March 21, 2022 at 11:16 a.m.
Judge grants state's 'forfeiture by wrongdoing' motion in Miller homicide case
Separate hearing scheduled on photo identification motion
Judge grants state's 'forfeiture by wrongdoing' motion in Miller homicide case
By Jamie Taylor and Heather Schaefer-
At the end of a roughly one-hour hearing, Bloom ruled that text messages sent by 26-year-old Hannah Rose Miller to a friend about abuse she said she was suffering at Anderson's hands can be read to the jury during the trial. "Notes" saved on her cellphone will also be made available to the jury, the court ruled.
Anderson, 30, is accused of killing Miller, his former girlfriend, on a local roadside last summer. According to testimony offered at the preliminary hearing, Miller's body was discovered in a ditch on River Bend Road at about 11 a.m. June 30 with injuries consistent with gunshot wounds. The pathologist who conducted the autopsy later reported Miller suffered a wound to the chest, two to the back and one at the base of the skull, along with a graze wound to the arm.
The body was discovered by a married couple traveling between Pelican township and the City of Rhinelander. Anderson was arrested in September, following a multi-state manhunt.
Also awaiting trial is 25-year-old Seth Wakefield of Rhinelander who is charged with first-degree intentional homicide (as party to the crime). He is accused of taking part in discussions and other actions to help advance a plan formulated by Anderson to kill Miller. Wakefield, who was arrested over the Fourth of July weekend, told authorities he rented a U-Haul truck to conduct surveillance on Miller's apartment from June 24-25. Wakefield also allegedly told investigators that he had conducted surveillance on foot by himself at Anderson's directions on two separate occasions, according to the complaint.
In January, Oneida County district attorney Mike Schiek filed a "forfeiture by wrongdoing" motion in Anderson's case. The Forfeiture by Wrongdoing Doctrine is an exception to the confrontation clause included in the 6th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The doctrine holds that defendants lose, or forfeit, the right to cross-examine (confront a witness) if they commit an act that makes it impossible for a witness to testify.
In this case, Schiek is arguing that Anderson made Miller unavailable to testify by killing her. The DA also plans to argue that Anderson had been abusive and threatening to Miller and that she had sent photos of her injuries and other information to a friend in a series of text messages.
The filing indicates the state also wants to have a law enforcement officer read the contents of notes they say were found on Miller's phone indicating Anderson had made threats against her as well as evidence that she had retained an attorney for the purpose of filing for custody and physical placement of the child the two shared.
As an alternative to the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine, Schiek also argued the court could allow the material to be admitted as "other acts" evidence.
Anderson's attorney Scott Anderson (no relation) argued that the only potential hearing that his client could have tried to keep Miller from testifying at would have been in family court with regard to their child.
"But beyond that, there was no pending court appearance, she has not reported anything to the police," Anderson said. "There were no restraining order hearings, there's no criminal actions. She never called the police on him."
He argued the exhibits show that the victim considered hiring Gary Cirilli to handle her child custody case, but the matter had not reached the court hearing stage.
"This homicide, in any fashion, appears to be tied to any attempt by Mr. Anderson to prevent her from attending a hearing. There's been no hearings, there's been no scheduled hearings. There might have been contemplation, certainly," Anderson said.
Schiek responded that Miller had hired an attorney, who was in the process of drawing up paperwork for custody and a restraining order.
Bloom stressed that the standard he is required to use in evaluating this motion is less than "beyond reasonable doubt" that Anderson will face at trial, and that his finding wouldn't be the same as a verdict reached by a jury.
"And that distinction is very important for the purposes of these proceedings, and it should be kept in mind by everyone," Bloom said. "But for purposes of determining whether or not the forfeiture by wrongdoing doctrine is applicable relative to statements of the alleged victim in this case, the court needs to make those findings based on the evidence."
He then recited the history of the crime as presented in police reports and testified to during Anderson's preliminary hearing.
Bloom noted two aspects of Wakefield's cooperation with detectives since his arrest over the Fourth of July weekend and cited two compelling aspects of that cooperation.
"One, is how adverse the information he provided to law enforcement was to his own interests, which historically is the basis for finding credibility in a statement," he noted.
He said the second aspect was that several parts of Wakefield's statements to detectives were corroborated by other evidence.
The judge said that the purpose Anderson allegedly had for killing Miller has to be considered.
"Intellectually, this has to be looked at because the concept of a person determining that they need to kill someone so they won't be available to testify at the murder trial, is not how it works," Bloom said. "There's an easy solution to that; no killing, no murder trial."
He then cited the example of someone robbing a liquor store and shooting the clerk. The robber shoots the clerk to make the clerk unavailable for an armed robbery trial not a murder trial and neither is even contemplated until the robber commits the crimes.
"Making someone unavailable is a broader concept than it could be couched by some," he concluded.
Bloom then went through the items found on Miller phone detailing abuse she said was inflicted on her by Anderson. Miller sent photos of her injuries to a friend so that she could delete them from her phone so Anderson wouldn't find them, according to the judge's recitation of the evidence Schiek wants to submit to the jury.
He also noted that there is evidence that less than a month before the homicide Miller went the Rhinelander Police Department about Anderson's behavior and that she had told RPD Captain Josh Chiamulera that she feared Anderson would kill her.
Bloom then ruled "that the defendant's actions were consistent with an intent to make (Miller)" unavailable to testify, thus Schiek can present the information at trial, barring any challenge by Anderson under the rules of evidence.
Anderson also filed a series of motions, one seeking access to Wakefield's case file, another asking that a questionnaire be sent to prospective jurors ahead of jury selection, and the last challenging the I.D. of Anderson by a witness.
Anderson and Schiek told Bloom they could jointly solve the first two of Anderson's motions. However, Schiek requested a chance to file a response brief to the last. Bloom set a May 19 date for a hearing on that motion.
Anderson is being held in the Oneida County Jail on a $1 million cash bond while Wakefield is being held in lieu of $250,000 cash.
Both men face life in prison if convicted.
Jamie Taylor may be reached via email at [email protected]. Heather Schaefer may be reached at [email protected].
Comments:
You must login to comment.