Missouri Inmate’s DNA Evidence Mishandled

The St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office has admitted to mishandling key evidence in the case of Marcellus Williams, a Missouri death row inmate convicted of the 1998 murder of Felicia Anne Gayle Picus. In a packed courtroom on Wednesday, special counsel Matthew Jacober revealed that the knife used in the killing had been contaminated by the prosecution team that tried Williams.

This improper storage and handling of the murder weapon meant that the unknown male DNA found on it, which excluded Williams as the source, was no longer usable as evidence to support his exoneration. “The murder weapon was handled without the proper procedures then in place,” Jacober stated. “The St.

Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office regrets its failure to maintain proper protocols surrounding key physical evidence in this heinous crime.”

This admission came as a surprise, as Jacober was scheduled to present the state’s case that Williams had been wrongly convicted. The mishandling of the knife by prosecutors meant that the key evidence supporting Williams’s innocence claim was now compromised. After hours of closed-door negotiations, county prosecutors offered Williams a deal: plead guilty in exchange for a life sentence without the possibility of parole, taking the death penalty off the table.

Mishandling of DNA evidence

Williams, 55, agreed to the terms in court. However, the Missouri Attorney General’s office appealed to the state Supreme Court to block the deal.

The court’s decision on the matter is pending. Williams was convicted of stabbing Picus to death in her home in August 1998. Despite a lack of physical evidence tying him to the crime scene and questionable testimony from jailhouse informants, he was sentenced to death.

In 2015, DNA testing ordered by the Missouri Supreme Court revealed unknown male DNA on the murder weapon, excluding Williams. This discovery led to further investigations into his case and claims of innocence. While the mishandling of evidence by prosecutors has now made it impossible to use the DNA to exonerate Williams, the county prosecutor’s office has acknowledged that his conviction and death sentence cannot stand due to this violation of his rights.

The case highlights issues of evidence mishandling and the potential for wrongful convictions in the criminal justice system. It also underscores the ongoing debate over the death penalty and the importance of proper safeguards to prevent the execution of potentially innocent individuals.