New Hell Hole News - #25

June 17, 2010

Re: USSC N° 09-9000

Dear Connect Amarillo.com, et al:

I have been made aware of Lynn Switzer and Mark White’s letter concerning my case and the
Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari on 05.24.10. I wish to respond personally and publicly. Their letter
is reprinted below paragraph by paragraph. Each paragraph is followed by my response.

In January 2010, the United States Supreme District Court dismissed Mr. Skinner’s civil
rights lawsuit, and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the decision. Mr. Skinner
petitioned the United States Supreme Court seeking further review, and that request was
granted by today’s order.

The Federal District Court dismissed the suit only because it was bound by outdated, incorrect 5th
Circuit case law which is at odds with Supreme Court precedent, as well as every other Circuit to have
considered the issue.

Our office responded to Mr. Skinner’s civil rights litigation by taking positions strictly in
accordance with the controlling law of the State of Texas, and the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals, and the briefing we filed primarily challenged whether the District Court had
jurisdiction to reach Mr. Skinner’s complaint.

“Her office responded” to nothing. She hired outside private counsel to represent her at cost to the tax
paying citizens of Gray County. This counsel, like Switzer herself, also proved ineffective. So lately
their briefs are being ghost-written (again at cost to the taxpayer) by a skeezy attorney in the Texas
Attorney General’s office. The positions they’ve taken are not “strictly in accordance with the
controlling law of Texas” nor in compliance with the Federal constitution. That’s why they lost; their
arguments were totally without merit. Lynn Switzer has something to hide regarding this evidence and
these subterfugial arguments are merely designed to protect their illegal secrets. There were no
jurisdictional arguments but merely a question of law: whether the controlling Supreme Court
precedent of Heck vs Humphrey and its progeny bars such a suit. Madam Switzer does not even
understand the issue at bar. That’s why she had to get help. The Heck question alone is what the
Supreme Court granted cert on.

There have been many inquiries about why Lynn Switzer has opposed Mr. Skinner’s
request for post-trial DNA testing. It is important for the citizens of Gray County to view
that request in light of the procedural background of this case.

As you will soon discover below, Madam Switzer’s procedural arguments have already been found by
the Federal Courts to be without merit, otherwise they could not have even reached the substantive
question raised. The citizens of Gray County should be totally unconcerned with inconsequential
procedural matters and should be concerned instead with only whether one of their citizens, though
actually innocent, is sitting on death row for 17+ years while the State is trying to kill him. Madam
Switzer is very actively and adamantly, as well as very seemingly irrationally, blocking all efforts to
get at the simple truth by testing this evidence. Every State agent involved in the investigation of this
1
case has said this evidence needs to be tested, as have the original prosecutor and two other previous
D.A.’s.

Mr. Skinner was convicted and sentenced to death in March 1995 for having killed Twila
Busby and her two adult, mentally-challenged sons Randy Busby and Elwin “Scooter”
Caler, shortly before midnight on New Year’s Eve of 1993. Before the trial, former Gray
County District Attorney John Mann obtained DNA testing and those results were
admitted against Mr. Skinner during trial. DNA testing of two of the blood stains on Mr.
Skinner’s shirt were consistent with Twila Busby’s DNA, while a third blood stain was
consistent with Mr. Skinner’s DNA. DNA testing of blood stains were consistent with
Elwin’s DNA. A forensic scientist testified at trial that 1 in 5.5 billion people (at the time, the
population of the earth) would have the same DNA probes identified in the blood stains as
belonging to Twila, Elwin, and Mr. Skinner. In 2000, former District Attorney John Mann
again submitted several items of evidence for DNA testing. The results of some of the items
were inconclusive. The testing on the hair found in the right hand of Twila showed a profile
that was consistent with both Twila and Mr. Skinner. All evidence was available for forensic
testing prior to trial had Mr. Skinner’s attorneys Harold Comer and Kenneth Fields chosen
to do so.

At autopsy both Scooter (Elwin) and Randy were found to be physically normal (i.e. free of disease
and/or defects); both graduated high school on time, with their class. The DNA testing referred to were
only contact stains consistent with my claim of innocence according to the State’s own experts. The
post-trial testing conducted in 2000 by D.A. John Mann was not “inconclusive”; Mann simply lied
about the results and, long after he was corrected by GeneScreen, he continued to lie. These facts are
well attested by documents from Mann’s own files, contained in exhibits P2 and P3 in my January
27th, 2010 letter to D.A. Lynn Switzer. On March 24th I almost died because of these lies, coming
within 20 minutes of execution. On May 24th, 2 months later, Lynn Switzer once again continues to try
to perpetuate these lies.

It is true that the initial test yielded a result of a “mixed profile” of Twila and myself from the bloody
hairs “clutched” in her hand. However, unlike Paul Harvey Madam Switzer simply fails to tell “the
rest of the story” which is this: of the mixed profile, all of my markers were “faint”, indicating it likely
resulted from innocent lab contamination between the wellplates when my standard sample was loaded
too close to Twila’s evidentiary samples. Which is why accepted practice is to load them separately
and far apart. Additionally, subsequent testing of the blood flakes off the hair prove it was only
Twila’s blood, not mine; subsequent mitochondrial testing of the hairs themselves prove that they
came from an unknown male individual, not me! But that’s nothing. The criminalist who viewed a
man’s jacket size XLG 44-46 found beside Twila’s body said it was likely worn by the assailant as it
had medium velocity impact spatter on the cuffs and forearms of the sleeves. Only Twila had injuries
that would result in medium velocity impact blood spatter. Ergo, the assailant was the owner and one
wearing that jacket, not me. I wear a medium 38-40. I could’ve have used that jacket for pup tent.
Footwear impressions in the pooled blood by Twila’s head are size 11-12 and American technics (or
polytechnics) semi-combat boot. I wear a 9-9 1/2 . I owned no boots at the time of the murders only
tennis shoes. Bloody fingerprints on a trash bag containing one of the purported murder weapons were
determined to not match me. Blood off a cassette tape case found near where Twila was killed contains
a mixture of blood from an unknown male and female individuals. Blood off the sidewalk outside the
front door belongs to an unknown male individual. Yet previous D.A.’s John Mann and Rick Roach
lied to the media, telling them that “in all the testing there has been no DNA from any 3rd party”.

2
Madam Switzer conveniently fails to tell any of you citizens of Gray County any of these facts, eh.

Oh, hold on. I’m not done yet. The fact that 1 in 5.5 billion people would match Twila’s blood on my
clothes as cited by Switzer is evidentiarly meaningless. Big numbers meant to impress. The State’s
own experts conceded at trial that the stains on my clothes which were tested were only contact
transfers and showed only that I came into contact with a victim at a time after they became bloody,
not that I did anything to them; or that I came into contact with a surface upon which they’d deposited
blood. Both scenarios consistent with my innocence and the actual events that I got off the couch and
stumbled out of the house after the murders were committed.

I was injured that evening as well. I had a very profusely bleeding cut on the palm of my right hand,
the hand with the barely healed, crippled thumb. My blood was found nowhere on Twila, Elwin,
Randy nor on any of the alleged murder weapons.

I cannot be faulted for Harold Comer’s refusal to test the evidence prior to trial. I wrote him letters all
summer proclaiming my innocence, begging him to help me prove it; begging, demanding, cajoling
him to test the evidence. Comer was an ex-D.A. with a $96,000 IRS tax lien default and about to go to
federal prison for it, but his good political buddies Mann and Judge M. Kent Sims bailed him out – the
price was steep: my life. Comer sold me out.

Years later on appeal, as he sat on death row, Mr. Skinner argued that his attorneys were
ineffective for failing to pursue DNA testing.

It was not “years later on appeal as I sat on death row” that we filed ineffective assistance claims on
Comer. We had to file those in a state habeas after direct appeal. Everything was filed at the
appropriate time. We pursued DNA testing consistently and timely as well. There are no valid
procedural default issues in this case. All federal court rulings were on the merits.

In November 2005, lead defense trial counsel Harold Comer testified during a federal
evidentiary hearing and explained the trial strategy (1) that the defense hired a DNA expert
who evaluated the State’s evidence and found no basis for challenging the results; (2) that
certain DNA test results, such as for the blood stains on Mr. Skinner’s clothing, had been
damaging to the defense’s blood spatter expert determined that widespread amounts of
blood stains on the clothing Mr. Skinner was wearing when he was arrested a few hours
after the murders were inconsistent with Mr. Skinner’s story that he had lain comatose on
the sofa only a few feet away from where Twila was beaten and strangled to death; and (4)
that Mr. Skinner’s videotaped statement to police about how he and Twila had fought with a
stick (which police found imbedded with blood and hair, and laying near Twila’s body) was
also inconsistent with Mr. Skinner’s alibi.

Comer never coined this “strategy” argument until well after Mann falsely claimed in 2000 that post
trial DNA testing was inculpatory. After Mann was shown to be lying, the only thing Comer could say
about his alleged “strategy” is that “we only wanted to try that case to a jury with an alternate suspect
(Donnell) so we didn’t investigate it to any conclusion much like the police would”. Comer admitted
that he had no reason, much less any strategic one, for failing to conclude the investigation into
Donnell. Of course, pursuing that should have included testing.

The widespread stains inconsistency with my having simply lain on the couch, according to the
criminalist who examined evidence, was a direct result of Comer’s failure to fully inform said expert
3
of the totality of facts regarding this issue: namely a) that most of the blood on my clothes is likely my
own dripped blood from my hand wound and b) more importantly, I wasn’t even wearing my clothes
when I was lying on the couch; they were draped over the furniture less than 18”-24” from where
Twila was killed. Blood was spattered all the way onto the curtains behind the couch where I lay, so
certainly it was spattered on my clothes as well.

I didn’t make any such videotaped statement as Switzer alleges. In the statement I did make, I did not
admit involvement in the crime at all. I said I remembered something about the club and a fight. Not
that I was involved. I said I didn’t know what happened; that’s true, I don’t have firsthand knowledge.
I was comatose on the couch when it all happened.

However, even in my sickened state at the time, during questioning I demanded a lawyer and lead
detective Terry Young admitted at a pre-trial habeas hearing that he refused me access to counsel then
continued questioning me and began suggesting scenarios to me and attempting to get me to confirm
them, violating all my Miranda rights and rights to constitutional due process. John Mann testified at a
federal evidentiary hearing that all my rights were so blatantly and obviously violated; that officer
Young was known to be corrupt and his tactics illegal and, that he was not trustworthy. Young himself
admitted to the Houston Chronicle that I never confessed. Lyn Switzer cannot deny knowledge of this
fact because Young’s truthful statement is contained in exhibit “B” of the letter I sent her on January
27th, 2010. A Houston Chronicle story (titled “ANOTHER DEATH PENALTY CASE BECOMES
FOCUS OF SCRUTINY”) by James Kimberly and Mike Tolson, June 28th, 2000. That story and other
exhibits to my letter disprove every other contention Switzer makes in her letter.

I did not have any “alibi”. An alibi is usually a general denial by claiming to have been elsewhere at
the time of the crime. I never claimed that. Switzer is obviously confused. That seems to be her semi-
permanent, fatuous state.

Talking to Young was a “free shot”. Knowing he’d so egregiously violated my rights, I knew the
interview was inadmissible for any purpose. So I decided to bait him. I knew that club was used to kill
Twila, he’d told me so. I knew damn well I hadn’t touched that club. But I knew that if they tested it
and it didn’t come back to me I could use that to prove my innocence. I also knew Terry Young was
attempting to set me up for this crime – his suggested scenarios had clearly revealed that much.

I knew Young was an idiot, I knew I didn’t touch that club, I knew a killer did. So I decided to say
what I could to give him the impression he’d find my DNA/prints on it. I made the mistake of thinking
the State crime lab people were honest even tho’ I knew Young was not. They were liars too. Altho’
they were forced to admit my blood/prints were not on the club, they likewise claimed there was no
DNA on the gripping end nor any usable prints. But they didn’t use the Ninhydrin or superglue cyano-
acrylate fumes method for raising prints, either. I guess because my hand was cut those geniuses
finally figured out I could not have been the one to wield that club, so they lost any interest in further
testing it.

I couldn’t have used those knives purported to be the murder weapons, nor the club. My thumb had
nearly been severed off my hand in a shop accident just 5 months before the murders. At the time of
the murders my hand was freshly healed after an infection and outpatient surgery to remove necrotized
tissue; I’d lost 38% of the muscle mass in the base of my thumb and palm, the wound was barely
closed and the skin and scar stretched tight and thin over the bone. I could not make a fist with that
hand and was having trouble just holding a toothbrush or hairbrush. This was my right hand. I’m right
handed, thus right hand dominant. I had less than 50% strength and motility in that hand 14 months
4
after the murders. In addition to the weaponry I could not have made any use of, Twila was strangled
by hands so powerful they left permanent indentations in the flesh of her neck and broke the hyoid and
cricoid bones attached to her larynx. Experts testified at trial, unrefuted by the state, that I could not
have effected these injuries to the victims.

Isn’t it interesting how hired gun Mr. White and D.A. Switzer conveniently fail to mention any of the
above? You know why? Because they cannot answer to nor refute any of these facts. These blatant
omissions by Switzer/White amount to dishonesty. They’re using a very skewed view of facts in a
limited fashion to paint a picture for you, the public and you, the media which is obviously false. My
question to you is: why aren’t you calling them on it? Why don’t you present them with these facts and
demand rigorously honest answers? I am a citizen of Gray County just like those of you White and
Switzer are speaking to! My damned life is at stake here! This could easily be you! Because, by God,
if she’s allowed to do it to me and get away with it, she can do the same to you! Any of you!

The United States District Court held that Mr. Skinner was represented at trial by competent
counsel who mad a reasoned strategic decision to not seek DNA testing, and denied relief on
this ineffective assistance of counsel claim. The Fifth Circuit found that reasonable jurists would
not debate the decision, and the United States Supreme Court denied review.

So? That doesn’t make it right or just! It is well known that since the courts became antagonistic
toward defendants in the republican led “get tough on crime” political craze of the 90’s, the federal
judiciary (Averitte and Robinson) and the 5th Circuit lost any integrity and commitment to true justice
it ever had. When it became politically unpopular to rule for any defendant, justice flew out the
window. Lie and deny became the order of the day and it rules still. Then people like White and
Switzer point to these decisions and say “the courts denied relief” as if it were somehow justification
for their own failure to honor their oath of office.

Additionally, Mr. Skinner filed two motions with the trial court (in 2001 and 2007) seeking
post-conviction DNA testing. Both times, the trial court and the Court of Criminal Appeals
found that Mr. Skinner was unable to show that there was a reasonable chance that additional
testing could exonerate him, and therefore denied the motions. In both instances, Mr. Skinner
failed to ask the Supreme Court for certiorari review.

Mr. White misstates the CCA’s actual language. The courts denied testing on erroneous grounds. The
fact that the Supreme Court is now forced to take up the matter is testament to that fact. We did not
“fail” to seek Supreme Court review of the State court decisions as Mr. White states. We were
pursuing federal constitutional claims. In that context we are merely required to first exhaust State
court remedies, then to show that those remedies were inadequate and that the State courts decisions
are arbitrary and violate federal mandates. This is readily demonstrated by the CCA’s written opinions.
They’re the laughing stock of the judiciary nationwide. In the latter opinion that nutcase Sharon Keller
lapses into an inquisitorial style of address, she’s so full of hatred and devoid of any rational logic. The
United States Supreme Court does not sit to address matters of State law interpretation – such as a
CCA decision – but only matters of federal constitutional dimension. So it would’ve been futile and
frivolous to appeal the CCA decisions to the Supreme Court – Ch 64 DNA statute is a State law. It
doesn’t implicate federal mandates on its face. The arbitrary application of Ch 64 to my case by the
CCA is part of our federal lawsuit against Switzer and we are addressing it in that context.

5
It is Mr. White and Madam Switzer who have failed to convince the United States Supreme Court that
certiorari review of the 5th Circuit’s erroneous denial of our suit and access to DNA testing is not
warranted. Thus the Supreme Court grant of certiorari May 24th, 2010.

Lastly on this issue, Mr. White falsely implies we’ve been dilatory in filing for DNA testing. The
record will reveal that as soon as the Ch 64 DNA statute was enacted we were amongst the first to file
a claim. We vigorously and very timely pursued it to a conclusion. It was the State that dragged its feet
for 9 months, refusing to rule. Judge Schemmert was cited by the CCA for abusing his discretion in
that initial Ch 64 litigation. When the statute was amended, we again were among the first to file.

Nearly 15 years after trial, Mr. Skinner tried another tactic – arguing for the first time that
current Gray County District Attorney Lynn Switzer is violating his civil rights by not allowing
him to conduct additional DNA testing. Although nothing prevented Mr. Skinner from filing a
civil rights lawsuit earlier, he did not initiate this attack until after the trial court ordered his
execution for February 2010.

We’re not trying another tactic, we’re following the United States Supreme Court’s precedential
direction on how to obtain access to test DNA evidence that could prove my innocence. Last year in a
decision called Osborne vs Dist. Att’y the Supreme Court decided how this must be done. That’s how
we’re doing it. Mr. White is mistaken yet again. We timely filed the suit. One of the reasons Osborne
was denied was because he filed suit without first having utilized State law procedures for obtaining
access to the DNA evidence. So we had to fully litigate the matter under State statute (Ch 64), first. As
I’ve already stated, all the delay in this matter is directly attributable to Judge Schemmert and the
nutcase Keller on the CCA. Also, no valid death warrant/execution date was extant at the time we filed
suit.

Now to address Switzer’s direct statements.

“As District Attorney for the citizens of Gray County, I give great weight to the wishes of the
victims’ families, and particularly with the immediate family of these victims and my position
regarding the DNA evidence controversy is fully supported. There have been many questions,
speculations, allegations and outright misrepresentations in this case that it has been difficult to
stand silent until the civil lawsuit was resolved. I made the decision to defend against this suit
with an eye not only on Mr. Skinner’s case but on past and future cases as well. I knew that
there were ramifications for District Attorney’s all across the state, especially where the
defendant waits so long before even filing a civil rights lawsuit. I felt that it was important to
stand firm, something that is not always easy to do. If defendants are allowed to “game the
system” then we will never be able to rely on the finality of the judgments entered in their cases.
I know that it has been hard on the family and friends of Twila, Randy and Elwin and I
appreciate their feelings of frustration and hurt.

The “family of Twila”, Scooter and Randy have already publicly stated unequivocally that they want
the testing done – just ask Twila’s daughter and only surviving heir, Lisa Busby. If she’s so “fully
supported” why are David Brito-Garcia and Lisa Busby selling t-shirts in Pampa right now at 841 S.
Barnes that say “Test the DNA in Hank Skinner’s Case!”? The “outright misrepresentations” Switzer
complains of, as shown above, are all her own!

We haven’t waited too long to file anything. All of Switzer’s subterfuge totally overlooks the fact that
if she’d just turn over the evidence and let us test it all of this could be resolved!
6
In the US Supreme Court’s decision in the 2009 Osborne case, they said that Osborne could not
contest Alaska’s post-conviction testing statutes or sue the D.A. without having first attempted to
utilize those procedures to an ultimate conclusion. By the Supreme Court’s own precedent, then, we
could not have filed suit until the CCA’s final decision on our DNA Ch 64 testing request.

No one is “gaming the system” Lynn Switzer. But your lying ass is attempting to game the public at
large and the citizens of Gray County with your subterfuge and misdirection.

“Skinner has a full and fair trial before a Gray County jury. He elected not to have more
evidence tested for DNA, which was his trial strategy. He was convicted. His case has dragged
on for years. The fact that the Supreme Court has granted Skinner’s request for a final review of
this matter provides an excellent opportunity for the Court to affirm that once a convicted state
prisoner has had an adequate opportunity to make a due process challenge to his conviction
through a habeas corpus proceeding, other post-conviction proceedings are better left to the
states to handle. The Texas procedure for obtaining this evidence is ample and reasonable, and
Mr. Skinner has been given plenty of opportunity to show that additional testing could prove
his innocence, but he could not show that. We look forward to presenting the case to the
Court.”

No, I did not “have a full and fair trial”. I also did not “elect not to have more DNA evidence tested”.
These statements are outright lies! As I pointed out to you in my Jan 27th letter (Delivery confirmation
#7004 2510 0007 2512 1425) then D.A. John Mann suborned perjury from Twila’s mother, Beverly
Clark, which is unequivocally proven beyond any doubt by documentation you turned over to us
persuant to an open records request out of Mann’s own files! He likewise threatened Andrea Reed into
lying on me and it was solely on her lies that I was convicted! The fact that the 5th Circuit refused to
reverse my conviction does not make it right or just. It only means that those three clowns on the 5th
Circuit panel, just like you, try to lie and deny, sweep it under the rug rather than admit the truth: I was
framed. You, wench, are only the latest continuance of John Mann’s legacy of deceit, corruption and
lies. The jury never heard the truth!

Your statements are in direct conflict with the record evidence. The record shows that I wrote Harold
Comer, the ringer ex-D.A. and Mann’s crony I was saddled with for a “defense” lawyer, demanding
that he hire experts and serologist to test the forensic evidence. At that time I thought serologists did
DNA. DNA was in its infancy still in 1993-94 having been first used in a criminal trial in 1986. As the
federal court stated, it was “novel”, still in 1995. My letter to Comer was dated June 16th-25th, 1994.
Comer refused to get the testing done.

There are no “important issues or ramifications for D.A.’s all across the State’”. What an absurd joke.
What D.A. in his or her right mind would oppose the justice he/she is sworn to uphold, would deny
testing in a case like mine, where the crucial evidence that can unequivocally determine innocence or
guilt has never been tested? Only you, Lynn Switzer! Only you. Yes, you thought these issues to be so
“important for D.A.’s all the across the State” that you flatly refused to attend the CCA’s oral
argument on my Chapter 64 DNA appeal in Austin in October 2008. You have admitted elsewhere that
this evidence could prove my innocence yet you would send me to my death without testing it. What
D.A., what true servant of the citizenry and taxpayer, would take such an illogical, asinine stance when
all three of your predecessors in office, including Mann himself before he died, as well as the medical
examiner who worked the case, three lead detectives and the first officer on the scene have all publicly
stated that this evidence needs to be tested? You, woman, are a sick walking joke. The Dallas D.A.’s

7
office has stated unequivocally that they would not oppose testing in a case like mine and they have
more DNA exonerations than any other county in the State!

To anyone who believes Texas DNA rulings “are ample and reasonable”, read the CCA’s Ch 64
opinion ruling in my case. Sharon “Killer” Keller wrote it herself! It employs an inquisitorial form of
address, it’s so biased and one sided. The Inquisition (1233-1834) has long ended. Today our justice
system employs an adversarial system and form of address.

Lynn Switzer has squandered an untold amount of the taxpayers’ money hiring outside counsel to
defend her, in an effort to thwart justice and commit State sanctioned murder, where she could easily
just have tested the evidence and let the chips fall where they may. It would not have cost her or you,
Mr. and Mrs. Taxpayer, one thin dime!

Lynn Switzer has something to hide. Time will bear that out, mark my words on it.

I have done everything within my power to get this evidence tested from day one, even coming
perilously close to falsely admitting involvement in the crime, just to get the club tested. Before the
DNA statute was even written and passed into law, I filed discovery motions with the CCA during the
pendancy of my first State Habeas which they never even heard.

This case has “dragged on for years” only because of the State’s never ending delays, subterfuge, lies,
stalling and resistance to allowing the testing. They could’ve opted to put an end to this at any time by
simply testing the evidence! Do not allow Lynn Switzer and her ilk to mislead you as she has others.

I’m sorry for what Lisa Busby has went through because of this case, but, I’ve went through the same
and worse. I’ve been locked up for 17+ years now for a crime I did not commit. Those lost days of my
life I will never get back. Worse, I’ve been within 20 minutes of death, as well.

Respectfully,

Hank Skinner

999143 Polunsky Unit

H W Hank Skinner
3872 FM 350 South
Livingston TX 77351-8580

http://www.hankskinner.org

h.w.skinner@gmail.com
hwskinner@yahoo.com

For those of you who use JPay to write to Hank, don’t forget to always include your postal address and
your e-mail address after your signature, so Hank can reply to you. For those who would like to use
JPay to write to Hank (www.jpay.com) don’t forget to enter the TDC number as an 8-digit number:
00999143.

Thank you!