Jump to content

UT student murder trial (Haruka Weiser)


bschoolprof

Recommended Posts

SIAP.  Trial judge just tossed most of the DNA evidence. Circumstantial case still seems pretty strong though.  

Quote

State district Judge David Wahlberg has excluded most of the DNA evidence that prosecutors planned to present to a jury to link defendant Meechaiel Criner to the April 2016 attack of University of Texas student Haruka Weiser.

In announcing his decision Wednesday morning, Wahlberg said evidence shows the forensic analyst who worked with DNA found on Weiser’s right thigh used an improper technique. The analysis found that it’s 192,000 times more likely that the DNA sample belongs to Weiser and Criner than to Weiser and anyone else, according to testimony Tuesday.

Wahlberg also excluded a DNA sample taken from Weiser’s glasses.

The decision is a blow to the prosecution, which now must piece together a circumstantial case against Criner for the July 9 trial.

https://www.statesman.com/news/crime--law/judge-tosses-out-dna-evidence-death-student-haruka-weiser/nJskrIBzJwUlmflUzw3ZVO/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand murder DNA gets tossed.  I understand rape DNA gets tossed.  

Hard to see how you can toss both.  This has to be incredibly difficult for her family to sit through.  Even a verdict never brings closure, but these continuations have to be excruciating to sit through.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Well I wasn't there, so I think he didn't do it". These are the types of morons that are seated on these juries. Direct quote from a fellow juror on an assault case. So yes, it must be horribly stressful for her family when evidence is tossed.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Police made the link to Criner after the Austin Fire Department alerted them to a trash fire they were called to on Monday, April 4 at 2900 Medical Arts Street, which is just off-campus. When firefighters arrived, they found Criner who had a woman's bicycle in his possession as well as a small blue duffel bag that resembles the one that Haruka had. Among the items in the ashes Criner burned, was a Doc Martin shoe, notebook, and black jacket. Haruka's roommate said she was last seen wearing Doc Martin shoes, a black shirt and black pants.

Wish we had the DNA at trial.  Seems to me there is plenty of evidence remaining that points to Criner, no?  Not an attorney, don't know shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is somewhat hazardous from a spiritual and mental health perspective to rely on the criminal justice system for closure or solace or other comfort in the face of the loss of a loved one.

 

And I think this is even more true now that we have an accumulating body of evidence of regular police and prosecutorial misconduct leading to wrongful and suspicious convictions.

 

So, I hope that her family has found some comfort in something other than this trial and the conduct or outcome of same.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaggerHorns said:

Yeah, this guy seems like he has the same resources as OJ. Just replace the bronco with the bike and it’s nearly identical.

Looks like the public defender is putting the state through the wringer.  Good for them.

 

I should clarify, as with most counties in Texas, there is no public defender as in an office or organization of salaried attorneys whose job it is to defend indigents (as in the case of the Federal Public Defender).  There is a private, non-profit Capital Area Defender Service, which helps oversee and supervise private attorneys appointed to defend the indigent.  So the attorney in this case is a private criminal defense attorney.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaggerHorns said:

Yeah, this guy seems like he has the same resources as OJ. Just replace the bronco with the bike and it’s nearly identical.

To be fair, he has two of the top attorneys in town.

 

One of them walked a guy on a murder a couple of months back.

 

The other one pissed off a Shaggy poster (can't remember his name) when she defended the guy who stuck a gun in his pregnant wife's face, and the jury did not find him guilty of aggravated robbery.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, woohorn said:

Stupid q, I know: lab used incorrect testing method. Why can't they retest it?

My guess is it was partial or mixture "touch DNA" sample based upon the relatively high probability levels (192,000 times more likely vs 1 and billion you normally see), and thus there is a good chance whatever sample they had was consumed by the 1st test they did.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, scottsins said:

So, is the defense that he found her dead, stole her shit, then set her on fire?

I think he set her stuff on fire, not her, correct?

In any event, the old "I just found a dead body lying there" defense is probably not going to fly with a jury.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes DNA evidence gets tossed in a murder case, but usually it doesn’t. Sometimes DNA gets tossed in a rape case, but usually it doesn’t. So, to have both types of evidence tossed in a single case is improbable. They are two distinct types of samples, and you’d expect at least one of them to prove admissible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

So they broke protocol and used new testing software because the old software wouldn't have given them a match.  I'm no lawyer but that seems pretty reasonable basis to toss the DNA.  When stuff like this goes down are they just hoping the defense doesn't notice?

To a certain extent, the state is dependent on whatever the crime labs do.  That is, if the state crime lab has picked an analysis method or tool that hasn't received scientific acceptance or has come under fire, they're kind of at the mercy of the technology.

 

Also, a judge has two options, basically.  Exclude the testimony or evidence entirely because it is "junk," or let it in and subject the witness (there's always a witness "sponsoring" the evidence) to cross examination on the technology and to permit expert testimony from another witness as to how junky it is.  The junkier the science, the more likely it is to be excluded entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, SquishMitten said:

Sometimes DNA evidence gets tossed in a murder case, but usually it doesn’t. Sometimes DNA gets tossed in a rape case, but usually it doesn’t. So, to have both types of evidence tossed in a single case is improbable. They are two distinct types of samples, and you’d expect at least one of them to prove admissible.

What he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, woohorn said:

Why would the state crime lab ever pick an analysis method or tool that hasn't received scientific acceptance?

 

yeah I’m not a lawyer nor have I seen one episode of law and order.  but if a certain test is inadmissible in court the decision to even consider using it doesn’t seem to make any sense at all.  what the fuck is wrong with people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sometimes DNA evidence gets tossed in a murder case, but usually it doesn’t. Sometimes DNA gets tossed in a rape case, but usually it doesn’t. So, to have both types of evidence tossed in a single case is improbable. They are two distinct types of samples, and you’d expect at least one of them to prove admissible.


But the problem was the testing so the “types of evidence” are the same in this instance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would the state crime lab ever pick an analysis method or tool that hasn't received scientific acceptance?
 
To set this guy up? I hate to think that there is a murderous rapist still on the UT campus.
 
 


All forensic science is novel and potentially inadmissible at the outset. Someone has to be the canary in the coal mine.

In this instance, nothing was actually lost by using this method because the more established method didn’t help the state’s case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My recollection is they have him on video within a couple dozen yards of where her body was found near the time of death and also found him in possession of her backpack at the time of the arrest. If that’s accurate, absent a crazy twist of events, that’s the guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Hanrahan said:

My recollection is they have him on video within a couple dozen yards of where her body was found near the time of death and also found him in possession of her backpack at the time of the arrest. If that’s accurate, absent a crazy twist of events, that’s the guy.

Yes, I remember the police showing the clips in a press conference as the suspect they were looking for and offering a reward. He was caught later burning her papers, notebooks, and (IIRC) her laptop inside the backpack at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given his proximity to her before/after and the burning of the personal effects, wouldn't it have occurred to the defense to curry favor with the judge to ask him about what/who he might have seen that night?  If he didn't do it, but given his locale and timing, maybe he saw who did do it.  Now that the evidence is being dismissed, it's too late to ask him since that was almost two years ago.  If your guy didn't do it, what does it hurt to ask him about what he saw since everybody can put him near her that night.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wait a minute-  the non-approved DNA test matches his DNA to the samples found at the crime scene.  how do they know using the old process it wouldn't have matched?  did they test it that way?  if i'm the defense i'm submitting that as evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lobo said:

Given his proximity to her before/after and the burning of the personal effects, wouldn't it have occurred to the defense to curry favor with the judge to ask him about what/who he might have seen that night?  If he didn't do it, but given his locale and timing, maybe he saw who did do it.  Now that the evidence is being dismissed, it's too late to ask him since that was almost two years ago.  If your guy didn't do it, what does it hurt to ask him about what he saw since everybody can put him near her that night.  

Don’t think it’s a good defense strategy to put your client near the scene if you don’t have to. They may argue that it’s impossible to tell if it’s really him there from the video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the defense needs is reasonable doubt.  The jury is probably going to be shielded from the fact that the DNA stuff even happened and probably suspicious why the prosecutors aren't talking about DNA at all.

Defense just has to say "yeah he was there, and yeah he had her stuff afterward, but maybe he just found a dead body that was already there and took her stuff because that's what crazy homeless people do"

What was the medical cause of death?  Was she strangled?  

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

All the defense needs is reasonable doubt.  The jury is probably going to be shielded from the fact that the DNA stuff even happened and probably suspicious why the prosecutors aren't talking about DNA at all.

Defense just has to say "yeah he was there, and yeah he had her stuff afterward, but maybe he just found a dead body that was already there and took her stuff because that's what crazy homeless people do"

 

 

Is that "reasonable" doubt to you?  "Some other dude strangled and assaulted her right before I got there and took her shit."   When I eventually murder a left lane cruiser, I hope you're on my jury.  

Edited by bschoolprof
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

Is that "reasonable" doubt to you?  "Some other dude strangled and assaulted her right before I got there and took her shit.   When I eventually murder a left lane cruiser, I hope you're on my jury.  

If you didn't know about the DNA or the semen, the only thing linking him to the crime scene was that he was found with some of her belongings.  Possession may be 9/10 of the law, but that 1/10 leaves 10% doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that "reasonable" doubt to you?  "Some other dude strangled and assaulted her right before I got there and took her shit."   When I eventually murder a left lane cruiser, I hope you're on my jury.  


Depending on the other evidence and particularly what the various surveillance videos show about where she was, where he was, and what other people were in the area, yes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A suspect matching his physical description is seen on video on a woman's bike riding around the area, then following her to the trail.  He then emerges with a duffel bag (hers).  Criner is later found with the same bike and duffel bag and her possessions.  So it's not just "I happened to stumble across a dead body."  It's "I was in the area following this chick and then someone else came and murdered her and then I immediately stole her stuff. " 

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/arrest-made-killing-university-texas-student-haruka-weiser-n552991

http://www.kxan.com/news/crime/suspect-in-ut-homicide-arrested/1049660185

Edited by bschoolprof
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

A suspect matching his physical description is seen on video on a woman's bike riding around the area, then following her to the trail.  He then emerges with a duffel bag (hers).  Criner is later found with the same bike and duffel bag and her possessions.  So it's not just "I happened to stumble across a dead body."  It's "I was in the area following this chick and then someone else came and murdered her and then I immediately stole her stuff. " 

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/arrest-made-killing-university-texas-student-haruka-weiser-n552991

http://www.kxan.com/news/crime/suspect-in-ut-homicide-arrested/1049660185

Comes across more as a keen entrepreneur, not a killer. [/defense argument]

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, chainsaw said:

I only saw that he was riding around the area.  Is there video of him actively following her?

From the links:

On the night Weiser disappeared after leaving the drama building, a suspect was seen walking around the area at about 10 p.m. and again after 11 p.m. while steering around a red or pink women's bike, police said Thursday. Authorities described him as a 6-foot-tall black male.

 

The man who police believe was Criner is seen on surveillance video following Weiser after she passed him, and pulling a "shiny rigid object" from the back of his pants, according to an arrest warrant affidavit. When the suspect returns into view he is carrying a duffel bag and walking with a limp and an apparent injury to his leg, police said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

From the links:

On the night Weiser disappeared after leaving the drama building, a suspect was seen walking around the area at about 10 p.m. and again after 11 p.m. while steering around a red or pink women's bike, police said Thursday. Authorities described him as a 6-foot-tall black male.

 

The man who police believe was Criner is seen on surveillance video following Weiser after she passed him, and pulling a "shiny rigid object" from the back of his pants, according to an arrest warrant affidavit. When the suspect returns into view he is carrying a duffel bag and walking with a limp and an apparent injury to his leg, police said.

that would be more evidence than him just being in the area and ending up with her stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still pretty circumstantial.  Doesn't rule out a drifter having laid in wait along waller creek and having killed her.  If the DNA of his semen was available, I think it would rule out the drifter.  But without the DNA, the jury will have to guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...