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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I guess she pled to this lesser charge in negotiations? It's a bit confusing as many of her actions and parts of her testimony seem to suggest more than 'negligence'.

Could you elaborate?

I remember reading about this last year. A few observations.

1) I've been in the Hudson river in a canoe, including on Bannerman's island. It is a bit confusing to imagine a "murder plot" that relies on somebody drowning there, even in cold water. I've been in a swamped canoe in that part of the Hudson. I've also been in very cold water in other places. It shocks a person to fall into cold water but a fit person can swim a short distance in cold water.

2) The evidence seems ro point to "a convenient accident", i.e., it was honestly an accident, but it isn't going to leave a broken heart. The guy was pretty far from ideal and she was gold digging, but there is no indication even, as far as I know, that she planned or intended anything.

3) Taking the drain plug out of the bottom of a kayak is laughable as 'a murder plot'. The detectives were fishing, trying to play kojak, and they knew they had a vulnerable woman who would cooperate with them literally no matter what they did. So instead of looking for facts they set her up.

4) One article says he asked her to call 911 while he was drowning. Does anybody take that seriously? Obviously she was "over cooperating" under extreme pressure from a very ambitious cop.

5) I cannot imagine that too many people take this death as a murder, based on the evidence, unless more evidence has emerged. Has it?
 

Wow. Immediately eligible for parole.

Well, I guess this kind of nixes the argument that she may not have been guilty of anything except being foreign and scared of and manipulated by the police. Oh I;m sure some will say she just pled because the risk was too great but if her case was so solid...
 
Could you elaborate?

I remember reading about this last year. A few observations.

1) I've been in the Hudson river in a canoe, including on Bannerman's island. It is a bit confusing to imagine a "murder plot" that relies on somebody drowning there, even in cold water. I've been in a swamped canoe in that part of the Hudson. I've also been in very cold water in other places. It shocks a person to fall into cold water but a fit person can swim a short distance in cold water.

2) The evidence seems ro point to "a convenient accident", i.e., it was honestly an accident, but it isn't going to leave a broken heart. The guy was pretty far from ideal and she was gold digging, but there is no indication even, as far as I know, that she planned or intended anything.

3) Taking the drain plug out of the bottom of a kayak is laughable as 'a murder plot'. The detectives were fishing, trying to play kojak, and they knew they had a vulnerable woman who would cooperate with them literally no matter what they did. So instead of looking for facts they set her up.

4) One article says he asked her to call 911 while he was drowning. Does anybody take that seriously? Obviously she was "over cooperating" under extreme pressure from a very ambitious cop.

5) I cannot imagine that too many people take this death as a murder, based on the evidence, unless more evidence has emerged. Has it?

She pled guilty to negligent homicide. Bottom line. So she is admitting culpability for recklessly failing to act. But yes, it;s not murder.

It seems appropriate.
 
Wow. Immediately eligible for parole.

Well, I guess this kind of nixes the argument that she may not have been guilty of anything except being foreign and scared of and manipulated by the police. Oh I;m sure some will say she just pled because the risk was too great but if her case was so solid...

Sorry to push, but could you explain how it "kind of nixes the argument that she may not have been guilty of anything except being foreign and scared of and manipulated by the police"?

Was she a small foreign woman in an area where she had no family and did not speak the language fluently? I get the impression from news that this was the case.

Can a woman being held involuntarily by a powerful group be made to feel some intimidation or pressure? And in this case was there a deliberate attempt by police to apply pressure? It seems to be the case here.

Do the facts of the "confession" that she produced under pressure match what a person would consider reasonably likely? Her confession does not actually make much sense, it does not look like she was recounting facts. It looks more like a cop took advantage.

1) The body was not found for weeks, so he was not buoyant. In other words he had a low fat ratio on his body. He may have been wearing a lot of clothing and that would have made it hard to swim. He may have been drinking too. A drunk person falling into very cold water with a lot of clothing can drown easily enough, but if he is really drunk and negatively buoyant than he is going to go under water quickly.

2) The drain plug theory is mentioned in several comments. Imagine a kayak with the marketing pitch "Comes with a drain plug that, when removed, causes the kayak to sink quickly".

3) The guy was pretty big and would have been less stable in his kayak. She was very small and would have had more stability. Still, imagine the scenario pictured in the confession. If he were above water, and panicking he might have approached her kayak and would have overturned it obviously, that didn't happen.

4) He supposedly asked her to call 911. Would he have done that while he was flailing? Or was he holding onto some flotation object? Hard to picture a drowning person asking somebody to call 911. It sounds more like the kind of fake detail that a person from another country might concoct if they wanted to add local credibility to a confession. He would have known that 911 would be little help, she might not have known that.

Police do have a well deserved reputation for taking advantage of vulnerable people. It looks like that is what happened here. People who need to always take the side of police, even when the police are victimizing somebody, are only creating an atmosphere that perpetuates the problem.

I am curious how somebody who does not see any problems in this case would view a case where the woman was American. Just last year I think a dozen or more Oakland cops were criticized for having sex with an underaged 'prostitute'. Some of them may have even lost their jobs. Would a person say that the girl there was victimizing the police by complaining? Or perhaps was she justified in complaining because she was American and American cops should not abuse American women, but foreign women are fair game?
 
She pled guilty to negligent homicide. Bottom line. So she is admitting culpability for recklessly failing to act. But yes, it;s not murder.

It seems appropriate.

So you are saying that you believe she did what? Pulled the drain plug from the kayak? Failed to call 911 when he asked her to? They were engaged to be married so if she was going to kill him, why wouldn't she wait til they were actually married and she would have gotten a lot of benefit?

add
If you agree that 'murder' is unlikely, to what degree do you think the still serious charges are an attempt by police to cover their own misconduct in this investigation. And I'm sorry if that sounds rude.
 
On researching a little more.

1) "Graswald reached an agreement with prosecutors to plead guilty to the lesser felony charge of negligent homicide, in which she admitted she should have perceived the risks of the dangers out on the water that day. She has always maintained she never intended to kill Viafore."

2) Most news articles are heavily slanted towards the view that "the police tried to prosecute a dangerous killer woman, but were foiled by a flawed justice system". A person should read through the Daily Mail UK comments for some of the silliest examples.

3) There is little doubt, and all of the evidence seems to indicate, that overzealous police fabricated a crime that did not actually occur, then used the blunt force of their badges to minimize the harm to their image, once publicity started to turn against them.

That's the simple truth in my opinion.
 
I just never saw any solid evidence that she tried to kill him. I think they would have had a hard time convicting her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I just never saw any solid evidence that she tried to kill him. I think they would have had a hard time convicting her.

Why do you think she pled guilty?

Do you think most people would have been asked to plead guilty to manslaughter for failing to anticipate the dangers of kayaking, which appears to be what she pled guilty to?

Is it possible that the police simply refuse to admit they made a mistake and they are trying to save face at her expense?

Considering that she really is totally at the mercy of the police, was it the right thing to plead guilty, since the police are so much more powerful than she is?
 
The police kept saying that she killed him by taking the plug out. That plug would not cause his kayak to overturn.

I never believed she intentionally tried to kill him.

:moo:
 
On Monday, Graswald pleaded guilty to one count of criminally negligent homicide

Graswald is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 1. Under the terms of the agreement, she is expected to receive from 15 months to four years in prison, prosecutors said. But Mr. Portale said that, taking into account the 27 months she has spent in jail since being arrested, she expects to be released by the end of the year.

“She knows she’s coming home,” Mr. Portale said. “She can focus on moving forward.”

By pleading guilty to criminally negligent homicide, Mr. Portale said, Ms. Graswald acknowledges that she took the plug from the kayak and that she was aware of the rough weather conditions on the river that day, but not that she intended to kill Mr. Viafore. “The record is clear that this was not an intentional killing,” he said. “This was a case of negligence.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/nyregion/angelika-graswald-kayak-vincent-viafore.html

“You can see by her struggling today that she cared very much for Mr. Viafore. Never in her wildest dreams did she anticipate that her actions could cause his death," said Graswald's attorney, Richard Portale.

http://www.twcnews.com/nys/hudson-valley/news/2017/07/24/graswald-guilty-plea-kayaking-death.html
 
District Attorney David Hoovler:

"While no outcome can compensate for the loss of a beloved son, brother, and uncle, this disposition will hopefully bring a measure of closure to the Viafore family. This plea ensures that the defendant will be held criminally liable for her actions. By pleading guilty the defendant has acknowledged that Vincent Viafore's death was not simply a tragic accident, but the result of this defendant's criminal conduct."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/angelik...-plea-in-fiances-kayak-death-on-hudson-river/
 
Wow that was unexpected!

Google Alert - sharing

Woman pleads guilty in Fiance's kayak death on the Hudson River
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/24/nyregion/angelika-graswald-kayak-vincent-viafore.html

This plea ensures that the defendant will be held criminally liable for her actions,” David M. Hoovler, the Orange County district attorney, said in a statement on Monday. “By pleading guilty the defendant has acknowledged that Vincent Viafore’s death was not simply a tragic accident, but the result of this defendant’s criminal conduct.”
Ms. Graswald is scheduled to be sentenced on Nov. 1. Under the terms of the agreement, she is expected to receive from 15 months to four years in prison, prosecutors said. But Mr. Portale said that, taking into account the 27 months she has spent in jail since being arrested, she expects to be released by the end of the year.
 
The police kept saying that she killed him by taking the plug out. That plug would not cause his kayak to overturn.

I never believed she intentionally tried to kill him.

:moo:

What was her reason for removing the plug ? Didn't she say she "wanted him dead"? Sorry, I'm a little behind. TIA
 
What was her reason for removing the plug ? Didn't she say she "wanted him dead"? Sorry, I'm a little behind. TIA

The kayak was in their apartment and she removed the plug weeks before the accident to use as a cat toy.

There are pictures on her Facebook of the cat/kitten sitting in and on the kayak in the apartment. If you do an image search in Google you will find them posted on another forum.
 
District Attorney David Hoovler:

"While no outcome can compensate for the loss of a beloved son, brother, and uncle, this disposition will hopefully bring a measure of closure to the Viafore family. This plea ensures that the defendant will be held criminally liable for her actions. By pleading guilty the defendant has acknowledged that Vincent Viafore's death was not simply a tragic accident, but the result of this defendant's criminal conduct."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/angelik...-plea-in-fiances-kayak-death-on-hudson-river/
emphasis added

It looks like the police messed up in charging her for a crime that she did not commit. Then, when it became too obvious to the public that the police were creating a criminal rather than catching one, they looked for a way to backpedal.

The police are using the ploy of "defending the victim's interests" when in fact they are doing the exact opposite.

It's not shocking that there are dirty cops who pervert justice in that way, but it is surprising that there is not one single honest cop in that region who is willing to publicly challenge the gang.
 
Why do you think she pled guilty?

Do you think most people would have been asked to plead guilty to manslaughter for failing to anticipate the dangers of kayaking, which appears to be what she pled guilty to?

Is it possible that the police simply refuse to admit they made a mistake and they are trying to save face at her expense?

Considering that she really is totally at the mercy of the police, was it the right thing to plead guilty, since the police are so much more powerful than she is?

I think part of the reason for her plea is she has been sitting in prison for over two years now. The process of getting to a trial has been anything but speedy. She is not in her home country, and I doubt she has been able to have much contact with family and friends from her home country. She is represented by a private attorney, as oppposed to a public defender, and I am not sure how she is paying for that. I can only imagine what those bills could potentially be. If a plea agreement allows her to be out with the time she has already served, it makes a lot of sense to me.

I have never felt she did anything intentional to cause Vincent's death. I can understand how some of her actions and what she had said may have come off as heartless or left her open for misinterpretation.

Could I see myself in her shoes? Unfortunately, yes! I believe she was put under a microscope because people wanted to blame her.
 
emphasis added

It looks like the police messed up in charging her for a crime that she did not commit. Then, when it became too obvious to the public that the police were creating a criminal rather than catching one, they looked for a way to backpedal.

The police are using the ploy of "defending the victim's interests" when in fact they are doing the exact opposite.

It's not shocking that there are dirty cops who pervert justice in that way, but it is surprising that there is not one single honest cop in that region who is willing to publicly challenge the gang.

......this..........^
 
The kayak was in their apartment and she removed the plug weeks before the accident to use as a cat toy.

There are pictures on her Facebook of the cat/kitten sitting in and on the kayak in the apartment. If you do an image search in Google you will find them posted on another forum.

Greetings WebSleuths,
Right on, Angelika pleaded GUILTY!
But I am still confused about something, help me out please?

When I read of the Orange County District Attorney's Statement, it states this important fact:
"The plug, which was missing from Vincent Viafore's kayak, was eventually recovered from the center console of the car Graswald was driving."
>snip

As JerseyGirl notes above, the kayaks were stored inside the apartment.
Heck, doing some WebSleuthing myself, I found awhile back that the drain-age plug can be seen still screwed in where it belonged after Vinny had returned from his last paddling adventure and then stored the kayaks inside the apartment.

Raskal,
the new kitty is even seen lurking under the open stern cargo hatch of Vincent's blue kayak.

Have a look:


Angelika Graswald has said that she unscrewed and removed Vinny's Drain-age plug screw from his kayak so the kitty could play with it, right?

Where was the Raskal, the kitty cat, going to play with Vinny's drain-age plug?
In the car she was driving?
Hmmmm...
RW
 
This was one of the first cases that I followed on WS.
Very surprised by the outcome!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
1,689
Total visitors
1,874

Forum statistics

Threads
599,313
Messages
18,094,430
Members
230,846
Latest member
sidsloth
Back
Top