NY - Liang 'Jim' Tan, 49, shot to death in his Pittsford home, 5 Feb 2015

[OkieGranny]

http://www.democratandchronicle.com...-tan-pittsford-homicide-court-liang/23364617/

Pittsford teen Charles Tan, accused of shooting his father Liang Tan to death inside their Coach Side Lane home on Monday evening, has been indicted by a grand jury.

The Pittsford Mendon grad, who was arraigned earlier this week on second-degree murder charges, had well over 100 supporters show up for a brief appearance in Pittsford Town Court Friday afternoon...

"Charlie was a big kid in the community, as you can see from all the people here," said friend Kareem Tawil, a student at University of Buffalo who attended high school with Charles Tan. "He's just a great kid and most of us feel a little guilty. We had a sense that his home life wasn't that good."

http://www.ithacajournal.com/story/news/local/2015/02/14/tan-fatal-update/23426981/

Tan's son, 19-year-old Charles Tan, is accused of shooting his father, Liang, with multiple shotgun blasts at their Pittsford home at 37 Coach Side Lane... Authorities are investigating how long Liang Tan — the president of Dynamax Imaging in Canandaigua — had been dead...

Charles Tan, once a student council president at his high school, is immensely popular among his peers and their families — so popular that an online fundraising campaign for the Tan family quickly raised nearly $50,000...

Nobles maintained last week that Liang Tan had been an abusive husband and father, subjecting his wife, Qing, and sons, Charles and Jeff, to years of physical and mental abuse. That abuse was at the root of the killing, Nobles alleged.

 

[newone]

"Monroe County Sheriff's Office deputies responded to multiple calls there in recent years and Tan's mother, Qing Tan, had recently sought an order of protection against his father, Liang Tan."

http://www.democratandchronicle.com.../13/andreatta-charles-tan-parricide/23345053/

it will be interesting to find out whether the mother pulled the trigger or if the good son was protecting his mother MOO

 

[OkieGranny]

http://www.cnycentral.com/news/story.aspx?id=1173434#.VPjftsbhoWc

The Pittsford teen accused of fatally shooting his father in the family's home last month has pleaded not guilty to a second-degree murder charge.

Judge James Piampiano set bail for Charles Tan, 19, at $50,000 cash or $100,000 bond. Tan posted bail and is expected to be released this evening. He must also surrender his passport.

 

[Abigail]

This is the most bizarre case -- first, that so many people in the community are supporting the lad, and secondly, who actually pulled the trigger?? Mom or son?

Gun purchased days before killing. Premeditated murder, or protection for mother?

He left for Canada and tried to close out a bank account -- sounds like Dad already dead at that point. But if Mom actually shot father, then why would he flee? And why did he come back?

Body maybe around for awhile. Huh? Couldn't the medical examiner determine time of death? What did they do -- put him out in the back yard for the cold to preserve his body while they tried to figure out what to do?

 

[Abigail]

So, trial is underway. Testimony from LE and employees paint a picture of Liang as an abusive bully (and the defense hasn't even gotten started yet). I pieced together a timeline of Charlie's movements on Feb 5, the date that the murder probably happened.

Feb. 5 (probable date of murder)
10 AM – met with football coach at Cornell U (in Ithaca). Crying. Said he had to go home. Family problems.
12:48 PM – called his friend Jacob Grossman (who lives in Rochester area). Asked him how much money he had. Grossman said about $300. Asked Charlie why. Charlie said he’d explain that night. They made plans to meet that evening.
4 PM – friend bought rifle for him at Walmart in Cortland; Tan tried but failed (Canadian citizen)
8:40 PM – last email from Liang Tan (I’m guessing Liang was shot very soon after this)
10 PM – Charles goes over to friend Jacob Grossman’s house. Charlie looked like he’d been crying. They watched a college basketball game for awhile. Charlie said he might have to leave country the next day. Grossman asked “what the f… are you talking about?” Charlie became defensive, like a “wall” which was out of character, said, “shut the hell up.” After he left, Jacob became concerned and talked with his mother. He and his mother drove over to Tan house, called 911. Told them about money and leaving country.
11:35 PM – Deputy William Connell arrives in response to 911 call. He first spoke with Grossman, and then with Charlie. Spoke with Charlie about 5 to 10 minutes. Calm demeanor. Connell asked Charlie if he was suicidal. (Report of this visit not written until after Feb. 9 discovery of dead body). Connell then spoke with Jacob Grossman and his mother Julie. Later, Officer LeClair (the one who responded to the Jan. 28 911 call) called Deputy Connell to advise him of the domestic violence issues in home.


Feb. 6 – Charles Tan traveled to Canada. Tried to close out a personal bank account. Returned to New York on Feb. 9, the date that his mother called 911
http://www.democratandchronicle.com...ittsford-homicide-arraignment-liang/24435791/

 

[Abigail]

Interesting twist in today's testimony. Turns out that on the evening of Feb. 5, Charlie went over to RIT to see his high school friend Anna. He arrived at 6, and left her apartment around 9:30. From there, he apparently went directly to the Grossman's house, since he arrived there about 10 (it would take about 20 to 30 min. to get from the RIT campus in Henrietta to the Grossman's home, depending on the snow and road conditions.

So...Charlie was at the Walmart in Cortland with his buddy buying a gun at 4 p.m. It would take about 2 hours to drive from Cortland to Henrietta. He hangs out with Anna, and then goes over to the Grossman's around 10 p.m. (appeared to have been crying when he got there) and hangs out there for awhile. I don't think it was stated what time he left there, but that means he didn't get home until probably after 11 p.m. And the gun would have been with him. And then the deputy arrived at 11:35 and questioned Charlie, and he appeared calm at that time.

So...the question is...IF Charlie was the one who killed his father, and if the murder occurred on Feb. 5, when, exactly, did he do it?

I'd been assuming all along that it would have been around 9 PM or so. His father's last email was sent at 8:40 p.m. And Charlie showed up at Jacob's at 10, visibly upset. But...he wouldn't have been home at 9ish -- he was over in Henrietta at the RIT campus.

But...if Liang Tan was still alive at 11:35 p.m. when the deputy arrived, wouldn't he have gone to the door to see what was going on? And if Charlie had JUST killed his father, how could he appear calm when the deputy arrived? And...it seems odd that Liang would have sat at his desk for about 3 hours that evening without doing anything on the computer. He was working and sending emails and making calls right up til 8:40, and then...nothing. But he died in his office, at his desk. But if Charlie killed him, it couldn't have happened until much later. Probably not until at least after 11, and more likely after midnight. We know that Charlie left for Canada the next day, and didn't come back until Feb. 9.

So, IF Charlie were the killer, Liang wouldn't have died until after 11 PM or probably later on Feb. 5 or maybe early Feb 6 before Charlie flew to Canada. So...why was he sitting at his desk all those hours, NOT working on the computer, and NOT going to the door when the police came????

 

[AlwaysShocked]

Okay, but just because the father did not use his computer or other electronic devices after 8:40PM does not mean he was sitting at his desk thereafter. Nor does it mean he died shortly thereafter.

He could have been doing something else. He could have gotten tired of working, gone into the kitchen for food, took out the garbage, talked to a neighbor, watched some tv - basically could have been doing anything. Just sayin'.

But thank you so much for the timeline. Very helpful!

 

[Abigail]

You're right -- he could have been doing other stuff. But he did die at his desk. But maybe he took a break from work to watch TV or eat or something and then went back to his desk. No one outside the family saw him that evening. And he didn't make or receive any calls. Where was he when the police came at 11:35 that night?

 

[KristinSchmistin]

Hi all! Kinda close to this case, but wanted to pop in and participate a little bit- The jury will start at 9am deliberating again.

It's a pretty huge deal here... Charlie was/is (according to friends of the family and my friends who teach at our old high school and taught him) by all means a "model" student, good kid, volunteer at the Y, smart, etc, babysat for neighbor kids.... it's so sad that this all happened.

I honestly think it could have been the mom and charlie was covering for her... but I don't know. Totally my own opinion. So many things upset me about the mom right now, totally keeping those things to myself. The mom has not been seen in weeks. Has totally been MIA from all of this. ZERO support for her kid. The kid who supposedly saved her life, according to her 911 call. Lots of charlie's friends and former h.s. teachers, college professors have been there to support him- and honestly he needs it regardless of what did or didn't happen.

Long history of domestic violence in the family- sheriff deputies have made numerous appearances to that house as far back as 2008- neighbors have seen wife with bruises, have seen wife try to prevent husband from leaving the house by jumping in front of the car, have witnessed fights so loud it carried from their house to the neighbors houses (these are nice, big houses with half acre or more lots just to give perspective).

Mom started an order of protection but never went through with it- meaning, she filed the initial petition, but never appeared for the next court appearance which essentially causes all proceedings and the order of protection to be dropped and voided. (I only know that from testimony in the trial, and knowledge of how the courts work here in Monroe county).

Neighbors and close family friends raised 50k for his legal defense, multiple character witnesses talking about what a great kid he was, kind, etc. But you know how that goes, it could mean something or literally nothing.

However, the prosecution did NOT prove his case. In fact, it seemed that the prosecution jumped at charges against him without investigating the matter fully, had little evidence, speculated on most of his theories, and made a total "poop-show" in court- so much so that Judge Pampiano had to dismiss the jury, several times, to admonish the prosecutor, they were literally screaming at each other (one reporter quoted- "they're not using their indoor voices")- and the Judge told the prosecutor that he was inches away from prosecutorial misconduct. He got all nuts and ran across the courtroom with the murder weapon towards the defense table and got in their faces. It was fifty shades of CRAY.

Anywho, it was quite a show. Pretty awkward and shocking. And as for everything else - he really did not prove even a little bit, nor beyond a reasonable doubt that Charlie pulled the trigger- he did not put that gun in his hands.

And the judge was pretty clear in his instructions- and also made it clear that they cannot charge for a lesser charge like the prosecutor wanted- in case he didn't get the second degree murder charge, he wanted to try for some accomplice charge to cover the theory of Mrs. Tan doing it. Total 100% insanity.

Here are some facts from the trial:
1) There were no fingerprints from Charlie on any part of the gun.
2) his fingerprint was found on a spent shell casing and box of ammo.
3) There WAS DNA found on the gun, but upon initial testing by the crime lab, there were multiple DNA profiles found, so they halted testing and did not go forward. Also, the samples were too small to get a good reliable sample from- they could just tell there were multiple contributors to the DNA.
4) Here is a GREAT link with a whole bunch of links to key pieces of information and evidence from the trial for those interested: http://www.democratandchronicle.com...-jury-continues-deliberations-today/73078006/


IMO, the prosecutions case was flimsy, at best. Justice was not done IMO. Because IMO they charged the wrong person. MOO! Ok, hope that helped with the information. I'll see if I can drop in once the jury decides and see what you all think!

 

[monkey222]

The winter weather last Feb 5 was not exactly a easy drive. How could he be darting around W NY all day? Did he meet with coach in Ithaca in am? Long day for driving alot....on snowy roads.
...
Where is his Mom? ?

 

[KristinSchmistin]

The winter weather last Feb 5 was not exactly a easy drive. How could he be darting around W NY all day? Did he meet with coach in Ithaca in am? Long day for driving alot....on snowy roads.
...
Where is his Mom? ?

I remember that! We had two snow days the monday and tuesday after superbowl. It was snowy- our roads were semi-ok by then- salted, etc. The drive from Ithaca is horrendous in the snow though. Blech.

See this is why it makes me think- his mom was at the point where she was going to leave Mr. Tan. She had an escape plan according to her friend. Charlie was going to help her get away safely, get a bit of money for her (hence the canada trip to close bank account), brought the shotgun as a "just in case" thing because he probably thought he would never have to use it, dad would be at work, he could get her out.

But unfortunately he lost it when he sensed she was leaving. This is often the most dangerous time for a victim of DV -- when they are leaving- the call to police on jan 28 - the situation was escalating quickly by the end of jan/early feb. She needed to leave. He wouldn't let her go...

And the worst case scenario happened. They panicked. It was legitimately out of an imminent need for personal safety and to protect their lives.

It seems like the most logical and simple explanation, IMO. If that is how it went down, all of this is obviously my own opinion.


(I temper this with - when I left my ex husband, he escalated to the worst point when it was ending. Domestic violence is so hard to escape- the hardest at the end. A nightmare in any situation.)

I just hope no matter what this family can find some peace. And have a second chance at happiness.

 

[Abigail]

Kristen, I think you may be right about the dangerous time when leaving part. However, Jim was shot at his desk, so there wasn't imminent danger at that immediate point in time. It sounded like (from the friend's testimony in the trial) that Jean had been locking herself in a room whenever Jim was home -- the friend said that the house was uncharacteristically messy, and Jean apologized and said, "I've been locking myself..." and then she was cut off in the trial.

I think the defense told Jean to stay away from the trial. Their strategy was to point the finger at her, and they didn't want her in the courtroom when that happened. And they didn't want all the reporters to pounce on her out in the corridors. I think Charlie told her to keep a low profile. I think the brother was told to stay away for the same reason.

I'm amazed that the prosecution didn't call her to the stand. I think they assumed this was a slam-dunk case, since Mom pointed the finger at him and he sorta confessed in the driveway before he was arrested.

As far as the timeline, I've been trying to figure that out. You're right about the snow -- there was a lot of it that weekend. I posted a photo on my FB on Feb. 9, and the snow was about 3 to 4 feet deep (accumulated) in my yard -- you couldn't even tell the picnic table was out there. But not sure how the road conditions were on Feb. 5, and how much it affected Charlie's travel time from the Walmart in Cortland to RIT and then to the Grossman's house.

 

[Abigail]

I certainly have loads of reasonable doubt as to whether Charlie pulled the trigger. But he certainly bought the gun (or had it bought), and loaded at least one shell. Whether he was in on a murder plot or simply buying it to give his Mom protection is another thing.

I'm pretty sure that Jean shot Jim while Charlie was having dinner with Anna and other friends at RIT that evening. He called her at 9:50 (when he'd have been driving from RIT to the Grossman's), and showed up at Jacob Grossman's very upset. However, I can't figure out how she got the gun. It would take 2 hours (in GOOD road conditions) to drive from the Cortland Walmart to the RIT campus, and security cameras show Charlie at Walmart at 4 PM, and Anna said he arrived at 6 PM, (although later I heard 6:30). He may have quickly dropped off the gun to his Mom early in the evening -- it takes about 1 hr 50 min (in good road conditions) to get from the Cortland Walmart to their house in Pittsford. So, he could have dropped off the gun around 5:50 PM (before Dad got home from work). But there's no way he'd have then gotten to RIT by 6 PM. The absolute earliest he could have gotten to RIT, with a stop off at Coach Side Lane, would be 6:20 PM (and that would be in optimal road conditions). But perhaps Anna was just giving an estimated time, and he got to her place closer to 6:30 than 6 PM. I suppose he could have had his friend who purchased the gun then deliver it to his Mom? (Can't imagine why they didn't call that guy to the stand - -you're right, Kristen, the prosecution really dropped the ball).

At any rate, we know that Jim Tan was alive and well at the time that Charlie got over to RIT and had dinner with Anna and some others. (Almost as if he were setting up an alibi). He left RIT about 9:30 and drove to the Grossmans. That would be about a 25 minute drive in good road conditions, and wouldn't have left time for him to drive way down to Coach Side Lane (which is way south, down by I-90) and get to the Grossman's by 10. But we do know he called his Mom at 9:50 and arrived at Jacob's looking like he'd been crying. So...something happened during that half hour...most likely that's when Jim was killed (and would fit with when prosecution think he died).

 

[Swirlz]

Charles Tan Case Dismissal Shocking

Charles Tan is a free man.

Following a heated exchange in which the judge threatened to throw the prosecutor in handcuffs, a judge dismissed the second-degree murder charges against the Pittsford Mendon High School graduate.

 

[OkieGranny]

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2016/04/20/charles-tan-dateline-nbc/83238994/

The slaying of Pittsford businessman Liang "Jim" Tan and the subsequent murder trial of his son Charles Tan will be the focus of a segment Friday night on the long-running NBC News program Dateline.

 

[0101ABA]

Legal experts on both sides of the courtroom acknowledged that the Monroe County District Attorney's Office attempt to get a new trial for Charles Tan will — at best — be a long shot.

But some say in a murder case filled with strange twists and turns, including the judge's surprise ruling that prompted the appeal in the first place, anything can happen.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2016/08/12/new-trial-charlie-tan-not-likely/88608792/

 

[OkieGranny]

http://www.democratandchronicle.com...-murder-dismissal-could-argued-soon/96004892/

The debate over whether a judge rightly threw out a murder charge against Charles Tan — who was accused of shooting his father in the face with a shotgun — could be heard by a regional appellate court in coming months.

The District Attorney's Office has contended that then County Court Judge James Piampiano erred when he dismissed the murder charge against Tan, a former student body president at Pittsford Mendon High School who was attending Cornell University at the time of the 2015 homicide. Piampiano, who is now a state Supreme Court justice, ruled after a mistrial that there was not enough evidence to justify the criminal accusation against Tan...

Arguments are scheduled for March 1 before the State Supreme Court Appellate Division, Fourth Department, but that date is subject to change.

 

[JusticeWillBeServed]

Retrial for Charles Tan in hands of appellate court - March 1st

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/2017/03/01/retrial-charles-tan-hands-appellate-court/98348150/

Having been cleared of a murder charge by a judge, Charles Tan cannot be retried on allegations that he fatally shot his father, Tan's attorney argued Wednesday in an appellate court.

The District Attorney's Office contends otherwise, saying that Judge James Piampiano's decision to throw out the criminal charge against Tan can be appealed and reversed.

However, Assistant District Attorney Kelly Wolford acknowledged before a regional appellate court that "this is a very unique" set of circumstances.

Arguments Wednesday before the Fourth Department Appellate Division of state Supreme Court weren't focused on the usual issues with criminal cases — was evidence properly obtained by police, for instance — but instead on whether Piampiano's decision can even be challenged.

By dismissing the criminal count, Piampiano may have assured that Tan is not guilty under the law.

"We acknowledge our right to appeal is very limited," Wolford told the judges Wednesday.

A ruling is not expected for weeks.

No decision in Charles Tan case

http://www.whec.com/news/charles-tan-retrial-decision/4435329/

Earlier this month, judges heard an appeal by the Monroe County District Attorney's Office for a new trial in the case.

The earliest the decision could have come down was Friday, but the district attorney's office says it wasn't released Friday.

 

[Swirlz]

Charles Tan can't be retried in dad's slaying, appellate court rules

A judge's decision to dismiss the murder charge against Charles Tan cannot be reversed and Tan cannot be retried, appellate judges ruled Friday.

However, the panel of appellate judges said that the decision from Judge James Piampiano, while it can't be reversed, was wrong in its claims that the evidence was insufficient to support the murder charge. Tan was accused of murdering his father.

http://www.democratandchronicle.com...-appellate-court-rules-dont-publish/99854872/

 

[tarabull]

Police believe this Ivy Leaguer got away with murder. His Canadian citizenship held the key to his second trial