New trials ordered in 1985 murder
Court rules criminologist Dr. Henry Lee gave false testimony in death of 65-year-old New Milford man
HARTFORD — The state Supreme Court, ruling the state’s top criminologist had given false testimony, ordered a new trial for two men who have served more than 30 years in prison for a New Milford murder they claim they didn’t commit.
Shawn Henning and Ralph Birch have steadfastly maintained their innocence in the 1985 murder of 65-year-old Everett Carr, claiming their conviction was the result of false testimony by state criminologist Henry Lee regarding bloody towels found at the crime scene.
While a civil appeals judge later rejected Birch’s and Henning’s claims, on Friday the state’s highest court ruled they should get a new trial.
“We agree with the petitioner that, contrary to the determination of the habeas court, he is entitled to a new trial due to the state’s failure to alert the trial court and the petitioner that Lee’s testimony was incorrect, and, therefore, we reverse the judgment of the habeas court,” the appeals court ruled.
“We are so delighted and ecstatic,” said Henning’s lawyer, James Cousins. “Justice has prevailed.”
He said that neither Henning nor Birch had anything to do with the murder, and points they raised showing their innocence were reiterated in the Supreme Court’s decision.
Craig A. Raabe, the other attorney representing Henning also applauded the decision.
“Shawn Henning was wrongly imprisoned for nearly 30 years on the false and misleading testimony of Henry Lee,” said Cousin’s co-counsel Craig Raabe. “It has taken 30 years to correct this injustice and we are very pleased with the court’s thoughtful decision.”
State’s Attorney David
Shepack could not be reached for comment.
In 1985, Carr was murdered in what appeared to be a home burglary.
At the time Henning and Birch, 17 and 18 years old respectively, were troubled youth living in a stolen car and burgling homes in the
New Milford area.
The two teens were taken in as suspects and while they confessed to stealing the car and to committing four other area burglaries, they steadfastly insisted they were not involved with the Carr murder.
The victim, clad only in an undershirt and underwear, was lying in a pool of blood. Blood spatter and smears covered the walls
around him, almost to the ceiling.
An autopsy later revealed the victim had sustained about 27 stab wounds, a severed jugular vein and blunt force trauma to the head.
While none of the victim’s blood was found on either Birch or Henning, or in the car they drove, the prosecutor argued the men cleaned up after the murder
based on Lee’s testimony.
During his testimony, Lee relied on certain photographs of the crime scene. One photograph was of two towels hanging next to the sink in an upstairs bathroom.
Although the towels had not been tested for the presence of blood Lee testified that they had, in fact, been so tested, stating that a “[s]mear of blood was
found on[one of ] the towel[s]” and that this smear was “[a]nalyzed and shows” blood.
The men were tried separately and convicted of Carr’s murder in 1989. Henning was sentenced to 50 years and Birch, 55 years in prison.
“The state proffered two theories, one of which the respondent now concedes was predicated on Lee’s
incorrect testimony. If the jury had known that Lee’s testimony about finding blood on the bathroom towel was incorrect,that knowledge might well have caused it to question the reliability of his other testimony. If that had occurred, the state’s entire case against the petitioner could very well have collapsed,” the Supreme Court ruled.