Re: 7/16/99 - CNN Burden of Proof
Burden of Proof
Yale Murder Investigation: Seven Months After the Killing of Suzanne Jovin, Investigators Try to Piece Together a Bloody Crime Puzzle
Aired July 16, 1999 - 12:30 p.m. ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ROGER COSSACK, CO-HOST: Today on BURDEN OF PROOF: an Ivy-League murder mystery. Seven months after the killing of a Yale senior, investigators try to piece together a bloody crime puzzle.
ANNOUNCER: This is BURDEN OF PROOF with Roger Cossack and Greta Van Susteren.
COSSACK: Hello and welcome to BURDEN OF PROOF. Greta is off today.
Well, by now, Suzanne Jovin should be a Yale alumnus. She was scheduled to graduate this year. But, last December, she was murdered. Jovin was found bleeding to death in an intersection one mile north of central campus. She had been stabbed repeatedly in the back and neck, and died later that night at Yale New Haven Hospital.
Jovin's senior thesis adviser James Van de Velde was named one of the suspects in the case, but he denies involvement and says he offered to give police blood samples and take a polygraph test to prove his innocence. Moreover, he voluntarily went to speak to the police without an attorney twice.
Joining us today from Hartford, Connecticut is Dr. Henry Lee, chairman of Connecticut's Department of Public Safety and a nationwide forensics expert. Also in Hartford, Dave Altimari of "The Hartford Courant." In Boston, former Middlesex County assistant DA John Benzan. And, here in Washington, Justin Zuccolotto (ph), criminal defense attorney Ron Sullivan, and Jennifer Kantor (ph). In the back row, Stephanie Cuccaro (ph) and Grant Dragon (ph).
Let's go right to Dave Altimari.
Dave, you've been covering this case. Tell us about Jennifer?
DAVE ALTIMARI, "THE HARTFORD COURANT": Well, Suzanne...
COSSACK: Suzanne, rather, I'm sorry.
ALTIMARI: Suzanne was a very attractive, very bright. The night she was killed, she was actually at a function for a program called Best Buddies that she ran, and she was bringing back a car she had rented from the university, and that was the last time she was seen, shortly after that, right on campus. And then 45 minutes later, she was dead, about a little over a mile away from campus in a very upscale neighborhood.
Her death, I think, Roger, affected so many of the students because she was so well known, and then when the professor's name got out, that just made the story and the mood on campus even -- emphasized the case even more I think.
COSSACK: Let's talk a little more about the facts in this case. Now, she was, as you pointed out, an extremely popular student, and she was a senior.
ALTIMARI: Yes.
COSSACK: What was her relationship -- or at least the alleged relationship, if there was any, with the senior thesis adviser James Van de Velde?
ALTIMARI: The police have been trying for months to answer that question, whether there was a relationship. There doesn't appear to have been one. They spent several months on campus interviewing students, interviewing professors, trying to put some kind of a relationship other than a student-professor with these two people. And they don't seem to have gotten anywhere with that.
He was her thesis adviser. There was concerns that she had about how he was not reading her paper on time. She had told some students within a week of her death that she was very upset with how he had handled her paper. She was disenchanted with his class, but there does not seem to be, at least at this point, anything to show any kind of an improper relationship or anything like that.
COSSACK: Dave, the police seem to believe that she was in a car, and perhaps was murdered in a car, and then died at the spot where she was either thrown or left that car. Why do they believe that?
ALTIMARI: I think that -- I think, Roger, they feel that she was probably killed at the spot. Whether she was in a car, theoretically, you could walk from where she was last seen to the area where she was killed within a half an hour time period, although it isn't likely given the fact the number of times she was stabbed. It was not a quick -- she was stabbed 17 times, it had to take a few minutes to do that.
The thing about this case, there are no witnesses who saw what happened, even though that night was a very warm. There was a hockey game going on, two streets down the road. Neighbors that we've talked to have all said people were walking around that night, yet nobody saw or saw him or her or anyone until somebody came along and saw her on the ground.
COSSACK: Dave, describe that area where she was murdered. It's a rather upscale area, and it's an area that's full of neighbors, and, as you say, warm night, apparently windows were open, or could have been open. ALTIMARI: A lot of Yale -- actually a lot of Yale professors live in that area, Roger. There was the house -- the closest house to where she was found, the people were having a party that night. Across the street, a woman was home with her daughter and had her windows open, but says she did not hear anything. There are some people who claim that they heard loud voices, a man and a woman's voice about a quarter of 10:00, which was about five or 10 minutes before her body was found.
COSSACK: She was found right in what they call the park way, wasn't she? Right in the middle of this residential area, it wasn't hidden.
ALTIMARI: Right. No, she was found on a piece of grass right next to a sidewalk on the intersection of the street, of a street, St. Ronin Street.
COSSACK: All right. Now, tell us about James Van de Velde and what his relationship is to the school, and why is he a suspect at all?
ALTIMARI: He has no relationship anymore. In January, they canceled his classes, which upset several students who had showed up to take them. He was technically, at that point, taken out of the class and told that he could do research work, but for all intents and purposes he was done at Yale.
His name surfaced very early, it was leaked to the local papers that a professor was a suspect. He, himself, went on TV to deny that he had killed her, and then things quieted down until Yale canceled his classes and said that they thought he would be a distraction.
COSSACK: But, to be fair to him, isn't it true that he voluntarily went in and spoke to the police twice without a lawyer, volunteered to take a lie-detector test, and volunteered to give blood, and allowed the police to search his car.
ALTIMARI: Yes, he did. I believe the first time that he went to talk -- he talked to them was only perfunctory, that he was someone who knew her or one of her professors. The second time he was interviewed for three or four hours. And, at that point is when he allowed them to search his car.
He also gave them permission to search his house, although it's not sure whether they did or not. He did not -- they did not take a blood sample and they -- he did not take a lie detector test.
COSSACK: All right, let's take a break. Up next, a closer look at this investigation and what the body of Suzanne Jovin could tell a trained criminologist, like Dr. Henry Lee, who is with us. Stay with us.
(BEGIN LEGAL BRIEF)
A Palo Alto, California man has pleaded guilty to defrauding Internet buyers of $37,000 on the online Web site eBay. According to prosecutors, Robert Guest collected the checks and money orders from victims, but failed to send any merchandise.
(END LEGAL BRIEF)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COSSACK: Police in New Haven, Connecticut are searching for the killer of a Yale University student. The body of senior Suzanne Jovin, slain last December, may be one of the few clues for forensic investigators.
All right, Ron, we know that this senior adviser, James Van de Velde has been named a suspect but there doesn't seem, at least at this point, to be much evidence. As a defense lawyer, what would you be looking at right now?
SULLIVAN: Well, I would try to get everything that the police have. His lawyers, apparently, have gone after each of the people -- or most of the people -- that police have talked with, interviewed those persons, anyone with any knowledge about either Ms. Jovin or Mr. Van de Velde and just to try to see what the police have.
As it appears, now, there doesn't seem to be any reasonable basis for the police to call him a suspect. There just doesn't appear to be the evidence there.
COSSACK: All right, let's find out if there's any basis or not. Joining us now is Dr. Henry Lee.
Dr. Lee, you had the opportunity, as part of the your job, to examine the body of Suzanne Jovin. What did the body tell you?
DR. HENRY LEE, COMMISSIONER, CONNECTICUT PUBLIC SAFETY DEPT.: Roger, that's a misleading information. I did not have the opportunity to look at the body.
COSSACK: Well, in terms of your examination -- I'm sorry, I misspoke -- in terms of your examination in this case, what were you -- what did you see and what did you do?
LEE: Well, this case -- the investigation is conducted by New Haven Police Department. Our department, Department of Public Safety, State Police, we just assist in the investigation with a limited scope. We examined few pieces of scientific evidence.
COSSACK: What were those pieces of scientific evidence, Doctor?
LEE: Those evidence encompassed clothing from the victim's body.
COSSACK: And when you examine the clothing from the victim's body, what exactly are you looking for?
LEE: Well, I cannot comment on this case, specifically. When we examine a piece of garment, usually we look in a bullet hole or knife holes or any damage, any abrasion mark, then we try to identify any trace evidence, so-called trace-transfer evidence, whether or not the suspect left some material such as hair, fiber, saliva, blood or semen material on to the garment.
COSSACK: Without telling us things that, obviously, you can't, and I know you won't, did you find any trace evidence, Doctor?
LEE: We found very limited amount of trace evidence.
COSSACK: All right, can you tell us what that trace evidence was?
LEE: Well, one of the items already become public information. We just found some hair fiber-like material.
COSSACK: And was that hair fiber?
LEE: Those are identified as hair, microscopically similar to animal hairs.
COSSACK: And were you able to -- were they animal hairs or were they human hairs, Doctor?
LEE: Those are animal hairs.
COSSACK: Were you able to find any human hairs, Doctor?
LEE: Well, there are some hairs. I cannot really comment on that at this point.
COSSACK: All right. And what other evidence were you able to find while you were doing your examinations?
LEE: As I indicate to you, this case -- we only involved a very limited amount of scientific analysis evidence. Generally, in a case, sometimes the police department contact me right away to conduct a crime scene examination with them. Other times, they submit the whole case to me, we can do a reconstruction -- a complete crime scene reconstruction to determine what had happened, how it happened, when it happened, where it happened, and sequence events. And sometimes they just submit the physical evidence to us.
So with this particular case, my role is pretty limited and only few piece of garment was examined. As a matter of fact, we spent a whole Christmas Day, Christmas Eve, New Year's Day and New Year's Eve finished the whole examination.
COSSACK: When you examine this material for the evidence, what kind of technical availabilities do you have? For example, do you use microscopes, do you use electron microscopes? What are you using to find this evidence?
LEE: Well, in the laboratory, our laboratory has 14 different sections from DNA, serology, immunology, to chemistry, to fingerprinting and voice analysis -- all variety of services.
With this particular case, we generally used microscopic examination first to document the patterns. After the pattern document, we start looking at trace evidence and, subsequently, each type of trace evidence we use chemical tests, immunological examinations, higher power magnification involving SEM -- we use SEM involving elemental composition analysis. We can use (UNINTELLIGIBLE) sometimes when we look at the GCGC (UNINTELLIGIBLE), try to study the composition.
Once we finish all the examination and we reassemble the whole case, try to make an analysis, the interpretation, what kind of result we have.
COSSACK: Doctor, can you tell us whether or not you found any DNA at the -- during your examination, that was present?
LEE: Well, I cannot, you know, really comment on the specific type of evidence. This particular case, we did not find any semen evidence.
COSSACK: All right, let's take a break. When we come back, one of the few suspects is this case is part of the Yale faculty. But does James Van de Velde deserve all this attention? Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COSSACK: James Van de Velde was identified as a suspect in the murder of Yale student Suzanne Jovin. He was Jovin's senior essay adviser and has denied involvement in the case and says he has cooperated fully with the investigation.
Dr. Lee, as you point out to me, I was incorrect in saying that you had seen the body in this case. And you didn't see the crime scene either, at least where the body was found, is that true?
LEE: That's true. This particular case, unfortunately, we wasn't able to examine the crime scene directly.
COSSACK: And, Dr. Lee, you say "unfortunately," and that's what I want to ask you. What possible evidence did you, perhaps, miss because you were unable to see the crime scene directly?
LEE: Well, not really something -- definite something evidence missed and you have a police department that did a super in investigation. Usually, a crime scene, with some experience, we look at a certain silent clue, not always say you found a big pool of blood or a bullet, sometimes a pattern, or a lacking of evidence which means to the investigator or forensic scientists may have some important clue.
COSSACK: All right, let's now go to John Benzan.
John, as a former prosecutor, and we've heard Dr. Lee talk about the evidence that he was able to gather and that he was unable to see. As a prosecutor, what are you doing in this situation?
JOHN BENZAN, FMR. MIDDLESEX CO. ASST. D.A.: Well, firstly, Roger, thanks for having me on. Secondly, let me begin by saying that the prosecutor's role is an awesome one. And when you are dealing with a murder investigation, it is even more so.
Under the Constitution, under the double-jeopardy clause of the Constitution, you only get one shot at convicting somebody for murder. So a prosecutor has to keep his eye -- his or her eye -- open and on the end result. And that is getting a conviction and a sentence that's going to stick.
So everything that happens during the investigation and the prosecution, the prosecutor has to make sure everything happens correctly, and correctly meaning it's going to be admitted or it is going to withstand any legal challenge throughout every step of that investigation or the prosecution.
COSSACK: All right, but, John, the prosecutor's job is, as they say, is to search for truth, not to search for a conviction. And here you have a suspect, if you will, and that there doesn't seem to be much evidence, and who apparently has cooperated with the police. How does that play into what you do?
BENZAN: Well, it is a search for truth. And when I mentioned that the prosecutor looks for a conviction and a sentence that's going to stick, it's a conviction of the person that the prosecutor truly and sincerely believes committed the crime. And so everything, again, is looked at, how you get the conviction, how you going to make it stand, and make sure every step of the investigation is done properly.
And that means the prosecutor has to oversee the investigation done by the investigators and anything anybody else brought in, like Dr. Lee was brought in on that case to assist, the prosecution would oversee that to make sure everything is done correctly.
COSSACK: All right, let's take a break. Up next, with the case stalled in police hands, can the D.A.'s office move forward? Stay with us.
(BEGIN Q&A)
Q: A Michigan judge has denied a new trial for which convicted murderer who served as his own lawyer?
A: Dr. Jack Kevorkian, who claims a legal adviser provided inadequate assistance.
(END Q&A)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COSSACK: New Haven, Connecticut police have yet to charge anyone in the slaying of a Yale University student last December.
Ron, there is an identification that was made by a witnessed who claimed the night of the murder that she saw a blond Caucasian wearing glasses, and then later saw this James Van de Velde on television, and said: You know, that's the guy. Is that a good identification?
RONALD SULLIVAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It's a problematic identification because it's potentially suggestive. She didn't pick Mr. Van de Velde out of a lineup. She didn't pick him out independently. Rather, it was after she saw him on TV in the context of being called a suspect in the murder that she said that, well, this looks like the guy that I saw that night.
Also, contrast that with another witness who said that she saw a small red car leaving the scene, not a big red jeep, like Professor Van de Velde had. And, when shown a picture of the professor, said that's absolutely not the person that was driving the car that apparently fled away from the scene of the crime.
So it's a problematic ID at best.
COSSACK: John, as a prosecutor, what do you do with an ID like that?
BENZAN: Well, you have to test it. You have to put the witness to the test. You test her ability to perceive, the angle from which she saw the person, and what she went through that day to make sure that if you are going to use that at trial that it's something that is going to stand and it is going to be good evident. So you put the witness to the test.
COSSACK: All right, Dr. Henry Lee, what kind of an identification is that? How would you describe it?
LEE: Well, solving any case we need four elements: the crime scene, physical evidence, witness, and a little luck. Witness ID we have been use that for years now, years, centuries. And basically put people in category, this witness tell us certain racial origin, the hair color, wear glasses. We put people from a universal poll to a smaller poll, it will help the investigator focus on certain group.
COSSACK: What about the suggestion, though, that this is a suggestive kind of an identification, that the witness initially identified this sort of general characteristics and then specifically said -- made the identification when she saw this fellow on television?
LEE: Yes, there is nothing wrong with that, FBI "10 Most-Wanted" man, for example Connecticut state -- state police fugitive task force we often put the picture on the television screen, and mainly of the time we got good tips.
COSSACK: All right, that's all the time we have for now. Thanks to our guests and thank you for watching. Join us again next time for another edition of BURDEN OF PROOF. We'll see you then.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com |
