| ||
| ||
| ||
 |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 Defense: Malvo statement was illegal
FAIRFAX, Virginia (CNN) -- Lawyers for Lee Boyd Malvo are asking a judge to throw out a statement in which the 17-year-old Jamaica native admitted involvement in the Washington-area sniper shootings. In a 40-page motion, Malvo's lawyers argue that FBI and local police investigators violated Malvo's rights by ignoring his request for an attorney. "Police lied by telling Mr. Malvo that he would see his attorneys before proceeding to ignore his request," Malvo's attorneys say in the motion. During a lengthy interrogation, prosecutors say, Malvo admitted being involved in several of the 13 sniper-style shootings that terrorized the Washington area in October. Ten people died in the shootings. Prosecutors consider the Malvo statement a key piece of evidence, and defense attorneys make no secret they consider the fight to exclude it a major component of their case. "That's going to be, for lack of a better word, the granddaddy of them all," defense attorney Michael Arif recently said of the motion. The outcome of the fight "will set the tenor for the rest of the trial," he said. Fairfax County, Virginia, Circuit Judge Jane Marum Roush will consider the motion at a hearing April 28. Transfer faces scrutinyArguments will focus on the events of November 7, 2002, when federal prosecutors in Baltimore, Maryland, unexpectedly dropped charges against Malvo and transferred him to Fairfax County. There, Fairfax County Police Detective June Boyle and FBI Special Agent Brad Garrett told Malvo they wanted to talk to him, the motion says. "Initially, Mr. Malvo indicated he did not want to speak to the officers, and twice asked to see his attorney," the motion says. "Mr. Malvo asked, 'Do I get to see my attorney?' to which Det. Boyle responded, 'Yes.'" Malvo then said his lawyer told him not to talk to the police until the lawyer arrived. According to detective Boyle, "it was explained to him that he was being charged in Virginia with new charges and that the police wanted to get some information about him. He said, 'OK.'" After some general conversation, Malvo began making statements that were arguably incriminating, the motion says. Malvo signed a form acknowledging he had been read his rights with an "X," saying that writing his name would be self-incriminating. Prosecutors contend the interrogation was lawful and that Malvo willingly made statements implicating himself. In their motion, defense attorneys say Malvo asserted his constitutional right to remain silent on numerous occasions, and that his attorneys in Baltimore told investigators he "should not under any circumstances be questioned outside his attorneys' presence." Motion cites constitutional violationsWhen Malvo was transferred from federal custody to Virginia, he was "never told where he was being brought," had not seen an attorney, and did not appear in court until after the interrogation, his attorneys say. Indeed, he was still wearing his federal prison garb during the interrogation, they say. Nor did the government notify Malvo's five attorneys or the federal judge assigned to the case about the transfer, they say. The transfer, the motion says, was "designed to circumvent Mr. Malvo's right to have counsel present." The motion alleges police violated Malvo's Fifth, Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights, as well as a 1969 diplomatic convention that guarantees foreign nationals access to consular officials if they are detained. Malvo is scheduled to stand trial in November in Fairfax County for the October 14, 2002, murder of Linda Franklin outside a Home Depot store in Falls Church, Virginia. His alleged accomplice, John Allen Muhammad, is awaiting trial in October in neighboring Prince William County for the October 9, 2002, shooting of Dean Harold Meyers at a Sunoco gas station in Manassas, Virginia.
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
