Death on the River

Home > Other > Death on the River > Page 24
Death on the River Page 24

by Diane Fanning


  “He touched many lives and gave so much to the people around him.…

  “Vinny was a special person with a huge heart and was loved by so many people. After eighteen years of marriage, he had a special relationship with his former wife Sue. He had more friends than anyone I have ever known, and these friends are truly amazing people. In fact, during the time he was missing, they never gave up on the search for him or the support of our family. Since this tragedy occurred, they have shown their love with their ongoing messages, tributes to his life, and annual gatherings respecting his life and legacy.

  “My brother and I were very close. We talked often and were always there for each other. One of the hardest things for me, as a parent, is seeing how his death impacted my children. Vinny was very close to them and for my son, Michael, Vinny was the big brother, always including him and spending time with him. My son will forever be affected by the loss of his uncle. As for my daughter, Melissa, Vinny was the fun uncle and made her feel special. She now has a daughter and it is especially hard knowing that she will never get to meet her great-uncle, who would have adored his grandniece.

  “As for my mother, there are no words that can describe how she feels losing a child, especially her only son. This truly is one of the most devastating events a mother can go through, especially when the death is so tragic and caused intentionally by someone else. Her life will never be the same.

  “My brother did not deserve to have his life end this way. Our family feels Angelika should be held accountable for the actions she admitted to, where a short four-year sentence does not seem just. Furthermore, serving a portion of that sentence seems even more unjust. Also, we strongly believe that this injustice is brutally difficult to deal with and, in turn, Angelika, as a non-citizen of the USA, should be immediately deported upon completing her sentence.

  “… Vinny is missed every day and will never be forgotten while he remains in our hearts forever.”

  Speaking to the judge, ADA David Byrne said, “The defendant through her criminally negligent actions left the world a lesser place. Vincent Viafore was beloved. He was a good person, he was a decent person. He was a true friend.”

  Richard Portale made no comments during the sentencing session. Judge Freehill asked Graswald if she wanted to speak.

  “No, thank you,” she said.

  In his sentencing, Freehill dug in with sharp comments about Angelika. “It is apparent that you have some kind of narcissistic personality disorder. Was it removing a plug from the kayak, which appears to have been done months ago? Was it tampering with the clip on his paddle? Not really. It was the immediate acts of you being in your kayak and Vincent floundering in the water and you not taking any steps to try to help him and your failure to perceive a substantial risk.”

  Referencing the comments Angelika had made to police, the judge said that they demonstrated that “you certainly have a lack of understanding of other people’s feelings. It appears to me you have an excessive need for admiration. You exhibit such exaggerated feelings of self-worth and Vincent Viafore was the unnecessary victim of that.”

  Mentioning her two previous divorces, he said that she understood how to end “unsatisfactory relationships in a manner that would be socially and legally acceptable. You could have walked out on Vinny if you were unhappy, rather than whatever it was in your mind that led to removing the plug and the other acts you took.”

  With that, he pronounced the sentence: one and a third to four years in state prison, as agreed. With time served, only forty-two days remained in her mandated incarceration. The judge added a five-thousand-dollar fine, to which the defense objected, since it hadn’t been mentioned in the plea deal.

  Outside of the courthouse, Richard Portale read a statement that Angelika had prepared: “‘Never would I have imagined waking up one day and finding myself behind bars, charged with murdering the man I love.

  “‘The entire process has been incredibly difficult for me. I love Vince very much and miss him terribly. When we went kayaking that day, my intention was for both of us to come home. But, [from] the moment I was pulled from the water—they labeled me a defendant. I don’t believe I was treated fairly. This entire process has been incredibly one-sided and unjust. I’ve learned so much about the system. I’ve learned that you are not innocent until proven guilty. I foolishly placed my trust in people who didn’t deserve it and it cost me dearly.

  “‘I am not a murderer. I’ve said that from the beginning. If I could do anything to bring Vince back, I would.

  “‘I’d like to extend my deepest gratitude to my friends, family, and legal team who believed in me and fought against all odds for my release. And to those who haven’t even met me yet [who] showed me so much love and support.

  “‘I have now been in jail for over two years. Once I am released, I will try and put my life back together again. I’m hoping to see my sister Jelena, who had a baby while I was in jail, and to hug my mom and dad again, and mourn the loss of my grandmother who died while I was behind bars.

  “‘I hope that, with this legal battle behind us, we can all begin to heal. I send my condolences to the Viafore family and to my own family, who have had to walk this hell beside me—although from across the world. May God heal us all.’”

  Angelika’s only reference to Vince’s family was a perfunctory one—stuck at the end like an afterthought. It seemed to prove the judge’s point about the self-absorption of the woman who had just been convicted of criminally negligent homicide.

  As Mary Viafore emerged from the courthouse after sentencing, Blaise Gomez of News 12 Westchester approached her. “How are you feeling?”

  “I believe that justice was not served for my son,” she said. “We’re not happy with the sentence. It’s the law—we couldn’t do anything about it—but four years for taking someone’s life? No way.”

  By now, a flock of reporters had surrounded Mary Ann, her daughter, and her lawyer. Another reporter said, “We listened to your daughter, that must have been tough.”

  “Yes, yes, it was.”

  “What do you have to say about what she had to say?”

  “Well, she was right on the money. My son was a good man and everyone loved him,” Mary Ann said, her voice strangled with emotion. “We miss him very much and so, that’s all we have to say.”

  “One last question,” another reporter asked, “because she didn’t say anything to you. She didn’t turn around. Were you expecting it or did that not even matter?”

  “No, it didn’t,” Mary Ann said firmly. “I never want to see her again if I don’t have to.”

  A different reporter spoke up. “Out here, her lawyer read a statement on her behalf saying that she was a victim of the process, that she is not a murderer. And that she expected to come home with Vincent that day they went out kayaking.”

  As she listened, Mary Ann shook her head in disbelief. “I don’t believe a word she said.”

  Mary Ann’s lawyer stepped in. “The closing statement from the judge said it all, and that’s how we all feel. And he was just as angry as we were in this case. We believe in the American justice system and we do not believe in the sentencing of it all, but it is over and we need to go on.”

  CHAPTER THIRTY-FIVE

  Under sunny skies, with her hair pulled up in a high ponytail and wearing a gray parka, tan pants, white shirt, and white athletic shoes, Angelika Graswald walked out of the Bedford Hills Correctional Facility for Women on Thursday, December 21, 2017, about six weeks after her sentencing. With Richard Portale by her side carrying a full grocery bag, she walked over to a vehicle and climbed into the back seat. The driver placed the bag in the hatchback compartment, got up front, and drove through the jail gates.

  Once off the grounds of the incarceration facility, the vehicle parked. Portale and Angelika got out of the car and approached a wide array of microphones beside a busy street. Two women emerged from the vehicle. One pointed a camera at reporters, recording them a
s Portale read a statement to the gathered media. Angelika stood quietly by her attorney. As he spoke, she looked at the passing traffic, down at the ground, and up at Portale’s face.

  Addressing the crowd, Portale said, “Angelika is grateful to be here today. She’s grateful for this day. She’s excited to be able to reconnect with her family in a meaningful way. She plans to FaceTime with her family as soon as we can. She’s grateful to be able to breathe in the fresh air, walk in the fresh air. But, to be sure, reconnecting is going to be difficult, and reconstructing her life is going to be difficult. Her day-to-day, her reality, is much different today than it was thirty-two months ago. She’s excited to be able to do that and, at this point, we’re going to get started. So, thank you very much. We’re not going to take any questions, but I want to say, we appreciate all of you for having covered her story in a fair and evenhanded manner. We do appreciate that. Thank you.”

  The two returned to the waiting vehicle and drove away from the jail and the press. A man, who identified himself as one of Portale’s lawyers, followed in a Range Rover. He hopped from lane to lane, preventing any press vehicles from pursuing the car carrying Angelika. On his erratic journey, he cut off a school bus and stopped at a green light to foil the dogged media.

  After losing them all, Angelika and company pulled up to a white-tablecloth surf ’n’ turf eatery, the Lexington Square Café in Mount Kisco. Lawyer, client, and the two women went into a private room on the second floor, where their meal began with martinis all around. Angelika ordered a thirty-eight-dollar steak, cooked medium.

  When Angelika had pleaded guilty, Richard Portale had initially told the media that she absolutely was not going to attempt to claim Vince’s life insurance money. Now his statement was laden with uncertainty. “I can’t comment on whether she will [ever] try to collect the claim. This is still ongoing and there are so many variables pending.”

  After her release, Angelika would have to spend sixteen months on parole living in a halfway house in Orange County. The possibility of deportation hung over her head.

  * * *

  In January 2018, the amount of the insurance payout—which would have gone to Angelika if Vince’s death had been natural or by accident—was revealed to be higher than previously reported. Instead of a quarter of a million dollars, she was to receive 45 percent of the policies, for a total of $545,000.

  On January 16, Laura Rice appeared before Judge James Pagones of the Dutchess County Surrogate Court, asking that the court confirm that Angelika had forfeited her rights to any assets when she’d admitted her responsibility for Vince’s death. The judge ruled that the court was required to conduct a hearing and that Vince’s family had a burden to present “a preponderance of credible evidence” to prove that Angelika’s actions on April 19, 2015, were reckless. The legal definition of one “recklessly” causing the death of another person required that the perpetrator was “aware and consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that such a result … [would] occur or that such circumstance … [existed]. The risk must be of such nature and degree that disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation.”

  Most of the public believe that if you are found guilty of causing someone’s death you cannot benefit from it. However, there are limitations. If the court had found Angelika guilty of first or second-degree murder or manslaughter, the situation would be different. But because she’d pleaded guilty to criminally negligent homicide, she was placed in the same category as those who had committed involuntary manslaughter. The court would decide the outcome.

  The family continued to wage a legal battle to prevent Angelika from getting any proceeds from the insurance policies. They felt that Portale was doing his best to drag out the procedures, and those delays were costing them a great deal of money. They put the civil wrongful death case on hold to await the outcome of the case on the insurance, because legal costs were too expensive to pursue both at the same time.

  On January 25, 2018, in Albany, New York, Woodbury Democrat Assemblyman James Skoufis introduced a bill that would cause an automatic forfeiture of life insurance payouts when the beneficiary was determined to be guilty of any involuntary manslaughter charge, including criminally negligent homicide. If this bill was passed, the “slayer rule” that New York judges have followed since a court of appeals decision 130 years ago would finally be codified.

  In a press release, Skoufis said, “This isn’t simply a matter of finances and insurance, it’s a matter of justice. Any life insurance benefit ought to go to a loved one, not a convict who is intrinsically responsible for the person’s death. Individuals like Angelika Graswald should never see a penny of insurance money from their homicide victim’s policy.”

  The final chapter of the legal battle was settled in August 2018. It was decided that the Viafore family and Angelika would share the insurance money; the amount of Angelika’s portion was not disclosed.

  In addition, Angelika dropped the appeal of her conviction, and the Viafore family ended their wrongful death civil suit against her. The Viafores’ attorney reported that the family was “happy it was now all behind them.”

  Whatever the amount, Angelika will not directly benefit from the financial windfall. She signed over any money she would receive from the life insurance policies to her legal team. The cost of her defense exceeded $1 million.

  * * *

  In February 2018, 20/20 aired an updated story on Angelika’s case. In Richard Portale’s interview with the show, he continued to cast doubt on the state’s case. “When [… the police] realized there was a gun missing, that’s when they really cranked it up, ’cause that’s when they thought that she maybe shot him.”

  The state police investigators denied that allegation. They’d learned very quickly that the missing weapon was in the possession of Vince’s second wife, Suzanne Viafore. Had the investigators not located the gun and they suspected it was a murder weapon, they would have immediately rushed to the island with forensic experts to look for any evidence that a gun had been used there.

  On the show, Angelika once again claimed that she loved Vince and did not kill him. She took umbrage at the possibility of being deported: “It’s not right. I want to be able to choose whether I want to stay here or go.”

  When she was reminded that others thought that her light sentence meant she’d gotten away with murder, she insisted that there was no murder.

  Was this the truth or magical thinking? The only person who knows for sure is Angelika, and she has nothing to gain by admitting to anything more.

  AFTERWORD

  I wanted him dead, and now he’s gone

  and I’m okay with that.

  Angelika Lipska Graswald during her interrogation

  Everyone has an opinion on Angelika Graswald’s actions, and every one of them is different—they run the gamut from one extreme to another. Somewhere between a long, careful plan for premeditated murder to just another tragic accident, the answer lies concealed in the shadow of bias and personal perception.

  The truth is somewhere in the middle. The one extreme—an intentional first-degree homicide plot—lacks credibility because there were so many events outside of Angelika’s control. Yes, her actions with the kayak plug and the paddle ring were contributing factors, but she could not have manipulated other necessary variables, like the ferocity of the approaching storm or its ability to create sufficiently threatening rough water in the Hudson River.

  Still, the euphoria she expressed feeling at his death does indeed point to culpability.

  The defense claimed that the words caught on the interrogation tape amounted to a false confession. They insisted that their client was coerced and bullied into saying what police wanted to hear. This can be a credible claim, but it is hard to swallow in this case. From the beginning, Angelika pointed a finger of guilt at Vince, blaming his sexual proclivities, his failure to go thro
ugh with the marriage in 2014, and his controlling behavior. These words did not fly out of her mouth after hours of questioning. They erupted first on the island and again in the initial phase of the interrogation.

  The theory of accidental death doesn’t exactly hold up either. Angelika’s behavior in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy—her Facebook posts and her conversations with Vince’s friends—demonstrate that she was not just a victim who was lucky to survive a horrendous ordeal. I know everyone grieves differently and I realize that even though Angelika was in this country for years, there were cultural differences, but doing cartwheels in the backyard of Vince’s family members is not a reasonable expression of sorrow in any culture.

  Angelika’s delay of twenty minutes in calling 911 was pivotal in Vince’s death. Her admission that she deliberately overturned her own kayak when rescuers were nearby pointed to how she was willing to manipulate the perceptions of others to cover up some measure of her guilt.

  The fact that she said she removed his paddle from his reach means she was closer to him than she had tried to make it appear. If she was near enough to grab his paddle, she was in a position to offer more aid. I know many of us would do anything to help a person we loved, even at the risk of losing our own lives. Angelika, however, watched Vince struggle and die while staying safe in her kayak.

  What is the truth about the death of Vincent Viafore? We are left holding on to the mushy middle, where total culpability and blamelessness comingle to produce this outcome of a guilty plea and a far-too-short sentence.

  Angelika blamed Vince’s sexual behavior as the cause of her problems. But how much of that was real and how much was created after the fact to justify her behavior? We don’t know. A myriad of possibilities exist.

  Vince’s mother spoke about Angelika’s sexual accusations to journalist Nina Schutzman. “It makes you want to scream at her, at the world, and say, ‘That’s not true.’ Vinny was not like that. She’s just dragging him through the mud.” His sister added, “I don’t know about their sex life, and I don’t care to know about it. But I don’t believe he is the kind of person that she says he was, in that sense.”

 

‹ Prev