Beware Casey Scamthony

by Levi Page

For the last three years, the country has been transfixed watching the weird antics and dysfunction of the family of murdered Orlando toddler Caylee Anthony. Now each family member seems to be in a battle over who deserves the most sympathy from the court of public opinion, and the jury deciding whether or not Casey Anthony, Caylee's mother, is responsible for her death.

This has caused the Anthony family to split apart, as Casey Anthony throws them under the bus to save her own skin. Formerly her biggest, most vocal, and only supporters, now have targets on their heads, and the defense is aiming right at them, characterizing her family as liars, sexually abusive, intimidating, and the poster family for dysfunction.

The nation watched in amazement as Casey Anthony's lead defense attorney Jose Baez gave his mesmerizing opening statement laying out how Caylee's death wasn't an act of foul play, but rather a tragic accidental drowning in a swimming pool. Baez wanted the jury to believe that Casey Anthony was intimidated by her sexually abusive, ex cop father, to not report the drowning, but to allow him to cover up the death, and dispose of Caylee's dead body. Baez even went so far as to allege that George Anthony was trying to frame Casey Anthony for murders. Jose Baez told the jury that Cindy Anthony was holding around guilt for leaving the ladder to the pool up, where Caylee could get into the pool by herself. Additionally, Baez painted a picture of a young Casey Anthony being forced to go to school as if nothing was wrong, after her father forced her to perform oral sex on him as a child.

It seems as if nobody is safe from being targeted by Casey and her defense team. Even the meter reader who discovered the body of Caylee has been accused by Casey's defense team as being a "morally bankrupt" individual with a thirst for money. The defense team claims Roy Kronk found Caylee's remains where George Anthony dumped them, and then put the remains in the wooded area 15 houses from the Anthony family home.

While the defense team wants us to believe Casey is a victim of her family, it is the other way around. Casey has victimized her family and friends. For example Casey Anthony stole $45,000 from her parents, causing them to almost loose their home. Casey even stole checks from her elderly grandmother, Shirley Plesea. Casey even took advantage of her so called best friend Amy Huizenga, stealing her check book, and then in January of last year pleading guilty to check fraud charges.

I wouldn't want to be connected in any way to Casey Anthony, as it is obvious that she is a self centered narcissistic brat that will scam people, use people, and throw anyone to the wolves in order to save herself, whether her allegations are true or not. Even to people she should love.

I'm not the biggest fan of the Anthony family, but I don't see a shred of evidence that George Anthony disposed of the body, or that he put the duct tape and heart shaped sticker over Caylee's mouth and nose. To the contrary, all the evidence points to Casey Anthony. Is it really reasonable that a male ex cop like George Anthony would put a pink heart shaped sticker over duct tape? That screams Casey Anthony and really fits into her immature personality.

Casey Anthony is a scam artist, constantly lying, constantly using other people, throwing them under the bus, and this current defense strategy is nothing unusual for her. Anyone want to bet that when this trial is over, Casey Anthony will throw her attorney Jose Baez under the bus and accuse him of some sort of misconduct? Anyone that is associated with her in anyway ends up getting stung.

It really shows that nobody is safe when it comes to Casey Anthony... or shall we call her Casey "Scamthony?"

Tweet

Levi Page Guest Posts for WCI Tomorrow

by Levi Page

He’s been a longtime friend of the WCI contributors, and tomorrow, BlogTalk Radio show host and blogger, Levi Page, will guest post here, at Women in Crime Ink. 

Levi started his career as the relatively obscure BlogTalk Radio show host of War on Crime before he catapulted to host of the highly popular Levi Page Show on BlogTalkRadio.com, where Levi and a panel of experts from diverse perspectives give their take on the crime stories that hit home.

Levi has been covering some of the most high profile crime stories since starting his BlogTalk Radio show in 2008, including the Casey Anthony murder case, the Haleigh Cummings investigation, the Kyron Horman investigation, Drew Peterson, Natalee Holloway, and most recently the Holly Bobo case.

Levi's scored exclusive interviews with the people at the center of the most talked about crime stories, including a rare interview with Misty Croslin, the last person to see missing Florida child Haleigh Cummings alive. Levi's passion for justice has earned him a loyal following. In addition to hosting his own show, he has made numerous appearances on HLN’s Issues with Jane Velez-Mitchell, Prime News with Vinnie Politan, and Nancy Grace to discuss high profile investigations and court cases.

You can listen to The Levi Page Show weeknights at 9pm EST/6pm PST at www.blogtalkradio.com/levipage

Tweet

There is only One Word for Casey Anthony: Psychopath

by Pat Brown

Give up attempting to understand Casey Anthony or what makes her tick; she is a psychopath and that makes her the kind of person you shouldn't waste time trying to figure out. The argument over whether psychopaths are born or made – nature versus nurture – will continue decade after decade, century after century. For all of our scientific progress, why a person becomes evil, chooses to murder simply for the fun or convenience of it, is something likely to remain a mystery forever. She is a snake, a snake who needs to be caged or exterminated if found guilty of murder, regardless of how she turned into a serpent.

Let's take a look at the nurture aspect of Casey. Many think that her home was severely dysfunctional. I tend to agree that there was a bit of a twisted dynamic going on there, a battle of wills and a fight for power and control between Cindy and Casey; the two men, George and Lee basically just got out of the of the line of fire. Cindy appears to have a pretty high level of narcissism herself, which is not unusual to find in one parent of a psychopathic individual. An absent or distant father figure, either physically or emotionally, also is often in the mix.

Usually, if there is a set of parents in the home, we tend to find one parent, usually the male, who is cold, stern or uncommunicative with the child and the other parent, usually the female, who then overcompensates by giving far too much and coddling the child as she is growing up. Sometimes, that female is actually narcissistic, and what looks like love can be more about being the winner within the couple, getting more of the attention from the child, and controlling what happens. We sometimes see this narcissism lead to Munchausen syndrome by proxy, a personality disorder in which the caretaker of the child uses the child as a pawn to gain massive attention, sometimes even causing the child to become ill or die just to get a jolt of importance.

Then again, sometimes we don't see too much amiss with the parents at all, and, yet, they are still stuck with a psychopathic kid who they have no idea what to do with.

We also see an increase in psychopathy when there is some kind of attachment disorder occurring at a very young age; children who have been abandoned to orphanages or tossed around the foster care system so often that they have trouble connecting with human beings. This can lead as well to serious personality disorders.

Then, we mix in the individual personality and the cultural issues, financial issues, etc., stir, and whammo, a psychopath emerges, usually by the age of eight, if not by the even earlier age of five, which I have observed in children not even in school and find quite disconcerting. What then? Well, not much, because at this point treatment usually fails and the only thing that has an effect of sorts is behavior modification.

Essentially, once you are dealing with a psychopath, the only way to improve their choices is to show them a way to get what they want in a way that will be less trouble. You can't impress upon them that doing right is a good thing or making others happy is worth it, but you can help them find a way to get what they want in a less destructive way. Dr. Stanton Samenow who spent years at St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington, DC, recognized how the criminal mind was rigidly set, could not be changed, and, therefore, he set out to find ways to deal with what simply was a reality.

So, I don't know how Casey Anthony got to be a psychopath, but there she is-lying, manipulating, ignoring how others feel, seeking constant attention, and wanting to have her way all the time. She exhibits the hallmarks of psychopathy; total narcissism and complete lack of empathy for anyone else, including her own daughter. When she does act like she cares, she is doing just that: acting. This is a recognizable trait of a psychopath that Casey exhibits because one can see how quickly she can change mood or expression.

I remember walking in on a "friend" I later realized had a serious personality disorder. She was sobbing on the phone to her boyfriend, telling him how horrible she was feeling, how upset she was. When she saw me, she put the phone down in her lap, flashed me a big smile and mouthed "I'll be with you in a sec!" and then went back to sobbing on the phone. When she hung up, she turned to me just as cheerful as ever, lit a cigarette, and started chatting about our evening plans. The friendship didn't last long after that. I didn't trust much genuine was going to come from this particular woman.

Sound like Casey? You bet. And you can see those same behaviors in murderers like Darlie Routier, Scott Peterson, Karla Homolka, and just about any serial killer you can think of.

If the jury takes a look at Robert Hare's list of psychopathic traits, I am sure they can check just about every one of them off for Casey.

• Glibness/superficial charm
• Grandiose sense of self-worth
• Pathological lying
• Cunning/manipulative
• Lack of remorse or guilt
• Shallow affect (genuine emotion is short-lived and egocentric)
• Callous/lack of empathy
• Failure to accept responsibility for own actions
• Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
• Parasitic lifestyle
• Poor behavioral controls
• Lack of realistic long-term goals
• Impulsiveness
• Irresponsibility
• Juvenile delinquency
• Early behavior problems

Why is it important to know what Casey Anthony is? Because knowing she is a psychopath means she is perfectly capable of murder. The jury needs to recognize this, add this information to the body of physical and circumstantial evidence the prosecution has presented, and convict the snake.

Not all psychopaths are murderers, but most murderers are psychopaths. I believe Casey Anthony is both and needs to be removed from society permanently so she can't do any more harm. And, Caylee, innocent little Caylee, deserves justice.

Tweet

George and Cindy Anthony’s Body Language Shows They Are In Sync

by Dr. Lillian Glass

George and Cindy Anthony have been living a nightmare over the past three years. They have tried to defend their daughter Casey at all costs. The two of them have obstructed justice and made bizarre statements and have done bizarre things that have left people’s mouths agape. Cindy insisted their granddaughter Caylee was still alive, even though Caylee’s bones and remains were found and a memorial service was performed.

Cindy tried to throw everyone possible under the bus, from Casey’s ex-fiance Jesse Grund to Casey’s friend Amy Huizinga. Cindy even gave law enforcement the wrong hairbrush. Instead of Caylee’s brush, Cindy gave them Casey's. Cindy even made a Freudian slip and discussed “the woods" when woods were not even a consideration at the time Caylee went missing.

George insisted that he was loyal to Casey no matter what and got furious and fought with protesters who insinuated Caylee was dead and that Casey killed her. As we saw in an early interview, George was into blaming everyone but the person who needed to be blamed–Casey. George even allegedly had an affair with River Cruz (according to her), and spent time with Cruz instead of searching for Caylee.

George and Cindy were known to have their marital difficulties before Casey left the house with Caylee in tow. Apparently much of their tension was over their financial difficulties with George allegedly having lost a considerable amount of money in an online scam. He had trouble finding adequate work, and Cindy appeared to be the breadwinner. Casey kept running up their credit cards and taking money from them. No doubt, this caused them a great deal of anxiety and tension in their relationship.

The entire ordeal put a great strain on their relationship. In examining screen shots of their body language over the past three years, there have been times where they have turned their backs on one another even, refusing to look at each another. At times, they have been seen acting distant and even hostile toward one another.

But all that has changed. Hearing Jose Baez’s testimony during his opening statement that George sexually molested Casey appears to have brought them closer together.

Perhaps the $2 million payout for the Lifetime movie helped ease the tensions as well. At least now they won’t have financial worries. Their home will no longer be in foreclosure and they can afford to move away to a more luxurious place in a gated community to keep paparazzi at bay. In addition, there will most likely be no Casey to run up any credit card bills since the state will pay for her room, board and clothing as well as her medical bills as she sits in prison for life or sits on death row in Lowell Penitentiary waiting for appeals and for her final day.

No doubt, with a book deal for George and another for Cindy, even more millions of dollars will flow into the Anthony household. They trademarked the name Caylee. In doing that they will make more money suing anyone who tries to use it commercially. They may even come out with their own Caylee products, which would add more millions to their coffers. So their financial tensions will be gone forever. They lost a sweet granddaughter and troubled daughter, but gained millions of dollars.

The two of them have been forced out of denial and into the reality of grieving for Caylee and now grieving for Casey. Their new-found wealth has no doubt helped to cement their bond. Even though George has been perceived as weak and wimpy, he showed strength and fortitude as he had to physically and emotionally bolster up Cindy after she testified and sobbed on the stand. While she has always seemed like George's pillar of strength, the tables have now turned.

The once-screaming and hostile Cindy has been humbled, and George has been there to pick up her emotional pieces. They are now in sync with one another as you can see from the above photo. They now walk hand in hand. Unlike before, they look directly at one another. While they may have lost a daughter and a granddaughter, it appears they have gained a renewed sense of love, respect, and affection toward one another.

Tweet

Laws of Nature

by Lisa R. Cohen

Sometimes I think that males are taught the Ten Commandments in a separate room from us girls. Like maybe the day we're shuffled off to the auditorium in the fifth grade to see "that" film, and learn about the joys of being a woman. (Do they still do that?) In another room, the boys are being handed the tablet, each commandment starred almost imperceptibly. At the bottom of the engraved granite, an asterisk explains the tiny caveat: "*...except if it can get you laid."

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness*

Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery*

Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor's Wife*

You get the picture.

I intended to write this column about Johnny Reid Edwards and his inability to follow all three of the above laws of God. He failed so miserably that federal prosecutors charged him Friday with violating the laws of man - six counts of them. But before I could weigh in on this seemingly fresh and fertile ground of male doggery -- it was superseded by even fresher meat.

Yesterday, after days of kerfuffling about inappropriate online messages, New York Representative Anthony Weiner tearfully admitted that yes, he did send the – um – package in question. And that that was the least of his inappropriate conduct. More risque photos, salacious texts, and online canoodling with sexy young constituents.

But unless there is much more to come, really, this is not politics' finest hour; it's also not its worst. Most (but not all) of Weiner's randy texts and tweets and emails took place before his recent marriage. To quote another politician, in Weiner's case he really did not "have sex with (those) women."

Weiner's biggest misdemeanors, in my humble opinion, were poor impulse control, arrogance, and the more heinous crime of hijacking the public conversation.

Now, Congressional leader Nancy Pelosi has announced she will call for an investigation into whether Weiner misused government resources. That will waste more government resources. We'll have as many news cycles as possible to wring out every last detail of these embarrassing revelations, yet more time sucking and agenda fogging.

The only Democrat who might be thrilled with all this Johnny Reid Edwards.

Last Friday, federal prosecutors handed down the indictment against Edwards. The onetime presidential hopeful was charged with four counts of illegal campaign contributions, one count of false statements, and one count of conspiracy. Edwards immediately pleaded not guilty, acknowledging he'd done wrong, but claiming he hadn't broken any laws.

Over the next few days, pundits and legal experts alike agreed it was a highly unusual case. It's unclear whether the government will be able to convince a jury that almost a million dollars funneled to pay the expenses of Edwards' paramour Rielle Hunter could be considered campaign funds. If so, it should have been reported as campaign funds, (which would have been problematic, handily topping the $2,300.00 legally allowed individual limits). If not, the money was just a friendly gift, maybe designed to keep the damaging details from Edwards' sick wife.

That's certainly the position Edwards' lawyer takes.

"No one has ever been charged, either civilly or criminally, with the claims that have been brought against Sen. Edwards today. This is an unprecedented prosecution," said attorney Gregory Craig. "No one would have known, or should have known, or could have been expected to know, that these payments would be treated or should be considered as campaign contributions. And there was no way Sen. Edwards knew that fact either."

Here's the tricky part. It's a no brainer that John Edwards, through his flunkies, took fistfuls of cash from rich folks - specifically 100 year old heiress Bunny Mellon and Texas lawyer Fred Baron, and used the money to conceal Edwards' affair, and its resulting child. At issue is whether that money qualifies as campaign funds.

It comes down to intent. Prosecutors will argue that of course the money was politically motivated, thus qualifies as campaign donations. Bunny Mellon started passing the dough to Edwards' aide Andrew Young (the man tasked with pretending he was Rielle Hunter's baby-daddy – shouldn't there be a law against that?) after Edwards was excoriated in the press for his $400.00 haircuts. Mellon sent her money with a note, now touted as a smoking gun for the prosecution, one that provides evidence Mellon thought she was supporting the campaign.

"From now on, all haircuts, etc..., that are necessary and important for his campaign – please send the bills to me," wrote Mellon. "... It is a way to help our friend without government restrictions."

If $400 haircuts could negatively impact a presidential shot, think of what a torrid affair under the nose of one's cancer ridden wife, and an out-of-wedlock baby, would do to it?

"A centerpiece of Edwards' candidacy was his public image as a devoted family man," Friday's indictment read. "Edwards knew that public revelation of the affair and the pregnancy would destroy his candidacy."

So Listerine heiress Mellon eventually spent upwards of $725,000 to keep Hunter quietly tucked away. That's a lot of mouthwash. In fact, some of it was being passed off as home furnishings, funneled through Mellon's decorator, pricey antiques – chairs, a "Charleston" table. Meanwhile the checks were really going to fund private jets for Hunter, hotels and baby expenses.

Edwards faces up to five years in prison. So even if yet more crazy, self-imploding politicians eclipse him in the weeks and months to come, he's not off the hook.

And there will undoubtedly be more. As sure as the asterisk lurks at the bottom of the male ten commandments, male politicians will implode. That seems to be a law of nature. You can bet, though, that the Democrats are hoping for another John Ensign (R-Nev) the next time around.

Tweet

A Chemical Battle Cry

by Deborah Blum

Last fall, the respected magazine, Scientific American, posted an intriguing (or alarming, depending on one’s point of view) infographic titled “The Great Chemical Unknown.”

It noted that an estimated 50,000 chemical compounds are used by American industries and their customers and that about 300 have gone through rigorous safety testing and only five – a short list of notorious environmental contaminants such as PCBs and dioxins - have been officially banned by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

In fact, this represents a conservative estimate of the situation. A story in TIME magazine, also last year, put the numbers at 80,000 compounds circulating in the U.S. marketplace of which only 200 have been tested. In other words, whatever the exact total, the phrase “chemical unknown” applies perfectly here.

Why is it so difficult to get accurate informal on chemical exposure here in the United States? As it turns out, the country relies on a thirty-five year old law, the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, for oversight of potentially hazardous compounds. And this law is – let’s just say – timid in its approach to regulation. In point, it doesn’t actually require that chemicals be registered or proven safe before they are put to use. There is provision to ban a compound but it must be first be shown as an extremely bad actor. For instance PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) ended up on the short list only after it was discovered that they were poisonous, probable human carcinogens, and extremely durable – capable of remaining in the environment (or the human body) for decades. By that time, of course, they had contaminated communities across the country.

Of course, even being a known bad actor hasn’t guaranteed protective measures under the old law. “How weighted is the TSCA toward industry?” the Time piece asks. “The law didn’t even give the EPA enough power to ban asbestos, a known carcinogen that still contributes to the deaths of more than 10,000 Americans a year.” It’s worth noting that, by contrast, the European Union banned production and use of asbestos in 1999.

Why, you may ask, is the subject of our so-called regulation of toxic chemicals getting so much attention now? Last year, a cadre of federal legislators moved to in replace the 1976 law, proposing the House Toxic Chemicals Safety Act of 2010 and the Senate Safe Chemicals Act of 2010. Both of these would require manufacturers meet new and tougher safety standards, not only for new compounds but for those already on the market.

Of course, neither of these have so far inched their way into actual law. Why not, you wonder?

You might postulate – and many do - that the well-heeled chemical industry is doing its influential best to fend off such restrictions. The Scientific American article raises the possibility that under stricter regulation – something more comparable to Europe and Canada oversight – the number of compounds requiring stricter controls would rise to between 5,000 and 15,000 rather than, um, geez, five.

But U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who introduced the Senate bill, says the delay is mostly a result of fine tuning of the legislation, which actually has gained support from chemical manufacturers. Last month, new versions of the legislation were reintroduced in both houses. Among the updates were guidelines directing the EPA to develop a risk priority list, rather than attempting to deal with tens of thousands of untested compounds in, say, alphabetical order. That change was among those suggested by the American Chemistry Council (the national association of chemical manufacturers) which has publicly endorsed an updated law.

Since the new bills were introduced in mid-April, advocates have been working to gain support from the public – or even just to gain notice. Nurses, pediatricians, health advocacy groups, environmental groups are among others who have all urged passage. A piece this week in The New York Times bisphenol A), directly urged support “We will have to make as much noise as newborns to get Congress to pay attention to Senator Lautenberg’s proposal and, more broadly, to chemical regulation.” focused on the suspected evils of plastics (notably the suspected endrocrine disruptor,

The cost of our inadequate system of chemical regulation – not to mention the way we’ve skimped on honest investigation – has brought us to a point that the word “chemical” itself has become something to be feared. I want to note here that the old TSCA isn’t the only law allowing the government to regulate risky compounds. The EPA pursues pesticides, for instance, under a different set of rules. The FDA gains its authority over pharmaceutical compounds under yet another.

But the same principle applies to all. It’s ridiculous to argue that a laissez-faire approach in any of these cases has – or will – brought us safety or the perception of being protected. As a consequence, industrial chemicals have developed a reputation akin to horror movie monsters, to those mysterious things that go bump in the night. Some of these materials undoubtedly deserve those fears; others are unfairly tarnished by the current situation. We’re afraid of what we cannot see in the dark, what we don’t understand, and our government, I’m afraid, has been complicit in allowing chemical fears to spring out of shadows.

The new legislation won’t undo years of mistrust. Nor, reasonably, will it give us instant clarity on tens of thousands of chemical compounds. But it’s a lot more honest than the old law and it will, I hope, allow us to build a more honest assessment of our chemical risks. We’ve done enough bumping around in the dark on this one. And, if as the Times piece suggests, that that passage of these laws requires that we make the noise of newborns, then consider this blog post in the nature of a baby-like howl.

Tweet

'Forget Me Not' Cold Case, Kanika Powell Murder Mystery

by Michelle Sigona

Kanika Powell's case is still a Prince George's County, Maryland, mystery.

Kanika Powell graduated from Largo High School in 1998 and enlisted in the Army two years later. She proudly served in Korea and, after her tour, returned to her home in Prince George’s County. Trying to figure out the next steps in her life, Kanika decided to take on a job as a security contractor at Hopkins laboratory. She was very private about the work she was doing for the laboratory and would sometimes travel for days at a time to handle work projects before returning home. Judy Powell, Kanika's mom, said she always knew where her daughter was going, but her daughter was not allowed to discuss what she was doing when she was on location.

Kanika lived alone in her garden-style apartment in Laurel, Maryland. On Saturday, August 22, 2008, she heard a knock at her door. Judy says Kanika told her she peeked through the hole and a man was holding up a badge claiming he was an FBI agent. Kanika wouldn’t open the door without seeing ID, and the mystery man left. She called 9-1-1 and police came to her apartment, but nothing was found. Judy says Kanika was planning to install a security system thereafter. The incident jarred her so much that she wrote this e-mail to share with her friends and family:

“I just wanted to share with you the scariest thing that happened to me this weekend. Saturday evening around seven pm a man was knocking at my door (as all of you may know I live alone). I asked who it was and he didn't answer, so once I got close to the door and looked out of the peephole I saw a male figure that was not familiar to me at all. I asked who he was and all he stated was that he was from the FBI and that he was looking for Kanika Powell.

"It freaked me out completely because this man knew my name. He held a shield up but no picture ID and he never gave his name. He told me he was looking for me in regards to an investigation. I told him that I had no idea as to what he was talking about and that he would need to show me documentation as well as a warrant of some sort. So he left and I looked out my bedroom window and saw him walking. I also heard a voice tell him to walk in the opposite direction. The whole situation was scary and seemed so false. So because of this incident not only did I get no sleep for the rest of the weekend but I am now trying to get an alarm system installed in my apartment. I had one in my old apartment, but I just hadn't had it transferred over to my new one. As far as everything that happened with the guy. I did call the FBI and they told me that it was more than likely bogus because they never come to your door by themselves and they always leave a card of some sort so that you can contact them. I called the local police as well to give them a description just in case someone is out there trying to rape or harm single woman... pass this on ladies. This is not a fake forward this happened to me, Kanika... Who knows who these guys are and what they are doing and in what areas other than mine.” 

A mere five days later, on August 27, 2008, Kanika had another knock at her door. It wasn’t an FBI agent this time, but someone claiming they had a package for her. Again, Kanika wouldn’t open the door, and a package was never left. The very next morning,  there was another knock at the door, the same routine, Kanika would not answer. Judy says the police were called again and an officer came out to speak with her, but again nothing was found.

After the police left, Kanika decided to leave to run errands. When she came back, the unknown person who had claimed to have the package was now waiting in the hallway. The suspect opened fire, shooting Kanika on the first landing of her apartment. She was transported to the hospital, but sadly Judy says her daughter never regained consciousness and died the next day.

Kanika would have turned 30 on January 31, 2010. She wasn’t married and didn’t have children, but her mother Judy says, “What makes her so remarkable was that she was a donor. I signed the papers and two people in the metropolitan area were able to receive her kidneys. We also donated some tissue and bone and her liver was donated to a research lab.” Let’s get justice for Judy and Kanika Powell’s family.

Police are asking anyone with information to call the county's Crime Solvers hotline at 866-411-TIPS (8477). Crimesolvers is offering a $25,000 reward in this case.

Tweet

Alcohol and Crime

by Dr. Gina Simmons

John took his girlfriend Elena to a nightclub with strong drinks and loud music. A few drinks later, John saw a drunk man grab Elena. The drunk tried to kiss Elena and began to grope her. John shoved the man and a fight ensued. Two bouncers pulled the men apart. John and Elena were ushered out the front door and the other man was taken out the back. John, Elena and the drunk man met in the parking lot. The fight continued, only this time the drunk had a knife. John was stabbed seven times before the police arrived. John survived, and two years later he still shakes as he talks about the night he almost died.

In 2008, about 19 percent of violent crimes were perpetrated by someone under the influence of alcohol. Between 1997 and 2008, violent crime decreased. The percentage of victims who perceived their offenders as under the influence of alcohol also declined from 25 percent in 1997 to 19 percent in 2008. About four in 10 fatal car accidents involve alcohol, and four in 10 offenders self-report that they were under the influence when they committed crimes.

Janey arrived at a counseling session in tears: "I love my husband, but when he drinks he turns into a monster." Janey said that she and her husband Mike were flown overseas by her employer for a business trip. After dinner and a few drinks, Janey wanted to stay and talk with her co-workers about their presentation the next morning. Mike, jealous and drunk, flew into a rage. He stomped up to their room and proceeded to destroy everything in the room, causing $5,000 worth of damage and their eviction from the luxury hotel. Janey, mortified and frightened, nearly lost her job.

In three out of four incidents of spousal victimization, alcohol played a role. Two-thirds of those who suffered violence by an intimate reported that alcohol came along for the ride. An estimated eight in 10 people, age 12 or older, report using alcohol sometime in their lives, and about half say they use alcohol regularly. On a positive note, alcohol consumption in the U.S. declined 10 percent since 1990. This corresponds with a decline in violent crime.

After their high school graduation, Susan, her boyfriend Taylor, her best friend Micah and her boyfriend Jacob, partied with friends. Honor students headed for good colleges, they wanted to celebrate together one last time. The foursome decided to make a run to a local convenience store a mile away, to buy more refreshments. Jacob only had a couple of beers that night, so he drove. They cranked up the volume on the stereo and sped down the winding road. He cut a corner too wide and smashed into a tree. Jacob, Taylor and Micah died at the scene. Susan, the only survivor, suffered brain damage.

On a more positive note, only 6 percent of teens said they drove under the influence on Prom night. As we approach graduation time parents worry whether someone they love might become a statistic. Fortunately, 89% of schools have programs in place to curtail alcohol consumption and provide safety protections. The presence of security guards, organized transportation, breathalyser tests and other programs continue to save lives. Peak times for teen drinking and driving are summer, 4th of July and New Years Eve. Parents can plan parties at home, arrange for fun activities that do not involve alcohol, and educate their kids. Encourage them to volunteer for Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD). This organization teaches healthy coping skills and provides resources for parents and educators.

Groups like SADD and MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) continue their work to change our cultural obsession with alcohol. Slogans like, "Friends don't let friends drive drunk," and programs promoting designated drivers appear effective in reducing alcohol-related tragedies. Many families come to my psychotherapy office with problems caused or fueled by alcohol. DUI's, domestic violence, child abuse, all lubricated by an unhealthy dose of booze. Winos of a feather get sauced together. These folks form networks that support drunkenness as an acceptable and necessary way to have fun. They get irritated when I try to influence them to drink less. "Alcohol is not a problem for me. I can stop any time. I've even gone a month at a time without it. I don't need it. I'm not an alcoholic." Their life is a disastrous mess, but quit drinking? Never!

Many drinkers are ignorant about healthy, moderate drinking. (Denial prevents them from reading the insert that comes with their car registration). According to research, moderate drinking means no more than one drink per day for women and no more than two drinks per day for men. A drink is defined as a 12 ounce beer, a 5 ounce glass of wine, or a 1.5 ounce shot of liquor. Some people save all their drinking for the weekend. That's called binge drinking. It's healthier to drink a little everyday than to save it up and have seven on Friday night.

As we approach prom season and summer party madness, think about how you might enjoy life without the presence of alcohol or drugs. Swimming, sports, music, dance, hiking, camping, fishing, picnics, can brighten our lives without ethanol. (To sound like a drunk, say ethanol five times really fast). We are the creators of our culture. What we do influences others. Think about that the next time you find yourself laughing in drunken hilarity in front of children.

photo courtesy of FlySi

Tweet

Sometimes It’s the Little Things: The Titterton Case

by Andrea Campbell

The Titterton case is interesting for several reasons. One, it took place in 1936 New York and demonstrates the abilities of forensic science and the tenacity of law enforcement at that time; and although the mystery had its twists and turns, it was a little thing that paid off.

The Victim

This case is about a fairly wealthy woman named Nancy Titterton. Ms. Titteron, 33 at the time, was an author of great promise. Her husband, Lewis Titterton, was an executive at the National Broadcasting Company and they lived at Beekman Place, a neighborhood comprised of New York artists and intellectuals. A devoted couple, they were married for seven years and part of a small circle of friends who were also interested in the arts—but Nancy had a propensity for shyness, so they were circumspect about socializing.

The Crime Scene

When police found Nancy Titterton, she was lying face down in an empty bath, naked except for a pair of silk stockings and her pajama top was knotted around her throat. There had been a sexual attack and ripped underclothes littered the floor. Two furniture men—Theodore Kruger and Johnny Fiorenza—who were delivering a renovated love seat, found the front door of the apartment open at four o’clock on Good Friday afternoon.

It was determined she had opened the door to her killer and let him into the apartment, an important clue. This baffling, fairly high-profile case would show the muster of police on follow-thru and demonstrate a pretty impressive arsenal of scientific and forensic aids. You have to remember that this was predicated by the famous Edmond Locard, a great criminologist who is known for an important forensic principle: ‘Every contact leaves a trace,’ meaning, the criminal leaves something of himself at the crime scene and also takes something away with him. The investigators were using silver nitrate to raise fingerprints on fabric, studying fibers under a microscope, and conducting blood groupings from seminal fluid in this era.

Assistant Chief Inspector John A. Lyons surveyed the crime scene and was hopeful of finding evidence. And one thing came to light immediately. When they lifted Nancy Titterton’s body from the tub, a 13-inch cord that had been cut with a sharp knife was discovered. The victim also had abrasions on her wrists indicating that her hands were bound before she was raped. The perpetrator, thinking he was smart, had cut her hands free when she lay face downward in the bath, and took the cord with him. In his haste however, he overlooked a short piece that had slipped under the body. Lyons set his men to checking every manufacturer in the immediate New York area for the source.

Other Potential Clues

There was mud on the carpet mixed with lint, but it was thought to have been brought into the apartment by the two delivery men. A small dash of green paint appeared on the bedding but the building was in the process of being painted, and a check of the painters lead nowhere—they were all cleared. A audio clue came from the maid downstairs who claimed she heard a woman’s voice call: ‘Dudley, oh Dudley!’ The building janitor was named Dudley Mings and although police could not verify an alibi, his apartment was searched and he was revealed to be a man of good character.

The Scenario

The cord search was labored but they did build a kind of scenario: The killer entered 22 Beekman Place through the front door, either by ringing the bell or manipulating a defective lock. They believed he was known to the victim. He clamped a hand over her mouth and jammed it with a piece of cloth. He tied her hands with the rope he brought with him, and carried her to the bedroom where he removed her blouse and skirt, threw her down on the bed and tore off her brassiere and panties. Then the attack. After the rape, he knotted a pajama jacket around her throat (and a red blouse), took her into the bathroom, cut the cord from her wrists and turned on the shower. He hurried out, leaving the door open behind him.

This was a planned crime as he had brought materials with him. He wiped his fingerprints off the knife used to cut things, and the police thought he must have blocked her breathing with fabric and used the shower to revive her. They suspected he was a spurned lover or someone who had an emotional interest, but queries with Nancy’s friends indicated she was not the type to engage in an affair. 

The Break

The break in the case came from the crime laboratory. The toxicologist, Dr. Alexander O. Gettler, found a piece of white hair on the bedclothes. It was less than a half inch long, stiffer than human hair, and when viewed under a microscope revealed it was horsehair, the type used to stuff furniture. In fact, it matched the love seat, delivered on the day of the murder. Lyons liked the furniture men for an interview at the very least. Both claimed to have not entered the bedroom. And since they had been together in the apartment until the police arrived, police surmised that one of them must have come to the apartment earlier in the day. It was found that Kruger had been in his upholstery shop, and he noted for police that his assistant was out until after lunch because he had to report to his parole officer in the morning. But Kruger stood by the young man's side and claimed Fiorenza had turned over a new leaf—his crime was basically taking a car—and he claimed that he was a good boy. Lyons wasn’t so sure.

Fiorenza Rap Sheet

Fiorenza’s record was checked: four times for theft, two years in Elmira for stealing, and a psychiatrist there had reported him an "emotional fellow." Also, Fiorenza had also been to Titterton’s apartment two previous times, and even though each time he visited it was with his employer, Nancy would have known and trusted him.

The Key

Finally, the results of the canvassing for the cord information came in. It was discovered to be a piece of venetian blind cord manufactured by Hanover Cordage and the wholesaler sold a roll to Theodore Kruger’s upholstery shop! When Fiorenza was confronted with the evidence, he confessed. He admitted to having become infatuated with the attractive authoress and he thought he needed to possess her. You know the result.

The jury arrived at a guilty verdict fairly fast and Johnny Fiorenza went to the electric chair in Sing Sing. Betrayed by a horsehair.

Photo's From Flickr Authors: New York Public Library; xavi talleda; Old Shoe Woman

See an original newsreel here.  

Tweet