Attorneys say DNA proves inmate is innocent of rape

Man pleaded guilty to 2001 rape but quickly recanted

By Dena Potter
Associated Press

CHARLESTON, W.Va. (AP) — Attorneys for a West Virginia man who has served 11 years for a rape they say DNA proves he didn’t commit are asking a judge to release him.

Attorneys with the Innocence Project appeared in Harrison County Circuit Court on Thursday to argue that Joseph Buffey should be released on bond while a judge considers whether to overturn his conviction. Buffey pleaded guilty to the 2001 rape and robbery of an 83-year-old Clarksburg woman, but quickly recanted.

In 2011, the Innocence Project secured a DNA test on biological evidence left at the scene, and it did not match Buffey. Buffey’s attorneys then fought for more than a year to run the DNA through a national criminal database. Late last month it hit on another man who was serving time in West Virginia for another crime.

Buffey’s attorneys and prosecutors have agreed not to release that person’s name while authorities investigate the new evidence. He has not been charged.

Prosecuting Attorney Joseph Shaffer is fighting the motion to release Buffey, saying the DNA tests do not prove Buffey is innocent.

“You have to keep in mind that Mr. Buffey did in fact plead guilty to this,” Shaffer told the AP. “We’re not just going to agree to unlock the doors to the jailhouse merely because somebody else’s DNA was found at the scene. It does merit further investigation, obviously.”

Buffey’s attorneys say prosecutors’ reluctance to run the DNA through the database — and their insistence he is guilty despite the DNA tests and other evidence — raises questions about their motives. Shaffer wasn’t in office when Buffey was prosecuted, but came in shortly after.

“Why would you not want to know who committed this crime so you could prosecute them, especially if this person could be on the street and could be committing more crimes?” asked Barry Scheck, co-director of the Innocence Project. “Personally, that’s when we reached the conclusion that the prosecuting attorney in this case was less interested in finding out the truth and finding out who committed this crime, and more interested in protecting who might be at fault for failing to find who committed this crime.”

Added Innocence Project senior staff attorney Nina Morrison: “The only reason they would have to oppose the database in this case is if they were afraid of where it might lead.”

They argue the evidence to support Buffey’s innocence claim is overwhelming.

The victim said she was attacked by one man. Buffey’s attorneys said the victim spent considerable time with the suspect and that she was subjected to multiple assaults, so she would know if two attackers were involved. If the DNA evidence excludes Buffey and points to another person, they say, it proves Buffey was not involved.

Shaffer says that isn’t so. He has argued that Buffey could have been an unseen accomplice.

“We need to go back and look at her statement to determine what she may have meant by what she may have said,” Shaffer said. “We’d like to try to re-interview her, but I’m not sure if that’s going to be possible because of her age.”

Buffey’s attorneys say he confessed after eight hours of interrogation, giving facts that were “wildly inconsistent” with the crime. The victim did not pick his photo from a lineup even after his confession.

They claim the 19-year-old was pressured by his lawyer into pleading guilty, which resulted in charges involved in three break-ins to be dropped. Buffey admits he broke into several businesses, but maintains he never committed a violent crime or broke into a home.

Shaffer insists he will look at the investigation’s findings objectively. Buffey’s attorneys don’t believe that.

“We’ve lost confidence that the state is taking a fair and objective look at this case,” Morrison said.

Last month, Harrison County Circuit Court Judge Thomas A. Bedell ordered every state agency that had any contact with the case, including the prosecutor’s office, to turn over its files to Buffey’s attorneys — a move they said was rare. That has not happened, Buffey’s attorneys said, and it’s something they’ll stress Thursday.

They stress that 10 percent of the 301 people exonerated through DNA testing originally pleaded guilty to the crimes for which they were eventually proven innocent.

“Whether or not the State is yet prepared to come to grips with the fact that it has incarcerated an innocent man for the last eleven years, Mr. Buffey should not spend one more day in prison for a crime he did not commit,” they argue in court documents.

Even if the conviction is tossed out, prosecutors still could retry Buffey.