Did dying man use eye blinks to ID gunman?
This undated file photo provided by the Hamilton County Sheriff's Department shows Ricardo Woods, who is charged in the 2010 fatal shooting of a man in Cincinnati.
/ AP Photo/Hamilton County Sheriff's Department, FileCINCINNATI A criminal justice organization in the U.S. is backing a murder suspect's efforts to exclude from his trial a videotape of a dying man's blinking eyes, which allegedly identified the suspect as the gunman.
Ricardo Woods is to go on trial Monday in the October 2010 shooting of 35-year-old David Chandler in Ohio. Chandler was shot in the head and neck as he sat in his car. He was paralyzed and hooked up to a ventilator when police interviewed him days before his death and could only communicate by blinking.
Judge Beth Myers ruled that jurors can see that videotaped interview in September 2011. Myers watched the video herself in 2011 and said Chandler identified the shooter as "O," apparently Woods' street name.
Prosecutors say Chandler clearly identified 34-year-old Woods as the shooter. But the defense insists the identification is unreliable.
The Innocence Project filed a motion last week supporting that request and offering research on eyewitness identification.
Popular on CBSNews.com
- Port Authority releases photo of One WTC workers at dizzying heights
- Washington state bridge collapses 20 Photos
- Bridge collapse blamed on tractor-trailer 292 Comments
- Best U.S. beaches 2013 10 Photos
- Frantic 911 calls reveal chaos in Okla., following tornado
- No fatalities in I-5 bridge collapse in NW Wash. 141 Comments
- Clean-up efforts underway in Okla. 29 Photos
- Judge: Ariz. sheriff's office profiles Latinos
- linkicon reporticon emailicon
- Why does the defense insist the identification is unreliable? Because it accurately incriminates the thug defendant?
- reply
-
- linkicon reporticon emailicon
- As per usual...
- linkicon reporticon emailicon
- Probably because it's common sense that eye blinks from somebody who was shot in the head can't really be taken seriously. Did the victim have brain damage and was he in shock? Kind of a "reasonable doubt" situation if there ever has been one.












