Michele Berry, appeal attorney for Ryan Widmer, shows a photo of the space where Widmer's bathtub was ripped out of from his Hamilton Township home in 2008. Berry says police had no right to remove the tub under the search warrant they obtained. Berry presented evidence to a three judge panel at the Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals in Middletown on Monday April 16, 2012. The Enquirer/Cara Owsley
Janice Morse reports:
In an alleged “bathtub murder” case, why was the bathtub itself not listed on a search warrant?
That is one of the major points that Ryan Widmer’s appellate lawyer, Michele Berry, hammered home today during a hearing before the Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals here, arguing police had no right to take the bathtub, which is considered part of the home. She said that, for example, if a crime were committed in a mobile home, police shouldn’t therefore be allowed to seize the entire mobile home. That, she said, would be a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Judges Robert P. Ringland, left, Robert A. Hendrickson, and H.J. Bressler, listen to Michele Berry, appeal attorney for Ryan Widmer, as she goes over details about the bathtub where Widmer's wife Sarah, drowned in their Hamilton Township home in 2008. / The Enquirer/Cara Owsley
Police never should have removed the tub without a court order — and Widmer’s trial lawyers erred when they failed to file timely objections to admission of the tub, which ended up being a major piece of evidence against Widmer, Berry said.
Assistant Prosecutor Michael Greer argued: “The police officers do not know, cannot list every possible source of fingerprints.” That’s why the search warrant didn’t list the bathtub, he said, although the search warrant did say they were looking for fingerprints.
The presiding judge, Robert Hendrickson, noted: “The search warrant didn’t list one or a couple items. There were multiple items,” yet the bathtub itself was omitted.
Widmer, 31, who is serving 15 years to life in the 2008 bathtub drowning of his wife, protests that he was wrongfully convicted of murder last year. None of his fingerprints were found on the tub, but prosecutors argued that was evidence that the tub had been wiped clean after the drowning of his wife, Sarah, 24. And prosecutors argued that, based on a criminalist’s testimony about unidentified “streaks” and a “forearm mark” — were evidence of a violent struggle. Such evidence lacks a scientific foundation, Berry argued, and that testimony should have been barred from the trial.
About a dozen supporters showed up wearing white to symbolize they believe Widmer is innocent. On the other side of the room sat John Arnold, a Warren County assistant prosecutor who presented evidence against Widmer during all three of his trials.
Posted in: Crime, News, Widmer Trial |
Loading ...
