SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases
SUPREME JUDICIAL COURT DIRK GKEINEDER - Mass Cases
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
1. Rebeiro's trial testimony was false, and<br />
her recantation was credible.<br />
There can be no doubt that Rebeiro' s recantation was<br />
honest and reliable. She would not have volunteered her<br />
affidavit, exposing herself to professional embarrassment<br />
and potentially imperiling the conviction, unless it were<br />
true. Moreover, Rebeiro's recantation is strongly<br />
corroborated by Bodziak's affidavit, the catalyst<br />
prompting Rebeiro to change her tune. In sum, this Court<br />
should credit Rebeiro' s recantation and conclude that her<br />
trial testimony that Greineder's heel mark was adjacent<br />
to a drag mark leading to Ms. Greineder's body was false.<br />
2. Rebeiro's erroneous trial testimony<br />
seriously prejudiced the defense.<br />
The connection between Greineder' 6 alleged heel mark<br />
and the drag mark found near Ms. Greineder's body was a<br />
key part of the Commonwealth's case. The "heel mark" was<br />
discussed by the prosecutor in his opening, addressed at<br />
length by Rebeiro, and emphasized in the prosecutor's<br />
closing argument. The significance of this evidence was<br />
clear - if the jury believed Rebeiro' s uncontradicted<br />
testimony about Footprint #7. it could conclude that<br />
Greineder had dragged Ms. Greindex's body to its final<br />
resting place and thus, almost certainly, was her killer.<br />
The prosecutor also used this false testimony to<br />
undermine Greineder's credibility and suggest that he had<br />
31