Third degree murder trial delayed, evidence under review
The attorneys representing a Connellsville woman who is awaiting retrial for third-degree murder are asking a Fayette County judge to dismiss the case, arguing the commonwealth has even less evidence heading into the second trial than they did the first time.
Crystal Weimer, 37, had her conviction and sentence vacated in October, after Dr. Constantine Karazulas, the bite mark expert whose testimony was critical to Weimer’s conviction, told the court he would not be able to reach the same conclusion if presented the same evidence now.
Attorney Jeffrey J. Bresch, who, along with a group of attorneys who call themselves “Team Crystal”, argued before President Judge John F. Wagner Jr. that without the bite mark evidence, the prosecution is left with two pieces of evidence, neither of which are sufficient or reliable.
Weimer was convicted of third-degree murder in 2006 for her alleged role in the death of 21-year-old Curtis Haith in Connellsville. Another man, Joseph Stenger, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit homicide the same year, and was sentenced to nine to 18 years.
According to trial testimony, Weimer and Haith had a physical altercation on Jan. 27, 2001, and Haith hit her. To even the score, she enlisted Stenger and two other men to go to Haith’s house, where she lured Haith outside and the two men beat him, court records state.
Several soil samples were collected by police from Weimer’s clothing and from the area where the incident occurred, and Bresch argued that the court previously determined at a 2004 hearing that the soil samples had very little evidentiary value, considering the same size and color particles of dirt may have been anywhere throughout Connellsville, not necessarily tying her to the scene.
Wagner pointed out that since conspiracy is part of the charge against Weimer, the prosecution would not have to prove that she was even in Connellsville on the evening of the beating.
Bresch said that leaves the prosecution with the testimony of Stenger, who is the only person who can connect Weimer to the alleged conspiracy.
He argued Stenger’s story about that evening has changed 15 or 16 times, and that his testimony would be so unreliable, the court should not permit him to testify at Weimer’s retrial.
“Are you asking me to make a determination that a jury could not believe Stenger?” Wagner asked.
Bresch called Stenger “a caricature of himself,” and said, “We no longer can piece together any reliable testimony. We would be asking a jury to guess which version is correct.”
Besides those three pieces of evidence, Bresch said the prosecution has no other forensic evidence to connect Weimer with the killing.
Wagner scheduled an evidentiary hearing for Feb. 20, to determine whether Stenger’s testimony can be used.
Throughout the hearing, Bresch repeatedly referenced the 2004 motion to dismiss charges, which now-retired Judge Ralph C. Warman granted. He argued the court faces the same set of circumstances now, but with less evidence, and that the case should be dismissed immediately.
Assistant District Attorney J.W. Eddy contended that none of the proceedings before Warman are relevant now.
“Judge Warman didn’t think a jury could convict. Subsequently a jury did convict,” Eddy said.
Wagner pointed out that the faulty bite mark evidence came in after those proceedings, stating, “That was when you added the junk science.”
Although Weimer’s retrial was scheduled for Jan. 11, Wagner agreed to push the date forward, until some time after the hearing regarding Stenger’s testimony.