Kirstin Blaise Lobato Fights For DNA Testing That Would Exonerate Her.

Kirstin Blaise Lobato was convicted in October 2006 of voluntary manslaughter and sexual penetration of a corpse. However, even though there is no evidence of Lobato committing this crime (including no eyewitnesses, a more than substantial alibi, false testimonies, and 150,000 supporters that have signed and stand behind Lobato’s innocence) Lobato still remains behind bars 11 years later.blaise_photo_homepage-246x300

In late May 2001, Lobato was attacked by a man who tried to sexually assault her. Lobato defended herself and stabbed the man in the groin. For the next several weeks, Lobato repeated the incident to friends and family. Like many rape incidents, there was no official charged filed and follow up to the attack.

Months later, Duran Bailey was found dead in Las Vegas only miles away from where Lobato’s attacker approached her. Through third person accounts, police heard of Lobato’s attempted rape incident and quickly arrested Lobato as the main suspect in the murder.  At the time of the arrest Lobato was not informed of the circumstances, location, dates of details of the crime in which she was in custody for.

Lobato was initially offered a plea deal of three years, which she rejected because she had confidence and belief in the American Justice system.

The defense brought forth important and exculpatory evidence and alibi testimony on behalf of Lobato, clearly showing that the prosecution has little to no evidence to convict Lobato of manslaughter and penetration of a dead human body. It was made absolutely clear through evidence that Lobato was 170 miles away in her hometown of Panaca at the time of the crime. She passed a lie detector that was administered by a professional who Las Vegas prosecutors regularly use.  According to the defense, there were four identifiable crime scene fingerprints, none of which matched Kirstin’s. There was also a bloody shoe print that was found next to the body, however, according to a footprint expert that testified at the trial, it came from a U.S men’s size 9 athletic shoe.

So with all this evidence supporting the defense, how has this woman been forced to spend the last the last 11 years?  Lobato’s initial sentence was secured through a testimony of a jailhouse informant. The testimony of the informant was limited by the prosecutors and by Judge Vega. This was found to be a reversible error by the Nevada Supreme Court in 2004 and they remanded Lobato’s case back to the District Court for a new trial.

Again in 2006, at her second trial, important exculpatory evidence, alibi testimony, and DNA testing were limited. At this second trial, Police detective Thowsen falsely testified at the trial that she made up the story of the attempted rape.  The DA’s office claims to the courts, press, and the public that Lobato confessed to the murder, but there was never a confession, her statement about being a victim of a sexual assault in May 2001 was misinterpreted and presented to the jurors as a statement about the murder of Duran Bailey in July 2001.  Lobato was again charged with Involuntary Manslaughter, Deadly Weapon Enhancement and Sexual Penetration of a Dead Human Body and sentenced to 13-35 years. Lobato was given the maximum allowable sentence by Judge Verda of 35 years.

The one thing that can save Lobato from spending another decade in prison is DNA testing of 13 pieces of evidence that tested prior during the first two trials. Judge Vega has denied all new evidence including DNA testing and habeas corpus.  Lobato’s petition for habeas corpus is currently pending before the Nevada Supreme Court. It includes new evidence, affidavits, expert testimony along with evidence of witness tampering and prosecutorial misconduct.  Currently there are over 150,000 people that have shown support and signed a petition to allow DNA testing in the Lobato case.  The Innocence project, an organization that has freed hundreds of innocent people from prison through their DNA testing work, has offered to pay for all the costs to test and re-rest the 13 pieces of evidence that are in question. However, Clark Court District Attorney Stephen Wolfson has denied the allowance of the testing.

You can sign Kirstin Blaise Lobato’s petition here.  The entire case and current news on Kirstin Blaise Lobato can be viewed at her homepage Injustice Anywhere Kirstin Lobato.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

15 Responses to “Kirstin Blaise Lobato Fights For DNA Testing That Would Exonerate Her.”

  • Rick Bonin:

    A very nice summary of this case. All I can figure is the State of Nevada is afraid of the embarassment that will result from testing the DNA. How do these “people” sleep at night?

  • Thank you, Rick. I appreciate your comment. Having spent 8 years as a prosecutor, I know that these guys are highly skilled at the art of self-delusion!

  • Thank you for the article. We all hope at some point that justice will prevail. Thanks for being willing to speak out against injustice.

  • anna brown:

    I pray that more people will stand together and all the injustice will end. We need more people to speak out and stand up for our rights and whats right. This young woman is innocent, she has lost 11yrs that can’t be given back. Enough is enough she deserves to be exonerated.

  • Steve, thank you so much for taking the time to research and present Kirstin’s case on your blog. You’ve done a wonderful job of summarizing the facts and we deeply appreciate you for sharing the story of the severe judicial injustice she faces every day.

  • larry easter:

    What happen to miranda, can and will be use against you. If it was a interview the statements cannot be used against her, and the US Supreme court in Crawford v Washington 541 US 36 (2004) reexamined the confrontation clause and did away with the Robert’s test. The Court stated ” (e) Robert’s framework is unpredictable. Whether a statement is deemed reliable depends on which factors a judge considers and how much weight he accords each of them. However, the unpardonable vice of the Roberts test is its demonstrated capacity to admit core testimonial statements that the Confrontation Clause plainly meant to exclude. pg 62-65. One cannot be a witnesses against one’s self under the Constitution, and all I have heard was her statements being used against her. Her case is no doubt full of constitutional erros, but if not presented right, will not prevail in a habeas. From the facts I read, the police should have gotten reports from the hospital of any incidents in regards to treatment of the genital area. And if there was none, investigated any male member of the rape victim, for bruises or cuts, and alibi’s.

  • Thanks Larry. I appreciate those insights into the new case law, and how it applies in her case.

  • To Steve Graham

    Hey Steve Graham this is an excellent article and I do like it a lot, and I am a proud supporter even I am not a lawyer. I am only a fan of reading mystery novel and it what I love to do. But my dad is a lawyer. So I am keeping the faith alive for Kirsten B. Lobato to be free and talk to you soon Steve Graham!!!

    From TMJ

  • WE GOT HUNG UP SILLY:

    Who’s on first when those empowered to prosecute our City,County,State and Federal laws are allowed to decide who gets DNA testing to exonerate themselves and who will be denied tests for future freedom ?

    Clark County Nevada DA Stephen Wolfson is replicating the same exact demonic mentality that was being inflicted on Texan Hank Skinner prior the U.S. Supreme Court’s order forcing Rick Perry Texas to conduct DNA testing…

  • Donna:

    I read about this case on the website injusticeanywhere.org. I am shocked, disgusted, and heartbroken that such a miscarriage of ‘justice’ can even occur in today’s society. Is a complete list of phone numbers for anyone involved with the prosecution and court systems so we can bombard them with phone calls demanding the DNA testing which will free Ms. Lobato? Stay strong, Ms Lobato, you will see true Justice and be free!

Leave a Reply

Comments may be edited for content. Please avoid harsh language and profanity. Flaming or use of threatening language is not allowed. Adding a signature is completely optional. I reserve the right to edit or delete comments as I feel necessary. If you do not like the way your comment has been edited, let me know and I will delete it. Thanks for commenting! (It may appear that your comment does not post at first. However, it will usually appear once the administrator logs in.) Leaving a comment does not create an attorney client relationship, and no confidential information should be left in a comment.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR….
Photo of Steve Graham Steve Graham is a criminal defense lawyer, and he splits his time between Spokane and Seattle, Washington. Visit his website by clicking: www.grahamdefense.com
........
Law Office of Steve Graham
1312 North Monroe Street, #140
Spokane, WA 99201
(509) 252-9167
Blogs I Read
Disclaimer
..........
Categories
Archives