
December 22, 2007
Jailed 17 Years, Long Island Man Gets Second Trial
By BRUCE LAMBERT
A state appeals court on Friday overturned the conviction of a Long
Island man imprisoned 17 years for the grisly murders of his parents in
1988. The decision cited the “cumulative effect” of new witnesses and
extensive new evidence that have emerged in recent years, pointing to
other suspects as the real killers.
The man, Martin H. Tankleff, was a teenager in 1990 when a jury
convicted him, largely on the basis of an incomplete confession written
by detectives, which he repudiated almost immediately and never signed.
The long campaign to free him drew national attention and support from
a battery of prominent pro bono lawyers and former prosecutors and
judges, as well as his relatives and a private investigator who
unearthed the new evidence. But several appeals were denied by state
and federal courts.
Friday’s decision, a unanimous ruling by a four-judge panel in the
Appellate Division of State Supreme Court in Brooklyn, granted a new
trial for Mr. Tankleff, who is now 36. It also renewed attention to
questions he has raised about police and prosecutorial methods in
Suffolk County, where a state investigation found rampant misconduct in
the 1980s.
“It is abhorrent to our sense of justice and fair play to countenance
the possibility that someone innocent of a crime may be incarcerated or
otherwise punished for a crime which he or she did not commit,” the
judges wrote in a 21-page opinion.
Suffolk County prosecutors said they were considering whether to appeal
the ruling. “We respectfully disagree with the court’s decision,” said
District Attorney Thomas J. Spota. If the ruling stands, Mr. Tankleff
will be retried under the original indictment, said the assistant
district attorney in the case, Leonard Lato.
Mr. Tankleff’s lawyers began arranging bail for his release, which
prosecutors have agreed to. “Marty was very, very happy,” said one
lawyer, Bruce A. Barket, who gave his client the news in a phone call
to the Great Meadow state prison, near Lake George, where Mr. Tankleff
is serving a sentence of 50 years to life.
“Literally his first words were: ‘Finally, justice is starting to tilt
to us,’” Mr. Barket said.
Mr. Tankleff’s jubilant supporters said they welcomed the opportunity
for him to prove his innocence at a new trial. But they demanded the
appointment of a special prosecutor to take over the case and pursue
the other suspects, saying they did not trust Suffolk County law
enforcement.
“We handed this evidence to them, and they did nothing,” said Ron
Falbee, Mr. Tankleff’s cousin and a family spokesman. “They’ve been
covering up something, big time.” Prosecutors have denied the
accusation. Mr. Tankleff has also accused the lead detective in the
case, K. James McCready, of lying and shielding the real culprits. The
detective, now retired, has denied doing so.
Mr. Tankleff has not wanted for defenders. His cause has drawn help
from public relations consultants and volunteers who organized a Web
site. Friend-of-the-court briefs were filed by former state and federal
prosecutors and judges, state and national defense lawyer associations
and watchdog groups like the Innocence Project. The case was featured
on Court TV and news programs including “48 Hours.”
Mr. Tankleff had just turned 17 when his parents, Seymour and Arlene,
were slashed and bludgeoned in their spacious home in Belle Terre, on a
North Shore cliff overlooking Long Island Sound on Sept. 7, 1988. He
was arrested that day, based on the disputed confession, which became
the prime evidence in his conviction.
Appeals to state and federal courts challenging the admissibility of
the confession were rejected, sometimes narrowly.
Several new witnesses came forward starting in 2003, implicating Joseph
Creedon and Peter Kent as the killers. Mr. Tankleff said he believed
the two had acted at the behest of his father’s embittered business
partner, Jerard Steuerman. Under oath, the three men have all denied
guilt, though other witnesses said they had admitted their involvement.
Last year, Judge Stephen Braslow of Suffolk County Court denied an
appeal, discounting the witnesses as “a cavalcade of nefarious
characters.” Several had psychological problems, criminal records or
histories of drug abuse. But others included a restaurant owner, a
cabinet maker, a retired businessman and a priest.
In reversing Judge Braslow, the appellate court said: “The county court
in effect applied a blanket disqualification for all of the defendant’s
proffered evidence. It viewed almost all of the defendant’s witnesses
as questionable, untrustworthy or unreliable.” But, the appellate
judges said, “At this juncture there is no basis to conclude that all
of the subject evidence is inadmissible.”
The panel noted that the lower court had “completely disregarded a
crucial fact which is pivotal to our determination” — that many of the
witnesses did not know each other, yet implicated Mr. Creedon and Mr.
Steuerman.
“It appears that the county court never considered that the cumulative
effect of the new evidence created a probability that, had such
evidence been received at trial, the verdict would have been more
favorable to the defendant,” the appellate court said. It concluded,
“This evidence warrants a new trial.”
The decision was signed by Judges Reinaldo E. Rivera, Gabriel M.
Krausman, Anita R. Florio and Mark C. Dillon.
At the time of the murders, Seymour Tankleff was pressuring Mr.
Steuerman to repay him $500,000, and they were fighting over control of
their growing chain of Strathmore Bagel stores, witnesses testified
early in the case. Mr. Steuerman was at the Tankleff home for a late
poker party on the night of the murders and was the last player to
leave, according to testimony.
When Detective McCready and other investigators arrived at the scene
the next morning, Martin Tankleff — who had called 911 and administered
first aid to his father — told them to investigate Mr. Steuerman.
Instead, they focused on Mr. Tankleff.
Detective McCready acknowledged that he had tricked Mr. Tankleff during
interrogation, telling him that investigators had found his hairs in
his mother’s hands, that a humidity test proved he had used the shower
to wash off the blood and that his father had regained consciousness
and named Mr. Tankleff as the attacker.
None of that was true, but Mr. Tankleff said he began doubting himself.
He told the interrogators: “Could I have blacked out ... and done
this?” and adding, “Could I be possessed?” That led to the disputed
admissions.
A co-founder of the Innocence Project, Barry Scheck, said on Friday,
“This had all the earmarks of a classic false confession.”
A decade after Mr. Tankleff went to prison, a private investigator
working for the defense, Jay Salpeter, began turning up new evidence.
The first breakthrough was finding Glenn Harris, an ex-convict who said
he had driven Mr. Creedon and Mr. Kent to and from the Tankleff house
that night. Other witnesses followed, including Mr. Creedon’s son, who
said his father had admitted to the killings.
Despite Detective McCready’s denials that he knew Mr. Steuerman, two
witnesses said they had seen the men together. A restaurant owner said
Detective McCready told him that a construction business he owned had
done work for Mr. Steuerman.
There were also questions about District Attorney Spota, who as a
private lawyer had represented Mr. McCready when he was investigated by
a state commission that found he had lied in another murder case, and
later when Mr. McCready was charged and acquitted of assault. Mr.
Spota’s law partner had also represented Mr. Steuerman.
“The big question is what happens now,” said Bennett L. Gershman, a law
professor at Pace University and a former prosecutor who has followed
the case closely. “You have three people walking at liberty — Creedon,
Steuerman and Kent — who are potential killers. Is Spota going to
continue on the case? I don’t see how he can.”
Mr. Gershman praised the appellate ruling, saying: “Finally you have an
objective, fair-minded view of this case, which has never happened
before.”
|