This story beforehand aired on July 2, 2016.
Seven years after she shot her husband of their suburban front room, Linda Duffey Gwozdz was in a Los Angeles County courtroom denying, as strongly as she might, that she is a murderess.
“This was a horrible accident,” she cried in courtroom, along with her late husband’s relations wanting on. “I wish and pray constantly that I could be able to take away your pain, but I can’t.”
This case shouldn’t be a whodunit; it’s extra of a why’d she do it? Linda admitted she shot her husband, Patrick Duffey, in 2007, however she mentioned it was an terrible, and unlikely, accident. She has needed to persuade authorities that reality may be stranger than fiction, as a result of her authorized protection has featured, amongst different issues, a solid of cartoon characters.
Her lawyer used the phrases of Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd to elucidate her actions as he insisted she is harmless.
Linda talked to police voluntarily and with out a lawyer simply hours after the capturing:
Linda Duffey to police: It was pointed down … and the following assume I do know, his head was proper there! … he was simply laying there!
Shaun McCarthy and Shannon Laren are veteran murder detectives with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Division for 13 years. Forgive the cliché, however they actually did assume they’d just about seen all of it.
Then, on April 26, 2007, they received a name a few capturing on the Duffey’s home in suburban Whittier:
Linda Duffey to 911: My husband was gonna go capturing … and I by chance shot him. We want assist.
911 operator: OK, keep on the road with me ma’am …
The detectives discovered Patrick Duffey useless on the sofa; his left hand was in his pocket.
“And his right knee was being supported by a pillow. Very comfortable, relaxed,” Sgt. Laren informed “48 Hours” correspondent Richard Schlesinger.
There was blood pooled on the ground and splattered on the wall.
“There was a pretty good sized blood puddle…” Laren mentioned, pointing to the ground on the finish of the sofa the place Patrick Duffey’s head rested.
“Clearly he had a gunshot wound to the head,” mentioned Lt. McCarthy.
The couple’s two teenage sons, Sean and Thomas, had been at college, so Linda was the one surviving witness. Det. Laren had a humorous feeling.
“It looked like he’d been sleeping on the couch,” he mentioned, “and somebody just walked up and shot him in his sleep.”
“I was leaning … that this was an accident,” mentioned McCarthy.
Detective McCarthy has been investigating murder instances for about 13 years and is aware of methods to spot even the tiniest clues. He noticed little or no that made him suspicious.
“Did you guys disagree frequently on cases?” Schlesinger requested the detectives.
“I disagree with all of my partners on every case,” McCarthy replied.
“How does that work?” Schlesinger requested.
“I think we kind of wait until we have more information,” mentioned Laren.
“I wanted to hear her story,” mentioned McCarthy.
“She was very entertaining … loved to tell stories,” mentioned Julie Prendergast, who has been listening to Linda’s tales since they first turned buddies in a university music program within the Nineteen Eighties.
“She said, ‘Well, actually I’m from Ireland,” Prendergast mentioned. “And she started talking with what I thought was a pretty phony accent. …That was my first indication that Linda was a little bit different.”
Prendergast mentioned Linda may very well be irreverent, even goofy.
“I would … say, ‘Linda … I’m gonna tell you something and you’re gonna want to laugh, but we’re in class right now so don’t laugh out loud.’ And it would just pop out anyway,” she mentioned.
“She said, ‘I’m so excited. I’m getting married, and I’d like you to be in my wedding!’” she mentioned.
Linda and Patrick Duffey on their wedding ceremony day
Pam Nylen
The groom was a person Linda had met 4 years earlier: Patrick Duffey, a radio engineer, gun fanatic, and personal pilot.
“She just said it was like her dream come true and she couldn’t be happier,” mentioned Prendergast.
Patrick’s sister, Katherine Hunt, mentioned he and Linda had been soul mates and playmates.
“They seemed happy as a family. …They understand each other,” she defined. “They were kidding with each other, joking with each other.”
Linda Duffey to police: We’re simply all the time simply joking round with one another and fooling around and having time…
And it was that silliness that turned a cornerstone of Linda’s story when she defined to police what occurred the day she killed her husband:
Linda Duffey to police: And I got here into the household room and he was sitting on the couch…
She mentioned that they had simply come again from a health care provider’s appointment. Patrick had persistent circulation issues. Linda mentioned he’d been planning to go to the capturing vary. His .38, one among three revolvers he stored in the home, was close by.
Linda Duffey to police: We hold it on this little locked field…
Linda informed police she normally stayed away from the weapons. However that day, she picked up the .38.
“And the story got stranger as it went on,” mentioned McCarthy.
Linda Duffey to police: We do that little foolish factor. We all the time type of relate little foolish conversations to, like, cartoons that we’ve seen after we had been youthful and stuff. And he does this foolish little Elmer Fudd voice: “No more buwwets.”
“And she claims she said to him, ‘No more buwwets?’ in Elmer’s Fudd’s voice,” McCarthy defined. “And she said his response was, ‘No more buwwets.’”
Linda Duffey Gwozdz and the story of Elmer Fudd
01:44
Linda mentioned it was a recreation they performed on a regular basis. And when her husband mentioned ‘no more bullets’ in his Elmer Fudd voice, she took it to imply the gun was empty; that it was protected to strive one thing Patrick had taught her.
“She said that she then wanted to impress him by showing him she can shoot it cowboy style,” mentioned McCarthy.
It’s known as fan firing, and any fan of westerns is aware of it; you maintain the set off down and hold pulling again the hammer so the gun fires rapidly.
Linda Duffey to police: He informed me there was no bullets within the gun.
She mentioned as soon as she began fan firing, she couldn’t cease in time to keep away from hitting her husband, who leaned into the road of fireside.
Linda Duffey to police [crying]: …and the following factor I do know he —his head was proper there.
“The statement about the fan firing, it just didn’t sound right,” mentioned Laren.
However his associate, Lt. McCarthy, who had heard his share of loopy explanations from suspected killers, listened to that panicked 911 tape, listened to Linda’s story and concluded the story was simply wacky sufficient to be true.
“The overwhelming feeling that I got from her was she was odd at best and eccentric at worst,” he mentioned.
After the detectives interviewed Linda for an hour, they let her go residence.
“When you left work that day did you have in your mind that she was a suspect?” Schlesinger requested McCarthy.
“No,” he replied.
His intestine informed him Linda was harmless, however he’d want extra. He’d want science.
IS FACT STRANGER THAN FICTION?
When he first studied the scene the place Linda Duffey killed her husband, Det. Shaun McCarthy was fairly certain it was an accident. He believed her story that she had reenacted their favourite Bugs Bunny cartoon after which fan fired the gun.
And when he talked to Linda later that day, she mentioned nothing that made him doubt her:
Lt. McCarthy: Begin with if you received up this morning
Linda Duffey: It’s my fault.
Lt. McCarthy: No, it’s not your fault. … it’s simply that we have to perceive …
Patrick Duffey
Detectives Laren and McCarthy had been starting to grasp extra about what occurred contained in the Duffey residence, particularly after they talked to the health worker, who had simply performed an post-mortem on Patrick Duffey.
“There was a second gunshot wound,” mentioned McCarthy.
Linda Duffey claimed this was an accident, however she had shot her husband within the head not as soon as, however twice. Consider it or not, even seasoned investigators can miss that type of clue on the crime scene.
“You could not see the second gunshot wound?” Schlesinger requested.
“Because dry blood and the amount of blood and coagulated blood … we weren’t privy to the second gunshot wound,” mentioned McCarthy.
“What did you make of that?” Schlesinger requested.
“Well, it’s — it certainly was a red flag,” McCarthy replied.
But it surely was not only a crimson flag for McCarthy’s associate, Shannon Laren. It was extra like a vibrant crimson arrow pointing proper at Linda Duffey.
“There was so many highly improbable events that would’ve had to have all lined up for this to actually have been an accident,” he defined. “They didn’t line up.”
Nonetheless, McCarthy was not satisfied. “Why didn’t you just say this has got to be murder?” Schlesinger requested.
“Because I needed to be convinced myself that this was murder,” McCarthy replied. “The last thing in the world I wanna do is send an … innocent person to prison for the rest of their lives.”
It wasn’t sufficient for McCarthy to know what occurred. He wished to know why it occurred.
“We struggled to find a compelling motive. And we looked. And we looked. And we looked,” he mentioned.
However they couldn’t actually discover one. The Duffeys gave the impression to be a mean center class household dwelling within the Los Angeles suburbs. There was a life insurance coverage coverage on Patrick, however they’d purchased it a long time earlier. There was no proof of dishonest. And contemplating her persona, McCarthy couldn’t simply dismiss Linda’s story.
“It’s like, ‘OK, maybe this could’ve happened the way she says, ’cause she’s so quirky and eccentric,” he mentioned.
But it surely was about to get slightly tougher for McCarthy to consider Linda’s story due to Tracy Peck, a firearms professional for the sheriff’s division who was introduced into the case by McCarthy and Laren.
Bear in mind, in accordance with Linda, she fired the way in which they did within the motion pictures. It’s doable to do this fairly simply — with the proper of gun.
The weapons used within the cowboy motion pictures had been single-action weapons. You’ll be able to simply hold firing rapidly by pulling and releasing the hammer whereas the set off is held again.
“When the hammer is fanned, the cylinder will rotate with this type of gun. So it will fire the cartridges in the chambers of the cylinder as its being fanned,” Peck demonstrated.
The Duffeys had two single-action revolvers in the home. However the gun Linda used to shoot her husband was not one among them. It was a double-action revolver — and there’s an enormous distinction.
“The shooter simply pulls the trigger, which accomplishes both cocking the hammer and releasing the hammer. And the gun will fire,” Peck demonstrated.
To fast fireplace a double-action revolver, the shooter has to do all types of issues on the proper time and in the appropriate sequence.
Requested if that sort of gun is designed to be fired that means, Peck mentioned, “No.”
“For the purposes of this case, I essentially invented a way in which I would conceivably fan this. That included pulling the trigger, releasing the trigger, fanning the hammer, pulling the trigger, releasing the trigger, and fanning the hammer, but doing it pretty quickly,” Peck demonstrated.
And Peck mentioned it’s very exhausting to purpose whereas doing all that. She mentioned the sudden, deafening noise of the gun, and the recoil, would have alarmed Linda if she didn’t know the gun was loaded.
In keeping with Peck, it might have been subsequent to not possible for Linda, who claimed to be an beginner, to shoot her husband twice, quickly accidentally — particularly for the reason that wounds had been so shut collectively.
“I don’t find it a very believable story,” she informed Schlesinger.
How far-off was the gun from Patrick Duffey?
01:52
“I still wanted to believe her,” McCarthy mentioned of Linda. “But it clearly couldn’t have gone down the way that she said it went down.”
By now, Detective McCarthy was all however sure that Patrick Duffey’s demise was no accident, however the two detectives felt they didn’t have sufficient to show it. Due to a heavy workload — it took two years — however in January 2009, McCarthy and Laren introduced Linda again in for an additional chat.
The dialog was recorded:
Linda Duffey to police: He confirmed me methods to do it actually quick. He goes, “You gotta do it like the cowboys.”
“Well, in the second interview — I think we were both convinced that this was a murder,” mentioned McCarthy.
How exhausting is it to fan fireplace a double-action revolver?
01:35
The detectives confirmed her a video of Tracy Peck fan firing the gun.
“I think she was certainly surprised when we explained to her how difficult it would be,” McCarthy mentioned. “I could tell the light bulb went on in her brain. And she said… I gotta at least change the story a little bit.”
Linda now mentioned she and her husband had practiced fan firing with an unloaded revolver for years:
Linda Duffey to police: Perhaps like, yeah, 15, 20 instances.
Requested if he believed her this time, McCarthy informed Schlesinger, “No.”
However the detectives wished to provide Linda one final probability to point out them how she fired the gun. They made her an uncommon provide.
“Meet us at the range. We’ll bring an exact replica and show us how you can fire this gun in the manner that you said,” mentioned McCarthy.
The detectives had been sure Linda wouldn’t kill once more, so that they let her go residence once more and waited to listen to from her about their provide. Days become weeks, then months, and life went on on the murder bureau.
“We changed partners,” Det. Laren mentioned. “And when that happens, you start getting new cases. …And other cases start falling through the wayside.”
Because the years handed, Linda might need thought she was off the hook, however her previous was about meet up with her.
“The district attorney said, ‘I’m gonna file this case. And you need to go get her,’” mentioned McCarthy.
A NEW LOOK AT THE CASE
“She was incoherent,” Hunt recalled. “And I said, ‘What happened?’ ‘He was cleaning his gun, and it accidentally went off.’”
Linda informed police that she had shot Patrick accidentally, however later that evening she informed his siblings he’d shot himself.
“Could you picture him having that kind of an accident? ” Schlesinger requested Hunt.
“No, absolutely not,” she replied. “We were raised with guns.”
“And we were taught to empty our … weapons before even entering the house. And that was like the number one rule,” mentioned John Duffey.
“It was hard to believe that he had done something like that,” mentioned Hunt.
And Hunt realized she was proper the day after Patrick died, when she met Linda on the funeral residence.
“I said, ‘Where was he shot?’ And she went like this. Just like that,” she mentioned, tapping the highest of her head. “That’s when it hit me that he didn’t shoot himself… I said, ‘So tell me what really happened’ … she said, ‘Oh, you’re gonna hate me, you’re gonna hate me.’ … I said, ‘No, I’m not gonna hate you, but I need to know what the truth is.’ …And I said, ‘Did you shoot my brother in the head?’ And she said, ‘Yes.’”
It was there, within the funeral residence the place Hunt first heard the story of Elmer Fudd.
“Pat had told her, ‘No bullets.’ Like, ‘No buwwets,’ like — like Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd, because they would talk in cartoon characters sometimes,” Hunted laughed. “She thought the gun wasn’t loaded, and it went off. …I couldn’t quite understand why she had lied. If it was an accident, it was an accident. But she had lied to us.”
However police nonetheless needed to show she had lied to them about why she shot him. Detectives had interrogated her twice, and launched her twice. The second time they let her go they’d made that uncommon provide to satisfy her on the firing vary.
“We even told her, ‘it can be at your convenience,’” mentioned McCarthy.
They weren’t shocked once they didn’t hear again from her and a number of other months later they stopped by the Duffey’s home and noticed a “For Sale” signal. Her sons had been residence.
“And they said … ‘She’s on her honeymoon in Italy,’” mentioned McCarthy.
Two years after the capturing, Linda Duffey was Linda Gwozdz — newly married to Lawrence Gwozdz, a world class saxophone participant.
“When we Googled him, he was playing in Carnegie Hall,” mentioned McCarthy.
And as soon as once more when wedding ceremony bells rang, so did Julie Prendergast’s telephone.
“She asked me would I sing in that wedding. And I said, ‘What?’” Prendergast mentioned. “‘Linda, I’m not coming to your wedding. …something’s not right, surrounding the death of Patrick.’”
Prendergast mentioned she was uneasy with how Linda simply moved on.
“She dyed her hair blonde. She was wearing different style of clothes. She seemed to be walking on air, on clouds, like oh, just as happy as can be,” she mentioned.
A yr after capturing her first husband, Linda met Gwozdz on-line. She moved to Mississippi the place her new husband was a music professor. She was out of sight, however for detectives Shannon Laren and Shaun McCarthy, she was not out of thoughts.
“Did you forget about this case? Was there a period of time where -” Schlesinger requested the detectives.
“Oh, no. Absolutely not,” Lt. McCarthy replied.
When their workload with their new companions permitted, McCarthy and Laren every turned their consideration again to Linda. They wished to take a brand new have a look at the blood proof with a brand new professional, Paul Delhauer. He studied the photographs and police studies and concluded Linda needed to be mendacity. Based mostly on her statements, police believed Linda was claiming that she had fired rapidly and from the identical spot.
“She moved and the — the relative position of the gun to the head changed,” mentioned Delhauer.
Blood spatter on Linda’s shirt
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept.
Standing subsequent to the sofa the place Duffey died, Delhauer mentioned the blood proof informed him loads — particularly the tiny stains on Linda’s clothes and the partitions, known as spatter, which he says got here from the primary shot.
“The barrel has to be within about three inches of the head in order to produce the spatter,” he defined.
Delhauer mentioned the second shot created a big pool of blood on the ground — within the actual spot the place Linda mentioned she was standing.
“…she would’ve been getting jets of blood hitting her,” Delhauer identified.
Requested if Linda had any blood on her, Laren mentioned, “Very little. Very, very little.”
Police thought they now had proof that Linda was mendacity — she didn’t have sufficient blood on her after the capturing to assist her story. Laren and McCarthy thought they knew what actually occurred.
“She took aim, fired one round while he was sleeping … realized he wasn’t dead … comes back on target, fires the second round, and that’s why they’re within two inches of each other,” mentioned McCarthy.
They consider Patrick’s demise wasn’t an accident; it was an execution. By 2012, the brand new prosecutor assigned to the case was keen to maneuver forward. And police started speaking to Linda’s co-workers.
“Boy, that was very revealing,” McCarthy mentioned. “They consistently talked about how … she was so charming. But then as time went on, they started finding out that she was this compulsive liar.”
And Julie Prendergast had just a few tales to inform about her one-time good friend’s report when it got here to telling the reality.
“We all have one gallbladder. Linda had hers removed three times,” Prendergast mentioned. “Linda just always needed — seemed to want to have attention.”
It was sufficient for McCarthy. “I became absolutely convinced that we need to prosecute her,” he mentioned.
Lastly in Might 2012, 5 years after Patrick Duffey’s demise, Lt. McCarthy flew to Mississippi the place Linda and her new husband had been dwelling in a cushty residence and he or she had gotten a job on the college.
“You knock on the door,” Schlesinger mentioned to McCarthy. “What’s her reaction?”
“Her reaction was … ‘I thought the investigation was all over,’” he replied.
The investigation wasn’t over. McCarthy arrested Linda Duffey Gwozdz for homicide. And everybody was in for some surprises.
LINDA DUFFEY GWOZDZ GOES ON TRIAL
Six years after Linda Duffey shot her husband to demise, she thought she was occurring along with her life with a brand new husband, a brand new home, a brand new look, and a brand new city. However now, she was occurring trial for homicide.
“Unfortunately, on this particular day, she was going to play with the gun again like she’d done so many times before and she rapid fired it into the top of his head. It was a complete accident,” mentioned her lawyer, Joseph Low.
Low argued that, based mostly partly on the phrases of Elmer Fudd — “No more buwwets” — Linda thought the .38 revolver was empty.
“Did you ever consider the possibility that this — what we’ll call a Bugs Bunny defense, for lack of a better term, could be true?” Schlesinger requested Prosecutor Legal professional Robert Villa.
“Zero percent chance it’s true,” he replied.
Robert Villa mentioned in 27 years on the job, he’s by no means seen a protection rely even partly on a cartoon.
Watching a prosecutor parrot a bunny was a primary for “48 Hours” too, however an official transcript of the cartoon needed to be made.
“Bugs is having a conversation with Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd,” Villa defined earlier than studying the transcript. “‘What do you know, no more buwwets.’ After which Bugs Bunny says ‘No more buwwets?’
“As they’re having this conversation, just as she was about to fan fire the gun, he laid down and put his own head right in front of the gun,” Villa mentioned of Linda’s account. “It’s so ridiculous.”
“You know and I know, strange things do happen,” Schlesinger famous.
“Strange things happen. This wasn’t one of them,” Villa replied. “He was asleep. She shot him in the head twice.”
“It was that simple, open and shut?” Schlesinger requested.
“For me, it was,” mentioned Villa.
But it surely wasn’t so easy for the jury. Over two weeks they heard three recordings of Linda’s statements to authorities about cartoon rabbits and cowboy fan firing. Additionally they heard days of testimony from dueling forensics consultants about whether or not Linda’s clarification made any sense in any respect. It was loads for the jury to think about.
“It was difficult,” juror Brandie Jones mentioned. “For every expert there’s another one who can tell you a different story.”
The protection questioned whether or not prosecution professional witness Paul Delhauer was actually an professional in any respect. The jurors deliberated for a day, however couldn’t attain a verdict.
“Very few of us thought the intent was there,” Jones mentioned. “So how do you convict somebody when it could have happened exactly the way she explained it?”
With a deadlocked jury, the decide had no selection and needed to declare a mistrial.
“It sends a clear message that the jury wasn’t willing to convict on murder,” mentioned protection lawyer Joseph Low.
“Were you disappointed?” Schlesinger requested Prosecutor Villa.
“I’m always disappointed when there’s no verdict, because that means I have to do it again,” he replied.
And roughly one yr later, with Linda having remained in jail, Villa was doing it once more. This time his case could be very totally different – streamlined and easy.
“He laid down on the couch,” Villa addressed the courtroom in his opening. “His wife came up to him, put a gun between one and seven inches from his head, and pulled the trigger. …Some time went by. She pulled the trigger again.”
He mentioned the Duffey’s marriage was strained and Linda thought she might need to deal with her ailing husband.
“She’s like, ‘I’m not gonna wait on this guy for the rest of his life,’” Villa informed Schlesinger.
“This was a premeditated and deliberate murder,” he informed the courtroom.
For his opening arguments, protection lawyer Joseph Low introduced his personal couch to the courtroom to current this as a easy case.
“No motive, no intent, no crime,” he informed the courtroom. “Pat was her best friend, and she was his. … One of the things they loved to do is to watch cartoons together… They were kinda goofy.”
However there are lots of facets to this trial which might be, if you’ll, offbeat.
Choose John Torribio has a status for lightening the ambiance for the jury.
“One of you asked the clerk about how the cameras work. Well, they’re only on me,” Choose Torribio joked to the jurors, who laughed in response. “I’m the star, so don’t worry.”
However issues rapidly received severe when the district lawyer took jurors again to the second proper after Linda Duffey shot her husband:
Linda Duffey to 911: My husband was going to go capturing and he was displaying me methods to use a gun and I shot him. … He mentioned there have been no bullets within the gun! …I assumed that’s what he informed me.
“It’s hard to make out some of the words ’cause she can’t even talk,” Low informed jurors about Lind;a 911 name to police.
“She sounds terrified and frantic to me. What does she sound like to you?” Schlesinger requested Villa.
“She sounds like someone who is acting,” he replied.
Utilizing the firearm to show, Tracy Peck informed the jury Linda needed to pull the set off on the gun twice to get two bullets to fireside.
“If I do not release the trigger, the cylinder will not advance,” she testified.
The large shock on this trial is what prosecutor Robert Villa leaves out.
“I ask that people’s exhibits 1 through 35 be admitted into evidence, and with that I rest,” he informed the courtroom.
“I rested my case after basically two-and-a-half days,” he informed Schlesinger.
In contrast to the primary trial, there was little or no dense forensic testimony about blood stains and, most crucially, he didn’t introduce Linda’s taped interviews with police, the place she first mentioned Bugs Bunny.
“There was no need for Bugs Bunny,” Schlesinger famous to Villa.
“No need, unless she took the stand,” he mentioned.
Villa has thrown protection lawyer Joseph Low a curve ball. For the reason that protection isn’t allowed to introduce the police interrogations except the State does first, the one means jurors will hear Linda’s aspect of the story is that if she takes the stand and exposes herself to cross examination.
“Were you hoping she would take the stand?” Schlesinger requested.
“Absolutely,” Villa replied.
“Were you ready?”
“Absolutely.”
Low started his protection with offense. His first witness was the detective who at first didn’t assume Linda was a murderess:
Joseph Low: If you’re performed asking her questions, you allowed Mrs. Duffey to go residence.
Lt. Shaun McCarthy: Right.
“Talking to her … was very convincing to me,” McCarthy informed Schlesinger. “She was eccentric and, how could she harm anybody?”
Joseph Low: You wouldn’t let anyone who you thought had simply dedicated a homicide return out on the road … Isn’t that appropriate, sir?
Robert Villa: Objection, relevance.
Choose Torribio: Sustained.
“That night I liked her. As the investigation went on, I liked her a lot less,” mentioned McCarthy.
Low tried to color a sympathetic image of Linda by calling her sons to the stand.
“She’s a very emotional, caring person,” Thomas Duffey testified.
“We were always really happy,” Sean Duffey informed the courtroom. “They liked cartoons a lot. They were always making funny jokes to each other … always poked fun at each other and stuff.”
The protection has a really large resolution to make: will Linda take the stand herself?
“And if she took the stand, we were gonna hear all about Bugs Bunny,” mentioned Villa.
Linda determined to not take the stand. Apprehensive that the jury will hear nothing about fan firing, her lawyer comes up with an concept.
“I’d like to refer the court and counsel to page 5 of the 911 transcript,” Low addressed the courtroom.
He discovered a reference to it within the 911 tape prosecutors have already launched.
“A long time ago he showed me how to pull the thing back on the top of the gun and pull the trigger it fast,” the Choose Torribio learn aloud.
So Low is allowed to name firearms professional Lance Martini, who mentioned fan firing a double-action gun like Linda claims she did isn’t so far-fetched in any case.
Lance Martini: This may be performed. It’s not overly frequent, nevertheless it definitely may be performed.
Joseph Low: Is it humanly doable to shoot multiple spherical in lower than a second? Double-action mode?
Lance Marini: Sure it’s.
“There’s no way, absolutely no way that it happened that way,” Villa informed Schlesinger.
In his closing, Villa informed jurors, “This was an execution.”
The jurors in Linda’s second trial by no means received to see any cartoons, however they did see an animation produced by the prosecutor. It’s no laughing matter; it makes an attempt to reply a lethal severe query: what occurred to Patrick Duffey?
The video animation of a girl capturing her husband within the head twice doesn’t depart a lot to creativeness, though the protection, in closing arguments, mentioned it and the remainder of the State’s case are all a fantasy.
“She accidentally shot her husband,” Low informed the courtroom. “It ain’t right, it’s not fair to guess somebody into a conviction, guess somebody into a concrete tomb.”
“It all comes down to whether it’s one word or two words from the jury,” Schlesinger commented to Villa. “Guilty or not guilty.”
“Correct,” he replied.
A TALE OF TWO JURIES
It’s been an extended street – now practically seven years since Patrick Duffey died and one yr after a jury deadlocked in his spouse’s first homicide trial. This time, the jury got here again in simply over 24 hours:
“We the jury above and titled action find the defendant Linda Doreen Gwozdz guilty of the crime of second-degree murder…”
The responsible verdict floored Linda, who collapsed whereas leaving the courtroom. It hit her lawyer exhausting, too; he waved off the digicam. For his half, the prosecutor is extra relieved than the rest.
“I’m pleased that I don’t have to try it a third time,” Villa mentioned.
“You saw how she reacted,” Schlesinger commented to Villa.
“Yes,” he mentioned. “I’ve always thought she was an actress, so, that was her moment.”
Patrick Duffey’s sister, Katherine Hunt, has waited years for today.
“That’s the first time I saw her really cry,” she mentioned following the decision. “She didn’t get away with murdering my brother.”
Linda Duffey Gwozdz addresses the courtroom at her sentencing
When it got here time to condemn Linda three months later, it was her final probability to handle the courtroom:
“I wanted to let all of you know how grieved I feel. Most of all to Patrick and — my beautiful sons, Sean and Thomas, because you lost such a loving wonderful father,” she mentioned.
Her sons strive their greatest to ask for leniency.
“If there’s anything you can do to help out with my family,” Sean Duffey mentioned in courtroom, “that’s all I can ask.”
“I believe she’s innocent, and I will until the day I die,” Thomas Duffey informed the decide.
Linda’s second husband, Larry Gwozdz, additionally appealed to the decide.
“To assert that this was a premeditated purposeful act, I’m sorry. It’s unacceptable to me,” he mentioned.
“Look at these two people, beautifully in love,” Gwozdz continued, shakily holding up a photograph of himself and Linda. “Why? Because she’s a wonderful human being … who doesn’t deserve this.”
However the decide doesn’t have a lot leeway.
“In this particular instance the law mandates 40 to life, and my oath requires that I impose that,” he mentioned.
“48 Hours” discovered it curious that one jury couldn’t agree on a verdict in any respect and a second jury convicted Linda in a day. It’s ironic, however in these two trials it’s apparently true, that, within the case towards Linda Duffey Gwozdz, much less was extra.
“48 Hours” sat down with jurors from each trials to see why one jury rapidly reached a verdict, whereas the opposite by no means did.
Bear in mind, the jury that convicted Linda solely heard the naked bones prosecution — little or no about fan firing or cartoons.
“They heard a lot more than you heard,” Schlesinger commented to the jurors from the second trial.
“And we can only make the decision based off of the evidence that we heard,” mentioned juror Danielle Wong.
The jurors from each trials — those who heard the lengthy story and those who heard it made quick — sat round our desk and contemplated: whereas much less could also be extra, is it sufficient?
“You’re putting a woman away for the rest of her life, so present everything,” mentioned Brandie Jones, a juror within the first trial, who voted not responsible.
“I think I really have to agree with Brandie. Maybe all the evidence should be presented,” mentioned Wong.
“Did you know she gave an interview to police?” Schlesinger requested.
“Uh-uh,” Wong replied, shaking her head “no.”
“Would you have liked to?” Schlesinger requested.
“I would have loved to hear what she had to say. Would that have changed my decision? Don’t know. Possibly,” Wong replied.
“If you had heard everything … do you think it would have affected the deliberations?” Schlesinger requested.
“Absolutely,” mentioned Wong.
And despite the fact that they made their resolution, a few of the jurors who convicted Linda nonetheless have questions.
“Did it bother you that they never said exactly why she did it?” Schlesinger requested.
“Um, yeah, it did,” mentioned Wong.
“How’d you get over that?”
“I’m not over it. I still wanna know!” she replied.
“When I heard the guilty verdict, I said, ‘Yay, justice is finally served,” mentioned Julie Prendergast.
Prendergast has little doubt the second jury did the appropriate factor by discovering her former good friend responsible. And he or she wonders how Linda’s life, which was as soon as so completely happy, turned so unhappy.
“I’m sad for everyone involved … Those two boys lost their father. And now, they’re losing their mother,” she mentioned. “It’s a tragic story … in every way you can think about it.”
Extra from CBS Information
