About Dr. Spence

Click on button above for a PDF of Curriculum Vitae.

BACKGROUND: Dr. Michael J. Spence received his Bachelors of Science and Masters of Science degrees from the University of Texas at El Paso in 1983 and 1985, respectively. He earned his Doctorate in Molecular Biology from New Mexico State University in 1990. Dr. Spence continued as a Postdoctoral Research Assistant at the University of Vermont, Department of Molecular Genetics. He then moved on to work as a Research Assistant at the V.A. Medical Center in Boise, Idaho. During his work in Boise, Dr. Spence secured funding for a five-year independent research project focusing on an anti-cancer cytokine called oncostatin M.

In May 2003, after over 20 years of research and 14 publications in scientific journals, Dr. Spence began his efforts as a Forensic Biologist with the Indiana State Police - Evansville Laboratory. Over the course of four years, he completed forensic biology/DNA examinations corresponding to over 100 criminal cases and testified as an expert witness in 16 felony trials.

SPENCE FORENSIC RESOURCES (SFR): On February 25, 2008, Dr. Spence launched Spence Forensic Resources (SFR) in Las Cruces, New Mexico. As of September 2010, he has reviewed over 350 criminal case files. Representing SFR, Dr. Spence has testified in 14 criminal case proceedings. Among those proceedings are the following verdicts:

• State of New Mexico v. Juantio Becenti, November 28, 2008 testimony, Aztec, NM: Counsel for prosecution withdrew from the case prior to jury deliberation.
• State of Maryland v. Larry Wooden, March 3, 2009 trial, Baltimore, MD: Counsel for prosecution decided to eliminate all biological/DNA aspects of the case. Defendant was subsequently found not guilty of first and second degree murder. Jury found defendant guilty of gun possession.
• U.S.A. v. Seth Hornedeagle, April 9, 2009 testimony in U.S. Federal Court, Las Cruces, NM: Defendant found not guilty and immediately released.
• State of New Mexico v. Fernando Coyazo, May 8, 2009 testimony, Alamogordo, NM: Defendant was found not guilty and immediately released.
• State of Maryland v. Gary Leon Holloway, March 9, 2010 trial, Frederick, MD: Attempted homicide case was dismissed due to questionable eye witnesses and misinterpretation of DNA results.
• State of New Mexico v. Danny Rascon, June 18, 2010 testimony, Alamogordo, NM: Defendant was found not guilty and immediately released.
• U.S.A. v. Theodore Largo, July 28, 2010 testimony in U.S. Federal Court, Albuquerque, NM: Defendant found not guilty and immediately released.

Of particular interest is the case, U.S.A. versus Theodore Largo, case No. 08-CR-02830-JCH, Albuquerque, N.M. 7/26/10 through 7/29/10, Judge: The Honorable Judith C. Herrera. Counsel for the defense was Steve Aarons - Santa Fe, New Mexico. This case is described in more detail at the SFR web page entitled: 'Most Fascinationg Cases'

And finally, …. a brief commentary from Dr. Michael Spence:

It has come to my attention that certain individuals may attempt to scrutinize the spenceforensics.com website as an avenue for gathering ammunition and questioning my professional integrity.

Integrity is achieved through truth. Any individual taking the witness stand agrees to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. The LENGTH of one's answers during testimony are not particularly vital (indeed, excessively long answers may put jurors to sleep-which is never good). How might an expert witness compromise his/her integrity? For an informative recent article exploring this issue, please take a look at this August 27, 2010 article.

In my humble opinion, one's integrity is certain to be damaged when one provides misleading information while under oath (even if the deception is EVER so subtle). For example, it would be misleading for me to testify that I once worked for the Indiana Department of Public Safety. No, I worked for four years as a Forensic Biologist with the Indiana State Police. I WAS paid by the state of Indiana and our little lab in Evansville was a LAW ENFORCEMENT FACILITY.

When prosecutors or  police investigators called me or e-mailed me at the crime lab, I freely communicated with them about my examination of the case evidence. If any person associated with the defense attempted to contact me (none ever did) I was under the same strict orders as ALL forensic biologists working for the ISP. I zipped my lips and directed the individual to my supervisor in Indianapolis.

When I testified, .....who do you suppose I testified for....? The prosecution? Wrong, .... the defense? Wrong, .... give up? It was a trick question. I testified for the TRUTH, ....the truth collected during my scientific examination of the case evidence. The only difference now is that I no longer handle the evidence in the lab or on the witness stand.

--Michael J. Spence, Ph.D.

Dr. Spence is a native of New Mexico. He enjoys golf, the unique cuisine of his home state, and volunteering his time to provide forensic DNA technology presentations to students at the elementary, secondary, and college levels.