Jury convicts Philip Chism of first degree premeditated murder and aggravated rape

I expected this verdict because the evidence of premeditation was overwhelming. For example, Chism brought a ski mask, gloves, and box cutter to school the day he assaulted her in the women’s bathroom and slashed her throat with the box cutter.

The evidence of premeditation overwhelmed the defense effort to present an insanity defense. The evidence of premeditation established that he knew what he was doing and the evidence of his effort to conceal his identity and conceal her body in the nearby woods established that he knew that he had violated the law.

The jury properly acquitted him of a second count of aggravated rape based on what he did to her in the woods because she was dead. The proper charge would have been abuse of a corpse.

Chism will return to court on December 22nd to schedule a sentencing date.

Meanwhile, Chism faces a second trial in nearby Suffolk County where he is accused of attacking a female Department of Youth Services worker in June 2014. That case is scheduled to begin next Wednesday.

The Colleen Ritzer rape murder is an extremely disturbing case and Philip Chism is an extremely disturbed young man.

Phillip Chism accused of assaulting a female guard: UPDATED BELOW

Thursday, May 5, 2014

Good afternoon:

Philip Chism has been accused of attacking a female guard at the Massachusetts Department of Youth Services where he has been confined pending trial for the murder of Colleen Ritzer, his eighth grade math teacher.

WCVB is reporting:

Surveillance video captured Chism following the DYS employee into a locker room carrying an object that appeared to be a pencil.

He then allegedly began choking her, and as she started to scream he began to punch her, Anderson reported.

Sound familiar?

Chism has been transported to Boston Medical Center for a mental health evaluation.

UPDATE: The Boston Globe is reporting that Philip Chism has completed his stay at BMC and will be released today to the Department of Youth Services. They are not going to return him to the Dorchester facility. Instead, they are going to place him in a more secure facility.

The woman he assaulted has declined medical treatment, so she is apparently OK.

If you appreciate what we do, please make a donation.

Prosecution adds new aggravated rape charge in Philip Chism case

Thursday, February 27, 2014

Good morning:

Time to update readers on the Philip Chism case in Massachusetts. He is the 14-year-old boy charged with raping, robbing and killing his 8th grade math teacher, Colleen Ritzer.

First, a word of caution. The article discusses graphic and potentially disturbing acts.

A new charge of aggravated rape was added last month, so he now faces two rape charges.

The first charge was based on a stick or tree limb that police found inserted into her vagina when they found her body in the woods next to the school.

I suspect the second charge is based on an STR/DNA test result that detected the presence of spermatozoa that yielded a complete profile matching his known profile. Such a result would warrant two separate rape charges and the delay in charging the second count may have been due to a delay in processing the evidence at the crime lab.

To review the STR/DNA testing procedure, read my recent article about the Craig Michael Wood case, How DNA testing will be used in the case against Craig Michael Wood.

I have been somewhat perplexed by the original rape charge involving the tree limb because I have been assuming it was was inserted in the woods post mortem (i.e., after she died). If that were so, the appropriate charge would be abuse of a corpse.

I have to assume, however, that the prosecution knows the difference between the two charges, so I think they believe they can prove that he inserted the limb, which I also have read described as a stick, in the bathroom before he slashed her throat.

This new rape charge probably preceded that act and may not have involved penetration of her vagina.

The defense is attempting to sever the new rape charge to keep it in juvenile court. Unless he pleads guilty, he will be tried in adult court on the original three charges.

I do not believe his lawyers will succeed in preventing the juvenile court from declining jurisdiction and transferring the new rape charge to adult court.

The Daily Mail, which tends to highlight the lurid aspect of violent crimes, is reporting that investigators in Clarksville, TN, where Chism lived with his mother before they moved to Massachusetts last fall, are investigating a rumor that he tortured cats and set them on fire.

Since motive is not an element of the charges against him, the prosecution could not introduce that evidence at trial, assuming it exists.

It might, however, be admissible at a sentencing hearing.

Finally, the Boston Herald is reporting today that Cellebrite has completed its effort to recover video and photographs stored on Chism’s smashed cell phone that police recovered in the woods near Ritzer’s body.

The Boston Herald states,

What if any disturbing evidence investigators recovered from accused teen killer Philip Chism’s smashed Samsung smartphone to bolster their charges he raped and murdered Danvers High math teacher Colleen Ritzer — and possibly memorialized the horror in pictures — may not be disclosed until the case goes to trial.

The results of that testing have been filed under seal.

I doubt they would have filed the results under seal, if Cellebrite did not find anything.

Updates on Chism, Arias and Thomas cases

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Good evening:

Philip Chism was arraigned today in Superior Court and pled not guilty.

I also have updates on Arias and Thomas.

Judge Sherry Stephens issued an order today in the Jodi Arias case denying a defense motion to compel jurors in her penalty phase retrial to reveal their social media and Twitter account information. The defense wanted to monitor the accounts to make sure jurors do not use them to obtain or disseminate information about the case.

Two weeks ago she issued an order banning live television coverage of the penalty phase.

Adolpho Flores reported today for the LA Times that the prosecution played an audio recording yesterday in which defendant Jay Cicinelli could be heard proclaiming that he hit Kelly Thomas 20 times in the face with his stun gun. Cicinelli’s statement was picked up by a body microphone worn by Officer John Ema. Cicinelli is charged with involuntary manslaughter and using excessive force.

Flores reports that Cicinelli’s lawyer, Michael Schwartz, told reporters after court that his client did not really mean what he said.

“That’s not what happened,” Schwartz said outside the Santa Ana courtroom. “What he’s saying is driven by his heightened state of anxiety, stress and disbelief.”

In his opening statements Monday, Schwartz said his client encountered a combative, uncontrollable suspect who grabbed his Taser.

At times what appears to be Cicinelli striking Thomas in the face is him actually hitting the homeless man’s hand to push it away from the stun gun, Schwartz said.

“An officer is trained in the state of California to never relinquish the weapon to a suspect,” Schwartz said.

Yeah, sure. You betcha.

Flores also summarized the videotape of the encounter between police and Thomas.

Jurors on Tuesday were also shown security footage of the encounter between Thomas and police outside a Fullerton bus depot. The 33-minute video is a compilation of cameras from the bus depot and audio from recording devices worn by police officers.

The grainy black and white video is a key piece of evidence in the prosecution’s case and captured the Fullerton police officers hitting Thomas with batons and a Taser, in addition to shocking him with the device. Several people, including Thomas’ mother, cried as the tape played.

Thomas was in a coma after the incident and died five days later.

The footage begins with Ramos approaching Thomas after receiving a 911 call of someone attempting to break into cars.

To read the remainder of his vivid and sickening description, please go here.

Analysis of the prosecution’s case against Philip Chism

http://www.flickr.com/photos/104178037@N08/10445423715/in/photolist-gV2wyk-9kAfrM-9kDhhL-9kDiHC-9kDhtj-9kDhQy-9kDius-9kAf22-9kDibL-9kDhUY-9kDiz7-9kDipW-9kDikE-9kDig9-9kDiDb-9kDi7C-gWFrp8/lightbox/

Creative Commons on Flickr by Marsmettn Tallahassee

Friday, November 22, 2013

Good afternoon:

Go to this link to read the 9-page affidavit filed in support of the application for a search warrant in Philip Chism’s case. Warning: Contains graphic details.

Today I am going to analyze the prosecution’s case against Philip Chism and ask readers to indicate which of three alternative ways of proving first degree murder they would select, if they were to prosecute this case.

The prosecution is not limited to proving only one theory. Separate verdict forms can be submitted as to each alternative way of proving first degree murder. To convict him of first degree murder, the prosecution need only prove one alternative. Proving one, two or all three alternative methods of committing a crime only proves one crime and only one sentence may be imposed for that one crime.

Even though Philip Chism is only 14-years-old, he will be prosecuted as an adult because Massachusetts has a statute that mandates the prosecution as adults of all juveniles over the age of 13 who are charged with murder. If convicted, he cannot be sentenced to death because Massachusetts does not have a death penalty.

He also cannot be sentenced to life without possibility of parole (LWOP) because the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has prohibited sentencing juveniles under the age of 16 to LWOP.

He cannot be prosecuted as an adult for the charges of aggravated rape and armed robbery unless the juvenile court declines jurisdiction. Therefore, he will have to be arraigned in juvenile court on those charges.

After the arraignment, the prosecutor will file a motion asking the juvenile court to decline jurisdiction and to transfer those two charges to adult court for adjudication on the grounds that, if convicted, the court lacks the resources to rehabilitate him before he turns 21 and the alleged crimes are an inextricable part of a single criminal episode that includes the murder over which the juvenile court lacks jurisdiction. Readers can reasonably expect the juvenile court will grant the prosecution’s request.

Philip Chism will be arraigned on the three charges in adult court. Pleas of not guilty will be entered on his behalf and his counsel will be provided with discovery.

Eventually, he will have to decide whether to go to trial and contest the charges or plead guilty.

Every defendant in a criminal case has a right to be presumed innocent and go to trial, even if he committed the crime(s) charged, and the jury must be instructed to return a verdict of not guilty as to each charge, if the prosecution fails to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

Given his confession that is confirmed by the videotape from a hallway camera showing him entering the women’s bathroom while wearing a jacket, hat and gloves and departing sometime after that with her body in a recycling bin, little doubt exists that he killed her while acting alone.

First degree murder in Massachusetts is defined by Chapter 265, Section 1 as:

Murder committed with deliberately premeditated malice aforethought, or with extreme atrocity or cruelty, or in the commission or attempted commission of a crime punishable with death or imprisonment for life, is murder in the first degree.

Notice that there are 3 ways to commit this crime:

(1) Murder committed with deliberately premeditated malice aforethought;

(2) Murder committed with extreme atrocity or cruelty; or

(3) Murder committed in the commission or attempted commission of a crime punishable with death or imprisonment for life.

Analysis of the statute

The prosecution may be able to prove that he committed the murder by each of the following three methods.

He came to school with a box cutter, balaklava ski mask, gloves and multiple changes of clothing strongly suggesting that he premeditated the murder with malice aforethought.

The second option does not require proof of intent to kill or premeditation, if the murder itself demonstrated extreme atrocity or cruelty. The use of a boxcutter to slash her throat from behind while gripping her hair and pulling her head back suggests extreme atrocity or cruelty as would the use of the box cutter ante mortem to penetrate and slash her vagina (see below).

The third option is a felony-murder rule that does not require proof of intent to kill or premeditation, if the murder occurred during the commission of a felony that can result in a life sentence. Aggravated rape and armed robbery are felonies that can result in life sentences, so a murder committed during the commission of either those felonies would be a first degree murder.

Aggravated rape requires proof of penetration of the vagina, no matter how slight, with the penis or finger(s), or an object and proof of the use of force or threatened use of force. Massachusetts defines penetration of the mouth or anus as “unnatural sexual intercourse.”

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt of any of the following three felonies will satisfy the use-of-force element:

(1) assault with a dangerous weapon; or

(2) robbery; or

(3) armed robbery.

According to the news report last night, the prosecution has alleged that he penetrated her vagina with an object. If the object is the box cutter used ante mortem, that would likely establish that the murder was committed with extreme atrocity or cruelty.

Her body was found in the woods supine with her legs spread and a tree branch inserted into her vagina. Since this staging occurred post mortem, it should not be considered as evidence establishing that the murder was committed with extreme atrocity or cruelty.

Police also found a note with the body that said, “I hate you all.”

If you were prosecuting this case, which alternative way of proving first degree murder would you choose (assuming you had to choose one)?

Or, which alternatives are the easiest and weakest to prove and why?

Here’s a link to a Boston Globe story about the affidavit.

Philip Chism indicted by grand jury today for first degree murder, aggravated rape and armed robbery

Thursday, November 21, 2013

Good evening:

A Massachusetts grand jury returned an indictment today against 14-year-old Philip Chism.

The Boston Globe has the story.

Philip D. Chism was indicted by an Essex County grand jury today on charges of first-degree murder, aggravated rape and armed robbery, according to Essex District Attorney Jonathan Blodgett’s office. Chism allegedly attacked Ritzer when she stayed after school to talk with him about an upcoming exam, according to prosecutors and students who were in the building that day.

“The indictments returned today detail horrific and unspeakable acts,” Blodgett said in a statement. “This is the first step in a long process to secure justice for Ms. Ritzer and her family.”

/snip/

Chism allegedly sexually assaulted the victim with an object. The aggravated rape charge is brought when there was serious bodily harm or when the rape was committed during another violent felonious crime or both, prosecutors said.

Prosecutors also allege that Chism, armed with a box cutter, robbed the victim of credit cards, an iPhone, and her underwear.

Ugly, ugly crime.

This is our 765th post.

Why did Philip Chism kill Colleen Ritzer?

Monday, November 4, 2013

Good morning:

Why did Philip Chism kill Colleen Ritzer?

Many people are asking that question, including the police. Philip Chism knows the answer, but he has refused to disclose it.

Pursuant to the Fifth Amendment, he has a right to remain silent and cannot be compelled to reveal why he killed her. Therefore, we may never know why he killed her, unless he changes his mind.

This situation raises the following question: Must the prosecution prove motive in order to convict him of murder?

The answer is, “No.”

Recall that a crime consists of committing a prohibited act (actus reus) accompanied by a particular mental state (mens rea), such as premeditation, intent, knowledge, recklessness or criminal (i.e., gross) negligence.

The distinction between recklessness and criminal negligence is that the actor is reckless if he is aware that his conduct will create a substantial risk of causing serious harm or death to another person, yet he goes ahead and commits the act despite the risk; whereas, the actor is criminally negligent if he fails to be aware of that risk and his lack of awareness constitutes a gross deviation from the standard duty to act with due care to avoid injuring or killing other people.

We learned from the Zimmerman case, for example, that Florida defines second degree murder (FL Stat 782.04) as “the unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual.” As I noted in yesterday’s post, intent to kill is not an element of second degree murder. The actus reus is committing an unlawful act that causes the death of another person and the mens rea is “evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual.”

Relative to the issue of intent, notice that the prosecution must only prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant intended to commit the act that caused serious injury or death, but it is not required to prove that the defendant intended to cause the harm that resulted from the act. This is the critical distinction that eluded the jury in the Zimmerman case.

Under Florida law, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the act that the defendant intended to commit, which in turn caused the victim’s death, was imminently dangerous to another person evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life. This is a recklessness standard and shooting someone in the chest at point blank range is such an act.

Notice that motive is not mentioned. This is not unusual. Should you desire to check all of the statutes in the United States defining murder, you will find that, with the notable exception of death penalty offenses, none of them require proof of motive. Death penalty offenses require proof of premeditated intent to kill, plus at least one aggravating factor, all of which are listed in the statutes that define the crime. Some motives are defined as aggravating factors. For example, premeditated intent to kill a witness or victim of a crime in order to prevent them from testifying at trial is defined as an aggravating factor in all death penalty statutes.

Massachusetts does not have a death penalty and motive is not an element of the crime of murder. Of course, motive will generally be a relevant consideration at sentencing and that is especially true in Chism’s case, even though the penalty for first-degree-murder is a mandatory life-without-parole sentence. He was 14-years-old when he committed the crime and in June 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down all statutes that require a juvenile to be sentenced to die in prison. Therefore, the court will have to impose a sentence that allows for the possibility of parole, a decision delegated to the parole board.

I suspect Chism’s sketchpad may contain important clues to his motive. He was drawing during class while Colleen Ritzer was explaining some mathematical concepts. Some students mentioned that she walked to his desk and commented about his drawing saying something like, “I didn’t know you could draw.” She then scheduled the appointment after school with him.

Why did Philip Chism kill Colleen Ritzer?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We have reached that time of the month when we ask our readers to consider making a donation. We cannot maintain this blog without your assistance.

Thank you,

Fred

I was a public defender. They are my people and I will always belong to their tribe

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Good morning:

I write just after midnight to say something that has been on my mind all day and night.

I want to put in a good word for Denise Regan, the public defender representing Philip Chism. As I wrote yesterday morning, she released a statement on behalf of Philip’s mother stating,

On October 22, 2013, two families were unexpectedly and inconceivably changed forever. Ms. Chism’s heart is broken for the Ritzer family and the loss of their daughter and sister Colleen Ritzer.

Ms. Chism would like you to know that her son was born in love and is dear to her, very dear. She is struggling to understand this and respectfully asks for some time to process this.

She asks that you know that she cares for the world’s hurt over this and greatly hopes for your prayers for the Ritzer family, the Danvers community, for her son, and all those affected by this tragedy.

I do not doubt that Ms. Chism made this statement, but I have a feeling that Denise Regan helped her to find the right words with which to express her thoughts and emotions.

I say that because I used to do this in my death penalty work. I not only met with my client’s family to show that I genuinely cared about them and wanted to be of service in any way they believed might help them deal with the bad news, including issuing a public statement that I assisted them to write, I approached the victim’s family and offered to answer any questions they had about my role in the case. With a victim’s family, I just wanted to let them know that, although I represented the defendant, I also was a human being who knew they were in pain and would try to answer any questions they had about the death penalty and the procedures that would be followed in the case. My goal was to demonstrate that I was a caring human being, rather than a demon from hell, and open a channel of communication should they wish to contact me.

I regarded these efforts to be a very important part of my job and I sense that Philip’s lawyer shares my belief.

Malisha inspired me to write this post when she made the following comment about the statement:

The attorney seems to me to be top-drawer! What an eloquent and appropriate statement the mom issued! This is how people caught in horrible circumstances can sometimes act — it shows courage under stress and a kind of elegant humility. My sympathy goes out to this woman. OMG, just imagine a family member is arrested for this kind of crime, there you are, what do you say? Unthinkable.

I wrote the following response to Malisha and decided to turn it into a new post instead. This is what I wrote;

Malisha,

I agree with your comment. She’s a public defender, which just goes to show that there are good ones. She stood there next to Philip during the initial appearance with her hand resting on his back. A simple gesture like that is not only a way of reassuring the client that you care about him, it’s a way of demonstrating to the court and the national audience watching the hearing that he is a human being and not a monster. Little gestures like that communicate in a manner that mere words can never match.

The relationship between Denise Regan and Philip Chism is quite different from Mark O’Mara’s relationship with George Zimmerman. O’Mara’s body language demonstrated that Zimmerman was nothing more than a vehicle to fame and fortune for him. He placed Don West between him and Zimmerman and he had the woman lawyer from his office sitting on the far side of Zimmerman throughout the trial carrying out her role as Zimmerman’s designated baby sitter. She never appeared to be very happy about her role as babysitter. She probably spent most of her time wondering why she had sacrificed three years of her life and incurred considerable debt to get a law degree and pass the bar exam just to be a baby sitter and look pretty at counsel table

O’Mara was too full of himself to be bothered with interacting with his client except when absolutely necessary and that speaks volumes about the kind of person that he is.

I noticed that the woman lawyer who represented Jodi Arias in the penalty phase began her closing argument standing behind Ms. Arias with her hands on Ms. Arias shoulders. I thought she did a splendid job of letting the jury know that she cared about her as a human being, despite what she had done, and I think that her demonstration of genuine concern probably played a significant role in persuading several jurors to reject the death penalty.

I think women are much better at feeling and expressing empathy than men.

I have heard jurors say,

We wanted to sentence your client to death but in the end we could not do it because of what that would have done to you.

Please remember that a lot of public defenders are outstanding lawyers who chose to be public defenders because they genuinely care about their clients. Like teachers and nurses, they are not in it for the money. Ironically, Colleen Ritzer appears to have been driven by her desire to teach.

I was one of them.

They are my tribe.

Philip Chism’s attorney issues statement on behalf of his mother

Monday, October 28, 2013

Good morning:

Philip Chism’s attorney issued the following statement:

On October 22, 2013, two families were unexpectedly and inconceivably changed forever. Ms. Chism’s heart is broken for the Ritzer family and the loss of their daughter and sister Colleen Ritzer.

Ms. Chism would like you to know that her son was born in love and is dear to her, very dear. She is struggling to understand this and respectfully asks for some time to process this.

She asks that you know that she cares for the world’s hurt over this and greatly hopes for your prayers for the Ritzer family, the Danvers community, for her son, and all those affected by this tragedy.

Collen Ritzer will be buried today.

Colleen Ritzer stabbed to death in faculty bathroom and transported to woods in recycling bin UPDATE 1 BELOW, UPDATE 2 BELOW

Thursday, October 24, 2013

Good morning:

ABC News is reporting this morning on Good morning America that police say Chism stabbed Colleen Ritzer to death in the faculty bathroom at Danvers High School around 3:30 pm on Tuesday. Based on a review of videotape and Chism’s confession, police have determined that he transported her body in what appeared to be a recycling bin into the woods behind the school.

After dumping her body in the woods, Chism went to a movie theater and watched Woody Allen’s new film, Blue Jasmine. I have no idea why he selected this film or if he knew what it was about when he chose it. Seems an extremely odd choice for a 14-year-old boy who just stabbed his teacher to death.

His family reported him missing at 5:30 pm. Ritzer was reported missing a few hours later.

Police went to the school to check on her late Tuesday evening and found the bloody crime scene in the faculty bathroom.

Police subsequently responded to a report of a pedestrian walking northbound in the southbound lane of Route 1 around 12:30 am Wednesday morning. The pedestrian turned out to be Chism. He was placed under arrest and transported to the Danvers Police Station where he confessed to the murder.

Chism’s uncle, who resides in Clarksville, Tennessee, describes Chism as a nice kid from a perfect family.

Danvers is located approximately 20 miles north of Boston.

Contrary to reports yesterday, Chism was not arraigned. He had an initial appearance at which the judge found probable cause to support the charge based on a review of the charge and supporting documents. He also denied bail. The next court appearance will be a preliminary hearing, which is scheduled for November 22nd.

The purpose of the preliminary hearing will be to determine whether probable cause exists to support the murder charge based on live witness testimony, as opposed to the more limited document review yesterday. The defense will be accorded an opportunity to cross examine witnesses called by the prosecution.

Given the confession, there is no reason to suppose that the court might not find probable cause.

Chism probably provided police with an explanation regarding why he killed Colleen Ritzer. If he did, they are not disclosing what he said. That is pretty much standard operating procedure at this point. For example, they likely would want to wait until the autopsy and forensic testing have been completed to determine whether the evidence supports or conflicts with his statement.

I suspect they are waiting to see if sperm is detected on any of the oral, vaginal and anal swabs obtained during the autopsy. If so, the next question will be whether the lab can detect a DNA profile for the male contributor and, if so, whether it matches Philip Chism.

UPDATE 1: Reuters is reporting that Philip Chism used a box cutter to stab and cut Colleen Ritter to death.

UPDATE 2: NBC News is reporting new details of the crime today:

A law enforcement source told NBC News on Friday that Ritzer’s throat was slit from the back with a box-cutter in a second-floor bathroom at the school. Her body was wheeled out of the school in a recycling bin, dumped in the woods and covered with leaves, the source said.

Philip Chism, a freshman, was charged as an adult with first-degree murder and has been ordered held without bail. A surveillance camera caught the suspect following Ritzer into the bathroom and then leaving, covered in blood, the source said.

The suspect changed his clothes at some point and went to the movies and to Wendy’s, the law enforcement source said. Investigators found both the suspect’s and Ritzer’s phones smashed, the source told NBC News.

Students said that Ritzer had asked Chism to meet with her after class on the day of the murder. The second-floor bathroom, where blood was found, was to remain closed Friday.

Apparently, Chism sat through the movie, so my theory in the comments that he may have purchased a ticket to the show intending to use the stub as an alibi may be wrong.

He only had 40-45 minutes after the murder to transport her body to the woods, change clothes, and make it to the theater.

I don’t know where he lived and am assuming that he did not go home to change clothes.

The box cutter and a change of clothes nearby suggest that he went to school intending to kill her. Whether or not he did, he apparently had no specific idea about what to do after the movie and his dinner at Wendy’s.