facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Judge holds hearing for new trial



Published: Tue, August 27, 2013 @ 12:05 a.m.

By Joe Gorman

jgorman@vindy.com

youngstown

Lawyers for a former chiropractor and gymnastics coach who is serving a 43-year prison sentence after being convicted on multiple sex counts in 2008 say their client deserves a new trial for several reasons.

One reason is that someone deliberately tampered with the makeup of the jury that convicted their client, the defense lawyers told Judge R. Scott Krichbaum of Mahoning County Common Pleas Court on Monday.

Gregory Dew also says he deserves a new trial because video and audio evidence was tampered with and some of the jury instructions were improper.

Dew was convicted of sex crimes committed between 1990 and 1992 against two of his female gymnastics students, who were then between age 15 and 17, before he became a chiropractor. The allegations by the gymnasts came out in 2007, and while that case was being investigated, Dew was indicted on charges relating to his chiropractic practice.

Dew had crimes the jury convicted him of as a chiropractor vacated by the 7th District Court of Appeals.

Michael McGee, a lawyer for Dew, said his team has proof that someone changed codes on the computer system that picked jurors for his client’s trial to ensure that the jury pool was made up of an inordinate number of people who were related to police officers. When asked who might have done it, however, McGee said he did not know.

“The bottom line is, someone is messing with your courtroom,” McGee said.

Judge Krichbaum said Dew and his lawyers offered no evidence to point out who tampered or how, and he also said that by law, that has to be dealt with before the trial starts and after the jury is picked. He said it is too late to appeal that issue.

McGee said the law allows him to appeal at any time if evidence can be shown that Dew was denied a fair trial. He said the jury evidence was not available until after the trial, but Judge Krichbaum overruled that argument. The judge said there is no proof that relatives of a police officer as a group have a bias against defendants. McGee said he had data that show relatives of police officers are more likely to side with prosecutors in trials.

McGee also said that there was a DVD with a police interview with Dew that had portions of the audio deleted. Those portions would have undermined one of the detectives interviewing him, McGee said. Also, the DVD was protected by a password that needed to be put in before it could be played and Dew’s former attorney never had that password.

Judge Krichbaum also said that was an issue that was never brought up on appeal and that he addressed the issue before the trial. He said the DVD was played in court while Dew’s trial counsel was there and she never raised the issue again after he ordered prosecutors to give her the password. McGee also said the audio on a wiretap was altered and that statements by one of the victims that the acts Dew performed were consensual was taken out of the tape. Judge Krichbaum said that also is an issue that needed to be raised on appeal and was not.

He did say that he would study briefs on whether the jury was improperly instructed about the fact that, because Dew was a coach, he could use his position of authority to break the will of his victims. McGee said that was not automatically the case under the laws in 1992, when he was accused of committing the crimes.

Judge Krichbaum also allowed affidavits to be filed, but he did not allow the testimony of witnesses, including Dew himself.


Comments

1handymandave(474 comments)posted 1 year ago

This is exactly why the courts get tied up. This defendant has no leg to stand on was already found guilty of his crimes and should be serving out his 43 year term.

Suggest removal:

2RoyDew(25 comments)posted 1 year ago

Judge Krichbaum is the kind of judge that would make Vladimir Putin proud.

The composition of the jury was analyzed by a published national expert on jury composition.

There were 7 members of the jury pool related to members of the Youngstown Police Department. The analysis concluded that the likelihood of that many persons being related to members of the Youngstown Police Department was 1,250,000 to 1. The professional conclusion what that it was highly unlikely that the jury pool was the result of a random selection process.

Who was the person responsible for overseeing the jury pool selection process? The Youngstown Chief of Police. What a coincidence!

The jury pool analysis did not include the following:

A juror who is the mother-in-law of a former Youngstown Municipal Court Judge.

A juror whose mother was the Director of Parks and Recreation of Mahoning County, appointed to that position by the Common Pleas Court Judges of Mahoning County, including Judge Krichbaum.

A juror who was a school teacher for one of the gymnasts in the case.

A juror who is a next door neighbor of Natasha Frenchko, Asst. Mahoning County Prosecutor on the case.

A juror who had a daughter that attended Youngstown Gymnastics Center at the time of the alleged activities.

A juror who is a friend of a Mahoning County Prosecutor and supported his candidacy when running for a judge seat in Mahoning County.

In addition, the defense presented absolute evidence that the software used for the jury selection was tampered with. This evidence was provided through Mahoning Common Pleas Court Judge John M. Durkin.

Suggest removal:

3RoyDew(25 comments)posted 1 year ago

I failed to mention that one of the jurors was also related to an FBI Special Agent.

Sincerely,
Roy J. Dew

Suggest removal:

4RoyDew(25 comments)posted 1 year ago

Another interesting fact.

The number of police officers in the Youngstown Police Department account for less than 24% of all sworn law enforcement officers in Mahoning County.

No jurors were related to law enforcement officers of any other local law enforcement department in Mahoning County.

How likely is that?

No reasonable person, wearing judicial robes or otherwise, could believe that the jury was not purposely packed with jurors favorable to the prosecution in this case.

Combine the previous information with purposely withholding exculpatory evidence from the defense and the jury, fabricating charges and perjury by Detective Flara of the Boardman Police Department and what do you have?

Who is the person in the court room responsible for ensuring that the safeguards guaranteed the accused by the Constitutions of the State of Ohio and the United States are strictly enforced?

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport