Showing posts with label murder. Show all posts
Showing posts with label murder. Show all posts

Monday, December 19, 2016

Thirty Facts Suggesting Melissa Calusinski’s Innocence in the Death of Benjamin Kingan

Written between December 17th and 20th, 2016

Edited on January 19th, 2017



On Saturday, December 17th, 2016, CBS News aired “Blaming Melissa”, an episode of its investigative report series entitled 48 Hours. Reporter Erin Moriarty hosted the episode. “Blaming Melissa” has been described as a hit piece by members of “Free Melissa Calusinski”, a Facebook group dedicated to proving the woman’s innocence.1
Calusinski is currently serving a 31-year prison term at Logan Correctional Center in Lincoln, Illinois. She was convicted of first-degree murder in the January 14th, 2009 death of toddler Benjamin Kingan.
In Illinois, a conviction of first-degree murder requires that the prosecution demonstrate that the defendant “killed an individual without lawful justification”, and either “intended to kill or do great bodily harm (or knew that the act would do so), Knew that the act created a strong probability of causing death of great bodily harm; or Was attempting or committed a forcible felony other that second degree murder”.2
She, her sister Crystal Calusinski, and Nancy Kallinger, worked at a day care center in Lincolnshire, Illinois, named “Minee Subee in the Park”. Melissa was an assistant teacher at the facility.3 The day care center has since closed, following a $2 million settlement with Kingan’s family.
On September 30th, 2016, a judge in Lake County, Illinois rejected a request to overturn Calusinski’s conviction.4 Melissa was 22 years old when Kingan died; she is now 30 years old. If she serves her entire sentence, she will be in her early fifties when she becomes a free woman.

What follows is a list of facts which, in the opinion of this author, suggest Melissa Calusinski’s innocence in the case, and point to her confession having been coerced.
Note: some of these facts do not directly point to Calusinski’s innocence; but rather merely suggests oversights in the prosecution. Point #21 explains a detail about the civil case between the Kingan family and the day care center, and has nothing to do with the guilt or innocence of Calusinski on an individual basis.



1. Calusinski had a low verbal I.Q., in the bottom 4%.3

2. Calusinski had been teased as a youth for her low comprehension skills.5

3. Calusinski was described as having an “extreme vulner having "
- Interrogated without an attorney present
ability to suggestion”.5

4. Calusinski was described by her attorney Kathleen Zellner as “unsophisticated about her legal rights”3. She was interrogated without an attorney present, and “never asked for a lawyer”.6

5. After she had confessed, Calusinski asked interrogators whether the incident would go on her criminal record, which suggests that she didn’t understand how serious the charge was.5 Calusinski was also described as believing that she would be allowed to go home when the interrogation concluded.

6. Although Calusinski had the right to leave the room during the interrogation (because she agreed to be interviewed), she claims that she was locked inside the room while detectives were outside. Calusinski stated, “They would leave and lock the door, and lock me in there”.3

7. Calusinski was interrogated off-and-on for somewhere between eight and ten hours (according to various, and somewhat conflicting, reports); from roughly 9:30 A.M. to 7 P.M. on January 16th, 20097; two days after Kingan died at 4:30 P.M. on January 14th, 2009. Most interrogations do not last anywhere near that long; most last only several hours at the longest.

8. Calusinski was deprived of food during the interrogation.8

9. Calusinski was deprived of restroom breaks during the interrogation.8

10. When Calusinski entered the interrogation room, she stated that she had “barely slept” during the two days between Kingan’s death and the interrogation.5

11. Calusinski was interrogated seated, confined to a 9” x 12” interrogation room, backed into a corner by two males – Lake Zurich, Illinois police department detectives Sean Curran and George Filenko9 – both of them older and larger than Calusinski.

12. Defense attorney Kathleen Zellner said police “got in her face, yelling expletives and slamming their fists”.5

13. Calusinski denied her guilt at least 79 times before confessing.

14. Calusinski has stated that she can’t explain why she confessed, nor why she demonstrated slamming Kingan to the ground during the interrogation.3

15. Despite having stated that she can’t explain her confession, Calusinski also told reporters that during the interrogation she was “terrified”; saying “They don’t know what I was put through in order for me to confess”.7 She also stated that she was “emotionally exhausted” at the time.7

16. The detectives who interrogated Calusinski arguably insisted to her that she was guilty (“he starts acting up and you get mad at him and you throw him on the floor”) because “something else must have happened”, and “that story you’re giving us is a load of shit”, and “that’s a bunch of lies”.3 Several of the interrogation methods used by the detectives parallel components of a controversial interrogation technique known as the Reid Technique.

17. Before confessing (six hours into the interrogation), Calusinski stated that Kingan “kind of almost slipped when I dropped him. And then he hit the chair”. 3 Calusinski “says she was putting Ben down, close to the ground on his tiptoes. “I thought he was going to stand,” she told the investigator. She said he fell and hit his head.”6

18. Reporter Ruth Fuller called Calusinski’s confession the “most troubling confession” she’d ever seen.5

19. According to their testimony, no workers at the day care center ever saw Melissa Calusinski become frustrated, nor angry, at the children in her care.5

20. Nancy Kallinger testified that she didn’t hear any screaming, nor crying, at the time of the incident.5

21. Two teachers (Melissa Calusinski and Nancy Kallinger) were present in the room at the time of the injury; which fulfilled Illinois’s requirement that two teachers be present in the room whenever there are more than five children.3 This means the day care center shouldn’t have been held liable, as it was complying with the regulation, at least at the time of the second injury (sustained on January 14th, 2009). However, Melissa Calusinski stated that she was alone in the room when she realized that Kingan was unresponsive;10 so holding the center liable may have been appropriate.

22. Day care workers showed the bump from Kingan’s previous injury to his mother. Prosecutor Steve Scheller stated, “The pediatrician actually examined Benjamin’s head, had felt around… said there was no issues that she felt needed to be addressed, that mom should just keep an eye on him”.5

23. Lake County Coroner Thomas Rudd stated that the previous injury could have “easily” caused Kingan’s death two months later, even without a second injury.5

24. Head injuries sometimes cause vomiting; prosecutors attributed the vomiting to a stomach bug,5 although it’s unclear whether there is evidence to support the claim that Kingan was still suffering from such an ailment in the day or two leading up to his death, following his apparent recovery from his stomach bug after taking Pedialyte.

25. State pathologist Dr. Eupil Choi crossed out the word “significant” in an affidavit about the head injury which Kingan sustained in October 2008.5

26. Prosecutor Matthew deMartini called the previous injury “microscopic”, while Thomas Rudd disagrees, saying that the injury was visible to the naked eye.5

27. Prosecutors downplayed and suppressed evidence of Kingan’s previous injury, but conceded that the previous injury occurred, but said it was “too small to matter”.5

28. Some attributed the abnormal rate of growth of Kingan’s head (during the last several months of his life) to normal growth, while others attributed this growth to swelling of the brain.5

29. Lake County Coroner Thomas Rudd stated that Kingan was a head-banger, which if true could have made his previous head injury worse.5 Nancy Kallinger said Kingan threw his head back slightly, twice, shortly before he died.

30. Lake County, Illinois has a reputation of being reluctant to admit to falsely convicting the accused, in order to prevent the government from losing money in payouts to convicts.5



Sources:

1. “Free Melissa Calusinski”, Facebook.com, accessed December 18th, 2016


2. “Illinois First Degree Murder Laws”, statelaws.findlaw.com, accessed December 19th, 2016


3. “Melissa Calusinski: Was a Day Care Worker Coerced into a Murder Confession?”, CBSNews.com, July 18th, 2015


4. “Guilty Verdict Stands in Day Care Murder; Judge Rejects Reversal”, ChicagoTribune.com, September 30th, 2016


5. “Blaming Melissa”, 48 Hours, CBS News, December 17th, 2016

6. “Melissa Calusinski: Detective “Made a Mistake””, Chicago.CBSLocal.com, February 24th, 2016

7. “Daycare Worker Melissa Calusinski Reveals Why She Confessed to Murdering a Toddler: ‘I Was Terrified’”; People Magazine, October 13th, 2016


            8. “Is Deerfield “Killer” Innocent? “48 Hours” Suggests So”, JWCDaily.com, March 4th, 2015

9. “Questioning Melissa Calusinski”, CBSNews.com, February 28th, 2015


10. “Lake County Coroner: Toddler’s Death ‘Undetermined’ in Day Care Murder Case”, ChicagoTribune.com, July 8th, 2015 


at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Sunday, December 6, 2015

On the Death Penalty



Originally Written on March 17th, 2003
Edited on December 6th, 2015
Edits Shown in [Brackets]



      Since the time of Babylonian leader Hammurabi, fair and proper punishment has been a difficult and complicated issue. Hammurabi’s code says “an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.” This code, commonly misinterpreted as a call for revenge, is in fact a call for fairness. If a man steals a loaf of bread, he would not have his hands cut off. The punishment must fit the crime, so he would have something of equal value taken from him, or he would be made to pay a fine. The code also states that if a man takes another man’s life, then his life must be taken as punishment.
      In [the fictional 2003 film] The Life of David Gale, Kevin Spacey plays a Texan ex-college professor who opposes the death penalty. He works with the abolitionist organization called “Death Watch,” which tries to prevent death row inmates from being eliminated. He is accused of killing the leader of the organization[, Constance Hallaway (played by Laura Linney)], who is also his colleague. Beginning four days before his death by lethal injection, News Magazine’s Bitsey Bloom ([played by] Kate Winslet) conducts three interviews with him.


      This film seeks not to entertain (although it does), but to inform and to explore the issue and reveal the flaws in and wrongs of the process of what some call “legalized murder,” and also its possible benefits. Many valid arguments come up in the course of the film, and it is a must-see for anyone with any opinion at all [about] the death penalty.
      A simple and obvious question frequently asked when discussing this issue is “Is death a reasonable punishment for murder?” After all, the death penalty attempts to teach murderers that it is wrong to kill by killing them. Life imprisonment would make them learn the consequences of their actions, whereas death [would not, but] would offer them release from what could [arguably] be a harsher, more effective, and more proper punishment.
      On the other hand, [death may be a more merciful punishment than life in prison, because] a cancer patient or someone with serious organ failure may want to end their own life rather than having to live for months with endless pain. The death penalty complies with Hammurabi’s code, and it may be fitting to do to the guilty what they have done to the innocent and prevent them from killing again.
      Former Illinois Governor George H. Ryan commuted the death sentences of all eligible death row inmates to life imprisonment only days before he was succeeded by Rod Blagojevich. This did not abolish the death penalty in Illinois, although [some in the State Legislature are trying to abolish it]. Flaws in [the death penalty] process can cause innocent people to be killed as punishment for crimes they did not commit. This sentence cannot be taken back if it is discovered that the accused was innocent after he is put to death. If a term of natural life in prison is [given as a sentence], he [may] be removed from jail with no harm done. Ryan stated that all murder cases are very important matters and must be examined closely, and that there should not be simply a blanket decision on whether murderers can and should be killed for their crimes.
      Lawyers have the ability to remove and select jurors for cases, and if they are corrupt or prejudiced, they can purposely choose jurors who[m they believe are likely to] find the accused guilty or innocent based on their race[...]. Some say all murders committed must be treated as the same crime, be they committed by black or white [people], and [whether] the victims [be] male or female[, b]ut what if the murderer is mentally disabled or insane?
      The debate about the death penalty is complicated and [there are] many exceptions to the rules. Every state has the right to choose whether or not convicted violent criminals will live or be executed, but [it would be difficult to] disagree that each case must be examined until there is no doubt whatsoever as to the guilt of the accused.
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Friday, December 14, 2012

Is it Time to Legalize Murder?

Written in December 2012
Edited in May 2014, and on April 22nd, 2016


In "Utopia", Sir Thomas More wrote that the government should stop focusing on enforcing harsh penalties for theft, and instead focus on eliminating the policies that led to the impoverishment of the tenant farmers (namely, encroaching on and fencing-off their lands, effectively forcing them to compete for labor in the city centers to survive).

Abbie Hoffman wrote that the decades-long prison penalties for violating anti-marijuana laws made it so that young people may feel pressure to commit acts of violence (including, potentially, murder) against witnesses in order to prevent being punished for the original crime.

Why do people turn to theft, drugs, and violence? They perceive that they have few other options. They harm themselves, others, and others' property, often as a way to feel in-control; while society has conditioned the set of legitimate alternative courses of action available to them.

It should make sense, then, that several of the last few famous American mass shooters were on prescription anti-depression and anti-schizophrenia medications. Depression and schizophrenia are over-diagnosed, and the medications prescribed to treat them often have suicidal thoughts as side effects.

We must begin viewing many of these shootings as symptoms of the ills of society, not simply as ills. Saying that a mass shooter was "deranged" is a cop-out. But calling for "free" psychiatric care for all Americans (as a preventive measure) is an expensive proposition that diminishes the value of the labor of the people who perform psychiatric evaluations for a living.

Capital punishment (execution) is not an effective deterrent for murder; like the marijuana example, it only leads to (and, in the criminal mind, excuses) further violence. But prison - with its routine beatings and rapes (corporal punishment, whether sanctioned or overlooked) - is no creative or effective way to humanize the criminal justice system.

In some non-industrialized societies [including the Babemba tribe of Africa], when a person commits a crime, it is seen as a cry for help, and the village comes together to praise the criminal, and tell him about all the good things he has done in the past, in order to convince him that he is a good person (no deterrence necessary). Similarly, Socrates suggested that as "punishment" for corrupting the youth of Athens he should not be sentenced to death but instead given free food for life.

The trial of Socrates undoubtedly led his student Plato (who wrote, "[g]ood people don't need laws to tell them to act responsibly, and bad people will find a way around the laws") to wonder whether justice is truly good or instead simply a necessary evil. It is an appropriate question, especially given that today some homeless commit acts of petty theft so that they will be arrested and taken to jail, thus ensuring them shelter for the night, and possibly also a meal or two.

It should seem obvious by now that once a man has killed, he is willing to eliminate witnesses without blinking an eye. So too police, and whatever non-witness innocent bystanders happen to be between him and his getaway car. Thus, the fear of being confronted with deadly force is not an effective deterrent for these people who have little or nothing to lose.

But what good, exactly, would result from the legalization of murder? In all likelihood, nothing. But what good has resulted from its decriminalization (i.e., reduced penalties, and augmented rights of the accused)? It depends on whether you ask a civil-libertarian or someone who thinks society "coddles" criminals and the disadvantaged.

So why, then, even bring up the idea of legalizing murder (that is, repealing laws against murder, and eliminating sentencing guidelines for it)? We may remember from the First Book of Timothy "...law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels...". Just as "when guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns", when murder is outlawed, only outlaws will commit murder.

Actions are not immoral because they are illegal, but illegal because they are immoral. Those who believe that murder is wrong will not commit murder, and nothing will stop those who do not care whether murder is wrong from committing it.

Nothing, of course, except threats by individuals (and threatening by the State, called "laws") that such actions will be met with violent retribution. And, naturally, in the absence of Statism, the same set of threats would have the same potential to prevent aggression and enact retribution against its victims.

In addressing the complaints of voters upset by the legalization of gay marriage, stand-up comic Daniel Tosh remarked that the fact that gay marriage is legal doesn't mean that people who participate in homosexual civil unions are not going to go to Hell, saying "Just because the state says it's legal, it's not like God's gonna let 'em into Heaven."

Maybe if legalizing murder doesn't work, we can always replace those "gun-free zone" signs in schools with "murder-free zone" signs.



For more entries on justice, crime, and punishment, please visit:
http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2010/10/thrasymachus-support-for-justice-being.html
at No comments:
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

How to Fold Two Square Pieces of Card Stock into a Box

      This series of images shows how to take two square pieces of card stock (or thick paper), and cut and fold them into two halves of a b...