Furthermore, were we to reach the merits of the videotape's admissibility, we would reject the defense argument that its contents are based on pure speculation and thus were improperly placed before the jury. He also disclosed to his date that in the past he had a bad temper, but that it had gotten much better. Dr. Baran unequivocally denied she had ever made either of those statements to defendant or that she had even held these opinions. Dalsass waited until 12:30 A.M. and left the first of approximately eight messages on defendant's home answering machine and at his work number during the ensuing week. The couples stormy marriage continued as Katz worked toward her doctorate in clinical psychology at Long Island University. I wanted her to stop yelling at me and I attacked her, Bierenbaum said, according to a hearing transcript obtained by the network. Robert Bierenbaum, who is serving a sentence of 20 years to life in prison, revealed the details of the 1985 murder during a December 2020 parole hearing whose Defendant also suggested to others that his wife was depressed and thus may have killed herself, disclosing also that she had tried to commit suicide years earlier. Katz, 29, of New York, was murdered in July 1985 by her husband, Dr. Robert Bierenbaum. The trial justice rejected the People's pre-trial request to call defendant's treating psychiatrists and psychologist as witnesses to testify about factual matters and opinions connected to their treatment of defendant, including the conversations they had with the victim and defendant's parents, after defendant's consent was procured. Please try again. While defendant understandably argues that this ruling prejudiced him at trial, we hold that under these circumstances it did not unduly do so. Rather, it should be, and is, a process whereby trial attorneys announce an unambiguous objection, in praesenti, based on an articulated or otherwise known rationale involving logic, legal principles, and/or common sense, a protest which gives an adversary notice sufficient to frame a response, and affords the court an opportunity to issue a ruling. A jury convicted Robert Bierenbaum of second-degree murder based on circumstantial evidence that on July 7, 1985 he intentionally killed his wife, Gail Katz Bierenbaum, in their Manhattan apartment; transported her body to a New Jersey airport the same day; loaded it onto a small private plane; and piloted it over the Atlantic Ocean where he discarded her remains. From the rental office's vantage point, one would not have been able to see defendant on the tarmac getting ready to board-and possibly load luggage or other items onto-the plane, which was in a position readily accessible by automobile for such purposes. Upon seeing the transcript of Bierenbaums confession, Alayne Katz said the words sounded like her former brother-in-law. We recognize that as a general proposition false statements are a relevant but weak form of evidence. From there, he telephoned his apartment more than once. of Cal., supra, at p. 442, 131 Cal.Rptr. On July 8, 1985, Bierenbaum called the police and reported his wife missing. Another woman whom he dated in Las Vegas in 1995 asked him on their first date whether he had ever been married. All of Bierenbaums appeals over the years were unsuccessful. Robert Bierenbaum, a former plastic surgeon, confessed to the 1985 killing of his wife, Gail Katz, during a parole hearing in December 2020 He said he strangled her to Dr. Karnofsky also remembered a phone call defendant received one morning at three o'clock, a few months after she moved in. Corrections is thankful to the Tribes for caring for these lands since time immemorial and honors its ongoing connection to these communities past, present and future. Any friends, relatives, anything that could assist me would certainly be very beneficial in locating her as quickly as possible. WebDr Robert Bierenbaum is sentenced in New York City to twenty years to life in prison for murdering his wife, Gail Katz-Bierenbaum, who disappeared 15 years ago; Judge Leslie 9. O'Malley in the interim, Det. At a parole hearing in December 2020, he confessed to killing his wife and dumping her body from a plane, according to the New York Daily News. Whether earlier acts of alleged violence or threats are admissible depends on the circumstances surrounding both the past and the currently charged aggressive acts or threats. The protective privilege ends where the public peril begins (Tarasoff v Regents of Univ. Robert Bierenbaum admitted he threw his wife's body out of an airplane and into the ocean nearly three decades ago during a parole hearing in December 2020, ABC News reported. Additionally, her key reason for precluding the professionals from giving oral testimony at trial was that one of their purposes for consulting with defendant's closest family members was to gain insights from his family members, insights which might enhance their treatment of defendant. denied 93 N.Y.2d 879, 689 N.Y.S.2d 441, 711 N.E.2d 655), and its denial of the motion was a discretionary decision we perceive no reason to disturb. Moreover, he told Dr. Feis-after withholding the whole truth from others, and from her during their many earlier conversations subsequent to July 7-that his last encounter with his wife on July 7 ended in an argument more severe than he had previously let on, that it had become explosive, and that in its midst he had failed to heed his psychiatrist's advice to defuse the situation. More specifically, he also admitted to his father that they had difficulty in adjusting to each other, and in 1983 [t]hat they had an argument, had some physical contact. By way of corroboration, Dr. Leigh McCullough testified that in November 1983 she saw finger shaped bruises on the victim's neck, and the latter told her that defendant choked her when he became angry at seeing her smoking a cigarette. Second, if we were to reach the merits, we would find that the prosecutor's summation arguments on the subject, when viewed in the complete context of his closing statements, do not warrant reversal. Stay up-to-date with how the law affects your life. In addition to the foregoing powerful circumstantial evidence, the People contend that the interplay between certain items of evidence also supports the verdict. Defendant gave contradictory accounts about whether and why he sent the living room rug out to be cleaned immediately following the decedent's disappearance, but completely withheld that information from the police; 4. Contemporaneously with these expressions of despair and bewilderment, he promptly had sexual relations on his first date with a nurse in the very room he and his victim had rented for the 1985 summer in the Hamptons, less than a month after she vanished. One can reasonably infer that he knew she would not suddenly return and appear at his bedside. Before ending that July 8 interview, Det. When he exhibited hesitation in responding to her, she jokingly asked him if he had killed his wife. The trial justice's carefully balanced decisions allowed the People to show only the existence and the general nature of the letter in order legitimately to probe defendant's motive. Bierenbaum, an experienced pilot who had been convicted on circumstantial evidence, was serving his 20 years-to-life prison sentence when he made the chilling On July 7, 1985, at 4:30 P.M., he rented a Cessna 172 plane at Caldwell Airport in Fairfield, New Jersey. Robert Bierenbaum, an experienced pilot, was serving his 20 years-to-life prison sentence when he made the chilling confession during a December 2020 parole board hearing. Most of the victim's hearsay statements, in one way or another, bespoke this couple's marital strife and unhappiness, a perception defendant himself shared and repeatedly admitted. However, the proof here evinces defendant's intent to focus his aggression on one person, namely, his wife-his victim. Investigators took steps for a jury to witness exactly how they believe Bierenbaum dumped his wifes body during his 2000 murder trial, according to the New York Post. Later on July 14, at a meeting at Det. I heard the cuffs close round hishands. denied 92 N.Y.2d 893, 680 N.Y.S.2d 57, 702 N.E.2d 842). Finally, although the alleged assault she recounted was undoubtedly extremely frightening, the proof shows her mental state so many hours later was not shown to be dominated by the same level of heightened excitement that would normally overwhelm a person in the immediate aftermath of such a recent traumatic shock. He said Katz had stormed out of their apartment following an argument the morning before and not returned. Bierenbaum confessed to killing his wife during a parole hearing in December 2020, saying they were fighting and he wanted her to stop yelling, according to the New York Daily News. | The full 20/20 premieres TONIGHT at 9/8c on @ABC. dr bob bierenbaum parole 2020 CMI is a proven leader at applying industry knowledge and engineering expertise to solve problems that other fabricators cannot or will not take on. We further determine that the instant body of consciousness of guilt evidence-because of its quality and quantity-exhibits a guilty mind, a finding which, in this context and under these circumstances, is surely not weak, or, for that matter, even moderate. Defendant offered that Gail had, years earlier, attempted suicide. Consequently, it is not improbable that her call followed at least some degree of reasoned reflection. Molineux authorizes a trial justice to consider allowing a jury to hear about a defendant's prior bad acts-be they violent or otherwise-if they shed light on the issues of intent, identity, motive, absence of accident or mistake, or common plan and scheme (id. First, the court prohibited the People from showing the letter to the jury and, second, they were not permitted to adduce anything other than oral testimony describing only the type of letter the victim had received from defendant's psychiatrist. She was speaking spontaneously; she repeated the statements separately to various people in her life; her statements about the troubled side of their marriage were a natural consequence of corroborated facts about their marriage; she was, by all indications, in good mental health; there appears no reason for her to have fabricated the matters she discussed at the time of her utterances; and her statements largely concerned private matters that some would be embarrassed or otherwise reluctant to disclose. Dalsass' office arranged by the deceased's sister Alayne Katz, and with her parents and defendant's father also present, Dalsass interviewed defendant again face-to-face. Apart from the fact that there is no reliable evidence that anyone else saw or heard from her thereafter, defendant repeatedly admitted to several people, including his father, that he last saw her then. At 9:00 P.M. the next night (July 8), he finally spoke to Detective Vergilio Dalsass, telling him that his wife left their apartment at 11:00 A.M. on July 7 to sunbathe in Central Park wearing pink shorts and a white t-shirt. O'Malley inquiring how the investigation was proceeding and met with him on July 13. She expressed this homicide theory to Sharon one day while defendant was not home. Dalsass repeated his appeal to defendant to leave out nothing, saying: I pretty much told him that any information that will assist in finding Gail was rather important. The clear and direct language the Lipsky court selected to disavow the 124-year-old Ruloff ruling is significant in light of the Ruloff facts, because those facts are, in several key ways, similar to those at bar. Powered by. Verbal strife plagued it, express and implied threats uttered by defendant aggravated it, and defendant's admitted violence against his victim during at least one episode surely worsened it. Tarasoff v. Regents of Univ. O'Malley that they argued on July 6 and continued on the morning of July 7. I went flying. To reject any notion that the victim intended to use the letter a second time simply because she may have already used it once before would unreasonably ignore her various statements, her reasons for wanting a divorce, and her state of mind as that fateful weekend approached. Compounding the significance of that devastating omission-an omission which concealed the very means and opportunity to dispose permanently of his victim's body-is the documentary evidence found in his home several months after July 1985 showing clearly that his written flight log entry for July 7 was changed from July 7 to August 7. 1. When a few months later he received an early morning telephone call from the police indicating they may have had his lost wife at the precinct, he was less than anxious to accede to their request that he immediately leave his bed to possibly identify his inexplicably missing wife. at 44, 608 N.Y.S.2d 1; cf. More than 30 years later, Robert Bierenbaum confesses to her murder. 93 N.Y.2d 946, 694 N.Y.S.2d 337, 716 N.E.2d 172 [prior assault admissible]; People v. Jones, 289 A.D.2d 1010, 735 N.Y.S.2d 276, lv. Without objection, the prosecution showed the jury a videotape specifically prepared for trial, demonstrating how defendant could have accomplished this from the point of loading the 110-pound body onto the plane, discarding it over the ocean, and landing back at the same airport. However, he again omitted to mention that he had rented and flown an airplane for almost two hours that same afternoon, a consistent omission whenever he told others about the events of July 7. Notwithstanding these and other direct, uncomplicated admonitions, defendant omitted telling Det. Because defendant did not have a list with him, Dalsass said he would call defendant's home for it that evening. Gail Katz reported the assault at a local police precinct, but nothing came of the report. https://t.co/RWuaARMIay pic.twitter.com/6FoU3ze3wU, Uncovered (@uncovered) December 16, 2020. People v. Benzinger, 36 N.Y.2d 29, 33-34, 364 N.Y.S.2d 855, 324 N.E.2d 334. From the beginning, they quarreled frequently. This couple had a history of angry words and deeds, of threats, and of violence; they harbored a wide range of feelings ranging from ambivalence to profound hostility toward each other, and, beyond their generalized resentment, defendant had evident motives to kill the decedent. He never told investigators about the flight. He didnt understand how to deal with his anger, Bierenbaum said, according to the transcript. However, the court, while prohibiting publication of its specific factual contents to the jury, did allow the jury to know that the letter warned the victim of the danger defendant posed to her. We reject the notion that in a case where an alleged homicide is the second alleged violent act against a spouse-instead of, for example, the third, fourth or ninth-the case may not be treated as a domestic violence homicide for purposes of evidentiary rulings. Thus, it is impossible for a court to conclude safely that her motivation was untouched by economic self-interest or unencumbered by concerns about legal strategy. The defense argues that these rulings were improper because: 1) there was no evidentiary foundation to justify the opinion evidence and the scenario depicted in the video demonstration, i.e., that they were purportedly based on speculation; and because 2) these forms of evidence are extremely potent, inflammatory, and therefore they unduly prejudiced defendant in a case like this where, according to him, there is no proof to support the opinions or the scenario shown on tape. within 10 minutes, pack her dismembered torso and limbs into a flight/duffel bag and carry them through an unmonitored rear exit of his apartment building for a distance of two blocks to his garaged car. At a parole hearing in December 2020, he confessed to killing his wife and dumping her body from a SEATTLE - Robert Parker, spared the death penalty last week, was sentenced today to life in prison without the possibility of parole. WebThe written ruling by a three-judge panel of the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals in Manhattan was consistent with previous rulings by judges who have reviewed the conviction of Dr. Robert Bierenbaum. Once over the ocean, Rowley slowed the plane, took both hands off the controls, opened the passenger door and easily shoved the duffel bag out, the article said. He thus claims that those cases do not apply to permit such evidence under these facts because this case involves evidence of only one prior assault. denied 94 N.Y.2d 904, 707 N.Y.S.2d 389, 728 N.E.2d 988; People v. Bonilla, 251 A.D.2d 82, 674 N.Y.S.2d 23, lv. He was convicted in her death in 2000, but her body was never found. Alayne Katz told ABC News she immediately knew something was very wrong. Apart from the fact that defendant's alternate theories of his victim's demise have no evidentiary support, the existing evidence itself also refutes them. Defendant contends that the court improperly allowed the prosecution to adduce testimony, and otherwise refer to evidence, that defendant was violent, and that he choked his wife to the point of unconsciousness in late 1983. In the days, weeks, months and years following his wife's disappearance, defendant made several inconsistent, unfounded or otherwise suspect and incriminating statements. Accordingly, there can be no holding that this verdict is against the weight of the evidence. Defendant called a number of the deceased's friends voicing expressions of concern that she may have harmed herself, specifically attributing that notion to comments made to him by her therapist, Dr. Sybil Baran. That ruling was correct, first, because defendant waived his CPLR 4504(a) privilege by consenting that the warning be communicated; second, because a warning under these circumstances is an exception to the principle of confidentiality since the psychiatrist is under a duty to warn the intended target of a patient's violence; third, because the nature and existence of the warning letter were relevant to the state of the parties' marriage and defendant's motive to kill his wife in light of her stated intent to use it as leverage in her contemplated divorce action against defendant by confronting him with it and threatening to reveal its contents if he refused to meet her divorce settlement demands; and, finally, because it was relevant to prove, in addition to motive and the state of the parties' marriage, the interrelated issues of his intent to kill her and his identity as her killer. Dalsass and later to Det. He stated he had remained behind in their apartment until 5:30 P.M. before leaving for his sister's New Jersey home. NEW YORK Dr. Robert Bierenbaum maintained his innocence in 2000 as he was tried and convicted of killing his first wife 15 years before. Investigators believe Bierenbaum strangled her in their Upper East Side apartment before disposing of the body, the article said. In fact, defendant even misstated to Det. Defendant displayed no reaction, [h]e didn't say anything.. 14, 551 P.2d 334), to the victim. The email address cannot be subscribed. She was also determined to make it clear to defendant that she would use a letter, written to her by his psychiatrist warning her of the danger he posed to her, in order to humiliate him with his professional peers should he refuse to meet her divorce settlement demands. But, as the law requires us to look at the body of proof as a whole, we are convinced it paints a clear picture of a defendant's guilt, and that the jury's verdict is both supported by legally sufficient evidence and entirely consistent with its weight. This complaint-apart from ignoring or underestimating the appropriate, limiting language the court carefully chose to caution and instruct the jury-misconstrues the rationale underlying People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264, 61 N.E. The Washington State Department of Corrections (DOC) strongly emphasizes the importance of inclusion and representation by recognizing the unique challenges that non-binary and transgender incarcerated people face Gov. He saw three different doctors. Dalsass' approximately eight telephone answering machine messages. Gail Katz Bierenbaum Murder: Her Cause of Death, Copyright 2023 Heavy, Inc. All rights reserved. He became eligible for parole last October, according to state prison records. Stream next day on Hulu. After reviewing the court's rulings and reasons in this regard, the other evidence, and the court's cautionary instructions to the jury during and at the trial's conclusion, we hold that none of these rulings compromised defendant's right to a fair trial. We welcome the opportunity to collaborate with the Indigenous populations and communities, and strive to work with our Tribal partners to improve the lives of Indigenous People and non-Indigenous neighbors throughout the state. The PEOPLE of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Robert BIERENBAUM, Defendant-Appellant. That evening, he went to the home of his friend, Dr. Scott Baranoff. In our role of reviewing the sufficiency of trial evidence as an appellate court in a purely circumstantial evidence case, we must decide whether a guilty verdict is based on legally sufficient evidence by determin [ing] whether any valid line of reasoning and permissible inferences could lead a rational person to the conclusion reached by the fact finder on the basis of the evidence at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the People [citations omitted] (People v. Williams, 84 N.Y.2d 925, 926, 620 N.Y.S.2d 811, 644 N.E.2d 1367). He returned it after one hour and fifty-six minutes, giving him time enough to fly round trip approximately 165 miles over a part of the Atlantic Ocean. It was therefore highly relevant to the question of defendant's motive that the jury be allowed to know and consider the consequences the victim intended by threatening defendant with such a disclosure to his superiors and peers, a disclosure which would likely compromise severely his professional status, his personal reputation and standing, and his economic future. It was appropriately rejected by the jury. 831), a physician is required to disclose to the extent necessary to protect a threatened interest. A trial court must not merely count the number of past incidents, but it must engage in a qualitative assessment of the words and deeds which create the history of the relationship between defendant and alleged victim. At one point while they lived together, on a day that Dr. Karnofsky was angry or annoyed with defendant, and, having heard a number of accusatory answering machine messages directed at defendant, she confronted him to see what his reaction [would be]: What I said to him was, well, I think that if you did this and if it really happened as some people seem to think it did, that perhaps something happened in the apartment and you intentionally or unintentionally-Gail was hurt, you could have put her in one of those big flight bags or duffel bags and carried her out of the apartment since she was very small, put her in the back of your car, drive out to the airport and thrown her body out of the plane. He urges now-as he did at trial-that the court could have served the People's purpose adequately by only allowing the People to use the letter to inform the jury that the letter existed, and stipulating that its unspecified contents would embarrass defendant. (Photo courtesy of Alayne Katz). 2. These facts establish beyond any question that this marriage existed in a volatile, highly emotional, turbulent and dysfunctional environment. The call came from the police who insisted that he immediately come in to view a woman they had found at the New York Port Authority Bus Terminal, someone they thought might be his missing wife. It was the first time he had admitted to the crime since his wife, Gail Katz, disappeared in 1985. When he later returned, he tersely remarked to his roommate that it was not his wife. He is incapable of a shred of remorse.. On the other hand, the acts and/or threats can-separately or together-demonstrate as they do in the instant case defendant's specific intent to hurt a particular human being, i.e., in this case, his wife, and to do so physically and emotionally. We disagree. Should we answer that inquiry in the affirmative, we next must weigh the relative probative force of conflicting testimony and the relative strength of conflicting inferences that may be drawn from the testimony (People ex rel. That anything said, however insignificant it could possibly be used to find her and locate her , I told the defendant that he should give me a narration of the time he spent over the last weekend. However, in 1982, in People v. Lipsky, 57 N.Y.2d 560, 457 N.Y.S.2d 451, 443 N.E.2d 925, the Court of Appeals overruled Ruloff.
Stonewood Apartments Linden, Mi, Articles R