Given the reality of his report, Meehan really didn't want to appear in court on Dec. 15, 2006, as this deposition excerpt from a Meehan co-worker suggests. Not too hard to figure out why. Meehan's 2006 W-2, showing how he earned $125,000 even as his unprofessional behavior helped prop up a case against innocent people.
From his complaint, Meehan affirms that he testified truthfully in the Dec. 2006 hearing. Leaving aside the absurdity of this claim (since he initially tried to parry Brad Bannon's questioning until he figured out that Bannon knew what he was talking about), this admission seems to confirm that he told the truth to Jim Cooney.
From his complaint, Meehan blames Nifong for his problems.
From his deposition, Mr. Obfuscation suggests that he can't remember who Lane Williamson was.
From Meehan's deposition, a potentially significant revelation: he and Nifong, in spring 2006, appear to have discussed the non-lacrosse player DNA found in Mangum's rape kit.
Meehan had admitted that he followed the lacrosse case pretty closely in the media before he got involved. But, he claimed, he stopped reading newspapers--especially the N&O--once he was the subject of negative scrutiny.
Meehan's refusal to admit error consisted of his suggesting that DNA labs are always attacked by defense lawyers and the media. The company's attorney asked him whether the SBI DNA lab was attacked in the lacrosse case.
In his deposition, Meehan occasionally would lapse into his "Mr. Obfuscation" mode. Here, he tries to imply that his amended report in the lacrosse case (in which he added test results he hadn't reported) could be seen as the equivalent of correcting a typo.
In his deposition, Meehan conceded that the lacrosse case was the biggest case DSI ever had--showing again the financial incentive to pacify the firm's "client," Mike Nifong.
In the annals of chutzpah, this e-mail from just over a month after the disastrous Dec. 2006 hearing features Meehan complaining about his not having received his promised raise.
Clark's letter firing Meehan combined the DSI head's blustery refusal to acknowledge error with his obsession with image.
Scaife adds that the finding of no DNA matches should have been enough to prove the lacrosse players' innocence. Meehan, of course, doesn't appear to have pressed this point to Nifong.
In his deposition, Meehan admitted that initially he was "excited" to have been involved in the lacrosse case.
Despite his passionate denial (above) that he had not coached Meehan, Clark subsequently admitted that he had done so:
60 Minutes might have been a last-gasp for DSI's reputation, but DSI official Michael Burrows also understood the grim situation that the company occupied given the program's interest.
More on the harmful financial effects resulting from the exposure of Meehan's dubious conduct.
DNA Security's Michael Burrows, outlining the devastating business effect that Meehan's performance at the 12-15-06 hearing:
Here is what Fred Antoun, brought in to advise DSI on how to handle the post=Dec. 2006 controversy, wanted Brian Meehan to say during Meehan's 60 Minutes interview: