SLOWLY THE MEDIA IS COMING AROUND ON THIS STORY --- THE NY TIMES SHOWS THAT IT GETS IT --- THE CASE AGAINST CHANEL LEWIS JUST GOT VERY HARD FOR PROSECUTORS TO PUSH FORWARD AND GET A CONVICTION AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT
It looks like this case might get significantly more critical scrutiny from the press on the second go round --- remember, this article by the Times is just a start in that direction
What the NY Times said today is that the jury in the Karina Vetrano murder case against Chanel Lewis looked very closely at the circumstances surrounding the confession by Chanel Lewis and at least some of the jurors were sceptical about the NYPD handling of purported DNA samples found at the crime scene --- AND PERHAPS OF OVERWHELMING SIGNIFICANCE --- this jury completely rejected the prosecution's main theory of the case against Chanel Lewis --- THAT THE DEATH OF KARINA VETRANO OCCURRED IN A COMBINED SEXUAL ASSAULT AND HOMICIDE by Lewis
Today's New York Times article by Jan Ransom [posted on line yesterday] highlighted some of the inconsistencies in the evidence that the jurors actually focused upon during their deliberations prior to the trial judge's granting the >>> Defense's <<< motion for a mistrial in the case against their client (See "The Murder Case Seemed Solid. Why the Jurors Still Would Not Convict" by Jan Ransom, 12/5/18, NY Times/ New York
[https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/nyregion/queens-jogger-trial.html]).
EVEN THOUGH THE ARTICLE IN TODAY'S TIMES LOOKS LIKE IT'S ABOUT WHAT THE JURY DID (AND THAT CERTAINLY WAS DISCUSSED) --- JAN RANSOM'S REPORT IN THE NY TIMES PRETTY MUCH FINISHED-OFF ANY CHANCE OF CONVICTING CHANEL LEWIS
According to Ms Ransom's article, one of the key concerns considered by the jury in the Howard Beach murder case was why so many police officers had handled the crime scene DNA samples before they had been turned over to the lab for testing and analysis. Another area of concern was the long period of confinement of Chanel Lewis with the only human contact being with police and prosecutors prior to his making his "confession." The jurors noted Chanel Lewis' obvious confusion, which in many ways showed no actual knowledge of the facts of the crime, but did seem like his attempt to closely track what the police believe happened.The defense now knows where to steer any future jury's attention --- and --- these weaknesses in the case against Chanel Lewis will not go away between now and anytime early in 2019, when the Queens DA's Office said the re-trial will occur.
A very interesting item mentioned in the Times piece was that "crime scene photos" had been "downloaded" onto Chanel Lewis' cell phone --- think about that.....
44 comments:
A few quick questions:
Is Queens DA Richard Brown still alive?
Has Queens DA Richard Brown ever heard the name Chanel Lewis?
Has Queens DA Richard Brown yet announced his formal retirement?
Is Queens DA Richard Brown the historical figure that asked an accused the question, "What is truth?"?
A few quick answers:
The answer as to DA Brown being alive is a complex issue.
Brown has never heard of Chanel Lewis or anyone else since the 90's.
No DA Brown has not announced his retirement from his retirement home in Connecticut.
The only history to Brown is he was elected Judge and then elected DA but no elections were ever held. That's how they do it in Queens. Ask Virginias Joe Crowley.
Crowley was elected to the state assembly and then elected to congress but there were no elections.
But, 'What is truth?' Was it Richard Brown who asked that? And who was the accused?
No it wasnt Brown who asked that.
It was the Cardinal in The Verdict.
Nobody cares about the new york times.
BACKFILL: THE "ODD SOUNDING STATEMENTS BY THE DNA LAB TECHS" EDITION
Here are 'facts' reported by Tim Fleischer of ABC News in February 2017, at the time supposedly 'consensual DNA' was taken from the defendant Chanel Lewis shortly before his arrest.
According to Fleischer's ABC report, over 600 DNA samples had been taken in connection with the Vetrano murder case, but according to a spokesperson from the lab that did the DNA testing only a few were directly connected to the victim, ".... We were able to recover DNA in three places, and one being on her actual body'..."
Even more odd was this statement by the DNA techs, 'When you do this much testing and there were so many investigative leads during the time period, it was very gratifying at the end to see that there would be a match'.
'... to see that there would be a match...' Isn't that an odd choice of words, or an oddly expressed thought, or just plain odd for a spokesperson from the DNA lab in this case ???
Speaking of 'consensual DNA sample,' why is one of the REAL VILLAINS in the Karina Vetrano-Chanel Lewis case getting a free pass from this blog?
Almost nobody has looked at Justice Gregory Lasak, the first judge to really screw up this case.
If Detective Lieutenant John Russo and other higher ups in the NYPD, like David Boyce and an as yet not identified 'Chief' who lives in Howard Beach, are the engineers on the train to railroad Chanel Lewis, then Judge Gregory Lasak was the conductor on that train that said, 'All aboard!"
Gregory Lasak's early rulings on the admissibility of the initial DNA samples taken from Chanel Lewis during the very first NYPD storm trooper raid on Chanel Lewis' home 'without probable cause' remain the biggest legal blunder by any judge involved in this case, and still are part of a court record that screams out 'reversible error' if the case were to be re-tried and there might happen to be a guilty verdict after that.
I don't know why Lasak is getting such a free pass. He is low-hanging fruit, especially since he quit the bench right after his DNA ruling in this case so he could run for Queens DA in 2019 (odd that he didn't stick around for a 'guilty verdict'; maybe he knew that wasn't likely to happen).
Lasak's DNA ruling and all of his other looking the other way when it came to the cops' abuse of the civil rights of the black defendant in this case should be a big issue in any campaign by Gregory Lasak in Queens in 2019 or any time from now on.
Gail, you are missing a lot in this case, you can't just listen to Johnny-boy and his 'go fund me' angle.
This case stinks worse than the old uncooked calamari in the dumpsters behind the clam joints on Cross Bay Boulevard, and it stinks lots a different ways.
You had something with the Jon Benet Ramsey angle. It really fits like OJ's glove never did.
Phil, Cathie and Karina Vetrano are just a different version of John, Patsy and Jon Benet Ramsey.
If the cops didn't stop him, Phil Vetrano would have done the 'full John Ramsey' and carried his dead daughter's body all the way home from the crime scene. I hate to say this, but maybe somebody is helping a certain set of parents get away with, um, SOMETHING.
There's lots and lots of video of both the Vetranos and the Ramseys, look closely at both. That's a better comparison than all the DNA in the world, and that's a lot a DNA.
Gale you are way ahead of this but Queens County Politics blog is playing catch up. Today QCP asked the three candidates running next year for DA about this case and they took the 5th. More or less. Melinda Katz is such a statesperson. As DA she promised to look at the evidence. Such courage !!
I read the queens politics blog and i never saw candidates for office take the 5th
RESPONSE: THE "LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE NARRATIVE" EDITION
TO: ALL COMMENTERS AND READERS OF MY BLOG
THE VARIOUS POSTS AND FOLLOW-UP COMMENTS THREADS CONCERNING THE MURDER OF KARINA VETRANO, AND THE SUBSEQUENT FINGERING, HOME INVASION, ILLEGAL EVIDENCE GATHERING AND PROTRACTED CUSTODIAL INTERROGATION OF CHANEL LEWIS RESULTING IN A PIED MESS OF A CONFESSION THAT DOESN'T JIBE WITH MOST OF THE PHYSICAL EVIDENCE IN THE CASE, ALONG WITH THIS BLOG'S REPORTING ON THE LEGAL SIDE OF THINGS, SHOW THAT THE CONTROL OF THE NARRATIVE THREAD IN THE VETRANO-LEWIS MURDER CASE HAS PASSED FROM THE ALWAYS ON STAGE VETRANOS, AND THEIR ALLIES INSIDE THE NYPD AND WITH THE QUEENS DA'S OFFICE TO CRITICS AND MORE OBJECTIVE REPORTERS OF THE FACTS
STEVE WITT'S QCP HAS GOTTEN STARTED ON ONE OF THE POLITICAL ANGLES --- HIS SUCCINCT QUESTION FOR THE THREE DECLARED CANDIDATES FOR QUEENS DA SPOKE VOLUMES --- THEIR RETESCENT REPLIES WERE QUITE PREDICTABLE, BUT THEY ARE NOW ON THE RECORD (SORT OF) NOT WANTING TO TALK ABOUT THIS CASE --- THAT'S A COMPLETE TURNAROUND FROM THE POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT OF 2016 & 2017, WHEN SOME QUEENS POLS WERE READY TO LEAD A "LYNCH MOB" ONCE THE RIGHT KIND OF SUSPECT WAS FOUND
My best BSI's are a little ahead of me on this story. I have to tell myself that's a good thing; they grow up so fast..... Some are going where I would not want to go; or at least, wouldn't want to go yet.
And it looks like one of them has spread his wings and obviously flown to Steve Witt's windowsill (yes, I do have proof of that). --- Voila, a nice bit of questioning by Steve Witt; and dissembling by the three pols involved.
BTW, has DA DICK expressed himself other than to give us the new docket dates for any re-trial. After all, his underlings on this case made him look like the very old >>> DICK <<< that he is. What, no "ATTABOYS !!!" or "GREAT JOB, KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK." HMMMMM !!!!!
The times wrote that the jury was 12 to zero on not guilty for sex crime. The only way to interpret that is the DNA was planted.
To the liar or illiterate or both at 1:01. The Times wrote that Jury was 7- 4 or 5 in favor of convicting. Hope that helps.
No 1:14 or should I say Lt?
The Times wrote the jury was unanamous for not guilty on the sex crime. Eventually the jury probably would have been not guilty on all counts but the prosecutor and the family wanted to cut and run. Meanwhile an innocent person is at rikers and the real killer is not.
Hey Lou !!
Got awfully quiet.
RESPONSE: THE "FACTUALLY CHALLENGED CROWD DEFENDING THE HOWARD BEACH MURDER INVESTIGATION & PROSECUTION" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 1:14 PM"
MULTIPLE NEWS SOURCES HAVE REPORTED THAT THE VETRANO-LEWIS JURY VOTED 12-0 TO ACQUIT CHANEL LEWIS OF ANY SEXUAL ASSAULT CHARGE --- INCLUDING THE NEW YORK TIMES ARTICLE CITED ABOVE IN THE INSTANT MAIN POST, WHICH ARTICLE IS THE SUBJECT UNDER DISCUSSION
THIS POLITICAL BLOG HAS BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME --- AND AS THE MODERATOR I HAVE MANY TOOLS FOR DEALING WITH "FAKE NEWS" COMMENT MAKERS, LIKE YOURSELF
HOWEVER, EVEN THOUGH THE COMMENTER(S) "... AT 1:01 PM" & "... AT 4:20 PM" IS/ARE CORRECT ABOUT THE JURY'S REPORTED 12-0 NULL-VOTE ON THE SEX CRIME, I DISAGREE WITH THE CONCLUSORY SUB-COMMENTS CONTAINED IN HIS/HER/THEIR BROADER COMMENT(S)
The 12-0 jury vote to acquit Chanel Lewis of any sexual assault doesn't prove that any DNA was planted. However, it does indicate that the entire jury on the Karina Vetrano murder trial rejected the NYPD's and the Queen's DA's theory of the case against Chanel Lewis.
Also, "... at 1:14 PM," please try to be a little less pissy and whiney with your comments, especially if you are trying to peddle "fake news" --- like you did above.
Here’s some exact quotes from the Times article. “
The juror said all panel members agreed early on that prosecutors failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lewis, 22, had sexually assaulted Ms. Vetrano, but the jury remained split about whether Mr. Lewis was guilty of murder.” And here’s the part where 7 members of the jury wanted to convict “Seven members wanted to convict him, according to the juror, including all four white members of the panel, a Hispanic woman, an Asian man and a black man.” There you have it troglodytes.
RESPONSE: THE "I'M SURE THAT YOU DO KNOW WHAT ALL THAT MEANS, DON'T YOU !!!" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 7:34 PM"
YOU KNOW, I FIND YOUR REPETITION OF "TROGLODYTES" TO BE VERY ANNOYING --- TRY TO BE HONEST; WHY ARE YOU PRETENDING TO BE DUMB AS DIRT ????? IN SPITE OF YOUR PUMPED-UP ATTITUDE, YOU DO REALIZE THAT YOU HAVE JUST THROWN THE TOWEL INTO THE RING VIS A VIS COMMENTERS "... AT 1:01 PM" & "... AT 4:20 PM" --- OH, AND OF COURSE >>> ME <<< BOTH FOR THE POINT OF MY MAIN POST, AND MY COMMENT "GALEWYN MASSEY SAID ... AT 6:58 PM"
Intellectually, you are a squirmer. Even when you have been badly beaten, you struggle like a bug caught in raw amber. Like I said, your side no longer controls the narrative.
Wise up. From here on in, this case ain't going your way. The DNA evidence will be shown to leak like a sieve; and the defense DNA cross-examination during any re-trial will be 1000% tougher. Also, this time around, the alleged 'confession' of Chanel Lewis will be used to completely discredit the raging 'bulls' who worked that part of this case, wait and see.
But, puhleez, stop with all your pissing and moaning while you go down for the count.
DNA evidence leaks like a sieve? You can write fifteen paragraphs of verbal diarrhea again and declare yourself the “winner” 100 times but I just used direct quotes from the Times article to make you piss and moan enough to write another rambling bumbling war and peace length diatribe. Seven voted to convict.
Seven, nine, ten, what is the point?
You need 12 to convict. They never came close to convicting Lewis. The DA and the family wanted a mistrial and they got it. They also got 400k in a go fund me account.
Does 8:55 think this is an election? Seven voted to convict means no conviction.
RESPONSE: THE "WHO HAS A VESTED INTEREST IN KEEPING THE LID ON THIS ???" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 9:55 PM"
YOU ARE WASTING YOUR TIME GOOD AND FAITHFUL SERVANT (AND YOU ARE FORGIVEN FOR RUNNING OFF TO STEVE WITT WITH THE DA CANDIDATE STUFF).
IF YOU TAKE "... AT 8:55 PM" LITERALLY, IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT FACTS YOU HAVE TO BACK UP YOUR ARGUMENT. THEY ARE RIGHT AND THAT IS ALL THAT THERE IS TO IT
An interesting parallel is the language of Cathy Vetrano, who late in February 2018 was reported as saying that the case against Chanel Lewis was 'not racial' while referring to him as an 'animal'.....
She also said that anybody who might stand up to defend Chanel Lewis was "delusional" --- Okay, possibly the family and East New York activists, but the defense lawyers too ???
It's not delusional to wonder why Chanel Lewis doesn't appear on any video tape on his long walk from the Essex Street apartment in East New York to the spot on the Queens side of the inlet/creek where the murder took place; and that would have been followed by a reverse trip with an injury sufficient for a hospital visit, if you believe the cops and the prosecution. The police theory tries to explain it all away by saying he took some path next to the Belt Parkway, but then he would have had to go over the highway bridge over Betts Creek, as well. More important, nobody has explained why their isn't a sign of him on any of the many security cameras at the Gateway Center Mall, it's the biggest mall in Brooklyn and almost completely astride any route he might have taken, especially if he came down Erskine Avenue as suggested by the cops.
But his genetic fingerprints are all over the crime scene which means he was there. His genetic material so basically goes back to DNA. His DNA underneath the victim’s fingernails, on her neck, and on her phone. This places him at the crime scene. Seven jurors were ready to convict while the other five tried to reenact the OJ verdict.
5:33 maybe someone can buy you “hooked on phonics” or some other learning aid so you can understand what the Times article is saying while you’re trying to read it.
When are we going to get back to blaming people for destroying the Brooklyn Republican Party?
RESPONSE: THE "REAL DNA STORY IS YET TO BE TOLD" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 3:57 AM"
HOW COME YOU KEEP REPEATING THE SAME OLD DNA LINE OVER, AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN ??? I DON'T BUY IT; THE JURY DIDN'T BUY IT; THE TRIAL JUDGE PROBABLY DIDN'T LIKE IT; AND AS A RESULT THE PROSECUTION AND EVEN THE VETRANOS SAW THAT IT WASN'T FLYING WITH THE JURY AND DIDN'T OPPOSE THE DEFENSE MISTRIAL MOTION
First, you were completely wrong when you said, "... his genetic fingerprints are all over the crime scene which means he was there..." There was lots of DNA all over the crime scene, but only three of the samples fit a "DNA profile" consistent with the defendant. However, some or all of those three "profiles" might have been arrived at by discredited methods and analytics.
Second, for a fuller context to the whole DNA story in this case --- most of the DNA samples found at the crime scene did not fit the defendant's profile, but almost certainly did fit the "profile" of another suspect --- somebody who was actually accused "on the record" of corrupting the crime scene. The prosecution has fought hard to keep all this other DNA evidence under wraps and away from the defense team's DNA experts.
Third, according to the very detailed NY Times article the jury did vote 12-0 to acquit on the sex crimes charge --- a complete rejection of the prosecutions "theory of the case" that this murder was associated with a sexual assault --- since you are a disciple of the "DNA as proof" school, there was NO DNA EVIDENCE for any "sexual assault".....
Fourth, even the 7-5 vote to convict on the murder charge was not a strong vote and based on the so-called "confession." --- Watch what the defense does to the isolation room, sleep-deprived, "cartoons" confession at the re-trial. Maybe, NYPD Detective Barry Brown will even be called in as a hostile defense witness next time around >>> to give the next jury a detailed description of the day-long, isolated and un-videoed custodial interrogation of this mentally challenged "suspect" prior to his breaking down and giving a confession >>> so he could go home after making restitution.
GM you don't understand DNA, that is clear in your writing. Until you do, anything you post about this case is going to leave you totally discredited to anyone with a working knowledge.
I dont know if GM understands DNA but Gm seems to understand dirty cops.
RESPONSE: THE "WATSON & CRICK RIP" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 8:25 AM"
MY APOLOGIES TO JAMES WATSON, WHO I DO BELIEVE STILL LIVES..... ALSO MY APOLOGIES TO THE MANY SCIENTISTS BEFORE WATSON & CRICK, WHO HAD HELPED DEFINE AN DESCRIBE DNA BEFORE THEIR "DOUBLE HELIX" WAS PUT BEFORE THE PUBLIC..... LET'S JUMP AHEAD FORTY OR FIFTY YEARS TO THE REAL WORK STUDYING THE HUMAN GENOME..... THAT'S THE REAL SCIENCE PART OF THIS. THE FORENSIC USE OF "DNA" IS APPLIED SCIENCE; AND IN MANY INSTANCES, IT IS BADLY APPLIED SCIENCE.
THE FORENSIC USE OF DNA IN THE VETRANO MURDER INVESTIGATION IS THIS BRANCH OF APPLIED SCIENCE AT ITS WORST --- AND IN THIS CASE, INTENTIONALLY AND PROBABLY CRIMINALLY MOTIVATED
Nobody has mentioned that forensic DNA "being tested" goes through computer-based analytics, and many of those programs are quite controversial and viewed by many as unreliable. It is so bad that the former law & order Attorney General of the United States, Jeff Sessions, fretted that the entire forensic DNA regime underlying thousands of Justice Department cases was in danger of crumbling. What more does one need to know ?????
BTW, something else that I do know is that the science of human genetics has been hurtling forward with the speed and force of a Saturn rocket. So what I learned in my advanced genetics course as a biology major at Brooklyn College, so many years ago, is pretty much stone age stuff.
Yes GM word is you were top in the class.
REPONSE: THE "VERY UNSAFE TO BE PLACE" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 9:58"
ARE YOU CRAZY !!! THE CLASS WAS FULL OF PRE-MEDS; IF THEY EVEN SUSPECTED THAT YOU MIGHT BE HIGHER UP IN THE CLASS RANKINGS, YOU MIGHT HAVE A CONTRACT PUT OUT ON YOU
My good friend at the time Bob Andina got an "A" in that course --- now he's a big cardiologist out west.....
I should have studied harder; instead, I had to go to law school and wound up as a trial lawyer, before working for judges and justices.
Gail, you are trying to be Sisyphus when it comes to 'anyone with a working knowledge' that wants to discredit you.
Don't you know that 'anyone with a working knowledge' really means cops and prosecutors, and probably some of them are actively involved in this case against Chanel Lewis.
Everybody knows they are cement heads, so screw 'em.
GM what you’re posting about DNA is tautology mixed in with a bunch of tired old tropes. No one is contesting that the DNA found on the victim belongs to the Defendant. It’s a one in six trillion match. Other cases receiving notoriety are those with very weak commingled samples, this is a rock solid match and nothing you write about Watson, Crick, or Jeff Sessions changes that.
Wait! Wa-it! WAAAAAAIT! GM, don't listen to that.
Instead listen to Albert Camus, when he tells you, 'The struggle itself ... is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.'
If a District Leader or BoE employee didn't taint the evidence, your audience isn't interested, Gale.
RESPONSE: THE "ARE YOU MAD --- NOTHING IS 'ROCK SOLID' IN THIS CASE" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 11:12 AM"
I AM CONTESTING UNEQUIVOCALLY AND ABSOLUTELY THAT ANY OF THE DEFENDANT'S DNA WAS ACTUALLY "FOUND" AT THE CRIME SCENE OR ON THE VICTIM'S BODY --- NOTE THE WORD THAT >>> YOU <<< USED AND I ADOPTED "CONTESTING"
IN EQUAL MEASURE, I DON'T NEED TO CONTEST YOUR BOGUS "ONE IN SIX TRILLION MATCH" ASSERTION
--- NO SUCH THING EXISTS IN THIS CASE OR ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD OF FORENSIC DNA SAMPLING --- AND WHETHER SOME TECHS MIGHT >>> FIND <<< SOME KIND OF "ONE IN SIX TRILLION" CONVERGENCE THAT CRANKS OUT USING CERTAIN MODELS AND ALGORITHMS, IT IS STILL A MATTER OF SIGNIFICANT DISPUTE AND CONTROVERSY IN THE FIELD OF DNA ANALYSIS
Let's start at the beginning.
Was any DNA found at the murder scene and/or on the body of Karina Vetrano?
Did it belong to one of the top suspects from day one of this investigation ?????
AND IF NOT --- WHY NOT --- BECAUSE THEN EVERYTHING IN THIS CASE WOULD BE BOGUS FROM DAY ONE --- JUST LIKE IN THE JONBENET RAMSEY CASE !!!!!
Poor GM especially at 11:47 the fact that you are trying to compare this to the JonBenet case shows conclusively that you don't know what you're talking about as far as the DNA evidence in this case goes. First of all the defendant's DNA in the Vetrano case wasn't planted, it's not like they took some of his known genetic material and put it on the victim's neck, underneath her fingernails and on her cell phone. That didn't happen. It came up as a match in the lab with a good sized sample. There is no real DNA evidence in the JonBenet case, in fact most of the foreign DNA found on JonBenet was so weak it couldn't even make CODIS until amplification techniques were used, which is why you often hear about "DNA transfer" in that case. In fact in the JonBenet case it's not even certain if any of the foreign DNA belongs to one person and isn't a mixed profile of several different people. That's not the case in the Vetrano case. It is definitively his DNA, which puts him at the crime scene. The three locations of the matching DNA, the hand injury the day of the murder, and the taped confession also distinguish this case from what happened in the JonBenet Ramsey case.
RESPONSE: THE "MAYBE, SOMEBODY WILL EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU" EDITION
TO: "ANONYMOUS SAID... AT 12:12 PM"
I AM UNCONCERNED ABOUT THE DNA IN THIS PHONY CASE AGAINST CHANEL LEWIS --- THE DEFENSE TEAM BEAT THE PROSECUTION AND THEIR PURPORTED "ROCK SOLID" DNA EVIDENCE AT THE FIRST TRIAL; THEY WILL DO EVEN BETTER REBUTTING THE DNA >>> IF <<< THERE IS ANOTHER TRIAL
THE ONLY THING THAT STOPPED A COMPLETE ACQUITTAL OF CHANEL LEWIS WAS HIS ERSATZ CONFESSION --- THAT CONFESSION WILL GET BLOWN UP COMPLETELY --- AGAIN, >>> IF <<< THERE IS A SECOND TRIAL
You are right, I don't know any of the DNA evidence from the JonBenet Ramsey case. I was talking about the as yet undisclosed DNA evidence in the Karina Vetrano murder pointing directly at someone that should have been at or near to top of the suspect list from day one. How I compared that to the Jon Benet Ramsey case was this: if there isn't a very strong DNA profile of the person who should have been the early top suspect found on the body of Karina Vetrano and at the crime scene, then a legitimate search or searches for DNA were never conducted in the Vetrano murder investigation.
The Jon Benet case was known for the DA not going along with the police hunch that the family did it. Not similar in any way to the Vetrano case.
Here the DA & Cops colluded to frame a black man who is mentally challenged. The jury saw it. The Judge saw it.
"I beat her to let my emotions out".
That is an exact quote from the confession. Does not sound like something a 20 year old black man would say.
ya dig !!
The quote is right, but your description of 'the 20 year old Black man' isn't complete. He was a twenty year old back person with special needs, who had asked to watch cartoons all night before he made that strange confession. He also left out the part about having to walk halfway across God's creation and remain completely invisible before he could '... beat her to let my emotions out.'
Here's a real FACT that should give everybody pause to question if police detectives had any idea how to secure the crime scene where Karina Vetrano's murdered body was found. In the days following his daughter's murder and HIS being the first to find his daughter's body, Phil Vetrano was allowed to walk around the crime scene, to help look for evidence.
Chanel Lewis was seen at a hospital with a hand injury the day after the murder of Karina Vetrano. A medical expert said the injury was consistent with a 'boxer's' injury. That seems pretty bad, right? Wrong!
The whole of Chanel Lewis' hospital record from the day after he allegedly murdered Karina Vetrano is very EXCULPATORY.
Chanel Lewis' hospital record does not show somebody that was in a fight to the death with somebody who was in good physical condition and whose own body showed a furious fight to save her life.
That's why the Queens DA wanted the press never to see it.
COMMENT: THE "BEWARE OF FULLER'S SPELUNCEAN HYPOTHETICAL" EDITION
THERE MIGHT HAVE BEEN TOO MANY CREDIBLE AND A FEW INCREDIBLE SPELUNKERS THAT LEFT REAL EVIDENCE AT THE KARINA VETRANO MURDER SCENE --- AND WHO BEHAVED LIKE THEY MIGHT BE GUILTY OF SOMETHING
Post a Comment