'Brighton ax murder' case: James Krauseneck appeals conviction from beyond the grave
In a New York criminal case that has its share of unusual twists, the "Brighton ax murder" now has another: James Krauseneck Jr. is appealing his murder conviction from the grave.
The appeal, filed in the regional appellate court, is novel: Krauseneck died in prison May 5 and, because an appeal was pending, New York law calls for his indictment to be dismissed. So, as far as the state law is concerned, Krauseneck no longer stands convicted of the February 1982 murder of his wife Cathleen, who was killed with a single ax blow to her head as she slept.
But Krauseneck's family considers the posthumous dismissal of the indictment as a pro forma step that does little to alter the public perception of Krauseneck as a murderer. Instead, they want the appeal to be heard, just as it would be were he alive. And, his lawyers contend, a recent ruling from New York's highest court, the state Court of Appeals, strengthens their claims that Krauseneck was severely prejudiced by the four-decade time span between the homicide and his 2022 trial.
"The appeal is not moot," Krauseneck's attorney, William Easton, wrote in the appellate brief. "The reputational damage to Mr. Krauseneck and his family is real and survives his death. In fact, the 'technical' dismissal of the indictment due to his death exacerbates the harm, as the publicity already generated emphasized the 'automatic' remedy of the granting of his appeal solely because of his death and not the merits of his arguments."
Krauseneck was sentenced to 25 years to life in November. While incarcerated, he was diagnosed with rapidly advancing esophageal cancer and transferred to a prison with a regional medical facility.
In prison, Krauseneck signed a waiver stating that he did not want his indictment and conviction tossed out upon his death. Instead, he wanted the appeal to be considered.
"Because of the public opprobrium he fell under, and the strength of his appellate issues, he believed that the 'automatic' (vacating) of his conviction upon death would not adequately address his loss of reputation and the harm to his surviving family," the appellate brief states.
A similar issue arose in Massachusetts that vacated the murder conviction of former New England Patriot Aaron Hernandez, who killed himself in prison. In 2019, the highest court in Massachusetts determined that the doctrine that erased the conviction was "outdated and no longer consonant with the circumstances of contemporary life." Hernandez's conviction was restored after a public outcry over the earlier indictment dismissal.
What will happen next
The Rochester, New York-based regional appellate court could opt not to hear the appeal, deciding that past precedent is firmly entrenched and Krauseneck's family has no legal right to challenge the posthumous dismissal of the indictment.
The appellate court could also set a schedule for arguments. Then, according to district attorney's office spokeswoman Calli Marianetti, the office would decide how to respond.
Unsolved for decades, the February 1982 murder at the Krauseneck's Brighton, New York, home became known in local crime lore as the "Brighton ax murder." The crime spawned segments on the true crime shows "48 Hours" and "Dateline" and provided the foundation of a novel and a Netflix movie.
Cathleen Krauseneck's sister, Annet Schlosser, said in a statement: "The Krausenecks obviously are unable to deal with the fact that they have a damaged reputation now. Their blood must be boiling that he died behind prison bars an ax murderer.
"They can spend all the money (they must have a lot) they want on an appeal. It does not change the fact that the entire world knows he is guilty. The Krausenecks will never get their reputation or name back. I will never get my sister back."
For subscribers: True-crime book. Netflix adaptation. Why New York ax murder case continues to fascinate
Appellate decision after conviction
Before Krauseneck's 2022 trial, his lawyers attempted to have the criminal indictment dismissed under a precedent case known commonly as Singer, named for the defendant in the case. That case established guidelines dictating what would be a prejudicial delay between the crime and an arrest.
Crucial to the legal equation is proof of diligence by law enforcement during that time frame. Krauseneck's lawyers argued that there were long lapses with the investigation between the time of the murder and Krauseneck's indictment on a second-degree murder charge in late 2019.
As well, the attorneys maintained, the proof used to indict Krauseneck had been available for decades and key witnesses had died and could not be subjected to questioning during a trial.
Prosecutors responded that the Brighton police and local prosecutors had diligently revisited the case throughout those decades, but had decided not to present evidence to a grand jury to consider an indictment. State Supreme Court Justice Charles Schiano Jr. sided with prosecutors, ruling that Krauseneck "has not demonstrated significant impairment of his ability to defend himself as a result of the delay."
The testimony of deceased witnesses, which included investigating police, the medical examiner who conducted the autopsy on Cathleen Krauseneck, and Eastman Kodak colleagues of James Krauseneck, was introduced into the trial record via their past reports or interviews. Prosecutors said both sides were hamstrung by the deaths of witnesses, but that the past records provided ample evidence for the trial.
A recent ruling
This year, the state Court of Appeals revisited the Singer guidelines with a rape case involving a defendant, Andrew Regan. In that case, the Court of Appeals dismissed the indictment after deciding that prosecutors and police had let the investigation lag for three years before finally securing a DNA sample from the accused, who was identified as the rapist at the time of the initial allegations.
Regan and the woman who made the rape allegations were acquaintances. Regan claimed until the testing of the genetic sample that he had not had sex with the woman. After the test showed a match with genetic evidence from a rape test, he instead admitted there had been sex but said it was consensual.
Police and prosecutors offered no substantive reasons for the delays, and indicated that early in the investigation they were weighing conflicting testimony. The Court of Appeals decided that the delay ran counter to a defendant's right to a prompt trial and hindered the likelihood of a reliable investigation.
In its ruling, the Court of Appeals noted that it has let stand other convictions with longer periods between crime and prosecution but that, with Regan's prosecution, "affirming the prosecutorial conduct here would establish a precedent — which would apply in every future rape and sexual assault case — that the People can delay investigation of a serious crime for years without any explanation or excuse, with no constitutional consequence."
The Court of Appeals vote to dismiss the indictment was 4 to 2. The dissenting judges maintained that the precedent could harm rape cases and other criminal prosecutions.
Krauseneck's attorney Easton said he thinks the Court of Appeals decision doesn't drastically alter the legal landscape but "forcefully clarifies it."
Even without the Court of Appeals decision, Easton said he thought the Krauseneck conviction would likely be reversed on appeal because of the prosecutorial delays. Still, he said, the recent ruling provides more legal ammunition for an appeal.
"I can't be cocksure about anything in this system but I can't conceive how they can get out from under (the precedent of the Regan case)," he said.
Prosecutors and police "did less in our case, and they did that for almost 40 years," Easton said.
Marianetti, the spokeswoman for the DA's office, said the office thinks Schiano's pretrial ruling, which allowed Krauseneck's indictment to stand and him to be tried, is on point and would survive an appellate challenge.
The arguments
Krauseneck's appeal revisits claims made by his attorneys before and during the trial: That a violent sex offender had been overlooked in 1982 by Brighton police, even though the department was alerted to his dangerousness, and that the 2019 indictment of Krauseneck hinged on unreliable evidence about the likely time of his wife's murder.
At trial, Krauseneck's lawyers, Easton and Michael Wolford, contended that the sex offender, Ed Laraby, was a viable suspect for the murder. Laraby died in prison in 2014 after making a confession to the Cathleen Krauseneck homicide.
Prosecutors argued at trial that Laraby's version of the crime was wrong on key details — the defense attributed this to his deteriorating health and the decades that had passed since the murder — and that the single ax strike that killed Cathleen Krauseneck would be out of character for the notoriously brutal Laraby.
Jurors said after the verdict that they did not see Laraby as a legitimate suspect, and that they decided the crime scene was staged by Krauseneck to try to mimic a burglary — the stance taken at trial by prosecutors Patrick Gallagher and Constance Patterson.
Jurors also said that questions over the time of death did not change their beliefs of Krauseneck's guilt.
Only weeks before Krauseneck's death, his lawyers asked the appellate court to allow him to be released on bail as his appeal was pending. Krauseneck's death appeared imminent then.
The Monroe County District Attorney's Office opposed the request, and an appellate judge decided not to release Krauseneck.