SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK i aan — Xx PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, INDICTMENT # 182-75 KEITH BUSH, DEFENDANT. MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO VACATE CONVICTION AND SENTENCE‘TRODUCTION Forty-two years ago, on January 11, 1975, someone strangled SW in Bellport, Long Island. Children found $W’s battered and bloodied body lying in a field 36 hours after she attended a teen party. Within two days, Suffolk County Detectives decided Keith Bush committed the murder, strangling SW with his hands after stabbing her in the back with his hair comb. Keith Bush was then 17 years old, He was convicted and sent to prison, In 2006, the Suffolk County Laboratory used STR-DNA technology, capable of detecting and analyzing minute samples of biological material, to analyze skin cells scraped from underneath the vietim’s fingernails. The laboratory identified male tissue and excluded Keith Bush as the source of that tissue — providing compelling proof that some man other than Keith Bush attacked and killed SW. Since then, Mr. Bush has assembled powerful additional new evidence corroborating the DNA exclusion, The new evidence undercuts cach piece of proof the State used to convict. At trial, in 1976, the prosecution relied on four pieces of evidence to connect Mr. Bush to SW’s murder. A criminologist testified fibers under the victim’s fingernails “matched” Mr. Bush’s jacket. The Suffolk County medical examiner told the jury Mr. Bush's metal hair comb caused wounds on the victim's back. A witness claimed to see Mr, Bush leave the party with the victim just before she died, and the Suffolk County Police Department (“SCPD”) Detectives testified Mr. Bush signed a confession they wrote for him, “confessing” to the murder. New evidence proves false every facet of that evidence, The State’s key witness, now a grown woman, has recanted. New science reveals the Suffolk County medical examiner's tr testimony to be false in material part, the criminologist's opinions to be unreliable, and those revelations in tum show the confession to be likely false as well as coerced.Recently disclosed documents reveal the SCPD and the Suffolk County prosecutor's office surreptitiously investigated another man, John W. Jones, Jr. in connection with SW's murder. Forensic evidence links him to the crime. When the SCPD investigated SW’s murder, they photographed the body, bagged the victim’s hands, and collected material from the crime scene. One of the items collected was a black plastic comb found lying next to the body. Information kept secret for 40 years reveals that the Suffolk County Crime laboratory compared Mr. Bush's fingerprints to a latent print lifted from that comb and determined the print on the comb was not his. Even more surprisingly, soon afier the laboratory conducted that fingerprint analysis, the SCPD questioned Mr. Jones about the murder. Until then no one had mentioned Mr. Jones in connection with the investigation of SW’s death. It is reasonable to infer from the new evidence just disclosed, that John W. Jones, Jr.'s prints were on that comb. He admitted seeing SW lying in the field, tipping over her dropping his “pik.” Police administered two polygraph examinations to Mr. Jones, never charged him, and never informed Mr. Bush. The evidence should have been disclosed and the failure to do so, without more requires, vacature of Mr. Bush’s conviction, pursuant to C.P.L. § 440.10 (Dh). All the new evidence - DNA testing, witness recantations, information about the on, and startling evidence of unreliable pseudo-scientific trial proof and likely false confes Possible third party guilt - points to Mr. Bush’s innocence. Justice requires a new trial for Mr. Bush ~ a trial where he can present a jury with all the evidence. ARGUMEN’ Keith Bush is entitled to have his conviction and sentence vacated pursuant to New York CPL §§ 440.10 (1)(g) and (h). Standing alone, the 2006 DNA testing is “of such character as 10