Gothamist: Actress's Killer Pleads Not Guilty

jbr

Mon, 01 Jan 2007 19:36:13 -0500

this was worse than murder - it is a crime worse than any that one can imagine. if he is released on a loophole, it will be once again our justice system circumvented by ridiculous details not designed to serve right and wrong but to ruin our world.

edEx

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 18:05:33 -0500

I really do not care what it looks like to you... (i can tell you this, you're misquoting yourself (go back and reread your posts)). Again, I'm stating the facts of how and what he was charged with. He was charged with second degree murder, not manslaughter. IF a jury is convinced by the prosecution that he did infact commit second degree murder he will be convicted of second degree murder... If you do not agree with that charge bring it up with the Manhattan DA's office.

anonymass

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 17:06:17 -0500

edEx, he intentionally HIT her. He didn't intentionally KILL her. One is manslaughter the other is murder. If he had gone up to her with a gun or a knife or if there were multiple bruises from her body indicating that he really wailed on her, it might be easier to prove murder (intention to kill). Without that, it looks like manslaughter to me.

mithras

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 17:03:34 -0500

Wasn't there a CSI:NY episode based on this story?

doosh

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:43:59 -0500

cxb? As in Christopher X. Brodeur? Wow, the kooks have finally landed on Gothamist.

Tom

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:32:39 -0500

cxb: most murders are accidental By pretty much every definition of "murder" the act of killing the person either has to be intentional or occur during the act of another crime (ie: if person A kills person B accidentally while in the process of robbing or raping them). If you shoot another hunter in the woods thinking he was a deer, it's manslaughter. If you go into the woods intending to shoot another hunter and blame it on thinking it was a deer, it's murder. Not one of the cases you've mentioned, by definition of New York's statute, is a murder. The third one is arguable because it shows depraved indifference. Now, do you want me to believe that some people who didn't commit a murder went to jail for murder because of aggressive prosecution from an ADA with a resume to pad? No problem. But that doesn't make it right. And to your extra point, no, they couldn't.

edEx

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:24:27 -0500

#34: most of what i wrote is what is defined as second degree murder. i didn't rewrite the law to suit my post. *Let's get this straight, edEx: he hit her unintentionally and thought he had killed her, and in the course of covering his tracks ended up mistakenly finishing the job. In your own words (see above) you're calling this second part intentional...* Actually, he hit her intentionally. knowing whether she was dead or alive is irrelevant—he intentionally tried to cover his tracks and hanged her in the bathroom. he has been charged with second degree murder with a plea of not gulty. if a jury finds him guilty of this charge (which i'm sure they will), then it was proven by the prosecution that he intentionally commited murder...

cxb

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:03:58 -0500

Sorry, one last rant/point: "manslaughter" is criminally negligent murder. EX: Rudy and Tax Hike Mike were grossly negligent about the toxins at Ground Zero and had a legal duty to protect NYC and be honest about the toxins. They refused, for a variety of noble and non-noble reasons. They could be arrested and tried tomorrow for ANY death of a ground zero worker. It's classic manslaughter. Lucky for politicians there's professional courtesy. The DA is their buddy!

cxb

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:00:43 -0500

FACT: most murders are accidental: ex: man and wife in fight, pushing each other, and one slips and cracks head open ex: in a bar fight, one guy in a fit of anger and booze smashes other in head. victim dies. ex: crackhead mom shakes child to make it stop crying. Is she a dangerous moron? Of course. But murder is seldom intentional. I've interviewed shitloads of murderers, and any examination of most murder cases will show you they're impulsive and accidental. (Of course, there's no such thing as "accidents" but you know what I mean.) WE simply can't praise our "soldiers" who kill strangers while calling civilians who do same "psychos". Pick ONE story and stick to it. Reportedly, self-defense isn't even a legal murder defense in NY state. The impulsive nature of murder is another clue that the NYPD and Giuliani faked ALL the crime stats. Rudy's entire argument was "Broken Windows" but how can arresting pot smokers stop murder if murder is not intentional? And busting pot smokers doesn't even stop them from smoking POT! Yet 100% of the media fell for these amateurish hoaxes, and then YOU fell for the media lies. Cripes. mayorcxb@yahoo.com

anonymass

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 14:30:20 -0500

Initially he did not intended on killing her with the assault, but then thinking she was dead, he hanged her—at that point it's intentional murder... Ummm...does anyone else read this and think "Danger: moron at work?' Let's get this straight, edEx: he hit her unintentionally and thought he had killed her, and in the course of covering his tracks ended up mistakenly finishing the job. In your own words (see above) you're calling this second part intentional. Summary: you're a fucking 'tard. And nice try making it seem as if you're quoting statute. Will.xls - I'm not assuming that he's telling the truth about what he thought or that he's lying about what he thought. Point is: how would you prove he's not? If you can prove that someone thought something or didn't think something definitively, you have a lucrative future in store. There are ways to prove intention, but in this case I don't see how you can do that.

will.xls

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 13:00:47 -0500

anonumass, That is, of course, assuming that he truthful in his confession. But he can't be doctoring his words to make it seem like a terrible mistake when in fact it was cold blooded 'I've got a 110 lb problem' murder. We all know that criminals have no reason to paint themselves in a self serving manner during a police interrogation....right?

edEx

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:57:54 -0500

#27, Tom: I was going on the basis of his original charge of muder, in the second degree. What he's finally convicted of I'm not sure. Possibly Manslaughter, but not knowing she was a live or dead may not exempt him from the second degree murder charge if the prosecution can prove it. #31: take off your diaper and put the big-boy pants on—it's a sad state of affairs when a person like you is as ignorant as you are. I'm stating actual facts and definitions of law with this case and others. I didn't say he knew if she was alive or not. But law has charged him with second degree murder, apparently because they believe he knew she was still alive and they intend on proving it. you're just trolling and refuting factual definitions with your prepubescent douchebaggery.

anonymass

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:32:10 -0500

Since it will be impossible to prove that he thought she was still alive when he hanged her - and since he has stated the contrary in his confession - it would appear that edEx is one again talking out of his ass. Good job pal.

Columbia University

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:12:54 -0500

Jen, didn't we teach you not to use conjunctions to start a sentence? You might have to return that diploma.

robin.g

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:09:22 -0500

"1) he's an Ecuadorean day laborer 2) he killed an affluent white woman" 1) He murdered someone. 2) He murdered someone.

osemar

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:51:58 -0500

"He's totally getting the maximum sentence: 1) he's an Ecuadorean day laborer 2) he killed an affluent white woman" He's an Ecuadorean day laborer who has some serious rage and violence issues, and he killed a middle-class white woman who didn't do anything offensive to him, strung her up 'like a pig', and purposely staged a suicide. His ebing a laborer and her being white is incidental in this this case comapred to his being purposefully, unnecessaily violent and her being purposefully, unnecessarily dead.

Tom

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:49:09 -0500

Extreme pressure on her neck. Initially he did not intended on killing her with the assault, but then thinking she was dead, he hanged her—at that point it's intentional murder, premeditated post the first assault (the punch)... this is the definition for second degree murder Not true. If he thought she was dead when he hanged her, he still didn't intentionally kill her. If he injured her, and knew she wasn't dead, then hanged her to kill her, that's second degree murder. If he injured her, thought she was dead, and hanged her without intent of killing her (thinking she was already dead), it's manslaughter. The DA essentially has to prove that he knew she was alive after punching her to prove murder. Otherwise, it's manslaughter.

will.xls

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:43:52 -0500

The guy should go away for a long time. At least until he is too old to do anyone any harm. Prison in the United States does not aim to save the criminal. It just warehouses them away from the law abiding public so that the rest of us can go on with our lives unmolested. Inhumane? maybe. Effective? yes. As for recanted confessions: As my evidence professor said "sometimes the fish jumps in the boat" and a defense lawyers job is to try and kick the fish back out. If the cops Mirandized this guy and he never asked for a lawyer the fact that he did not sign the documents is not a big deal.* The Cops can testify to his confession. The lack of a signed written statement will affect the weight given the confession by the jury but not the admissibility of the statements made. He is cooked. *disclaimer-not an expert

annie

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:35:49 -0500

He's totally getting the maximum sentence: 1) he's an Ecuadorean day laborer 2) he killed an affluent white woman Precedent says he's screwed.

edEx

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:35:48 -0500

#21: *we're not sure yet what killed her - the punch/head injury or the hanging.* accorsing to the M.E. she died from hanging. Extreme pressure on her neck. Initially he did not intended on killing her with the assault, but then thinking she was dead, he hanged her—at that point it's intentional murder, premeditated post the first assault (the punch)... this is the definition for second degree murder.

adamks

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:29:32 -0500

Pillco had confessed to striking Shelly unconscious and, thinking she was dead, staging her body to look like she hanged herself in a suicide because in order to cover it up. awkward sentence construction.

ok, i'll bite

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:24:28 -0500

why does someone think he doesn't deserve any jail time?

Samantha T

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:24:08 -0500

Well, we're not sure yet what killed her - the punch/head injury or the hanging. Sure, he says he thought she was already dead and hung her to cover his tracks, but boyfriend has already told several half-truths about what happened, including that he didn't do it at all. For all we know, he hung her knowing full well that she was still alive to get rid of a witness. This is a very fact-intensive situation - that's what the jury is for.

osemar

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:22:42 -0500

"He won't do any jail time if I'm on that jury." Hey 'left of center', you keep saying that without saying why. Why wouldn't you have a man who staged a stranger's suicide do any time? I'm left of center too, and I have sympathy for the horrible lives of illegal immigrants, but this one still committed a crime. He became physically violent toward and killed an innocent woman and then very premediatedly hung her body from a pole so that her family would find her that way. Is he not responsible for that?

if you leave

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:20:22 -0500

One never knows who's on the jury. The judge can't do a thing. I have all the time in the world. jack mccoy sounds like a good guy.

edEx

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:16:50 -0500

from what i read in the times he didn't sign any of his confessions, but was video taped. *Inside the apartment, Mr. Pillco said, he kicked Ms. Shelly’s purse across the floor as the argument intensified. “I punched her in the eye,” he told the police. “She came towards me and tried to grab my shirt. She scratched me on my nose. I pushed her.” Ms. Shelly hit her head on a computer table and fell to the floor with her eyes open, Mr. Pillco told the police. He put his ear to her chest but could not hear a heartbeat, he said. He closed her eyes, took a sheet from the bed, tied it around her neck and dragged her down the hallway to the bathroom, according to the statement.* - nyt.com MURDER, SECOND DEGREE - In order for someone to be found guilty of second degree murder the government must prove that the person killed another person; the person killed the other person with malice aforethought; and the killing was premeditated. The homicide must still be intentional, or it is not murder, but it becomes second degree murder when the intention to cause the persons death did not occur before the act began. In other words, there was no planning or deliberation. For example, someone assaults another person without having had any plan ahead of time to kill this person, but once the assault is commenced, intends to kill him.

stewart

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:15:24 -0500

Suzanne Vega shut up already, no one is going to pick a washed up hag like you for the jury.

Mike

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:14:28 -0500

"He won't do any jail time if I'm on that jury." Don't worry, you won't be on the jury. You're a goddamn troll who will be handily weeded out when the judge determines that your mommy didn't love you and as a result you suffer from crippling insecurity and a pathetic desire for any attention whatsoever, even if it's negative.

left of center something about me

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:03:56 -0500

He won't do any jail time if I'm on that jury.

stewart

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:03:33 -0500

Since he is a illegal immigrant from Ecuador, why not just send him back? In Ecuador there is pervasive vigilantism and he would not likely even make it to trial there. Let's just return him to Ecuador, beam his videotaped confession to the news media and let them take out their own trash.

jack mccoy

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:02:26 -0500

Everbody claims their confession was coerced - or I should say their lawyer claims it. Even when the ADAs have it on video tape. I know plenty of ADAs that would remind the accused multiple times that they can have a lawyer present and they still spill their guts. Some of them actually think they can talk their way out of it. People even try to take back plea bargains once they're in prison. It's a wacky system. And I can only assume that the crowd that suggests life in prison are Republicans. If this were Europe, this guy would serve a dozen years maximum.

parsnip lee

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:00:54 -0500

Not if I'm on the jury. We all know how these people are treated. Still don't get it, do you? He won't go to jail if I have anything to do with it. Get what exactly? You haven't stated anything.

Tom

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:54:40 -0500

"While we know it's possible, can any lawyers or legal buffs explain how Pillco can plead not guilty, even with a confession?" He's probably pleading not guilty to murder. He didn't "intend" to kill her. He's certainly guilty of manslaughter, but with manslaughter you get out eventually.

Tom

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:53:52 -0500

Robot

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:53:25 -0500

If I were that guy, I think I would have rather been deported than to spend the rest of my life in prison. Then again, I think. He obviously does not.

Robot

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:51:31 -0500

If I were that guy, I think I would have rather been deported than to spend the rest of my life in prison. Then again, I think. He obviously does not.

if you want me left of center

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:50:42 -0500

Still don't get it, do you? He won't go to jail if I have anything to do with it.

jk

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:47:30 -0500

Believe it or not, the district attorney will have a tough (if not impossible) time proving Murder in the Second Degree. That crime requires that you INTEND to kill someone. If he only punched her once then by law he can't be guilty of murder. Even more, there's a very strong argument that he didn't intend to kill her when he hit her - he was just trying to stop her from calling the police. And he certainly couldn't have intended to kill her when he hanged her - he already thought she was dead. It's also probably not depraved murder because it actually took a lot of thought to do what he did just to cover his trail. So what is it? Probably a wreckless manslaughter or criminally negligent homicide. One thing's for sure - he's not getting life without parole - it's only for Murder 1 which he's not even charged with.

stewart

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:41:34 -0500

you're right; maybe he was abused as a child - that explains everything he should go live with 60 left of center instead of going to jail - just don't look him in the eye

60 left of center

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:37:26 -0500

Not if I'm on the jury. We all know how these people are treated.

Nick

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:17:03 -0500

I'm no lawyer, but as far as I know you can plead whatever you feel like pleading, no matter what evidence to the contrary there is (including your own confession). Confessions get thrown out for being coerced or whatever all the frikin time ...at least in Law & Order.

edEx

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:14:15 -0500

I predict the same fate as the killer of Nicole duFresne. Life no Parole. So Sad.

Samantha T

Thu, 14 Dec 2006 10:14:09 -0500

"While we know it's possible, can any lawyers or legal buffs explain how Pillco can plead not guilty, even with a confession?" Sure - for all degrees of murder, manslaughter, etc. there are differing levels of intent. He's probably going to claim that he didn't have the requisite level of intent, at least for second-degree murder, which he's being charged with, for any number of reasons. That's going to require some fancy footwork, to say the least. This crime is terrifying to me. It seems like it all happened within a span of three minutes. Awful. Poor woman.