Tweet
Correction: Article was from 9News. Greeley Tribune has their article here entitled Key question: When did Andrade know?, and they have an excellent twitter feed with much detail on the trial at www.twitter.com/greeleytribune.
From the Greeley Tribune‘s 9News‘s Defense: Andrade did kill transgender teenager:
During the second day of jury selection, the prosecution and defense in the Allen Andrade murder trial gave a glimpse into how each side will proceed throughout trial.Thursday afternoon, the two sides presented what are called mini-opening statements to potential jurors.
Such three-minute statements during jury selection are new to Colorado. The Colorado Supreme Court’s Jury Reform Committee approved the use of them last year.
The prosecution went first saying Andrade, 32, intentionally and deliberately murdered Angie Zapata, 18, on July 16, 2008.
…”You’re also going to learn from the evidence that there’s absolutely no evidence of any sexual activity occurring either on or around the time this murder was committed,” Nieto said.
…Andrade’s defense attorney, Annette Kundelius, followed saying Andrade did kill Zapata, but argued the murder was a crime of passion and doesn’t rise to the level of first degree murder or a bias motivated crime.
This is a recommended read for anyone interested — there are photos of the defendant Allen Ray Andrade with the article.
8 Comments
Thank you AutumnThank you Autumn for providing these updates and being there. Please take good care of yourself as you absorb the horror of Angie’s murder and the trial. I will be thinking of you.
I’ll go there
Is it just me? Or is the fact that a woman – presumably non-transsexual – is making this argument wrong on muliple levels?
( http://www.examiner.com/x-391-… )
I’m a lawyer. I know that sometimes you can end up with a client that you don’t want. I know that you still have to do your best for the client.
However, I don’t believe that this is an ethical defense – even if it succeeds.
As the author of that blurb later says: “Shame on Annette Kundelius.”
Well…we could just die of our own volition before these fine upstanding young examples of proper, faux-heterosexual American manhood have to interrupt their lives by dispatching a freak.
‘Mini Statements’ lock defense upProsecution opening statement “there’s absolutely no evidence of any sexual activity occurring either on or around the time this murder was committed,”
If the prosecution makes this statement stick the defense of Andrade will be extremely problematic since the opening statement by Andrade’s defense Lawyers had stated that Andrade had in fact murdered Angie Zapata.
Thank you Autumn!
Crime of PassionCan one of the lawyer folk (Kat?….) explain whether there’s a technical side to this “crime of passion” business (do lawyers typically use this in arguing for lesser charges, if so when)? It mostly looks like bigoted BS to try to convince a jury that Andrade was a pretty good guy (I mean, Angie Zapata had a penis and she, gasp, smiled at him). I get that the defense in this trial is going to be plenty messed up (given that they were already forced to admit that Andrade killing Zapata), but seriously? Crime of passion, NBD….? Just how typical is that crap? And yes, as Kat gets at… that’s some seriously sexist BS.
And yes, she’s a public defenderI’m glad the state of Colorado is paying someone to argue that a smile is justification for murder.
I’ve felt since he was arrested and confessed last year that the onlything that was problematic about his case was whether he would be convicted of first degree murder or second degree murder. If it’s really true that he was in her apartment for two days before he killed her, it’s looking better and better for the first degree conviction.
Let’s say thatyou’re in the public defender’s office and you’re up next and draw this case. Your client is a habitual criminal who has already confessed to a brutal murder by the time you first meet him. Some of the awful details have made the papers from coast to coast and beyond. What do you think would be the best way to serve your client?
They’ve probably had a psychological evaluation and know he’s not crazy. It sounds like they have only one possible defense – the heat of passion/the lying victim made me do it. If you can’t argue that, then you better find other employment. Like in the prosecutor’s office.
It won’t work, though, and at sentencing, she’ll be essentially begging for mercy, introducing all manner of evidence and witnesses to testify to the horrible life this poor killer had as a child (which may, of course, actually be true).