Louisiana death row inmate freed after nearly 30 years as overturned conviction upends case

A Louisiana man who had spent almost three decades on death row was granted bail and walked out of prison on Wednesday after a judge threw out his death‑sentence conviction. Jimmie Duncan, now in his 60s, had been sentenced in 1998 for allegedly raping and drowning his girlfriend’s 23‑month‑old daughter, Haley Oliveaux—an accusation that hinges on shaky forensic evidence that has been disputed for years.

In April, Fourth Judicial District Court Judge Alvin Sharp dismissed the case, ruling that the expert testimony the state had presented was “not scientifically defensible” and that the toddler’s death could plausibly have been an accidental drowning. The judge also noted that new evidence presented at last year’s evidentiary hearing, coupled with Duncan’s clean prior record, made the presumption of guilt “not great.”

Faulty bite‑mark analysis has plagued the justice system, leading to dozens of wrongful convictions elsewhere. Duncan’s lawyers released a statement saying the April ruling demonstrated “clear and convincing evidence showing that Mr. Duncan is factually innocent,” and that his bail release was a key milestone toward full exoneration.

After posting a $150,000 bond, Duncan plans to stay with a family member in central Louisiana while the Louisiana Supreme Court reviews the vacated conviction. Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, a Republican who has pushed for faster executions, opposed his release, arguing he should remain incarcerated until the high court’s decision. However, the Supreme Court allowed the district court to grant bail, enabling his return to freedom.

Since 1973, more than 200 death‑row inmates nationwide have been cleared, with about a dozen from Louisiana—one of the country’s highest wrongful‑conviction states. The state’s last death‑row exoneration was in 2016. At the time of Duncan’s release, Louisiana’s Angola prison housed 55 death‑row inmates, and the state had carried out its first execution in 15 years earlier that year.

During the bail hearing, the mother of the victim stunned the judge by acknowledging she now believes Duncan did not kill her daughter. She explained that the child had a history of seizures and the drowning was likely accidental. She accused prosecutors and forensic experts of fabricating evidence that had destroyed her family and Duncan’s life.

Prosecutors had leaned heavily on the bite‑mark analysis of forensic dentist Michael West and pathologist Steven Hayne—both later implicated in multiple overturned convictions. A videotape of the autopsy shows West pressing a dental mold onto the toddler’s skin, creating marks that were then linked to Duncan. The state‑appointed expert, who was unaware of the tape, testified that the marks matched Duncan’s teeth.

The mother expressed anger, saying the “horror story” presented had desecrated her child’s memory. She lamented that had she been informed earlier, the outcome might have been different for everyone involved.

Over the past quarter‑century, at least two dozen wrongful convictions have stemmed from bite‑mark evidence. Innocence Project attorney M. Chris Fabricant criticized the methodology, calling bite‑mark testimony “junk science” and underscoring it as one of the most prejudiced forms of flawed forensic evidence still admitted in U.S. courts.

Both West’s and Hayne’s work has been linked to other exonerations, including those of Mississippi men Levon Brooks and Kennedy Brewer, who served a combined 30 years before DNA cleared them.

Despite the new evidence, prosecutors still seek to reinstate Duncan’s conviction and cite the original 1994 grand jury indictment as justification for keeping him in prison.

Stay informed on all the latest news, real-time breaking news updates, and follow all the important headlines in world News on Latest NewsX. Follow us on social media Facebook, Twitter(X), Gettr and subscribe our Youtube Channel.