Dennis Oland’s defense team will not nominate Richard Oland’s mistress or her now estranged husband as possible alternative suspects for his death by beating in 2011, a retrial of the murder case heard on Tuesday.
The defense will not argue that the investigation conducted by St. John’s police against Diana Sedlacek’s husband, Jiri Sedlacek, was also inadequate, said lawyer Michael Lacy at the royal court court.
He made statements opposing the Crown calling Jiří Sedlacek a witness.
Sedlacek testified at Olanda’s first trial in 2015 and faced tough cross-examination protection.
But Lacy objected to his response to the retrial of the case of Oland on charges of second-degree murder.
“We believe that his testimony is irrelevant … and has no evidential value," Lacy told Judge Terrence Morrison.
The judge thought for about an hour before agreeing and declaring Sedlacek’s evidence unacceptable.
Oland, 50, is being tried for the death of his father after the Court of Appeal overturned his sentence in 2015, citing an error in the jury instructions of the first instance judge.
He is the last of those who saw his millionaire father alive when he visited him in his office July 6, 2011 around 5:35 pm
The next morning, the office found the corpse of a 69-year-old man, who had 45 wounds inflicted with a sharp and blunt blow to the head, neck and hands.
The re-trial is scheduled to resume on Wednesday at 9:30 am, according to the testimony of an unidentified Crown witness, followed by video recordings of the judicial video analytics from the first trial.
On Tuesday, Lead Crown Prosecutor P.J. Venio argued that it was important for the court to hear from Jiri Sedláček, because in order to convict Dennis Olanda, the judge must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt.
"Who has more motives than an abandoned husband?" said Veniot.
Sedlachek’s permission to testify would give the court the opportunity to hear him say: “It was not me, I wasn’t there, I didn’t,” the prosecutor said.
This also disproves the defense's claim that the police had tunnel vision to focus on Oland as a suspect for several hours, Venioot claimed.
Sedlacek said that in the first trial, he had nothing to do with the death of Richard Oland, and he found out about his wife’s case only 15 months later, when his lawyer shared a message with him in the media.
He admitted that he would be “very upset” if he knew that his wife had been cheating on him for 24 years, but insisted that he had no idea.
Sedlacek, who retired in 1988 as director of corporate planning for Bata Shoes, and was about 84 years old at the time of the murder, was twice questioned by St. John’s police and expelled as a suspect.
During the first trial, Alan Gold’s defense attorney indicated that the police had never asked for Sedlacek’s bank or phone records or GPS for his car.
On Tuesday, Morrison said that if the judge and jurors tried to judge Olanda, then the “jury” might be tempted to participate in the wrong assumptions that [Sedlacek] would be implicated in the murder. "
But he stressed that he was listening to the case alone, and did not see any evidence involved in any of the Sedlacek in the murder of Oland.
Lacey assured the court that the defense did not intend to nominate Sedlacek as possible alternative suspects.
In his decision, Morrison said that if the defense tries later on during the trial to bring any such evidence or to ask the court to draw such a conclusion, the Crown can make a motion to refute the evidence.
The hostess was never questioned by the defense.
Diana Sedlacek also did not take a position at the re-meeting.
The defense did not object to the Crown filming a video tape on Tuesday about her testimony in the first case of Oland in 2015, instead of urging her to testify again.
His lawyers did not cross-examine Sedlachek on the first test – a decision that surprised many observers in the then courtroom, because she is the key witness in the Crown case.
Prosecutors use a series of text messages and phone calls between the couple to set a timeline when Richard Oland was killed.
The crown claims that it was around 6:30 pm, shortly before the defendant left his father’s office. The defense, however, suggests that it happened sometime after 7:30 pm, when Anthony Shaw told police he heard a knock at the office. At about the same time, Dennis Oland was captured in a video taken with the guards, and made purchases with his wife in Rotsey, about 15 minutes away.
Impatience went into a panic
Richard Oland and Diana Sedlacek exchanged several messages earlier in the day, mainly in connection with their trip. joint planning in Portland, Maine, heard in the courtroom.
According to Sedlacek, they have been in a "romantic relationship" for about eight years.
At 6:44 pm, her text, "Are you there ??" remained unanswered. She tried to call him, and then rewritten again at 7:19 pm. "You turned off your phone !! Why !!!!!! ??????"
She believed that he had turned off his phone, because during the call he went to voice mail.
Mobile phone entries would later show that the text was the last message received by Richard Holland's cell phone. He hit a cell tower in Rotsey, not far from the harbor Renfort, where Dennis Oland told the police that he stopped on the way home to visit his father.
"I [have] many men who would like 2 b with me !!!!!! Stop that [expletive] around! And answer this damn phone! I [will] Call your house, ”wrote Sedlacek, referring to the house of Rotsey, which Oland shared with his wife Constantia.
The next morning, when Sedlacek still could not get to Oland, her impatience turned into panic, she said. She "corresponded, called, prayed."
When she saw the police outside his office and towed his car, she felt that something terrible had happened, but did not know what. She thought he might have a heart attack, she said.
When Denis Oland was questioned by the police on the same day, he suggested that Sedlacek might have a reason to harm his father.
“The only person who comes to mind is the intended friend, because she really seemed ridiculous. For example, they call her Lady Dragon.
On the mobile phone? Follow our blog dedicated to the case of Hollande