DNA test-bid filings sought

Judge gives both sides in ’94 murder case 3 weeks to fi le

BERRYVILLE - Attorneys on both sides of a DNA-testing argument in a 20-year-old murder case have been given three weeks to submit additional material in support of their positions after failing to sway a circuit court judge Monday afternoon.

Carroll County Circuit Judge Kent Crow told Carroll County Prosecuting Attorney Tony Rogers and defense attorney Karen Thompson, a staff attorney with the New York City-based Innocence Project, they each have 21 days to submit supplemental briefs. Monday’s hearing was to determine whether new DNA testing should be allowed on behalf of Belynda Goff, who was convicted in 1996 of the murder of her husband, Stephen Goff.

In 1994, Stephen Goff was bludgeoned to death in the couple’s Green Forest apartment. Belynda Goff, now 52, told investigators that she had been deep asleep when the murder occurred with the aid of medication prescribed after a recent surgery and that the couple’s 3-year-old son had been with her.

No murder weapon was ever discovered, but investigators found traces of Stephen Goff’s blood on the underside of the apartment’s shower drain. They argued in court that Belynda Goff had washed the murder weapon in the shower before attempting to flush a shirt she had purportedly worn during the murder down a toilet, after cutting it into small pieces.

A jury convicted Goff, who had maintained her innocence and refused a plea bargain, and sentenced her to life in prison. Although Goff appealed to the Arkansas Supreme Court in 1997, both her conviction and sentencing were upheld.

In December, lawyers with the Innocence Project filed a motion with the Carroll County Circuit Court, asking that they be allowed access to physical evidence from the original case - including Stephen Goff’s shirt, glasses, hair that was found in his hands and fingernail clippings - for DNA testing.

Belynda Goff’s attorneys are seeking the new testing under Act 1780 of 2001, which allows convicted defendants the right to request forensic DNA testing of evidence not previously tested, once the direct appeals process has been exhausted.

Thompson argued that not only had the hair and fingernails not been tested, but that the kind of DNA testing the defense is requesting did not exist at the time of Goff’s trial. The method, known as “short tandem repeats” testing, is still not performed in Arkansas.

In January, Rogers filed a response to Thompson’s motion, arguing that Arkansas law forbids convicted defendants from filing requests for DNA testing on material they failed to have tested during their trial and that the motion was essentially “a request for clemency.”

“You can’t just come back and say, ‘This should’ve been tested way back when,’” Rogers said Monday. “The testing has to be requested at trial, and it wasn’t.”

During Rogers’ argument, Crow pointed out that while the materials were available for testing, the specific technology the defense is requesting be used did not exist.

Rogers further argued that even if the testing were allowed and revealed the presence of DNA of a third party, it would not exonerate Goff.

“Even if the testing came back, and there’s hair belonging to a third person, so what?” Rogers said. “You’ve got to view the evidence in its totality. There was a very strong case made against Ms. Goff.”

During her rebuttal, Thompson said there was no expectation that DNA evidence alone would automatically lead to the overturning of Goff’s conviction.

“We’re not here to prove actual innocence, but to prove exculpatory evidence,” Thompson said. She said that if DNA from a third party is discovered, it may trigger a match in CODIS, the Combined DNA Index System, a database of DNA from convicted criminals maintained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Crow declined to issue a ruling Monday, instead giving the lawyers 21 days to submit supplemental briefs in support of their positions. Crow did not say when he would issue a ruling beyond the deadline.

Both Thompson and Rogers said they would file supplemental briefs.

Arkansas, Pages 10 on 04/01/2014

Upcoming Events