195. How wrong can a judge be?
Newspaper coverage of the courts tends to be dismal (see post 183), and it's not always easy to tell whether the reporter has missed the point or the judge has gone off his rocker. Consider this very distressing case from the lovely little western Pennsylvania town of Kittanning. (More photos here and here - a lot of web-savvy local boosters, apparently.) You probably heard about this story when it occurred, although so many similar incidents have occurred that they all tend to run together:
As could have been anticipated, the suspect's husband was convinced his wife was pregnant. She apparently needed a baby to maintain the illusion. As for the person on the ATV:
The police arrived quickly enough to find Conner still at the scene with blood on her clothing. The location was "a remote wooded location" in Wayne Township, an inland pocket of rural poverty in Erie County, an area of 2,365 people with an average household income of $21,034 (compared to a Pennsylvania median of $45,941).
Conner was arrested, and confessed. But what happened in the interval between arrest and confession was in doubt, as anyone experienced in this business would expect:
I assume the police told a different story at the suppression hearing, which was devoted to defense counsel's argument that "Conner did not knowingly waive her Miranda warnings before making statements to police and [that] her requests for counsel were allegedly ignored by police" - and, I would gather from the above, that the confession was involuntary, to boot.
Armstrong County Judge Kenneth Velasek didn't rule and didn't rule, and finally defense counsel filed a mandamus petition in the Superior Court to force him off the dime. (Mandamus just means an order mandating something - usually a superior court ordering an inferior court to take some required action.) The Superior Court refused to intervene, but at a subsequent bail hearing Judge Velasek explained the delay:
How the prosecutor's heart must have sunk on hearing that news! Judges never take 40-50 pages to deny a motion to suppress. But I bet the defense attorney's elation was tinged with apprehension, too. It's rarely a good thing when a judge takes over the conduct of the litigation, playing the role of advocate before himself. Defense counsel had figured out which was his strongest arguments, and now the judge was telling him, in so many words, that he had decided to rule in the defense's favor, but on a weak argument, one much less likely to stand up on appeal.
If I were the defense attorney I would have been thinking: "You moron, just grant my motion!", while standing at attention and saying out loud, "Thank you, your honor."
Anyway, Judge Velasek finally released his ruling: "The court cannot hold that the troopers had probable cause to arrest the defendant at the scene," the judge wrote. "Simply because she was present with some blood on her clothes does not, by itself, constitute probable cause to effect a lawful arrest."
A remote wooded area. Two women are alone. One is unconscious, having been struck multiple times by a baseball bat, her abdomen sliced open, rapidly bleeding out. The second woman is observed kneeling beside her. The 17-year-old who found this odd couple left them briefly, then returned with his father and stayed with them until the troopers arrived. The troopers hear the teen's story, see the first woman's injury, and observe blood on the second woman's clothing.
Would a reasonable police officer think there was reason to believe the woman in the blood-stained clothing seen kneeling over the bleeding woman had something to do with the latter's bloody injury? This was probable cause squared. Cubed. No wonder defense counsel didn't make any argument about illegal arrest in his motion to suppress.
Valasek said it was reasonable to assume that Conner was taken into custody when she was not permitted to the leave the scene in Wayne Township. Conner was handcuffed and placed in the back of a police cruiser at the scene, and told she could not leave until being interviewed.
So, in other words, the troopers were required to let Conner drive away in her car, the one that also contained "a bloodstained crowbar, a razor knife, rubber gloves and other medical supplies", which Conner only needed a few minutes in that water-logged area of the country to dispose of effectively.
Unless some crucial facts were omitted from the newspaper stories - always a possibility - you have to worry a bit. About Judge Velasek, I mean. Would you like to lie down, Ken? Can I bring you a glass of water?
Incidentally, I couldn't locate a photo of Kenneth, the son of the late Ludwig "Moon" and Mary (Goyda) Valasek, on the web, but I did find out some pretty detailed biographical information about him. And I must add that anyone who can organize a "Latin singing Guardian Angel choir" while coaching Little League has his good points, too.
Saturday, November 11, 2006 at 01:40PM in
Covering the courts,
Individual judges,
Judging the judges

Reader Comments (2)
It is certainly based on these reports that the police had probable cause to arrest, and that the judge's decision is goofy. But couldn't a reviewing court uphold the suppression on the Miranda ground alleged by the defendant, even if those grounds aren't mentioned in the trial court's opinion? I'm in Ohio, and we have those kind of "right result, wrong reason" appellate opinions all the time--although I must say they usually benefit the state rather than the defendant!