10-12-2017, 05:57 AM
Lacey Spears' murder conviction in son's salt-poisoning death upheld
Taken from: http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/20...754496001/
A panel of state appellate judges has denied Lacey Spears' appeal to overturn her murder conviction in the salt-poisoning death of her 5-year-old son, Garnett.
The Appellate Division, 2nd Judicial Department in Brooklyn delivered the decision today, concluding that the evidence showed "beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life."
Spears had argued that the evidence used against her was not legally sufficient to support her conviction.
Spears, who had lived with her son in Chestnut Ridge, was convicted by a jury in 2015 of second-degree murder under the theory that she showed a depraved indifference to human life. She was sentenced to 20 years to life in prison.
Garnett Spears died on Jan. 23, 2014, at Westchester Medical Center, of hypernatremia, or elevated sodium levels, that led to brain swelling.
The judges agreed with Spears' claim that an article from Wikipedia on hypernatremia should not have been admitted as evidence at trial because it was not authenticated by the prosecution. But the court said that "error was harmless." The panel ruled that Spears' "remaining contentions are without merit" and "the sentence imposed was not excessive."
The Westchester County District Attorney's Office issued a statement saying it's "very pleased with the decision rendered by the Appellate Division in the Lacey Spears case."
Spears' attorneys, Stephen Riebling and David Sachs, said although the Appellate Division’s decision is "devastating to Lacey (Spears)," they're "not in any way deterred."
"In fact, we will continue to pursue justice for Lacey and seek the reversal of her wrongful conviction by the Court of Appeals, the highest appellate court in New York," Spears' attorneys said in an email. "Lacey (Spears) shares our confidence that the Court of Appeals will make the correct decision and reverse her conviction because she is not guilty of murdering her son."
During Garnett Spears' life, his mother took him to a variety of doctors and hospitals and repeatedly reported that he had medical conditions that had been ruled out by other physicians, according to the court documents. She posted regularly about his conditions on a blog and Facebook.
Westchester County Assistant District Attorney Doreen Lloyd said during the trials that Lacey Spears had shown a pattern of sickening her otherwise healthy child out of a "bizarre" need for attention.
On Jan. 17, 2014, Garnett Spears' teacher stopped by Lacey Spears' home and saw Garnett "seemingly uncomfortable" on the couch and a feeding bag attached to a pole in the middle of the room, court documents said.
Not long after the teacher left, Lacey Spears called her friend and said Garnett, who was seen by her friend hooked up to the feeding bag, was having a seizure. The two of them took Garnett to Nyack Hospital, where Lacey Spears said he experienced three episodes that she believed to be seizures, court documents say.
While Garnett was in the hospital, he was monitored by a video camera to record physical symptoms of seizures. On Jan. 19, 2014, the camera showed Garnett and his mother entering the hospital room bathroom twice with a white cup and what appeared to be an attachment that connected to Garnett's feeding tube, court documents say.
Both times, Garnett became ill with headaches and diarrhea after leaving the bathroom and displayed symptoms of seizures, court documents say. But the electroencephalogram, EEG, didn't show any seizure activity but rather "significant" slowing in the brain waves, suggesting brain dysfunction, according to court documents. A blood test showed "abnormally" high sodium and chloride levels.
He was no longer breathing on his own and had to be airlifted to Westchester Medical Center, where he was diagnosed with hypernatremia. Two days later, he was brain dead.
"Before and throughout the child’s last hospital admission, (Lacey Spears) sent many texts to friends reporting on the child’s actual and purported health problems, indicating her worry for him, and asking the recipients to pray for the child. The information in the texts was often unconfirmed or contradicted by the evidence from the physicians who had treated him," court documents said. "(Lacey Spears) also posted photos of the child on Facebook, including photos taken after the child suffered cerebral edema and she was told that he would not likely recover."
Taken from: http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/20...754845001/
Defense's arguments and appellate court's ruling:
1.The defense argued that evidence was legally insufficient to support her conviction.
The Appellate Court found evidence was legally sufficient "to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." The court said Spears demonstrated "beyond a reasonable doubt" that she acted "under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life" because she repeatedly sickened her son and subjected him to pain until he wasn't able to breathe and became brain dead.
2. The defense argued some evidence taken from her phone, including text messages, should be thrown out because the search warrant affidavits submitted by police omitted the traditional language "sworn before me" above the judge's signature.
The Appellate Court ruled that there was "substantial compliance" with the law. In its decision, the the Appellate Court explained, although the warrant applications didn't contain a "traditional jurat or form notice," they were labeled as affidavits and identified the affiant by name declaring that he was "being duly sworn deposes and says" with the magistrate's signature below the affiant's signatures, which signifies that the magistrate witnessed the signatures.
3. The defense argued a Wikipedia page about "hypernatremia," which is an elevated sodium level, should not be admitted into evidence because it was not authenticated by the prosecution.
The Appellate Court agreed with the defense but said, "The error was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, and no significant probability that the defendant would have been acquitted if not for the error in admitting the article."
Taken from: http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/20...754496001/
A panel of state appellate judges has denied Lacey Spears' appeal to overturn her murder conviction in the salt-poisoning death of her 5-year-old son, Garnett.
The Appellate Division, 2nd Judicial Department in Brooklyn delivered the decision today, concluding that the evidence showed "beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant acted under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life."
Spears had argued that the evidence used against her was not legally sufficient to support her conviction.
Spears, who had lived with her son in Chestnut Ridge, was convicted by a jury in 2015 of second-degree murder under the theory that she showed a depraved indifference to human life. She was sentenced to 20 years to life in prison.
Garnett Spears died on Jan. 23, 2014, at Westchester Medical Center, of hypernatremia, or elevated sodium levels, that led to brain swelling.
The judges agreed with Spears' claim that an article from Wikipedia on hypernatremia should not have been admitted as evidence at trial because it was not authenticated by the prosecution. But the court said that "error was harmless." The panel ruled that Spears' "remaining contentions are without merit" and "the sentence imposed was not excessive."
The Westchester County District Attorney's Office issued a statement saying it's "very pleased with the decision rendered by the Appellate Division in the Lacey Spears case."
Spears' attorneys, Stephen Riebling and David Sachs, said although the Appellate Division’s decision is "devastating to Lacey (Spears)," they're "not in any way deterred."
"In fact, we will continue to pursue justice for Lacey and seek the reversal of her wrongful conviction by the Court of Appeals, the highest appellate court in New York," Spears' attorneys said in an email. "Lacey (Spears) shares our confidence that the Court of Appeals will make the correct decision and reverse her conviction because she is not guilty of murdering her son."
During Garnett Spears' life, his mother took him to a variety of doctors and hospitals and repeatedly reported that he had medical conditions that had been ruled out by other physicians, according to the court documents. She posted regularly about his conditions on a blog and Facebook.
Westchester County Assistant District Attorney Doreen Lloyd said during the trials that Lacey Spears had shown a pattern of sickening her otherwise healthy child out of a "bizarre" need for attention.
On Jan. 17, 2014, Garnett Spears' teacher stopped by Lacey Spears' home and saw Garnett "seemingly uncomfortable" on the couch and a feeding bag attached to a pole in the middle of the room, court documents said.
Not long after the teacher left, Lacey Spears called her friend and said Garnett, who was seen by her friend hooked up to the feeding bag, was having a seizure. The two of them took Garnett to Nyack Hospital, where Lacey Spears said he experienced three episodes that she believed to be seizures, court documents say.
While Garnett was in the hospital, he was monitored by a video camera to record physical symptoms of seizures. On Jan. 19, 2014, the camera showed Garnett and his mother entering the hospital room bathroom twice with a white cup and what appeared to be an attachment that connected to Garnett's feeding tube, court documents say.
Both times, Garnett became ill with headaches and diarrhea after leaving the bathroom and displayed symptoms of seizures, court documents say. But the electroencephalogram, EEG, didn't show any seizure activity but rather "significant" slowing in the brain waves, suggesting brain dysfunction, according to court documents. A blood test showed "abnormally" high sodium and chloride levels.
He was no longer breathing on his own and had to be airlifted to Westchester Medical Center, where he was diagnosed with hypernatremia. Two days later, he was brain dead.
"Before and throughout the child’s last hospital admission, (Lacey Spears) sent many texts to friends reporting on the child’s actual and purported health problems, indicating her worry for him, and asking the recipients to pray for the child. The information in the texts was often unconfirmed or contradicted by the evidence from the physicians who had treated him," court documents said. "(Lacey Spears) also posted photos of the child on Facebook, including photos taken after the child suffered cerebral edema and she was told that he would not likely recover."
Taken from: http://www.lohud.com/story/news/crime/20...754845001/
Defense's arguments and appellate court's ruling:
1.The defense argued that evidence was legally insufficient to support her conviction.
The Appellate Court found evidence was legally sufficient "to establish defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt." The court said Spears demonstrated "beyond a reasonable doubt" that she acted "under circumstances evincing a depraved indifference to human life" because she repeatedly sickened her son and subjected him to pain until he wasn't able to breathe and became brain dead.
2. The defense argued some evidence taken from her phone, including text messages, should be thrown out because the search warrant affidavits submitted by police omitted the traditional language "sworn before me" above the judge's signature.
The Appellate Court ruled that there was "substantial compliance" with the law. In its decision, the the Appellate Court explained, although the warrant applications didn't contain a "traditional jurat or form notice," they were labeled as affidavits and identified the affiant by name declaring that he was "being duly sworn deposes and says" with the magistrate's signature below the affiant's signatures, which signifies that the magistrate witnessed the signatures.
3. The defense argued a Wikipedia page about "hypernatremia," which is an elevated sodium level, should not be admitted into evidence because it was not authenticated by the prosecution.
The Appellate Court agreed with the defense but said, "The error was harmless, as there was overwhelming evidence of the defendant's guilt, and no significant probability that the defendant would have been acquitted if not for the error in admitting the article."