Mr. Blair's attorneys said Thursday that the test results heighten their optimism that the death row inmate will win a new trial or be exonerated.

"We've certainly arrived at a place where the hair evidence has created a sufficient basis to vacate his conviction," said Barry Scheck, a New York defense lawyer who specializes in DNA cases and is monitoring Mr. Blair's case.

"It's pretty clear from the record that the hair evidence was central to the conviction and was of such great importance that it raises a reasonable probability of a different outcome if the case were tried again."

The next legal steps include a Collin County judge making findings of fact and forwarding those to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals in Austin, which would decide Mr. Blair's fate. If the conviction is upheld, Mr. Blair's attorneys could move their appeal back to a federal court.

An independent forensic laboratory that both sides had agreed upon conducted the DNA tests on the hair shafts with technology that was not available during Mr. Blair's 1994 trial.

Seven-year-old Ashley disappeared in September 1993 from a crowded Plano soccer field, where she was watching a tournament. Her body was found a day later beside an isolated road 6 miles away. The case prompted "Ashley's Laws," a package of sexual-predator measures in Texas requiring longer prison terms and public registration for sex offenders.

The latest DNA tests focused on a clump of hair, which forensic analyst Charles Linch testified contained strands microscopically resembling the victim's hair and Mr. Blair's hair. Mr. Linch also told jurors that the clump found in a Plano park more than 2 miles from the site where Ashley disappeared contained the most microscopically distinctive hairs of any hair evidence in the case.

No match

DNA results show that none of those strands match those of Mr. Blair or Ashley, the report says. The DNA from strands in the hair clump also doesn't match the DNA found in other strands from Mr. Blair's car and on Ashley's body that were previously tested.

"What it means is the state's best association of Estell and Blair [being together] is now gone," said Philip Wischkaemper of Lubbock, one of Mr. Blair's appellate attorneys. "The remainder of the evidence against him is so tenuous that I don't think it would sustain a conviction."

He said if Mr. Blair wins a retrial, the hair evidence would be "inadmissible because it's not relevant anymore."

A federal judge in Midland ordered the DNA testing of hairs found in his car and on Ashley that Mr. Linch and prosecutors used to link Mr. Blair to the crime.

The results contradicted the trial evidence. Hair found in Mr. Blair's car wasn't Ashley's, and hair fragments found on Ashley weren't Mr. Blair's.

Last year, the U.S. district judge dismissed the federal appeal, allowing Mr. Blair's case to return to the Court of Criminal Appeals. The state's highest criminal appeals court then ordered the Collin trial judge to conduct hearings on the new DNA evidence.

State District Judge Nathan White Jr. ordered the DNA tests on the hair clump, which the federal judge had deemed irrelevant.

Mr. Wischkaemper said he's hoping to work with prosecutors to reach a written stipulation in which both sides agree that all hair collected during the investigation has no bearing on the case. Meanwhile, Judge White could conduct a hearing or seek information through motions and affidavits before he completes his order.

Both sides said there is no timeline in which Judge White or the Court of Criminal Appeals would act.

Source: Dallas Morning News

A Collin County judge has ordered DNA analysis on previously untested hair evidence that helped condemn Michael Blair to death row for the 1993 abduction and murder of Ashley Estell.

The latest DNA tests will focus on a clump of hair found in Jack Carter Park, 2 1/2 miles from Carpenter Park in northwest Plano, where Ashley was abducted.

Previous DNA tests have disputed key hair evidence used against Mr. Blair during his 1994 trial.

7-year-old Ashley disappeared while attending her brother's soccer game, part of a tournament that September 1993 weekend at several fields, including Jack Carter and Carpenter parks.

Investigators quickly identified Mr. Blair, a previously convicted child molester, as the suspect. The case became the catalyst for "Ashley's laws," a package of tough sexual-predator measures in Texas requiring longer prison terms and public registration for sex offenders.

During the trial, forensic analyst Charles Linch testified that the hair clump contained strands that microscopically resembled the victim's hair and strands that resembled Mr. Blair's hair. He also said the clump contained the most microscopically distinctive hairs of any hair evidence in the case.

"We appreciate the court's decision to perform more DNA testing inasmuch as we are of the opinion that it is important to negate all hair evidence utilized by the state to convict Michael," said Roy Greenwood of Austin, one of Mr. Blair's appellate attorneys. "We are confident that the test will come back negative on that hair also."

Collin County chief felony prosecutor Mary Scanlon, who was not involved in Mr. Blair's trial, said her office agreed to test the hair clump because such DNA analysis was unavailable at the time.

But no matter the results, she said, prosecutors are confident that Ashley's killer is on death row.

Other circumstantial evidence and fibers from a stuffed animal found in Mr. Blair's car have "never been disproved or shown to disconnect him in any way," Ms. Scanlon said. "We still feel we have a good conviction."

Defense attorneys have said that if DNA tests throw out all the hair evidence, prosecutors are left with only "tainted" witness identifications that Mr. Blair was in the park that day. No one saw him with the girl, records show.

Prosecutors contend that the independent witnesses destroy Mr. Blair's alibi that he was at home. They question why Mr. Blair took part in the search for Ashley and note that her clothing was found near a business where Mr. Blair worked cleaning carpets.

Prosecutors also cite an FBI test in which a fiber from a stuffed toy in Mr. Blair's car was found on Ashley, but defense attorneys argue that the test results weren't conclusive.

The judge who was overseeing Mr. Blair's federal appeal previously deemed the hair clump unnecessary for DNA testing. However, he ordered all other hair evidence in the case to be analyzed by DNA at the urging of Mr. Blair's attorneys and, later, the Texas attorney general's office.

Previous DNA tests contradicted Mr. Linch's testimony and prosecutors' assertions that hair resembling Mr. Blair's was found in the waistband of Ashley's underwear and on the sheet used to transport her body. Other DNA testing contradicted allegations that hair similar to the child's was found in Mr. Blair's car.

After the DNA results came in, U.S. District Judge Royal Ferguson of Midland dismissed Mr. Blair's federal appeal, clearing the case's return to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

In May, the appeals court ordered the original trial court to conduct evidentiary hearings on the new DNA evidence and on defense concerns about the competency of Mr. Linch's work.

Since then, the appeal has been pending in state District Judge Nathan White Jr.'s court. He signed the joint motion ordering the DNA testing earlier this month.

Only the strands identified by Mr. Linch as being consistent with Mr. Blair's hair and Ashley's hair will be tested, Ms. Scanlon said. The strands will be sent to Mitotyping Technologies in Pennsylvania, the laboratory that performed previous DNA tests in the case.

Ms. Scanlon said the results should be available in about 3 months. Meanwhile, prosecutors filed court papers in October asserting that no evidentiary hearing was needed and that Mr. Blair's conviction should stand.

Prosecutors argued that the DNA results "were not significant for purposes of linking [Mr. Blair] to the crime," according to court records. They contended that Mr. Blair had not shown that the DNA results would "undermine confidence in the verdict" or that the verdict would be different on retrial.

"He is not entitled to any kind of hearing," prosecutors asserted. "Under a bare claim of actual innocence, an applicant ... must convince the ... court that the new facts unquestionably establish his innocence."

Judge White has not ruled on the prosecutors' motion, and no hearing date has been set.

(source: Dallas Morning News)

The victim's hair also wasn't found in Mr. Blair's car, according to a lab report made public Friday by the Texas attorney general's office.

Mr. Blair's appellate attorneys say the DNA results virtually exonerate their client; the Collin County district attorney says there is other evidence to prove Mr. Blair's guilt.

"Obviously, my previous guarded optimism is much less guarded," said Philip Wischkaemper of Lubbock, one of Mr. Blair's attorneys. "This is as good as we could have hoped for under the circumstances. We're not saying we've won this one yet, but we're a whole lot closer than we were before."

The Collin County district attorney's office referred questions Friday to the attorney general's office. District Attorney Tom O'Connell has said in previous interviews that even DNA results favorable to Mr. Blair wouldn't change his mind about Mr. Blair's guilt in the slaying of the 7-year-old girl.

"I think there's other sufficient evidence," Mr. O'Connell told The Associated Press earlier Friday. "I don't know that that would be the deciding factor."

It is unknown what the latest test results will mean to Mr. Blair's appeal or whether his conviction might be overturned.

Defense attorneys say the hair samples were the only association between Mr. Blair, a previously convicted child molester, and Ashley. She was abducted Sept. 4, 1993, from a crowded Plano soccer field. Her body was discovered a day later beside an isolated road 6 miles from the field.

The case became the catalyst for "Ashley's Laws," a package of tough sexual-predator measures in Texas requiring longer prison terms and public registration for sex offenders.

At trial, forensic analyst Charles Linch testified and prosecutors asserted that hairs found on a sheet used to move the child's body and in the waistband of her underwear linked Mr. Blair to the girl. They also said that hair microscopically similar to the girl's was found in Mr. Blair's car.

New DNA technology not available at the time has proved otherwise. "Michael Blair and Ashley Estell are excluded as contributors of these questioned hairs," says the lab report made public Friday.

Jane Dees Shepperd, an attorney general's spokeswoman, said, "Recent DNA testing confirmed that hairs found on the victim's body and hairs found in Blair's vehicle do not belong to either Blair or the victim."

Records show that the hair samples and a fiber from a stuffed toy were the only physical evidence in the case. Defense attorneys say the fiber is inconclusive.

Mr. Blair, who has repeatedly proclaimed his innocence, was scheduled for execution in July 1999, but the date was delayed when his attorneys moved his appeal to federal court.

"I'll never be proud of my past, but I'll stand on the truth," Mr. Blair wrote recently from death row. "I became falsely accused in Ashley Estell's murder case. I did not kidnap or murder her."

A federal judge overseeing Mr. Blair's appeal ordered the DNA tests, and Mitotyping Technologies of Pennsylvania conducted them. The lab performed DNA tests on 2 previously untested hair fragments, and it retested a strand of hair found on the floorboard of Mr. Blair's car. That strand and another found in Mr. Blair's car had already been DNA-tested - and excluded as belonging to Ashley - at a lab chosen by Mr. Blair's attorneys.

"I knew this was going to clear him," Roy Greenwood of Austin, Mr. Blair's other attorney, said Friday. "Here's this expert [at trial] who says all this hair from his car is hers. Our tests 2 years ago said he's wrong. Our tests a year ago said he was doubly wrong. Now this test says that our testing was correct. Their tests also have taken his alleged hair off her body. We knew where this was going."

In August, The Dallas Morning News interviewed 5 jurors from Mr. Blair's case. Each panel member said testimony about hair microscopically similar to Mr. Blair's and found on Ashley's body was most meaningful to them. They said that hair was the most compelling proof against him, although they noted that they considered other factors, such as Mr. Blair's decision to search for the child, in determining his guilt.

Mr. Wischkaemper has said that if the DNA tests throw out the hair evidence, prosecutors are left with only "tainted witness identifications" that Mr. Blair was in the park that day. No one saw him with the girl, transcripts show.

Mr. O'Connell has said that he would retry Mr. Blair's case if it were overturned; Mr. Wischkaemper says he doesn't know how that could be. While the DNA results pleased the appellate attorneys, it also left them with some decisions to make. On Friday, the attorney general's office filed a motion with the Midland federal court overseeing Mr. Blair's appeal. The motion asks that Mr. Blair's case be returned to the trial court in Collin County to consider the new DNA evidence.

"This new evidence necessitated the [attorney general's] request to return the case to the Texas courts for further review," Ms. Shepperd said. "Federal habeas corpus law requires that any new evidence in a case be considered 1st by the state courts before it can properly be considered by the federal courts."

The trial court could either forward the case immediately to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for review, or it could hold evidentiary hearings.

Mr. Blair's attorneys say they aren't sure whether they will agree to move the case back to state court. Doing so, they say, could leave them with few federal avenues for further appeal. They plan to work over the weekend doing research before they make a decision, Mr. Greenwood said.

Legislators are considering a bill in which the wrongly convicted would have a new, expedited path into court if DNA evidence could prove their innocence. The bill was introduced after 34-year-old Christopher Ochoa was released in Austin after serving 12 years in the rape and murder of a Pizza Hut employee.

The DNA bill would give inmates convicted of a crime the opportunity to ask a trial court to test biological evidence. No such legal mechanism exists now.

The most recent prisoner to be freed due to new DNA evidence was David Shawn Pope, who had spent nearly 15 years in prison. Gov. Rick Perry pardoned him Feb. 2 after DNA testing proved that he didn't commit the rape for which he'd been convicted in 1986. (source: Dallas Morning News)

The federal judge overseeing Mr. Blair's death-row appeal ordered the tests last month after the Texas attorney general's office requested them. The request came after months of discussions between Mr. Blair's appellate attorneys and the attorney general's office.

Mr. Blair's case - which has attracted the interest of and some involvement from defense attorney Barry Scheck, founder of the Innocence Project at Cardozo Law School in New York City - is among the latest making use of DNA technology that wasn't available at trial.

Records show that hair samples and a fiber from a stuffed toy were the only physical evidence that Collin County prosecutors used to link Mr. Blair, a previously convicted child molester, with his 7-year-old victim. Defense attorneys say the fiber is inconclusive.

Ashley was abducted from a crowded Plano soccer field, and her body was found a day later beside an isolated road six miles from the playing field. The case became the catalyst for "Ashley's Laws," a package of tough sexual-predator measures in Texas requiring longer prison terms and public registration for sex offenders.

Mr. Blair, who has repeatedly said he is innocent, was scheduled for execution in July 1999, but the date was delayed when his attorneys moved his appeal to federal court.

Mitotyping Technologies of Pennsylvania, which was among the labs recommended to Mr. Blair's attorneys by Mr. Scheck, is conducting several tests after the attorney general's office agreed to send the evidence there. It is unknown how quickly the results will be available.

Mr. Scheck said he's been consulting with Mr. Blair's attorneys on DNA-related issues. He said he could make appearances on Mr. Blair's behalf if it were deemed necessary by the court-appointed attorneys.

"We have the ability to focus national attention on these issues to make sure everybody knows the world is watching," he said. "Mr. Blair's case is quite an important one because it's part of a new wave of cases where we can utilize this technology to correct the miscarriages of justice that have been brought about by microscopic hair comparison, which I think is junk science."

The lab is performing DNA tests on 2 previously untested hair fragments that were said to be microscopically similar to Mr. Blair's hair and were found inside the waistband of Ashley's underwear and on a sheet used to transport her body.

The Pennsylvania lab is also retesting a strand of hair found on the floorboard of Mr. Blair's car. A forensic expert testified and prosecutors asserted at trial that the strand microscopically matched Ashley's hair. But, results in June from a DNA test performed at a North Carolina lab hired by Mr. Blair's attorneys showed it "could not have originated from Ashley Estell."

Philip Wischkaemper of Lubbock, one of Mr. Blair's court-appointed attorneys, said he's cautiously optimistic as he awaits the latest DNA results.

The attorney general's office routinely declines to comment on its pending cases. However, Attorney General John Cornyn issued a statement Wednesday in response to Gov. Rick Perry's comments about Texas' criminal justice system, saying post-conviction DNA testing ought to be routinely available in capital and felony cases can shed light on whether a conviction is correct.

Collin County District Attorney Tom O'Connell did not return a phone call Thursday seeking comment. He has said in previous interviews that he does not think Mr. Blair's guilt hinges on the outcome of DNA tests.

Previous DNA testing of a different kind on a fourth hair, found on a plaid blanket in Mr. Blair's car, contradicted forensic expert Charles Linch's findings that it could have been Ashley's. Mr. Blair's appellate attorneys sought the testing after his 1994 conviction. However, an expert hired by Collin County prosecutors disputes those results.

5 jurors from Mr. Blair's case said in August that testimony about hair microscopically similar to Mr. Blair's and found on Ashley's body were most meaningful to them. They said that hair was the most compelling proof against him, although they noted that they considered other factors, such as Mr. Blair's decision to search for Ashley, in determining his guilt.

Mr. Wischkaemper said that those hair fragments are the only direct link between Mr. Blair and the crime victim. The Collin County district attorney has said that if Mr. Blair's case were overturned, he would try it again. (source: Dallas Morning News)