Networked Knowledge - Media Report

This version of the report has been prepared by: Dr Robert N Moles

DNA Homepage
Go to: A state of Injustice - table of contents
Go to: Losing Their Grip - The Case of Henry Keogh - table of contents

On 8 June 2008 Maunette Loeks of ZWire reported “Judge to weigh DNA in Boppre case”.  

She said defense attorneys claim evidence would clear convicted murder.

A Scotts Bluff County judge will weigh the relevance of DNA recovered from evidence in a murder case prosecuted 20 years ago. A jury convicted Jeff Boppre, 44, two counts of first-degree murder in the Sept. 19, 1988, murders of Richard Valdez, 25, and his pregnant girlfriend, Sharon Condon, 19. In March 2005, Boppre and his defense attorneys filed a motion seeking additional forensic testing on items recovered during the investigation in May 2005, saying that DNA evidence would clear Boppre of the murders.

On Tuesday, Scotts Bluff County Judge Randall Lippstreu listened as Boppre's attorneys Jeff Mowbray, of the Nebraska Commission on Public Advocacy, and Omaha attorney Lawrence Whelan presented evidence. Former Scotts Bluff County Attorney Doug Warner, who was among the original prosecutors in the case, submitted evidence for the state. Warner, who now serves with the attorney general's office, has been appointed as a special prosecutor in the case. Prosecution and defense opinions on evidence that is relevant to the defense's motion to seek DNA testing were at issue during the hearing. DNA testing of evidence is allowed under a 2005 state law that allows defendants to seek additional tests to produce evidence that a person was wrongfully convicted of a crime.

Boppre and his attorneys sought testing of jeans recovered from Kenard Wasmer, a key witness during Boppre's trial. Wasmer testified that Boppre spoke about killing Condon and Valdez. During previous attempts to seek new trials in the case, the defense has also tried to link the jeans to another witness, Alan Niemann, who testified that he waited outside in Boppre's car as the couple was killed. In its current motion for DNA testing, Boppre's attorneys drew from evidence that it acknowledged is part of case files, such as transcripts from a preliminary hearing and documents submitted by investigators to log evidence and have it tested. Warner argued that arguments regarding DNA statutes only allow the court to consider evidence that had been presented during the trial. He said only "evidence that resulted in a verdict of guilty" is allowed to be considered, and other evidence would be outside of the record and scope of the trial. Mowbray argued that the entire case is allowed to be considered "because if this evidence would have been presented to a jury and DNA would have been available at that time, another outcome might have been found. It may have resulted in a different verdict by the jury."

Some of the defense attorneys' presentation on Tuesday laid the groundwork for future arguments it plans to present, Mowbray acknowledged. In court motions and in submitting evidence during the hearing, the defense has presented a theory that another person, a cousin of Sharon Condon and friend of Richard Valdez, killed the couple. The defense presented an affidavit from Moreno, who claims in the sworn statement that she was hiding underneath a bed during the shootings. Moreno, who was a high school student at the time, claims that she heard Condon's cousin, John Yellowboy, in the home at the time of the shooting.

The defense has filed a second motion for additional DNA testing, seeking to test hairs recovered from the home and tennis shoes that belonged to Nieman. Mowbray says that the tennis shoes appear to have blood on them and the hairs would confirm the statements of Melissa Moreno, now known as Melissa Archibeque. The defense claims that the hairs belong to Yellowboy. Defense attorneys claim that further testing of evidence in the case will exonerate Boppre, or at the very least, result in a new trial. Mowbray said that evidence and photographs from the scene substantiate Moreno's current statement, despite her previously recanting statements during the initial investigation." "The bottom line is that we know Jeff Boppre was not there," Mowbray said after the hearing. "Who all was there and what did happen, we don't know."

A series of motions have been filed as part of the case, including motions for post-conviction relief, motions for a new trial and motions to remove Warner as an attorney in the case. Lippstreu reiterated Tuesday that he plans to deal with each motion in the order that they were filed. With that in mind, attorneys on both sides will have time to file additional motions relating to DNA testing and discovery. Lippstreu scheduled a telephonic hearing for Oct. 3.

Top of Page