before the illinois prisoner review board fall term, … · 2013. 11. 27. · pamela j acobazzi was...
TRANSCRIPT
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS PRISONER REVIEW BOARD FALL TERM, 2013 ADVISING THE HONORABLE
PATRICK QUINN, GOVERNOR IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
In re: Clemency Petition of ) )
PAMELA JACOBAZZI, ) )
Petitioner. )
PETITION FOR EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY BASED ON ACTUAL INNOCENCE, and in the alternative,
FOR COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE
I. REQUEST FOR CLEMENCY
In America, the goal of the criminal justice system is to provide a fomm whereby the guilt or
innocence of an accused is dete1ruined by an objective analysis of all relevant facts. In short, the
foundation of the American criminal justice system dating back to its roots in the English common
law is that it abhors any conviction of an innocent person. See, Blackstone, Commentaries on the
Laws of England (1765-1769). Against this foundation, the instant case provides a tragic example of
how each aspect of the criminal justice system designed to uphold a defendant's tight to due process
and a fair ttial, failed '!lld resulted in a miscarriage of justice. As a result of this tragic breakdown, a
mother who conducted a day care set-vice from her home is imprisoned as the result of an
unexplained malady of a ten month old child who subsequently passed away sixteen (16) months
later.
After having se1ved fourteen (14) years of a thirty-two (32) year sentence' in the Illinois
Department of Corrections, Pamela J acobazzi now seeks a grant of Executive Clemency, both in tl1e
form known as Executive Pardon based on her claim of actnal innocence which is supported by the
state of generally accepted medical principals, as well as tl1e declarations, affidavits and repo1ts of,
and leading authorities, on the subject of Shal<en Baby Syndrome; alternatively, in the form of
1 A copy of Ms. Jacobazzi's current inmate infonnation sheet from the Illinois Department of Corrections is included in the Appendix and incorporated herein as Exhibit"!".
Commutation of Sentence based on her claim that she has served a sufficient sentence (87.5% as of
April 1, 2013) based on the evidence adduced at trial, and further disclosed subsequently thereto.
In support of and incorporated into this Clemency Petition by the indicated Exhibit
numbers are the following reports, declarations, and/ or affidavits:
Exhibit "2" - Dr. Patrick Barnes dated December 26, 2012;
Exhibit "3" - Dr. Patrick Lantz dated March 6, 2013;
Exhibit "4" - Dr. Jan Leestma letter dated May 16, 2002;
Exhibit "S" - Dr. Jan Leestma report dated March 6, 2013;
Exhibit "6" - Dr. John Plunkett report dated March 6, 2013;
Exhibit "7" -Dr. Claus P. Speth declaration dated July 31, 2006;
Exhibit "8" - Dr. Claus P. Speth declaration dated March 7, 2013;
Exhibit "9" - Dr. Uma Subramanian Srinivasan dated July 23, 2002;
Exhibit "10" - Dr. Shaku Teas Affidavit dated March 7, 2013;
Exhibit "11" - Chris Van Ee, Ph.D., report dated March 7, 2013.
Here, none of the above doctors, professionals and/ or experts has accepted any fees
for their work in any post-trial matter on Ms. ]acobazzi's behal£
The instant Petition arises out of Petitioner Pamela Jacobazzi's conviction for First Degree
Murder. On May 1, 1999, a DuPage County jury found Ms. Jacobazzi guilty of "intentionally"
committing acts on August 11, 1994, that created a strong possibility of resulting in death or serious
bodily injury, and that caused the death of Matthew C. approximately sixteen months after the
assumed injury he is said to have sustained while in Ms. Jacobazzi's care. Thereafter, Ms. Jacobazzi
was sentenced to 32 years in the Illinois Department of Corrections. Ms. Jacobazzi's sentence is
scheduled to terminate on May 10, 2015. (See Exhibit "1")
2
While Ms. Jacobazzi pursued a direct appeal, and currently has a Petition for Relief Pursuant
to the Illinois Post-Conviction Relief Act ("Post-Conviction Petition"), pending in the Eighteenth
Judicial Circuit (DuPage County), Ms. Jacobazzi has no pending appeals regarding her case. In 2010,
the Second District Court of Appeals reversed and remanded Ms. Jacobazzi's Post-Conviction
Petition (for the second time) to the Circuit Court for a full un-bifurcated Strickland hearing witl1
further direction to allow the three expert witnesses, who provided affidavits2 in support of the
instant post-conviction petition, as well as any other qualified expert witness, to testify as to the
medical significance of The Nadehnan Records, not only as it relates to whether 1:J:ial council's
decision not to pursue a certain medically-based defense was objectively reasonable, but also
whether the outcome of the trial would have been different had such a defense been presented.
Further details of said opinion are set forth below. People v. Jacobazzi, 398 Ill.App.3d 890 (2d Dist.
2010). (A copy of the above appellate opinion is included in the Appendix and inco1porated herein
as Exhibit "12").
II. REQUIRED INFORMATION
The following infonnation regarding Ms. Jacobazzi is provided in compliance with the
Prisoner Review Board Guidelines for Executive Clemency.
1. Ms. J acobazzi seeks a grant of executive clemency, either in the form known as a pardon (formally absolving her of the crimes for which she was erroneously convicted) for her convictions relating to the murder and aggravated battery of a child involving Matthew C., or alternatively, in the form known as commuting the balance of her thitty-two (32) year sentence imposed as the result of said convictions.
A jury convicted Ms. Jacobazzi of said offenses after a trial on May 18, 1999, in DuPage Case Number 95 CF 1160. On December 27, 2001, the Second District Court of Appeals denied Ms. Jacobazzi's direct appeal and affirmed her conviction. Thereafter, the Illinois Supreme Court denied Ms. Jacobazzi's Petition for Leave to Appeal and the United States Supreme Court denied Ms. Jacobazzi's Petition for Certioraii.
2. Was Ms. Jacobazzi convicted of tl1e offenses for which clemency is being sought in the name of Pamela Jacobazzi?
2 Dr. Claus P. Speth, Dr. Jan Leestma, and Dr. Uma Subramanian.
3
Yes. Ms. Jacobazzi requested executive clemency in 2006, to then Governor Blagojevich. The Governor denied Ms. Jacobazzi's request for executive clemency in 2007. Prior to the instant Clemency Petition, Ms. Jacobazzi has not filed any additional Clemency Petitions since the 2007 denial of her p11.or Clemency Petition.
3. Please see sec. N of this Petition for a detailed statement of the facts of the offenses charged in this case.
4. Other than routine traffic citations, Ms. Jacobazzi had never been charged of a crime or ordinance violation prior to the instant offense.
5. Please see sec. III of this Petition for Ms. Jacobazzi's personal life histo1y.
6. The reasons for seeking clemency are set forth more fully in sec. V of this Petition.
7. Address of Petitioner:
Ms. Pamela J acobazzi Inmate# K94781 Logan Correctional Center P.O. Box 1000 Lincoln, Illinois 62656
III. PAMELA JACOBAZZI'S BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
Pamela J acobazzi was born on April 27, 19 55, in Norridge, Illinois. She has one son
(Steven), one sister, her mother, and five (5) nieces and nephews. Ms. Jacobazzi's father passed
away in 1984. However, he was involved in her life as her father until his death.
Ms. Jacobazzi's mother, Theresa Jacobazzi, was a homemaker and office worker who raised
Pamela and her two (2) sisters in Norridge, Illinois. Ms. Theresa J acobazzi presently resides in
Bartlett, Illinois.
Ms. Jacobazzi attended elementa1y, junior high, and high school in Norridge, Illinois. Her
elementaiy and Junior High School years were in the James Giles School, in Norridge, Illinois. In
1973, Pamela graduated Ridgewood High School in Norridge, Illinois.
Instead of immediately enrolling in college, Pam Jacobazzi married Hemy Piasecki. During
tlie course of her maniage to Henry Piasecki, Pamela worked in the Admissions Departtnent at
4
Resurrection Medical Center, and also worked as a mortgage loan processor, while Heury Piasecki
was primarily responsible for the family's income as a truck driver. Despite their best efforts,
Pamela and Henry divorced in 1987 after eleven (11) years of marriage. The divorce was partly due
to their inability to conceive a child.
After her divorce from Henry Piasecki, Pamela obtained a real estate sales license, and
became a real estate agent for Reality World in Schaumburg, Illinois. In 1988, Ms. Jacobazzi met
Peter Janisko. After dating for several montl1s, Ms. Jacobazzi and Mr. Janisko began living together.
Shortly thereafter, Ms. Jacobazzi became pregnant with her only child, Steven. Pamela, Steven, and
Peter lived together as a family until May 18, 1999, when Ms. Jacobazzi's bond was revoked and she
was taken into custody after the jury returned the guilty verdict for murder and aggravated batte17 of
a child. Ms. Jacobazzi and Peter Janisko did not formally marry because Ms. Jacobazzi was a devout
Catholic, and had not obtained an annnlment of her marriage to Henry Jacobazzi.
In 1994, Ms. Jacobazzi had decided that she wanted to be able to raise her only son, Steven,
despite the need that she contribute financially to the family. As a result, Ms. Jacobazzi began a
licensed day care business from her home where she provided care for three to four children,
without incident, from 1989 to August 12, 1994. In addition to operating a day care facility from her
home, Ms. Jacobazzi also served as a teacher's aide in the CCD program at Resurrection Parish,
located in Worth, Illinois from 1994 through 1998.
Even after the jm-y returned the gnilty verdict in this case, Ms. Jacobazzi continued to be a
missionary in assisting others through difficult times, and has been recognized as such in the
following certificates:
Certificate of Award for Outstanding Achievement in 150 hours of Tutoring;
Certificate of Completion for completing 12 hours of Literacy Tutoring Training with Heartland College - Project READ;
Peer Educator for Healtl1 Care - Prevention of HIV;
5
Certificate of Achievement for completing HIV/ AIDS CTRPN Home Study Course;
Teacher's Aide in Business Management Pre-start School Aide;
Certificate of Appreciation as Angel Tree Volunteer Business Management Teacher Aide of the Month Certificate of Participation for 125 Hours in Project READ;
Taught Religious Education at Resurrection Catholic Community;
Counseling of other Inmates - See letters from inmates attached
(A copy of said certificates are included in the Appendix and inco1porated herein as Exhibit "13",
and letters from fellow inmates are included in the Appendix which are incorporated herein as
Exhibit "14").
In addition to her ongoing service to others, Ms. Jacobazzi has continued her education and
improved her skills enabling her to be a contributing member of society upon her release from the
Illinois Department of Corrections. These accomplishments are documented in the following
certificates:
Computer Technology;
Business Management;
Catholic Home Study Set-vice for completing the correspondence course Christ Mother and Ours;
Catholic Home Study Service for completing the correspondence course The Catechism Handbook;
Food and Sanitation License;
Creative Wt1ting;
Numerous College Courses - See attached ttanscripts;
Parenting from the Inside Certificate;
Symposium- Not Just Child's Play
(A copy of said certificates are included in the Appendix and incorporated herein as Exhibit
6
N. HISTORY OF THE CASE
This Clemency Petition relates to the actual innocence of, and wrongful conviction for, first
degree murder and aggravated battery (of a child) of Pamela Jacobazzi based on a theory of Shaken
Baby Syndrome (hereinafter referred to "SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME") absent any facts of an
"impact injuty" or signs of other physical injuries dui-ing the time frame advanced by the
pr,osecution as the only time frame (3-4 hours before Matthew C. became unresponsive between
5:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.tn., on August 11, 1994) that Matthew C. had to have been injured (e.g. "pnre
shaking" or "non-impact" shalciug case). Matthew C. had been enrolled in Ms. Jacobazzi's home
daycare for only ten calendar days prior to the alleged date of the alleged incident (August 11, 1994),
and, due in part to illness, had only actually been with Ms. J acobazzi for five (5) of those days. After
her conviction, Ms. Jacobazzi's attorneys discovered facts that had not been considered by Ms.
Jacobazzi's trial attorneys and trial expert (Dr. Jan Leesttna) in Matthew C.'s medical records
obtained from his pediatrician (hereinafter "The Nadeltnan Records") which revealed a pre-existiug
medical condition which provides an alternative explanation for the medical event that occui-red on
August 11, 1994. (A copy of The Nadeltnan Records is included in the Appendix and inco1-porated
herein as Exhibit "16"). Additionally, both long-established medical p1-inciples, as well as evolving
generally accepted (and rejected) conclusions in the medical community, actually exclude "SHAKEN
BABY SYNDROME" as the mechanism of inju1y for Matthew C.'s August 11, 1994 medical event.
The above-referenced information and evidence was not presented at Ms. Jacobazzi's trial.
Prior to August 11, 1994, Ms. Jacobazzi was a mother of one son, and lived with her family
in Bartlett, Illinois, where she operated a day care service from her home. Ms. Jacobazzi's se1vice
provided care for children from Monday through Friday. The children in Ms. Jacobazzi's day care
would be dropped off by their parents beginning at approximately 8:00 a.m., and would be picked
up by tl1eir parents by 5:00 p.m. Dui-ing July and August of 1994, Ms. Jacobazzi cared for two
toddlers in addition to her son. Matthew C. began Ms. Jacobazzi's day care program on August 1,
7
1994, just ten calendar days prior to the alleged incident. However; during the five actual days he
was enrolled in Ms. Jacobazzi's day care, Matthew was kept home sick twice, including August 10,
1994, for "viral'' symptoms.
On August 11, 1994, Matthew C.'s mother left hiru at Ms. Jacobazzi's day care in the
morning while on her way to work. Apparently, Matthew C. had not fully recovered from the
"vira1" symptoms he experienced the day before, when his mother had kept hiru home from day
care. Matthew C.'s mother picked hiru up from Ms. Jacobazzi's home shortly after 5:00 p.m., on
August 11, 1994, and began to drive him to his natura1 father's house. While en route, Matthew C.'s
mother noticed that she could not awaken her son. Matthew C.'s mother continued to the father's
house where she and the father attempted to awaken Matthew C. while on the father's dt-iveway.
After the efforts of Matthew's parents on the driveway of the father's house to awaken hiru failed,
they took hiru to the emergency room at St. Joseph's Hospital, located in Elgin, Illinois. The
Emergency Room staff attempted to stabilize Matthew.
The neuroradiologist, Dr. Kenneth Sullivan, performed an emergency CT scan which
revealed a large clot over the left side of the brain (subdural hematoma) composed of both "new and
old blood," and severe brain swelling or infarction (infarction is death of tissue due to cut off
circulation) on the same side, severely shifting the brain to the other side and down around the brain
stem (called mass effect). (A copy of Dr. Sullivan's Report dated August 11, 1994 is included in the
Appendix hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "17"; see also, Exhibit "2" (Dr. Pattick Barnes).
After beginning seizure medication and antibiotics, Matthew was then airlifted to Lutheran General
Hospital, located in Park Ridge, Illinois, for emergency neurosurgery. The ttansfer diagnosis was
acute subdural hematoma and likely brain infarction (no mention of "SHAKEN BABY
SYNDROME").
The emergency brain surge1y ( craniotomy) was perfo1med by Dr. Jerry Bauer to evacuate the
subdural hematoma in an attempt to relieve the markedly elevated inttacranial pressure. However,
8
even after said craniotomy, Matthew C.'s medical records indicate that he continued to suffer from
markedly increased intracranial pressure (up to 73) and loss of cerebral brain function in association
with the extensive brain infarction.
It is significant to note that the working diagnosis for Matthew C. changed a day later after
an eye examination by Dr. Leonard revealed "scattered intraretinal hemorrhage" in the right eye
(scattered bleeding within the visual membrane inside the back of the eye) and "dense confluent
intraretinal hemorrhage, a retinal fold and separation of the internal limiting membrane"
characterized as "traumatic retinoschisis" in the left eye. No further characterization was provided,
no photos were taken, and no follow-up exam was undertaken. This examination was 20-1/2 hours
after the onset of symptoms, after respirato1y assistance via bag-mask and endotracheal tube, after
some 20 hours of markedly elevated intracranial pressure, after neurosurge1y and multiple
medications, including mannitol for herapeutic dehydration, raising serious concerns about their
possible artifactual role in the eye findings. Critically, alone on these ocular finding, the
diagnosis was changed to "Shaken Baby Syndrome'~ and remained such thereafter without the
staff at Lutheran General Hospital ever conside11ng any other possible causes for Matthew's
condition or conducting any additional studies.
It is critical to note that Dr. Leonard has recently reconsidered the opinion she gave at trial
in this case. Specifically, after reviewing several peer-reviewed articles on the issue,3 Dr. Leonard
stated that the science behind her diagnosis in 1994 was not as ironclad as she had believed. That's
very compelling stuff. It certainly opens up the differential diagnosis beyond sl1aken injury."
A copy of the relevant portion of the article from The Medill Innocence Project is included in the
Appendix and inco1-porated herein as Exhibit "18". It is further significant to note that Matthew C.
3 Alnong the aiiicles reviewed are "Archives of Ophthalmology", Lueder, Turner, et al., Washington University School of Medicine Un Saint Louis) (2006); Obi and Watts, Are there any pathognomic signs in shaken baby syndron1e?, "Journal of the American Association for Pediatric Ophthaln1ologists and Strabisn1us", Vol. 11, Issue 1) pp. 99-100, (February (2007).
9
had no neck injmy, no grip marks, no long bone fractures, no skull fractures, and no objective
evidence of an impact-caused injury.
The staff at Lutheran General Hospital simply assumed, without any corroborating evidence,
that 22-lb Matthew C. had been lifted up and violently, forcefully shaken, causing his head to whip
forward and back repeatedly causing the large subdural hematoma and infarction on the left side of
his brain and the bleeding in his eyes. In this regard, Ms. Jacobazzi was 5'1'' tall and weighed
approximately 110 pounds at the time of the alleged incident. They also concluded that it had to
have happened while under the care of Ms. Jacobazzi. This hasty conclusion was tl1en adopted
tl1ereafter by tl1e child protective services, law enforcement and the prosecution. At no time did the
staff of Lutheran General Hospital or any of Matthew C.'s medical providers consider or investigate
a cause of the condition other than "Shaken Baby Syndrome".
Most disturbing is that the peer-reviewed medical literature clearly states that, in the
absence of impacts to the head (which Matiliew C. did not have), "SHAKEN BABY
SYNDROME" is characterized by (1) a bilateral iliin layer of subdural blood (never a massive
unilateral subdural clot), (2) bilateral symmettical ischemic/hypoxic swelling of the brain (never
unilateral massive infarction of ilie brain), and (3) unilateral or bilateral retinal hemorrhages
(bleeding in ilie visual membranes in ilie bases of tl1e eyes), especially wiili lifting and tearing of ilie
retina. Matthew is said to have displayed only the latter --- but iliere are oilier causes for iliat,
especially sickle cell disease (See, Exhibit "7" (Dr. Speili), at p. 3, i\i\ c, d, e & g; p. 8, i\ a; & p. 9, i\ c.;
also see ilie contained Speth Report wiili quoted excerpts from peer-reviewed referenced medical
literature).
Furiliermore, at no time did the staff at Luilieran General Hospital, or any post-surgical
care facility, note iliat ilie neuroradiologist, Dr. Kenneili Sullivan at St. Joseph's Hospital had
characterized ilie blood clot over Matiliew's brain in tl1e initial CT scan Report as boili "new and
old blood."
10
Neither the staff at Lutheran General Hospital, nor any post-surgical care facility had ever
reviewed or considered Matthew C.'s prior health problems involving a variant of sickle cell trait
causing persistent anemia, recurrent infections (the last just a day before his subdural hematoma)
and dehydration and with its known propensity for strokes, brain bleeds and other neurovascular
complications (such as subdural hematomas, ruptured aneurysms or AV malformations with
subarachnoid hemorrhage, cerebral sinovenous thromboses and cerebral infarctions, central retinal
venous thromboses and retinal hemorrhages, and retinal schisis and detachment), nor had they
considered that tests had been pending to further characterize the type of sickle cell variant. (See,
Exhibit "7" (Dr. Speth), at p. 3, '
The prosecution's theo1-y at trial was that Matthew C.'s fatal condition was due to the
"SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME" and that he had suffered it at the hands of Ms. Jacobazzi at some
point late in the afternoon of August 11, 1994. However, despite the fact that three other children
were present with Ms. J acobazzi and Matthew C. on the day in question, the prosecution introduced
no direct evidence that Ms. Jacobazzi either shook or otherwise mistreated Matthew C. on August
11, 1994. The prosecution also provided no motive for Ms. J acobazzi to have done so. Instead, the
prosecution's case was a largely circumstantial case, based on the assumption that Matthew C. was a
healthy ten-month old boy when he was left in Ms. Jacobazzi's day care on August 11, 1994. Here,
the prosecution relies almost exclusively on expert witnesses who testified to medical certainty that
the cause of death was "Shaken Baby Syndrome" (described by them as akin to falling out of a third
floor window or striking the head against a dashboard of a front end auto collision), and that no
person other than Ms. J acobazzi had access to Matthew C. to have inflicted his alleged injuries
during the period of time within which they claimed the injuries had to have occurred. The
prosecution further theorized that, due to this time frame and the nature of Matthew C.'s alleged
injuries, the subdural hematoma could not have been the result of a "re-bleed'', as theorized by Ms.
Jacobazzi's attorneys at tr-la~ from a fall out of a sitting position on the ceramic floor that resulted in
Matthew C. crying and developing a small lump on his forehead on August 8, 1994, or from some
other, unknown incident 10 to 14 days earlier.
Not one of these medical "experts" was confronted by the Defense during cross
examination with the abundant peer-reviewed medical literature which clearly states that, in the
absence of a blow to the head, "SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME" never embraces massive unilateral
subdural hematomas or massive unilateral brain infarction displacing the brain!! Also, not one of
these experts was told about the variants of sickle cell trait, which can cause, in contrast to
"SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME", massive subdural hematomas, can cause cerebral infarction and
can cause the eye findings! In fact, Dr. Nadehuan, Matthew C.'s family pediatrician, never was asked
12
about the sickle cell issue which prevalently appeared in his records, never volunteered it and in fact
characterized Matthew C. as a healthy boy! The "experts" also were not cross-examined as to the
significance of Matthew C.'s enlarging head indicative of an undiagnosed condition which may have
predisposed him to subdural hematoma.
After the denial of her motion for directed verdict, Ms. Jacobazzi called the neuroradiologist,
Dr. Kenneth Sullivan, to testify about his initial reading and interpretation of Matthew C.'s initial CT
scan that had been taken at St. Joseph's Hospital on August 11, 1994. Dr. Sullivan testified that said
CT scan had revealed both new and old blood in the large subdural hematoma on the left side, as
well as infarction on the left side of tlie brain, and that the old blood could have been 10 to 14 days
old. (See Exhibit "17"; see also the transcript of Dr. Sullivan's Trial Testimony is included in the
Appendix hereto and inco1porated herein as Exhibit "20").
Ms. Jacobazzi then called her mother to testify that she obse1-ved an unharmed, awake
Matthew C. with Ms. Jacobazzi and the other children at approximately 3:15 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. on
August 11, 1994. Ms. J acobazzi then called her medical expert witness, Dr. Jan Leestma. Dr.
Leestma is a neuropathologist with special expertise in forensic neuropathology, and who was, at the
time, the Associate Medical Director of the Chicago Institute of Neurosurge1y and Neuroresearch.
Dr. Leestma testified on tlie Defense theo1y of an older and more recent subdural hematoma.
However, at the time of trial, Dr. Leestrua was not aware about the sickle cell disease present in
Matthew C. since birth. (See Exhibit "4"). Dr. Leestma testified that the microscopic slides of the
subdural hematoma revealed both old and new blood which connoted that the hematoma originated
from an older injmy by a mechanism other than shaking. Dr. Leestma's testimony bore out the
radiological findings by Dr. Sullivan.
Ms. Jacobazzi then testified on her own behalf and provided information concerning her
personal background and the other children enrolled in her day care on August 1, 1994. At u-W.l, Ms.
Jacobazzi denied doing anything to Matthew C. to cause his condition. At trial, Ms. Jacobazzi
13
fm-ther described how Matthew C. bumped his head on August 8, 1994, while he was sitting in her
kitchen. Ms. Jacobazzi also testified that Matthew C. was not at day care on August 10, 1994
because his mother reported that he had a fever. Thereafter, Ms. Jacobazzi testified to the events of
August 11, 1994, in which she denied shaking or injuring him. However, at trial Matthew C's.
mother testified that while she was dropping Matthew C. off at Ms. Jacobazzi's house the morning
of August 11, 1994, Matthew C. became clingy and cried. (A copy of the transcript of the referred
to portion of Cynthia Czapski's trial testimony on May 6, 1999, is included in the Appendix hereto
as Exhibit "25").
As part of their rebuttal case, the prosecution called Dr. Robert K:irschner, who was a
forensic pathologist, to contradict Dr. Leestrua' s testimony concerning an old injm-y as the cause of
the subdm-al hematoma. Dr. Kirschner echoed the opinions of the prosecution's expert witnesses
who had testified in the case-in-chief to the extent that he found "SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME"
to be the sole medical explanation for the child's condition. Dr. Kirschner even misstated one of
the medical findings in Matthew C. by testifying that the child was found to have suffered a massive
cerebral edema when, in fact, the medical finding that Dr. Kirschner was refening to was a massive
cerebral infarction. However, Dr. Kirschner's misstatement of medical findings, and its significance
to the diagnosis of "SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME" was not exposed on cross-examination, nor
was Dr. Kirschner confronted by the defense with peer-reviewed literatnre that contradicted his
opinion that "SHAI<EN BABY SYNDROME" was the sole medical cause of Matthew C.'s
condition.
To confuse the entire case even more, Dr. Smith, a pediatric radiologist (but not a
nem-oradiologist), echoed by Dr. Alexander, a pediatrician, (both on the paid testimony circuit),
testified that there was extensive subarachnoid hemorrhage, (a thin layer of hemorrhage under the
tbin lining over the sm-face of the brain) visible on the CT scan, further thereby invoking the severity
of the ""SHAI<EN BABY SYNDROME"" and further inflaming the jmy. [However, subarachnoid
14
hemorrhage is not one of the cardinal findings in "SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME" in the absence
of impact or blunt injury]. Furthermore, Dr. Sullivan, the neuroradiologist who performed, read and
inte1preted the CT scan, did not describe, nor did he testify to, the presence of subarachnoid
hemorrhage, and Dr. Bauer, the neurosurgeon who performed the craniotomy, stated in his original
operative report that there was no subarachnoid hemmrhage on the surface of the brain. These
overt contradictions were never confronted by the Defense and the Judge never questioned the
integrity of the testimony!
After closing argument, the trial court refused Ms. Jacobazzi's request to submit an
involuntai-y manslaughter instruction to the jmy because she denied any conduct which could have
caused Matthew C.'s condition, and that Matthew C.'s condition had not been caused by shaking.
After summarizing its recollection of the evidence and testimony presented at trial, the trial court
denied Ms. Jacobazzi's tendered involuntary manslaughter jmy instmction. The court again refused
to submit the involuntaiy manslaughter instmction to the jury during the Jmy Instmction
Confirmation on June 18, 1999. After deliberating for more than eight (8) hours, the jury retmned a
guilty verdict against Ms. Jacobazzi for murder and aggravated batte1y (to a child).
On December 27, 2001, the Second District Court of Appeals denied Ms. Jacobazzi's direct
appeal and affumed her conviction. People v. Jacobazzj, 326 Ill.App.3d 1171, 811 N.E.2d 79 (2d. Dist.
2001); petition for leave denied, 199 Ill.2d 568, 775 N.E.2d 6 (2002). Thereafter, the Illinois Supreme
Cami: denied Ms. Jacobazzi's Petition for Leave to Appeal and the United States Supreme Court
denied Ms. Jacobazzi's Petition for Certioraii.
On May 17, 2002, Ms. Jacobazzi filed a Petition for Relief pursuant to the Illinois Post
Conviction Relief Act, and subsequently thereto on July 23, 2002, filed a Supplemental Post
Conviction Petition. The operative fact of the instant Post-Conviction Petition is the fact that in
May of 2002, Dr. Lcestrna leained and advised Ms. Jacobazzi's current counsel that he was never
provided The Nade!tnan Records by defense counsel prior to trial. (See Exhibit "4").
15
Said Post-Conviction Petition further alleges, and is supported by separate affidavits from
both Dr. Claus P. Speth and Dr. Uma Subramanian Srinivasan, that the pediatrician's records
contained the key to the victim's medical condition p11or to and on August 11, 1994, and explained
the hue cause of his fatal condition. Specifically, Ms. Jacobazzi's Post-Conviction Petition provides
uncontradicted evidence from the pediatrician's records clearly showing that the victim would have
had enhanced susceptibility for the development of a massive subdmal hematoma, cerebral
infarction and the eye findings. Ms. Jacobazzi's Post-Conviction Petition fmiher contains
uncontradicted attestations that a review of the above medical records by an expert witness would
have also revealed the possible existence of hemophilia, "a variant form of sickle cell trait" (also
referred to herein as "sickle cell variant" and "hemoglobinopathy"4), and/ or a mptured aneu1ysm or
A-V malformation in the victim on August 11, 1994. (See Exhibits "7" & "9"). In light of the likely
presence of complications of either hemophilia, "a variant form of sickle cell trait" (also referred to
herein as "sickle cell variant"), and possibly also a mptured aneurysm or A-V malformation, it would
have been impossible for the prosecution's expert witnesses to rule out that Matthew C's afflictions
were not due to some underlying organic cause, as opposed to "SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME"
because the above were never ruled out by the victim's treating physicians subsequent to August 11,
1994. (See Exhibit "9" at p.8). After the trial, Dr. Nadelman confirmed Matthew C's. medical histo1y.
Specifically, in his deposition in the related civil case, Dr. Nadelman confirmed that Matthew C.
was not healthy in August 1994, had a decreased hemoglobin level, and the cause of his
ongoing symptoms was not determined prior to August 11, 1994. (A copy of Dr. Nadelman's
deposition transcript from Czapski v. J acobazzj is included in the Appendix and incorporated herein
as Exhibit "21")5• Tbis testimony was not admitted at Ms. Jacobazzi's murder trial. (See Exhibit "22").
4 The terms "sickle cell disease", "sickle cell variant", and "sickle cell trait" as used in this Clemency Petition refer to he1noglobinopathies that are genetic mutations of the hemoglobin inolecule "globin". 5 However, during the criminal trial, the prosecution went to great lengths to limit their inquiry of Dr. Nadelrnan only to whether Matthew C. bad met his developmental goals for a boy his age, and defense counsel failed to conduct any cross-examination into any of the ongoing symptoms Matthew C. was exhibiting prior to August 1994,
16
In this regard, the Second District recognized the significance of the pre-existing medical
condition, and held as follows:
the opinions of Drs. Speth and Subramanian are probative as to whether counsel had a duty to incorporate the N adehnan records into the defense theory despite any contrary recommendation by Dr. Leestrna. Drs. Speth and Subramanian mention several preexisting conditions that might have accounted for the victim's conditions, particularly the subdural hematoma and subarachnoid bleeding. Some of the conditions, like sickle cell trait, anemia, and fevers, are expressly diagnosed in the Nadehnan records. Others, like external hydrocephalus and hemophilia, are inferable or at least sm1nisable from the records. Wllitt these conditions all have in common, according to Drs. Speth and Subramanian, is that they suggest a predisposition to bleeding in the victim. Such evidence might have bolstered the defense that the victim's massive intracranial hemorrhaging could have been precipitated by even minor tramna, such as the. fall described by defendant Moreover, because these preexisting conditions also suggest the possibility of entirely spontaneous bleeding, the defense might have been able to avoid altogether the "prior trauina" theory, which had the drawback of positing substantial bleeding that was not immediately symptomatic.
Jacobazzi, 398 IlLApp.3d at 890, 2009 WL 3968849, at *29-30.
The above detailed histo1y of Ms. Jacobazzi's Post-Conviction Petition is important to
understand, because it illustrates how, to date, the prosecution has successfully avoided having to
respond to Ms. Jacobazzi's allegations that medical evidence, never presented to a jury or considered
by a judge, establishes her actual innocence in this case because it effectively ntles out "SHAKEN
BABY SYNDROME" as the explanation of Matthew C's condition. Furthermore, no court has
ever considered or rnled on Ms. Jacobazzi's claim that the medical evidence contained in Matthew
C's pediatrician's records exonerates her from the allegation that she shook the child, and that the
alleged injnties resulted in the child's subsequent death approximately eighteen months later. Even
if the above-referred evidence does not completely exonerate Ms. Jacobazzi's involvement in the
condition suffered by Matthew C, it does at least establish that any conduct on the part of Ms.
Jacobazzi that contributed to said condition was merely negligent or reckless, and that such a mental
state would support the commutation of the balance of Ms. Jacobazzi's sentence.
as set forth in Matthew C.'s medical records obtained from Dr. Nadelman's office. (A copy of the transcript from Dr. Nadelman's testimony in People v. Pa111ela Jacobazzi is included in the appendix and incorporated herein as Exhibit "22").
17
Pursuant to 730 ILCS 5/3-3-13, the Governor of the State of Illinois can consider such
evidence. In this regard, the Governor has the authority to grant Ms. Jacobazzi executive clemency
either in the form known as a pardon (formally absolving her of the crimes for which she was
erroneously convicted), or alternatively, in the form known as commuting her sentence.
Additionally, the Supreme Court has recently held in a SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME case which
contains a factually simihr scenario, that clemency is an appropriate method to correct a defendant's
incorrect conviction and sentence. Cavazos v. Smith, 132 S.Ct. 2 (2011).
On behalf of Ms. Jacobazzi, we respectfully request that the Prisoner Review Board
recommend that Gove1nor Quinn grant this relief on one of the alternative grounds that Ms.
Jacobazzi is actually innocent, or that justice requires that the balance of her sentence be commuted.
V. REASONS FOR GRANTING CLEMENCY
A. EXECUTIVE PARDON BASED ON ACTUAL INNOCENCE
1. Summary o(fuasons
Ms. Jacobazzi is entitled to an Executive Pardon because developments in the medical
community significantly question the continued validity of the theory of Shaken Baby Syndrome in
"no impact'' or "purely shaken" shaken cases such as the instant case. (See the Affidavit of Dr.
Norman Guthkelch dated Febrnary 3, 2012, which is included in the Appendix and incorporated
herein as Exhibit "23"). Here, Ms. Jacobazzi notes that the Shaken Baby Syndrome theoq regarding
the oft quoted "triad of symptoms" itself has undergone a significant name change from "Shaken
Baby Syndrome" to "Abusive Head Trauma" and does not generally include findings of Abusive
Head Trauma in pure shaking cases such as this. As such, the medical community no longer
recognizes that the SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME tlleory in a "pure shaking", non-impact
scenario is not valid. Turkheimer, Deborah, "The Next Innocence Profect: Shaken Baby Syndrome and The
Criminal Courti', 87 Wash. Univ. Law Rev. 1, 20 (2009).
18
Next, the symptoms Matthew C. exhibited on August 11, 1994 through December 19, 199 5,
coupled with the information contained in Matthew C.'s pediatrician's records, (also referred to as
The Nadehrum Records) demonstrate that Matthew C.'s malady, and ultimately his death, were not
the result of Shaken Baby Syndrome. In support of and inc01"porated into this Clemency Petition by
the indicated Exhibit numbers are the following reports, declarations, and/ or affidavits:
Exhibit "2" - Dr. Patrick Barnes dated December 26, 2012;
Exhibit "3" - Dr. Patrick Lantz dated March 6, 2013;
Exhibit "4" - Dr. Jan Leestrua letter dated May 16, 2002;
Exhibit "5" - Dr. Jan Leestrua report dated March 6, 2013;
Exhibit "6" - Dr.John Plunkett report dated March 6, 2013;
Exhibit "7" - Dr. Claus P. Speth declaration dated July 31, 2006;
Exhibit "8" - Dr. Claus P. Speth declaration dated March 7, 2013;
Exhibit "9" - Dr. Uma Subramanian Srinivasan dated July 23, 2002;
Exhibit "10" - Dr. Shaku Teas Affidavit dated March 7, 2013;
Exhibit "11" - Chris Van Ee, Ph.D., report dated March 7, 2013.
Finally, both Dr. Wilbur Smith and Dr. Deena Leonard have significantly changed their
opinions as to what could have caused tl1e findings present in Matthew C., and whether the retinal
hemorrhages and retinal folds are indicators of Shaken Baby Syndrome. (A copy of the
correspondence from Dr. Wilbur Smitl1 to the Downstate Illinois Innocence Project dated August 5,
2011 is included in the Appendix and inc01"porated herein as Exhibit "24"; see also, a copy of the
Medill Innocence Project interview with Dr. Deena Leonard which is included in the Appendix and
inc01"porated herein as Exhibit "18"). Without Drs. Smith and Leonard's trial opinions, the
prosecution's theory of a "pure shaking" /non~irnpact injury that was advanced at trial, is no longer
supported in eitl1er fact or science.
19
Thus, there exists a compelling basis for the likelihood that the cause of Matthew C.'s
condition was not Shaken Baby Syndrome (or any abusive conduct for that matter), and that Ms.
J acobazzi is innocent of any wrongdoing.
2. Argument
At the time of the alleged incident and Ms. Jacobazzi's trial, the theory of Shaken Baby
Syndrome was not subjected to much critical peer review. It was viewed as the "ultimate
explanation" to terrible conditions and maladies brought on to children who, due to their age, were
unable to communicate whether the malady was the result of some soli: of abuse, impact, or an
unknown. In the twelve (12) years that have passed since this incident, much has been learned
about the shortfalls of SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME, especially in cases alleged to be "purely
shaken" incidents that takes much of the "luster" off of the theo1y of Shaken Baby Syndrome and is
no longer advanced as an exclusive etiology". See Turkheimn; supra, at p. 20. This, coupled with the
misrepresentations at Ms. Jacobazzi's trial, provide sufficient evidence to establish that Ms. Jacobazzi
is innocent of any wrongdoing (specifically a violent shaking or other physical abuse), to Matthew C.
Thus, it is clearly within the discretion to grant Ms. Jacobazzi's instant petition based on her claim of
actual innocence.
a. The Theory of Shaken Baby Syndrome is No Longer Recognized in Pure Shaking Cases
At the onset, it is important to note that the prosecution's theory at trial was that the type of
Shaken Baby Syndrome at issue in the instant case was what is referred to as a "pure shaking." In
other words, the prosecution presented absolutely no evidence or testimony at trial that would
support the theo1y that the type of Shaken Baby Syndrome at issue in this case was the result of
some type of blunt trauma to the head. The only evidence at trial that the cause of the condition
could have been a blunt trauma to the head was Ms. Jacobazzi's statement to the police that the
child had fallen fotward from a sitting position and struck his head on the ceramic tile floor
(resulting in a small bump to his forehead) a couple of days prior to August 11, 1994, and the
20
testimony from both Detective Joseph Leonis and Cynthia Czapski that on the day of the alleged
fatal :injuiy, Matthew C. had been tumbling and rolling while in the care and custody of Ms.
Jacobazzi. While the above incidents served as one of the bases for Dr. Leestrna's opinion that the
condition may have been caused by a prior fall or bump to the head, the prosecution's "expert''
witnesses uniformly rejected such a theo1y and uniformly opined that neither the above fall or
activities could have been the cause of the condition.
Based on the above, the prosecution's theory that the cause of the condition was the "purely
shaken" type of Shaken Baby Syndrome is disproved by the hospital findings displayed by Matthew
C. on August 11, 1994.
Initially, Dr. Guthkelch, the "father" of what has become Shaken Baby Syndrome theo1y
states that "[A] diagnosis of non-accidental death, such as "Shaken Baby Syndrome", is not justified
when the ~ evidence of abuse is the triad (subdural hematoma, cerebral edema and retinal
hemorrhages). (A copy of the Affidavit of Dr. Norman Guthkelch is included in the Appendix and
incorporated herein as Exhibit "23", at '\I 1). Dr. Guthkelch is one of the first medical professionals
who studied potential causes of subdural hematomas in infants. See Exhibit "23", at '\11-2; see also
Guthkelch, et al., "Infantile Subdural Hematoma and its Relationship to Whiplash Injuries" (1971).
According to Dr. Guthkelch the subsequent the01y that Shaken Baby Syndrome is assumed to be
the mechanism of injuiy in babies presenting, with subdural hematomas, retinal hemorrhages, and
brain swelling even in the absence of other signs of abuse is a distortion of and not consistent with
his studies, data or article. (Exhibit "23", at'\[ 3). This "no impact'' the01y of shaking is exactly the
the01y advanced by the prosecution in Ms. Jacobazzi's tl-ial. Here, Dr. Guthkelch further states that
it is accepted that "a number of other conditions - natural and non-accidental-may lead to u-iad."
(Exhibit "23", at '\[5). Included in those other conditions that "mimic" the "triad'' of symptoms
previously argued by prosecutors to be "pathognomonic" of Shaken Baby Syndrome, include (but
21
are not limited to) metabolic disorders, blood clotting disorders, and birth injmy. (Exhibit "23", at
iJS). Dr. Guthkelch, next states as follows:
A diagnosis of Shaken Baby Syndrome or non-accidental head injmy should only be made after a thorough examination. Besides evidence of any injuries, a thorough examination must include the infant's medical histo1y, clinical, radiological and laboratoty evidence, consideration of a differential diagnosis to rnle out other causes, and all other relevant evidence.
(Exhibit "23" at iJ6).
Moreover, as set forth above, the medical community no longer recognizes that the Shaken
Baby Syndrome theoty in a "pure shaking", non-impact scenario is not valid. See Turkheimer, supra,
at20.
Next, in addition to identifying the likely causes of the physical event that occurred on
August 11, 1994 (as more fully set forth below), Dr. Speth's Certification further explains why
SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME is not applicable to the instant case. In this regard, the "peer-
reviewed medical literature" concerning Shaken Baby Syndrome involving a shaking without impact
(previously referred to in this petition as a "pure shaking") establish that there are the following
three (3) cardinal features:
(1) A thin subdural layering of blood over both halves of the brain (over the convexities of both hemispheres) --- never a large hematoma over just one side of the brain.
(2) Symmetrical swelling of the brain called "encephalopathy" --- never infarction of half of the brain and never marked shift or marked mass effect. The symmetrical swelling is thought to be due to tissue fluid called edema and thought to arise from a combination of ischemia (compromised blood flow) and/ or hypoxia ~ack of oxygen supply in the blood)
(3) Hemorrhage of a particular appearance within all layers of the retina and extending out to the very periphery (the ora serrata), and occasionally also retinal folds and retinoschisis.
(Exhibit "7", at p. 2-3). Without the above-three symptoms, the condition is not the result of
Shaken Baby Syndrome caused by a "pure shaking'' incident. (Exhibit "8", at p. 2-3). However,
22
contraq to the above, on August 11, 1994, Matthew C. presented with the following three (3)
cardinal features:
(1) A large blood clot ("hematoma") over the left side of his brain called a "subdural hematoma."
There was a dispute among the "experts" as to whether it was entirely a fresh clot or whether it was a fresh clot superimposed on an older clot.
(2) Marked swelling of the left half of the brain beneath the hematoma that was determined to be infarction (death of the brain tissue due to cut-off circulation).
This enlargement encroached upon, and thereby compressed, the opposite right half of the brain, also compressed blood vessels and the brain stem (called "shift" due to "mass effect'') causing markedly increased pressure within the head (increased intracranial pressure or "ICP")
(3) Alterations of the visual membranes ("retina's") inside the backs of the eyes (seen with a scope)
Characterized on a one-page diagram with notes by one physician on only one occasion as "scattered" bleeding ("hemorrhage") into the retina ("intra-retinal") on the rigl1t, "dense confluent" bleeding into the retina on the left, as well as a "retinal fold" and "separation of the internal limiting membrane" (the membrane at the front of the retina) on the left. The latter was defined as "traumatic retinoschisis" (splitting of the retina) "consistent with shaken injll1)'." At autopsy occlusion of the left central retinal arteq was identified.
There was a 20-'/z hour delay before the exam was performed, during which time Matthew had extraordinarily elevated intracranial pressures (as high as 73), was ventilated with bag-mask and via endotracheal intubation, received seizure medications, was transported via helicopter, underwent more than 1 hour of neurosurgeq, was subjected to therapeutic dehydration (including Mannitol) and received steroids.
(Exhibit "8", at pp. 1-3). Based on the above, the prosecution's theory at trial that Matthew C.'s
condition on arrival in the hospital were injuries and were caused by a "purely shaken" episode of
Shaken Baby Syndrome, are disproved by the objective medical hospital findings following his
arrival there on August 11, 1994.
Not only do the hospital findings present in Matthew C. on August 11, 1994, mle out a
"purely shaken" episode of Shaken Baby Syndrome, they are highly indicative of underlying medical
causes other than Shaken Baby Syndrome or instances of child abuse.
23
b. Matthew C. 's Medical History Disproves Shaken Baby Syndrome as the Cause of his Fatal In;it1ies
Additionally, Pamela Jacobazzi is entitled to a grant of clemency because the information
contained in The Nadehnan Records as reviewed and inte1-preted by leading, prominent
professionals who work in the various disciplines associated with Shaken Baby Syndrome, establish
Ms. Jacobazzi's claim of actual innocence. In short, the physical event which occurred in Matthew
C. on August 11, 1994, was not the result of shaking at the hands of Pamela Jacobazzi, or any other
conduct by Pamela Jacobazzi on August 11, 1994, but most likely the result of sludging and clotting
of blood in tl1e cerebral and retinal venous channels, and further exacerbating a subdural bleed from
days or weeks previously, all of this caused by the pre-existing condition present in Matthew C. since
birth. As set forth above, and in the Declaration prepared by Norman Guthkelch, it is no longer
accepted in the medical community that an infant can suffer a brain injury resulting in the triad of
symptoms present in the instant case in a no-impact shaking case. (See Exhibit "23"). In the instant
case, from the times since Ms. Jacobazzi's prior clemency petition, several leading doctors have
thoroughly reviewed her case.
Dr. Teas' affidavit (Exhibit "10"), contains a detailed tiine line of events, including a
summaiy of the relevant portions of The Nadehnan Records. Here, both Matthew C and his
mother's medical records displayed that both had repeated low hemoglobin and low hematocrit. (See
Exhibit "10", at 'if'if 15, 34-36). Additionally, both Matthew C. and his mother were iron deficient,
and were prescribed iron supplements. (See Exhibit "10", at 'if'if 15, 34-36). Moreover, Matthew C.
was identified, on four occasions in The Nadehnan Records, to have inherited the sickle cell gene
from at least one parent. (Exhibit "16", at 001080-81; 00185; 001096; 001113). Finally, despite Dr.
Nadehnan's advice for Matthew C's. mother to follow up with a hematologist, this advice was
followed. [Exhibit "16"; also, Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at 'if'il 187-190].
24
Next, Dr. Teas' affidavit further details the history of fever, dehydration, low hemoglobin,
low hematocrit, as well as HbS (sickle cell) level of 40%. (Exhibit "10", atiJif 23-41).
Furthermore, Dr. Teas' affidavit also describes the statements of Matthew C's. preV1ous
caretakers to Joseph P. Mahr, as well as the letter from parents on one of the children Ms. Jacobazzi
cared for on August 11, 1994, and the affidavit of one of Ms. Jacobazzi's neighbors (Robert Eck)
who observed Matthew C. on several occasions at Ms. Jacobazzi's house prior to August 11, 1994.
(A copy of the statement of Diane Wore! to Joseph P. Mahr is included in the Appendix and
incorporated herein as Exhibit "26"; the statement of Pat Lynge is included in the Appendix and
incmporated herein as Exhibit "27"; the Affidavit of Robert Eck is included in the Appendix and
incorporated herein as Exhibit "28"; and the letter to The Hon. Ronald Mehling from Paul and
Michelle Zelinsky (parents whose son was present in Pamela Jacobazzi's daycare on August 11,
1994, included in the Appendix and incorporated herein as Exhibit "29"). The above descriptions
as set forth by these individuals are consistent with the theory that Matthew C's. behavior and level
of developmental progress revealed an underlying malady. (See Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at iii! 104-
127). Furthermore, these individuals never were called to testify at trial. Had they testified, the jury
would have been alerted to the fact that the child was not healthy contrary to the bedrock element
of the prosecution's case.
Next, Dr. Patrick Barnes, who is a full professor at Stanford University, as well as both Chief
of pediatric radiology, and Director of pediatd.c MRI and CT-scans at Stanford Lucille Patrick
Children's Hospital, conducted a review of the August 11, 1994 and December 14, 1995 CT-scans
of Matthew C.'s brain after having reviewed The Nadeltnan Records as well as the other medical
records regarding Matthew C .. (See Exhibit "2", at p. 1) Dr. Barnes is a leading pediatric
neuroradiologist who dedicates a substantial portion of his career to studying brain injury in young
children and infants. Dr. Barnes bas been qualified as an expert witness in the area of Shaken Baby
Syndrome as well as pediati-ic neuroradiology in numerous cases. Dr. Barnes' report concerning his
25
review of records in this case reaffirms that "there is nothing about the imaging findings in this case,
including the presence or absence of retinal hemorrhage, that is specific for, or characte1-istic of NAI
(non-accidental injmy)." See Exhibit "2", at p.2. Dr. Barnes fw:ther confirms that "shaking alone
(i.e., without impact) is unlikely to produce intracranial injury in the absence of requisite injmy to the
spinal cord, spinal column, or neck" and that intracranial injuries similar to that in the instant case
can result from short distance falls. See Exhibit "2", at p.2. Thereafter, Dr. Barnes' report confirms
the Certificates and Affidavits filed by Drs. Speth and Submariam in the previous clemency petition
by confirming that brain findings similar to those depicted in Matthew C.'s CT-scans may also be
caused by "predisposing or complicating conditions such as perinatal and birth-related issues;
craniocerebral disproportion; developmental disorders; coagulopathy or vascular disease; metabolic,
toxic, and nutritional disorders; infectious or post-infectious conditions; hypoxia-ischetnia (e.g.
airway, respirato1y, cardiac or circulatory compromise); seizures; prior trauina; and, multi.factorial
(e.g. synergistic cascade phenomena)." See Exhibit "2", at p.2.
Additionally, Dr. Barnes notes that "clinical deterioration due to a predisposing condition
(e.g. coagulopathy or metabolic disorder) may be 'triggered' by an infectious or post-infectious
condition (e.g. recent vaccination), by hypoxia-ischemia (e.g. dysphagic choking or cardiorespirato1-y
arrest and resuscitation), or 'trivial' trauma (e.g. AI)." See Exhibit "2", at p.2. Finally, Dr. Barnes
notes that the clinical deterioration of a child suffe1-ing from these brain findings "may occur
following a 'lucid' interval." See Exhibit "2", at p.2. Critically, Dr. Barnes noted that in the absence
of a specific medical diagnosis, a conclusion such as Shaken Baby Syndrome or other Non.
Accidental Injw.-y ("NAI") should not be the "default'' diagnosis. See Exhibit "2", at p.4.
Thereafter, Dr. Barnes concluded, relative to the instant case, that "there is nothing about the
imaging findings in this case, including the presence or absence of retinal hemorrhage that is specific
for, or characte1-istic of NAI. In this case, specific consideration should be given to a predisposing
26
chronic collection or coagulopathy with subsequent hemorrhage or re-hemorrhage, including
associated with 'trivial' trauma (i.e. accidental)." See Exhibit "2", at p.4.
In addition to Dr. Bames' review of Matthew C.'s CT-scans, Dr. Patrick Lantz, a full
professor at the Wake Forest School of Medicine reviewed and conducted a whole slide imaging
process (WSI) on the blood clot taken from Matthew C. tl1at was introduced at trial as People's
Exhibit #9 and reviewed by all the trial wimesses. See Exhibit "3", at p.1. Dr. Lantz's review and
analysis of ilie sample clot confirmed that, contrai-y to Dr. Robert Kirschner's rebuttal testimony at
trial, tl1c "histopathological findings were indicative of acute subdural bleeding but also had
macrophages with cytoplasmic pale yellow pigment indicative of a prior bleeding episode." See
Exhibit "3", at p.1. Thereafter, Dr. Lantz, a recognized forensic pathologist, who is also a
recognized leading expert as to retinal hemorrhages, co1n1nented, that retinal hemorrhages,
perimacular folds, and retinoschisis, as were present in Matthew C.'s eyes when examined by Dr.
Deena Leonard tl1e day after the alleged occurrence, are not limited to being caused by violent
forces. See Exhibit "3", at p.2. Thereafter, Dr. Lantz specifically refuted Dr. KJ.rschner's trial
opinion that "accidental injuties in ilie home, the kids who fall from counters or fall down stairs or
have an injury in the home, these kids do fine, they don't suffer neurologic injury" is absolutely not
supported by tl1e objective scientific community. See Exhibit "3", at p.2.
Here, Dr. Lantz refers to an article he authored which studied the brain injui-y and retinal
hemorrhages present in a child who fell from a swing set in the back yard less than four feet from
ilie ground. See Exhibit "3", at p.3, ref. note 2. Additionally, Dr. Lantz provided that the trial
testimony of Dr. Deena Leonard concerning the ocular findings concerning the retinal hemorrhages,
retinal fold, and retinoschisis as being pathognomonic for a shaken injury, are not supported by tl1e
objective, scientific co=unity. See Exhibit "3", at p.2. In fact, Dr. Leonard herself has recently
acknowledged this conclusion by Dr. Lantz when she spoke to students at the Medill Innocence
Project investigating Ms. Jacobazzi's case. See Exhibit "3".
27
Next, Dr. John Plunkett, another leading doctor in the area of forensic medicine and
traumatic head injmy issues, provided a report confirming that his review of the whole slide image
("WSI") of the surgical pathology slide confirms "uneqnivocally that Matthew C.'s hematotna had
both acute and sub-acute components." See Exhibit "6", at p.2. Dr. Plunkett went on to describe,
in detail, the va1-ious scavengers cells, connective tissue cells, along with the red blood cells that had
been dead for several days, all of which were present in the slide he reviewed. See Exhibit "6", at
p.2. Based on the objective findings of the various cells contained in the pathology slide reviewed
by Dr. Plnnkett, he concluded that "the most likely cause for Matthew's initialhematoma was a head
impact that occmred no later than August 8 and possibly much earlier." See Exhibit "6", at p.2.
Additionally, Dr. Plnnkett stated that the fall on August 8 (as reported by both Ms. Jacobazzi and
Matthew's mother) may have been the prima17 event or may have aggravated an earlier impact or
pre-existing condition. See Exhibit "6", at p.2. In addition to the possibility that the bump that
Matthew sustained to his head when u-ying to sit up on August 8, 1994, triggered the event on
August 11, 1994, Dr. Plunkett further concluded that it was also possible that a "vascular
malformation, 'spontaneous' bleeding, or sickle cell-trait [see below] caused his initial SDH [subdmal
hematoma]." See Exhibit "6", at p.2.
Dr. Plunkett's report further provided infom1ation explaining how seemingly innocuous and
extremely low velocity inipact may cause a subdural hematoma in infants, and that bleeding in such
cases may be relatively slow and asymptomatic for a considerable period of time. See Exhibit "6", at
p.2. This is directly contradictory to Dr. lCirschner's rebuttal testimony at trial that there is no such
thing as a lucid interval in that the cause of Matthew C.'s injm7 had to have been within two houts
prior to him losing consciousness after he was picked up by his mother ftom Ms. Jacobazzi's house.
In this regard, Dr. Plnnkett expounded that "a simple head first impact to a non-yielding surface
(including a catpeted floor) from as little as a two-foot fall will usually exceed" thresholds required
to cause subdural he1natomas in infants. See Exhibit "6", at pp.2-3. Dr. Plunkett then emphasized
28
that "fatal impact head injui-y in an infant does not require a motor vehicle accident or a fall from a
two-stoi-y building." See Exhibit "6'', at p.3.
Critically, Dr. Plunkett then went on to exphin how abnormalities to the blood coagulation
system, and other underlying medical conditions may alter the threshold requirements and outcome
for impact trauma in infants. See Exhibit "6", at p.3. Dr. Plunkett then provided a non-exhaustive
list of "natural diseases" and metabolic abnormalities which predispose to, or are associated with,
the presence of subdural hematomas, which included the following:
1. Cortical venous thrombosis (CVT), sagittal sinus thrombosis (SST), or other large-sinus thrombosis;
2. Hemoglobinopathies such as but not limited to sickle cell disease;
3. Vascular malformations such as, but not limited to, AV malformations; and
4. Spontaneous, in which the bleeding develops with no recognizable cause.
See Exhibit "6", at p.3. Next, Dr. Plunkett elaborated on the issue of retinal hemorrhages - - - that
Matthew's bilateral retinal hemorrhages were disproportionately present on the same side as the
subdural bleeding, which would seem to iule out a shaking as the mechanism of injury. See Exhibit
"6", at pp.3-4.
Next, Dr. Plunkett squarely addresses the potential significance of the findings of a va1~ant
of the sickle cell trait contained in The Nadelman Records. Here, Dr. Plunkett indicates that he was
able to "identify a small acute arteriolar thrombus in the scanned slide of the SDH [subdural
hematoma] of the slide he reviewed. See Exhibit "6", at p.4. Dr. Plunkett allowed that such a
finding also allowed for the possibility that Matthew C. "had an underlying aneurysm or A-V
malfo11nation associated with his hemoglobinopathy" and gave some significance to the fact that
Matthew C. lived for more than one year after the event on August 11, 1994. See Exhibit "6", at p.4.
Thereafter, Dr. Plunkett confirmed that Matthew C. had a significant hemoglobin abnormality
known to be associated with a variety of vascular disorders. See Exhibit "6", at p.4.
29
Next, Dr. Plunkett confirmed that "scientific stndies suggest that it is not possible to shake
an infant hard enough to cause a concussion, SDH, or traumatic brain injmy (IBI)." See Exhibit
"6", at p.4. Thereafter, Dr. Plunkett analogized that Ms. Jacobazzi's short stature and slight build,
combined with the weight of Matthew C. and the absence of any physical marks associated with
shaking, bmising, or fractnres, would render it in1possible that Ms. Jacobazzi could have generated
the force required to have caused the alleged injuries or triggered the event with Matthew C. on
August 11, 1994. Thereafter, Dr. Plunkett opined that it was a possibility that the variant of sickle
cell trait contt1buted to Matthew C.'s injuries on August 11, 1994 and is a factor that should be
considered. See Exhibit "6", at p.5. Dr. Plunkett then unequivocally stated that "'shaking' did not
cause or contribute to his subdural bleeding or collapse. "In fact, there is no evidence that
anyone did anything to Matthew to cause the subdural and death." See Exhibit "6", at p.5.
(emphasis added); see also, Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at p. 35, if 215.
The Nadehnan Records' establish that Matthew C. had (among other possible pre-existing
conditions), a hemoglobinopathy. (See Exhibit "8", at pp. 6-8, ifif16-24). But, as set forth next, this
hemoglobinopathy involved more than just the commonly recognized sickle cell trait, and this was
the cause or substantial contributing factor in the medical event that occurred on August 11, 1994.
As to evidence ofhemoglobinopathy, The Nadehnan Records confirm that Matthew C. had
a hemoglobinopathy. (See Exhibit "8", at pp. 6-8, ifif16-24). A hemoglobinopathy is "a kind of
genetic defect that results in abnormal sliucture of one of the globin chains of the hemoglobin
molecule." An "abnotmal structure" is considered a "mutation" where "the sequence of amino
acids are switched (forming variants). (Exhibit "8", at p. 6, if 14). While sickle cell disease is one of
the most commonly known hemoglobinopathies [mutated sickle globins from both parents], some
children have not only a mutated sickle globin from one parent, but also another (not sickle)
6 See Exhibit "16"; see also, Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at pp. 3-6, '!l'\118-39 (containing a detailed summary of the significant contents of The Nadelman Records).
30
mutated globin from the other parent (Exhibit "8'', at pp. 6-7, 't['t[17, 19). Such a scenario creates a
"compound heterozygous" which is "invisible" on electrophoresis', but "when combined in the
child with Hb-S (mutated sickle globin), the combined effect causes severe, perhaps fatal disease
with severe anemia and/ or hyperviscosity of the blood causing sludging and thrombosis in the
vessels!!" (Exhibit "8", at p. 6, 't[17). This "sludging" of the blood results in the blood being unable
to move smoothly through the blood vessels and ultimately "clogging" them (called thrombosis)
resulting in an infarction of the brain and leakage of blood from small vessels in the retina. (See
Exhibit "8", at p. 16 - 18 (peer review articles cited to therein).
In the instant case, it is uncontradicted that Matthew C. had at least one mutated sickle
globin from his father. (Exhibit "16", at 001080-81; 00185; 001096; 001113). Next, Matthew C's.
mother is of Polish descent and abnormal hemoglobin "with a modular similar to" the sickle cell
hemoglobin has also been identified in families of Polish descent. [Exhibit "8" (Dr. Speth), at p. 7, 't[
19; also, Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at pp. 27-30, 't['t[ 178, 190). It follows that symptoms and medical
events in children with such a combination of mutations could manifest in the same manner as a
child with sickle cell disease. (Exhibit "8", at pp. 9-22).
Moreover, Matthew C.'s clinical presentation as described by Dr. Sullivan, as well as the
neurosurgeon (Dr. Jerry Bauer) at trial, support the diagnosis of cerebral sinovenous thrombosis.
Also, Dr. Bames (prior to Dr. Speth completing his report on March 7, 2013), stated in his report:
"... including along the dural venous sinuses (acute-subacute hemorrhages, re-hemorrhage or
thromboses ... " (See Exhibit "2", at p.1") (emphasis added). In this regard, neither Dr. Sullivan's CT-
scan repo1i:8, nor Dr. Bauer's testimony at trial indicate that either observed a subarachnoid
hemorrhage when the CT-scan was read or when Matthew C's. brain surface was examined.
(Exhibit "8", at p. 9, at 't[27). In light of the fact that no subarachnoid hemorrhage was observed on
7 One of the tests used to identify sickle cells in globin. 8 See Exhibit "17"
31
the CT-scan or during the brain surgery, cerebral sinovenous thrombosis becomes the more likely
finding. (Exhibit "8", at p. 9, if27). In this regard, Dr. Speth notes as follows:
Cerebral sinovenous thrombosis can readily cause exocitotoxic, or more likely vasogenic edema with swelling and ischemic infarction of vast areas of the brain that are subject to the ill effects of the compromised venous channels, with increased intracranial pressure. It would, then, not only explain the CT scan findings, but also, at least in part, the severe damage with swelling of the left hemisphere, that in the face of this type of thrombosis, particularly of the deep sinuses - would cause characteristically, sudden seizures and coma, all of which would characterize Matthew's presentation on August 11, 1994!!
(Exhibit "8", at p. 9, if 27).
The Nadehnan Records strongly implicate that Matthew C. had been suffering from the
effects of the hemoglobinopathy which caused, or significantly contributed to, the medical event on
August 11, 1994. [See Exhibit 2 (Dr. Barnes), at p.4 (identifying an underlying coagulopathy as a
potential cause); Exhibit "5" (Dr. Leestrna), at p.2; Exhibit "6" (Dr. Plunkett), at pp. 4, 6; Exhibit
"8" (Dr. Speth), at pp. 6-8, ifil 15, 17-18, 21, 24, also, p. 8, exce1pt "a" desc1ibing such cases in
individuals witl1 sickle cell trait; Exhibit "9" (Dr. Subramanian), at pp. 7-8; and Exhibit "10" (Dr.
Teas), at iJif180, 183, 186-190]. Both, Drs. Shalm Teas and Claus P. Speth submitted an affidavit and
declaration containing an extensive review identifying the portions of The Nadehnan Records which
unequivocally establish that Matthew C. had been anemic, dehydrated, and suffering from ongoing
fevers for the months prior to August 11, 1994. Drs. Speth and Teas also note the complications of
the presence of the hemoglobinopathy implicated by the symptoms described in The Nadelman
Records. As such, Matthew C. had a more complicated hemoglobinopathy than just the generally
recognized sickle cell trait.
Initially, Dr. Spetl1 described how an individual diagnosed with a sickle cell variant may have
the same health 1isks and symptoms as when diagnosed with sickle cell disease. See Exhibit "8", at
pp. 6-7; see also, Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at ifif180, 183, 186-190. In particular, Dr. Speth indicated
that "even in sickle trait, if the Hb-S is greater than 35%, complications identical to that of sickle cell
32
disease can occur in the presence of iron deficiency anenllii, hypoxia, dehydration and fever!!" See
Exhibit "8", at p.7, if 21. Consistent thereto, Dr. Teas noted that The Nadelman Records reveal that
Matthew C.'s Hb-S level constituted 41% of his red blood cells. See Exhibit "10", at p.29, if 187.
Here, it is important to note that the pathophysiology of sudden death in those with sickle cell trait
or a sickle cell vatiant is the same as that in sickle cell disease. See Exhibit "10" (Teas) at p.29, ifif185
and 186. Dr. Teas further explains that sickle cell trait is called "the silent killer" in which, "until
recently, was thought to be relatively benign since the HbA was considered sufficient to provide
oxygen and to compensate for any sickling that might occui-." However, Dr. Teas further states
that it is now known that hypoxia ~ow oxygen), exercise, dehydration and/ or infection can produce
the same complications in individuals of those with sickle cell disease, including sudden death. See
Exhibit "10" (Teas), at p. 28, if183.
In addition to the diagnosis of sickle cell trait, both Drs. Speth and Teas described that the
medical histo1y contained in The Nadelman Records of repeated respiratory infections,
developmental delays, anenllii which was recalcitrant to iron therapy, and dehydration confirm that
Matthew C. likely suffered from a va1-innt of sickle cell trait in August 1994. See Exhibit "8" (Speth)
at pp.7-8; see Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas) at pp. 29-30, ifif187-195; see also, Exhibit "6" (Dr. Plunkett), at
p.4; Exhibit "8" (Dr. Speth), at pp. 6, 8, ifif18, 24). Additionally, Dr. Speth describes in great detail
that the effect of a hemoglobinopathy or sickle cell variant can result in a cerebral sinovenous
thrombosis, and the fu1dings are consistent with this having been present in Matthew C. in August
1994, and was most likely the cause or a significant contributing cause of the medical event on
August 11, 1994. See Exhibit "8" (Speth) at p. 9, if 27; see also Exhibit "6" (Plunkett) at pp. 3-5;
Exhibit "2" (Dr. Barnes), at pp. 3-4. Consistent with Dr. Teas' Affidavit, Dr. Speth's Declaration
contains exce1pts of numerous articles detailing cerebral sinovenous thrombosis in children that
caused fu1dings ( subdural hematomas, including tl1ose witl1 re bleeding, and infarctions of the brain)
identical to those found in Mattl1ew C. in August 1994. See Exhibit "8" (Speth) at pp. 9-13. Of
33
significant note is that several of these studies had detailed the presence of both cerebral sinovenous
thrombosis as well as sickle cell hemoglobin hemoglobinopathy. Predisposing factors for cerebral
sinovenous thrombosis include dehydration, anemia sickle cell hemoglobinopathy (as in The
Nadelman Records), and manifestations of cerebral sinovenous thrombosis include increased
intracranial pressure (ICP), seizure, encephalopathy, and infarction (as in the medical records of
August 11, 1994). (See Exhibit "8" at p.9-13). Further consistent with Dr. Teas' Affidavit, it is noted
that "sickle cell trait, in addition to sickle cell disease, represents an increased risk of cerebrovascular
thrombosis especially with an elevated level of hemoglobin S (greater than 36%)." See Exhibit "8"
(Speth) at p. 10. Again, The Nadelman Records indicate that Matthew C.'s hemoglobin S level in
August 1994 was 40%.
Here, cerebral smovenous thrombosis is recognized as a disease that "mimics" non-
accidental injuries by presenting during imaging with infarction, subarachnoid hemorrhage, subdural
hemorrhage and/ or retinal hemorrhage; especially in cases involving infants. (Exhibit "8", at p.11,
citing to Barnes P.D., Imaging ef nonaccidenta! Injury & the Mimics: Issues & Controversies tiz the Era ef
Evidence-Based Medicine, "Radio!. Clin. North Am.": 2011; 49: 205-209). Additionally, "[S]ickle cell
trait, in addition to siclde cell disease, represents an increased risk of cerebrovascular thrombosis
especially with an elevated level of hemoglobin S (>36%). (Exhibit "8", at p.10, citing to Feldenzer
JA, et al; SuperiorSagittal Sinus Thrombosis Jvith I1rfarctio11 in Sickle Cell Trait Stroke; 1987 May-June 18 (3):
656-660). Finally, sinovenous thrombosis is aggravated by dehydration, iron deficiency anemia, and
infection, and is manifested by symptoms in infants of irritability, headache, seizures,
encephalopathy, motor weakness, and coma. (Exhibit "8", at pp. 9-13). Physical results of cerebral
sinovenous thrombosis include: increased intracranial pressure requiring aggressive treatment; mass
effect of accompanying hemorrhages; subdural or subarachnoid hemorrhages; brain swelling; white
matter edema; and loss of gray-white matter differentiation [all of which were present in Matthew
C.]. Exhibit "8", at pp. 9-14. In fact in those fatal presentations, "death was associated with coma
34
at presentation." See Sebire G, et al, "Cerebral venous sznus thrombosis zn Child1~n: Risk Factors,
Presentation, Diagnosis & Outcome", Brain 2005, 128, 477-489.
The hemoglobinopathy ve1y likely caused the medical event on August 11, 1994, and it
would also have rendered Matthew C. increasingly susceptible to exacerbating the pre-existing
subdural hematoma, where the latter could have been triggered by the fall and bump to his head as
described on August 8, 1994, and fw:ther exacerbated the tumbling and playing activities as
described by Ms. Jacobazzi and Matthew C's mother. See Exhibit "6" (Dr. Plunkett); Exhibit "5"
(Dr. Leestrua), at pp. 2-5; Exhibit "8" (Dr. Speth) at p. 8; Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas) at 'if'if 212, 215.
Critically, and contrary to the theo1y advanced by the prosecution at trial, Dr. Plunkett notes that if
the medical event on August 11, 1994, was caused by the subdural hematoma, it must have been
triggered by some sort of impact. [Exhibit "6", at p. 2, 4-5; see also Exhibit "11" (Dr. Van Ee), at pp.
5-6 ("[B]ased on a review of the current scientific data, the hypothesis that shaking without impact is
likely to result in injurious angular acceleration/ deceleration cannot be scientifically supported").
Specifically, Dr. Plunkett notes as follows:
In fact, "shaking" was the mechanism that the State's witnesses testified caused Mattbew's injury and subsequent death. However, scientists have demonstrated unequivocally since the time of Ms. Jacobazzi's trial that shaking is an unlikely mechanism for brain damage or SDH. It is possible at least theoretically to shake an infant violently enough to cause ce1-v:ical spinal cord damage, cessation of breathing, and death. However, scientific studies suggest that it is not possible to shake an infant hard enough to cause a concussion, SDH, or traumatic brain injury (TBI). (Neuroscientists often refer to TBI as diffuse axon.al injmy, or DAI.) Studies published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature have shown that shaking a ten.pound surrogate produces a maximum acceleration approximately ten times the acceleration due to gravity, or 10 gs. Shaking achieves maximum brain acceleration well below any established brain injmy threshold. Shaking is unlikely to cause brain damage. However, it could cause other injuries at levels considerably below the brain injury threshold. Ms. Jacobazzi was 5 feet tall and weighed approximately 120 pounds in 1994. Assuming that she was even capable of shaking Mattbew at all, she would have to exert a large quantifiable force to his chest or a171ts in order to accelerate his head at 10 gs. This force is likely to causes skin bruises or fractures. Matthew had no evidence for a1~n or chest injuries.
If the head is unrestrained and free to move, and a person or an object applies a force (acceleration; "shake") to the thorax or arms, the head will move. The force is
35
transmitted through the neck to cause the head motion (impulsive loading). The neck fails structurally at acceleration considerably lower than that required to cause bridging vein rnpture or traumatic brain damage. Therefore, if shaking caused mechanical brain injury, then significant strnctural neck damage must accompany it Matthew had no evidence for spine or spinal cord injury.
(Exhibit "6", at pp. 4-5; see also, Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at p. 31). Additionally, Dr. Plunkett
explained that a "low impact", such as the reported fall and bump to his head Matthew C. suffered
on March 8, 1994, as he was tr-ying to sit up, could have caused the subdural hematoma and the
medical event on August 11, 1994. Specifically, Dr. Plunkett explains as follows:
biological systems including human beings are seldom "all" or "none". Further, underlying conditions such as an abnmmality of the blood coagulation system, individual cerebral vascular anatomy, cerebral atrophy or increased extra-axial fluid, and an individual's unique metabolic pathways may alter the threshold and outcome for impact trauma. A number of "natural diseases" and metabolic abnormalities predispose to, or are associated with, SDH. Examples include but are not limited to:
D The birth process itself, including C-section delive17;
D Lumbar puncture resulting in intracranial hypotension;
D A variety of infections caused by bacteria and virnses;
D Cortical venous thrombosis (CVT), sagittal sinus thrombosis (SST), or other large-sinus thrombosis;
D Inborn errors of metabolism such as glutaric aciduria and Menkes Disease;
D Hemoglobinopathies such as but not limited to sickle cell-disease;
D Inherited or acquired coagulation abnormalities, such as but not limited to hypofibrinogenemia, Vitamin K deficiency, or thrombocytosis;
D Structural abnormities such as an arachnoid cyst, increased extra-a,-Tial fluid, or subdural hygromas;
D Vascular malfo1mations such as but not limited to AV malfo1mations;
D Poorly understood inflammato17 processes such as hemophagocytic Ly:tnphohistiocytosis and post-vaccination reactions; and
D Spontaneous, in which the bleeding develops with no recognizable cause.
**** If an acute hematoma does not resolve, it develops a membrane that is extremely fragile and has many new, immature blood vessels. These blood vessels may 1upture, causing "new" bleeding and an increase in the size of the initial SDH. There have been a number of studies to determine why some acute hematomas follow this path. The best explanation appears to be that the unique characteristics of the clotting system in the hematoma itself allow the bleeding to persist rather than to heal. The Medical Imaging literature has documented this phenomenon in studies following hospitalized SDH patients with serial CT and MR scans, which show new bleeding in
36
established hematomas in the absence of trauma. "New" trauma is not required for this.
(Exhibit "6'', at p. 3; see also, Exhibit "10" (Dr. Teas), at pp. 31-33). As such The Nadelman
Records and the pre-existing conditions that are easily diagnosed from the information therein
establish that on August 11, 1994, Matthew C. was not a well-baby, and "predisposed" to suffering
a head injmy from an otherwise minor, innocuous head impact.
c. Change in Dr. Wilbur Smith's and Dr. Deena Leonard's Positions Regarding the Instant Case Support Ms. Jacobazzj's Claim of Actual Innocence and Her Request far Clemency
Ms. Jacobazzi's claim of actual innocence is further suppm-ted by the recent statements of
both Dr. Deena Leonard and Dr. Wilbm Smith, both of whom provided critical testimony for the
prosecution in the instant case. As previously stated, Dr. Leonard who testified at trial that her
findings from her examination of Matthew C.'s eyes were pathognomonic for Shaken Baby
Syndrome. However, within the past year, Dr. Leonard has changed her view on this issue. After
an interview with the Medill Innocence Project, Dr. Leonard was provided certain articles
concerning retinal hemorrhaging, vacular folds, and retinoschisis. After reviewing the articles
provided, Dr. Leonard agreed and indicated that she no longer agreed with the opinions she testified
to at trial in this matter, in particular that her findings present in Matthew C. on August 12, 1994 are
not "pathognomonic" of"SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME". (See Exhibit "18").
Furthermore, one of the leading authorities on retinal hemorrhages asserts that. the
presentation described by Dr. Leonard at trial is not pathognomonic for SHAKEN BABY
SYNDROME. (See Exhibit "3" (Dr. Lantz), at p. 2 and articles cited therein).
Moreover, Dr. Speth's 2006 Declaration explains several ocular manifestations of sickle cell
hemoglobinopathy, and those ocular manifestations which complicate subdmal hemato1nas and AV
111alformations. (Sec Exhibit "7", at p. 6). Specifically, Dr. Speth stated as follows:
There are several likely interacting causes for the ocular findings. They include vascular complications of the sickle cell disease (including the central retinal arte17 occlusion) and the compounding effects of the sudden onset of
37
extremely high intracranial pressure in combination with the acute subdural hematoma and infarction, again on the background of the sickle cell vascular disease.
Above it was demonstrated that the subdural hematoma may have arisen as a direct complication of sickle cell disease. However, it may also be the result of the 1upture of an aneurysm or a vascular malformation through the arachnoid into the subdural space. The reason for also raising this possibility is that aneurysms and vascular malformations are quite prevalent in sickle cell disease --- a mpture through to the subdural space might account for the contradicto1y inte1pretations of the CT scan. The importance of this is the role of subdural hemorrhage as a cause for Terson's syndrome (see excerpts below) when there is sudden increase in intracranial pressure as was determined clinically in Matthew.
(See Exhibit "7", at p.6).
In his supplemental Declaration prepared in March 2013, Dr. Speth explains in great detail,
and refen-ing to numerous peer-reviewed articles, that hyperviscosity syndromes (such as such as
sickle cell hemoglobinopathies) produce wide-spread retinal hemorrhages throughout all layers of
the retina (very similar to those found in cases alleged to be caused by SHAKEN BABY
SYNDROME), as well as, occasionally schisis. (See Exhibit "8", at p. 14-19). As such, it is generally
accepted within the medical community that the ocular findings described by Dr. Leonard at trial are
not pathognomonic of SHAI<:EN BABY SYNDROME, but also common in hemoglobinopathies,
and characteristic of central retinal venous thrombosis. (See Exhibit "8", at p. 14-19 and articles
cited therein). It is also generally accepted that when a patient presents with bilateral retinal vein
obstructions (like Matthew C.), the medical and laboratory evaluation should include a search for
evidence of hype1-v:iscous and hypercoagulable syndromes. (See Exhibit "8'', at p. 17; citing to
Bradvica, et al., Retinal Vascular Occulsions, "Advances in Ophthalmology'', Ch. 21, pp. 357-398
(March 2012); Morley, MG & Heier, JS, Venous Obstructive Disease of the Retina, Free Medical
Textbook, "Ophthalmology'', Ch. 115 (Dec. 31, 2010); Fong, ACO, et al., Central Retinal Vein
Occlusion in young Adults, "Sm-vey of Ophthalmology", 37 (6): 393-416 (May-June 1993). The medical
records from August 1994 and thereafter indicate that no such tests for hyperviscous and
38
hypercoagulable syndromes (as charistically foui1d in hemoglobinopathies) were ever performed on
MatthewC.
In light of the above, Dr. Leonard's testimony that the ocular findings she described in her
trial testimony, that she claims were present in Matthew C. on August 12, 1994, and that could
ONLY be caused by SHAI<EN BABY SYNDROME, and which were essential to the viability of
the prosecution's theory at trial as the third part of the triad of symptoms - - - all that has now been
established to be UNEQUIVOCABLY false.
Similarly, Dr. Wilbur Smith, in a letter to the Downstate Illinois Innocence Project, info1mcd
them that he no longer was of the opinion, which he ei-roneously reached during his trial testimony.
Namely, his erroneous testimony stated that Matthew's brain injuries would have required the force
equal to a fall from a third or fourth st01y window. This erroneous opinion was also advanced in
the prosecution's rebuttal by Dr. Robert Kirschner. Both Dr. Smith's and Dr. Kirschner's ti~al
testimonies were essential to the prosecution establishing Ms. Jacobazzi's "intent'' to injure Matthew
C. in a pure shaking case to rebut the defense of "accident''. Here, Dr. Smith specifically stated, in
his letter, as follows:
"I believe that the preferred term in the medical commuillty is now abusive head trauma or abusive head trauma because the work of Duhainle which shows that indeed shaking alone is not the sole cause of injury in many infantti'
(A copy of the correspondence from Dr. Wilbur Smith to the Downstate Illinois Innocence Project
dated August 5, 2011, is included in the Appendix and incorporated herein as Exhibit "24'').
Dr. Smith's opinions were essential to the theo1y advanced by the prosecution at trial, that
Ms. Jacobazzi shook Matthew with such force that she intentionally caused the alleged brain injuiy
on August 11, 1994. Here, the prosecution argued that since there was no evidence of an impact
injuiy, Ms. Jacobazzi had to have shaken Matthew C. with such force that she intended to cause the
injury because the symptoms were such where the only medically acceptable explanation was Shaken
39
Baby Syndrome that had to be generated with a shaking the force of a fall from a fourth floor
window.
Here, Dr. Smith's recent "change in position" is consistent with the generally accepted
medical and scientific opinions as referred to by Dr. Lantz in his report that "shaking alone cannot
generate the force required to inflict the damage found in the brain." [See Exhibit "3" (Dr. Lantz), at
p. 2, citing to Lantz, PE, Couture DE. Fatal Acute Intracranial I1gury, Subdural Hematoma, and Retinal
Hemoirhages Caused by a Stairway Fall. "J. Forensic Sci.": 2011; 56:1648-52 and Lantz PE, Carlson JN,
Mott RT. Extensive Hemoirhagic Retinopathy, Perimacular Retinal Fold, &tinoschisis, and Retinal Hem01rhage
Progression Associated With a Fatal Spontaneous, Non-traumatic, Intracranial Hemorrhage in an Infant (G82).
65'h Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences. Washington, DC. Febiuai-y
2013; see also, Exhibit "S" (Dr. Leestma), at pp. 3-4.
Similarly, biomechanical engineer, Chris Van Ee explains that
Unfortunately, some medical clinicians have come to believe that not only can manual shaking create rotational acceleration/ deceleration forces sufficient to cause the tearing of bridging veins, they also believe that shaking creates greater rotational accelerations than those produced in low level falls. Statements have been made that baby shaking can produce head exposures similar to those caused by multi-story falls or by high speed motor vehicle accidents with head impact. Prange et al's data (2003) demonstrate that falls of only 12 inches resulting in head impact produced angular accelerations well in excess of those produced during maximal manual shaking, with or without inflicted impact onto a foam mattress style pad. Based on Prange et al.'s results (shown in Figure Al), the rotational acceleration, and thus the shear forces, for a shake are less than those developed in a one foot fall onto carpet. The rotational forces attained in manual shaking cannot therefore be equated to those occurring as a result of a multistory fall or a high speed motor vehicle accident with severe head impact. To suggest otherwise is without scientific foundation.
**** Based on the available scientific data, anyone who suggests that the angular acceleration produced in shaking or impact onto a soft surface is sufficient to cause traumatic head inju17 must also logically accept that such injuries are even more likely to occur from angular accelerations resulting from falls of only 1 foot in height onto a hard surface since the magnitude of the traumatic head exposure is greater with the fall. It is similarly illogical to dismiss a given history of a fall of 1 foot or more onto the head and attribute
40
the injuries to the rotational accelerations of manual shaking since shaking would produce much lower angular accelerations than the fall.
(Exhibit "11", at pp. 5-6).
In light of the above, Dr. Smith's (and Dr. Kirschner's) testitnony regarding the amount of
force that Ms. Jacobazzi could have and did generate to "shake" Matthew C. dm-ing the afternoon of
August 11, 1994, is established to be UNEQUNOCABLY false and not accepted by the scientific
conununity.
Throughout the opinions provided by Drs. Leonard and Smith at ttial, the above theory
advanced by the prosecution would have no factual basis.
d. Summation
In sum, the actual innocence of Pamela Jacobazzi is established by the objective findings
contained in The Nadehuan Records which reveal that Matthew C. was not a well-baby as theorized
by the prosecution at trial. Instead, Matthew C. was an infant who suffered from the following
existing medical condition: hemoglobinopathy (sickle cell variant or compound heterozygotic
hemoglobinopathy) manifested by iron deficiency anemia (resistant to treatment) with the adverse
effects of iron supplements, recm1:ent infections, fever and dehydration that evolved on August 11,
1994 to the complications of cerebral sinovenous thrombosis and central retinal venous thrombosis;
and possible anemysm or A-V malformation rnpture. The only findings which mimic SHAI<:EN
BABY SYNDROME were the ocular findings. The medical event that occurred on August 11, 1994
is consistent \vi th having been precipitated by sludging and thrombosis (clotting) of cerebral venous
channels and central retit1a1 veins and exacerbating the pre-existing subdural hematoma that may
have arisen from the minor inipact to the head sustained by Matthew C. on August 8, 1994 (or an
even earlier minor head inipact or possibly any of the other activities described by Ms. Jacobazzi and
Matthew C's mother).
41
In light of all of the above, and with the information contained in The Nadehnan Records,
which reveal the pre-existing medical condition in Matthew C. in and prior to August 1994, it is
established that "Shaken Baby Syndrome", especially in a "pure shaking'' or no impact scenario, \
played no role whatsoever with regarding with what happened to Matthew C. on August 11, 1994.
Furthem1ore, there is no proof in the record that Ms. J acobazzi did anything to cause or contribute
to the medical event that occurred on August 11, 1994.
B. COMMUTATION OF BALANCE OF SENTENCE
In light of the medical significance of the information contained in The Nadehnan Records,
Ms. Jacobazzi would have been entitled to a jury insb.uction for Involuntai-y Manslaughter; and if
convicted of anything, would have probably been convicted of Involuntary Manslaughter, a Class 3
Felony, as opposed to First Degree Murder. As the sentencing range for Involuntary Manslaughter
was not less than two, and not more than five years in the Illinois Department of Corrections, with
the availability of probation9, Ms. Jacobazzi would have served her sentence a this point, even if she
had been incarcerated for Involuntaty Manslaughter. In this regard, Illinois Courts have long held
tliat due process and tlie right to a trial by jllly requires tliat the jury receive an Involuntuy
Manslaughter insb.uction if any evidence, however slight, exists to support tliat instruction. People v.
DiVincenzo, 183 Ill.2d 239, 249, 700 N.E.2d 981, 987 (1998); People v. Jones, 175 Ill.2d 126, 132, 676
N.E.2d 646, 649 (1997); People v. Ryan, 9 Ill.2d 467475-76, 138 N.E.2d 516, 521 (1956); People v.
Gttthrie, 123 Ill.App.2d 407, 412, 258 N.E.2d 802, 805 (1" Dist. 1970). Furthermore, Illinois courts
have held tliat a jury instruction must be submitted even if the defendant denies the conduct, if there
exists any factual evidence to support it. In People v. Rodrigttez, 96 Ill.App.3d 431, 421 N.E.2d 323 (1"
Dist. 1981), the Court found reversible error because tlie trial court failed to insb.uct the jllly as to
tlie issue of self-defense even though defendants denied having any contact with tl1e victim. The
9 720 ILCS 5/9-3 (West 1994); 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3 (West 1994); 730 ILCS 5/5-6-1(West1994); 730 ILCS 5/5-8-l(a) (6) (West 1994).
42
&driguez court specifically rejected the argument that the defendants were not entitled to a self-
defense instruction because they did not admit to hitting the victim, and concluded that "a
defendant is entitled to the benefit of any defense shown by the evidence, even if the facts
on which such defenses are based are inconsistent with the defendant's own testimony." Id.
at 96 ill.App.3d 431, 421 N.E.2d at 326 (emphasis added).
A review of the evidence considered by the jui-y at trial coupled with the medical evidence
concerning Mattl1ew C.'s health prior to August 11, 1994, demonstrates that even if any conduct by
Ms. Jacobazzi that might have contributed to Matthew C.'s condition was either negligent; or, at
worst, reckless but more likely unknowingly aggravated an undisclosed preexisting malady in
Matthew C.. Such a cause of an injury would constitute involunta1y Manslaughter as opposed to
First Degree Murder. At all times relevant hereto, Involunta1y Manslaughter carried a sentence of
not less than two, and not more than five years in the Illinois Department of Corrections, with the
availability of probationrn Ms. Jacobazzi would have served her sentence at this point, even if she
had been incarcerated for Involuntary Manslaughter. As set fo1-th above, Ms. Jacobazzi had no prior
criminal histoi-y prior the instant case, and led a life of charity and volunteering prior to and since
the instant case. (See Exhibits "13" - "15").
Initially, Ms. J acobazzi asserted that the evidence at trial was sufficient to constitute "slight
evidence" of recklessness and the mental state which constitutes Involuntary Manslaughter. In this
regard, both Detective Joseph Leonis and Cynthia Czapski testified that on the day of the alleged
fatal injury, Matthew C. had been tumbling and rolling while in the care and custody of Ms.
Jacobazzi. Next, the prosecution attempted to discount the evidence of recklessness by introducing
a series of scenarios to several of the expert witnesses as to whether it was possible that Matthew C.
could have sustained his injuries as a result of either falling from a standing position; tumbling;
10 720 ILCS 5/9-3(West1994); 730 ILCS 5/5-5-3 (West 1994); 730 ILCS 5/5-6-1(West1994); 730 ILCS 5/5-8-l(a) (6) (West 1994).
43
dancing; doing soinetsaults; stopping quickly in a car; being bounced on a knee; being dropped froin
soineone's arms and then caught in the air; or froin being tripped by another child. The prosecution
also spent a significant po1tion of their closing arguments atteinpting to discredit the inference of
reckless conduct.
Most iniportantly, the prosecution introduced no evidence that Ms. J acobazzi knew her
alleged [undesc1-ibed 1nanner ofJ shaking Matthew C. created a strong probability of death or great
bodily hatin as required by Sec. 9-1(a)(2) of the Illinois Criniinal Code. (720 ILCS 5/9-l(a) (2) (West
1994)) (einphasis added). In fact, the trial was coinpletely devoid of any evidence that would
indicate that Ms. Jacobazzi was aware of Matthew C.'s pre-existing inedical condition that left hint
!note susceptible to the type of injuty that might be sustained from other inconsequential physical
activities.
In Illinois, one coin1nits Involuntaiy Manslaughter when one recklessly performs acts that
are likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another. (720 ILCS 5/9-3(a) (West. 1994)
(emphasis added). In DiVincenzo, (supra.), the Illinois Supreme Coutt reversed a defendant's inutder
conviction because the tt-ial court failed to submit an Involuntary Manslaughter instruction to the
jmy. (183 Ill.2d at 239, 700 N.E.2d at 981). In DiVincenzo, the defendant and the victim engaged in a
physical altercation whereby the defendant continued to punch and kick the victi1n on the head after
the victim had been knocked to tl1e ground. Unbeknownst to the defendant, the victim had a rare
inedical condition which made hint !note susceptible to sudden, severe traumatic brain injury. The
victim ultimately died from the brain injuries suffered in the altercation. However, the Illinois
Supteine Court noted that the cause of the death was the effect that the blows to the head had on
the victim's rare medical condition, and held as follows:
[b]ased on the evidence, the jmy could reasonably have concluded tl1at defendant, by punching and kicking the victim, consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk of death or great bodily harm but did not have the mental state required for first degree murder. (Id. at 252, 700 N.E.2d at 988).
44
In the instant case, the public policy for providing the jury with the "third option" of a lesser
included offenses" is more applicable to the instant case than other cases. Here, the juiy was faced
with a tragic case where a toddler unexpectedly died, allegedly as the result of "Shaken Baby
Syndrome." The alleged perpetrator was Ms. Jacobazzi who was the victim's day care provider. The
prosecution's case was largely circumstantial, and the juiy was provided with no direct evidence that
Ms. Jacobazzi shook Matthew C. However, the evidence presented at trial was overwhelming that
"something" happened to the child when it was in Ms. Jacobazzi's care. Consequently, the jury was
left with only two options: (1) convicting the petitioner of first degree murder, or (2) acquitting her
outright. See Keeble, 412 U.S. at 212-13, 93 S.Ct. at 1997-98. It is especially noteworthy, in tlus regard,
that the May 14, 1997, Grand Jury, when faced with the decision as to whether to return a bill of
indictment for first degree murder, felt that the evidence warranted a lesser offense. In tlUs regard,
the following exchange took place:
[THE JUROR]: I have a question for you, the State's Attorney's Office. Why are you seeking first degree murder charges rather than a lesser charge, and a related question, if we were to deny first degree murder charges, could you then seek lesser charges.
[Ms. MASTERS]: With regard to our choice of what to charge, we felt that based on the nature of the injuries, that tlUs was the most appropriate charge. Now, if you were to return a no bill, I'm not quite sure show that affects the procedure, if I could come back and ask for something less.
[THE JUROR]: You don't know that?
[Ms MASTERS]: I mean, I suppose before you were to - I suppose I would like to know whetl1er you were - if you required further testimony, I could do that.
[THE JUROR]: I'm asking that because I think maybe you - I think first degree murder is inappropriate because it requires intent and there isn't any proof of intent, but some other charges might be more appropriate. That's why I bring it up. I couldn't support a first degree murder charge on this. I think it is the wrong charge, but obviously there is a crime.
(A copy of the above portion of the transcript from the Grand Juiy Proceedings is included in the
appendi" and inco1porated herein as Exhibit "30"). Ms. Jacobazzi notes that the Grand Juror's
feeling that the evidence wati:anted a lesser charge than murder is strongly indicative of the
45
reasonableness that a juror could have found at the least slight evidence of recklessness in this
matter. Furthermore, the instant case provides a stark example of this Court's warning in Keeble that
"where one of the elements of the offense charged remains in doubt, but the defendant is plainly
guilty of some offense, the jmy is likely to resolve its doubts in favor of conviction." It is this
fundamental unfairness that the requirement of the lesser included instruction seeks to avoid. This
fundainental unfaiiness is even more glaring in the instant case because the jury never heard that
Matthew C. had an underlying pre-existing medical condition, and was never told of the medical
significance of said pre-existing medical condition.
In rejecting this argnment in the direct appeal, the Second District Com1: of Appeals
highlighted the significance of Matthew C.'s prior medical hist01y contained in The Nadelinan
Records to the instant case when it noted that the trial record lacked information of an underlying
medical condition in Matthew C. that would have made Ms. Jacobazzi's above argU1nent medically
possible. (See Jacobazzi, Rule 23 Order, at p. 76).
As set for-th above, the medical significance of the information contained in The Nadehnan
Records is exactly tl1e type of pre-existing medical condition that was relied on by the DiVencenzo
Cow:t in reversing that defendant's murder conviction, and exactly the type of information that the
Second District Com1: of Appeals was missing from the trial record that would have it required a
jury instruction for Involuntary Manslaughter pursuant to DiVencenzo (supra). Had the jmy had the
information and opinions that flowed from The Nadelinan Records, along with an option to find
Ms. Jacobazzi guilty of Involuntary Manslaughter, they would have surely done so as the "third
option" in the tragic scenario that it addressed. Based on the range of sentences required by
Involuntary Manslaughter, the availability of probation, and Ms. Jacobazzi's lack of criniinal history
and personal background, Ms. Jacobazzi would be free if she had convicted of Involuntary
Manslaughter.
46
Pursuant to 730 ILCS 5/3-3-13, the Governor of the State of Illinois can consider
comnmting a sentence. On behalf of Ms. Jacobazzi, we respectfully request that the Prisoner
Review Board recommend that Governor Quinn grant this relief on one of the alternative grounds
that Ms. Jacobazzi is actually innocent, or that justice requires that the balance of her sentence be
co111111uted.
RECOMMENDATION
For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned respectfully requests that Govemor Quinn grant
to Ms. Jacobazzi one of the following forms of Executive Clemency:
1. Grant to Pamela Jacobazzi in the form of a full and complete pardon for each and eveq of the offenses for which Ms. Jacobazzi was convicted on May 18, 1999, in DuPage County Case Number 9 5 CF 1160, and further request that the pardon be issued on the ground that Ms. Jacobazzi is innocent of the crimes for which she was impdsoned;
2. Alternatively, grant to Pamela J acobazzi Executive Clemency in the form of a Commutation of the balance of her Sentence she received in DuPage County Case Number 95 CF 1160, and further order that the Illinois Department of Corrections immediately release Pamela Jacobazzi.
Respectfully Submitted,
ZU
Anthony J. Sassan (#06216800) ZUKOWSKI, ROGERS, FLOOD & McARDLE Attmneys for Petitioner, Pamela Jacobazzi 50 N. Virginia Stteet Crystal Lake, Illinois 60014 (815) 459-2050
47
, OGERS, FLOOD &MeARDLE
Affidavit of Service
STATE OF ILLINOIS ) ) SS.
COUNTY OF McHENRY )
The undersigned, being first duly swom on oath, deposes and says that he served a copy of the following:
1. PAMELA JACOBAZZI's PETITION FOR EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY BASED ON ACTUAL INNOCENCE, and in the altemative, FOR COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE;
2. APPENDIX OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF PAMELA JACOBAZZI's PETITION FOR EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY BASED ON ACTUAL INNOCENCE, and in the alternative, FOR COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE; and
3. PAMELA JACOBAZZI's REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING.
on the following:
The Hon. John T. Elsner, Chief Judge, DnPage County Judicial Center, 505 N. County Fai= Road, Wheaton, Illinois 60189
Mr. Robert Berlin, DuPage County State's Attorney, DuPage County Judicial Center, 503 N. County Fartn Road, 2"d Floor, Wheaton, Illinois 60189
Via regular U.S. tnail by depositing a copy of satne in a postage paid envelope in a U.S. Mailbox
Sl;:B:)G;ITT3l~andSWORN pril, 2013.
otary Pnblic
48
OFFICIAL SEAL . ANTHONY J SASSAN NOTARY PUBLIC· STATE OF ILLINOIS
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:02/10/14
Declaration of Petitioner
I, Anthony J. Sassan, attorney for and on behalf of Pamela Jacobazzi, declare under penalty of perjmy that all of the assertions made in this petition for clemency are complete, truthful and accurate.
Respectfully Submitted this 23'd day of April, 2013
Signed and sworn before me this 23'd day of April, 2013. .
~aw~ NOTARY PUBLIC
OFFICIAL SEAL CHRISTINA A. WALKER
NOTARY PUBLIC, $"TATE OF ILLINOIS MY COMMISSION EiXPIRES o~/08/2014
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS PRISONER REVIEW BOARD FALL TERM, ADVISING THE HONORABLE
PATRICK QUINN, GOVERNOR IN THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
In re: Clemency Petition of ) )
PAMELA JACOBAZZI, ) )
Petitioner. )
On behalf of the Petitioner, PAMELA JACOBAZZI, I hereby request a public hearing for PAMELA JACOBAZZI's PETITION FOR EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY BASED ON ACTUAL INNOCENCE, and in the altemative, FOR COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE. I further request that said hearing be held in Chicago, Illinois.
The following witnesses may appear at said hearing and provide testimony in support thereof:
1. Claus P. Speth, MD. 501 Princeton Blvd. Wenonah, New Jersey 08090
2. Shaku S. Teas, MD. 1123 Ashland Avenue River Forest, IL 60305
3. John Plunkett, MD. Laboratory and Forensic Medicine
Associates 13013 Welch Trail Welch, MN 55089
4. Jan E. Leestma, MD, MBA 1440 N. Kingsbu1y Stteet, Ste. 210 Chicago, IL 60642
Res
Anthony J. Sassan ZUKOWSKI, ROGERS, FLOOD & McARDLE Attorneys for Petitioner, Pamela Jacobazzi 50 N. Virginia Stteet, C1ystal Lake, Illinois 60014 (815) 459-2050
5.
6.
7.
8.
49
Patrick D. Baines, M.D. Department of Radiology Stanford University Medical Center 730 Welch Road, 1st Floor Palo Alto, CA 94304
Patrick E. Lantz, M.D. Wake Forest School of Medicine Department of Pathology Medical Center Boulevard Winston-Salem, NC 27157
Chris Van Ee, Ph.D. Design Research Enginee11ng 46475 DeSoto Court Novi, MI 48377
Norman Guthkelch, MD.
tnela Jacobazzi