By Doug Miller
Rice said that the current threshold of murder with depraved indifference -- the threshold for Heidgen¹s second-degree murder conviction -- is too restrictive, and hinted that the state court of appeals had ruled improperly last summer that prosecutors needed to prove a depraved pattern of thinking in order to meet the threshold of second-degree murder.
³We were lucky to have [Heidgen¹s] statements and the depraved nature of his actions,² Rice said on Oct. 19 at a dinner for the Long Beach Lawyers Association, where she was guest speaker. ³But this case is the exception. For most DWI homicides, you¹re talking about probation. Four years. Six years. It¹s an outrage. We¹re going to Albany to have them re-write the laws on depravity and turn this statute on its head.²
Heidgen was convicted on Oct. 23 of two counts of second-degree murder in the deaths of Katie Flynn, a 7-year-old Long Beach Catholic Regional School student, and driver of the limousine she was riding in, Stanley Rabinowitz. On July 2, 2005, Heidgen was driving north on the southbound Meadowbrook Parkway while heavily inebriated when he hit the limousine head-on.
Several members of the Flynn family, including Katie¹s parents and maternal grandparents, were critically injured in the crash.
Rice said her job became a lot harder when the New York State Court of Appeals, the state¹s highest court, ruled that the principle of
mens rea, or guilty mind, must exist in order for a jury to reach a conviction of murder with depraved indifference.
The court established this precedent in the case of People v. Feingold, in which Larry Feingold, a depressed New York City man, sealed off his apartment, turned his stove¹s pilot light off and turned up the gas, intending to kill himself. Before he suffocated, however, a spark ignited the gas, and the explosion caused massive damage to his apartment building.
Feingold, who survived the explosion, was convicted of reckless endangerment, a charge that includes the same burden of proof for depraved indifference as second-degree murder.
The court of appeals, in overturning Feingold¹s conviction, ruled that while he clearly acted in a manner indifferent to the well-being of his neighbors, it was likely that he did not intend to hurt anyone but himself. In the ruling, Justice G.B. Smith wrote that the court ³cannot conceive that a person may be guilty of a depraved indifference crime without being depravedly indifferent.²
The court ruled that an investigator¹s take on the crime scene in fact exonerated Feingold. ³The fact-finder here went out of his way to explain that Œthis defendant was a plainly depressed individual, who committed an extremely reckless and foolish act not because of his lack of regard for the lives of others but because of his focus upon his troubles and himself. ... While being reckless, the defendant's state of mind was not one of extreme wickedness, or abject moral deficiency, or a mischievous disregard for the near certain consequences of his irresponsible act.¹ Thus, the fact-finder actually pronounced defendant innocent of the core criminal element, depraved indifference.²
The ruling had implications in the Heidgen case, because while Heidgen¹s actions resulted in the deaths of two people, prosecutors had to prove that Heidgen knew but did not care that his actions would likely result in harm to others. In effect, prosecutors had to ask jurors to read Heidgen¹s mind.
But, Rice explained, Heidgen¹s own words and deeds helped the jury get over that hump. Shortly after the accident, he reportedly told investigators he was ³in self-destruct mode² and was looking to find a violent end. Investigators estimated that Heidgen drove three miles in the wrong lanes of the Meadowbrook before hitting the limousine, and that the distance established his depraved state of mind. ³If he had just come off the entrance ramp and hit the limo, this might have been manslaughter,² she said.
Heidgen¹s lawyer, Stephen LaMagna, said he will ask that the verdict be set aside. ³Feingold was the latest decision curtailing the applicability of depraved indifference murder,² LaMagna said Monday. ³I believe the court of appeals will reverse [Heidgen¹s conviction] based on the Feingold appeal."
And Matthew Brissenden, a criminal defense attorney based in Garden City, said that such razor-thin points of law can be lost on a jury in a case as dramatic as this one. ³The verdict may be understandable given the extremely emotional nature of the facts and testimony,² Brissenden said Tuesday. ³But at the end of the day, the court of appeals may disagree with the legal analysis."
Rice vowed to work with the state Legislature to create new categories of murder to make it easier for prosecutors to get murder convictions against drunk drivers who kill. State Sen. Charles Fuschillo, whose district includes the section of the Meadowbrook where the crash occurred, confirmed on Monday that he was working on such legislation.
³I anxiously await my meeting with [Rice] to give her and other D.A.s the necessary tools to combat this epidemic of drinking and driving,² Fuschillo said.
Mike Schnitzel contributed to this story. Comments about it? DMiller@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 213.
