Thereafter, commencing in September 1985 and continuing for a period just under one year, defendant invited a medical student, Dr. Roberta Karnofsky, who worked under his direct supervision at Coney Island Hospital, to live with him in the marital apartment. Her body was never found and the great weight of the evidence shows that she was anything but desperate or depressed so that one might reasonably fear she was contemplating suicide. However, defendant said he would not be home until later, as he had plans to dine out-after an interview which had focused on his wife's sudden disappearance just 34 hours earlier. Defendant was pretty surprised and stunned and asked her what she knew. We disagree with defendant and find them fair and legally satisfactory. Further, he told Dalsass, in some detail, that on Saturday afternoon, July 6, while he and Gail shopped at various local stores, they argued about finances and other matters which he refused to disclose. Alayne Katz and other witnesses would later testify, however, that they had seen one of the letters, which Gail Katz planned to use in the divorce proceedings. We note further that the court exercised its discretion appropriately by rulings which significantly and thoughtfully limited the People. As this Court stated in Farrow v. Allen, 194 A.D.2d 40, 608 N.Y.S.2d 1, once a patient authorizes his or her psychiatrist to release, what might otherwise be, a privileged letter to a third party who is completely unconnected to his or her treatment and who is not subject to any other privilege, its release is sufficient to waive the privilege as to the information contained in the letter itself (id. A seemingly distraught defendant also told Baranoff about the argument, adding that his wife had not yet returned after having left their apartment wearing shorts, a halter top and sandals. Encouraging that type of qualitative analysis is the common theme of this State's settled law on this subject (see People v. Pena, 251 A.D.2d 66, 673 N.Y.S.2d 688, affd. When she asked what had happened, he told her his wife may have committed suicide or may have met with foul play, as she had dated a variety of men. He also said that he hated the victim so much, and that she would get him so upset, that he wanted to kill her. The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert BIERENBAUM, Defendant-Appellant. He returned it after one hour and fifty-six minutes, giving him time enough to fly round trip approximately 165 miles over a part of the Atlantic Ocean. denied 95 N.Y.2d 792, 711 N.Y.S.2d 160, 733 N.E.2d 232; People v. Valez, 256 A.D.2d 135, 682 N.Y.S.2d 162, lv. All of Bierenbaums appeals over the years were unsuccessful. 662, 4 L.Ed.2d 620; People v. Norton, 164 A.D.2d 343, 353, 563 N.Y.S.2d 802, affd. Among them are the following examples: he told Det. Surgeon Who Murdered Wife Confesses To Killing The magic didnt last long. Ex-surgeon confesses he took wife's 'body out of the airplane over SEATTLE - Robert Parker, spared the death penalty last week, was sentenced today to life in prison without the possibility of parole. Bierenbaum, now 66, convicted of the murder in 2000 under circumstantial evidence, had continually denied any involvement in her death, told parole that he killed his wife Gail To yet another, he described his missing wife as a tramp, off living with someone else. He was inconsistent about his purported knowledge of his wife's post-July 7 whereabouts, alluding to different theories and purported sightings to different people. Of California, 17 Cal.3d 425, 131 Cal.Rptr. We reject the notion that in a case where an alleged homicide is the second alleged violent act against a spouse-instead of, for example, the third, fourth or ninth-the case may not be treated as a domestic violence homicide for purposes of evidentiary rulings. Defendant and Dr. Feis spoke daily that first week, but during the first few calls she urged him to contact the police and to speak to the doorman. The Surgeon's Wife Robert Bierenbaum was sentenced to 20 years to life and is currently incarcerated at New Yorks Attica Correctional Facility. 20 Robert Bierenbaum strangled his wife Indeed, defendant himself told his father in 1983 that their strife had reached the point of some physical contact, and there is credible testimony that in 1985 defendant was so filled with hostility that he was tempted toward violence against his wife. In late July or early August, defendant asked her out, and they became intimate on their first date. He was the individual that las[t] saw her in the apartment. Rather, the evidence is credible and we hold that the resulting inference is strong. In MacDonald v. Clinger, 84 A.D.2d 482, 487, 446 N.Y.S.2d 801, the court said: where a patient may be a danger to himself or others (see e.g. Meanwhile, he remains imprisoned at the Otisville Correctional Facility, the records show. Sentenced to 20 years to life after his October 2000 conviction, Bierenbaum became eligible for parole in 2020. Indeed, his behavior utterly belies his claims of ignorance of his victim's whereabouts. Investigators took steps for a jury to witness exactly how they believe Bierenbaum dumped his wifes body during his 2000 murder trial, according to the New York Post. However, in a strange turn of events, Robert decided to confess during a 2020 parole hearing and claimed that he had strangled Gail to death before flying out with her body and dumping it into the Atlantic Ocean. Therefore, the trial justice's ruling was a careful and completely reasonable exercise of judicial discretion. 93 N.Y.2d 946, 694 N.Y.S.2d 337, 716 N.E.2d 172 [prior assault admissible]; People v. Jones, 289 A.D.2d 1010, 735 N.Y.S.2d 276, lv. Another woman whom he dated in Las Vegas in 1995 asked him on their first date whether he had ever been married. Before ending that July 8 interview, Det. TermsPrivacyDisclaimerCookiesDo Not Sell My Information, Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select, Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals. Significantly, he omitted telling his father that he had flown an airplane for nearly two hours that very afternoon. Furthermore, he invited a different woman to move into the marital apartment with him in September 1985. This abundant array of damning circumstantial evidence proves beyond any reasonable doubt that defendant intentionally killed this victim, that he did it on the date, at the time and for the reason the People offered; and that he disposed of her body as the People contend. Copyright 2023, Thomson Reuters. 3139, 111 L.Ed.2d 638; Dutton v. Evans, 400 U.S. 74, 89, 91 S.Ct. At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. 14, 551 P.2d 334). There is every reason in this record to find that defendant was the last person to see her alive at 11:00 A.M. that Sunday morning. Man confesses 20 years later to killing wife, throwing her into ocean Because defendant consented to having the warnings and disclosures communicated, not only to the victim but also to his parents, the court's ruling about the warning letter was correct. Although no DNA tests were available at the time to confirm whether the remains were that of the missing woman, it was assumed that Gail had been located, The Charley Project reported. Something that might be very innocent might develop into a lead where she might be. denied 77 N.Y.2d 879, 568 N.Y.S.2d 922, 571 N.E.2d 92; see also People v. Laverpool, 267 A.D.2d 93, 700 N.Y.S.2d 139, lv. People v. Leyra, 1 N.Y.2d 199, 151 N.Y.S.2d 658, 134 N.E.2d 475.) These facts establish beyond any question that this marriage existed in a volatile, highly emotional, turbulent and dysfunctional environment. denied 88 N.Y.2d 1020, 651 N.Y.S.2d 19, 673 N.E.2d 1246 [quoting Poppe]; People v. Govan, 268 A.D.2d 689, 701 N.Y.S.2d 474, lv. Dalsass' approximately eight telephone answering machine messages. And if shes not alive, theres only one person who is a likely suspect to murder her, and its Bob. In it, they located a handwritten entry which appeared to have been changed from the original notation of 7/7/85 to the substituted date of 8/7/85. Moreover, the justice's immediate response-I suspect I'll allow it-is of no greater legal significance. Dalsass waited until 12:30 A.M. and left the first of approximately eight messages on defendant's home answering machine and at his work number during the ensuing week. In part, he frames his argument by citing reported domestic violence cases wherein the jury was allowed to learn that the victimized spouses endured more than one attack by the accused pre-dating the violent act charged in the indictment. However, apparently also on July 8, defendant told the victim's therapist, Dr. Sybil Baran, that he and the victim had argued and that she'd gone off in a huff; 8. That was not always the case. Doheny v. Lacy, 168 N.Y. 213, 223-224, 61 N.E. It is clear to us that the highly probative nature of this particular proof on the critical questions of defendant's motive and intent, and of the killer's identity, far outweighs any prejudice (see People v. Alvino, 71 N.Y.2d 233, 241-242, 525 N.Y.S.2d 7, 519 N.E.2d 808). Robert Bierenbaum - The New York Times https://t.co/ZGewROXCaQ pic.twitter.com/qwTytMjU2s. at 44, 608 N.Y.S.2d 1; cf. For the entire week immediately following the victim's disappearance, defendant failed to return Det. I went flying. In People v. Cintron, 95 N.Y.2d 329, 332-333, 717 N.Y.S.2d 72, 740 N.E.2d 217, the Court said that the probative weight of evidence of consciousness of guilt is highly dependent upon the facts of each particular case. In an earlier case, specifically referring to a defendant's false statements, the Court said: In the circumstances of this case, it is difficult to come to any other conclusion than that these false statements indicate a consciousness of guilt. Finally, although the alleged assault she recounted was undoubtedly extremely frightening, the proof shows her mental state so many hours later was not shown to be dominated by the same level of heightened excitement that would normally overwhelm a person in the immediate aftermath of such a recent traumatic shock. In addition, he had, the day before (7/13), told Det. (Lorenzo Ciniglio/Sygma via Getty Images), We knew it was going to be the toughest trial that wed ever had. Molineux authorizes a trial justice to consider allowing a jury to hear about a defendant's prior bad acts-be they violent or otherwise-if they shed light on the issues of intent, identity, motive, absence of accident or mistake, or common plan and scheme (id. From the beginning, they quarreled frequently. He thus claims that those cases do not apply to permit such evidence under these facts because this case involves evidence of only one prior assault. Defendant described differently to different people the items the victim took and the clothes she wore when she purportedly left to sunbathe in Central Park, and whether she was then wearing shoes and her engagement ring; 3. They both complained many times to many people that their marriage was loveless and their life together was stormy. of Cal., supra, at p. 442, 131 Cal.Rptr. Katz and Bierenbaum met in the early 1980s in Manhattan and had what initially seemed to be a magical romance, Katzs sister, Alayne Katz, told ABC News. When defendant returned to their Manhattan apartment, he telephoned his wife's friend and former psychology teacher, Dr. Yvette Feis. But last week, a Manhattan jury found Dr. Bierenbaum guilty of killing his first wife and dumping her body from an airplane. Defendant asserts that because there is evidence of only one earlier act of violence by him against his wife, this murder case should not be considered as a domestic violence homicide, and therefore there is no justification for the single alleged choking episode to be received in evidence along with various threats and other evidence of discord. at 184). Former NY surgeon admits killing wife, throwing body from airplane in 1985 (NCD). Learn about careers at Cox Media Group. However, the evidence also conclusively establishes that he rented and flew a Cessna 172 airplane beginning at 4:30 P.M. that day from Caldwell Airport in Fairfield, New Jersey and returned two hours later at 6:30 P.M. Robert Bierenbaum (born July 22, 1955) is an American former plastic surgeon and convicted murderer. That defendant was the last person who saw her, and who was known to have been alone with her until 11:00 A.M. that day, cannot be persuasively disputed on the basis of this record. Courts have also considered the status or relationship to the declarant of the person to whom the statement was made *** whether there was a coercive atmosphere, whether it was made in response to questioning and whether the statements reflect an attempt to shift blame or curry favor (James, supra, 93 N.Y.2d at 642-643, 695 N.Y.S.2d 715, 717 N.E.2d 1052 [citing United U.S. v. Matthews, 20 F.3d 538, 546; other citations omitted]). We hold otherwise. ABC News reports that Robert Bierenbaum, who is serving 20 years-to-life in prison for murdering his wife Gail Katz, confessed to the crime during a Dec. 2020 parole On the other hand, the acts and/or threats can-separately or together-demonstrate as they do in the instant case defendant's specific intent to hurt a particular human being, i.e., in this case, his wife, and to do so physically and emotionally. Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) In our sufficiency review, we have determined that a valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences could lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by [this jury] on the basis of the evidence at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the People (People v. Williams, 84 N.Y.2d 925, 926, 620 N.Y.S.2d 811, 644 N.E.2d 1367). That key factor in the context of marital or other intimate relationships frequently differentiates domestic violence assaults and homicides-wherein prior bad acts have often been deemed admissible during the People's direct case-from other cases wherein evidence of past assaultive behavior against people other than the victim has most properly been precluded. Finally, this evidence shows that this defendant was motivated and had an intent to harm this victim. The court did, however, permit the prosecution to adduce testimony that the victim had received a letter from one of these psychiatrists warning her of the danger defendant posed to her, although the justice prohibited the People from introducing the letter itself. The two circumstances, i.e., 1) that the police never recovered the victim's body and 2) that no one other than the victim and her killer personally witnessed the violent act which ended her life, do not bar a valid murder conviction under current law. The episode premieres Friday, October 22, 2021, at 9 p.m. Eastern time. While married to defendant, the victim had an affair with at least one other man; just before the day she disappeared she stated to a friend she was about to tell defendant she wanted a divorce; she had borrowed money to prepare to leave; she said she was seeing one or two other men and that she loved one of them; she was looking for an apartment and was seen with circled newspaper ads for apartment rentals the day before she disappeared and her friend had offered her a place in Connecticut to stay while she got herself resettled. Defendant gave contradictory accounts about whether and why he sent the living room rug out to be cleaned immediately following the decedent's disappearance, but completely withheld that information from the police; 4. Authorities could not use the actual plane they say Bierenbaum flew because another pilot later crashed the plane, the article said. O'Malley that the building doorman said he last saw her leave the building shortly after 11 o'clock on July 7. He dated a chiropractor for a while before remarrying in 1996 and moving with his new wife, gynecologist Dr. Janet Cholett, to Minot, North Dakota, where they had a daughter together and he opened a successful medical practice. In this case his behavior and threats were admitted because they revealed the former three of these five potentially relevant items. The jury saw this altered document. In the days, weeks, months and years following his wife's disappearance, defendant made several inconsistent, unfounded or otherwise suspect and incriminating statements. He also disclosed to his date that in the past he had a bad temper, but that it had gotten much better. The two-hour special describes Bierenbaum, a multilinguistic surgeon, skier, chef and pilot, as a Jekyl and Hyde figure. denied 94 N.Y.2d 904, 707 N.Y.S.2d 389, 728 N.E.2d 988; People v. Bonilla, 251 A.D.2d 82, 674 N.Y.S.2d 23, lv. at 293, 61 N.E. On another occasion, while the couple was watching a television program about the Von Bulow murder case, defendant told the victim that the problem with Claus Von Bulow is that he left evidence and [defendant] would not leave evidence. The testimony revealed that the victim perceived this statement as a threat. I heard the cuffs close round hishands. He never told investigators about the flight. Dalsass' office arranged by the deceased's sister Alayne Katz, and with her parents and defendant's father also present, Dalsass interviewed defendant again face-to-face. Robert Bierenbaum first made headlines for the murder of his wife Gail Katz. Bierenbaum has been eligible for parole since October 2020. From the rental office's vantage point, one would not have been able to see defendant on the tarmac getting ready to board-and possibly load luggage or other items onto-the plane, which was in a position readily accessible by automobile for such purposes. | The full 20/20 premieres TONIGHT at 9/8c on @ABC. Beyond that, the proof also clearly shows how he went about it, that she did not kill herself, nor that any boyfriend or drug dealer killed her. Dalsass on Monday, July 8 and again on Sunday, July 14, he never said-indeed on July 8 he denied-that he and his wife argued that morning, even though Dalsass did acknowledge that defendant, on July 14, said the victim was pissed the morning she left. WebDr Robert Bierenbaum is sentenced in New York City to twenty years to life in prison for murdering his wife, Gail Katz-Bierenbaum, who disappeared 15 years ago; Judge Leslie Therefore, the trial justice should not have admitted the victim's statements to Hillard Wiese as excited utterances. However, we hold that this error was harmless, because, as we noted earlier, the jury otherwise properly learned that the victim claimed defendant had committed a violent act against her in the fall of 1983, as evidence relevant to the state of their marriage, to defendant's motive, to his intent, and relevant evidence of identity. During that meeting he told O'Malley that he drove his father's Cadillac to his sister's New Jersey home on July 7, instead of his own [smaller] Datsun, as his car allegedly had mechanical problems. In considering whether this defendant's behavior and statements show evidence of his consciousness of guilt, we find that they unquestionably do. Ex-surgeon confesses to killing wife, throwing her body out of In December 1999, prosecutors charged Bierenbaum based on the circumstantial evidence. He can hardly claim with any credibility that an interlude of that nature and length slipped his mind when he spoke to the police and others on the first day, or, indeed, at least four times during the first week, following his wife's unexplained disappearance. When a few months later he received an early morning telephone call from the police indicating they may have had his lost wife at the precinct, he was less than anxious to accede to their request that he immediately leave his bed to possibly identify his inexplicably missing wife. Dr. Robert Bierenbaum and his then-wife, Dr. Janet Cholett, leave court together in October 2000 in New York. Indeed, it has also been held that such evidence in like contexts is highly probative of the defendant's motive and [i]s either directly related to or inextricably interwoven (People v. Ely, [68 N.Y.2d 520] at 529 [510 N.Y.S.2d 532, 503 N.E.2d 88]) with the issue of his identity as the killer (People v. Linton, 166 A.D.2d 670, 671, 561 N.Y.S.2d 259, lv. Prosecutors who convicted Bierenbaum were stunned by his admission to the parole board, particularly because the confession mirrored the states theory of the crime in 1999, when Bierenbaum was charged with second-degree murder. They argue that when certain established facts are juxtaposed with other proven circumstances, defendant's multiple contradictions and omissions are patently incriminating. 286 and its progeny. He was convicted in October 2000 of having murdered his estranged wife, Gail Katz-Bierenbaum 15 years earlier in their Manhattan apartment on July 7, 1985. By using this website, you accept the terms of our Visitor Agreement and Privacy Policy, and understand your options regarding Ad Choices. https://t.co/WMwMXq1BzA, Gail Beth, beloved daughter, granddaughter and sister, her headstone says. The existence of a physical shock or trauma has often been cited as a key consideration (see People v. Brooks, 71 N.Y.2d 877, 527 N.Y.S.2d 753, 522 N.E.2d 1051; People v. Brown, 70 N.Y.2d at 516-517, 522 N.Y.S.2d 837, 517 N.E.2d 515;6 Wigmore, Evidence 1745[1] [Chadbourn rev. Defendant responded to none of them. Bierenbaum confessed to killing his wife during a parole hearing in December 2020, saying they were fighting and he wanted her to stop yelling, according to the New York Daily News. However minor it might be it was very important. It is clear to us that a finding other than guilt would not have been reasonable. Later on July 14, at a meeting at Det. Perhaps defendant's most damning omission was his repeated, false claim to the police and to others that he remained in the apartment all afternoon on July 7 and then went directly to his nephew's birthday party in New Jersey. Instead, he falsely told both detectives, on a total of at least three occasions, that he stayed in his Manhattan apartment all day until 5:30 P.M., emphasizing to Dalsass that he was positive that he left [his apartment] at 5:30 [P.M.]. He also changed his claim that on July 7 he had spoken to the doorman who, he had originally maintained, said he saw the victim leave the building Sunday shortly after 11:00 A.M. Defendant also disputes the instructions' adequacy, and, beyond that-in addition to urging this Court to reject the notion of a background exception to the hearsay rule-he further argues that the testimony recounting the victim's out-of-court statements was largely unreliable. ), rendered November 29, 2000, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 20 years to life should be affirmed. They could find no proof, however, that he had harmed his wife. Notwithstanding these and other direct, uncomplicated admonitions, defendant omitted telling Det. Dalsass and later to Det. Unless the patient waives the privilege, a person authorized to practice medicine shall not be allowed to disclose any information which he acquired in attending a patient in a professional capacity, and which was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity [emphasis added]. We also conclude that even if a different finding were somehow deemed reasonable, there can be no rational view after weigh[ing] the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony,'(People v. MacCracken ex rel. O'Malley that he and his wife had argued the night before she disappeared and continued arguing on the morning of July 7, prompting her to go to Central Park at 11:00 A.M. to cool off.. Thomas O'Malley-as he had indeed told others-that he allegedly left his apartment Sunday afternoon to search for his missing wife in Central Park and there allegedly found her towel and suntan oil.
E Hine Hoki Mai Ra Guitar Chords,
Town Of Hamburg Noise Ordinance Times,
Articles R
