Posted on 12/22/2007 8:36:29 AM PST by fweingart
(Martin Tankleff in a TV interview.)
(Tankleff's adopted parents, Arlene and Seymour.)
Convicted of killing his wealthy parents after confessing 19 years ago, Martin Tankleff moved closer to freedom Friday when an appeals court said there's enough new evidence to convince a jury he's innocent.
A four-judge appellate panel unanimously overturned his conviction and said it's "probable" a second jury would acquit him because cops tricked him into confessing and his lawyers have uncovered new evidence.
"It appears the [Suffolk] County Court never considered the cumulative effect of the new evidence created a probability that had such evidence been received at the trial, the verdict would have been more favorable to [Tankleff]," the judges wrote.
Tankleff, 36, serving 50 years to life at Great Meadow prison in Comstock, was overjoyed.
"His first words were, 'Finally justice has started to tilt our way,'" lawyer Bruce Barket said. "I'm telling my secretary to get champagne. We're thrilled."
Tankleff, who was convicted in 1990, has been behind bars for more than 17 years for stabbing and bludgeoning his adopted parents, Arlene and Seymour, on Sept. 7, 1988.
Suffolk County detectives extracted a confession from Tankleff after tricking him into thinking his father had fingered him on his deathbed.
Tankleff, then 17, had been subjected to intensive questioning by Detective Kevin McCready, who committed perjury in another murder case.
"Could I have blacked out and done this? Could I be possessed?" Tankleff asked, according to court records.
"Marty, I think that's what happened to you," another detective responded.
Appellate Judges Reinaldo Rivera, Gabriel Krausman, Anita Florio and Mark Dillon wrote that the confession was clearly the linchpin of the prosecution's case.
They said the mountain of new evidence uncovered since the conviction warrants a new trial.
The new evidence includes information that Seymour Tankleff's partner in the bagel business, Jerald Steuerman, owed him hundreds of thousands of dollars and was playing cards with the victim on the night of the murders.
Steuerman, who could not be reached for comment, allegedly hired three goons to kill the Tankleffs. Anthony LaPinta, the lawyer for alleged hit man Joseph Creedon, said his client is an "innocent scapegoat."
A witness testified at a 2004 hearing that he was offered $25,000 from a partner in the bagel business to kill the other partner, but the lower court upheld the conviction.
The judges criticized the lower court for failing to properly evaluate the new evidence.
"It is abhorrent to our sense of justice and fair play to countenance the possibility that someone innocent of a crime may be incarcerated or otherwise punished for a crime which he or she did not commit," they wrote.
Barket said he will ask a judge to release Tankleff on bail next week. "We want justice and we want Marty exonerated," said Tankleff's cousin Ronald Falbee.
District Attorney Thomas Spota "respectfully disagreed" with the ruling but did not say if Tankleff would be retried.
"I would hope they would ... investigate the people who are really responsible," Barket said.
McCready, who later opened a bar with the husband of Tankleff's half sister Shari Rother, did not return calls.
---------------------------------------------------------
Behind teen's '88 confession
Martin Tankleff was a 17-year-old high school student when cops say he stabbed his father, Seymour, and mother, Arlene, to death in their Long Island home in 1988.
He was convicted because of the confession he gave to police. He says cops tricked him into confessing by falsely claiming his dad fingered him from his deathbed.
Now 36, he has served 17 years of a 50-years-to-life term.
His lawyers say they've uncovered evidence suggesting that one of Seymour Tankleff's business partners was behind the murder because he owed the father money.
A state appeals court tossed the conviction, saying it's "probable" a new jury would decide the case differently based on new evidence "including the defendant's confession, how the confession was obtained and the fact that the defendant almost immediately recanted."
Prosecutors haven't decided whether they will appeal or retry Tankleff, whose lawyers plan to ask for bail next week.
Guilty.
Guilty as sin.
Ya missed this part..
This is called ‘leading’ the suspect into a confession.
“”Could I have blacked out and done this? Could I be possessed?” Tankleff asked, according to court records.
“Marty, I think that’s what happened to you,” another detective responded. “
Sounds to me like the investigator was trying to make him ‘think’ he killed his parents.
And the kid bought into it.
And he had no motive. Well, no motive like the Menendez brothers had no motive.
I saw a documentary on this case..I am suspicious of his confession..Let them retry him if they must..but old Law and Order here thinks this one may be innocent.
Don't be so sure.
Tankleff, then 17, had been subjected to intensive questioning by Detective Kevin McCready, who committed perjury in another murder case.
McCready, who later opened a bar with the husband of Tankleff's half sister Shari Rother, did not return calls.
So the estate went to the cop, very interesting.
There is way too much coincidence here to dismiss this offhand.
Aw, poor baby. I missed the part in the Constitution where we must not trick a murder suspect into a confession.
Perhaps we should not allow anyone to talk to any suspect at all under any circumstance.
Parents still dead?
Its actually not all that hard to get some people to confess to things they didn’t do.
Name three.
Especially a 17 year old. It happens all the time. That's why it's important to know your rights and if you did not do something, you make the system prove it. Moral of the story: never confess to something you did not do, because it will be you they will hang.
Keep your mouth shut. It is your Fifth Amendment right.
You are absolutely correct. the general population believes what they see on Law and Order and CSI; that they have to confess prior to talking to a lawyer if they hold any hope of getting any leniency. If you DONT talk to a lawyer first, you can be sure you won't get any deal at all.
The most classic example is DUI re giving a confession or even giving evidence. In most places it is a violation of law to not consent to a BAC test. The penalty? Loss of driver's license for one year. So what if you are drunk and blow? You get the DUI penalty, including losing your license for one year. what if you don't blow? most likely if its a 1st offense you will get offered a reckless driving plea along with the implied consent violation. Lots better that way. Just shut the hell up and be polite, say nothing, give nothing, and you will come out ahead.
And don’t consent to a search without a warrant!
Yep. we have a lot of highway stops here where there was no offense to trigger the stop, but the cops still ask if its ok to search the vehicle. My standard answer suggestion is “well sir, with all due respect, if you had probable cause to search my car, you wouldn’t be asking for my permission”.
Visit this site, view the video and urge your friends to.
http://totallyunjust.tripod.com
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.