Dubious convictions - The case of Abdul Raheem Proves a Commission with Real Power is Necessary

A SUFFOLK COUNTY jury may or may not have gotten it right in 2002 when it convicted Abdul Raheem of murdering his mother, Mary Chatman. But as David S. Bernstein reported in the Phoenix last week, Raheem’s trial was marred by serious errors of omission and commission on the part of police and prosecutors (see "Did He Murder His Mother?", News and Features, April 1). At best, Raheem was denied his constitutional right to a fair trial; at worst, there was a grave miscarriage of justice. Given the ongoing crisis in prosecuting homicides in Suffolk County, the Raheem case is one more indication of how badly the system is broken. Substantial reforms are needed. The Phoenix found that the investigation into Chatman’s 2000 murder was marred by poorly conducted evidence collection, botched and disregarded witness interviews, and the dubious interpretation of forensics. Among other things, crime-lab reports and photographs revealed DNA, fingerprints, shoe prints, and clothing at the crime scene that did not match or belong to Raheem. Moreover, the officer who headed up the investigation — Sergeant Detective Daniel Coleman —is now, remarkably, the deputy superintendent in charge of the Boston Police Department’s homicide unit. [more]