PA - infant Leon Katz murdered, twin injured, allegedly by babysitter, Pittsburgh- June 24, 2024

[steeltowngirl]

Bolded by me
I would agree that would be far more likely, than going back to investigate and charge the parents.

I would hope that police already ruled out the parents prior to charging NV. NV admitted to LK’s injury happening while in her care, and the parents were not home. Her defense may try to say another injury happened earlier while LK was with his parents, but I doubt they will try that approach. Blaming the parents wouldn’t sit well with a jury. If anything, defense will likely argue for it having been an accidental injury.

jmo

 

[Kittybunny]

This is a theoretical question. If NV goes to court and is found not guilty, then that leaves the question of who did it, and there is only one basic alternative that we are aware of. Do the police keep investigating to find out what happened. I know they can only try NV once for the same crime, and she has the right to a speedy trial. There doesn't seem to be any one left other than the parents, and I don't know how that could even work. However, if it isn't NV and no one else was there, do they leave the baby with the parents, and just move forward like they don't know who did it, and "oh well". I mean, basically, could they leave the baby in the care of the people who possibly caused the death of the other twin? Who is taking care of that twin now, do we know. This is just a thought I had, and I hope it was okay to post. I would like to know the opinion of other posters. Thank You. MOO. Katt

There are 2 primary ways she could be found not guilty, depending on her defense strategy. One is the one you present above, which is basically a SODDI defense (some other dude did it), which essentially says, yes it was murder but she didn’t do it, it was someone else, probably the parents. IMO, there’s little chance of them going this route, given that the parents were not there when baby Leon died. Maybe, with the other twin if the cases are separated, but it’s risky. In this case if investigators believe it and there was evidence, they could pursue charges, if it turns out she had a visitor no one knew about. (Highly unlikely to me, they should know that before charging)

The other way she could be found not guilty would be if her defense can prove or at least introduce enough doubt that this was even a homicide - just a tragic accident, nothing to see here folks, and certainly no one to charge. It’s likely an uphill climb, but as evidenced by the discussion here, many people don’t want to believe it’s murder so there’s always a chance some jurors will feel the same.

Edited to add: Or what Steeltowngirl said! Great Pittsburgh minds think alike

 

[steeltowngirl]

MOO but I think if LE or social workers had anything to show even possible involvement of the parents that the living baby would have been removed from their custody that night. I don’t know what LE has but I think it is more than the doctors’ conclusions that it was abuse as that doesn’t give any indication as to who committed the abuse. I don’t know what they have but I really think they have something that tells them conclusively that it was NV and that it was intentional.

I won’t be surprised if a mental illness defense is used in this case. I think they have evidence - whatever it is - and I think that NV will admit to what she did but will use mental illness as the reason she could not stop herself from doing it. I think that PA has both an insanity defense and a guilty but mentally ill defense. I think the insanity defense would require showing she didn’t know what she was doing was wrong and I do not think that is possible. But the guilty with mentally ill can be shown by establishing a mental illness and that she couldn’t stop herself even though she knew it was wrong. Either one can get treatment in a mental health facility instead of prison and would take death penalty off the table if successfully presented.

I don’t think that NV can successfully defend against whatever evidence it is they have simply by saying I didn’t do anything to the first baby and it was an accident with the 2nd one. It really wouldn’t take much evidence at all to overcome that position. And I think the lawyer saying something along the lines of his client is distraught because these were her friends instead of she didn’t intentionally hurt either child and her heart breaks for their parents is a hint that a mental illness defense could be forthcoming.

Agree. A mental illness defense is the most likely. Non-jury trial.

jmo

 

[*LD*]

Am I the only one wondering if there may have been a video camera in the babies’ room? Perhaps just wishful thinking but it seems to me that either the state put the death penalty in play in hopes of taking it off the table for a plea deal OR they have more conclusive evidence than what we’ve heard come out that the doctor(s) said. If there was a camera, it’s reasonable that the parents would not have reviewed the footage before they took the first baby to the ER but likely reviewed it or turned it over to law enforcement after the death of the 2nd baby. It might explain why they used the term torture more than just the doctor’s conclusions that it was abuse without knowing specifically what was done to the children. Just a possibility I’m throwing out there because it keeps popping in my head - not anything I’ve read or seen anything about anywhere.

This would make sense and why police would say she has a proven history of assault on minors. Thank you for this thought!