Photo credit: www.cbsnews.com
Connecticut Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction Despite Prosecutorial Misconduct
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled on Monday to maintain the murder conviction of Richard Dabate, a man found guilty of killing his wife, Connie Dabate, despite identifying “troubling” improprieties by the prosecution during the trial. This high-profile case gained significant attention due to evidence from the victim’s Fitbit, which contradicted Dabate’s account of events.
In a unanimous 6-0 judgment, the court concluded that the errors made by the prosecutor did not deny Dabate a fair trial. Among the notable missteps was the prosecutor’s inappropriate reference to one of Connecticut’s most infamous criminal cases during cross-examination.
Richard Dabate, now 48, was found guilty of murder and other charges related to the shooting of his 39-year-old wife at their home in Ellington in December 2015, just days before Christmas, while their young sons were at school. He is currently serving a 65-year sentence for the crime.
Prosecutors alleged that Dabate had a motive for the killing stemming from an extramarital affair with another woman, who was pregnant at the time of the incident.
According to the defense, Dabate claimed that he and his wife had explored unconventional family arrangements, stating that they were planning to co-parent with the other woman. However, the narrative took a bizarre turn when Dabate staged a fake crime scene, which included tying himself up and inflicting stab wounds on himself, claiming that a masked intruder had attacked them.
Investigators confronted Dabate with data from his wife’s Fitbit, which revealed discrepancies in his timeline. The Fitbit indicated that she was active for about an hour following the time he claimed she had been shot.
Dabate maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings, even testifying that a large intruder with a voice similar to that of actor Vin Diesel had been the real assailant. His defense also called into question the validity of the Fitbit evidence, but the Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of this data, reinforcing its importance in the case.
During trial proceedings, his attorney, Trent LaLima, pointed out the presence of unidentified DNA at the crime scene, including on the weapon used to kill Connie Dabate. Additionally, a house cleaner testified to having seen a shadowy figure near the Dabate residence around the time of the crime.
LaLima noted that prosecutorial misconduct included references to a tragic home invasion case from 2007, where a family was attacked, resulting in the deaths of a mother and her two daughters. This mention was made when the prosecutor suggested that Dabate might have reenacted that horrific event in his home. Although the trial judge instructed the prosecutor to rephrase the question, a similar query was posed, leading to the Supreme Court’s censure of that action.
Justice Joan Alexander, writing for the court, emphasized the inappropriateness of the prosecutor’s attempts to draw parallels to notorious criminal cases, stating that such comparisons could skew jury perceptions. Despite recognizing the improprieties, the court reaffirmed that the strength of the evidence against Dabate remained compelling, with extensive testimonies and exhibits contributing to the conviction.
In 2017, following the conviction, Connie Dabate’s sister initiated a wrongful death lawsuit against Richard Dabate, adding complexity to the case. Furthermore, the estate of Connie Dabate requested that Richard return over $70,000 he allegedly withdrew from her estate posthumously.
In the aftermath of the Supreme Court ruling, LaLima expressed disappointment, stating that they believed strong arguments for a retrial had been presented and that they were considering their next steps in an effort to clear Dabate’s name, who has asserted his innocence for nearly a decade.
The Supreme Court’s ruling, while acknowledging the prosecutor’s misconduct, highlighted the importance of the evidentiary foundation of the case, reinforcing the conviction amid serious concerns regarding the prosecution’s behavior during the trial.
Source
www.cbsnews.com