GUILTY NY - Vincent Viafore, 46, Newburgh, 19 April 2015 - #2

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I watched it last night. So Angelika sent the neighbors (Barbara) up on the mountain a text saying that her and Vinnie were kayaking out to the island and for her to look out for them.

I agree with 20/20 last night, if she were truly intent on killing him, why tell the people (Barbara) on the mountain that you will be out there (I am assuming these are the same people with the telescope).
 
Any thoughts on the first statement by Varges?

"Before the Jury weighs in, make up your own mind"
 
Watched the show this morning. Still not convinced of her innocence. My thoughts are that it is a news program that needs to produce a program that will make them money and get them viewers. Editing was done to portray the event the way they wanted it to be portrayed--which seemed to me to be to raise doubt that she caused his death. One thing I thought was interesting was the text messages to Barbara. While I get that it would be odd for someone who is about to harm someone to text someone who lives nearby so there could be a potential witness, is it possible that she knew that her friend Barbara was not at home at the time she was texting her? Again, going back to the "elaborate ruse" statement made earlier by investigators. I still can't help but believe there are key pieces to this puzzle that we are missing otherwise she would not be sitting in OCJ on 9 million dollars bail awaiting trial. JMHO.

As for the statement by Varges, I think it is unprofessional. "Before the Jury weighs in, make up your mind" in my mind implies that we are supposed to believe that they had access to every piece of evidence that will be presented at trial and they presented both sides of the story in an unbiased way.
 
Watched the show this morning. Still not convinced of her innocence. My thoughts are that it is a news program that needs to produce a program that will make them money and get them viewers. Editing was done to portray the event the way they wanted it to be portrayed--which seemed to me to be to raise doubt that she caused his death. One thing I thought was interesting was the text messages to Barbara. While I get that it would be odd for someone who is about to harm someone to text someone who lives nearby so there could be a potential witness, is it possible that she knew that her friend Barbara was not at home at the time she was texting her? Again, going back to the "elaborate ruse" statement made earlier by investigators. I still can't help but believe there are key pieces to this puzzle that we are missing otherwise she would not be sitting in OCJ on 9 million dollars bail awaiting trial. JMHO.

As for the statement by Varges, I think it is unprofessional. "Before the Jury weighs in, make up your mind" in my mind implies that we are supposed to believe that they had access to every piece of evidence that will be presented at trial and they presented both sides of the story in an unbiased way.


BBM
Good post. I feel the same.
I happened to catch the show by chance.

I'm glad they showed that cc footage of his car again with one kayak on top-that was bothering me. They said the other was inside.

She really reminds me of Jody Arias. Didn't JA also do yoga in interrogation room? And her demure demeanor--I'm not buying it.

From the show, I learned she was posing in lingerie that day. It was cold, I live in the area. There was ice on the river a few weeks prior. I also learned that she made a confession on the island and that's why they brought her in.

It was also mentioned that a witness saw her flip her own boat as they were approaching.

For those that came late, I have paddled there. The boats they use are not very good. Yes, you can flip a boat. He may have been drinking/drugs prior to their trip. Who knows?

My first instinct found it very odd that they crossed to the west side to launch. That means they had to cross the river in their kayaks. It would have been much easier to launch on the east side (where they live). They would have had a much easier time and been very close to shore. 4PM is not the best time to depart.

Also Bannerman's Island is restricted and she knew that.
 
Given what we know right now, the charge is absurd and the bail amount, scandalous.

Either she pissed off somebody with power in local LE or the Viafores have connections, or both.
 
I watched it last night. So Angelika sent the neighbors (Barbara) up on the mountain a text saying that her and Vinnie were kayaking out to the island and for her to look out for them.

I agree with 20/20 last night, if she were truly intent on killing him, why tell the people (Barbara) on the mountain that you will be out there (I am assuming these are the same people with the telescope).

BBM. So that there will be a witness to her flipping over as in "See it was an accident!". Jordan Graham also texted a friend that she was going to do something the night she pushed her new husband off a cliff. I became aware of this case yesterday after watching the 20/20 episode. I came away with the belief she is guilty. She is just like Jodi Arias. If you don't like the sex, you walk away, you don't kill them!!! If she didn't pull the drain plug, and that didn't kill him, she is at least guilty of manslaughter, not doing enough to try to save him and probably delaying calling 911. Also they reported that he drank some beer, she probably encouraged that and the time/path they went back.
 
I'm not sure she DID confess to either intentionally trying to harm him or to not trying to save him. The interrogation went on for 12 hours or so, right? And only a few minutes of it have been made public.

From what I've read, she actually continually said she did NOT want him dead, and that she wanted to marry him and have kids with him, though she sometimes felt stressed and unhappy with his alleged sexual demands and sometimes controlling/jealous behavior.

I've also read that 6 or more hours in she started agreeing with LE's leading questions, and that she may have done so because she just wanted to get out of that room. Stranger things have happened, especially if she had tried for 6 hours to tell them truths they simply refused to believe.


She clearly said in parts of it that she did want him dead, that she had a demon side to her that the prosecutors didn't want to see, and that she didn't like the kinky sex (3somes, *advertiser censored*, strip clubs).
 
I have never understood why people who say they are innocent confess to crimes, no matter how much pressure is placed on them. That doesn't excuse lengthy and high-pressure questioning tactics, but how can anyone think "giving LE what they want" is wise if they are innocent? Even if you don't know your rights, silence would be better than a false confession IMO. It just doesn't make sense to me. I would rather endure physical abuse than confess to something I didn't do. I don't mean to sound judgemental. I am sincerely curious. Am I missing something here?

Heading off to google false confessions...


Agreed, I don't understand the mentality. It's not something I would ever do and I'd ask if I was free to leave. But false confessions do happen as in the Ryan Ferguson case. I don't believe that's what happened here.
 
It is impossible to overstate just how meaningless that plug is. She seems to have told LE she removed it from his kayak at an earlier time, for whatever reason. I saw the snippet of out of context interrogation during which LE is trying to get her to say she removed it out of malice.

I'm sorry, but whole notion of removed plug as evidence of murder is just silly. Let's say she did want to kill him on that kayak trip, and her plans included having his boat fill up with water so that he was forced out of the boat and into the water. BTW....kayaks don't sink, period, unless they are smashed into pieces, so if she wanted the boat to fill up with water it wasn't to have him sink.

If she wanted to make sure the boat filled up with water she would have convinced him to not put a skirt on, and to make sure he drowned, to not wear a jacket.

But...he would have had to agree.

BBM
. He didn't wear a life jacket- she did. Also she may have encouraged him to drink beer while she probably didn't. I think she set up the perfect conditions for him to drown.
 
I am not sure how you can argue with the science that was presented. It was proven that the missing plug had little to no effect in the capsizing of Vincent's kayak. It was proven that 3-4 foot waves would have dumped more than enough water into the hull of the kayak to capsize it. They proved both that removing the ring from the paddle and even taking the paddle from Vincent were not the cause of his death.

Vincent chose NOT to wear a life vest. He chose to get in the water without one. Angelika chose to wear one. It is most likely the reason she is still here today.

I avidly ride horses. I choose to wear a helmet every time I ride. I cannot force anyone, particularly another adult, to wear a helmet. I can tell them why they should, I can deny them access to one of my horses or my property if they chose to not wear a helmet, but in the end, it is THEIR CHOICE!

I was married to a man, an avid road biker, who refused to wear a helmet. Even the fact we had a small child, who needed her father in her life for various reasons, did not contribute to his decision to wear a helmet. No one else was going to tell him what to do with HIS life. It got to the point that the other people he biked with no longer want to ride with him due to the lack of helmet.

You can hear the panic in Angelika's voice in the 911 call. She denies any involvement in his death initially in the police interview, and then 6 hours into it starts to crumble. You can hear officers leading her and her then parroting them after she tells them she needs to get home to her kitten. LE does make it sounds like if she tells them what they want to hear, she gets to leave and go home to her comfort zone!

I was previously on the fence but this has swayed me that this woman is being railroaded.

BBM. See, I hear staged act... and I hear soft little girl voice in her 20/20 interview, much like Jodi Arias. My gut tells me she is just like her.
She also wore a beige sweater for her interview and it was pre-trial, more things in common with Jodi.
 
BBM
Good post. I feel the same.
I happened to catch the show by chance.

I'm glad they showed that cc footage of his car again with one kayak on top-that was bothering me. They said the other was inside.

She really reminds me of Jody Arias. Didn't JA also do yoga in interrogation room? And her demure demeanor--I'm not buying it.

From the show, I learned she was posing in lingerie that day. It was cold, I live in the area. There was ice on the river a few weeks prior. I also learned that she made a confession on the island and that's why they brought her in.

It was also mentioned that a witness saw her flip her own boat as they were approaching.

For those that came late, I have paddled there. The boats they use are not very good. Yes, you can flip a boat. He may have been drinking/drugs prior to their trip. Who knows?

My first instinct found it very odd that they crossed to the west side to launch. That means they had to cross the river in their kayaks. It would have been much easier to launch on the east side (where they live). They would have had a much easier time and been very close to shore. 4PM is not the best time to depart.

Also Bannerman's Island is restricted and she knew that.
Sure doesn't pass the smell test to me.
 
Given what we know right now, the charge is absurd and the bail amount, scandalous.

Either she pissed off somebody with power in local LE or the Viafores have connections, or both.
Or LE knows she will leave the US.
 
He also wore neither a wet nor dry suit and his kayak itself was said by other kayakers to be ill-suited for Hudson conditions. Add that to no personal flotation device and his status as a responsible outdoorsman sags a bit. Graswald's to blame for all this though, I suspect?

She seems the very stereotype of the mysterious woman from a foreign culture, come to these shores to bewitch and destroy our menfolk doesn't she. And flaunting convention that way later, positively the shrew. Or at least that's the xenophobic subtext of much of what I'm reading here.


Yes, ultimately he made bad choices under the influence of alcohol. But she may have been the one to convince him to drink. I find it fishy that she didn't initially capsize until the rescuers were in view, and only she had the life vest. It has nothing to do with her being foreign and everything to do with acting like Jodi Arias. How does a much smaller woman manage to kill a big man, well... both of them succeeded, just in different ways.
 
We only have Angelika word on what happened that evening.
 
We only have Angelika word on what happened that evening.
Well, actually, we've heard several experts weigh in on the specifics upon which the state has hung its case. It ain't lookin' good.
 
Yes, ultimately he made bad choices under the influence of alcohol. But she may have been the one to convince him to drink. I find it fishy that she didn't initially capsize until the rescuers were in view, and only she had the life vest. It has nothing to do with her being foreign and everything to do with acting like Jodi Arias. How does a much smaller woman manage to kill a big man, well... both of them succeeded, just in different ways.
"Everything to do with acting like Jody Arias." What sleuthing is this? C'mon. A bathroom shower is not the Hudson River, albeit both hold water. (Unlike the state's case.)
 
Sure whatever if you have info from the State share. Would one of the Experts you speak of be Michael Archer?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
64
Guests online
3,432
Total visitors
3,496

Forum statistics

Threads
604,341
Messages
18,170,875
Members
232,420
Latest member
Txwoman
Back
Top