Dateline NBC - Dramatic closings in the tech exec trial. Debate over DNA analysis in a quadruple homicide. And Dennis Murphy on Amanda Knox.
Episode Date: December 5, 2024Listen to this week's episode of the Dateline: True Crime Weekly podcast with Andrea Canning. A jury in San Francisco begins deliberations in the trial of the accused killer of the Cash App co-founder.... And in suburban New Jersey, science takes center stage in the courtroom ahead of the trial of a man accused of killing his own brother and his brother's family. Plus, 15 years after the trial of Amanda Knox, Dennis Murphy reflects on the case. Find out more about the cases covered each week here: www.datelinetruecrimeweekly.comTo get new episodes every Thursday, follow here: https://link.chtbl.com/dtcw_fdlw
Transcript
Discussion (0)
Hi, good morning.
How are you?
Good. We're all excited about the tree lighting.
You're listening in to Dateline's morning meeting in 30 Rockefeller Center.
What was the motive if he was already the ex?
Great question.
Our editorial team is catching up on breaking crime news around the country.
Was this murder for hire? Did someone know that he had plans for something?
They were about to start jury selection and the attorney said,
we've had it with him.
So it's crazy.
Welcome to Dateline True Crime Weekly.
I'm Andrea Canning.
It's December 5th and here's what's on our docket.
Six years after a man was accused of murdering his brother's entire family
at their New Jersey mansion, a judge hears arguments about whether
cutting edge DNA analysis
can be used against him at trial.
What he decides has the potential to impact
all New Jersey criminal cases going forward.
In Dateline Roundup, we'll fill you in
on an unexpected twist in the case of a dentist
accused of poisoning his wife.
And the Florida woman convicted of murder by suitcase
takes the stand at her sentencing.
I didn't mean for this to happen.
To the entire planet, please forgive me.
Plus she was one of the most famous defendants in the world.
An American student abroad charged with a horrifying crime.
Fifteen years ago this week, Amanda Knox was convicted of murdering her roommate, Meredith
Kircher.
Dennis Murphy reflects on his time in Italy
covering this sensational case.
Here I was before this house that was all over the headlines
called the House of Horrors.
And it turned out to be all of that.
But first, we're heading out to San Francisco
for the final days of the trial
that's become the talk of the city and beyond.
In April of 2023, a 911 dispatcher took a call at 2.30 in the morning.
There's a male screaming help saying someone stabbed me, advised he's bleeding out.
He is outside on the street.
On that call, Bob Lee, a 43-year-old tech executive and father of two, asked for help 47 times.
He died on an operating table at San Francisco General Hospital a few hours later.
Another tech entrepreneur, a man named Nima Momeni, was arrested and charged with killing Bob.
And his trial, which we've been covering, began this October.
On Monday, the prosecution played Bob's 911 call to open their closing arguments.
There aren't any cameras in the courtroom, but Dateline producer Brittany Tom has been reporting on the trial for the past couple of months. And she joins us now to let us
know how both sides left things with the jury. Brittany, thanks for coming back on the podcast.
Thanks, Andrea.
The prosecutor beginning his closing arguments with that 911 call is pretty intense, Brittany.
Yes, the room was silent as he simply just played that 911 call.
Bob is pleading with the operator for help, and I think it was an effective way to start
closing.
His family was sitting in the front two rows, and even though some of them had heard this
call before, they were visibly very emotional.
In contrast, the prosecutor pointed out that Nima never called 911 or talked to police
about what happened, even though in his testimony, he claimed it was one of the most traumatic
experiences of his life. to police about what happened, even though in his testimony, he claimed it was one of the most traumatic experiences
of his life.
Let's remind listeners briefly, what
is the prosecution's theory of the case
as they presented it in court?
Right, so prosecutors say the evidence shows
Nima was angry at Bob because he had introduced Nima's
little sister, Kazar Momeni, to a man who
may have sexually assaulted her.
They've argued that Nima took a sister, Kazarmu Mene, to a man who may have sexually assaulted her.
They've argued that Nima took a knife from his sister's kitchen, drove Bob to a secluded
area under the Bay Bridge, stabbed him three times, then threw the knife over the fence.
Okay, the defense, of course, has a very different theory about what happened that night.
Nima and his sister had testified that Nima actually wasn't angry with Bob at all.
And Nima even said on the stand that by the time he and Bob ended up in that secluded place in the car, they
were friendly, trying to figure out where they wanted to go afterwards. He testified
he then made a bad joke and Bob flipped on him, took out a knife from his pocket. Nima
claimed that they tussled with the knife a little bit and he pushed the knife away. Eventually,
the knife went on the ground and he threw it over a fence
so Bob couldn't pick it up again.
He then said Bob walked away calmly on his phone
and he didn't look like he had any injuries at all.
A major point of disagreement between the two sides
is who brought the knife?
The prosecution is saying Neema had it
and they seem to be saying that just taking the knife
from his sister's apartment indicates that he had it. And they seem to be saying that just taking the knife from his sister's apartment
indicates that he had intent.
Yes, they said that for sure, that Neema intentionally took the knife from his sister's apartment,
then chose to drive Bob to a secluded area, a place he was very familiar with because
he had a lot of friends that lived in the area. And on top of that, even though the
defense said, oh, they were on great terms, they were friendly, the prosecutor actually argued, oh, this was actually kind of a ruse to be
chummy and pretend because he was actually very upset with Bob.
That also shows intent.
Nima's lawyer addressed the knife in his closings as well.
How did he counter the prosecution's story that it was in Nima's possession?
Nima's lawyer brought up how tiny the knife was a few times. He actually brought a cardboard
cutout of the knife and showed the jury how small it was. So the prosecution's theory
is that Nima pulled it from a set of knives at his sister's apartment. The paring knife
was missing. So the defense makes this point. Of all the knives around, he picks the smallest,
most beat up knife to commit a murder. And you know, Nima has this big jacket on. He could have concealed a cleaver if he wanted to.
So what did the defense say about how the knife got to the crime scene then?
So Nima testified that he never brought a knife, didn't have any weapons on him. And then in the
defense's closing argument, he played a new video that the jury has never seen before, a video that
the defense attorney claims the
prosecution had buried in thousands of hours of surveillance footage and it turned over.
So the video shows Bob and his friend Bo outside of a social club. This happened earlier in
the night before Bob saw Nima. And in the video, you can see Bob is using a small narrow
object to scoop what the defense is alleging to be cocaine
out of a baggie.
Nima's attorneys say that small object is actually the paring knife that was used in
the attack.
He's basically saying that Bob had that paring knife the entire night and his client had
no possession of it.
Then after court, Christa Lee, Bob's former wife, told the media that that wasn't a knife
at all.
It was actually a collar stay. It's a piece of plastic that comes inside of a men's button-down shirt.
It also can be metal. That's how Bob typically liked to do cocaine, not with a knife.
Interesting. Okay. This jury has a lot of evidence to go through, and the judge has
given them some pretty clear instructions on the charges.
Yes. So the charges range from premeditated murder, so first degree, second degree, to voluntary
manslaughter, which the judge described as basically imperfect self-defense.
And the least serious crime is involuntary manslaughter.
And then of course, there's also not guilty.
They were sent to deliberate Wednesday.
I guess it's anyone's guess how long it'll take to reach a verdict.
Yeah, we really don't know. The defense made a point stating that we all know that NEMA's
team doesn't have to prove NEMA killed Bob in self-defense. It's the prosecution that
has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that NEMA intentionally murdered Bob.
Brittany, you live in the Bay Area. What are people saying about this case, this trial?
Yeah, I mean, from the very beginning
when this case broke to even to this trial,
this has been in the headlines in the local papers.
Everyone's kind of heard about it.
I think a lot of eyes are watching.
The people in the Bay Area are curious
what the jury is gonna decide on.
Well, we will wait and see.
Thank you, Brittany.
Thanks, yeah, we'll be at the courthouse
waiting for the verdict.
Next up, when a wealthy businessman NC. Thank you, Brittany. Thanks. Yeah, we'll be at the courthouse waiting for the verdict.
Next up, when a wealthy businessman and his family were brutally murdered at their home six years ago, questions swirled about a possible hit for hire
until police arrested the man's brother.
We've got the latest from the courtroom.
For our next story, we're heading to a New Jersey courtroom where a judge is weighing
whether a prosecutor can use cutting-edge science in a disturbing quadruple murder case.
In November 2018, just a few days before Thanksgiving,
two fires broke out at the homes of two brothers, Paul
and Keith Canaro.
Paul and his family got out alive,
but his brother Keith was not so lucky.
When first responders got to his house,
they discovered that Keith had died, but not in the fire.
He'd been shot repeatedly.
His wife and two children were also dead. Tonight, an outpouring of grief for a family,
police say was targeted and murdered in their own home.
But by whom?
A week later, investigators came up with a stunning theory.
Paul Canaro had killed his brother and his family,
and then set fire not only to his brother's house,
but to his own, to cover up the crime.
He was charged with their murders and two counts of arson.
Producer Brenda Breslauer, who has been covering the case for Dateline, is here to tell us
what prosecutors believe is Paul's motive and why science is now taking center stage
in the courtroom.
Hey, Brenda.
Hi, Andrea.
So, first of all, very interesting that this involves two brothers.
What do we know about them, the Canaros, and their relationship?
Yeah, that's kind of the crux of the whole story here.
They appeared to be close.
According to press reports, Keith was the best man at Paul's wedding.
And when Keith built a tech company from scratch, he brought in his older brother, Paul. Keith
owned a mansion in Colts Neck, an affluent neighborhood in New Jersey, and he lived there
with his wife, Jennifer, and two children, 11-year-old Jesse and Sophia, who was eight.
Yeah, I've been to Colts Neck. It's an absolutely beautiful area of New Jersey. What can you
tell us about Paul? So Paul lived in nearby Ocean Township, about 12 miles away. He had a more modest home,
but he also drove a Porsche. And a family friend told NBC News that the brothers treated each other
with love and respect. Take us to the day of the fires. What exactly happened?
Okay, well, starting about 5am, police got a call from someone at Paul Canaro's home.
Our alarm just went off and my whole house was filled with smoke.
Did everyone out of the house?
Yes.
Then around 1230, two different neighbors called 911 to say they could see smoke coming out of Keith's house.
The 911 operator told one of them to walk over and check it out.
Oh my god, there's blood here. It's a corpse.
It's what?
Somebody is dead here.
It was Keith.
And what makes this story so incredibly tragic
is that it wasn't just Keith,
it was the rest of his family as well, right?
Yeah, his wife, Jennifer, and the two children,
Jesse and Sophia, were found dead inside the house.
The children had been stabbed.
And then about a week later, as you mentioned, Paul was arrested and charged with the four murders.
SONIA DARA So what exactly happened here between
these two brothers? Do we have a motive? Has the prosecution released that yet?
KATE The prosecution has said the motive was financial. According to a police document, there had
been arguments over money. And the day before the murder, Keith forwarded an email to a
family member saying money had gone missing from the businesses.
Paul Canaro was also charged with theft. How has he responded to all of this? Has he said
anything?
He has pleaded not guilty and he maintains his innocence.
The murders happened back in 2018. Six years later, the case is in court, but still not
in trial. What is happening?
I know. It's been a long time. Part of it, COVID, of course, and then some back and forth on these DNA issues.
A pretrial hearing has now been going on for three weeks. It centers on the issue of whether
the prosecution can present certain DNA evidence to the jury at the upcoming trial. The labs
used a cutting edge software called StarMix, which the defense is arguing is not reliable. I've never heard of StarMix. It sounds like something right out of a sci-fi movie. How
does it work?
It does sound like something out of a sci-fi movie. So StarMix is a computer software program
that takes a sample of DNA that may be from multiple people, a complex sample, and uses
mathematical modeling to separate them out. And it can get
results from much smaller samples of DNA. So in this case it was used to analyze
more than a dozen samples from blood-stained jeans and gloves, latex
gloves, that were found in Paul Canaro's basement after the murders. One stain on
the jeans revealed nothing
when it was examined using the traditional DNA method,
according to a prosecution expert.
But when it was run through star mix,
she was able to identify the source
as Paul's nephew, Jesse, the 11-year-old.
Is the assumption by the prosecution
that Paul thought that his jeans
and the glove would burn in the fire?
I mean, why would you leave these items in your own basement?
Right. Well, that is something the prosecutor did allege that there were two reasons for the
fires. One was to make it look like the whole family was being targeted. And the second was,
yeah, to burn the evidence.
But Paul's defense team says that Starmix can't be trusted.
Right. I've been watching the testimony and the back and forth has been quite heated.
Paul is being represented by the state public defender's office.
Their forensic experts are questioning whether enough research has been done on this software
to establish its error rates and its limitations.
And the other thing that's interesting
is they're arguing that the method
is particularly problematic when it comes to analyzing
the DNA of relatives.
There's an increased risk of a false positive.
This hearing doesn't just have implications for this case.
It goes beyond that.
That's true.
It really is a test case for the state of New Jersey.
It's being heard by one of the top judges in the county.
And what he decides has the potential
to impact all New Jersey criminal cases going forward.
Very long preliminary hearing.
When will Paul Canaro's jury trial begin?
That's projected to begin at the end of March
and last about six weeks.
Okay, thank you, Brenda,
for your insight into this disturbing case.
You're welcome.
Up next, it's Dateline Roundup.
The Florida woman convicted of leaving her boyfriend
to die in a suitcase learns her fate.
And prosecutors say the Colorado dentist
accused of poisoning his wife has a new target.
Plus Dennis Murphy remembers the Amanda Knox case.
Welcome back.
Joining me for this week's Roundup is Dateline producer, Sue Simpson. Hey Sue, welcome back. Joining me for this week's roundup is Dateline producer Sue Simpson. Hey Sue,
welcome back.
Thanks, Andrea. Hi.
Okay. First up, more stunning headlines in the case involving Colorado dentist, James
Craig. We mentioned his trial was set to begin in our last episode, but there have been a
couple of massive twists we didn't see coming. Before we get to that, just remind
people what this alleged crime is and who James Craig is.
James Craig was charged with murdering his wife, Angela Craig, by poisoning her protein
shakes back in 2023. He pleaded not guilty. And his trial was on the docket to begin this
month but on the day of jury selection, his legal team actually withdrew from the case.
Do we know why?
Well, Andrea, here's what we know.
According to the 18th Judicial District Attorney's Office,
his defense attorney said his client was persisting
in a course of action that he reasonably believed
is criminal or fraudulent.
That's a quote from the document.
And two, that his
client was insisting on action that, quote, he considers repugnant or has a fundamental
disagreement with.
The attorney didn't say what that action was, which he found so repugnant, but something
happened the next day, which could give us a clue.
That's right. So the following day, prosecutors filed two new charges against Craig, solicitation to
commit murder and solicitation to commit perjury.
He allegedly tried to persuade an inmate to commit murder for him.
Do we know who his alleged target is?
The Aurora Police Department says the intended target was an Aurora police detective who
investigated his wife's murder
case.
Major twist there. So when do we expect this trial to begin?
Great question. Court documents show the trial has been postponed indefinitely, so we shall
see.
All right. So next, we've got two sentencing's out of Florida to talk about from two big
cases we've covered on the podcast.
The first one we're going to talk about is Sarah Boone. She is the defendant in the so-called
suitcase murder trial.
Yeah. So Sarah Boone was accused of zipping her boyfriend, George Torres, into a blue
suitcase and leaving him to suffocate. Sarah pleaded not guilty and she testified on the
stand that she acted in self-defense. She alleged she'd suffered previous abuse at the hands of her boyfriend. The jury
didn't buy that and convicted her after less than two hours of deliberation.
The sentencing was earlier this week. We heard victim impact statements from
George's children and his mom.
You know my son, I love him. And I miss him a lot. My family misses him a lot, too.
And Sarah testified as well.
Sarah did, and she compared herself to a broken vase.
Kentu tsukoroi is a kind of Japanese ceramic style, which means to repair with gold.
When a ceramic piece breaks, an artisan will fuse the pieces back together again using
liquid gold or gold dust lacquer. And each piece becomes more beautiful because it has
been broken.
Sounds kind of odd.
It is odd. And Boone went on to say that all of the gold that held her together was forgiveness.
She said she forgave Torres for beating her senseless and she rattled off a bunch of other allegations
of abuse.
I didn't mean for this to happen.
Forgive me, George.
Forgive me, Torres family.
Forgive me, Judge Kranick.
To the entire planet, please forgive me.
Once Boone was finished, the prosecutor was not shy about what he thought of her testimony.
It's all about Sarah Boone. Everything's about Sarah Boone, about how she is the victim.
What was her sentence?
She was sentenced to life, life in prison.
All right. And the second big sentencing this week was Ashley Benefield. The former ballerina
was convicted of the 2020 killing of her husband, Doug Benefield.
So, Sue, what is the news there?
So, we weren't sure this sentencing was actually going to happen until a few days ago.
Remember, Benefield's team asked for a new trial based on alleged germ misconduct.
But just before Thanksgiving, the judge rejected the motion and sentencing did take place on Tuesday.
There were some victim impact statements from Doug's family.
We heard from his daughter, Eva, who's been very vocal throughout all of this.
Ashley, since the day you shot my father, I've only had one question to ask you. Why?
Did Ashley give a statement?
She did not.
All right. What did she get?
The judge sentenced Ashley to 20 years in prison with credit for time served, followed
by 10 years of probation.
Okay, lots of updates, Sue.
Thank you so much.
Lots of news.
Thank you, Andrea.
Fifteen years ago this week, jurors filed back into an Italian courthouse to deliver
their verdict in a murder trial that had captivated the world.
The victim was a 21-year-old student from England by the name of Meredith Kircher, mes
to her friends.
She had been sexually assaulted and her throat slashed in the bungalow she'd been renting
on her study abroad trip.
But it was one of her alleged killers who seemed to get all the attention in the months
that followed, Meredith's roommate, Amanda Knox.
Prosecutors said the American college student
had murdered Meredith.
Amanda's supporter said she'd been railroaded
by the Italian authorities.
Just after midnight on December 5th, 2009,
the judge read the verdict.
Amanda Knox, guilty of the murder
of her roommate, Meredith Kirchner.
Dennis Murphy covered the case from the very beginning and is here to tell us why this
case got so much attention and what happened next.
Hey, Dennis.
Hey, Andrea, how are you?
Good.
So Dennis, your first report came out in December of 2007.
So let's take a listen.
The awful crime here on Via Sant'Antonio would quickly have been forgotten
as yet another head-shaking statistic.
Sad, but not all that uncommon,
except for the authorities' chilling theory of the murder.
You flew out to Perugia, Italy, for this first report.
In fact, in that clip we just played,
you're standing outside the student housing cottage
where Amanda Knox and her roommate,
Meredith Kircher, lived.
Do you remember what was going on when you filmed that?
Oh, I so well remember standing there looking at that little building, Andrea.
Here's Perugia, this medieval beauty of a town known for making chocolate
and educating students.
And yet here I was before this house that was all over the headlines called the
House of Horrors. And it turned out to be all of that.
So remind us what exactly was the prosecution's theory about it was all over the headlines, called the House of Horrors. And it turned out to be all of that.
So remind us, what exactly was the prosecution's theory
about what happened, what they say she did?
Well, our most interesting stop on that trip,
we went to the office of the chief prosecutor
and he sat us down and he took us through
this very lurid, operatic theory of the crime.
He said there were three people involved here.
It was three on one.
It was a sex game going wrong.
Amanda Knox holding the victim with a knife under her chin,
her boyfriend of just a few days, an Italian boyfriend,
and a third man who sexually assaulted the roommate.
And it all took place in that little cottage,
the House of Horrors.
And you were getting some information from the Italian papers leaked by the prosecutor, right?
The Italian authorities leaked every bit of information
I think they had at the time,
especially to the British tabloids.
The media had a field day
when it found Amanda's MySpace web page.
Her online nickname was Foxy Knoxy.
Who was Foxy Knoxy, this young woman seen in
her high school photo playing soccer? And it was nothing more than that. That was an
allusion to her ability to play soccer. But somehow this appellation that she was known
as Foxy Knoxy became this portrayal of a promiscuous young American woman.
I mean, were you thinking how in the world does this young woman, girl get a fair trial
if all of this is out there in the public?
Exactly.
The court of public opinion had decided we've seen her in the paper every day.
What is she doing?
Giggling while she's buying lingerie with her boyfriend.
What is the story we hear about being in the police station doing cartwheels?
It all added up to a guilty on that side of the Atlantic.
Amanda changed her story at one point.
BD – She did. They bring her in and she doesn't have an attorney and she's being
interrogated by the homicide detectives in Italian. And she gives up what they said at
the time was something like a confession where she seemed to implicate herself by being in
the house. She recalled the screams of Meredith.
And the other thing that happened is that they said, who was the third man?
And Amanda Knox, under interrogation, gave up the name of her boss, the owner of a small
cafe where she part-time waitressed in town.
And she said, he was the guy.
He's your third man.
None of those things turned out to be true.
Amanda's trial, no surprise, was a complete circus.
Oh.
Cameras galore.
I wasn't in Italy at the time, but I was watching the coverage, of course, and I remember feeling
so sorry for her. She was so disturbed. Her face was just, it revealed everything that
was going on.
Yeah, the verdict. She was very dramatic. She's found guilty.
Sobbing. Sobbing at her table.
And just like that, it was over. 26 years for Amanda. 25 for her one-time boyfriend.
So much has happened since this guilty verdict. What happened next? Well, it goes
to an appeals court. And here it's very interesting because everything shifts to
Amanda Knox's favor.
They throw out all of the forensic evidence as junk science, incompetently collected and
processed.
And then there's a second trial.
And once again, she was found guilty.
And then the appellate court did something interesting.
They not only said there is not enough evidence to support a guilty verdict, they said she
did not do it.
You've got the wrong person here. So after nearly four years in prison, she was completely exonerated.
And the boyfriend?
The boyfriend was let go too.
So I think I read that she's working on some type of documentary. She went back to Perugia.
I think you could say that the events of her early 20s have really shaped the person she
is today. She's living back in Seattle, as I understand it.
She's married with children and has become a vocal advocate
for those who are wrongfully accused, wrongfully convicted.
And yes, she went back to Perugia to revisit it all.
It's not a case that she lets go.
And unfortunately for Amanda, Andrea, it's not a case
that a lot of members of the general public will let go either.
Yeah. It's like, does anyone not know the name Amanda Knox at this point?
And she doesn't deserve that. And no one really remembers the name of the victim that easily, Meredith Kurcher.
You can't call that up as easily as you can call up Foxy Knoxy.
Right. Dennis, what a fascinating story you covered. Really interesting looking back on
this. Thank you for joining us and sharing your memories.
Thank you. It's been interesting to retrieve some of these memories again.
Yeah. Thank you.
That's it for this episode of Dateline True Crime Weekly. Coming up this Friday on Dateline,
she was a murder victim without a name
until strangers gave it back to her.
To those armchair detectives and their partner,
she was as important as you or me.
It doesn't matter what walk of life you come from,
everybody's a person.
That's the way they should be treated.
Watch Keith's story, The Woman with No Name,
airing this Friday on NBC at a special time
of 10 15, 9 15 Central.
And be sure to check out Josh's brand new original podcast series, Deadly Mirage.
It's the story of a young couple living in the California desert who seemed to have it
all until the husband was found murdered and investigators uncovered a web of dark secrets.
The body lay on the shop floor,
the man's shaven head leaning against the front left tire
of a service truck.
There was a dime sized hole in his chin
and a pool of blood slowly congealing
on the concrete floor. The first two episodes are available now wherever you get your podcasts.
Dateline Premium subscribers get early access to episodes and can listen ad-free.
Thanks for listening.
Dateline True Crime Weekly is produced by Franny Kelly and Katie Ferguson.
Our associate producers are Carson Cummins and Caroline Casey.
Our senior producer is Liz Brown-Kuruloff.
Production and fact-checking help by Sara Kadir.
Veronica Mazekka is our digital producer.
Rick Kwan is our sound designer.
Original music by Jesse McGinty.
Bryson Barnes is head of audio production.
Paul Ryan is executive producer, and Liz Cole is
senior executive producer of Dateline. Okay, thanks Jane. Bye everyone.