Set convicted killer free? No way
Having attended the Zachery Witman murder trial every day, I am appalled at the attempt to set this convicted killer free. Quoting his own attorney's words that appeared in the York Daily Record's article, they argue that "it was incumbent on (McGlaughlin) to distance Zach from that mound" referring to the location in the backyard, where the bloody sports gloves and a knife were found, because and here's the key to this attorneys statement "as the commonwealth presented it, the socks pointed to Zachery as the killer." Police officers testified they followed a trail of bloody sock prints from the back door of the Witman home to a backyard fir tree where the gloves and knife were found. Duh....if it walks like a duck.
To comment on this letter, click on "Comments" below
And as for the attorney's statement that (McGlauglin) failed to establish the two boys "shared a loving and caring relationship that precluded the ferocity of this murder" We all know loving and caring husbands and wives murder each other. That relationship does NOT preclude the savage
butchery of this murder, but MAY be the reason for the ferocity of the murder.
Let's not forgot the victim here, Gregory Witman deserved to live a full life, and not to be nearly decapitated. Send a message to the district attorney's office, and the courts, not to set this convicted killer free.
Jim Griffin
York
If there was no overriding strategic reason for trial counsel to allow previously suppressed evidence to come in, that was a serious error indeed. Together with other allegations of ineffectiveness, it appears that the defense was a good deal less than competent and vigorous.