~INTRODUCTION~

The information herein this web page was written by Mr. Gary J. McDaniel of Pretext Services Inc. (an investigation service) from Palm Beach, Florida.

I am directing this letter to Virginia Larzelere supporters in my capacity as a private investigator. I am hopeful this will provide some insight as to the reasons why Virginia's case has been delayed for such a long period of time, questions related to her guilt or innocence, and what the future holds. Lastly, the investigation and the good news.

This investigation has been an expensive undertaking. I have invested my own monies and time with no promise of payment. I remain committed to prove Virginia's innocence and believe the evidence affirms same. We need your voice, prayers and personal commitment. In these times, Virginia and many others have been victimized by the injustice of our court system and the overzealous attitudes of prosecutors. I challenge you not to be apathetic - justice is not automatic in these times. Let us not forget, Virginia has been sentenced to death on the words of immunized witnesses and not physical evidence.

 

~HIGHLIGHTS~

Virginia made certain lifestyle choices which came back to haunt her in the eyes of the jurors. The witnesses has also made some poor lifestyle choices. They had criminal exposure which provided a motive to lie. The State gave them the opportunity. Their freedom was at Virginia's expense and that of JUSTICE.

Within an hour of Norman Larzelere's death on 8 March 1991, Virginia Larzelere was named a suspect in a telephone call to the Edgewater Police Department. The call came from a family associate of a major burglary organization. This call reinforced the predisposed opinions of officials that Virginia was somehow involved in Norman's murder. To allege that Norman Larzelere was the victim of a "contract murder" made good press. The self-serving headline stories victimized Virginia although she co-operated from the start of the investigation. Even at this time, she and Jason offer to share my discoveries with law enforcement, so there was never a time wherein Virginia remained silent.

Unbeknownst to Virginia, the lifestyle choices of the immunized witnesses, Kristen Palmieri and Steven Heidle, provided more than enough motive for them to lie. Aside from the criminal penalties they faced, it was necessary to preserve their well being with family members. By their own admissions, they were involved. The State gave them opportunity, motive and made every effort to accommodate their deceptions. The prosecutor even admitted knowing they lied during the trial, an issue for appeal. Today, the evidence is overwhelming that the witnesses committed perjury. Unfortunately, the State continues to be a willing participant and justice is obstructed.

The investigation by my firm and its associates was predicated on discoveries made by the police. For example, Kristen Palmieri stated that she traveled from the Orlando area with Ted Goodman, her then boyfriend, to West Palm Beach in search of a "hit man" at the request of Virginia Larzelere. They led authorities to believe they met Tony Marconi in West Palm Beach. The State would later admit they had no interest as to the true identity or whereabouts of Tony Marconi. Their reasoning; "we had a good suspect." So, after limiting their own investigation to approximately five (5) hours, they were full speed ahead to frame the evidence against Virginia and Jason. I would later take their initial leads and pursue the identity of Marconi, under the assumption the State's witnesses misled authorities to protect an accomplice using the name of Tony Marconi.

Between 8 March and 3 May 1991, Palmieri and Heidle each gave no less that seven (7) "sworn statements." From those statements Virginia and Jason were arrested on 5 May 1991. Virginia was convicted of first degree murder and awaits the death penalty. Jason's trial would follow Virginia's. Fortunately, Jason learned from his mistakes of his mother and counsel. In doing so, he sought new counsel and my assistance. Today the trial record is complete with contradictions as clear as the conflict in the verdicts, knowing the alleged gunman is innocent, but the alleged conspirator, Virginia, is guilty. Commonsense would cause anyone to look at the evidence and trial records and search for the perpetrator. Yet, there is no interest by the enforcement to pursue available leads. That task has been accepted by this firm.

To the trained observer there is very little difference between the charges against Virginia and Jason. The State's evidence remains the same. Unfortunately for Virginia, she assumed her attorney's would vigorously defend her innocence. To this day, it is difficult for me to accept that the defense attorney's did not summon the FORTY (40) plus defense witnesses available. Instead, they brought the trial to conclusion after ONLY FOUR (4) HOURS OF DEFENSE TESTIMONY. In the words of one juror, they were "pompous"; had they "provided us another theory for the murder" we would have most likely "voted for acquittal." By comparison, Jason's trial lawyer, William Lasley, worked closely with myself based on my experience and knowledge of the case. He summoned in excess of twenty (20) defense witnesses and reviewed every piece of evidence provided by the State. His homework gave him an insight into the shortcomings of the State's case and was an asset in the cross-examination of witnesses which devastated the State's case. A review of the testimony provides clear and convincing evidence that the State was attempting to develop evidence to fit a theory in lieu of following available leads as to the identity of Marconi, origin of the Heidle/Palmieri weapons and Goodman relationships. Had the State investigated the crime as a burglary gone bad the case would have been solved.

~THE WEAPONS~

Palmieri and Heidle, told the police on 3 May 1991 that they were asked to dispose of a shotgun and pistol on 10 March 1991 used in the murder. The fact they withheld this information should have generated suspicion, knowing they had been cooperating since March 9, 1991 and provided at least four (4) sworn statements. This admission was the prelude to the Grand Jury and the arrest of both Virginia and Jason on 5 May 1991. The first version was that Virginia and Jason summoned Steven Heidle and Kristen Palmiero to the DeLand residence. There, they were gifted a shotgun and a .45 caliber pistol and were asked to encase them in concrete and take them to the river. Heidle carefully described how they used the bathroom tub to prepare the cement and encase the weapons in concrete. Then, as Virginia's direction they threw them in the river on 10 March 1991. Palmieri would explain how Jason was "upstairs". Even then, it was confusing as to whether he assisted. From the information, authorities obtained another search warrant and removed the plumbing in search of residue, but found no physical evidence. They followed the directions of Heidle and found the weapons in the river within five minutes. The prosecution would learn later that the FBI discovered the shotgun was not functional and the .45 pistol most certainly was not used. NORMAN WAS KILLED BY A SHOTGUN.

The initial defense investigation was aggressive. To the benefit of the defense, Heidle and Palmieri could not keep their stories straight. They also enjoyed bragging about their participation in the crime. Their listeners later became defense witnesses. A review of police reports disclosed statements by Palmieri implicating Virginia on 10 May 1991, wherein Palmieri states that Virginia asked that she not mention the trip to West Palm Beach. The police had learned about the West Palm Beach trip from the Goodmans, not from Palmieri nor Heidle. Evidence will show the Goodmans alerted Palmieri to the police investigation on the proceeding day. So it was not a happenstance that brought Palmieri to the authorities the following day. In theory, all Palmieri had to do was cooperate the Goodman version of the Marconi scenario. After all, it was Palmieri phone records that disclosed phone calls to the Goodmans so she had to give it up.

The aggressive tactics of the defense investigation, spelled trouble for the State. Heidle was alerted to our interviews. He was in a panic and began a campaign of terror against defense witnesses leaving phone threats, throwing rocks through windows, graffiti markings and damaging their vehicles, in addition to his many verbal threats. During this period of time, both Heidle's and Palmieri's immunity agreements were at risk. After all, the defense investigation revealed a MULTITUDE OF CRIMINAL ACTS by Heidle to include conspiracy to commit bank fraud. Heidle had approached a bank clerk to transfer monies of wealthy businessmen into his personal account. Unfortunately, the friend brought the plan to the authorities. Additionally, a "grand theft investigation" was already underway and Heidle would certainly be charged for the theft of the cashiers checks. The defense located an alias Florida drivers license obtained by Heidle on 15 November 1990, under the name of WILLIAM SCOTT HUGHES; the list went on to include violation of probation and WITNESS TAMPERING based upon his threats to three (3) witnesses who were under subpoena for the defense. For the record, Heidle never reformed. In 1996 he would be charged with his third DUI. When the court ordered him to obtain counseling. Heidle forged a letter from a court appointed therapist, falsely stating the court ordered therapy was completed. Knowing the appeals of Virginia Larzelere were still pending, the Orange County State Attorney's Office is believed to have intervened, as before, in Heidle's defense.

In June 1991 the State found themselves in a precarious position as the stories of Heidle and Palmieri unraveled. It was time for a final sworn statement. Apparently, the Grand Jury testimony in May was not good enough. Heidle and Palmieri meet with the prosecutors and detectives. The defense would argue that the Grand Jury testimony of May 1991 must be released, but the State argued successfully for it to remain sealed. To this day we can only speculate that a different version of events was told to the grand jurors because the State has fought vigorously to keep the record sealed.

The 3 June 1991, 167 page statement of Palmieri was very telling. The not so bright Kristen Palmieri stated she had spoken with Heidle the evening before. He asked that they meet beforehand and enter together, adding they should always be together. It became obvious as to why. The witness, away from Heidle's presence, admitted that the weapons were stored in the attic of Heidle's mother's home. Adding that Heidle retrieved them from the attic where they were stored in a duffle bag. Together they put them in concrete prior to throwing them in the river. This admission was in conflict with the earlier version and deemed significant. During cross-examination in Jason's trial, witness Palmieri testified that the bag also contained a ski mask and gloves. Yet, there existed not report of this version and the items were never produced. Unfortunately, Virginia's attorneys were not prepared. Lasley's examination of witnesses disclosed the contradictions. Hence, the NOT GUILTY verdict.

Forensic examiners with the FBI and Florida Department of Law Enforcement attested that the weapons had been in the water no more that three or four days. The witnesses stuck to the earlier version that the weapons were thrown in the river on 10 March 1991. Even to the lay witness, the fact that no algae has formed was telling. In the trials, defense witnesses attested that the .45 pistol was brandished by Heidle on April 22 and May 1, 1991 when he was in a drunken stupor and threatening to kill. It was first observed before Christmas on 1990, less that twenty (20) days after it was stolen from an Orlando gun shop burglary. In Virginia's trial not one, but two defense witnesses testified that Heidle had the weapon after 10 March 1991 when it was claimed to have been thrown in the river.

Edgewater investigators pursued their first lead within an hour after Norman Larzelere's shooting. They never admitted to the earlier call, but traveled to West Palm Beach at the insistence of Ted Goodman's sister, an Edgewater citizen. This witness claimed Ted was a manic depressive, alcoholic and diagnosed with sclerosis of the liver of which took his life in February of 1991. The witness emphasized that Ted did not always tell the truth. Yet, the State believed Virginia sought Ted's assistance to locate a "hit man" and, for this reason detectives traveled to West Palm Beach to develop leads from the Goodman family. There, they identified the solicited hit man "Tony Marconi." The detectives claimed to have visited the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office and asked for an index of Ted Goodman and family members. Had they consulted the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office they would have learned the Goodmans were professional burglars. In fact, GOODMAN AND HIS SON HAD BEEN ARRESTED FOR MORE THAN FIFTY (50) HOME INTRUSION BURGLARIES, ALL OCCURRING DURING DAYTIME HOURS. So much for the theory that "burglaries do not occur during the day" as claimed by the Chief of Police in Edgewater to the media.

As early as 10 March authorities chose not to investigate the whereabouts or identity of Tony Marconi. Yet, I thought it was important because experience dictates that in every lie there is a little truth. In theory, Marconi could have done the dastardly deed. Kristen Palmieri admitted that these people traveled from West Palm Beach to Edgewater for the purpose of casing out the Larzelere's Edgewater office an en route they purchased a ski mask. One reason to pursue Marconi's whereabouts. It was interesting that the reports never disclosed where Marconi eas taken, the vehicle he drove, or city of residence. Further reason to pursue Marconi's whereabouts and identity. These efforts paid off. The new evidence includes the identity of Marconi.

Virginia's 8 March 1991 observations were confirmed in 1994 by an eyewitness. This individual was passing the office at the time the assailant exited. The witness described the car and assailant, all of which confirmed Virginia's statement to authorities on 8 March 1991 and days following. The car is unlike that of Heidle's mother which refutes his trial testimony; that Jason used his mother's car. Following this discovery, additional evidence was developed from earlier leads of both Edgewater and Orange County investigators. My private investigation would identify the assailants and motives known to Heidle and Palmieri. This newly discovered evidence could revoke the immunity of witnesses and subject them to prosecution.

Professional investigators have a moral and ethical responsibility to remain objective. In the State of Florida v. Virginia and Jason Larzelere cases, the State did not remain objective. They set their sights on Virginia and Jason and built a case around their beliefs. It is unfortunate that Virginia's counsel did not prepare nor use the same evidence provided to Jason's attorney. At best, the State produced two former boyfriends who alleged that Virginia solicited their interest to kill Norman. Although damaging on face value, this testimony was negated when in Jason's trial they claimed the remark was made flippantly and not to be taken seriously. As stated, even these persons had motive to lie. Had Virginia's counsel authorized my request to interview these witnesses, I am reasonably certain the intimidating tactics if the State would not have been successful.

As for the allegations that Virginia's motive was for insurance monies, the State never proved the theory. The insurance representatives testified that Norman Larzelere personally sought the insurance and Virginia's role was not unusual. The increases were justified and in keeping with the recommendations of a financial planner. Norman took into consideration the two infant children and the adoption of Jason and Jessica. The State also failed to prove that Norman Larzelere's will was forged and, for this reason, leaned heavily on Palmieri and Heidle. Based upon my experience, I conclude that the numerous contradictions forced the State to firm up their theory and opinions. Hence, the statements were taken by the Orange County State Attorney's Office on 3 July and 11 July 1991. The State was on notice of the many conflicts unbeknownst to the defense who did not have access to the Grand Jury testimony on or around 14 May 1991. In my opinion, the State suborned perjury.

 

CONCLUSIONS:
~VIRGINIA IS INNOCENT~

Virginia is innocent, but in reality may serve an additional four (4) years before the court overturns the conviction. If a new trial is ordered the State lacks the evidence to proceed, but may try. However, is a special prosecutor is appointed and the case returns to the Grand Jury the real perpetrators will be charged and the charges against Virginia will be dismissed. Virginia is considering several options with her attorneys. They must ultimately make the decision. I am an investigator and not an attorney and this matter is on of Life and Death. Virginia's court appointed counsel are extremely competent and dedicated. Yet, their office is dependent on financing from the State of Florida. In past years, monies have been exhausted and representation for those on death row has been delayed in mid stream. It is presently being entertained that the Governor's Office be consulted to consider a special prosecutor and investigation by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement. The Orange County State Attorney's Office is not receptive to new evidence and may have a conflict because some of the evidence appears to have been known and withheld. These are issues to be raised on appeal. If proved to be the case, Virginia may have cause to sue the county and enforcement persons if it is found they violated her rights to due process. If the Governor appoints a special investigator I am confident they will research the leads available and identify the assassin.

 

~THE DOWNSIDE~

To table the information to the State of Florida is a risk particularly when the State has control, as in the past, over immunity to witnesses. In this case we have seen so far too much abuse in the process. It could happen again, if a witness does not say what is expected. My worst fear is that the perpetrator will be given an opportunity to admit to killing Norman Larzelere, but be granted immunity only if they claim it was done so at Virginia's request. This is the easy way out for the State. In a trial setting I believe we could prove otherwise, however, it could delay her acquittal.

As you review this material you may begin to think justice is a game. Often it is true and the winners are those that play the best game. The impropriety in this case is clear as is the evidence. The State, and most particularly the Orange County State Attorney's Office, will not apologize or retract their unsubstantiated opinions under any circumstance. This attitude must change, but not at this time. Public awareness can make a difference. I've done my job and in the approaching month will finalize my discoveries. YOUR VOICE AND THOUGHTS ARE NECESSARY. Virginia remains patient, but is in ill health. She can no longer afford to be victimized by the legal system. The time is now. I remain loyal to the cause believing we will prevail. Some of you may know a reputable firm who can protect her interests. Hopefully, the courts will recognize Virginia's dilemma and provide her an avenue of recourse. To those who support the cause, feel free to contact Virginia directly or correspond with my office. 

Thanks for your support...

Mr. Gary J. McDaniel of Pretext Services Inc.