 |
| David Kofoed (Photo: Bill Kelly) |
Here we are again.
Another seemingly slam-dunk murder conviction.
Another claim the crime scene investigator planted
evidence.
The common denominator is Dave Kofoed.
Kofoed, once the respected leader of the Douglas
County Sheriff’s crime lab, landed in jail for planting evidence in a
notorious double-homicide investigation in a neighboring county. In the wake of that debacle three
other convicted murderers have gone to court claiming their cases may have been
tainted by Kofoed as well.
(The case was the subject of the NET documentary “CSI
On Trial.” Watch it here.)
Today the Nebraska Supreme Court heard convicted murderer Richard K.
Cook request evidence presented at trial by Kofoed get a second look.
Fifteen years ago Amy Stahlecker’s body was found on
the banks of the Elkhorn River on the western edge of Douglas County. She’d
been shot repeatedly. Her blood was found on the bridge nearby and inside Cook’s
truck.
A few days later Mike Horbacher went to police claiming
his friend Cook admitted he’d killed the
girl. In the following weeks there were complicated, conflicting stories about
what led up to the murder. Cook’s version implicated his friend who went to the
police.
What the jury believed was this: in the middle of
the night Amy Stahlecker got a flat tire driving home to Fremont. Richard Cook
had pulled over nearby. He had sex with the victim. There had been a struggle. Cook
“unloaded” his 9mm pistol into the woman and dragged the body to the edge of
the river.
 |
| Richard Cook (NDCS) | |
|
|
Five years later the crime scene investigator who
handled Cook’s case was also in jail.
A district court judge in Douglas County ruled there
wasn’t sufficient reason for Cook to get a hearing to review evidence in the
case. The Nebraska Supreme Court has been asked to overturn the ruling. Oral arguments were heard today.
Cook’s attorney, long time Kofoed
nemesis Jerry Soucie argued that Cook’s previous attorneys had been ineffective
in that they did not present the suspicions that Kofoed could have fabricated
some of the evidence in the investigation.
Soucie says because there had been no effort by the
Nebraska Attorney General or the Douglas County Attorney to review the body of
Kofoed’s work after it was clear he…in Soucie’s words…was a “dirty cop” it was
left to the defense attorneys in each individual case to return to court to
seek a fresh hearing on the integrity of the former CSI’s work.
Two pieces of evidence raise red flags for Soucie. Blood
smears matching Stahlecker were found inside Cook’s truck on the door
and the floor mat. Soucie raises questions about how the victim’s blood could
have gotten inside the truck when the shooting occurred on the bridge away from
the vehicle. In court filings Soucie points out Kofoed was convicted for
planting evidence inside the car of two innocent men. In a third murder
investigation under scrutiny, Kofoed is accused of similarly planting blood
evidence in the convicted killer’s car.
At the Stahlecker crime scene, Kofoed also located
a bloody shoe print, size 10 ½, on the outside of Cook's truck.
Soucie claims there was never evidence his client owned that type of shoe that matched the print but
Kofoed himself had purchased a pair.
Soucie says he is not asking the
court to reverse the guilty verdict but only to grant a hearing where
the integrity of the evidence can be reviewed.
Arguing for the State of Nebraska, Assistant Attorney
General Erin Tageman challenged every aspect of Cook’s demand for a new
hearing. She told the justices even if there had been indications Kofoed had
fabricated the blood smear and foot print Cook’s attorney “would not be able to
show his case was tainted.”
In documents filed by the state noted the nature of
the evidence and the methods used by Kofoed “were not similar to his unlawful conduct in the two other
investigations.” Tageman added in court that primary responsibility for this
homicide were with the Nebraska State Patrol and Kofoed’s role was “very small.”
For the justices there
may be a broader issue than whether the questioned evidence would have altered the
verdict in Cook’s trial. Justice Lindsey Miller-Lerman
made reference to “a more global view” where courts should be obliged to
re-examine the integrity of evidence brought into court by law enforcement
agencies entrusted by the public with that responsibility.
Kofoed has repeatedly
denied planting evidence in any of the cases.
It will be several weeks
before the Supreme Court will decide if Cook’s request has any merit in the
law.
In the next few weeks expect
to hear more about two other cases in which Kofoed is accused of planting
evidence.
 |
| Edwards |
Christopher Edwards. He’s in prison for killing his girlfriend, Jessica
O’Grady. Her body has never been found. At his trial in 2006 there was
overwhelming evidence Edwards murdered her in his bedroom using a ceremonial
sword, however questions arose about blood evidence in the trunk of his car
collected by Kofoed. A district court judge in Douglas County is expected to
decide soon if a new hearing on the evidence is warranted.
 |
| Henk |
Ivan Henk. After shouting out in the Cass County Courthouse that he had killed his
son because he was the antichrist, Henk was sentenced to life in prison for
murdering four-year old Brendon Gonzalez in Plattsmouth. During Kofoed’s trial
for planting evidence in another case, a judge ruled there was reason to
believe Kofoed tampered with evidence in Henk’s investigation as well. The CSI claimed to have found blood in the
dumpster months after Henk disposed of the child’s body in the trash. A new
evidentiary hearing for Henk is scheduled in February.
