SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases

concocted his testimony to fit the evidence.
The defense did not offer any explanation of the
"heel mark, " cross-examine Rebeiro about Footprint #7, or
give the jury any reason to disbelieve her testimony.
Defense counsel said nothing about Footprint #7 in
closing argument, presumably because he had nothing to
say. That evidence thus stood as an important, unrebutted
piece of the Commonwealth's case. As the motion judge
noted, this evidence was "significant" in light of the
Commonwealth's contention, "persuasively dr[ivenl home
to the jury,II that it was "strongly probative1' of
Greineder's guilt. 8. 975-976, 979. Rebeiro's
recantation, if available at trial, would have completely
eviscerated the inculpatory quality of this unrebutted
testimony.
The recantation evidence would have been important
for another reason as well. Much of the Commonwealth's
case was based on the credibility of ita coterie of
experts who testified, inter alia, about blood spatter,
footprint, fiber, and DNA evidence. If the defense had
been able to present Rebeiro's recantation to the jury,
it would have had the probable effect of casting doubt on
the Commonwealth's entire phalanx of experts.
3. Greineder I s entitled tQ relief.
a. Greineder is entitled to relief
under the Larrison atandard.
32