close

Accused killer deemed competent, motions to suppress evidence denied

By Susy Kelly skelly@heraldstandard.Com 5 min read

After waiting nearly nine months for a report from the Department of Welfare (DPW) on the mental competency of a North Union Township man accused of homicide, a Fayette County judge determined that the man may stand trial.

In an opinion an order from Judge Steve P. Leskinen handed down on Wednesday, the jurist stated that the DPW evaluation of 57-year-old Henry Clay Crawford indicated that he is competent to stand trial for allegedly stabbing 49-year-old Lisa Tupta to death inside her North Union Township home on Jan. 28, 2013.

Crawford had a number of pretrial motions pending before the court besides the competency issue, and Leskinen denied all but one.

Represented by his attorneys, Public Defender Jeffrey Whiteko and Assistant Public Defender Susan Ritz-Harper, Crawford moved to have the case dismissed for lack of evidence that he had the intent to kill Tupta.

“The record reflects that Ms. Tutpa died of multiple stab wounds to vital parts of her body,” Leskinen found, and Crawford was found with a knife in the immediate area. “The use of a deadly weapon on a vital area of a victim’s anatomy allows a jury to infer the specific intent to kill and malice, if they choose to do so.”

For those reasons, the judge denied the motion to toss the charges.

Crawford argued that letters he wrote to Tupta and her son around the time of her death at the request of police should not be admitted into evidence because he did not understand the content of the letters could be used against him in court.

Leskinen agreed.

According to court records, Crawford was in police custody when he was taken to the hospital to address stab wounds he reportedly suffered in the alleged attack on Tupta and he had invoked his right to remain silent.

State police Trooper Nathaniel Lieberum, who was guarding Crawford at the hospital, asked him if he would like to write a letter to Tupta, who was still alive but in critical condition, documents state, and told him the letter would be given to an investigator. After Tupta died, Lieberum similarly offered to let Crawford write a letter to the woman’s son.

“The letters were incriminating, and regardless of whether defendant was informed that they would be turned over to the investigating officers, the court finds that the defendant did not knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waive his privilege against self-incrimination,” the judge wrote.

Those letters are currently under seal, Leskinen noted.

Given that the letters are not public and “no confessions have been disseminated,” and that very little has been publicized about the case since the incident occurred, Leskinen ruled against Crawford’s motion to hold the trial in another county in order to get an unbiased jury pool.

Crawford additionally argued that other statements he made to police while in custody after the alleged stabbing should also be suppressed.

After being transported to a hospital in Pittsburgh, Crawford spoke casually with a radiologist and state police Trooper D. Thomas Cegan, records state. The officer told Crawford he had no knowledge of why he was in custody, that he was just watching Crawford, and that the two of them didn’t have to talk about anything.

“When defendant told Trooper Cegan that he had a fight with his girlfriend, and after she forced his way into her home, she ‘came at him with a knife,’ Trooper Cegan asked him if he felt badly about the situation,” Leskinen wrote. “Defendant responded, ‘No, she was trifling.'”

“There was no need for Trooper Cegan to Mirandize defendant during the conversation because it was not an interrogation meant to elicit an incriminating response, especially since the trooper had no prior knowledge of the case,” Leskinen wrote.

Crawford also sought to suppress evidence collected from six search warrants, including bloody clothes, DNA samples, weapons, notes and letters, controlled substances, cellphone records, Facebook correspondences and call and visitation logs from the Fayette County Prison where Crawford has been in custody since Tupta’s death.

Leskinen found that there was ample probable cause on each of the warrant applications and denied the motion to suppress evidence.

As for a series of motions challenging the constitutionality of the death penalty and the manner in which it is meted out, the judge wrote that the issue has been visited on a number of occasions and the death penalty remains constitutional.

He also denied Crawford’s claim that prosecution lacks sufficient evidence of the aggravating circumstances it has put forth in attempting to secure a death sentence.

Prosecutors argue that Crawford is eligible for capital punishment if convicted of first-degree murder because the alleged killing was committed in the perpetration of felony burglary; Tupta was allegedly tortured; Crawford has a significant history of violent felony convictions; and because at the time of the alleged killing, Crawford was subject to a court order directing him to have no contact whatsoever with Tupta.

“The commonwealth only has to prove that evidence exists to support one of the aggravating factors,” Leskinen wrote. That threshold has been met, he found, and the case may proceed as a capital one.

Finally, Leskinen denied Crawford’s motion to suppress the introduction of victim impact testimony in the penalty phase of the trial, should he be convicted. The judge found that the defense has been given notice of what will be presented and, Crawford’s constitutional rights will not be violated.

CUSTOMER LOGIN

If you have an account and are registered for online access, sign in with your email address and password below.

NEW CUSTOMERS/UNREGISTERED ACCOUNTS

Never been a subscriber and want to subscribe, click the Subscribe button below.

Starting at $4.79/week.

Subscribe Today