www.post-gazette.com, August 31, 2006 By Bill Moushey, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

New York Times, June 1, 2010 By Adam Liptak

New York Times Editorial

Many arson cases are solved by confessions. Because the science is inexact and because even if fire experts can tell that a fire was intentionally set, a confession is often still needed to determine who set the fire. This often leads interrogators to conduct highly confrontational and aggressive interrogations of suspects in order to obtain a confession. This, in turn, increases the risk of false confessions. In the United States, many arson cases are now being reviewed as questions concerning the arson science underlying these convictions is coming under scrutiny (often from the arson scientists themselves). I hope that in their review of cases involving questionable science that the experts do not rule out cases in which the suspects may have confessed. On Sunday, the Boston Globe published a terrific investigative piece by reporters for the New England Center for Investigative Reporting about an infamous arson case that is now coming under newfound scrutiny by arson experts. The article revisits Victor Rosario’s conviction in a 1982 fire in Lowell, MA that left eight people dead and raises serious questions about Rosario’s guilt, the science that was used to convict him, and the reliability of his confession. –Steve Drizin

WNYC, The Leonard Lopate Show, July 11, 2008

Plea to Reconsider Sentence Lonnie Soury explains his work to free convicted felon Damien Echols in Arkansas

By Norimitsu Onishi, “New York Times,” May 11, 2007

“Medical News Today,” January 14, 2007