Trending
YOUNGSTOWN -- Mahoning County Common Pleas Judge Maureen Sweeney on Monday issued a continuance in the retrial of Robert L. Moore for murder until Aug. 21, following a dispute between the prosecution and defense over an expert witness.
Court officials did not say what the witness's testimony would entail.
Earlier Monday morning, in a pretrial hearing about the admissibility of a polygraph issued in 2014 to a material witness, Sweeney told both sides she was not inclined to continue the trial that day. Sweeney appeared to favor the state's argument that the polygraph evidence should not be admitted as evidence in the case.
Moore, 53, is charged with murder in the 2009 disappearance of Glenna White, 16. A jury in Sweeney's courtroom found Moore not guilty of aggravated murder last year but could not agree on the charge of murder, and prosecutors elected to retry the case on that charge.
The polygraph evidence defense attorney Lou DeFabio wants to introduce is from an examination of a man who was dating Glenna's mother at the time of the girl's disappearance, conducted by the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation.
DeFabio has argued that polygraph examiner Michael LoPresti found deception in the man's answers to questions about whether he knew what happened to Glenna. DeFabio told the court last week that he wants to use the polygraph results for cross examination of that witness and law enforcement officers on the case.
Polygraph results are not commonly admitted in court, as they have been found to scientifically invalid in determining honesty or deception. They have been allowed in Ohio in the past under very specific conditions, but Sweeney indicated to both sides on Monday that she did not believe those conditions had been met in this case.
DeFabio said he believes LoPresti could explain why the 2014 test should be admitted into evidence in Moore's trial
Sweeney asked why the defense did not have LoPresti available to address the court at Monday's hearing.
The hearing also addressed possible plea agreements the state and defense had discussed. The state offered Moore the opportunity to make an Alford plea, whereby he would plead guilty while being allowed to maintain his innocence. Under the terms of that agreement, Moore would serve five years in prison.
Moore rejected the offer, and the defense countered with a plea that would see Moore released with credit for time served, which was rejected by the state.
dpompili@vindy.com