Breaking: New Report Raises Questions about Calusinski conviction

Over a year and a half ago, I wrote a blog post about why I was deeply troubled by Melissa Calusinki’s murder conviction (and 31 year sentence). She was the day care worker who allegedly picked up and threw a 16 month old boy on his head, causing his death. As I wrote last February, the evidence against her was exceedingly weak and the facts surrounding her “confession” were very troubling (the police interrogated her for 10 hours, she had a 74 IQ and the extent of her confession was to say “yeah” in response to the detective’s narrative of what he thought had happened).

Today comes news that the medical evidence against Calusinski was wrong; and that State’s Attorney Mike Nerheim doesn’t think that the collapse of the case matters:

An expert whose testimony helped convict a woman of the murder of a 16-month-old toddler in her care at a Lincolnshire day care is now admitting he “missed” a pre-existing head injury — a development the woman’s attorneys are arguing should lead to a new trial.

In a surprising revelation, forensic pathologist Eupil Choi said in a sworn affidavit that the boy, Benjamin Kingan, “had suffered an old injury that pre-dated January 14, 2009,” the date of the boy’s death.

The affidavit is expected to be a key part of the legal ammunition that attorneys for Melissa Calusinski will use to try to get her a new trial. Calusinski, who lived in Carpentersville, was convicted of the little boy’s murder and in February 2012 was sentenced to 31 years in prison.

“We believe there is significant new evidence,” said one of Calusinski’s attorneys, Kathleen Zellner. “We are consulting with a number of experts and we are investigating every aspect of the evidence that was used to convict Melissa, including the viability of the medical evidence.”

What’s more, Choi’s reversal is supported by two other doctors who have reviewed the case — the newly elected Lake County coroner and the former Cook County Medical Examiner.

But Calusinski’s attorneys are in for a courtroom fight.

Lake County’s top prosecutor said that even if the new findings of Choi are correct, Calusinski should still be held accountable for Benjamin’s death if her actions, at the now closed Minee Subee in the Park day care center, exacerbated his injury.

Lake County State’s Attorney Mike Nerheim, elected to the job in 2012, has worked to restore the reputation of an office beset with several wrongful convictions, a record that has drawn national attention.

But in Calusinski’s case, Nerheim said he reviewed the new findings and believe they simply rehash the defense’s arguments at trial. Nerheim said he has found nothing to give him pause about the guilty verdict.

For Calusinski, who has been behind bars since her arrest in January 2009, the new evidence angered her, then gave her hope.

In an exclusive interview at the Logan Correctional Center in downstate Lincoln, Calusinski, now 26, said she was “shocked” when told about Choi’s new opinion. Choi did not return a message for comment Friday.

“I was very angry,” Calusinski said.

Choi’s reversal came after Lake County Coroner Thomas Rudd, who took office in December 2012, reopened Benjamin’s case early this year after speaking with Calusinski’s father and one of her attorneys, Paul DeLuca.

Rudd said he read the trial testimony, reviewed Choi’s findings, looked at the original slides, had new ones made and found the existence of a prior injury.

Rudd then asked former Cook County Medical Examiner Nancy Jones to review the materials. Jones wrote that “at the time of his death, Ben Kingan had a well-developed, organizing sub-dural membrane (an old collection of bleeding on the brain) that was missed by Dr. Choi during his initial postmortem examination.”

Following Jones’ review, Rudd delivered the new findings to Nerheim on May 8, but Nerheim did nothing.

Earlier this year, DeLuca asked Nerheim to put Calusinski’s case before the new board Nerheim formed to re

view cases in which a defendant’s guilt was is in question. Nerheim declined.

Nerheim formed the panel shortly after being elected in 2012, to restore the reputation of the office, which had been tarnished during the final years of Mike Waller’s years as Lake County state’s attorney. Four felony cases — Juan Rivera, Jerry Hobbs, Bennie Starks and James Edwards — had collapsed after DNA evidence suggested each man’s innocence. The men spent about 60 years total behind bars before being exonerated.

But Nerheim saw no reason to reopen Calusinski’s case.

On the day he died, Benjamin went from “emotionally fine to dead,” Nerheim noted. If Benjamin had a pre-existing head injury, he would have had a “logical decrease in functioning over time,” which was not seen, Nerheim said.

Even if there was a pre-existing injury, if Calusinski’s actions did something to exacerbate Benjamin’s injury, she should still be held legally responsible for his death, the prosecutor argued.

With Nerheim’s seeing no reason to act, Rudd asked Choi to look at Jones’ findings. Choi concurred with Jones, adding that “at the time of his death, Benjamin Kingan had suffered from a head injury prior to January 14, 2009, as evidenced by the well-developed, organizing subdural membrane present.”

It was Choi’s original findings at the autopsy that led police to question day care workers about their role in the boy’s death.

I have to admit that I am disturbed that State’s Attorney Nerheim did not refer this case to his review unit. This case was already a classic example of a wrongful conviction. It was supported only by a very questionable confession and questionable medical evidence. Now the medical evidence is thoroughly discredited. Up until this point, I have been very impressed by Mr. Nerheim’s willingness to put aside emotions and politics in order to make sure that each case gets a thorough review. Hopefully, he will reconsider his decision and give this case a second look.

Similarly, Cook County residents should be very concerned about this story in which a State’s Attorney resigned after she was demoted for dropping a case which (she claims) even her bosses agreed was “unprovable.” Apparently, they are of the belief that a case should be prosecuted regardless of the facts, and despite the possibility that an innocent person might be convicted, because the story received media attention and/or Anita Alvarez feels the need to show that she is tough on crime.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s