
Court upholds conviction of man in murder of wife whose Fitbit exercise tracker helped crack case
Despite finding "improprieties" were committed by a prosecutor, the Connecticut Supreme Court on Monday upheld the murder conviction of a man found guilty of killing his wife in a case that drew wide attention because the victim's Fitbit exercise tracker contradicted his statements to police.
The justices ruled in a 6-0 decision that Richard Dabate was not deprived of a fair trial because of four missteps by the prosecutor they called "troubling," including referring to one of Connecticut's most notorious crimes while cross-examining the man.
Dabate, 48, was convicted of murder and other charges in the fatal shooting of Connie Dabate, 39, at the couple's home in Ellington two days before Christmas in 2015 while their two young sons were in school. He's serving a 65-year prison sentence.
Prosecutors said Dabate wanted his wife dead, in part, because he had a yearslong affair with another woman who was pregnant at the time of the killing and later gave birth to their child.
Dabate allegedly told investigators his wife was unable to have another child, so the couple did some "untraditional things." He said all three planned to co-parent the child, CBS affiliate WFSB previously reported.
Dabate staged a phony crime scene, including tying himself up loosely with zip ties and stabbing himself with a box cutter, and told police an unknown intruder in camouflage broke into their home, killed his wife and assaulted him, authorities said.
State police said Dabate gave them a timeline of events that conflicted with data on his wife's Fitbit, which showed she was moving around for about an hour after the time Dabate said she was shot.
Dabate testified in his defense and maintained his innocence, saying a large masked man with a voice like actor Vin Diesel was the killer.
Part of Dabate's appeal questioned the reliability of the Fitbit evidence and whether the trial judge was wrong to have allowed it, but the Supreme Court upheld the data and its use.
During the trial, Dabate's lawyer, Trent LaLima, also pointed to unknown DNA that was found in the Dabate's home, including on the gun that killed Connie, and testimony from a house cleaner, who said they may have seen a dark green figure move past the window around the time of the crime.
Dabate also accused Tolland State's Attorney Matthew Gedansky of multiple instances of impropriety, including Gedansky mentioning a notorious home invasion in Cheshire in 2007 while cross-examining Dabate. The home invaders killed a woman and her two daughters, ages 11 and 17, after terrorizing them for hours, while the woman's husband survived a vicious beating.
Gedansky asked Dabate if he was trying to create a "little mini-Cheshire scene" in his own home. The trial judge upheld an objection by Dabate's lawyer and asked Gedansky to rephrase the question, but Gedansky asked nearly the same exact question. The Supreme Court found Gedansky violated the judge's order to rephrase.
"In referring to a 'mini Cheshire,' the prosecutor's question was unnecessarily inflammatory because it compared the defendant to other notorious offenders or infamous figures," Justice Joan Alexander wrote in the decision.
Gedansky did not immediately return an email message seeking comment Monday.
LaLima, Dabate's lawyer, said he and his client were disappointed with the court's ruling.
"We believe we put forward strong issues supporting a new trial for Rick Dabate," LaLima wrote in an email to The Associated Press. "We are evaluating the best next steps for Rick, who has steadfastly maintained his innocence for nearly a decade."
The Supreme Court also found that Gedansky committed three other improprieties, including suggesting that the jury would have to be unintelligent or lazy to agree with the defense theory of the case.
"We disapprove of the improprieties committed by the prosecutor during the trial of this case in strong and unqualified terms and expect our message to be taken with the utmost seriousness by prosecutors," the decision said.
The court said it agreed with Dabate that "the prosecutor engaged in multiple acts of impropriety at trial that we consider troubling."
Justices, however, said the state's case was very strong and Gedansky's missteps did not overshadow testimony by 130 witnesses and the 600 exhibits presented during the five-week trial.
In 2017, Connie Dabate's sister filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Richard Dabate. Marliese Shaw, the executor of Connie Dabate's estate, also asked a probate judge to order that Richard Dabate return more than $70,000 taken from his wife's estate after she died.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Washington Post
9 minutes ago
- Washington Post
A federal appeals court is set to hear arguments in Trump's bid to erase his hush money conviction
NEW YORK — President Donald Trump's quest to erase his criminal conviction heads to a federal appeals court Wednesday. It's one way he's trying to get last year's hush money verdict overturned. A three-judge panel is set to hear arguments in Trump's long-running fight to get the New York case moved from state court to federal court, where he could then try to have the verdict thrown out on presidential immunity grounds. The Republican is asking the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene after a lower-court judge twice rejected the move. As part of the request, Trump wants the federal appeals court to seize control of the criminal case and then ultimately decide his appeal of the verdict, which is now pending in a state appellate court. The 2nd Circuit should 'determine once and for all that this unprecedented criminal prosecution of a former and current President of the United States belongs in federal court,' Trump's lawyers wrote in a court filing. The Manhattan district attorney's office, which prosecuted Trump's case, wants it to stay in state court. Trump's Justice Department — now partly run by his former criminal defense lawyers — backs his bid to move the case to federal court. If Trump loses, he could go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump was convicted in May 2024 of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels, whose affair allegations threatened to upend his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump denies her claim and said he did nothing wrong. It was the only one of his four criminal cases to go to trial. Trump's lawyers first sought to move the case to federal court following his March 2023 indictment, arguing that federal officers including former presidents have the right to be tried in federal court for charges arising from 'conduct performed while in office.' Part of the criminal case involved checks he wrote while he was president. They tried again after his conviction, arguing that Trump's historic prosecution violated his constitutional rights and ran afoul of the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling , which was decided about a month after the hush money trial ended. The ruling reins in prosecutions of ex-presidents for official acts and restricts prosecutors in pointing to official acts as evidence that a president's unofficial actions were illegal. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein denied both requests, ruling in part that Trump's conviction involved his personal life, not his work as president. In a four-page ruling, Hellerstein wrote that nothing about the high court's ruling affected his prior conclusion that hush money payments at issue in Trump's case 'were private, unofficial acts, outside the bounds of executive authority.' Trump's lawyers argue that prosecutors rushed to trial instead of waiting for the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision, and that prosecutors erred by showing jurors evidence that should not have been allowed under the ruling, such as former White House staffers describing how Trump reacted to news coverage of the hush money deal and tweets he sent while president in 2018. Trump's former criminal defense lawyer Todd Blanche is now the deputy U.S. attorney general, the Justice Department's second-in-command. Another of his lawyers, Emil Bove, has a high-ranking Justice Department position. The trial judge, Juan M. Merchan, rejected Trump's requests to throw out the conviction on presidential immunity grounds and sentenced him on Jan. 10 to an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction intact but sparing him any punishment. Appearing by video at his sentencing, Trump called the case a 'political witch hunt,' 'a weaponization of government' and 'an embarrassment to New York.'

Associated Press
17 minutes ago
- Associated Press
A federal appeals court is set to hear arguments in Trump's bid to erase his hush money conviction
NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump's quest to erase his criminal conviction heads to a federal appeals court Wednesday. It's one way he's trying to get last year's hush money verdict overturned. A three-judge panel is set to hear arguments in Trump's long-running fight to get the New York case moved from state court to federal court, where he could then try to have the verdict thrown out on presidential immunity grounds. The Republican is asking the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene after a lower-court judge twice rejected the move. As part of the request, Trump wants the federal appeals court to seize control of the criminal case and then ultimately decide his appeal of the verdict, which is now pending in a state appellate court. The 2nd Circuit should 'determine once and for all that this unprecedented criminal prosecution of a former and current President of the United States belongs in federal court,' Trump's lawyers wrote in a court filing. The Manhattan district attorney's office, which prosecuted Trump's case, wants it to stay in state court. Trump's Justice Department — now partly run by his former criminal defense lawyers — backs his bid to move the case to federal court. If Trump loses, he could go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump was convicted in May 2024 of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal a hush money payment to porn actor Stormy Daniels, whose affair allegations threatened to upend his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump denies her claim and said he did nothing wrong. It was the only one of his four criminal cases to go to trial. Trump's lawyers first sought to move the case to federal court following his March 2023 indictment, arguing that federal officers including former presidents have the right to be tried in federal court for charges arising from 'conduct performed while in office.' Part of the criminal case involved checks he wrote while he was president. They tried again after his conviction, arguing that Trump's historic prosecution violated his constitutional rights and ran afoul of the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling, which was decided about a month after the hush money trial ended. The ruling reins in prosecutions of ex-presidents for official acts and restricts prosecutors in pointing to official acts as evidence that a president's unofficial actions were illegal. U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein denied both requests, ruling in part that Trump's conviction involved his personal life, not his work as president. In a four-page ruling, Hellerstein wrote that nothing about the high court's ruling affected his prior conclusion that hush money payments at issue in Trump's case 'were private, unofficial acts, outside the bounds of executive authority.' Trump's lawyers argue that prosecutors rushed to trial instead of waiting for the Supreme Court's presidential immunity decision, and that prosecutors erred by showing jurors evidence that should not have been allowed under the ruling, such as former White House staffers describing how Trump reacted to news coverage of the hush money deal and tweets he sent while president in 2018. Trump's former criminal defense lawyer Todd Blanche is now the deputy U.S. attorney general, the Justice Department's second-in-command. Another of his lawyers, Emil Bove, has a high-ranking Justice Department position. The trial judge, Juan M. Merchan, rejected Trump's requests to throw out the conviction on presidential immunity grounds and sentenced him on Jan. 10 to an unconditional discharge, leaving his conviction intact but sparing him any punishment. Appearing by video at his sentencing, Trump called the case a 'political witch hunt,' 'a weaponization of government' and 'an embarrassment to New York.'


Hamilton Spectator
24 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Argentine Supreme Court upholds 6-year prison sentence for ex-President Fernández
BUENOS AIRES, Argentina (AP) — Argentina's highest court upheld a six-year prison sentence for former President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner in a ruling Tuesday that permanently banned her from public office over the corruption conviction that found she had directed state contracts to a friend while she was the first lady and president. The explosive Supreme Court ruling left Fernández, Argentina's charismatic yet deeply divisive ex-leader, subject to arrest and sent her supporters pouring into the streets of Buenos Aires, Argentina's capital, and blocking major highways in protest. The court asked Argentina's security ministry to set up a detention center to hold 72-year-old Fernández. Her defense lawyer Carlos Beraldi told C5N, a television station in Buenos Aires, that he had requested Fernández be allowed to serve her sentence in house arrest given her age. The ruling bars Fernández from running in this fall's Buenos Aires legislative elections just days after she launched her campaign. Fernández, who dominated Argentine politics for two decades and forged the country's main left-wing populist movement known as Kirchnerism, after her and her husband, former President Néstor Kirchner, rejects the charges as politically motivated. During Fernández's eight years in office (2007–2015), Argentina expanded cash payments to the poor and pioneered major social assistance programs. But her governments funded the unbridled state spending by printing money, bringing Argentina notoriety for massive budget deficits and sky-high inflation. Critics blamed Argentina's years of economic volatility on Fernández's policies, and outrage over successive economic crises and the country's bloated bureaucracy helped vault radical libertarian President Javier Milei to the presidency in late 2023. The ruling dealt a severe blow to Milei's opposition during a crucial midterm election year. He celebrated the ruling, writing on social media: 'Justice. Period.' Fernández was embroiled in multiple corruption scandals during her tenure. She was convicted in 2022 in this corruption case, which centered on 51 public contracts for public works awarded to companies linked to Lázaro Báez, a convicted construction magnate and friend of the presidential couple, at prices 20% above the standard rate ally in a scheme that cost the state tens of millions of dollars. The high court rejected Fernández's request for the court to review her prison sentence in March. In a resolution obtained by The Associated Press, the court said that the prison sentence 'does nothing more than to protect our republican and democratic system.' The Kirchner governments carried out 'an extraordinary fraudulent maneuver' that harmed the interests of the government and resulted in the embezzlement of roughly $70 million at the current exchange rate, the resolution said. Supporters of Fernández and her political movement blocked main roads into Buenos Aires and stormed the offices of Argentina's two main cable networks that are widely considered critical of the ex-leader, Channel 13 and Todos Noticias, smashing televisions, vandalizing cars and shattering windows. There were no injuries reported. Fernández rejected the decision, calling the court justices 'puppets' of those wielding economic power in the country. 'They're three puppets answering to those ruling far above them,' she told supporters in a rousing speech outside her party's headquarters. 'It's not the opposition. It's the concentrated economic power of Argentina's government.' Gregorio Dalbón, one of Fernández's lawyers, vowed 'to take this case to all international human rights organizations.' Fernández has questioned the impartiality of the judges. She claims her defense didn't have access to much of the evidence and that it was gathered without regard to legal deadlines. Fernández faces a series of other upcoming trials on corruption charges. ____ Associated Press journalist Sergio Farella contributed to this report. ____ Follow AP's coverage of Latin America and the Caribbean at Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .