Judges deny McNeil's appeal in 1998 murder of his daughter
PEORIA, Ill. (WMBD) — The latest attempt by Barton McNeil to overturn his decades-old conviction for killing his daughter was denied by a trio of appellate judges on Friday.
McNeil, 65, has been serving a virtual life sentence after being convicted for the suffocation death of his daughter Christina in 1998. Since then, McNeil has maintained no wrongdoing, claiming his ex-girlfriend did it and has continued to fight for a new trial.
4th District Appellate Court to hear two cases on the ISU campus
McNeil is being represented by both the Innocence Project and the Exoneration Project. He's battled his conviction on both the appellate court level and in the trial courts with post-conviction petitions.
It's that last form of appeal that was denied by the judges from the 4th District Appellate Court who heard his case last month during a special 'on the road' session at the Illinois State University campus.
He had asked appellate judges James Knecht, Amy Lannerd and Peter Cavanagh to overturn a Feb. 1, 2024, ruling by McLean County Circuit Judge William Yoder who said evidence that McNeil wanted to use at a possible new trial wouldn't have been legally allowed and beyond that, it's wasn't likely to tip the scales at that new trial.
McNeil argued he had new evidence that could show he didn't do it. He has consistently pointed to his ex-girlfriend Misook Nowlin, who now goes by Misook Wang, as the one who killed her. Wang was convicted and sentenced to 55 years in prison in 2013 for killing her mother-in-law.
McNeil claims Wang confessed to killing the little girl. However, the person she allegedly confessed to denied that such a statement was made, according to court records and that made things sticky.
But Yoder refused to allow what McNeil wanted, saying it wasn't admissible. The appellate judges agreed.
In 32-page unanimous order penned by Knecht, the judges said Yoder's analysis was on point and necessary. Also, they noted that Wang's refusal to testify, invoking her Fifth Amendment right was not an adverse reaction.
'At the time of the evidentiary hearing, (Wang) had a pending postconviction appeal in her own criminal case. As noted by the trial court, her answers at defendant's hearing could be used against her in future proceedings, which would include her own postconviction proceeding,' they wrote. 'This fact alone provides a sufficient reason as to why (Wang) refused to testify afterreceiving advice from her public defender.'
The judges also noted that Wang 'willingly testified at the March 1999 offer of proof hearing, even after being admonished of her right to remain silent, and when she knew defendantwanted to accuse her of C.M.'s (Christina McNeil's) murder at his trial.'
Yoder's ruling came in the post-conviction process. That form of appeal goes through the trial court, not the appellate court. There are three stages.
The first stage falls on a judge to 'determine whether the petition is frivolous or patently without merit in that it fails to state the gist of a constitutional claim,' according to the state act outlining the process.
If the matter goes past the first stage, then a judge could appoint an attorney to help with the petition. At a third-stage hearing, a judge would hear evidence of newly discovered materials or claims of constitutional right violations that a defendant thinks would lead to a different outcome.
It's possible that McNeil could now appeal Yoder's decision to the Illinois Supreme Court in Springfield.
This story will be updated.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sean 'Diddy' Combs trial recap: Hotel security guard says Combs paid $100,000 for video of Cassie Ventura assault as heckler is removed from the courtroom
The trial of Sean 'Diddy' Combs continued Tuesday in Manhattan federal court, with two more witnesses — including a hotel security guard who was paid $100,000 by Combs for a copy of the surveillance video showing him beating Cassie Ventura — testifying in the sex trafficking case. Their testimony was briefly delayed by an outburst from a spectator who was removed by court marshals. Federal prosecutors say that for decades, Combs abused, threatened and coerced women to participate in marathon sexual encounters called "freak offs" and used his business empire, along with guns, kidnapping and arson, to conceal his crimes. The 55-year-old hip-hop mogul is facing five criminal counts: one count of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking by force, fraud or coercion, and two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution. Combs has pleaded not guilty. If convicted, he could face life in prison. Here are some key takeaways from Tuesday's testimony culled from various reporters and news organizations in the courtroom, including CNN, NBC News and the Washington Post. Before Tuesday's testimony got underway, a woman who began screaming obscenities was removed from the courtroom at the request of Judge Arun Subramanian. The woman could be heard yelling at Combs, 'These motherf***ers are laughing at you!' "Escort her out right now!" Subramanian shouted from the bench. Combs, seated in his chair at the defense table, glanced at the woman as she was taken away by court marshals. Speaking to reporters outside, the woman said she was a Combs supporter and was upset about how people attending the trial in person had been mocking him. "Everyone is laughing at Diddy!" said the woman, who did not identify herself. "It's not right what they're doing to him!" Big picture: This was the first major outburst of the trial, which is now in its fourth week. Eddy Garcia, a former security guard at the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles where Combs was caught on surveillance video assaulting Cassie Ventura in March 2016, took the stand first. He testified under an immunity order after asserting his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself. Garcia told the court that he was initially approached by Combs's former chief of staff, Kristina Khorram, about the footage, which showed Combs kicking and dragging Ventura in an elevator bank. The video was shown to the jury earlier in the trial. He said he told Khorram that she would need a subpoena to see the video. Combs then called from his personal cellphone, saying the video 'could ruin' him if it got out, and that he would 'take care' of Garcia if he could secure the only copy. Garcia said he spoke to his boss and they agreed to sell it for $50,000. Big picture: The video is a key piece of evidence in the prosecution's case as it seeks to prove that Ventura was forced by Combs to have sex with male escorts as part of 'freak-offs' held at various hotels. At a private meeting at a Los Angeles high-rise building a few days later, Garcia said he and Combs got on a FaceTime call with Ventura, who at Combs's direction said she also wanted the video to go away. Garcia testified that Combs made him sign documents, including a non-disclosure agreement. Garcia then handed Combs a USB drive with the footage. 'Eddy, my angel, I knew you could help,' Combs told Garcia, according to the former security guard. Combs left the room and returned with $100,000 in a brown paper bag, ran the cash through a money counter and handed it to him while warning him not to make any big purchases, Garcia recalled. According to Garcia, Combs told him to give the extra cash to the other security guards on duty that day. Garcia testified that he gave $50,000 of the money to his supervisor who approved the deal with Combs, $20,000 to another guard involved in the incident and kept $30,000 for himself. Big picture: The defense team does not dispute the $100,000 payout. But they say it was made to avoid any negative press — and not to obstruct any potential criminal investigation. Derek Ferguson, the former chief financial officer of Combs's Bad Boy Entertainment, took the stand next. Ferguson told the court that he sometimes reported directly to Combs as CFO of Bad Boy from 1998 to 2012, overseeing budgets and salaries and at times was responsible for the music mogul's personal finances. Financial records from December 2011 submitted as evidence by prosecutors while Ferguson was on the stand showed three $20,000 transfers, including: An outgoing transfer of $20,000 from Combs to Cassie Ventura on Dec. 14 An incoming transfer of $20,000 to Combs from Broderick Ventura, Cassie Ventura's father, on Dec. 23 An outgoing transfer of $20,000 from Combs to Broderick Ventura on Dec. 27 Big picture: Earlier in the trial, Regina Ventura, Cassie Ventura's mother, testified that Combs had threatened to release explicit videos of her daughter after he learned she was dating rapper Kid Cudi. Regina Ventura testified that Combs wanted $20,000 to 'recoup' his investment in Cassie. She said she was scared for her daughter's safety and that the family took out a home equity loan to pay Combs via a wire transfer. Regina Ventura told the court that the money was returned several days later with no explanation. Prosecutor Maurene Comey said the government intends to call three more witnesses on Wednesday, including Bryana Bongolan, who previously accused Combs of sexual battery and dangling her over a balcony; and 'Jane,' another one of Combs's accusers who is using a pseudonym during the trial. 'Mia,' a former assistant and the first accuser to testify against Combs under a pseudonym, concluded three days of testimony on Monday. Comey said that direct examination of 'Jane' will take at least two days, followed by cross-examination that is expected to be of similar length. Big picture: Earlier Tuesday, prosecutors asked Judge Subramanian to order a news organization that revealed the identity of 'Mia' in a social media post to remove it. Subramanian said he would consider it if the government submitted a formal request.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Judge finds Kristi Noem likely violated due process on TSA collective bargaining
When you hear 'Trump administration Department of Homeland Security' and 'due process,' you might think of the government's legal violations in the immigration context. Branching out into a different context, a new ruling found a move by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem likely violated due process in her bid to crush collective bargaining at the Transportation Security Administration. Noem had issued a 'determination' intended to bar transportation security officers from engaging in collective bargaining. Along with a local union and two aviation-related unions, the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) filed a federal lawsuit in Washington state. The plaintiffs argued that the Noem Determination was retaliatory in violation of the First Amendment, violated due process under the Fifth Amendment, and was arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law under the Administrative Procedure Act. Siding with the plaintiffs, U.S. District Judge Marsha Pechman in Seattle granted a preliminary injunction against the Noem Determination and its rescission of a 2024 bargaining agreement. 'The Court here finds that an injunction must issue to preserve the rights and benefits that the 2024 CBA confers to TSOs pending resolution of this litigation,' the Clinton appointee wrote Monday, referring to transportation security officers. 'AFGE has shown the Noem Determination likely violates Due Process, having afforded no notice or process for AFGE and its members to work with DHS and TSA to resolve any disagreement before simply shredding the contractual promises of the CBA,' Pechman wrote. She added that the determination 'appears to have been undertaken to punish AFGE and its members because AFGE has chosen to push back against the Trump Administration's attacks to federal employment in the courts.' So with the caveat that this is a preliminary victory for the plaintiffs in what could be lengthy litigation, it's the latest example of the administration facing a skeptical bench because of its punitive approach. Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration's legal cases. This article was originally published on
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
State utility regulators preparing for Ohio House Bill 6 hearing
Natural gas meter with pipe on wall. Stock photo from Getty Images. Ohio utility regulators are gearing up for hearings on FirstEnergy's role in the House Bill 6 scandal. Former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder is behind bars — although seeking a presidential pardon — for overseeing the largest corruption case in state history. FirstEnergy funneled about $60 million to a dark money group controlled by Householder. The former speaker used that money to secure his own leadership position and influence passage of HB 6. The measure propped up a pair of nuclear plants and aging coal facilities by tacking a rider onto consumers' monthly bills. But that's just the broad strokes. Nearly five years on from Householder's indictment, questions remain about how exactly the scheme unfolded and where FirstEnergy officials got the money for it. Half a dozen former FirstEnergy officials in government affairs and c-suite positions are set to testify in a PUCO hearing next week. Four of them previously pled the Fifth and have since received immunity from a Franklin County judge. At the heart of the case, the Ohio Consumers' Counsel wants to demonstrate whether FirstEnergy used the money it got from average consumers to bribe state officials. In January, former FirstEnergy executives Charles 'Chuck' Jones and Michael Dowling were indicted on federal racketeering charges. Last year, state officials filed more than 40 charges against the executives as well as the man they bribed, former PUCO chairman Sam Randazzo. Last week, a judge in Summit County dismissed theft charges against Jones and Dowling, but they still face several other state criminal charges. The PUCO proceedings focus on the employees one rung below Jones and Dowling, attempting to show how money moved in the scheme by gathering testimony from the foot soldiers who answered to FirstEnergy's leadership. Four of the witnesses previously refused to testify, citing their Fifth Amendment protections against self-incrimination. A Franklin County judge ordered them to testify and granted them 'the broadest possible immunity' from prosecution. Ohio indictments provide a better picture of squalid relationships that spurred massive scandal The PUCO will also hear from Steven Strah, the former CFO who took over FirstEnergy following Jones' ouster, and Robert Reffner, the company's chief legal officer at the time of the scandal. The Ohio Consumers' Counsel subpoenas argue consumers were wrongly charged more than $6.6 million, and another $7.4 million was incorrectly listed as a capital expenditure. Compelling testimony, the filings argue, 'will help establish how and why FirstEnergy improperly misallocated House Bill 6 costs to the FirstEnergy Utilities.' 'We look forward to getting answers for FirstEnergy consumers and holding FirstEnergy accountable,' Ohio Consumers' Counsel Maureen Willis said in a statement. 'Justice for FirstEnergy consumers is long overdue.' Just over a month ago, state lawmakers voted to put an end to the House Bill 6 rider tacked on to ratepayers' monthly bills. The legislation won't take effect until August. Democrats in the Ohio House, meanwhile, argue the door remains open for next House Bill 6. 'No law in Ohio prevented this scandal,' state Rep. Bride Rose Sweeney, D-Westlake, argued at a press conference last month. 'And since, not one law has even remotely been truly attempted to fix this massive injustice.' Sweeney, and state Reps. Chris Glassburn, D-North Olmsted, Dani Isaacsohn, D-Cincinnati, and Desiree Tims, D-Dayton, have filed bills that would require contribution disclosures to or so-called dark money groups, institute penalties for undermining signature gathering campaigns and bar companies that make contributions from receiving state contracts. The PUCO will hold a procedural hearing this morning, with the evidentiary portion of the case beginning next week, on June 10. The hearings themselves will likely take several days. Follow Ohio Capital Journal Reporter Nick Evans on X or on Bluesky. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
