CA - Janet Kovacich, 27, Auburn, 8 Sept 1982

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

justice4janet said:
hi everyone. this current legal tango is very important to paul's case since he's hoping to have his bail reinstated. the only way that can happen is if the special circumstance allegations are dismissed.

for the person wondering about dixie, i sincerely doubt she'll ever admit to believing paul murdered janet. all the more astounding since she worked as a homicide detective in placer county.
Click to expand...

Either way, I am fascinated to know what she thinks. Or at least, what she says she thinks. She's got immunity now apparantly but I can't imagine they'll call her unless they think she'll give up something good.

PS - welcome, and thanks for jumping in.
 
Yes, welcome justice4janet! :)

I was reading the article in my Auburn Journal - and this part sticks out to me... In March 2005 DNA evidence collected in connection with the 1982 disappearance of Janet Kovacich along with human remains were sent to.... for forensic analysis and confirmed to be that of Janet... now, is this ADDITIONAL human remains, beside the skull they found in October, 1995?? I wonder if they found more.... :( so sad.... sorry...

I don't believe I'll go back to court until opening statements! It seems there will probably be MORE delays... as per defense team stragedy!! So I hang in and wait...
 
niner, i don't believe the defense is asking for the actual murder indictment to be dismissed~~i believe it's just for the special circumstances murder so that paul can be released on bail again.

the part of an auburn journal article that stood out to me was:

According to documents filed May 15 in Placer County Superior Court, a partial skull was found in Rollins Lake Oct. 22, 1995. No other evidence was collected at that time.

NO OTHER EVIDENCE WAS COLLECTED AT THAT TIME.
 
to me the saddest part of this is that janet's parents didn't get to live to see paul behind bars where he belongs. they didn't just lose janet that day, they lost their grandchildren, too. i'm glad her brother's seeing some justice finally. i love the irony that paul is now wearing an orange jumpsuit in placer county where he was himself a deputy sheriff.
 
justice4janet said:
niner, i don't believe the defense is asking for the actual murder indictment to be dismissed~~i believe it's just for the special circumstances murder so that paul can be released on bail again.

the part of an auburn journal article that stood out to me was:

According to documents filed May 15 in Placer County Superior Court, a partial skull was found in Rollins Lake Oct. 22, 1995. No other evidence was collected at that time.

NO OTHER EVIDENCE WAS COLLECTED AT THAT TIME.
Click to expand...

yes, I understand that "no other evidence was collected AT THAT TIME" - but I wonder if LATER they found MORE human remains - as it says in the article - I guess we shall just have to wait for the trial... I'm game!!

Yes, - it is an irony - that Paul is wearing orange now...
 
I just read in my Auburn Journal an update on what happened at the hearing on June 5th:

snip...
Court documents state that on the day she disappeared Janet had discussed leaving her husband and tansferring her children to a school near Lake of the Pines. She phoned the school around 9am and again 10am when she made an appointment for 11:10am to enroll the children in...
Janet was unable to drive due to recent breast surgery. The prosectuion asserts that Kovacich drove her, but she never reached the school.
Court documents filed June 5, in part, that during the drive to the school, "the defendant tried to convince Janet not to divorce him..."
"When she refused, he drove her to Rollins Lake, escorted her from the car, and murdered her," the document states.

Next court appearance is on June 21st... probably not going to that one either... :)
 
Next court appearance June 21st.
 
Niner said:
I just read in my Auburn Journal an update on what happened at the hearing on June 5th:

snip...
Court documents state that on the day she disappeared Janet had discussed leaving her husband and tansferring her children to a school near Lake of the Pines. She phoned the school around 9am and again 10am when she made an appointment for 11:10am to enroll the children in...
Janet was unable to drive due to recent breast surgery. The prosectuion asserts that Kovacich drove her, but she never reached the school.
Court documents filed June 5, in part, that during the drive to the school, "the defendant tried to convince Janet not to divorce him..."
"When she refused, he drove her to Rollins Lake, escorted her from the car, and murdered her," the document states.

Next court appearance is on June 21st... probably not going to that one either... :)
Click to expand...

What I want to know is how they (the prosecution) know this stuff (the begging while on the drive, etc)!

The article in the Union says she had breast augmentation surgery as well as scars on her face and shoulder removed. That's interesting.
It also says Kovacich admitted to kicking the dog to death, claiming he was training it at the time.
http://www.theunion.com/article/20070609/NEWS/106090141
 
And because I am a phreak, I must criticize the headline of the Union article mentioned above: "Former deputy faces new charges" The new charges have been known for a few months now....the writer is a bit late on the headline. I found it irritating because I thought maybe there was another new development.



I'll shut up now.
 
no need to shut up, californiacarrie!! :blowkiss: the more the merrier!! but I know what you mean - about the headline...

I noticed in that article this:

In Placer County Superior Court Thursday, Kovacich's attorney,...,argued the defendant did not kidnap his wife on Sept 8, 1982, because she willingly got into his car. Kidnapping was possibly also "incidental and was not used to facilititate' a murder, he said.

sooooo.... is Kovacich admitting she DID get into his car that morning???? :waitasec: or maybe another assumption on part of the prosecutor?? Guess I'll wait til trial!
 
**UPDATE**

Was reading my Auburn Journal last night, and they had an article on the hearing from Thursday, June 21st...

Death Penalty Likely Averted {says the headline}
Judge dismisses kidnap charge in '82 murder case...
Former Placer County Sheriff's Deputy Paul R. Kovacich Jr will not likely face the death pealty after a judge ruled to dismiss a kidnapping enhancement in an Auburn courtroom Thursday.....
A defense motion to dismiss a use of a firearm enhancement was denied by Judge Robert P. McElhany.... If convicted of 1st-degree murder with the enhancements, Kovacich could have faced the death penalty. But citing insufficient evidence on the kidnapping special circumstance, McElhany said the grand jury that indicted Kovacich may have not been advised of any laws relating to the enhancement....

And then the rest of the article is the same as the others... with a "status conference" hearing being set for 1pm, July 5th. "status" of what??? Let's get on with it!!!!???!! LOL!
http://www.auburnjournal.com/articles/2007/06/22/news/top_stories/04kovacich22.txt
 
by the way - I believe I'm going to send an email to Penne Usher, the journalist who is covering the case for the Auburn Journal, and have her explain what she means - when in the article she mentions "along with human remains" - to clarify IF other parts of her body (sorry!) were found along with that partial skull...
 
here's the answer I received from Penne Usher of the Auburn Journal:

Niner:
I probably should change the wording. DNA evidence from Janet's family members (swabs, etc.) were sent to DOJ along with remains, which we now know is the partial skull. I don't believe that more remains have been located.
Hope this helps.
Penne

so - as she says - it is HER wording - human remains - that should be changed.

That clears it up for me!! :cool:
 
Yes! I was surprised she got back to me so quickly!! :dance:
 
just bumping up this thread - as I see that Paul K. will be in court tomorrow - wonder what that will be about - "status" hearing??!! Unfortunately I can't make it - as I have WAY too much work at work!! LOL! :D but will be looking for updates!
 
hi, here's the most recent.

paul was granted bail again. last time around it was 1 million. this time it's 1.5 million. he barely made it last time after his family and dixie posted their properties, so i'm not sure what will happen this time around. i'm sure it will make the paper if he's released.

the da's office is frustrated that paul's attorney's have no dates open for trial this year, so it's looking like march of next year before this thing gets started.

no more court hearings scheduled now until october and i believe that's for a trial conference hearing.

i'll update again if i hear more.

(paul's looking like he aged 20 years over the past 2 years.)
 
justice4janet said:
hi, here's the most recent.

paul was granted bail again. last time around it was 1 million. this time it's 1.5 million. he barely made it last time after his family and dixie posted their properties, so i'm not sure what will happen this time around. i'm sure it will make the paper if he's released.

the da's office is frustrated that paul's attorney's have no dates open for trial this year, so it's looking like march of next year before this thing gets started.

no more court hearings scheduled now until october and i believe that's for a trial conference hearing.

i'll update again if i hear more.

(paul's looking like he aged 20 years over the past 2 years.)
Click to expand...

Thank you for the update!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 66 more.
Total: 298 (members: 67, guests: 231)

Online statistics

Members online
67
Guests online
231
Total visitors
298
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,776
Messages
18,257,812
Members
234,757
Latest member
Kezzie
Back
Top