stated that multiple “swabs” had tested positive for Mr. Brown’s DNA, and quoted the lab director as saying that cross-contamination was 'impossible.'"


B
"Lambert omitted material and important information from his application for the search warrant. This information included the following: the coroner’s microscopic examination of vaginal smears from Claire Hough at the time of autopsy in 1984 was negative for the presence of sperm; it was common practice for criminalists including Kevin Brown at both the San Diego Police Department and San Diego Sheriff’s Office during the 1980's to use their own blood and semen samples in the crime lab to verify the effectiveness of forensic reagents used in examinations. It was common practice for swabs from different cases to be dried in the same location and to be exposed to cross-contamination. Mr. Brown’s examination table was in close proximity to the table of the criminalist charged with examination of the forensic evidence in Ms. Hough’s homicide. Multiple witnesses informed investigators that Mr. Brown’s character was entirely antithetical to that of a violent misogynist."


"Even after his death, Kevin Brown was victimized by defendants. After Kevin’s suicide, defendant Oplinger obtained a warrant to search Mr. and Mrs. Brown’s Julian vacation home, located near the site of his suicide in Cuyamaca State Park. Oplinger’s application for this warrant failed to disclose material information: that none of the evidence earlier seized in the first warrant from the home in Chula Vista implicated Mr. Brown in any way; that cross-contamination was almost certainly the cause of the single DNA result; that Kevin Brown had suffered from long standing anxiety disorder and depression; and that no witness ever had ever seen Kevin Brown with Ronald Tatro, the convicted rapist whose DNA and blood was found on the victim’s pants. Oplinger failed to inform the judge reviewing the warrant application that an intensive investigation had revealed that there was no evidence that Kevin Brown had ever seen, met or associated with Ronald Tatro."


"After Mr. Brown’s death, S.D.P.D. issued a defamatory press release. Among other statements, the press release falsely proclaimed that at the time of his death, “preparations were being made for Kevin Brown’s arrest.” The purpose for this press release was to suggest that Kevin Brown’s suicide was an admission of guilt, and thereby preserve the reputation of the DNA component of the Cold Case Homicide program. The S.D.P.D. stated publicly that, with Kevin Brown’s suicide, the case was now solved."
-------------------

 

[CheckYourProof]

Here are quotes from Rebecca Brown's civil lawsuit (a link is in a reference in Post #35) against the San Diego police department in the matter of the investigation of retired San Diego Police Crime Lab criminalist Kevin Brown for the murder of Claire Hough on Aug. 24, 1984.

The quotes refer to working conditions in the crime lab at the time of the crime in 1984.

------------------------------
COMMON PRACTICES IN SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME LAB DURING 1984

In 1984, the San Diego police lab was in an upstairs room of the old Police Department building on Harbor Drive. In the lab, several desks were located along the walls.


In the central area of the lab were tables that were approximately six feet long and three feet wide. These tables, called examination tables, abutted each other.


When criminalists examined evidence, they would place white butcher paper on the tables and examine the evidence, which would be placed on the paper.


Up to six criminalists would conduct evidence examinations at the same time.


A criminalist’s DNA can contaminate evidence from his cough, sneeze, or even from microscopic amounts of spittle ejected while speaking.


Today, there are pieces of equipment known in labs as “sneeze” or “cough guards” which are commonly used to prevent evidence from inadvertent cross-contamination from contact with criminalists.


No such cough guards were used in 1984.


In 1984, when bodily fluids such as saliva, blood, or vaginal secretions from a victim or suspect were to be analyzed, these fluids would be preserved on a swab.


In order to prevent the formation of mold, criminalists would place the swabs in “drying boxes” to dry out.


These drying boxes were approximately the shape and size of a tissue box with lattice work slats to hold the swabs, which were placed with the cotton ends up to dry.


The cotton ends were exposed to the open air.


In 1984, neither the San Diego Police Department nor the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department conducted DNA testing at their labs.


The San Diego Police Department did not begin testing for DNA until 1992, eight years after Claire Hough’s murder. DNA testing was not yet widely conducted in police investigations of any jurisdiction in 1984.


Because there was no DNA testing in use at the time, the rigorous protocols now in effect to avoid cross-contamination of samples were not in use, and inevitably there was cross-contamination - i.e. the mixing of genetic material having nothing to do with the criminal act with the genetic material taken and preserved as evidence from the crime scene.


In the first half of the 1980s, criminalists in the S.D.P.D. lab sometimes did not wear masks or gloves when conducting forensic exams on stains.


Technicians would sometimes handle undergarments with bare hands when conducting forensic tests, causing cross-contamination by leaving the criminologist’s DNA on the garment.


Even when gloves were used, if they were not changed frequently, cross-contamination from one piece of evidence to another could result.


In this time period, there were no cough guards in the S.D.P.D. lab, allowing exposure by air of the DNA of technicians who sneezed, coughed, breathed or spoke in close proximity to forensic evidence.


The older the physical evidence in a case, the less likely it is that proper techniques to avoid contamination of the evidence were exercised by crime scene personnel and laboratory analysts.


The reason for this is neither ineptitude nor malice. It is simply a result of the rapid evolution of DNA analysis.


Items which would never have been considered for DNA testing in the past are now routinely tested by labs across the nation.
------------------------------