Appellate judges ruled Friday that a Polk County man serving a life sentence for the murder of his wife should not get a new trial, despite fingerprint evidence never heard in his first trial pointing to a different suspect.
The problem, wrote judges from the 2nd District Court of Appeal, is that a history of violence is the only thing that might connect the owner of those fingerprints, convicted killer Jeremy Scott, to the slaying of Leo Schofield's wife, Michelle. That violent history would be inadmissible at a new trial, they said, because it's not directly connected with this murder.
In early 1987, Michelle Schofield was found stabbed to death, floating in a Lakeland canal. Her red Mazda was found 7 miles away with her blood in it.
Schofield's murder trial was based entirely on circumstantial evidence. Witnesses said they saw Schofield hit his wife in the months before her death. A neighbor said she heard the couple arguing in their mobile home on the night Michelle disappeared and saw Leo carry something to the Mazda.
The prosecution said Leo stabbed Michelle 26 times in the mobile home — even though no blood was found there — and took her body to the canal in the Mazda, where her blood was found. Other witnesses questioned the neighbor's version of events, but a jury convicted Schofield.
Then, in 2004, fingerprints in the Mazda were identified as belonging to Jeremy Scott, who was serving a life sentence for murder and had a history of violence. Scott lived a few miles from the canal where Michelle's body was found.
In June, Schofield attorney Richard Bartmon argued that Scott's violent history should be admitted into evidence: "It would pervert the truth-seeking function of the court not to allow it," said Bartmon. "The reason to allow it is fairness — to give the jury the whole story."
But in their Friday ruling, the appellate judges disagreed.
"All of the evidence offered by Schofield concerning Scott's alleged violent acts toward his former girlfriend and others, his alleged reputation for violence, and the details of the crimes underlying his prior felony convictions is simply inadmissible and cannot weaken the case against Schofield so as to give rise to a reasonable doubt as to his guilt," they wrote.
Therefore, no new trial.
Meg Laughlin can be reached at mlaughlin@sptimes.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment