Innocent Man Convicted After FBI Confused His Hair With a Dog’s

‘The FBI recently admitted that “nearly every examiner in an elite FBI forensic unit gave flawed testimony in almost all trials in which they offered evidence against criminal defendants over more than a two-decade period before 2000.” One of the most egregious cases to come to light thus far is the case of Santae Tribble, who served 28 years in prison after hair analysts couldn’t tell dog hair apart from human hair.

The case went to trial in Washington D.C. in 1978. Tribble, then 17, stood accused of robbing and murdering a cab driver in front of his home. Tribble asserted throughout the trial he was not guilty, and in spite of the testimony of friends vouching for his innocence, he was found guilty after only 40 minutes of jury deliberation. He was convicted because two expert hair analysts testified that one strand of hair found near the scene of the crime matched Tribble’s.’

Read more: Innocent Man Convicted After FBI Confused His Hair With a Dog's