WBUR

State Chemist In Closed Lab Handled 50,000 Samples

BOSTON — The chemist suspected of violating protocols while testing evidence in drug cases was involved with some 50,000 drug samples, it was revealed Wednesday, leaving a staggering number of drug cases and convictions possibly open to challenge and reversal.

Six months after chemist Annie Dookhan was suspended from the state crime lab in Jamaica Plain because of irregularities, she was still testifying as an expert witness for the government. In January, she took the stand against a defendant charged with trafficking cocaine. The man’s attorney, James Powderly, didn’t have a clue she herself was a suspect.

“All her years of experience and her school and education, all that comes in,” Powderly said, explaining that Dookhan testified that “the substance that was seized was in fact cocaine and the weight of it was in excess of 200 grams.”

Dookhan’s testimony was crucial. If she had recorded the cocaine — if it was cocaine — as weighing under 100 grams, he would have been sentenced to five years. If she had recorded it as weighing more than 100 grams but less than 200, he would have been sentenced to 10 years.* Instead, he was automatically sentenced to 15 years upon his conviction under mandatory minimum sentencing guidelines.

“When an expert comes in from the state lab, they have that cloak of credibility with them,” Powderly said. “They are presumed to have that credibility and to be telling everything that’s accurate and truthful.”

And yet the Department of Public Heath and the crime lab it ran never notified authorities until February of this year that there was any problem or that their expert witness had been suspended and was being investigated.

Powderly found out a month or two after the trial. He says he would’ve done things differently if he had known she had been suspended.

“That’s something certainly I would have pursued aggressively in my case,” he said. “I would have an obligation to do so on behalf of my client.”

Powderly and the attorney who’s now handling the client’s appeal have still not been contacted by the Bristol County district attorney, the Department of Public Health or State Police, who have taken over the lab and the mess that was there.

“Approximately how many times have you ventured to identify whether an object or an item is a narcotic or not?” a prosecutor asked Dookhan at another trial where she testified in December 2009.

Her answer: “Tens of thousands.”

She wasn’t lying. Spreadsheets from State Police sent to the Committee for Public Counsel Services on Tuesday hint at a nightmare. They show that Dookhan was responsible for over 50,000 samples during her time at the lab.

Anne Goldbach, the scientific expert for the Committee on Public Counsel Services, says they still don’t know how many individual cases those samples will affect.

“We don’t have docket numbers, we don’t have police report numbers,” Goldbach said. “So we don’t have an easy way to connect the cases that are connected to these drugs.”

One question among many involving Annie Dookhan, who quit her job at the state lab in March: Is everything she ever touched now tainted?

More:


Clarification: This clarification on cocaine grams and sentencing guidelines was added to the Web version of this story.

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on wbur.org.
  • PropSeekTheTruth

    It is concerning that 

    why there is only one chemist out of 10 being investigated?
    what was her motive?
    why was she there for 10 years?
    why did one chemist who seems to be highly regarded become the target?
    what did she have to gain?
    where are the secondary chemists who double-check or verify her work?
    don’t they testify in teams?
    where are the “proper” protocols?
    don’t all chemists follow the so-called protocols? 
    doesn’t her secondary chemist need to verify her work to testify?
    where are the secondary chemists who double-check or verify her work?
    she already resigned, why is she being focused on?
    who are the others put on administrative leave?
    who gains the most in this situation?
    why do all the cases have to be looked at?
    where are the secondary chemists who double-check or verify her work? 
    to deal with finding all the cases, where is the money going to?
    who gains the most in this situation?
    there is a lack of money, it is election year, where is the money coming from and who is it going to?
    work conditions were stated to be difficult at the lab, the state police owns it now…where is the money going to?

    • mark springer

      why there is only one chemist out of 10 being investigated?
      The head of the lab , the one who testifies in court

      what was her motive?
      getting a conviction for the state

      why was she there for 10 years?
      She wanted the job for 20 years so she could retire

      why did one chemist who seems to be highly regarded become the target?
      They signed the documents which falsified results

      what did she have to gain?
      accolades and getting a conviction for the state

      where are the secondary chemists who double-check or verify her work?
      She was the lead investigator

      don’t they testify in teams?
      no

      where are the “proper” protocols?
      in the book she should have been using

      don’t all chemists follow the so-called protocols?
      obviously Norfolk Assistant District Attorney Thomas Finigan thinks so

      doesn’t her secondary chemist need to verify her work to testify?
      no

      where are the secondary chemists who double-check or verify her work?
      n/a

      she already resigned, why is she being focused on?
      for crimes committed while in office

      who gains the most in this situation?
      John Q. Public and the people falsely imprisoned

      why do all the cases have to be looked at?
      tainted evidence brings the convictions into question

      to deal with finding all the cases, where is the money going to?
      the taxpayer funds investigations into crooked public officials

      who gains the most in this situation?
      John Q. Public and the people falsely imprisoned

      there is a lack of money, it is election year, … not a question

      where is the money coming from
      the taxpayer funds investigations into crooked public officials

       and who is it going to?
       the cops doing the investigation,(salaries), and the lawyers, (fees)

      work conditions were stated to be difficult at the lab, the state police owns it now…where is the money going to?

          Like
          Reply

Most Popular