AZ - Michael Milke, 4, brutally murdered, Phoenix, 2 Dec 1989

Knitty

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
3,808
Reaction score
11,467
Prosecutors said Milke confessed to the crime but that Detective Armando Saldate, who obtained the confession, failed to tape record it, according to KNXV. Milke denied that she ever confessed, but was found guilty and sentenced to death.

Saldate's history, according to the court ruling, includes eight cases in which judges tossed out confessions, indictments, and convictions because Saldate lied under oath or violated suspects' rights during interrogations. He was also suspended for "taking liberties" with a female driver he pulled over and lying about it, the court said.

Much More Here

I've never heard of this one, found her mentioned in some threads but couldn't find one of her own - is there one?
 
It took them 22 yrs to figure out this cop's record.WOW!!
 
Much More Here

I've never heard of this one, found her mentioned in some threads but couldn't find one of her own - is there one?

You won't find one....this one happened in the 80's.
Also notable is that the men who actually killed her son did not testify against her. Very unusual. That alone makes me suspect something....along with the fact of the detective's past misconduct and that somehow this confession-a VERY important thing-didn't bother to get recorded in any way. Supposedly he stated that she waived her Miranda rights and didn't want it tape recorded...but that seems pretty fishy to me. All of that at the very least shows she deserves a new trial. There was none of the evidence like in Darlie Routier's case, or Susan Smith's. Honestly I feel CA's case had harder evidence then this one.

There is a website dedicated to her innocence...which has some interesting information. Of course you have to take it with a grain of salt like anything else out there, but much of the research I found there I have found in other sources that would be considered neutral-ish. It will be interesting to see what happens. If she is guilty then she needs to have a fair trial and be convicted on stronger evidence than a crooked cop's word alone.
 
http://www.centurylink.net/news/rea...org>&news_id=19378411&src=most_popular_viewed

PHOENIX (AP) — Debra Milke was once one of the most reviled mothers around, convicted of dressing her 4-year-old son in his favorite outfit and sending him off to visit a mall Santa Claus with two men who shot the boy execution-style in the Arizona desert.

Milke said she had nothing to do with Christopher's death, but a detective testified at her 1990 trial that she had confessed to him — and him alone — in a closed interrogation room. Prosecutors said she had her son killed to collect on a $5,000 insurance policy.

Now, Milke could walk free, leaving death row behind after a federal appeals court threw out her conviction Thursday because prosecutors had not turned over evidence of the detective's history of misconduct, including lying under oath in other cases.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals panel concluded that prosecutors' failure to turn over the evidence deprived Milke's attorneys of the chance to question Phoenix Police Detective Armando Saldate Jr.'s credibility before jurors.

And because it was the only direct evidence tying her to the killing, that fact could have swayed the jury, the panel ruled.........

Much more at link.....
 
Duh! I finally saw the thread posted in 'Up to the Minute' and have already asked that they be combined...
 
@adamlongoCBS5: BREAKING: Debra Milke to be retried on charges of murdering her 4 year old son. Papers just filed by Attorney General Tom Horne.

I'm not familiar with this case. Just seen this tweet and come here to read about it.
Now I'm off to go read about it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ok just read one of the post, I think I have read some if this story here.

Terrible!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've always believed she was guilty. Wasn't she the beneficiary of a life insurance policy she took out on her son? It's too bad a crooked cop will probably cost little Christopher the justice he deserves.
 
Debra Milke case: 2 decades later, retrial set

On Wednesday, Superior Court Judge Rosa Mroz set a new trial date of Sept. 30. According to a federal court order, she has to be tried by Oct. 7 or set free, though neither Mroz nor Kimerer nor prosecutor Vince Imbordino interpreted that order as meaning that the charge would have to be dropped. She simply would have to be let out of jail until the case was resolved one way or another.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/arizona/articles/20130717debra-milke-new-trial-date-brk.html
 
Seriously? :scared:

She has already spent 22 years behind bars.
It isn't like she didn't do any time even if they think she's guilty.

They have no confession (this cop will be ripped to shreds at trial!)
They have 2 other people in jail for this that won't testify against her!

They have no evidence!
They have no witnesses!

What are they going to use to convict her?
We've seen in acquittals in cases with FAR more evidence than this.
This is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money. :facepalm:
 
Seriously? :scared:

She has already spent 22 years behind bars.
It isn't like she didn't do any time even if they think she's guilty.

They have no confession (this cop will be ripped to shreds at trial!)
They have 2 other people in jail for this that won't testify against her!

They have no evidence!
They have no witnesses!

What are they going to use to convict her?
We've seen in acquittals in cases with FAR more evidence than this.
This is a ridiculous waste of taxpayer money. :facepalm:

No, he won't be ripped to shreds. The decision from the Loony 9th Circuit was that the confession can't be used in a retrial.
This could actually mean that the case will be stronger against her. We also don't know what her two co conspirators may be feeling right now, watching her walk free while they had their convictions upheld just 2 years ago. Also, some evidence that wasn't allowed in will be decided upon again...specifically Styers letters to Milke.

They didn't testify against her last time.
That may change.

The assumption seems to be that Saldate's conduct and Milke's confession was never challenged at trial. It was. All the facts of the confession were given to the jury about no tape recording although he was told to tape it. No Miranda waiver, no notes, etc....all brought out at trial and the jury still convicted her. All of that will be gone now, yes. But there's no proof that Saldate was the only reason she was convicted. And, like most appeals lawyers, the role of Saldate's former misconduct has been overhyped as being the reason for the conviction.
 
No, he won't be ripped to shreds. The decision from the Loony 9th Circuit was that the confession can't be used in a retrial.
This could actually mean that the case will be stronger against her. We also don't know what her two co conspirators may be feeling right now, watching her walk free while they had their convictions upheld just 2 years ago. Also, some evidence that wasn't allowed in will be decided upon again...specifically Styers letters to Milke.

They didn't testify against her last time.
That may change.

The assumption seems to be that Saldate's conduct and Milke's confession was never challenged at trial. It was. All the facts of the confession were given to the jury about no tape recording although he was told to tape it. No Miranda waiver, no notes, etc....all brought out at trial and the jury still convicted her. All of that will be gone now, yes. But there's no proof that Saldate was the only reason she was convicted. And, like most appeals lawyers, the role of Saldate's former misconduct has been overhyped as being the reason for the conviction.

I believe juries are smarter now - they require evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

My opinion only
 
No, he won't be ripped to shreds. The decision from the Loony 9th Circuit was that the confession can't be used in a retrial.
This could actually mean that the case will be stronger against her. We also don't know what her two co conspirators may be feeling right now, watching her walk free while they had their convictions upheld just 2 years ago. Also, some evidence that wasn't allowed in will be decided upon again...specifically Styers letters to Milke.

They didn't testify against her last time.
That may change.

The assumption seems to be that Saldate's conduct and Milke's confession was never challenged at trial. It was. All the facts of the confession were given to the jury about no tape recording although he was told to tape it. No Miranda waiver, no notes, etc....all brought out at trial and the jury still convicted her. All of that will be gone now, yes. But there's no proof that Saldate was the only reason she was convicted. And, like most appeals lawyers, the role of Saldate's former misconduct has been overhyped as being the reason for the conviction.

All of which shows she never should have been convicted. Saldate's story is ALL they had if you do research on the case. No witnesses. Little to no physical evidence. His former misconduct has a lot to do with it, as this wasn't the first time he had done this. This was the 1980s, a lot easier to get away with stuff like that. juries have let OJ and casey anthony go free. Just because they convicted her does not mean it was correct. Juries can and do screw up. Legally he screwed up once too many times...the word of a cop alone would never fly nowadays. There is no evidence she had anything to do with this. There could be, but even if there is trials have to be done correctly to be fair to both sides.

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2
 
Debra M Hearing today at 3pm PC 6pm EST is seeking to have DA's thrown off the case. They are the orginal case agents against her and they want a new unbiased team. I don't know if there will be a live feed, but check on azfamily.com today. 3pm their time.
 
I've always believed she was guilty. Wasn't she the beneficiary of a life insurance policy she took out on her son? It's too bad a crooked cop will probably cost little Christopher the justice he deserves.

We have life insurance policies on all our children, in case the unspeakable happens, and we have to bury them.
 
We have life insurance policies on all our children, in case the unspeakable happens, and we have to bury them.

Please keep them. Mom just had to use ours a couple of years ago. 3 of us. My sister passed at 48, and mom needed the $ to bury her, and to help pay the debt she and dad were in when he passed. (They were broke, dad never told her, was charging groceries, gas, bills, for a few years = $100,000 of credit card debt.)
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
58
Guests online
2,112
Total visitors
2,170

Forum statistics

Threads
590,011
Messages
17,928,954
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top