He Spent 27 Years on Death Row. Then Video Showed an Expert Manufacturing the ‘Bite Marks’ That Convicted Him

**Louisiana Man Exonerated After 27 Years on Death Row**

*Jimmie “Chris” Duncan, a Louisiana man wrongfully convicted of murdering his girlfriend’s young daughter, has been granted exoneration after spending nearly three decades on death row. His conviction was overturned following the emergence of a previously unseen videotape, which cast doubt on the forensic evidence that played a pivotal role in his trial.*

Duncan, now 57, was sentenced to death in 1998 for the 1993 death of 23-month-old Haley Oliveaux. The initial investigation indicated that Haley had drowned while Duncan was babysitting her. According to his account, he had temporarily left the child unattended in the bathtub, only to return to find her submerged in the water. Duncan’s initial charge was negligent homicide, but this escalated dramatically after forensic examinations were conducted on the child’s body.

In a turn of events, forensic pathologist Steven Hayne examined the toddler and claimed to have discovered bite marks. He subsequently called upon forensic dentist Michael West to examine these marks. West testified that the bite marks matched Duncan’s dental impressions, leading to a revision of Duncan’s charges to first-degree murder.

The case against Duncan was severely undermined when a 26-minute video surfaced as part of an investigation by NBC News. This tape revealed West performing numerous tests on Haley’s skin using a mould of Duncan’s teeth during a postmortem examination. Experts consulted for the investigation expressed that these actions inevitably created the bite marks that were later cited in court as evidence of Duncan’s guilt.

Unbeknownst to the jury during the original trial, the prosecution failed to present the footage, despite defence attorneys requesting access to it. Instead, jurors were exposed to testimony from a different forensic dentist who relied solely on photographs, neglecting the crucial evidence recorded in the video. Duncan was convicted swiftly, with the jury deliberating for less than three hours.

The case took a decisive turn when the Innocence Project joined Duncan’s legal team in 2022, leading to a renewed appeal and a six-day evidentiary hearing in 2024. During these proceedings, retired Judge Alvin Sharp reviewed the footage and expressed disbelief at the evidence it provided. “He’s absolutely creating marks on that baby’s body,” he remarked, highlighting the gravity of the findings.

Following this, in April 2025, Judge Sharp vacated Duncan’s conviction, citing the use of improper scientific evidence by both Hayne and West, as well as deficiencies in the original defence. This decision was subsequently upheld by the Louisiana Supreme Court in June 2026, who ruled that the new evidence fundamentally undermined the state’s case against Duncan and labelled the bite mark evidence as “scientifically indefensible.”

Duncan is one of at least ten individuals, including four on death row, who have been exonerated due to the discredited forensic methods employed by Hayne and West. However, his ordeal may not yet be complete. During proceedings before the Louisiana Supreme Court, Ouachita Parish District Attorney Steve Tew asserted that Duncan’s guilt does not rely solely on the bite mark evidence, insisting on the prosecution’s intention to retry him.

Former District Attorney Jerry Jones, who prosecuted Duncan initially, admitted in a recent interview that the bite mark evidence should never have been presented in court. “That bite mark evidence was bad and I shouldn’t have introduced it, but I didn’t know that at the time,” he conceded, underlining the serious repercussions of flawed forensic testimony.

Following his release on bail last November, Duncan spoke candidly about his hopes for the future. He emphasised his intention to continue fighting for justice, not just for himself but in memory of Haley. “I always promised her I would keep fighting,” he stated, highlighting the emotional toll that this lengthy legal battle has had on him.

Duncan’s case serves as a sobering reminder of the potential for miscarriages of justice within the legal system, compounded by reliance on questionable forensic evidence. As he embarks on the next chapter of his life, the implications of his story may well resonate beyond the courtroom, sparking necessary dialogue about the reliability of forensic science and the need for systemic reform in the justice system.