PORTLAND, Maine — A hearing in which a Maine man serving a life sentence for the kidnapping and murder of a 12-year-old girl in 1988 has wrapped up for the time being.
The lawyer for Dennis Dechaine is seeking a new trial based on DNA evidence from a fingernail clipping from the victim, Sarah Cherry of Bowdoin.
His attorney says evidence that now exists showing existence of DNA from an unknown male would have changed jurors’ minds at Dechaine’s 1989 trial.
Deputy Attorney General Bill Stokes says DNA evidence from Sarah Cherry’s fingernail clippings is inconclusive but that the rest of the evidence was overwhelming.
Much of the testimony focused on the possibility of evidence contamination before wrapping up Friday. The hearing is Dechaine’s fifth attempt to get a new trial.
Give the man a new trial!
I agree. Heck, even if he is found not guilty, and he really was guilty (only God knows), he would have served more time than many murderers have.
Unlike most murders, pedifiles repeat their crimes; no one knows the number of children saved by keeping this pathetic excuse for a human being in prison for the last 25 years!
he was railroaded in the first place,he is not guilty.
Even with a new trial and supposedly new DNA evidence, it still doesn’t change any of the original evidence (quite compelling too) against him.
Oh c’mon. Prosecutors can say they have overwhelming evidence all they like but their case is circumstantial and it fell apart when the AG’s confidential file was released showing the evidence prosecutors concealed.
There was no evidence concealed. Read the trial transcripts. Dennis’s lawyer had access to everything at trial.
Then why is Maine still opposing DNA testing even to this day? I mean the case is solved & closed, Dechaine is behind bars, there should be no opposition to any testing. Hmmm, wonder what Stokes is trying to hide now. Allow proper DNA testing on items the state did not destroy and we’ll see what comes of it.
They burned the rape kit @ a time the defendent had already requested testing, and would pay for himself. I don’t think a guilty guy would do that.
Aw c’mon Dana. SEE AND READ the official documents from the AG’s confidential file.
http://www.trialanderrordennis.org/books/StateSecretsLo.pdf
Merci Monsieur!
Vous etes bien venue
There is NO compelling evidence against Dechaine. That’s the whole problem. He didn’t confess to murder, fact in 2 recent independent forensic pathology reports Dennis was no where near the body when the girl expired.
It was compelling, there was certainly evidence looking away from him as well; and not just a little bit. He was guilty then, now? Im not so sure.
If you had been at the hearings this week, you would have seen the State look like a bunch of inept country bumpkins! I hope the Judge does the right thing!
Let this child killer free, he is a doper, he will over dose and be dead in a week. He is going back to court on new drug charges he got while in prison and was placed in the hospital for having over dosed. He is as guilty as the day is long and I hope he dies a long slow and painful death!
Just remember, inmates can’t traffick drugs in prison, but your well paid guards can. Now who should be held accountable.
You can’t be serious. There are a miltitude of ways to smuggle drugs into prison besides guards. Sure some guards probably do it sometimes, but I doubt if it’s very widespread.
Thank God they don’t get their drugs from visits or cheeking their meds or their loving families in the mail.Well paid guards?? Family of 4 can qualify for food stamps…
What do you mean a prisoner can’t traffic drugs in prison? If I’m a nurse and I come to your call and give you your medication, you hide the pills in you cheek, make it look as if you swallow and now you have the pills you need to get some Cash, then there are the visitors, and staff. You just can’t dump this on staff.
Doper yes? Child Killer is another. I do not have all evidence shown in court, but what evidence has been written in the paper, I think provides reasonable doubt.
I’ve heard of people who got picked up for walking down the street with knives near a murder and had nothing to do with it. They just happened to be walking down the wrong street at the wrong time.
How about an article recently about another man in another state who was put to the death penalty, and years later, we now have the man who really murdered the victim. Some innocent man lost his life for being at the wrong place at the wrong time. I think people are too quick to charge someone, to make the public feel good.
How about another black man, a movie was made from this story, who had to spend most of his life in jail because the white community saw him bringing the bodies up from the water, and later another family helped prove his innocence.
Wasn’t there a hired hand with a criminal past that worked with Dechaine and left the state immediately following Cherry’s death? From what I remember, they couldn’t locate him after he left. He would have known what was in the truck for rope, scarf, etc. Maybe they should compare the DNA sample they have to his DNA. Anything Dechaine may have admitted to while under cross-examination could have been the result of hours of improper police interrogation. Bring the hired hand back to Maine and test his DNA. There are a lot of innocent people in jail. If DNA proves him innocent, then let him go. If it doesn’t, then let him serve his time
Testimony of the detectives who claimed they were reading Dechaine’s incriminating comments from their notes was disproved when the Legislature ordered the AG to open his “confidential file.”
Those so-called “confessions” are NOT in the detectives’ notes.
That suspext who left the state wasn’t acquainted with Dechaine. He was a relative of Sarah Cherry who was, at the time of Sarah’s death, already under indictment for sexually molesting his step-daughter.
Look at the official record:
http://www.trialanderrordennis.org/pdfs/report.pdfhttp://www.trialanderrordennis.org/pdfs/report.pdf
Good thing Thos isn’t confused by silly things like (previously concealed) official documents.
http://trialanderrordennis.org/books/SS-1-08.pdf
This document is fiction by T&E. It has lots of assumptions and reads more like a novel than an independent report with quotes from Sherlock Holmes. Give it up. He did it.
OH YOU LUCKY DOG! Two Trial & Error members have each added $1.000.00 to the author’s offer of $1,000.00 to the person who points to a single false statement by the author in the book regarding the evidence or the official corruption.SO, the total is now $3,000.00.Step up with your evidence and collect now!What? You can’t point to any such false statement in the book?Sheesh!
Personal attacks are out of line – I hope the moderator shuts you down. Please don’t respond to me as I will not any longer to you. We can agree to disagree, but no attacking others. Good day and go away.
You didn’t make a personal attack on the integrity of the author?
Quitting is a good excuse to avoid having to offer any evidence or apply for the $$$
Put up or shut up!
Keep flogging your book ElderlyGent. Makes me wonder what your real agenda is. I read your (borrowed) book. Besides exhibiting a glaring inability to understand the rules of evidence, all you did was attack the state’s case, and impugn the people who you disagreed with — and their families. That’s all. You added nothing of value to the instant case and gave some false hope to the poor saps who believe your booshwa.
You’ve read the 2006 edition, seen the official documents proving misconduct by police and prosecutors, and you still think Dechaine is guilty and got a fair trial?
Well, that’s your progblem. Not mine.
The fundamental problem with your book is that you have a skewed idea of what, “Proof” is. Seems to me, your standard is if it needs to fit the dubious fact pattern you’ve created, it’s true. If it doesn’t, it’s false. It’s a flaw that appears page after page after page and fatally pollutes your narrative. Inside the bar, truth isn’t what you believe, truth is what you can prove.
Riddle me these minor details that you intentionally overlook: Did Dennis Dechaine admit that he was in the driveway of the house Sarah was abducted from? Then, tell me what happened to the fishing rod/tackle he claimed to be carrying when he went into the woods. And finally, did Dennis give a false name, hometown and occupation to the old couple (whose name(s) escape me) who found him on the road when he finally walked out of the woods?
Answers: Yes he did admit to being in the driveway — he said he went up the driveway (in the middle of day mind you) to pee. And although he claimed to be fishing, he had no fishing rod or tackle. He said, “I threw it away.” This rod and tackle, by the way has never been found despite the best efforts of a hundred searchers. And finally, he lied in EVERY respect to the old couple.
Am I incorrect in any way?
I’m not the brightest bulb in the drawer, but Sarah’s uneaten lunch and Dennis’ admission that he was in the driveway at a contemporaneous time is pretty compelling. Ditto the imaginary fishing tackle and the furtive behavior he exhibited to the very first people he came across.
And dude, that’s just the beginning..
Dechaine admitted stopping in “a driveway” not that driveway, and urinating in the woods. The answers to all your questions are in that book, so no need for me to copy and write them out.
If you still believe him guilty after seeing the testimony and official reports, well, that says more about you than about Dechaine.
I have no problem with you believing whatever you like — only with your posting false information. By now, though,I think readers can see the quality of your allegations.
You make my point.
It wan’t “A” driveway he admitted to driving into. It was “The” Driveway. You’re the only one who disputes this, Mr. Moore. Isn’t that correct? Even Dennis didn’t dispute it. Just you. I refer again to the way you whittle facts to fit your theory.
You refuse to answer the other questions because the facts aren’t in step with your fantasy. The fact is he lied about fishing. The fact is he lied to that old couple. From the moment he stepped out of the woods, he lied and lied and lied. And now you do it for him..
You never attended a moment of the trial. You never attended any of the post trial hearings. You came in waaaaaay after the thing was done, and despite your having absolutely no experience or training at appellate review, not only did you decry the prosecution, you got shrill and personal based solely upon your interpretation of the record — the mark of a rank amateur. In fact, you like to claim that you’re the expert on this case, when in truth there are a number people who knew it much better — when it happened — not X-many years later.
Some other lesser-known facts you gloss over/ignore:
Tell us how Dennis got that bite mark under his bicep. Surely you know about the bite mark. And then tell us WHEN the whole “Speed” thing was concocted (Seriously, when I wanna score injectable speed, I head right for the Museum of Science). And just why did you attack Eric Wright’s young son again? What did he have to do with the fact that Dechaine abducted, tortured and murdered Sarah Cherry.
Gotta tell you Moore — speaking of injustice — you do, and have done the citizens of this state a grievous injustice ever since you decided to stick your nose into this case.
Put that in your book.
You assume I’m Moore? Well, you are good at assuming that your guesses are facts. Kinda like that pathetic ole ex-prosecutor Eric Wright who was fired from the AG’s office after his chicanery began to be exposed.
According to the report by DeputyReed (to whom Dechaine made the “driveway” statement), Dechaine said “a driveway” and offered no further description. Later, interviewed on the Court TV program, Reed claimed Dechaine said it was “the driveway, and he described the house to a t.” Which was the lie?
Reed (and you) really must try to be truthful. Truth is easier to remember. You guys have a hard time keeping all your lies straight.
The rest of your rant is answered clearly in the book, but this latest screed of yours hardly qualifies you to accuse anybody else of being “shrill and personal.”
Nothing shrill about me, Moore. I’m not the one who defames decent people on behalf of a child killer.
I’m not the one out to make money on the murder of a little girl.
“Pathetic,” Eric Wright? Again, you’re the only person who’d make that claim.
Why won’t you tell us why you attacked his son?
Moore attacked Wright’s son?????
Never heard that tale before.
Let’s have some detail on that
because I don’t believe it!
Moore isn’t making money
out of his books or anything
else. In fact he has to spend
$100.00+ every time the
AG’s men make him go to court
to get information which the law
requires the state to disclose
without any fee. WHY do they
try to keep hiding documents?
Same reason they destroyed
the DNA evidence that could
have exonerated Dechaine?
Don’t they know they’re just
helping Sarah’s real killer to
get away with his crime so he
can harm more innocent
children?
I don’t think Moore would see Wright as pathetic.
Deceitful, maybe. Arrogant,
probably. With all the things
Wright says about Dechaine,
it’s likely Moore would borrow the words of an honorable lawyer named Welch to Sen. McCarthy,
“Have you no
decency, sir? At long last
have you no decency?”
As for me, I’d ask that exact
same question to YOU.
At least it’s a good thing
the Attorney General fired
prosecutor Wright. Nobody
needs prosecutors like him.
My last post:
You’re making money off a dead kid, Moore. Period. Your book is whole cloth, filled with errors, amatuerish logic, enormous assumptive leaps, personal attacks and blatant falshehoods all designed to free a man who abducted, tortured and murdered a poor little girl who made the fatal mistake of going out to see who was in the Toyota pickup that pulled into the driveway.
At some point, this came became less about Dechaine and Moore (sic) about you.
And you have the nerve to question my decency?
I’m certainly making no money from all this.
HOW is Moore making money?
HOW did he attack Wright’s son?
WHY did prosecutors hide evidence?
WHY did prosecutors destroy DNA?
WHEN will you offer answers and facts
instead of these florid, phony accusations?
NO WONDER the AG fired Wright!!!!
camcat’s “last post”?
bailing out before people expect him to answer the questions.
Dechaine’s opponants are all like that. Long on phony accusations.
Short on facts and truth.
Well said.
T&E and supporters only want to hear what they want to hear. That book is worthless and the web site is worse. They dismiss anything that points to Dechaine and just make statements without any proof.
The evidence shows he did it.
Hang in there Dennis. Saw a media piece yesterday when Wright or was it Wrong spoke about the so called confession. We know Wright lied in ’89 to the jurors and again Wednesday to the media. Dennis NEVER confessed to murdering anyone but confessed about drug use. Maybe Wright was confused again like he was in the original trial. Once the evidence is tested properly, you will head home to your family. We’re rooting and Praying for you because we certainly don’t want you to rot in he** as the old lady said on TV Tuesday, and I thought they were a good Christian family. Guess I was wrong.
Forget conspiracies, lies, sloppy police work, and everything else Dechaine supporters hang their hats on. Just look at the physical evidence. His paperwork in the driveway where she was babysitting, his truck in close proximity to the body, his rope, his scarf, the keys that he tried to hide belonging to his locked truck, his lawyer telling the police they were looking in the right area and that they were looking for a body. This DNA under a single fingernail really means nothing. It could have come from anywhere. It doesn’t prove his innocence, but the physical evidence does prove his guilt.
Well said. As to the “he was framed” crowd: while it makes for good entertainment its not possible.
The alternative suspect (dreamed up by the defense) would have needed perfect knowledge that:
1. DD had no alibi;
2. would not be able to explain what he was doing;
3. would lie to the police about what he was doing in the woods;
4. would hide his keys in the police car;
5. would lie to the police and his wife about his knife;
6. would confess to his lawyer (who told the police that the child was dead and where to find her);
7. would leave personal articles in the driveway;
8. would be doing drugs in the woods vs. his farm; among other evidence; and,
9. this “real killer” would not leave physical evidence to point to him and there was none. None!
The problem with with DNA is that it was clearly compromised by improper handling and even so, that does not change the physical evidence. He did it.
Totally absurd!
All the killer needed to know was that planting those easily accessible clues might mislead the police.
And “detective” (???) Hendsbee followed those bread crumbs just like the killer hoped.
Proves one thing: the killer was smarter than the state police’s ace detective.
Why did Dennis hide his keys? My guess is that if the killer was smarter than the state police’s ace detective, he wouldn’t be serving prison time for Sarah’s murder.
1. Yeah he was in the woods, time, versus time of death, debatable.
2. or did not want to admit to drug use at the time.
3. see number 2
4. did he drop them, or hide them, or did the person who commit the murder hide the keys, or forget the keys? Who would have access to hide his key in a police car?
5. see number 2
6. See number 2
7. ??? Maybe I don’t want to know.
8. that evidence came up later.
9. If you committed a crime and did not want to get caught would you leave physical evidence? Wiould you or would you consider making it look like someone else committed a crime, and wouldn’t that be a great way to get attention off of yourself, and change the direction of evidence. We also have better means of finding evidence today than at the time of the crime.
How is it evident the DNA was improperly handled? That would be in the Chain of Custody and how and where the DNS was extracted.
Does anyone believe Mark Fuhrman framed OJ? No, but that was the defense and it was absurd. Just as Fuhrman had no way of knowing where OJ was, the “alternative suspect” would have no way to know where Dechaine was and that he could not defend himself. Just no way. He also would not know that Dechaine would lie to the police about losing his car keys and would hide the keys in the police car. He did that. Why?
Framing someone and all those silly CSI shows make for good entertainment, but we need to remember that these writers have the luxury of creating their own facts and twisting events to produce a good story. Nothing in the real world is as easy as Hollywood presents.
As for the DNA: it’s well known the defense lawyer had it and no-one knows how it was handled and eventually the State had to consider legal action to get it back. The DNA was missing for over a year and how can anyone say it could not have been compromised, even if accidentially.
The most damning thing is the original defense lawyer who passed away from an illness told the police the child was dead and where to find her. Only Dechaine could have told him that. No one else and that’s the uncomfortable fact T&E avoids. He did it.
Wow I think one of the most remarkable scenes of this story is when Det Hendsbee asked Dechaine permission to search his truck. Hendsbee told Dechaine that if nothing was found in the truck, then he could go free. Well, our wonderful crime lab went through his Toyota truck 3 times in hopes of finding any trace of Sarah, but to no avail. Remember, this was a 90+ degree day in July, and the story goes like this according to Wright-Dechaine is casing a neighborhood for drugs and happens to come along the Henkel house where Sarah was. This was her 1st time baby sitting there because there were protection orders issued so a certain individual could not contact her at her home or where she usually baby sat. But the Henkel home was well away from the protection order. Enough of that, Dechaine apparently drives to the house, gets a few things out of the glove compartment to leave his trail and takes Sarah away to a secluded place a few miles down the road. Remember, a hot day, Sarah’s in shorts andd Dechaine’s Toyota has no A/C. Sarah’s legs hang over the seat. What happens when flesh contacts vinyl material on a hot day, yeah, they sweat. The canines would have gone nuts in that truck, but no, no trace at all. How did Sarah get from the Henkel house to the crime scene? My only guess is that she must’ve flown. After asking Wright about this a few years later, he answered by saying that Dechaine confessed, Well, we all know that there was no confession, nothing even close. So yeah, there are incriminating items linking Dechaine to the crime, that could have been planted by anyone, but what I want to see is real evidence and I’m sorry, but I don’t see that anywhere. Face it, Wright is a play wright . This whole case has been nothing more than a play or a show. Lawyers from both sides have acted well, but the drama is wearing out. There have been too many lies on both sides, police, lawyers, and family members have not done well at all. It sucks to continue going to court, sorta like a divorce that never ends, but the real truth is slowly emerging and we will finally get to see the part of the show that says “The End”.
How about this scenario:
You’ve read Moore’s book and now you’re an expert.
You suffer from a similar malady: You assume facts like, “The canines would have gone nuts,” and that Dennis Dechaine’s personal property, “Could have been planted by anyone.”
That’s the insurmountable problem for you and Moore and Trial and Error. You’re forced to create facts (up to and including and alternative suspect) in order to fit your theories.
Any school child knows it’s done exactly opposite.
P.S. In the future, when you need to describe her, could you please not use Sarah’s name? Call her the ‘victim’ or some other neutral term. You’re trying to set her killer free and the familiarity in which you use it is simultaneously creepy and heartbreaking — especially for those of us with daughters — especially today.
You have summed up the T&E / Moore arguments correctly. They twist facts to fit their version and even worse, just dismiss anything that points to his guilt.
I’ve looked at the T&E website and its filled with statements to the effect of “Dennis couldn’t do that” as if that’s proof of any kind. It’s not and when anyone reads the court transcripts and considers facts, well he did it.
It would be good if the author explained attacking Wright’s son, but I doubt we’ll ever get an answer.
Sorry, Sarah is a real name, victim is not.
I don’t how you look at yourself in the mirror knowing that you’ve taken the side of a child killer against overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the work of the best legal minds the state has to offer, a case that has endured more scrutiny than any other in the history of Maine jurisprudence and 12 ordinary citizens who listened to the evidence and applied their collective wisdom in the jury room to reach a righteous verdict.
But then, you read Moore’s book.
I see you’re back at it, again, over in this different article with your circumstantial evidence.
Are you on the AG’s payroll? I’m not! That probably accounts for the difference in opinion. I can see that the states’ case presents nothing that, inarguably, places Dennis Dechaine and Sarah Cherry physically together in an extremely physical case.
It’s virtually impossible that Sarah Cherry was transported in the Dechaine vehicle and left no physical evidence of her presence – even the police dog could not detect her scent. And, the same goes for Dechaine being able to physically abduct, physically torture, and physically kill a human being without leaving or receiving any biological body evidence of physical contact between the two.
The only biological body evidence that still exists, after the AG’s office destroyed all the other biological evidence during an active appeal, is the blood and DNA under Sarah’s fingernails, which you disregard because it doesn’t belong to Dennis Dechaine.
The AG’s office would not have destroyed evidence implicating Dennis Dechaine.
Nope, not on the AG’s payroll. I disregard the DNA under the fingernail, because it doesn’t create a reasonable doubt. If it had been properly handled by the investigators, the M.E., and Dechaines lawyer it would hold more credibility. Unfortunately it had too many opportunities to be contaminated. I look at the other evidence available to the public and base my opinion on that. I think Dechaine was properly convicted “beyond a reasonable doubt”. That’s the standard for a conviction in this country. A small sample of possibly, if not likely, contaminated DNA does not change my mind. I don’t want to see an innocent man in prison anymore than you do, but I don’t want a monster turned loose on the public either. I have no horse in this race, just an opinion. I have read “Human Sacrifice”, so I’m not completely closed minded and stubborn. I just believe the evidence points to his guilt.
Unless you’ve studied ALL the Discovery, interviewed Dennis, attended the trial and the subsequent post trial hearings, then sorry, you know nothing.If, however, you have a general clue about the differing values of real, actual evidence then you’ll know that amongst the wealth of inculpatory evidence against him, Dennis’ not only ADMITTING he was in the driveway of the home from which Sarah disappeared — and btw, driveway is really a misnomer, it’s actually a dirt road that leads to a house set way back — but dropping a significant piece of unambiguous evidence, then you’ll understand why this particular effort is a farce..
I know it’s hard for the Trial and Error folks to believe this because he seems such a nice boy, but Dennis Dechaine abducted, tortured and murdered Sarah Cherry. That is all..
The prosecution in this case was bush league, inept and totally mis-guided. If I was to ask for someone to help me find the truth they would be the last I would go to. I can just see some hill billies running around with a sunburn on their necks wondering what to do. Oh looks like we found someone, lets railroad this so we can continue to eat donuts and bs all day long. Wow. What a great job. As absurd as this sounds thats what the Dennis haters all sound like to me.
Such a case to split the community right up the middle. He was guilty then as the circumstantial evidence was a spot on match, now we’re not so sure? It will remain ‘innocent man; in prison’ until they put on another trial.