Imagine being arrested for murder based on a test that turns out to be wrong. That’s exactly what happened right here in Galveston County to Sanddy Diaz Pino, an Uber driver from Humble. He was charged with the fatal shooting of 29-year-old Patrick William Wright—all because of a faulty gunshot residue (GSR) test.
Wright was shot twice in the chest after stepping out of a vehicle near Avenue R to confront another driver, reportedly over tailgating. According to eyewitnesses, Wright stood in front of the Uber and said, “This is G-town,” before lunging toward the driver’s window. Moments later, gunshots rang out.
Police found the Uber nearby using app tracking. Pino initially denied involvement, but a GSR test reportedly came back positive, and he was arrested for murder.
Days later, the Galveston Police Department reversed course. In an unusual move, they issued a public statement asking the District Attorney to dismiss the case. Why? Because the GSR test they relied on was flawed, and new video evidence introduced substantial doubt about Pino’s involvement.
Forensic Failures Are Widespread
Many people believe forensic science is airtight, an infallible force in court. But the truth? It’s only as reliable as the people using it. And history shows just how often it goes wrong.
- The National Registry of Exonerations has documented over 3,000 wrongful convictions in the U.S., and more than half involve flawed or misleading forensic evidence.
- A National Institute of Justice report found that nearly 50% of wrongful convictions examined could have been prevented with better forensic procedures and practices.
- Even basic evidence like fingerprint analysis, long considered rock-solid, has an error rate that’s higher than most people expect—up to 4% in some studies.
Let that sink in. That’s 4 out of every 100 identifications being wrong, potentially costing someone their freedom.
Real People, Real Injustice
False positives and bad science don’t just happen on paper; they happen to people. Here are just a few examples:
Kirk Bloodsworth (Maryland)
Convicted of a child’s rape and murder in 1985 and sentenced to death. His conviction was based largely on eyewitness testimony and flawed forensic assumptions. In 1993, he became the first death row inmate in the U.S. exonerated by DNA evidence.
Robert Lee Stinson (Wisconsin)
Sentenced to life based on bite-mark analysis, one of the most notoriously unreliable forensic methods. DNA later cleared him after 23 years behind bars.
Glen Dale Woodall (West Virginia)
Served years in prison after state forensic chemist Fred Zain falsified lab reports. When tested properly, the evidence didn’t match. Zain’s misconduct led to dozens of overturned convictions.
The Beatrice Six (Nebraska)
Six people convicted of a rape and murder based on coerced confessions and flawed forensics. DNA evidence cleared them all, after 20 years in prison.
These cases, and hundreds more, reveal a disturbing truth: bad science in the hands of bad or careless actors is a direct threat to justice.
Common Causes of Forensic Failures
The failures aren’t just about one bad test. They’re systemic:
- Presumptive Tests Treated Like Proof
GSR tests like the one in the Pino case are often presumptive, meaning they give a quick read but aren’t conclusive. Yet they’re still used to justify arrests or charges, sometimes without lab confirmation.
- Contamination and Mishandling
Many forensic tests are vulnerable to contamination. A piece of clothing stored improperly, a swab touched with bare hands, or a tool not properly cleaned can skew results.
- Lack of Validation
Some forensic methods, like bite-mark analysis, have never been scientifically validated, yet they’ve sent people to prison for decades.
- Tunnel Vision in Law Enforcement
Once investigators lock in on a suspect, they often stop looking at other leads. This “confirmation bias” leads them to interpret evidence in ways that support their theory, even when it doesn’t hold up.
- Untrained or Undertrained Personnel
Sometimes the science is sound, but the people using it aren’t. Without proper training in collection, handling, and analysis, even legitimate evidence can be rendered useless.
Back to Galveston County: The Pino Case
What makes the Sanddy Diaz Pino case so important is that it happened right here, not in a distant city or decades ago.
Galveston police initially relied on a gunshot residue test that they now say was unreliable and discontinued. But they didn’t question it, until video evidence surfaced contradicting the initial findings. That video saved Mr. Pino’s life. If it hadn’t surfaced? He might still be in jail, facing trial for a murder he didn’t commit.
This wasn’t a case of “bad luck.” It was a predictable outcome of relying on unconfirmed science and failing to double-check the evidence before filing charges.
What makes it so alarming is how fast and how wrong things went. From the initial arrest to the public reversal, it all happened within days.
Kim Lain, the mother of the deceased, was there when her son took his last breath. She says she interacted with the Uber driver herself. “My initial thought is shock, and then it turns to disappointment,” she said. “I feel his identification was positive.
That emotional testimony highlights another truth: even eyewitnesses can be sure and still be wrong—especially in moments of chaos and trauma.
Despite the tragedy she endured, new video footage contradicted the original narrative and ultimately exonerated Pino. Without that footage? He might still be in jail.
Why You Need a Lawyer Who Understands Science
When the government uses flawed science to prosecute, you need someone who can fight back using real science. That’s where I come in.
I’m Tad Nelson, a Board-Certified Criminal Defense Lawyer with decades of experience here in Galveston County and I also hold a Master’s degree in Forensic Toxicology. That’s not just a piece of paper. It’s a deep, working understanding of how forensic evidence is gathered, tested, and often misinterpreted.
When I take a case, I don’t just question the police report, I rebuild the science from the ground up:
- Was the evidence properly collected and stored?
- Was the right testing method used?
- Were the analysts qualified?
- Did the results meet accepted scientific standards?
The scientific method matters!
I ask the questions that prosecutors hope no one will ask. Because I know how easily a false positive can land someone behind bars, and how hard it is to undo the damage once it’s done.
The System Doesn’t Always Get It Right
People like to think the justice system is fair. That if someone is arrested, they probably did something wrong. But cases like Pino’s, and thousands of others, prove that’s simply not true.
The system is only as good as the evidence. And if the evidence is flawed? Justice goes out the window.
Final Word: The Science Guy You Want on Your Side
In a world where the government has unlimited resources, forensic labs, and the power to lock you up, you need someone who can match them step for step, not just in the courtroom, but in the lab.
That’s what I do. That’s why I fight.
Because when it comes to forensic evidence, the truth isn’t always in the report. Sometimes, it takes a lawyer who speaks the language of science to find it.
If you’re facing charges based on questionable lab results, don’t wait until it’s too late. Call my office. Let’s talk about the science. And let’s make sure your case is built on facts, not faulty assumptions.