Found Deceased NY - Joseph Comunale, 26, Manhattan, 12 Nov 2016 #2 *Arrests*

[Momoffourboys]

Hi everyone, I am just wondering, does anyone have an opinion why the elder Rackover did not bond James out of jail? I would think he would want to talk to him, most likely privately? Does anyone know if he visits him in jail? I am assuming that the elder Rackover is still paying the rent on James' apartment, do we know this? I am really curious regarding the status of their relationship. He must be paying for his lawyer, or is the lawyer doing it pro bono? I am very interested in others opinions regarding this. How do we know that their relationship was on the rocks, was it because Jeffrey went to California and James went to the Hamptons for the summer. Maybe Jeffrey had business in California and he thought James would have more fun in the Hamptons. I am sure he must have financed the Hamptons interlude, no? Did James commute into the city, or did he no longer have that job Jeffrey got for him. Anyone's thoughts are welcome. Thank you. I'm sorry if any of these have been answered, I have read every page, but have not read every single newspaper article. Thanks, all. Katt

Hi Katt! Jeff has not been named a POI or suspect and is not to be sleuthed (here ;-)).

 

[katsrfun]

Sorry, I know that rule well. I apologize. Such a tragedy, can't help but wonder from all angles. But, again I am sorry. Thank you for the reminder. Katt

 

[BUcriminologist]

http://videos.news12.com/Document.pdf

Maybe this link to it will work

Wow...

Gemma's defense seems to have some very legitimate points.. IF, and let's play devils advocate here for a second, he is completely innocent, can you imagine how he must feel? Perhaps he was a witness to JRs behavior and did what LD should have done... and that is leave the apartment.

By the way..bottom of pg 16, footnote 10 - I can't copy the snip from the PDF... but look for yourselves... LD volunteered the information regarding his confession, BUT after being told of Law enforcements intent to arrest for murder and being read his rights, and he was not probed with questions. In fact the detective didn't answer Dilione at all, even after LD asked if he should tell what everyone happened about the muder...

so from this fact alone, the police did everything by the book and Pappas' claims get thrown out the window...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Freddie246]

Hi Everyone, I just thought I would give those of you who aren't familiar with my neighborhood a view of the Grand Sutton that has not been used in MSM. So this is looking at the southern side (e 58 St) of the block. All the way on the right is the Queensboro Bridge. The huge brown building next to it is The Sovereign and the skinny black glass tower with what looks like a brown triangular hat is the Grand Sutton. The Grand Sutton and The Sovereign share a party wall. I took this from my balcony on the 30th floor. Too bad I couldn't see what went on in the 4th floor. Anyways, thought some of you might be interested

 

[Inthedetails]

Thanks for the photo, Freddie246! You have a great view.

 

[TeenaNJ]

I was wondering the same thing!

http://streeteasy.com/property/7841979-the-grand-sutton-4b

If you read the listing it says views of 58th, which would be the rear of the buidling.

ETA: the listing could be incorrect, I am not saying this is without a doubt that unit but that's just what I assumed

a few listings also mention: "The Grand Sutton is a luxury doorman building with only two apartments per floor ."

 

[TeenaNJ]

Wow...

Gemma's defense seems to have some very legitimate points.. IF, and let's play devils advocate here for a second, he is completely innocent, can you imagine how he must feel? Perhaps he was a witness to JRs behavior and did what LD should have done... and that is leave the apartment.

By the way..bottom of pg 16, footnote 10 - I can't copy the snip from the PDF... but look for yourselves... LD volunteered the information regarding his confession, BUT after being told of Law enforcements intent to arrest for murder and being read his rights, and he was not probed with questions. In fact the detective didn't answer Dilione at all, even after LD asked if he should tell what everyone happened about the muder...

so from this fact alone, the police did everything by the book and Pappas' claims get thrown out the window...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Freddie246]

a few listings also mention: "The Grand Sutton is a luxury doorman building with only two apartments per floor ."

TeenaNJ,
The Grand Sutton is indeed a luxury doorman building, but I don't know about the 2 apts/ floor bit. i believe some floors have only 2 apts, like the 32nd, where JRtheElder lives but I'm not so sure about the 4th. I'm more inclined to believe it's like most other buildings that have all different sizes of apts & different numbers of apts on different floors. Probably the higher floors have 1 or 2 apts because they tend to be a lot more expensive than the lower floors.

 

[jillnors2]

Ffthanksy

 

[Freddie246]

Ffthanksy

Hi Jillnors2!
I don't know either JR. I can tell you the people who live in that building are still absolutely furious about what happened in their home. I know after this thing happened JRtheElder went into seclusion at a hotel and sent everyone in the building flowers. A few years ago there was a murder in my building. Some crazy thing where a son was high on heroin and killed his mother. I can't say with certainty how the people in the Grand Sutton feel but I'm sure it's not good. I don't know how much the blame Jeffery for the actions of JR & LD, but people in Manhattan tend to get over things and try to move on as quickly as possible. At least that's what happened in my bldg. Crazy how all this debauchery happens in such an exclusive neighborhood, right? My personal feelings are that JRtheElder was a victim of a con man and he suffered a lot. His reputation took a big hit and I'm sure there still are some tensions between him & his neighbors. I think he just fell for the wrong person- something I think many of us have experienced. As far as renting an apt for a convicted felon, more felons than you would think live in these luxury buildings. Look at all the Wall Street guys that go to prison but somehow end up with multimillion dollar apartments.. Bernie Madoff, Jordan Belfort, etc... I guess my point is that in these buildings money usually takes precedence over morality unfortunately. I'm not sure if I answered your question, but I guess I was just trying to give a picture of the general attitudes of the people in this neighborhood, MOO of course. The big difference with this case is that the typical "Sutton Place Felon in a Luxury Building" usually doesn't murder someone in their apt......

 

[BUcriminologist]

Thanks for screen shotting that for me

All, feel free to chime in with your thoughts... especially if anyone has a different interpretation of that info...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[BUcriminologist]

Thank you Teena!

All, feel free to chime in on the screenshots... especially if you're interpretations of the info from the document are different than mine...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Lawdini01234]

Thank you Teena!

All, feel free to chime in on the screenshots... especially if you're interpretations of the info from the document are different than mine...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

To my understanding LDs lawyer can try and fight the "confession" and I hate to even type that.

I'm only going off of what the motion filed on behalf of MG says, this could be a snippet of what transpired. Hearing the tapes would be best obviously.

People v. Kaye

https://casetext.com/case/people-v-kaye-7

This case presents the issue of whether spontaneous statements made to the police by a defendant who has been advised of his constitutional rights are rendered inadmissible solely because the defendant is in custody and represented by counsel who is not present when the statement is volunteered.


No doubt there will be a Huntley Hearing for LD

Huntley Hearing is a pretrial hearing in New York State and is requested for the purpose of reviewing the manner in which the police obtained statements from the defendant. People v. Huntley, 15 N.Y.2d 72 (N.Y. 1965) is New York State's application of a United States Supreme Court case Jackson v. Denno (378 US 368).

Huntley provides that a defendant may challenge the voluntary and lawful nature of any statement made to police if the prosecution intends to use the statement at trial. If the prosecution intends to use a defendant's statement, the prosecution must inform the defense of its intention. The defendant has the right to a Huntley hearing in front of the judge to determine whether the statement can be used at the trial. The court will consider factors like whether the defendant was in custody, if in custody, whether the defendant waived his/her Miranda rights, and whether the defendant gave the statement of his own free will. Huntley requires that the judge must find voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt before the confession can be submitted to the trial jury.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Inthedetails]

To my understanding LDs lawyer can try and fight the "confession" and I hate to even type that.

I'm only going off of what the motion filed on behalf of MG says, this could be a snippet of what transpired. Hearing the tapes would be best obviously.

People v. Kaye

https://casetext.com/case/people-v-kaye-7

This case presents the issue of whether spontaneous statements made to the police by a defendant who has been advised of his constitutional rights are rendered inadmissible solely because the defendant is in custody and represented by counsel who is not present when the statement is volunteered.


No doubt there will be a Huntley Hearing for LD

Huntley Hearing is a pretrial hearing in New York State and is requested for the purpose of reviewing the manner in which the police obtained statements from the defendant. People v. Huntley, 15 N.Y.2d 72 (N.Y. 1965) is New York State's application of a United States Supreme Court case Jackson v. Denno (378 US 368).

Huntley provides that a defendant may challenge the voluntary and lawful nature of any statement made to police if the prosecution intends to use the statement at trial. If the prosecution intends to use a defendant's statement, the prosecution must inform the defense of its intention. The defendant has the right to a Huntley hearing in front of the judge to determine whether the statement can be used at the trial. The court will consider factors like whether the defendant was in custody, if in custody, whether the defendant waived his/her Miranda rights, and whether the defendant gave the statement of his own free will. Huntley requires that the judge must find voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt before the confession can be submitted to the trial jury.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

This is so interesting! Of course, it's also a bit infuriating when you feel close to the case, like we do with Joey. But, in terms of living in a land that is ruled by law and protects individual rights, it's very interesting. I will be watching what happens, as we all will.

Thanks for the info. I always learn something from WSers.

 

[Lawdini01234]

To my understanding LDs lawyer can try and fight the "confession" and I hate to even type that.

I'm only going off of what the motion filed on behalf of MG says, this could be a snippet of what transpired. Hearing the tapes would be best obviously.

People v. Kaye

https://casetext.com/case/people-v-kaye-7

This case presents the issue of whether spontaneous statements made to the police by a defendant who has been advised of his constitutional rights are rendered inadmissible solely because the defendant is in custody and represented by counsel who is not present when the statement is volunteered.


No doubt there will be a Huntley Hearing for LD

Huntley Hearing is a pretrial hearing in New York State and is requested for the purpose of reviewing the manner in which the police obtained statements from the defendant. People v. Huntley, 15 N.Y.2d 72 (N.Y. 1965) is New York State's application of a United States Supreme Court case Jackson v. Denno (378 US 368).

Huntley provides that a defendant may challenge the voluntary and lawful nature of any statement made to police if the prosecution intends to use the statement at trial. If the prosecution intends to use a defendant's statement, the prosecution must inform the defense of its intention. The defendant has the right to a Huntley hearing in front of the judge to determine whether the statement can be used at the trial. The court will consider factors like whether the defendant was in custody, if in custody, whether the defendant waived his/her Miranda rights, and whether the defendant gave the statement of his own free will. Huntley requires that the judge must find voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt before the confession can be submitted to the trial jury.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I wanted to add but to late for editing

That "spontaneous" is the keyword


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[BUcriminologist]

To my understanding LDs lawyer can try and fight the "confession" and I hate to even type that.

I'm only going off of what the motion filed on behalf of MG says, this could be a snippet of what transpired. Hearing the tapes would be best obviously.

People v. Kaye

https://casetext.com/case/people-v-kaye-7

This case presents the issue of whether spontaneous statements made to the police by a defendant who has been advised of his constitutional rights are rendered inadmissible solely because the defendant is in custody and represented by counsel who is not present when the statement is volunteered.


No doubt there will be a Huntley Hearing for LD

Huntley Hearing is a pretrial hearing in New York State and is requested for the purpose of reviewing the manner in which the police obtained statements from the defendant. People v. Huntley, 15 N.Y.2d 72 (N.Y. 1965) is New York State's application of a United States Supreme Court case Jackson v. Denno (378 US 368).

Huntley provides that a defendant may challenge the voluntary and lawful nature of any statement made to police if the prosecution intends to use the statement at trial. If the prosecution intends to use a defendant's statement, the prosecution must inform the defense of its intention. The defendant has the right to a Huntley hearing in front of the judge to determine whether the statement can be used at the trial. The court will consider factors like whether the defendant was in custody, if in custody, whether the defendant waived his/her Miranda rights, and whether the defendant gave the statement of his own free will. Huntley requires that the judge must find voluntariness beyond a reasonable doubt before the confession can be submitted to the trial jury.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Thank you for that! In my opinion LDs defense is going to try to prove his comments inadmissible because... let's face it, when you have a client who leads LE to where he buried the body, the chances of winning that case doesn't look very good. It makes me nauseous to think that LDs comments during interrogations could be thrown out because of a technicality his defense happens to reveal


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[BUcriminologist]

Thank you for that! In my opinion LDs defense is going to try to prove his comments inadmissible because... let's face it, when you have a client who leads LE to where he buried the body, the chances of winning that case doesn't look very good. It makes me nauseous to think that LDs comments during interrogations could be thrown out because of a technicality his defense happens to reveal


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

However... I'm hoping LDs statement saying "I want to tell what happened (to the DA)" may be what proves his statements weren't exactly coerced out of him.. but yes, the tapes need to confirm that he did in fact that say


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Inthedetails]

Thank you for that! In my opinion LDs defense is going to try to prove his comments inadmissible because... let's face it, when you have a client who leads LE to where he buried the body, the chances of winning that case doesn't look very good. It makes me nauseous to think that LDs comments during interrogations could be thrown out because of a technicality his defense happens to reveal


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It's also a stalling tactic as well. I happen to think LD's statements will stand and that LE proceeded properly with the interrogation, but given that we live according to the law, it is worth the effort to examine the procedures closely.

I predict we will see LD facing the charges in court. JMO, of course.

 

[BUcriminologist]

It's also a stalling tactic as well. I happen to think LD's statements will stand and that LE proceeded properly with the interrogation, but given that we live according to the law, it is worth the effort to examine the procedures closely.

I predict we will see LD facing the charges in court. JMO, of course.

1000%


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[icantbelieveit]

Do we have any info from the girls?