I wasn’t going to write about convicted murderer Dennis Dechaine’s hearing that took place in Cumberland County this week.
I wasn’t, that is, until my mother-in-law came to visit.
When the news report of the hearing was aired during a 6 p.m. broadcast, my mother-in-law said, “I think he’s innocent.”
Probably there are others who feel that way, as well, if what you hear is that there is another, unidentified man’s DNA under the victim’s fingernail.
I mean, DNA is powerful stuff. It convicts people and exonerates them.
If Dechaine’s DNA was not found on the body of 12-year-old Sarah Cherry and some other man’s was, then Dechaine probably is innocent after all, right?
Dechaine, 54, is serving a life sentence for the 1988 kidnapping and brutal slaying of Cherry in Bowdoin.
His conviction in 1989 has been appealed on four different occasions. In each case his conviction has been upheld.
His supporters sought and received help from the famed New York-based Innocence Project and renowned attorney F. Lee Bailey. The case underwent an independent review by a panel made up of two criminal defense lawyers and a retired federal magistrate. That panel reviewed the case in response to allegations from Dechaine’s supporters of investigative and prosecutorial misconduct.
The panel found nothing to support those allegations.
Dechaine’s attorney is now before a judge trying to convince him that the jury in the 1989 trial would not have convicted his client if it had been presented the DNA evidence. The state contends that the DNA may simply have been a contamination, since methodical evidence gathering systems were not nearly as sterile and thorough as the methods used today.
Either way, the sample exists and it does not belong to Dechaine, Cherry’s immediate family members or staff members who worked for the medical examiner’s office in 1988.
Think what you will regarding that sample, but as I did for my mother-in-law, let me just remind you of the other evidence in the Dechaine case.
Cherry was kidnapped from the home where she was babysitting and her body was found a couple of days later in the woods in Bowdoin, She had been sexually assaulted with sticks, bound and gagged and stabbed repeatedly.
Coincidentally, Dechaine was wandering aimlessly in those same woods that day. He went into the woods to inject some sort of “speed” that he purchased randomly from a drug dealer at a Boston museum.
At some point he locked his truck, put his keys in his pocket and headed down a woods road and got lost.
By the time he wandered out of the woods at 8:45 p.m. police were already searching for Cherry. Dechaine had wandered into someone’s yard and said he had lost his way. Police were in the area and eventually picked him up to help him locate his truck.
They had already found a notebook and a receipt belonging to Dechaine in the driveway of the home from which Cherry was abducted.
Dechaine’s truck was located just 450 feet from where Cherry’s body was eventually found.
When he was in the cruiser and they were searching for his truck, Dechaine told the officer he didn’t have the keys to his truck and that he had left them in the vehicle. Actually, he did have his truck keys and hid them beneath the seat in the cruiser. Police found them the next day.
Why did he want the police to believe that he didn’t have his keys?
The rope that was used to bind Cherry was cut from rope that Dechaine carried in his truck. The scarf used to gag her belonged to Dechaine.
Dechaine and his supporters claim that some very fortunate sexually depraved killer just stumbled across Dechaine’s truck and all of the items he needed to aid him in his brutal quest and then also grabbed some documents from Dechaine’s truck and purposely deposited them in the driveway of the home from which Cherry was abducted.
Oh, and then there were the remarks that Dechaine allegedly made to two investigators and two corrections officers.
These remarks were taken from Dechaine’s supporters’ website, “Trial and Error.”
“Oh my God, it should never have happened. … Why did I do this?”
“I went home and told my wife that I did something bad and she just laughed at me.”
“I told her [my wife] I wouldn’t kill myself; besides that’s the easy way out.”
“Please believe me, something inside must have made me do that. Why would I do this?”
“I didn’t think it actually happened till I saw her face on the news, … then it all came back to me. I remembered it. Why did I kill her? … What punishment could they ever give me that would be equal to what I’ve done.”
“I feel so bad for her. My God, how must her mother and father feel. It was something inside that must have made me do that.”
“How can I live with myself again?”
Cherry was missing for a couple of days before her body was found and a couple of days after Dechaine was picked up in the very woods where it was.
He was a prime suspect in the case and police were following him.
Dechaine went to visit his attorney during that time.
Investigators at the time said they were concerned that Cherry might be alive and injured somewhere.
Those investigators called Dechaine’s attorney, whom they knew.
They asked the attorney two questions and reminded him that he didn’t have to answer them.
Could Sarah still be alive? They asked.
Are we looking in the right area?
Dechaine’s attorney told them the girl was dead and that they were in the right area.
Cherry’s body was found later that day.
Form your own opinion on any new potential evidence as you will, but don’t forget the original evidence that the jury heard in 1989.
Finally, a sane voice in the wilderness
Thank you for writing this. I have been wondering what evidence the state collected against him. I was very young when Sarah Cherry died, so my parents shielded me from the media coverage. After reading this, I know believe he is guilty, and I pray that the judge comes to the same conclusion. It’s hard to excuse all this other evidence against him.
Don’t base it on reading just one column. there are lots of things written for the other side as well.
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.
The suspect who left the state was not a man who worked with Dechaine
He was a relative of Sarah Cherry who was already under indictment at that time for sexually molesting his step-daughter.
Yes, and his footprints were identified at the site the body was found. Deschaine was just a pathetic doper who was set up to take the fall. After all, who can trust somebody who is strung out on dope?
Those footprints were finally IDed — they were from one of the Navy search team.
Why do some people say phony things as if they knew what they were talking about?
So, what about this pedophile relative of Sarah Cherry? I heard they couldn’t find him after the murder, so they stopped looking and charged Dechaine to quell public fear and outrage. Maybe they should put forth the effort to find this guy and prove once and for all who the guilty party really is.
It’s ironic, but since this crime, we have an entire generation of CSI/COLD CASE TV shows that demonstrate how crime scenes should be investigated and facts collected first, prior to indictment.
I know I’m second guessing the decision; but the A.G.’s office then, was pretty primitive compared to what we see on Cold Case and CSI. Time to re-open it and use current technology to solve it.
Agreed.
TV is entertainment. That’s all. One police officer could make a mistake, but the police men and women I have met are decent people and the idea all of them would fall into line to protect a child killer and frame someone is an insult to everyone’s intelligence.
The physical evidence is overwhelming and there is no ignoring that his lawyer told the police the poor girl was dead and where to look. How could he possibly have known that? Because DD told him.
Sounds like he should get a new trial based on the attorney’s information. He violated the attorney client privilege if Deschaine told him that.
In the documentary about this, one inexperienced officer interviewed him and wrote down some of those “confessions” There are many places where something is scratched out and written in. Don’t know which one to believe, but there are two definate sides to this story.
All evidence should be allowed and checked. Far too many men have been convicted of a crime against a girl, many spending years in jail, for a crime they did not commit. This should not happen, according to our constitution, however, does all the time since they have allowed girls to right to vote, and set on juries. It use to be a jury of one’s peer’s, but no longer sad to say.
It might be acceptable to me if girls were convicted without evidence also, but that does not happen. Any fool should be able to see why.
All other evidence would indeed be negated if the DNA evidence is considered. It matches no person that the little girl knew, nor Dechaine. There is no DNA evidence that connects Dechaine to the crime at all. If hidden DNA evidence is being used worldwide to exonerate innocents, it should be in Maine as well. As an aside, this op/ed is slanted at best because it fails to mention all the circumstancial evidence for the defense. There is plenty and if properly considered with the DNA facts, this case can never be settled beyond a reasonable doubt.
Wrong. Dechaine’s DNA was found on Sarah.. it just wasn’t the ‘only’ DNA found.
So I’ll say the same thing I’ve said every time this comes up…
Dechaine is either A. Guilty as Charged or B. Had someone else with him that he is covering for.
As far as I’m concerned.. either A. or B. he can stay in jail. We don’t want him back here. Ever. There are many more girls that deserve better than what happened to Sarah. He isn’t even remorseful for what he has done. So certainly he hasn’t been ‘cured’.
If you are so sure he’s innocent. He can live at your house. And the next child he kills you can go to jail with him.
3Steps..I’ve followed this case from the beginning, and I’ve never been on the Trail and Error site because I feel it will be biased. Dechaines DNA was not found on Sarah Cherry nor was any of her DNA found on Deschaine or in his vehicle (amazing how one can transport another human being without leaving a trace of DNA). There is/was no indication that Deschaine ever knew Sarah Cherry nor had any reason to know where she was baby sitting. Prior to the original trial, the defense asked for DNA testing to be done on the skin/blood samples found, it was blocked by the court. During the original trial, any and all alternative suspects (including the afore mentioned person who knew where Sarah was babysetting and knew she would probably be called as a witness to a charge of him molesting his daughter (after he had already served time for molesting other young girls)) or any information that might bring a reasonable doubt to the State’s case, was blocked by the judge. Witnesses that put the alternative suspect in the area on the day of Sarahs disappearence, driving a truck matching the discription of Deschaines, were dismissed by the court as “unreliable” and not allowed to testify nor were their sworn ( and none were ever charged with filing a false statement or perjury) statements ever allowed. As far as the footprints, they were not from a Navy search team, they were found during the initial search and were found with a barefoot print that could be that of a young girl. They were supposed to be followed up the next day but were “forgot”. As far as the interview notes by detectives, looked at the scanned copies available online in the court transcripts. They have obviously had something scratched out and alterted to portray a statement of guilt. I’m a distant relative to one of the law enforcement officials involved in this case. Until his dying day, although he would not say so publicly, (after all LE takes care of their own, right or wrong) he felt Deschaine was railroaded by the state and regretted and was disgusted by his part in the “investigation”
WRONG!
NO DNA from Dechaine was found on Sarah.
With incorrect information like that, it’s no wonder you think Dechaine is guilty.
Thank you for this refreshing dose of reality !
Before forming your opinion, make note of a few facts.
That panel Ms Ordway refers to, handpicked by the AG, fought all the way to Maine’s Supreme Court to avoid having to disclose a single fact or bit of evidence supporting their “no misconduct” decision. If they’d really wanted to do as the AG asked, to protect the reputation of the police and AG’s office, they’d have trumpeted their “evidence” — instead they refused to show anything. Golly, I wonder why.
As to the items from Dechaine’s truck, apparently neither the state police nor AG’s men nor Ms Ordway have ever heard about killers who stage the crime scene.
There is no evidence that Dechaine locked his truck. Although Det Hendsbee claimed often that the truck could not be locked without a key, the report he filed a few days before Dechaine’s trial (a report concealed by the State until the Legislature ordered the AG to open his “confidential file”) clearly shows he knew that one CAN easily lock the truck without a key.
Detectives’ testimony that Dechaine made incriminating admissions — words they testified they were reading from their notes — ARE NOT IN THEIR NOTES! Their notes were among documents concealed in that “confidential file.”
Except for that false testimony, the State’s case is entirely circumstantial and, when viewed beside ther evidence prosecutors concealed, it falls apart completely.
Regarding allegations that former lawyer Carlton said Dechaine confessed to him, it’s interesting that prosecutors never launched this bomb until years later when Carlton was in a state of terminal paralysis, unable to confirm or deny the story. The book “Human Sacrifice” includes the author’s investigation of Carlton including his years as a federal fugitive, hiding in Australia, to his return to the USA and time served in jail (after which Maine gave him back his license to practice law), his failed “career” as an attorney as proved by court records etc etc.
Anyone who cares to examine official documents proving the official misconduct may read it online at no cost at http://trialanderrordennis.org/books/SS-1-08.pdf
And, by order of the Legislature, that file is now open to anyone under the Freedom of Access Act. Check it for yourwself . . . or swallow the ill-informed allegations of certain people.
Next time someone tells you Dechaine is guilty, ask them to explain the evidence the state concealed, and the science re DNA and the time of death.
The author of “Human Sacrifice” has offered $1,000.00 to anytone who points to a single false statement he makes in that book regarding the evidence or the official misconduct.
In the 6 years since that offer was made, NOBODY has made any effort to collect.
Still trying to sell your book, huh Moore?
The author has taken NO royalties from sales of this book.
ALL royalties go to Trial & Error’s defense fund.
Now ain’t you happy to know that? (Why do I suspect you’re not happy…about anything?)
Would you please give your impression on why Patty Giles was released on $60 bail for the recent Bangor hit and run resulting the death of Joshua Constantine? Granted this is way off topic, however I am desperate for some insight and it sounds as though you may be able to offer some.
Hello. I know nothing about that case but I do know that the purpose of bail is only to ensure that a defendant show up for trial, so the best I can do is guess that the judge believed the bail was sufficient to ensure the defendant’s appearance.
Sorry I can’t be more helpful.
Thank-you for the reply.
I think it’s the DNA of his crime partner. He doesn’t want them to find the match because it could be very damaging to his case. Just think what it would be like if it turned out to be somebody with a criminal history that fits the profile. Then they find evidence of the man’s association with Dechaine. Even if the guy is dead now, Dechaine would not want the cops to make that DNA match.
If Dechaine doesn’t want the donor of that DNA IEed, why did Dechaine request DNA tests before his trial AND OFFER TO PAY THE COSTS HIMSELF???
It was prosecutors who prevented DNA testing before trial and then, AFTER Dechainer filed an appeal but without DNA tests, prosecutors destroyed every bit of evidence that might have yielded DNA.
I think some people would be just as happy if they knew what they were talking about.
He wanted the test done to show it’s not his own DNA. He’s not going to name his partner in crime. It’s better to have everybody thinking he has no idea who the person is. The tests do not prove that Dechaine is innocent but they help prove that he did not act alone. It’s amazing that so many people are taken in by this con game of his.
Wow fella, where did they find you?
It’s interesting to see your conceited certainty that your ill-informed gut feelings outweigh the value of hard evidence.
I guess the prosecutors are conspiring with Dechaine to hide the killer’s identity. After all, it was the AG’s men who destroyed everything that might yield DNA.
You seem to be an easy mark for the con artist. Dechaine is right where he should be.
Turn your pipdedreams into money.
The offer now stands at $3,000.00 for anybody who can point to any false statement by the author in the book “Human Sacrifice” concerning the evidence or the official misconduct.
Put up or, well, heh heh . . .
This would not fall into the false statement category. It’s an omission or a failure to consider a viable theory. The offer would not apply in that case. I’ll look into the book and website to see if they offer anything in that regard. They would have to do that in order to be objective. The theory that Dechaine had an accomplice has to be fully explored.
If you read that book you’ll see that the author/retired federal agent got into the case hoping he could prove that Dechaine’s supporters were wrong and should go home and quit criticizing law enforcement because Dechaine was guilty.
It’s the evidence (much of which was hidden by prosecutors, which changed his mind.
I read the book cover to cover and I am convinced he’s guilty. Nothing in the book swayed me. It’s easy to Monday Morning Quarterback the police, but the evidence is undeniable.
Hard evidence like a confession, his rope, his scarf, his locked truck, his drugged confused condition?
educate yourself on the evidence.
I guess I’d say the same to you.
Ms. Ordway, I’m appalled by just how little you really know about the facts in this case, and yet, you took it upon yourself to attempt to be the judge, jury, and hangman. If Sarah Cherry had been your daughter, would you be satisfied to ignore the unidentified DNA under her fingernails? Would you ignore the two top forensic pathologists that have concluded the Dennis Dechaine was in custody long before Sarah was killed? Or would you, also, be foolish enough to be 100% positive that the real killer is not out walking around on the streets?
If she were my daughter, I’d want to be 100% sure the right person is in prison, and at this moment we’re no where near 100% – and neither are you.
The bar for conviction is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. I think the State certainly surpassed that benchmark. His papers in the driveway, his rope, his locked truck (with him in possession of the keys and trying to hide them), his scarf, his admission. What more would you ask for?
The state presented circumstantial evidence only, just as you did in your comment.
When two people physically interact in the way Sarah Cherry interacted with her assailant DNA evidence most likely would be present – the only DNA evidence the state did not destroy was the DNA under her fingernails and that was because the state didn‘t get the chance to. Blood and DNA under her fingernails is a likely place for the evidence to be found because she most likely would have attempted to defend herself.
If Sarah had been transported in the Dechaine vehicle her DNA would have been present – none was found after an exhaustive search including having a dog check the passenger compartment.
In today’s world of sophisticated scientific technology, “beyond a reasonable doubt” must include scientific data/evidence, as well as, circumstantial evidence. The total lack of scientific evidence (due to the attorney general’s office deliberate destruction of evidence) makes “beyond a reasonable doubt” unattainable. No physical scientific evidence connects Sarah Cherry and Dennis Dechaine!!
Do you think you could physically restrain, brutally torture, and then kill someone the way it was done in this crime without leaving some of your personal DNA behind?
Do you think the prosecutor would have destroyed DNA evidence belonging to Dennis Dechaine?
The concept of “beyond reasonable doubt” in this case would force a re-investigation and new trial to defend and preserve the rights of Sarah Cherry and Dennis Dechaine.
Circumstantial evidence only???? His locked truck with the keys on him, his personal rope to bind her, his personal scarf to gag her, his personal papers in her driveway, his confession, his lawyer telling the police she was already dead and they were looking in the right area. Most of this is real “physical” evidence, certainly not circumstantial. The fingernail was in the custody of the defense attorney for a year if I recall correctly from the book. I think it was in an envelope in his desk. I’m really not sure of this because I read the book quite awhile ago, so I might be remembering wrong, but in any event how could DNA from it possibly serve as any sort of reliable evidence now? Is he 100% guilty? I don’t know, but I know he’s guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. A new trial would serve no purpose. The evidence hasn’t changed.
Again, you present just circumstantial evidence.
Who does the only remaining, conclusive DNA link – the only remaining, conclusive, link (discovered in the autopsy) – between Sarah Cherry and another human being belong to?
You can’t answer that and that is concrete, monumental reasonable doubt!!
Let’s make a proper effort to solve that huge question before we conclude that the right person is in prison. Your, mine, and everybody else’s children depend on us adults to protect them. We are failing if we don’t address this.
I don’t think you know the difference between circumstantial and physical evidence.
“I don’t think” is the important part of your comment.
You’re right I should have entered “You obviously don’t” instead.
Your point is clear that you are not going beyond the “obvious” to understand the defining facts or the lack of significant facts.
The time of death has been determined by recognized expert forensic pathologists to have occurred hours after Dennis Dechaine was in custody.
There is no evidence that proves Dennis Dechaine and Sarah Cherry had any physical contact during a very physical crime.
A very important part of this crime is missing (physical contact) and a significant part is being ignored (time of death). These are the facts that require thinking and are not obvious – in fact, the Attorney General’s office is working very hard to suppress these points.
None of the evidence you present, indisputably, brings Dennis Dechaine and Sarah Cherry physically together. That evidence may have existed until it was destroyed by the Attorney General’s office during an active appeal. And, the evidence that did exist and was destroyed was never presented in this case. Very troubling!!
Dennis is too smart to leave this evidence scattered around. This is the kind of stuff a perp. would take…papers in the driveway, yah sure.
A devious person w/a criminal background would take the ‘evidence’ and lock the truck making it appear the owner did it. Dennis rarely locked up his truck; most farmers don’t.
I could be wrong; but I don’t think the finding of this evidence is evidence of the
cool-headed Dennis I know. He could have panicked and but using his scarf as a gag? pulp fiction.
Planting evidence is common; some ex-cons think this was planted. Way too obvious.
Your words are not proof, and I believe greatly exaggerated. Why would a cop risk prison to plant evidence or commit perjury? Ridiculous. I know he’s your friend, but who knows what goes on in a persons mind.
That’s exactly the thinking of the people who framed him want you to think. This investigation was over before it started and they were not going to bothered by checking out the pedophile relative when they had dechaine handed to them.
Given the evidence in this article, I think Dechaine is guilty…
Ms. Ordway, If we could believe what the police report having heard, there would be no doubt in this case. If you spend enough time following the U.S. criminal justice system, you know that testilying is a common occurrence. I believe nothing from hearsay evidence from the police. If the defendant’s words are on tape, videotape preferably, then I think we can call it evidence.
It’s not hearsay evidence when presented by the police. In trials judges and juries consider things like changed statements, physical evidence, and who has a reason to lie and who doesn’t. His truck was locked and he had the keys. It’s beyond belief that any reasonable person would believe him innocent.
Right. It’s not hearsay evidence when presented by police. But the police lie in order to get a conviction of someone they are “sure” is guilty. It happens all the time. So they often have a reason to lie. And police plant evidence. Sorry, but it’s a sad fact. His drugged condition? Irrelevant and discriminatory.
You watch too much TV. Some bad apples in every profession, but most police won’t commit perjury for a conviction.
He’s about as innocent as OJ. Come on Dechaine your guilty and you know it. The evidence is overwhelming. Man up for once in your life and finally let this innocent angel rest in peace. Give her family closure and live with what you did. I don’t know if you’re a monster, but you did a monsterous thing and have to pay for it. I’ve read the “trial and error” book “Human Sacrifice” and it’s very misleading and one-sided. The alternate suspect is a tactic all defense attorneys use. The DNA not being Dechaine’s means nothing, there were many opportunities for it to be contaminated. If you read “Human Sacrifice” you’ll see that for yourself.
Where was a similar post regarding Robert Carlson, Renee?
I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED HE WAS GUILTY AND I HOPE HE GOES TO HELL FOR THE HORRID THINGS HE DID TO THAT PRECIOUS LITTLE GIRL :( HE IS WHERE HE BELONGS !!!!!
Yelling doesn’t make it true.
The only common sense here is from ElderlyGent. Good job. Those making sweeping generalizations that Dennis is guilty like they were facts are just haters. You have your opinion and voiced it. Not sure why you do because you obviously do not know him. Quit wasting time. He is already in jail.
Dennis was well known in the MidCoast as was his behavior while stoned. NO WHERE did he ever evidence any inclination to violence towards teen aged girls or seek them out for sexual pleasure.
Not so with the ‘drinking club’ of men who lived in Cherry’s neighborhood.
Teen aged girls were constantly harassed by them, some sexually.
One of their ‘leaders’ fled to Florida and rumor is that he ‘did it’, and it’s his DNA under Cherry’s fingernails.
This is the counter theory of who really ‘did it’.
Confessions of drugged prisoners are not considered as valid evidence.
A recalcitrant Attorney General’s office has either refused or won’t reveal any evidence in regard to this theory of the crime.
Time for a thorough airing of EVERY alternative, because there are hundreds of us who simply don’t believe Dennis would do such a thing, and given the violent behavior of people who use OXYCONTIN, it’s time for a thorough TOX screen of Dennis’s fluid samples to find out what he took and whether it would turn him into a murderer? ….in those days, using drugs was common, Dennis grew weed; and loved to get stoned and wander in the woods. He was a smart ‘pot-head’, not Charles Manson.
I just don’t believe it and know people who’ve spent many hours getting stoned with Dennis who refuse to believe it either. The drug of choice was marijuana, not alcohol…now which one is most associated with violence?
One BIG flaw to your theory… he wasn’t just stoned… he went into the woods to inject himself with something. Not just a sweet pothead. Guilty.
He was guilty then and he’s still guilty today. He’s just looking for some loophole in the justice system. He murdered and raped that girl and is lucky he is still alive. If that were my daughter he would not be.
Once again Renee Ordway has her facts wrong.
She is a horrible reporter.
Why does the bdn still let her write?
OK, Anne, take a few minutes. What did she have wrong? Give us something besides an unsupported statement.