Louisianna Man Released After Nearly 30 Years on Death Row

A man from Louisiana, who spent close to three decades on death row, was released from prison on Wednesday when a judge overturned his conviction and granted him bail.

Jimmy Duncan, now in his 60s, had been sentenced to death in 1998 for the alleged rape and drowning of his girlfriend’s 23-month-old daughter, Haley Oliveau. However, the case was marred by questionable forensic testimony. His release follows a state judge’s decision that the evidence utilized by prosecutors was unreliable, particularly a controversial bite mark analysis.

Judge Alvin Sharp from the 4th Judicial District Court vacated the conviction in April, stating that the expert testimony presented during the trial was “scientifically indefensible” and concluded that the child’s death could be attributed to accidental drowning.

In a bail order issued last week, Judge Sharp mentioned that “the presumption of his guilt is not great,” referencing new evidence brought up during an evidentiary hearing last year and noting Duncan’s lack of a criminal record.

Despite Duncan’s release on $150,000 bail, Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, a Republican advocating for faster executions, opposed it, urging that he should remain behind bars until the state high court made a decision. Nevertheless, the Louisiana Supreme Court permitted the district court to determine Duncan’s bail request, allowing for his release.

Duncan’s attorneys claimed that the evidence from the April ruling supports the notion that he is factually innocent, emphasizing that his bail marks a significant step towards his complete exoneration.

During a bail hearing last week, the mother of the victim shocked many when she expressed her belief that Duncan was not responsible for her daughter’s death. She stated that the child had a history of seizures and likely drowned accidentally.

She further expressed her frustration, insisting that both her family’s and Duncan’s lives had been “destroyed” by misinformation from prosecutors and forensic specialists. Her testimony pointed to the flawed reliance on bite mark analysis and questionable autopsy findings by two forensic experts, both of whom have been linked to numerous wrongful convictions.

In her tirade against the prosecution, she lamented, “I was never made aware of anything that would exonerate Mr. Duncan,” indicating that had she been informed earlier, the outcome might have been drastically different.

Over the past 25 years, there have been multiple wrongful convictions tied to bite mark analysis, a forensic technique criticized for its unreliability.

Interestingly, while there have been new developments related to Duncan’s case, prosecutors are still attempting to reactivate his conviction, citing the original grand jury indictment from 1994, contending that he should remain incarcerated.