Closing statements in Dyleski trial

Prosecutor: Dyleski misidentified Vitale:

Scott Dyleski killed Pamela Vitale mistakenly thinking she was another neighbor who had accidentally killed his dog and foiled his plan to buy marijuana-growing equipment, a prosecutor said Tuesday in closing arguments at Dyleski’s trial.

“It doesn’t make sense any other way,” Harold Jewett said.

In her closing, Dyleski’s defense attorney referred to her client a half dozen times as “a 17-year-old boy” and a kind teenager, and said somebody else killed Pamela Vitale.

Jewett portrayed Dyleski as dismal and depressed, blaming the defendant, but also his parents and teachers for allowing a killer to brew.

“You left me to die in the dark streets with nothing more than broken dreams. … You raised me to hate, and hate I will, because now I live, I live for the kill,” Jewett read from a school poem Dyleski wrote.

The prosecutor added that influential people in Dyleski’s life did not intervene.

“That’s really cool,” Jewett read from comments written by a teacher about the poem.

Deputy public defender Ellen Leonida reminded the jury how her client’s friends testified he was a non-violent vegan who cared about people.

I don’t know if it’s the way the media is reporting it but this trial sounds like a complete clusterfuck.

I won’t be surprised no matter what verdict is announced.

6 Comments

  1. He mistakenly killed the wrong woman? I would think if you were out for vengeance you would know your target.

    Like

  2. Overlooking the emphasis by both parties on the “Goth card” and all of the other usual meaningless attributes that always appear in cases like this, are completely irrelevant, and make life miserable for everyone else, there is still more than sufficient evidence, not even including the DNA results. He’ll be found guilty.

    Like

  3. There is no question about the DNA evidence, Trench. It’s rock solid. Short of saying he heard screams, ran in there and tried to resucitate her after single-handedly fighting off her killer, there is no excuse he could possibly give for her blood on his clothing, period. Lights out, curtain down, guilty as hell.

    Goth, I know it is many times hard to accept, but even nice guys can go wrong somewhere and get caught up in crazy shit that is hard to understand. But like I said above: Her blood on his clothes ties him to the crime scene. It is one of the most damning forms of direct evidence that doesn’t get more hardcore than that and nearly impossible to refute.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.