FABRICATED EVIDENCE?

In 1988 Windsor filed a discovery motion specifically requesting this material and many other still undisclosed items of evidence. 
In 4 years time the state would not  make the evidence available to defense, and only as the 
state wanted to enter it into evidence did they then produce xerox copies not suitable for testing purposes
To date never have they turned over actual fingerprint evidence, 
suitable for testing, i.e. photographs of the prints and the actual piece of evidence.

Windsor maintains this is not his print yet the state refuses to release the proper materials for independent testing. 
Even in the xerox copies you can see signs of fabrication this is why the state will not turn it over.

This issue will effect thousands of Alabama cases when the forensics lab is caught fabricating evidence.

Fabricated Evidence is fictitious testimony or documents offered to a court or jury in order to mislead them. Fabricating evidence involves arranging or manufacturing circumstances or indica, after the act is committed with the intention to use them as evidence and make it appear accidental. Such evidence may be wholly forged and artificial, or it may consist in so warping and distorting real facts to create an impression in the minds of those who observe them as true and genuine Prints found at the scene of the crime did not belong to Windsor

This finger print that is claimed to of come from a cigg butt were lead to believe it belongs to Harvey Windsor,and was taken from a mustang? Yet  a witness saw the 2 men that were in the car and Harvey Windsor was not one of them, and still  the victims son claims he saw Harvey Windsor, but he also claims the car was a Dodge with a fin on the back he recognized it as "being the same type of car his friend has"
so now we have a witness who saw the mustang which there is proof he is telling the truth as he said the passenger was eating an ice cream cone of which i have a picture of..he also had a very close look at the 2 men..there were many items taken from the car and many prints taken from the car and yet there is only a partial print that no other expert tested as they were never hired to do so ..there were prints found inside the store but  none belonging to Harvey Windsor...all of what I say I can prove...Harvey Windsor is innocent....

False positives and contamination by subsequent handling or nearby objects (e.g. mixing of blood from victim and attacker), for example, are problems owing to the presence of many common substances and the necessity of human involvement in the collection of trace evidence. Both can occur with DNA traces and fingerprints. Partial fingerprints are even more vulnerable to false positives.