Forensic Fraud

Forensic Fraud Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from Forensic Fraud, P.O. Box 2175, Sitka, AK.

He Was Wrongly Convicted of Attempted R**e. He’s Suing the DNA Analysts.Alexis Rodriguez claims technicians at the New Y...
08/23/2026

He Was Wrongly Convicted of Attempted R**e. He’s Suing the DNA Analysts.
Alexis Rodriguez claims technicians at the New York City medical examiner’s office fabricated DNA evidence, leading to his wrongful conviction in 2014 for attempted r**e.
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/23/nyregion/new-york-dna-analysts-sued-r**e-conviction.html

A pair of gloved hands at a lab swabs for DNA using a r**e kit.
The lawsuit comes more than a decade after the New York City medical examiner’s office launched an internal investigation into whether it had mishandled DNA evidence in hundreds of r**e cases. By Santul Nerkar, Aug. 23, 2026, 3:00 a.m. ET
On a cold January morning in 2010, a 22-year-old woman was walking to work on Staten Island when a man grabbed her from behind, pulled her scarf across her face and yanked her to the ground by the roadside.
The attacker started rubbing her thighs and tried to force her jacket open, but she managed to escape his grasp. Later that day, she provided the police with her scarf and gloves, hoping evidence could be extracted from them to help identify the assailant.
Scientists at the New York City medical examiner’s office — a leader in developing forensic methods to crack America’s most difficult cases — pored over the evidence in the case and was able to pull small amounts of DNA from her clothing.
After more than a year, the office reported a breakthrough: Alexis Rodriguez, a 26-year-old man who had been arrested in connection with an unrelated burglary, was a match for the attacker.
Mr. Rodriguez was found guilty of attempted r**e in 2014 and sentenced to 15 years in prison. But in 2021, a judge overturned the conviction, finding that Mr. Rodriguez had received inadequate counsel. Specifically, his lawyer had failed to properly challenge the DNA evidence, a move that could have exonerated his client.
Now, Mr. Rodriguez, 42, is suing the city and the lab analysts who worked on his case, accusing the analysts of fabricating evidence. His current lawyer, Zachary Margulis-Ohnuma, said it was the first time that anyone from the medical examiner’s office had been sued for DNA analysis leading to a wrongful conviction.
Mr. Rodriguez’s suit claims that the evidence was fabricated as part of an established practice at the medical examiner’s office in which analysts often used DNA samples that were too small and complex to be reliable, and conflicting interpretations of the data were pushed aside. Flawed results were then presented to law enforcement agencies — and then juries — as evidence of guilt, according to the lawsuit.
The suit, which was filed in Federal District Court in Brooklyn on Wednesday, comes more than a decade after the medical examiner’s office launched an internal investigation into whether it had mishandled DNA evidence in hundreds of r**e cases.
A subsequent report from the state inspector general found a troubling pattern of errors at the office. Disputes among lab analysts were papered over, and technicians often presented subjective, flawed interpretations as scientific findings to prosecutors or defense lawyers.
Julie Bolcer, a spokeswoman for the medical examiner’s office, said that it “operates in accordance with best practices and stands by the science produced by the experts who staff it.”
At the time of the attack of the 22-year-old woman in 2010, Mr. Rodriguez was working as a maintenance worker at a Y.M.C.A. on Staten Island, he said in an interview. In May of the following year, he was arrested in connection with a burglary, and his DNA was entered into a state database.
The medical examiner’s office, according to the lawsuit, then significantly altered the DNA profile of the attacker “to match a known profile that had been entered into the national, state or local databases.”
According to the lawsuit, Theresa Caragine, a senior scientist at the lab, and Craig O’Connor, an analyst, changed results from DNA testing so that they would more closely match Mr. Rodriguez’s profile.
Dr. Caragine and Dr. O’Connor are both named as defendants in the lawsuit. Dr. Caragine did not respond to a request for comment. The medical examiner’s office declined to make Dr. O’Connor, now its director of forensic biology, available for an interview.
In August 2012, Mr. Rodriguez was arrested and charged with attempted r**e, and the DNA was the only evidence that linked him to the attack. The victim did not identify Mr. Rodriguez as her attacker during a lineup. In an interview the day after the attack, according to the lawsuit, the woman identified her attacker as a Hispanic man who was about 5-foot-5; Mr. Rodriguez is more than 6 feet tall.
A jury on Staten Island convicted Mr. Rodriguez of all charges, which also included attempted kidnapping and criminal possession of a weapon, in May 2014.
Around the time that Dr. Caragine was handling Mr. Rodriguez’s case, her work came under scrutiny. She resigned in April 2013 from the medical examiner’s office after the state inspector general’s investigation found that she had ignored lab protocol, including by rewriting reports whose findings she disagreed with.
The circumstances of Dr. Caragine’s resignation, according to the lawsuit, were never disclosed to Mr. Rodriguez’s lawyers.
Mr. Rodriguez wound up serving seven and a half years in prison, including stints at the Attica and Otisville Correctional Facilities in New York. He now lives near Orlando, Fla., where he provides transportation for older people. (He referred to his work as driving “an Uber for senior citizens.”)
In an interview, Mr. Rodriguez said he hoped to bring attention to more instances of people being convicted on the basis of mishandled evidence.
“I don’t want this to happen to anyone else,” he said.
Santul Nerkar is a Times reporter covering federal courts in Brooklyn.

Alexis Rodriguez claims technicians at the New York City medical examiner’s office fabricated DNA evidence, leading to his wrongful conviction in 2014 for attempted r**e.

After I-Team exposes DUI testing scandal, questions grow over who's holding labs accountableThe I-Team traveled to Texas...
07/03/2026

After I-Team exposes DUI testing scandal, questions grow over who's holding labs accountable
The I-Team traveled to Texas to explore what is considered the gold standard of forensic science accountability.
ByMark Rivera and Barb Markoff, Christine Tressel and Tom
Tuesday, April 28, 2026

DUI testing scandal: Who's holding scientists and labs accountable?
Forensic science evidence can carry extra weight in the courtroom. For some accused, it can mean the difference between freedom or jail.

CHICAGO (WLS) -- A prominent lab used by prosecutors for ma*****na DUI testing in Chicago and the suburbs is no longer doing human testing but the fallout surrounding the flawed results continues.

More than a year after the testing scandal at the University of Illinois-Chicago was revealed by the I-Team, there are growing questions over who's holding scientists and labs accountable.

ABC7 Chicago is now streaming 24/7. Click here to watch
Forensic science evidence can carry extra weight in the courtroom. For some accused, it can mean the difference between freedom or jail.

The UIC's Analytical Forensic Testing Laboratory (AFTL) situation now touches more than an estimated 2,000 people, resulting in cases dismissed with potentially more to come.

At issue are reports of faulty blood and urine tests that were supposed to measure illegal levels of ma*****na in DUI cases.

This lab crisis is considered the first big test for the relatively newly formed Illinois Forensic Science Commission which is headed up by Executive Director Amy Watroba.

"The commission is actively working on examining issues related to what occurred at AFTL laboratory," she said.

The 14-member body is designed by law as an advisory board. It has no legal authority to sanction rogue analysts or order a lab to shut down.

But the commission is taking a stand issuing a scathing statement challenging UIC's attorney-authored report, saying it is "insufficient to address the allegations" and suggesting a "fundamental lack of understanding of forensic toxicology."

Watroba said, "The commission felt it was important to respond."

In a written statement, the university said, "UIC remains committed to upholding the highest standards of laboratory research integrity and compliance. The Illinois Forensic Science Commission's statement and recommendations reflect its views and analysis. We are carefully reviewing its assessment. "

DUI attorney Donald Ramsell has been vocal about the commission and his frustration by its limitations.

A prominent lab used by prosecutors for ma*****na DUI testing in Chicago and the suburbs is no longer doing human testing but the fallout surrounding the flawed results continues.
"It was great that the Forensic Science Commission called out the lab for their additional layer of a cover up of their misconduct. Unfortunately, the Forensic Science Commission doesn't have the power to do much more than post a position paper," Ramsell said.

And Ramsell worries those overseeing AFTL at the time of the testing errors will not be held accountable.

"The lab is now closed, but nothing prevents it from restarting at this time. Furthermore, those analysts have now scattered and are offering expert testimony, private consults and working at other crime labs," he said.

Most states don't have an independent agency dedicated to oversight and auditing of forensic science.

The president of the National Association of Forensic Science Boards, Kermit Channell, told the I-Team that state boards with or without enforcement powers still bring value to the public.

"I think it's all about transparency. There has to be, you know, good understanding of the issues and problems, and there has to be correct, effective corrective action when something does go wrong," Channell said.

Channell went on to say the most effective commissions do have statutory teeth to enforce their findings.

"I think that boards do need some kind of power to enforce things, whether it's a corrective action going through whatever the situation might be. No one wants someone to be wrongly accused and convicted of a crime that they didn't commit," Channell said.

The I-Team traveled to Texas to explore what is considered the gold standard of forensic science accountability.

In downtown Houston, inside an unassuming high-rise building is the Houston Forensic Science Center, led by Dr. Peter Stout, the center's CEO and president. He said real accountability for labs in Texas was born out of a history of forensic fiascos so significant that they required legislative intervention.

"The worst crime lab in the country. That's what this laboratory was," proclaimed Stout.

To combat a history of poor testing and bad science, the Texas legislature created the Forensic Science Commission in the early 2000s to independently oversee, and if necessary, penalize labs and scientists for bad science.

It also made the Houston forensic lab independent of the Houston police. More recently, Texas passed a law requiring an online portal to disclose forensic evidence to both defense attorneys and prosecutors at the same time.

Stout said, "It changes the dynamic between law enforcement, prosecution, the courts, and the feds. You're going to get an independent answer from the laboratory, and you might not like that answer."

Inside the lab, where tens of thousands of cases per year are processed, Stout said getting the forensic science right is vital to the criminal justice system.

"It is disproportionately impactful evidence. And we've got to take it seriously, that the controls, oversight, the quality of that matches the expectation that people have."

Stout also weighed in on the evidence provided in Illinois by the UIC forensic lab for ma*****na DUI cases, saying it "pains him."

"It is really easy for labs without the framework around them to end up in some really unfortunate place," Stout said.

The I-Team also traveled to Austin, where the Forensic Science Commission reviews allegations of forensic misconduct.

One member read from newly filed paperwork about a lab worker accused of inappropriate behavior.

"The complaint alleges that the analyst withheld information from the defense and exhibited bias," the paperwork said.

Members took official action against that former Texas lab scientist for poor forensic drug testing, barring them from future employment in a state lab.

Lynn White Garcia, the commission's general counsel said, "We were able to really look at that and say OK, that's enough for us, and we're going to take action to make sure that this person is not employed anywhere else in the future."

It is that power to penalize that leads to better forensic science presented in court, Stout told the I-Team.

But to get this kind of commission with oversight authority, the power to investigate and take action against bad forensic science, it takes legislators who are ready to act.

That is something that could be accomplished in Illinois with its own evolving Forensic Science Commission.

Watroba said Illinois' commission, which started meeting in 2022, is effective through policy initiatives, incident analysis and helping with new legislation.

But she acknowledges the relatively young group could eventually change with public demand and action from lawmakers.

"A good commission is structured in such a way that it is designed to evolve, adapt and grow as the needs of the community and landscape it serves changes. So yes, Illinois' commission is designed to evolve," she explained.

The commission called on UIC to initiate a comprehensive audit of the now shuttered human toxicology lab, made by an independent agency with forensic science expertise.

Watroba said they have not yet received a response.

Forensic science evidence can carry extra weight in the courtroom. For some accused, it can mean the difference between freedom or jail.

Missy Woods, former forensic scientist accused of mishandling DNA, changes plea to guiltyBy Ava Kian, Jun. 23, 2026, 1:1...
07/03/2026

Missy Woods, former forensic scientist accused of mishandling DNA, changes plea to guilty

By Ava Kian, Jun. 23, 2026, 1:13 pm

Former Colorado Bureau of Investigation forensic scientist Yvonne “Missy” Woods, accused of mishandling DNA evidence dating back to 2008, pleaded guilty to four felony counts on Tuesday.

Following an agreement with prosecutors, Woods entered a guilty plea to four counts of committing a cybercrime, perjury, attempting to influence a public servant and forgery.

Woods, who worked at CBI for 29 years, was originally charged with 102 felonies in 2025, which she pleaded not guilty to in February. Prosecutors were preparing for a multi-week trial this fall. Prosecutors agreed to drop 98 counts as part of the deal.

Tamara Harney is one of the many people affected by Woods’ misconduct and has followed the case closely.

Harney’s father was killed in 1985, and the case remained unsolved until recently. When the news about Woods’ misconduct came out, Harney agreed to allow prosecutors to make a plea deal with her father’s killer instead of taking it to trial, out of fear that Woods’ misconduct would imperil the case.

“[Woods] does not deserve a plea. However, I completely understand why they would want to give her one. Having a six-week trial drag out probably wasn’t going to serve anyone well,” Harney said. “She’s affected so many people.”

Throughout Wood's decades with the CBI, she worked on more than 10,000 cases, according to the organization. An investigation found she cut corners and deleted data in around 10 percent of them. Addressing her misconduct led to significant forensic backlogs at CBI and stress on the judicial system, as courts have been considering which cases may have been impacted.

In a press release, District Attorney Alexis King for the First Judicial District said the plea agreement guarantees Woods will spend time behind bars and “protects the interests of the community.”

“Today, Ms. Woods accepted responsibility not only for individual acts of misconduct but for the full scope of criminal conduct that spanned decades. Despite Colorado law allowing for these offenses to be probation eligible, this disposition guarantees a prison sentence and eliminates any possibility of a community-based sentence.”

The director of CBI said the plea lets the agency focus on reforms put in place after Woods' misdeeds came to light.

“This moment is not about moving on, for CBI it’s about moving forward,” said CBI director Armando Saldate in a statement. “Today’s guilty plea is an important moment of accountability.”

Woods’ sentence will be up to a judge, but under terms of the agreement, it will range from 8 to 16 years in the Department of Corrections, according to the First Judicial District.

Woods is free on bond and will be sentenced on September 8.

Victims of her misconduct, like Harney, hope she receives the maximum sentence.

“I think a deal of some sort was probably the best play as long as she actually gets the maximum number of years. And to me, it would never be enough.”

A former CBI forensic scientist reached a deal with prosecutors to plead guilty to several charges of mishandling evidence.

Address

P.O. Box 2175
Sitka, AK
99835

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Forensic Fraud posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share