i m jeff glor. this is the western edition of the cbs news. it s a review of the fbi lab in washington that is opening eyes across the country and now it could reopen hundreds of criminal cases. 95% of cases looked at so far included flawed testimony that includes 32 death penalty cases. this weekend the fbi acknowledged mistakes and jericka duncan has details. acknowledged mistakes and jericka duncan has details. reporter: before dna testing became prevalent, the fbi relied heavily on visual analysis of evidence, sometimes building occasions on microscopic analysis of hair. but in 2012, federal officials launched an investigation after the washington post reported that flawed forensic hair matches might have led to the convictions of hundreds of innocent people. a in a full report coming out tomorrow, the innocence project and the national association of criminal defense lawyers will
invasion of iraq. his defense attorney is a woman by the name of judy clark. she is one of the top lawyers in the country for defendants facing prominent death penalty cases. she is a strong opposition to the death penalty. she has called it legalized homicide. she saved a bunch of clients from the death penalty including susan smith. do you remember her? the mother who drowned her children. the unibomber. the tucson arizona shooter, then eric rudolph the atlanta olympics bomber. she did not save timothy mcveigh. he was executed in 2001 as we mentioned. if the past is prologue what has happened in similar cases to the boston bombing? timothy mcveigh killed 168 in the oklahoma city bomber. the defense was the bombing was
defensed ted kaczynski and and the merge who drowned her kids, was able to keep them off death row. she will hit hard but with the same strategy? it was the older brother s influence that made him do this? didn t the jury say they don t believe that? the defense attorney is one of the leading if not the foremost expert in death penalty cases. her statistics are she has a higher number of clients who are convicted on death penalty cases but not given the death penalty. the defendant has the very best. that s what you want in a case like this of such magnitude. the federal sentencing the federal laws list a number of about 25 aggravating factors and about 25 mitigating factors. so at what s the difference? aggravating are negative things. the judge is going to tell the jury is that they are to consider what are the negative things that would support a
likely. mark, the defense attorney, judy clark, well known for her work on death penalty cases. she also said this. in many different ways but one way she said it was very notable. tamerlan led. dzhokhar followed. did she make a strong enough case for that. she s looking ahead to the penalty phase already. the only point of the whole defense team is to convince one juror, not that he s not guilty, that s not going to happen, but one juror he should not be put to death because they need to have a unanimous verdict for death in order for it to be imposed in this case. so their whole thought process is not to do anything other than to decide or have a jury decide to save his life. what is judy clark trying to get at when she said more than once keep an open mind. what is she trying to lay the groundwork for there? she s very good at
that s what will be fascinating about this. i talked to alexandra field about his demeanor in the courtroom. every time he comes into the courtroom, his attorney what s her name judy clark, she adjusts his clothes and kind of treats him almost like a son, like a young person. we expect to see that from judy. some people the legal geeks like myself she s sort of this true believer. she s a true believer in the sense that she is just against the death penalty. she believes it is just wrong. she s really dedicated her career to defending people in death penalty cases. she does have a really wonderful way of humanizing these kind of defendants. you do see sort of that motherly role. and that is a play to the jury quite frankly. you want the jury to think, you know this is someone s son. this is someone s brother. this is a young man. remember that rolling stone cover. you only need one juror to not