The NYS Appellate Court's decision says that while Christopher was denied his Crawford right to question his accuser (his mother) because she doesn't remember nodding her head at Det. Bowdish's question: "Did Christopher do this to you?" it was a harmless error. It was harmless because the head nod was only admitted as an explaination of why the police immediately centered their investigation on Christopher...it was not admitted as evidence of Christopher's guilt. But, in any case, the Appellate Court said that the Prosecution presented such a perponderance of evidence proving their case against Christopher, that the head nod was not the reason the jury convicted...therefore, its admission was harmless. The Decision then repeats the bricks in the wall of evidence they were building. They conclude that if you pull out the head nod brick, the wall still stands.
Kindlon makes noises about taking this case to the US Supreme Court. He will probably present a petition to that Court....but, will the US Supreme Court, after reviewing all the evidence, want to over rule a jury verdict and 2 state appellate Courts because of a mother who "can't remember" nodding her head? A mother whose lack of memory has allowed these appeals... and who lives her life determine to free her son?
To allow a defendant freedom because he has rendered his victim so injured and traumatized that she cannot remember, or choses not to re-live the attack so that she can remember what happened, would be a travesty of justice.
It doesn't matter how many more appeals are made; the jury already renderred the verdict: GUILTY.
