NY - Lissette Torres, 19, Queens, 31 Dec 1986

:thud: He flat out got away with murder IMO. What more do jurors want these days, a video of the guy murdering her???

http://http://nypost.com/2014/01/16/east-village-man-acquitted-in-1987-lissette-torres-cold-case/

Amazingly, jurors said they thought Edwin Alcaide, 54, was probably guilty. But the evidence — which included his DNA being recovered from under the corpse’s fingernails — just wasn’t enough, jurors insisted.
[....]
But the prosecution’s evidence — which also included witnesses who testified that Alcaide had scratches on his face after the murder, and that he and the victim were smoking crack together hours before her disappearance — failed to place Alcaide at the murder scene, they complained.
 
Thank you so much! And I agree, this seemed like an obvious conviction.

Yup, they blew it. The jurors admitted they thought he was guilty; his DNA was found underneath her fingernails, scratches were on his face AFTER the murder, he was the last person to be seen with her as they were getting into her car. Her bloodied car was found later. BUT that wasn't enough to convince them.

This is the reason the jurors give as to why he was acquitted: A single hair was collected on the scene and was subsequently mishandled and misplaced. Never a good thing, of course. But the jury had to have that hair, damnit! Because the hair wasn't there to be tested, no guilty vote.

The accused was even stunned by the verdict:
Alcaide had no reaction as he sat at the defense table at Brooklyn Supreme Court and the verdict was read. He declined comment as he pulled a black woolen hat over his head and walked out of court a free man.

http://nypost.com/2014/01/16/east-village-man-acquitted-in-1987-lissette-torres-cold-case/
 
This case got me to thinking, and another case (James Ridgeway in NJ) made me question even more....

Can we really consider these cold cases "solved" if there was an acquittal?

Lissette's case is a little different, as it SHOULD have led to a conviction.
I don't understand why the tissue under her fingernails and the suspect having scratches on him were trumped by a missing hair that was once found on her. That makes no sense at all.
Was the jury flat-out DUMB?

And why can't I ever get a defense lawyer halfway as good as his?
Mine had me sign a plea for DUI when I had a BAC 0.01 that couldn't be "undone" once he found out about it...
His got him off of murder charges where there was DNA linking him to it.
 
This case got me to thinking, and another case (James Ridgeway in NJ) made me question even more....

Can we really consider these cold cases "solved" if there was an acquittal?

Lissette's case is a little different, as it SHOULD have led to a conviction.
I don't understand why the tissue under her fingernails and the suspect having scratches on him were trumped by a missing hair that was once found on her. That makes no sense at all.
Was the jury flat-out DUMB?

And why can't I ever get a defense lawyer halfway as good as his?
Mine had me sign a plea for DUI when I had a BAC 0.01 that couldn't be "undone" once he found out about it...
His got him off of murder charges where there was DNA linking him to it.

BBM1 I know!!! I just can't understand their train of thought about the missing hair. Not one juror had enough sense to speak out and say "umm.....dude is guilty and under no circumstance will I be voting to acquit him." Ya naw 'm' sayin?

Her family must be beside themselves, I feel just awful for them.

BBM2 Lol I know, if I ever find myself in need of a lawyer because of some sloppy murderin' I know who to call.

Yes, I believe you're correct about the "solved" in the title, I'll notify a mod about it. Thanks for pointing it out.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
101
Guests online
838
Total visitors
939

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,758
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top