You are the owner of this article.
Monson case can be easily solved

Monson case can be easily solved

{{featured_button_text}}

On the night Julie Monson disappeared, who was driving the car she got into on Prospect Street? A jury was told an ex-boyfriend was the driver of that car and the killer who stabbed her to death.

An eyewitness, who lived on Prospect Street, recognized the driver that night and it was not her ex-boyfriend, but what he said to detectives was illegally withheld from the defense attorneys and the trial judge. The eyewitness was a corrections officer, a sergeant, named William Komanecky and the man he saw drive away with Julie Monson was a violent sex offender named John Grossman.

This is what a State Supreme Court judge said when he overturned the murder conviction against the ex-boyfriend: “The purposeful removal of the Komanecky connection between the man whom he saw with Julie Monson and a man whom he had seen before, who lived nearby, and whom he recognized as John Grossman changes not only the form of prejudice to the ... defense, but elevates it to matter of substance requiring the strongest possible remedial action by this court.”

In March of 1993, District Attorney James Vargason told the media this was an active case and John Grossman was the prime suspect. In September of 2006, he told Julie Monson's hometown newspaper he would not bring John Grossman to trial until he had an “airtight” case. He never made that case, but he never told the public why.

Jon Budelmann, who took office in January of 2008, promised voters a complete review of this case. Mr. Budelmann has never explained why John Grossman walked free not once, but twice and he has never asked for an outside investigation.

The records between March of 1993 and December of 2007 will show that District Attorney James Vargason and his Chief Assistant, Jon Budelmann, never called a single person from this case to testify before a grand jury, they never charged anyone with perjury and they never had potentially damning evidence retested for DNA. Here, I am referring to several human hairs that were discovered by the FBI, tested at their Washington lab and admitted into evidence at the original trial along with hair samples taken from the ex-boyfriend for comparison.

When I started researching this case for a book, several years ago, John Grossman was still in prison on an unrelated charge. Now he is on parole and back on our streets.

Robert L. Schillagi

Auburn

0
0
0
0
0

Be the first to know

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.

Topics

News Alerts

Breaking News