Southampton Arts Center, Spooktacular Haunted House
27east.com

Story - News

Deliberations in Oddone trial resume Monday with testimony reread to jury

Publication: The Southampton Press
By Michael Wright   Dec 14, 2009 2:27 PM

The jury in the Anthony Oddone murder trial apparently has decided that Mr. Oddone is not guilty of murder in the second degree but has reached an impasse on the lesser charge of manslaughter in the first degree, according to accounts of the deliberations aired in the courtroom Friday.

Meanwhile, Judge C. Randall Hinrichs denied alternating motions on Friday by defense attorney Sarita Kedia to dismiss two jurors for disobeying rules for deliberating juries, to ask the jury if they can deliver a partial verdict and to declare a mistrial in the case.

The jury returned to the courtroom on Monday morning, the ninth day of deliberations, to hear testimony from two prosecution witnesses read back by the court reporter. The testimony focuses on two eyewitness accounts of the struggle between Mr. Oddone, 27, of Farmingville, and Andrew Reister, an off-duty correction officer from Hampton Bays who was working part-time as a bouncer at the Southampton Publick House in August 2008. He was 40 when he died.

After hours of legal wrangling earlier in the day on Friday, during which Ms. Kedia suggested that the jury appears unable to continue deliberating “in any appropriate fashion,” the jury went back to its deliberation at 3 p.m. that day. Shortly before 6 p.m. on Friday, the jury foreman sent Judge Hinrichs a note asking to have the testimony of Southampton Publick House employee Austin Everhart read back to them. Another note asked for a read-back of the testimony of John Cato, a sailing instructor who witnessed the fight and testified that he had punched Mr. Oddone in the head in an attempt to get him to stop choking Mr. Reister. A final note, issued while the defense and prosecution attorneys were poring over the testimony to be read back, then asked to be allowed to adjourn for the weekend before the accounts were read.

The adjournment ended a tumultuous 24-hour stretch in the trial, which will now apparently stretch into a ninth day of deliberations and possibly beyond. On Thursday, a juror sent a note to Judge Hinrichs that the judge said included an inappropriate reference to where the jury’s deliberations stood and what the opinion of at least one of the jurors was. The judge denied a subsequent request by Ms. Kedia to have that juror dismissed and to declare a mistrial. In her argument Ms. Kedia said that “the secrecy of deliberations is the cornerstone of modern courtroom” procedure, and that it had been violated. She also made mention that the note indicated at least one of the jurors was in agreement with an inference about the facts of the case that she had made during her closing summation.

The judge then brought the jury back into the courtroom shortly after 5 p.m. on Thursday, read them the state laws regarding deliberations and instructed them that any future notes were not to contain any information about their deliberations, opinions or possible verdicts. When he was done and the jury was sent back to the jury room, Ms. Kedia again asked for a mistrial, claiming the judge’s instructions to them had steered them toward issuing a conviction. The motion was similarly denied.

On Friday afternoon, it was revealed in court that another of the jurors—Juror No. 2—had spoken to one of the two alternates, who are not involved in the deliberations, about the fact that the panel appears deadlocked, and why. The alternate juror informed the judge of what had been communicated.

Ms. Kedia asked that Juror No. 2 be dismissed for being “grossly unqualified” to be a juror. She said that the alternate specifically indicated having been told that the jury had agreed not to convict on the murder charge, but was stuck on the manslaughter in the first degree charge. She also noted that two other jurors had been dismissed earlier for less serious violations of the judge’s instructions not to discuss the case.

The judge denied the request because of the late stage the trial is now in. The two jurors who were dismissed earlier were sent home before deliberations had begun.

“Not every misstep by a juror rises to the level that dismissal is required,” Judge Hinrichs said. “In the court’s view, at this stage, it does not warrant discharging this juror.”

Ms. Kedia said this was the second time that Juror No. 2 had been accused of misconduct since the case began. She indicated that earlier in the trial another juror had told the court that Juror No. 2 had indicated “her views about the defendant’s guilt” before the jury had begun its deliberations. Ms. Kedia then said the woman had lied and been evasive about what she had said when questioned in private by the judge.

Ms. Kedia renewed her request to have Juror No. 2 dismissed before the testimony readings commenced on Monday morning.

Amid the flurry of legal motions on Friday, which included at least three requests for a mistrial by Ms. Kedia, it was also revealed that one of the jurors had informed the court late in the day on Thursday that she could not continue deliberating and had become “extremely emotional” in the judge’s chambers.

1  |  2  >>  

You have read 1 of 7 free articles this month.

Yes! I'll try a one-month
Premium Membership
for just 99¢!
CLICK HERE

Already a subscriber? LOG IN HERE

WOW
By Sam (252), Westhampton Beach on Dec 11, 09 5:16 PM
16 months and hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars later (by both the defense and prosecution)........we're right where this case should've always been.....
a charge of manslaughter should've been brought, with the option to convict of a lesser charge.
What a waste of taxpayer resources and money, to say nothing of the emotional toll on both families, and apparently the jurors as well.
By open mind (18), southampton on Dec 11, 09 5:29 PM
And all Anthony had to do was get off the table!!! Andrew would be alive and Anthony would be moving on with his life.
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 8:52 PM
1 member liked this comment
It is that simple!! If he had gotten down, not gone into a fit of rage, then there would be no murder...and no trial. Simple!!
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 9:40 PM
3 members liked this comment
Oddone's fit of rage was brought on by his own issues. He was told to get off the table.... he replied with defiance and cursing.... All he had to do is get down off the table. Instead, he chose to kill Andrew.
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 6:54 AM
Simple disgusted? Yes very simple, if Reister used all his training as a correction officer he would have deflated the situation rather than excalate it.
By shamrock (22), brooklyn on Dec 12, 09 2:30 PM
1 member liked this comment
And if Oddone had been a classy, mature, young adult he wouldn't have been dancing on tables. And to give him the benefit of the doubt, since he was dancing on the tables, he should have been mature and responsible enough to get down. Instead he chose to be a defiant and let his rage get the best of him.
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 4:21 PM
you re just so simply narrow minded and limited murder! he chose to kill!
reister used VIOLENCE and violence bring violence
then he overused his power and he was not in duty as a correction officer he was doing extra hours as a simple bouncer in club .....2 different jobs 2 different positions 2 different environments 2 different rules & codes......
by the way , I suggest you to dance on a tables ...you need a blast girl
By dlb (21), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 10:54 PM
What an excellent job of reporting by the Press-thank you
By EastEnd68 (833), Westhampton on Dec 11, 09 5:30 PM
Let the rampant and partisan speculation commence anew! Let's see if this thread can beat the previous thread's 336 comments over the weekend.

Hope reporter Michael Wright has found a gal pal in Riverhead by now.
By Frank Wheeler (1269), Northampton on Dec 11, 09 5:32 PM
Nice work Michael through all of this.

Partial verdict that Murder 2 is out, and a hung jury on the rest, equals acquital for now and a re-trial on the lesser charges only.

How is that going to sit here?

Fasten seatbelts.
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 11, 09 5:33 PM
Just to amplify the point in the story above, so there's no confusion:

There is NO official word from the jury on any of this, nor a final ruling by the jury on any of the charges. The story above is based on discussions in open court today about the state of deliberations, based on notes sent to the judge by jury members.

I just want to be clear that there's no final decision made yet.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 11, 09 5:52 PM
Quick update from reporter Mike Wright at the courthouse: At about 5:45 p.m., the jury sent yet another note to the judge, asking for more testimony to be read.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 11, 09 5:55 PM
Mr. Shaw's amplification is very important.

A partial verdict has not been taken. A request for that to be done has been denied by the judge. While it seems unlikely, the jury could return to it and render a different verdict. As Mr. Shaw said there has been no official partial verdict.

§ 310.70. Rendition of partial verdict and effect thereof

1. If a deliberating jury declares that it has reached a verdict with respect to one or more but not all of the offenses submitted ...more
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 11, 09 6:16 PM
And can you confirm that if a partial verdict is rendered, eliminating the second-degree murder charge, and there is a mistrial or hung jury, the murder charge cannot be refiled because of double jeopardy? That's what we've been told.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 11, 09 7:52 PM
That is correct.
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 11, 09 9:18 PM
Thanks. Just want to be sure we've got the important legal details right.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 12, 09 8:39 AM
Before putting too much stock in his lengthy opinions, has Publius ever presented his legal credentials?
By Frank Wheeler (1269), Northampton on Dec 12, 09 9:19 AM
Sam as yours, Frankie - none.
By fcmcmann (417), Hampton Bays on Dec 12, 09 4:23 PM
SOUTHAMPTON PRESS STAFF: I, as I am sure every registered user, received an e-mail alert that a verdict was reached, specifically subject line: ODDONE VERDICT REACHED in caps just like that. 20 minutes later I receive an email alert that a verdict was not reached. This was extremely irresponsible journalism especially considering the emotion that surrounds this case.
By HB 4 Life (72), Hampton Bays on Dec 11, 09 6:35 PM
Richard!!!!
By double-D (96), southampton on Dec 11, 09 6:54 PM
1 member liked this comment
I sincerely apologize for that mistake. We immediately sent a corrected subject line as soon as we discovered the error, but I realize the damage had been done.

No excuses. Just a mistake, and we apologize.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 11, 09 7:53 PM
summary: jury has said no to murder BUT the "judge" refuses to accept the jury's finding. in allowing a partial verdict as any real judge would at this time, it would eliminate the possibility of Mr Oddone ever having to face a murder charge in the event that theer becomes a hung jury and a retrial takes place. He has refused to remove the twice soiled juror. He has done all in his power to prevent a fair trial. At this time our judge is a sore loser who can not accept that no matter how hard he ...more
By username1 (32), bay shore on Dec 11, 09 6:58 PM
3 members liked this comment
You my lady have a lot of class. You probably think O.J was innocent as well.
By porter (17), shoreham on Dec 11, 09 7:38 PM
1 member liked this comment
Username1: Frankly, that cake face blonde, as you call her, is a good looking, mature woman. Excellent shape, wears her stilettos well. She has a lot of class. And...she is educated and smart. I wish I looked as good.

Now...can you compare yourself to that? Maybe not, huh?
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 1:14 PM
username,
that is inappropriate.
This judge is doing his best to keep this trial fair from what I've observed-that's also his reputation.

By open mind (18), southampton on Dec 11, 09 7:03 PM
2 members liked this comment
his reputation is to deny every motion and request of the defense and to facilitate every whim of the ADA. thats his reputation from this trial. if you dont agree, you haven't been in the courtroom. His reputation is not in question, its his motivation...will you vote for him?
By username1 (32), bay shore on Dec 11, 09 7:08 PM
3 members liked this comment
As I understand the article, the only indication that the jurors have reached agreement on the top count to acquit is from the representation of one juror who the defense would like to have dismissed for misconduct.

That one juror's representation may be accurate or inaccurate. The jury may have tentatively reached agreement on Murder 2nd, and are proceeding down the charges. So there may or may not be a final verdict on this count.

At this late point in the proceedings I think ...more
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 11, 09 7:25 PM
There wouldn't even have to be a trial if Anthony had obeyed staff rules and just gotten off the table!
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 8:54 PM
1 member liked this comment
At times it's almost as if English is a second language for you -- did you actually read what you wrote before pushing the Submit button?

Suggest that you research the word "reputation" a bit before trying to use it again.
By Frank Wheeler (1269), Northampton on Dec 11, 09 8:55 PM
Excuse me, let me clarify for you....

If Anthony had obeyed the order from the staff to get off the table, there wouldn't be a trial~~
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 9:39 PM
So I noticed~
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 6:50 AM
1 member liked this comment
Once again with the childish insults.
By fcmcmann (417), Hampton Bays on Dec 12, 09 4:24 PM
god sake you again did mr reister had obey rules ? he used violence he could have find another way he was not a correction officer in this bar , he was a bouncer
By dlb (21), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 10:58 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By dlb (21), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 11:02 PM
Simple: One man choked another to death. Throw out the nonsense technicalities and what do you have? A killer.
By mcy957 (4), Moriches on Dec 11, 09 7:19 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By dlb (21), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 11:04 PM
MCY:
Finally some common sense. He will always be a killer. I just hope he gets what he deserves.
By Kibo (3), Southampton on Dec 11, 09 7:56 PM
New update above at shortly before 8:30 p.m., courtesy of reporter Michael Wright at the courthouse. Court will resume Monday morning with more testimony to be reread to the jury at members' request.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 11, 09 8:28 PM
INS: Why don't you just go to the trial yourself?
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 8:56 PM
Yes... another question...how do you manage to blog all day if you are working?
Just wondering~~
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 9:37 PM
You blog on your break of course ~~ you would never rob the company of time by slacking off ;)
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 7:35 AM
I've read about every comment associated with this case. As emotionally charged as this forum has been, and with what's at stake for both families involved, the conduct of some members of this juror is beyond comprehension. Is it easy to be on a jury like this? Of course not. But to disobey instructions that they have received more than once is despicable.
By IPA (4), East Hampton on Dec 11, 09 8:30 PM
Wouldn't even be a trial if Anthony had just gotten off the table!
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 8:57 PM
It totally disgusts me~~you Oddone supporters blame everyone but Oddone! He murdered a human being in a fit of rage! And you guys are blaming everyone from Andrew himself, to the people that tried to help Andrew, to the jury and now the judge. I am surprised you aren't blaming the table Oddone was dancing on.

You just don't get it ~~

Anthony Oddone killed Andrew... The End!!!

By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 9:09 PM
1 member liked this comment
Unfortunately, its not that simple in the eyes of the law.... If the jury is still working, asking for more info, deliberating more, after more then a week of deliberations, it seems that it is not as cut and dry as you think.

I have a feeling that you are the one that doesnt get it.

At least the jury seems to be using their heads.
By observer (7), Sayville on Dec 11, 09 9:24 PM
I get it.... If Anthony had obeyed the staff, there wouldn't be a trial. All he had to do was get off the table!
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 11, 09 9:35 PM
INS~~you're a mess...you love to heckle people, don't you
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 6:49 PM
the problem with missy disgusted she's not thinking she's too limited
I really think she needs to dance on her dining table it might wake up some in her..
as you said not that simple and that why they still on it...
By dlb (21), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 11:12 PM
Drinking plus disobeying the rules equals jail time. It seems very clear to me.
By EmployeeSH (4), Southampton on Dec 11, 09 9:56 PM
Probation
By porter (17), shoreham on Dec 12, 09 5:51 AM
It's most unfortunate that this chain of comments is filled with such one sided emotions...Tony is a killer, Tony is being railroaded, the judge has demonstrated his excellence, the judge is a political hack, the jury is handling a tough case adroitly, the jury is blind All this is unfortunate but also to be expected, i suppose, given the tragedy & terrible sadness involved Trying to observe it all as unemotionally as possible, Tony's actions don't strike me to be those of a killer & a murder ...more
By pano (1), Sag harbor on Dec 11, 09 10:24 PM
1 member liked this comment
Horrible situation all the way around. Interesting they felt Oddone was unsafe at the Riverhead Jail yet somehow it is safe and fair to try him at the court house right next door. Odd... If the case is so simple and 'cut and dry' why did it take the DA 5 weeks to make her case? If it was so 'cut and dry' then why didn't the jury come back with a verdict in a day or two?
By gwa (1), WHB on Dec 11, 09 11:35 PM
The Jury didn't come back with a verdict because the million dollar defense attorney twisted so much of the testimony that the jurors heads are spinning. Granted this is the same woman who got little John Gotti a hung jury.She is another quality defense attorney who has no moral questions about representing the pillars of our sociaty.
By porter (17), shoreham on Dec 12, 09 5:58 AM
1 member liked this comment
Has Oddone had any other issues with the law? Before he killed Andrew?
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 7:00 AM
He had an alcohol related charge a few years ago...
By Draggerman (175), Southampton on Dec 12, 09 7:27 AM
Oh really? anything else??
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 7:36 AM
This was from an article we published on August 21, 2008, a little more than a week after the incident:

"[Prosecuting attorney] Ms. Merrifield also revealed that the incident of violence in the Publick House was not the first for Mr. Oddone: She cited a May 2005 incident in a Cobleskill, New York, bar named Happy Trails, alleging that Mr. Oddone was involved in another assault involving three victims, hitting more than one of them with a beer bottle. No charges were filed in connection ...more
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 12, 09 8:50 AM
This is why we have Sandoval and Ventimiglia hearings prior to trial.

In a Sandoval hearing the prosecution offers any prior bad acts or misconduct that she would like to use to impeach the defendant's credibility in the event he should choose to testify at trial. It is at such a hearing that the accuracy of the alleged acts could be challenged and the parties would argue whether such bad acts, if committed, had any bearing on the defendant's credibility.

In a Ventimiglia hearing ...more
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 12, 09 11:23 AM
The following is from the rules of professional conduct that applies to both prosecutors [Ms. Merrifiedl] and defense counsel Ms. Kedia. The goal is to try the case in the courtroom where accusations can be met and fairly challenged. Not in the press which does not have the same advantages.

RULE 3.6:
Trial Publicity
(a) A lawyer who is participating in or has participated
in a criminal or civil matter shall not make an extrajudicial
statement that the lawyer knows or reasonably
should ...more
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 12, 09 11:38 AM
1 member liked this comment
Mr. Shaw,
Mr. Oddone was not charged in that incident. He was questioned-along with many others.

The original August '08 report in the SH Press said Mr. Oddone "attacked" Mr. Reister (without any details) which is quite different than what is now written in the press at the end of each of your articles as further info about the circumstances has come to light.

You and the Press have been a pawn of the prosecution since day 1 (not suggesting its' intentional-she's good)
Many ...more
By open mind (18), southampton on Dec 12, 09 9:14 AM
Oh, that'll happen!
By Frank Wheeler (1269), Northampton on Dec 12, 09 10:13 AM
I cited the article--which, by the way, states clearly that "no charges were filed in connection with that incident"--only to answer the question above. The prosecution had cited that previous incident, and I think it's clear from our report that we only know that much about it. I don't see any reason to take either that comment or yours down.

I also will point out that we've reported that people who know Mr. Oddone have said he was not someone who was generally violent, and he worked ...more
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 12, 09 11:25 AM
I am wondering why the friends of Tony think his past is irrelevant to this case....his past paints the picture of what Tony is capable of...violence infused by drinking...I'm still wondering if it was roid rage!!! I think so!
By wondering (62), Southampton on Dec 12, 09 10:20 AM
The prosecutrix did not make any application to bring in this alleged past so there must be something lacking in the alleged proof.

Prior bad acts, if proven, can be introduced to prove intent or absence of mistake. Maybe the proof you think it there, isn't.
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 13, 09 11:26 PM
wondering,
We're all "wondering" what happened the night of the incident.
His past might be relevant if there was actual testimony to that effect, rather than merely hearsay-that's why such items are not allowed in court.

My heart goes out to the Reister family, as well as the Oddone family.
Oddone will be held accountable for his actions, if not by this jury by another.

What's sad is that neither the prosecutor nor the defense seem interested in "justice" (or what ...more
By open mind (18), southampton on Dec 12, 09 10:31 AM
If they can research into a Andrew's medical records to see if they might be relevant, and if they can research into his family medical recordsto see if they might be relevant, then I don't understand why they couldn't research Anthony's criminal records...it might reveal rage, psychotic, ED issues.

But of course, ED issues would stunt him in the real world.

Just my thoughts, of course. I am no expert. I just think a lot. And of course, I am not pointing the finger....I ...more
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 11:06 AM
You are dreaming if you think Oddone's lawyer got a million bucks for this case. Just like you're dreaming that she got Gotti jr. off. She was like the third lawyer on one of his trials and only other work for Gotti was to plead him guilty in 1999.
By dotdot (1), Seaford on Dec 12, 09 11:10 AM
Mr. Shaw,
Fair enough.
You guys have done an admirable job on a hugely complex and sensitive case which has no doubt been incredibly time consuming for a publication with limited resources.
By open mind (18), southampton on Dec 12, 09 12:13 PM
1 member liked this comment
Indeed. I appreciate your kind remarks.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 9:51 AM
Unbelievable.. Oddone obviously has a jury of his peers, emotional and reactionary.. Behavior surrounding the murder of Mr. Reister is clear.. drinking on behalf of oddone.. dancing on tables by Oddone, choosing not to get off the table after being told do so by Oddone, Oddone choosing to strangle Reister, Oddone choosing not to let go of Reister, Oddone choosing to flee the scene.. All chosen behaviors of a murderer.. whether he was a punk or a nice guy prior to the incident does not change what ...more
By grimag (38), southampton on Dec 12, 09 12:43 PM
Crossed my mind just now.....I wonder if there are a few on here that could be using two different screen names... you know...arguing with themselves...just to stir up the pot. A couple of the writing styles are identical. hmmm... ya think?
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 1:57 PM
Disgusted,
your crossed mind brought up an interesting point -- with maybe all kinds of possibilities -- just wondering -- but you can end up disgusted wondering.
By fix-it-now (216), sag harbor on Dec 12, 09 5:14 PM
You are absolutely right, Fix-it-now. And I wonder what you fix?? lol
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 5:23 PM
Certainly not this jury, as it seems to be coming apart.
By fix-it-now (216), sag harbor on Dec 12, 09 5:53 PM
Reister is working as a bouncer, he is 6'4" tall and weighs 285 lbs. He is a trained correction officer and probably not permitted to work anywhere as a bouncer, especially in close proximity to where he works as a guard. He knows how to calm a situation as he has been trained to do so. He chooses to incite rather than calm. It is clear - the person Reister incited fought for his life. Now all the arm chair quarterbacks come forth with what should have happened & how Oddone should have acted.

From ...more
By shamrock (22), brooklyn on Dec 12, 09 2:27 PM
1 member liked this comment
You have your facts wrong there, Miss Shamrock.... Mr. Reister weighed about 240. Guess you weren't listening to testamony...just heresay. 285 was the bed scale weight they had to use at StonyBrook hospital after he was in a coma, after Oddone assaulted him.

And...if Oddone had gotten down like a gentlemen this wouldn't have happened. Oddone mouthed off, why would he do that if he knew Andrew was staff. Testamony has it that he asked Andrew if he worked there.

So your buddy ...more
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 3:10 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By dlb (21), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 11:44 PM
In the calm of this weekend, perhaps everyone can take a deep breath, and realize that the truth of what actually happened in the Publick House, especially in the minds of Mr. Oddone and Mr. Reister, may never be fully known.

The increasingly simplistic points of view here are not getting anyone anywhere. The case is in the hands of the jury, and we will be lucky IMO to receive ANY verdict at all. Moreover, I can only picture the family members reading this board, and thinking something ...more
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 12, 09 2:39 PM
You are quite the philosopher, Mr PBR. And may I add, if Mr. Oddone had followed Publick House rules, then Mr. Reister wouldn't even have had to approach him.

Merry Christmas!~
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 3:02 PM
Thank you Disgusted, and Merry Christmas to you.
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 12, 09 4:48 PM
Only because he was a corrections officer did he think he could do as he pleased including assault a patron and get away with it. If he were a 6'4" 280 lb african american part time bouncer from an estranged marriage, it wouldn't make page 9. The whole abuse of authority and manipulation of the system to build a case that never should exist is only trumped by the incompetence DA and the obvious bias of the judge who is refusing to accept a partial not guilty verdict. How obnoxious? Your job is to ...more
By username1 (32), bay shore on Dec 12, 09 3:07 PM
2 members liked this comment
Why do you continue to overstate Reister's size by fifty pounds even though you've had this brought to your attention many times? And why would you state Reister assaulted a patron? That is a complete fabrication. There is no evidence and no testimony that indicated an assault by Reister.
By VOS (616), WHB on Dec 12, 09 3:41 PM
1 member liked this comment
Username...and why would you bring up the african american part time bouncer....leave the race card out of this one..ok?! This isn't a race issue!

This would never have happened if Oddone got off the table as he was politely asked. He knew Andrew was staff...he asked him. So why did Oddone have to be defiant and tell him to F off.

All Oddone should have done is get down off the table like a mature adult. But he didn't....so now his life is a mess.

By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 12, 09 7:15 PM
And only as an anonymous blogger can you type ridicules comments with out any facts to back it up, here you are pretending to be fair and unbiased. You are one of the most pretentious persons blogging here. IF I were to guess, I'd say at one time you were incarcerated. You certainly sound like someone with a chip on their shoulder in regards to law enforcement.
By pjcd (24), Smithtown on Dec 13, 09 2:29 PM
No matter what the verdict , little Tony will always be looking over his back.
By ELECTRICUTIONER (65), east islip/montauk on Dec 12, 09 3:26 PM
1 member liked this comment
spot on!
By zeke (10), southampton on Dec 12, 09 3:35 PM
aquitted or found guilty the defendandts life as he knew it is over!
By zeke (10), southampton on Dec 12, 09 3:34 PM
Publius, or anyone else that actually knows the answer....

In the case that the jury is hung on a lesser charge, the judge can accept a partial verdict. Does he HAVE to accept a partial verdict if they reach one on a higher charge? Or is it simply up to the judge?

Reason being is that I am curious if the jury is in fact hung on a lesser charge, but the judge feels that the higher charge is appropriate, can he refuse to accept a partial verdict so that the defendant cannot avoid ...more
By observer (7), Sayville on Dec 12, 09 4:07 PM
I can't say I have come across this problem before. However, in view of the note given that indicates that the jury has already reached a partial verdict, it would be difficult to declare a mistrial as to the entire case without first inquiring into whether there is a partial verdict as to any one or more of the offenses submitted.

If the judge, over the objection of counsel, refused to make such an inquiry, then defense counsel would have a strong argument against re-trial. Generally ...more
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 13, 09 11:38 PM
ELECTRICUTIONER and zeke,

Are you suggesting that some form of physical violence directed at Mr. Oddone would be justified in the future, even if the jury acquits him of all charges?
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 12, 09 4:47 PM
DEFINITELY NOT JUSTIFIED !!! There are crazy people out there. Especially if he's hanging in a bar where common logic is at a minimal.RELAX PBR .
By ELECTRICUTIONER (65), east islip/montauk on Dec 12, 09 4:58 PM
Fact remains, Mr. Oddone CHOSE not only to assault Mr. Reister, he chose to hold him in a headlock for an extended period.

Regardless of either person's behavior, he HAD the choice to walk away.

Mr. Oddone did not walk away, and a man is dead for it.

He is responsible for this man's death, as HE made the decision to assault, and place Mr. Reister in a chokehold.

All Mr. Oddone had to do was walk away...
By Mr. Z (6250), North Sea on Dec 12, 09 4:59 PM
LETS KEEP OUR EYE ON THE BALL PEOPLE A MAN LOST HIS LIFE AT THE HANDS OF ANOTHER, SOMEONES FATHER,SON HUSBAND,BROTHER IS NOW DEAD I REALLY DON'T THINK IT MATTERS HOW MR.REISTER CHOSE TO REMOVE THIS DRUNKEN MAN FROM A TABLETOP, HE DIDN'T DESERVE TO BE MURDERED
By CHERI (12), HAMPTON BAYS on Dec 12, 09 5:24 PM
1 member liked this comment
It is not murder yet.
By fix-it-now (216), sag harbor on Dec 12, 09 5:27 PM
1 member liked this comment
It certainly should be.
By porter (17), shoreham on Dec 12, 09 6:21 PM
HE'S DEAD, HE WAS CHOKED TO DEATH HE WAS MURDERED MAYBE IN THE EYES OF THE LAW IT WILL BE CALLED SOMETHING ELSE HE'S DEAD
By CHERI (12), HAMPTON BAYS on Dec 12, 09 6:22 PM
Did we get a toxicology on this guy?

Was he on anything besides booze?
By Mr. Z (6250), North Sea on Dec 12, 09 5:28 PM
WHAT HAPPENED TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS WHEN THERE WAS A PROBLEM, MAYBE SOME FISTS WOULD BE THROWN BUT THEN YOU SHOOK HANDS AND IT WAS OVER NOW IF THERE IS A PROBLEM AT A BAR YOU MIGHT AS WELL GET THE HELL OUT OF THERE BECAUSE NOW PEOPLE COME BACK WITH GUNS AND DO THINGS LIKE CHOKE YOU TO DEATH
By CHERI (12), HAMPTON BAYS on Dec 12, 09 6:19 PM
LETS KEEP OUR EYE ON THE BALL PEOPLE A MAN LOST HIS LIFE AT THE HANDS OF ANOTHER, SOMEONES FATHER,SON HUSBAND,BROTHER IS NOW DEAD I REALLY DON'T THINK IT MATTERS HOW MR.REISTER CHOSE TO REMOVE THIS DRUNKEN MAN FROM A TABLETOP, HE DIDN'T DESERVE TO BE MURDERED
By CHERI (12), HAMPTON BAYS on Dec 12, 09 6:19 PM
This comment has been removed because it is a duplicate, off-topic or contains inappropriate content.
By happynow (19), east hampton on Dec 12, 09 6:34 PM
are the caps really necessary?
By slamminsammy (104), East Moriches on Dec 12, 09 7:01 PM
Are you serous happynow? They already said it was a mistake, and they corrected it as soon as they discovered it. I would imagine that the reporter at the courthouse had nothing to do with it. Either way, you have never made a mistake in your life?
By observer (7), Sayville on Dec 12, 09 7:36 PM
Mike reported it correctly-not quility of the murder charge. The misleading headline was corrected immediately. If anything Mike should be promped for a job well done.
By EastEnd68 (833), Westhampton on Dec 12, 09 8:51 PM
1 member liked this comment
Let me be clear: Our reporter, Mike Wright, had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with that mistake. He wasn't involved in the email alert that went out.

I sincerely apologize again for that. We corrected it immediately upon discovering it (in fact, it was Mike who pointed it out), and a corrected email went out in less than 30 minutes.

Again, I won't make excuses--it was a bad mistake, and I'm sorry.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 9:54 AM
Happynow is right. That was a pretty big mistake by a professional reporter. The time on the story is like 2:08 and the final correction by Shaw is 4 hours later. With what you read going back and forth above, four hours of a mistake is not acceptable. If you can't get it right then don't try to beat the other media by these e-mail flashes and let's beat the competition attitude. If you want to take that approach then get it right. No excuses.
By factsandtruth (42), East Hampton on Dec 12, 09 8:56 PM
Are you serious? The story was updated today at 2:08pm today. It has absolutely nothing to do with what was being talked about above. What they are talking about was an email that went out with an incorrect subject line yesterday, that was realized and corrected about 20 minutes later.

Maybe you should read "back and forth above" again.....
By observer (7), Sayville on Dec 12, 09 9:04 PM
Its called shooting the messenger.
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 12, 09 10:10 PM
Observer. Thank you for responding as I thought someone would. You are right. The story up above is posted today at 2:08 yet the first 7 responses below it are dated yesterday. Then there are about five posts dated today, then a bunch dated yesterday again, then a bunch dated today. I thought the posts were supposed to be in order? We know the story was changed. It had to be changed because it was wrong. A thread is called a thread because it is supposed to develop as the story develops. Something ...more
By factsandtruth (42), East Hampton on Dec 12, 09 11:24 PM
Factsandtruth, you should be more observant -- yes, a message thread is chronological, the word you seem to be looking for.

And as I post this, it's the last Comment in the thread, and you will note that it is indented below yours posted at 11:24 pm because it directly addresses the one you made.

This is how some comments seem to be out of sequence when in fact they are not.

The Press isn't trying to pull a fast one; you just are focusing on the wrong thing and failing ...more
By Frank Wheeler (1269), Northampton on Dec 13, 09 2:17 AM
There was only a 20 minute gap between the e-mails that were sent. That is an extraordinarily fast recovery. The error on these facts was entirely understandable:

A note was sent and it indicated in substance there had been a verdict of not guilty on the top count. This, however, came from a juror other than the foreman. That is unusual, and could easily give rise to a misunderstanding.

Counsel for the Defendant also asked to have the partial verdict recorded. Appropriate ...more
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 13, 09 10:01 AM
1 member liked this comment
Once again, well said.
By fix-it-now (216), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 10:22 AM
electricutioner, take another drink
By username1 (32), bay shore on Dec 13, 09 11:37 AM
I can see that !!
By fix-it-now (216), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 11:42 AM
I DON'T MIND IF I DO .
ONLY AFTER 12 .
THANKS
By ELECTRICUTIONER (65), east islip/montauk on Dec 13, 09 11:56 AM
Thank you Joe Shaw and Michael Wright for an outstanding job of reporting, especially for a weekly paper. Well done.

Fasten seat belts!
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 13, 09 1:44 PM
2 members liked this comment
I agree with that !
By fix-it-now (216), sag harbor on Dec 13, 09 2:16 PM
I think .. that all of you people that have so much to say here ought to go to the trial and support the side you feel for. You all seem so adament about your cause. Call in sick... take a personal day...take some vacation days.
By Disgusted (45), Sag Harbor on Dec 13, 09 9:36 PM
Disgusted,

One could also go to the trial and support Truth and Justice IMO, not a "side," eh?

Do you really think that one side is "right" and the other "wrong?"

Is the world really that black and white, consisting of diametrically opposed truths only one of which is correct?
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 14, 09 9:06 AM
amen PBR

there are no sides here..... only tragedy.
and both the prosecution and the defense have made truth and justice a nearly unknowable thing
By open mind (18), southampton on Dec 14, 09 9:57 AM
It is neither the prosecutor nor the defense attorney who have made this case difficult. It is the nature of the case, a fight in a bar.

From one perspective:

Mr. Oddone is a man who choked Mr. Reister for a period from 2 to 3 minutes. In the process Mr. Oddone broke small bones in Mr. Reister's neck and Mr. Oddone compressed Mr. Reister's carrotid artery until Mr. Reister became unconscious, and Mr. Oddone continued to choke Mr. Reister for a sufficient period of time to cause ...more
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 14, 09 11:48 AM
1 member liked this comment
SOUTHAMPTON PRESS STAFF: Are the deliberations ongoing this morning? Please update.
By HB 4 Life (72), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 10:51 AM
They are listening to read back of testimony.
By FOTO (36), Lake Grove on Dec 14, 09 11:35 AM
As noted below, we've just updated the story. Mike was on another story this morning, and he's getting caught up at court now. Just readbacks this morning, but if there were any other developments, we'll post something today.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 1:06 PM
So publius when Oddone continued to choke reister while he was unconcious Mr Reister was still a threat? Don't forget people screamed at Oddone that he was killing him and peple tried to pull him off yet he continued his choke hold. I think we know which side you are on so please do not try and play neutral
By razza5350 (1546), East Hampton on Dec 14, 09 11:57 AM
You are making the point. This case is founded upon the strength of the perceptions of people in a bar who have been there for a while.

That testimony may in the end be sufficient, but it is not an easy task for a jury to say that it constitutes proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

As to taking sides, my only hope is that justice, as best it can be served within human limitations, is served. That does not appear to be a simple issue in this case.

Dec 14, 09 12:10 PM appended by Publius
From your post as far back as November 17th, it is clear you had made your mind up before the case had even been presented "I hope Oddone rots in jail." Nov 17, 09 11:56 AM
By Publius (358), Westhampton Beach on Dec 14, 09 12:10 PM
Two things:

Story is now updated to include the latest from this morning. Not much--just listening to readbacks of testimony, as requested by the jury.

Also, to repeat what I said in reply to a commenter above, so everyone can see it: Our reporter, Mike Wright, had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the email that went out Friday with an erroneous subject line. He wasn't involved in any way in the email alert that went out.

I sincerely apologize again for that. We corrected ...more
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 1:05 PM
"went out in less than 30 minutes," over which I alerted family members and others that a verdict has been reached as per the subject line ODDONE VERDICT REACHED. The fact it took 30 minutes and not 30 seconds shows what a second rate news organization u are running.
By HB 4 Life (72), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 1:37 PM
HB 4 Life,

Your point has been taken, and re-taken, any times.

Mr. Shaw has apologized for the error, also many times.

Life is not perfect. Errors are made. Have you ever made one?

Any chance you could move on?

Peace on Earth includes Forgiveness?

Thank you.
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 14, 09 1:44 PM
1 member liked this comment
Why must you keep coming back here and reading if you are so displeased? Wait for the updates in Newsday and on News 12 then! Stop spewing your hate all over here!
By FOTO (36), Lake Grove on Dec 14, 09 1:50 PM
1 member liked this comment
For crying out loud, for someone who is so engrossed in this case, I find it hard to believe that you would actually contact family members and quote a subject line without bothering to actually read the copy of the email. Which, from what I could tell, didn't differ from the first email.
By RealLocal (76), Bridgehampton on Dec 14, 09 2:12 PM
1 member liked this comment
Publius. I have been folowing the story from the date of Mr Reisters death and I have never hidden the fact that I believe Oddone must be held accountable for his actions. I am not family. Your claim that you are taking a "neutral" position is laughable
By razza5350 (1546), East Hampton on Dec 14, 09 2:25 PM
to Joe Shaw - you are doing a great job - and I thank you for your coverage - if HB 4 life had just read the content of the email and not just the headline he would have known what was going on. And you did correct the headline - as quickly as you realized the error -

thanks again for your coverage of this case
By knitter (2), Southampton on Dec 14, 09 2:45 PM
1 member liked this comment
Mr Shaw-you have no need to apologize. You and your staff are doing a great job.
By EastEnd68 (833), Westhampton on Dec 14, 09 3:09 PM
2 members liked this comment
As a past patron of the PH, the "bouncer" atmosphere was never quite apparent. The "bouncers" seemed to secure the front door area checking IDs and collecting cover charges. Belongings were never asked to be checked as this was/is not the establishment's policy. The "bouncers" at PH seem to be primarily door men doing a good job collecting $ and maintain a 21 or older crowd vs. monitoring the condition of the patrons as they enter or keeping a watchful eye on the few individuals that look as ...more
By jojo5144 (1), southampton on Dec 14, 09 4:14 PM
BULLETIN:

Verdict is in, to be read tonight.

Update coming shortly--watch the home page.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 5:13 PM
Verdict reached. See new article.
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 14, 09 5:19 PM
Guilty--first-degree manslaughter.

We're working on the story right now. Verdict read about 5:15.
By Joseph Shaw, Executive Editor (172), Hampton Bays on Dec 14, 09 5:21 PM
Press scoops Newsday. Well done.
By PBR (4365), Southampton on Dec 14, 09 5:26 PM
©2014, 27east.com / The Press News Group - Ph: 631-283-4100 - mailbag@27east.com