Saturday, April 10, 2010
Wife Who Hired Cousin to Kill Husband Appeals Conviction
In a last-minute decision, the judge ordered defense lawyers to cram overnight and deliver closing arguments the next morning, but gave prosecutors the weekend to write theirs.
And after the defendant — accused of ordering her husband’s murder in 2007 and facing life in prison — decided to testify, the judge forbade her to explain why she did certain peculiar things, like buy a spy camera and secretly record conversations.
He also let prosecutors introduce another judge’s scathing order from a child-custody case that called the defendant a “smothering” mother, although that judge and the social workers he cited were not witnesses who could be cross-examined. No one disputes that those twists and turns took place during the six-week trial of Mazoltuv Borukhova, the Queens doctor convicted last year of hiring a relative to fatally shoot her husband outside a playground, in front of their 4-year-old daughter, during a bitter custody battle.
These are just a few of the points her lawyers have raised to call Dr. Borukhova’s trial “fundamentally unfair” and argue that a “fiercely partisan” judge, State Supreme Court Justice Robert J. Hanophy, fostered a “toxic atmosphere” in the Queens courtroom. The defense includes Alan M. Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor who has represented O. J. Simpson and Patricia Hearst. He is “of counsel” on Dr. Borukhova’s fiery 126-page appeal, filed by the law firm of Nathan Z. Dershowitz, his brother.
Once prosecutors submit their response, due on May 21, Alan Dershowitz plans to deploy his flashy oratory in arguments in the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court, in Brooklyn. That all but ensures that the case of Dr. Borukhova and her cousin, Mikhail Mallayev — which embroiled the close-knit Bukharian Jewish community where she and her husband, Daniel Malakov, a dentist, had been a proud example of immigrant success — will go another round in the spotlight.
Even in Queens, a borough that defense lawyers say is relatively sympathetic to prosecutors, the trial “stands out” as unfair, Nathan Dershowitz said recently. The brief, filed Jan. 12, argues that the trial violated Dr. Borukhova’s constitutional rights to confront her accusers, employ effective counsel, and “even to freely practice her religion.”
A spokesman for the Queens district attorney, Richard A. Brown, who has called the trial fair and professional, said on Friday that prosecutors would respond to the brief’s contentions in court. Justice Hanophy’s assistant said the judge was not allowed to comment.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/10/nyregion/10bukharan.html
And after the defendant — accused of ordering her husband’s murder in 2007 and facing life in prison — decided to testify, the judge forbade her to explain why she did certain peculiar things, like buy a spy camera and secretly record conversations.
He also let prosecutors introduce another judge’s scathing order from a child-custody case that called the defendant a “smothering” mother, although that judge and the social workers he cited were not witnesses who could be cross-examined. No one disputes that those twists and turns took place during the six-week trial of Mazoltuv Borukhova, the Queens doctor convicted last year of hiring a relative to fatally shoot her husband outside a playground, in front of their 4-year-old daughter, during a bitter custody battle.
These are just a few of the points her lawyers have raised to call Dr. Borukhova’s trial “fundamentally unfair” and argue that a “fiercely partisan” judge, State Supreme Court Justice Robert J. Hanophy, fostered a “toxic atmosphere” in the Queens courtroom. The defense includes Alan M. Dershowitz, the Harvard law professor who has represented O. J. Simpson and Patricia Hearst. He is “of counsel” on Dr. Borukhova’s fiery 126-page appeal, filed by the law firm of Nathan Z. Dershowitz, his brother.
Once prosecutors submit their response, due on May 21, Alan Dershowitz plans to deploy his flashy oratory in arguments in the Appellate Division of State Supreme Court, in Brooklyn. That all but ensures that the case of Dr. Borukhova and her cousin, Mikhail Mallayev — which embroiled the close-knit Bukharian Jewish community where she and her husband, Daniel Malakov, a dentist, had been a proud example of immigrant success — will go another round in the spotlight.
Even in Queens, a borough that defense lawyers say is relatively sympathetic to prosecutors, the trial “stands out” as unfair, Nathan Dershowitz said recently. The brief, filed Jan. 12, argues that the trial violated Dr. Borukhova’s constitutional rights to confront her accusers, employ effective counsel, and “even to freely practice her religion.”
A spokesman for the Queens district attorney, Richard A. Brown, who has called the trial fair and professional, said on Friday that prosecutors would respond to the brief’s contentions in court. Justice Hanophy’s assistant said the judge was not allowed to comment.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/10/nyregion/10bukharan.html
Comments:
Is there any doubt that she ordered her ex-husband to be killed? Isnt that of primary importance here?
Post a Comment
Comment Credit ---This article posted by 
: April 13, 2010 7:00 PM
: April 13, 2010 7:00 PM
