By
Melinda Cohenour
Latest News On Trial Pending for Serial Killer Rex Andrew Heuermann
Rex Heuermann and his Defense counsel, Michael Brown, were back in
court this week, February 25 2025, to support passage by Judge Mazzei of
their latest Motions.
The hearing was relatively short and revolved around these key issues:
1. Motion to sever trial: The defense has moved the court to sever
the cases for the murders of seven women to not one, but five separate
trials: one for three of the women referred to as the Gilgo Four, and
individual trials for the four other victims currently projected to be
tried in one serial murder trial
Prosecutor, Ray Tierney, argued the State's case that the
evidence pointing to Heuermann being the killer charged with all seven
victims has undeniable proof of Heuermann being a serial killer. That in
order to prove the allegation of serial murders, the State will present
applicable evidentiary materials showing how Heuermann targeted
specific victims, set about luring them into his trap, planned in
advance how each would be tortured and killed, and carried out these
murders using a planning document of his own creation.
Direct quote from ABC 7 in New York concerning the inadmissibility of severing the seven cases as follows:
The Suffolk County district attorney's office said severing the cases is "inappropriate
as the victims are inextricably interwoven by geographic proximity,
victimology, digital and physical evidence, forensic analysis, and
defendant's own planning document" that allegedly contained detailed instructions for killing women, dismembering bodies and burying them.
https://abc7ny.com/post/gilgo-beach-serial-killer-suspect-rex-heuermann-appears-court-judge-weighing-dna-evidence/15954067/
That to support applicability of each piece of
evidence, the State will rely upon expert witnesses each of which will
be possessed of knowledge specific to their scientific speciality. That
to have these same expert witnesses schedule five separate trials would
not only present those witnesses with a scheduling issue but would also
be extremely costly to the State. That to be required to present the
evidence in separate trials, references to similar killings and modus
operandi would be excluded by law in trials focused on a single victim,
placing an unfair disadvantage to prosecution. Further, that the whole
of the evidentiary materials provides proof of similar methods used by
the defendant in carrying out his serial murders.
Suffolk County District Attorney
Ray Tierney, who is prosecuting the case, when asked about the
prosecution's opposition to severing the cases, responded: "The
theory of our case is, this defendant is a serial killer who
meticulously and methodically hunted down and murdered seven women. That
is our case. He did use the same methodology. He utilized a planning
document in which he laid bare his intention to do this. And so, as such
under the law, a lot of the evidence of one charge would be admissible
in court as evidence of the separate charge. Specifically the DNA
evidence, the phone evidence, some of the financial evidence, the
searches he made, some of the mementoes he was alleged to have kept —
all of these pertain" to all seven victims, he said.
SOURCE: https://patch.com/new-york/riverhead/accused-gilgo-killer-meticulously-methodically-hunted-women-da
Additionally, Assistant District
Attorney Andrew Lee with the Suffolk County District Attorney's Office
argued in two documents filed Tuesday that the cases should be tried at
the same time rather than split into five trials requested by
Heuermann's defense attorney.
SOURCE: https://www.ctpost.com/news/article/rex-heuermann-gilgo-beach-murders-norwich-20187202.php
2. Motion by defense to exclude nuclear DNA test results
calling it "magic" and arguing the methodology has not been proven
accurate.
According to the prosecutor Tierney, who argued for continued inclusion of the nuclear DNA test results:
“It’s prevented people from dying from disease, it’s detected diseases,
it’s used in amniocentesis, it’s identified war dead, it’s identified
remains of 9/11 people,” said Suffolk County District Attorney Ray Tierney. “This
science has been around for many, many years and, if the defense wants
to call it magic, that’s fine, the defense can call it whatever it
likes. But we will determine that at the hearing, and we look forward to
that hearing and, I can tell you, this is sound science.”
SOURCE:
https://keyt.com/cnn-regional/2025/02/25/gilgo-beach-murder-suspect-rex-heuermann-back-in-court-for-hearing-on-dna-evidence-request-to-separate-trials/
However, it is your author's belief this type testing of DNA
derived from hair samples with no root follicle will require a Frye
Hearing since it has not to date been accepted in any case in New York
state.
3. Change of venue motion previously filed by Defense counsel Michael Brown:
In a surprise complete reversal of his prior filing requesting a
change of venue declaring Suffolk County to have a jury pool that has
been inundated with negative news publications there could not exist a
panel lacking preconceived beliefs as to his client's guilt.
At court, Defense counsel Michael Brown voluntarily removed
his Change of Venue motion from the Court docket. Brown was quoted as
saying:
“One of the reasons we did not file a change of venue motion is
because we are looking forward to 12 people in Suffolk County, the
residents in Suffolk County who are familiar with what goes on in
Suffolk County,” Brown said.
“We are looking forward to having them sit in that courtroom and listen to the evidence,” he added. “Listen to the lack of evidence. Listen to the whole picture as opposed to just snippets that you may have heard.”
SOURCE:
https://nypost.com/2025/02/25/us-news/accused-gilgo-beach-killer-rex-heuermanns-lawyer-drops-bombshell-that-theres-no-dna-in-alleged-basement-kill-room/
* * * * *
Justice Mazzei has ordered the parties back to court March 12
when, presumably, there will be a date set for a Frye hearing on the
admissibility of the nuclear DNA testing methodology.
Mazzei has indicated frustration and a growing impatience
with the slow progress of this case. He could establish a tighter time
limit for completing exchange of evidentiary materials. It is highly
unlikely in your author's opinion the Judge will actually set a date for
the trial to begin.
The proceedings of the March 12 hearing will be reviewed and reported here.
~
* * * * *
In the meantime, I hope to have results back from Ancestry for
our grandson Shaun. He was three years old when my son introduced Shaun.
Rod and I found Shaun to be a bright and engaging child who stole our
hearts. We ultimately moved for custody after learning disturbing
information about his mother, which was obtained when he was eight years
old. His biological father has been said to have fathered additional
children and Shaun is hopeful he will find those siblings through DNA
matches.
Hope you enjoy your own Armchair Genealogy research in the coming month.
Click on the author's byline for bio and list of other works published by Pencil Stubs Online.
This issue appears in the ezine at www.pencilstubs.com and also in the
blog www.pencilstubs.net with the capability of adding comments at the
latter.
Posts
