Prosecutor Misconduct

Sedwick knowingly used Heidle’s false testimony
(Sedwick is State Attonery against Virginia)

1. During direct, Heidle states that he and Jason went to a Deland storage unit on 3/7/91 to return insurance polices
       
   1. On cross examination, it becomes apparent Heidle lied when confronted with the fact that he was on an airplane returning from Massachusetts when he supposedly was in Deland.
   2. Edgewater police Dept. Supplement Repost ‘Trail Exhibit’ states insurance policies were taken from the Dental Office, inventoried, copied, and returned to Virginia on 3/9/91
   3. Detectives testified insurance policies taken from Dental Office

2. Heidle provides and testifies the shotgun retrieved from the river is the murder weapon; thrown into the river on 3/10/91, along with a blue 45 Argentine pistol.
         
   1. FDLE and FBI Crime Lab Reports state the shotgun is rusty, inoperable , and “Could not be made to fire.
      1. NOT the murder weapon
   2. FBI Crime Lab Reports states container of guns had no river algae or rot build up.  Estimated time in Saint Johns River, 2 to 3 days
   3. FDLE and FBI Crime Lab Reports state the shotgun shell casing and wadding retrieved from Dental Office did not match shell hammed in the shotgun retrieved from the river

3. Heidle claimed he had never seen the blue 45 Argentine pistol before he put it in the concrete on 3/8/91
       
   1. Blue 45 Argentine pistol was stolen from Oak Ridge Gun Shop in December of 1990.  Heidle was a suspect on the Orlando Police Report.
   2. Three witnesses testified Heidle had the blue 45 Pistol in late April
             
4. On direct, Heidle states Jason had a single hacksaw blade that he used in the Orlando house to saw off the shotgun barrel.  Sedwick repeatedly states to the jury that the metal shavings from the carpet confirm this.
           
   1. FDLE and FBI Crime Lab Reports state the metal shavings / particles retrieved from the carpet was not the metal gauge of a shotgun – most likely from a vacuum cleaner ball bearing.
   2. Firearm State Expert testified a shotgun barrel could nt be sawed off, as Heidle testified, with a single blade.  The procedure would require a vice and special tools.
              
5.  Heidle testified that he placed the container of guns in by bathroom, added the concrete and water.  Heidle also provided a metal cooking pot that he used for the concrete.  Sedwick displayed the metal pot and repeatedly told the jury that the concrete for the guns was mixed in it and the bathtub
         
   1. FDLE and FBI Crime Lab Reports state the concrete in the metal cooking pot does not match the concrete grade of the container of the 2 guns from the river.
   2. Judge Graziand issued a search warrant for the Deland house in regards to concrete.  Lab Repost found no concrete particles in the plumbing of my bathtub.
   3. My bedroom had 2 bathrooms.  Mine with the bathtub, was being remodeled by Geon Construction.  The bathtub Heidle supposedly used for concrete mix had been inoperable for 3 months.
            
6. Heidle testified on direct as to date, times and scenario concerning details of concrete / guns / and river dumping of 3/10/91.
           
   1. On date and time, Edgewater Detectives Osborne and Gammel testified they were at the Deland house questioning me, searching the house for hours. Neither Heidle or Palmier, were present according to detectives.
   2. Palmieri’s testimony and Heidle’s testimony was inconsistent and many details did not match.

 

Direct, redirect did not alter the fact that Heidle was giving false testimony.  He was contradicted by state expert’s testimony, detectives testimony and by Kristin Palmieri’s testimony.  Sedwick knowingly used Heidle’s version of facts as evidence presented to jury and reiterated his statements.  In closing argument, she tells the jury Heidle lied but rehabilitates him by stating to the jury that his lies were an effort to cover his prior knowledge of the murder along with his role.

There was no evidence before the court that Heidle had beforehand knowledge of the murder.  Heidle testifies he had no prior knowledge. This allusion of phantom evidence of Heidle’s knowledge misled the jury to believe Sedwick had evidence not before the court.

HOME