Kay Weden - Jason Weden

PLANTEDEVIDENCE.COM

JUSTICE DENIED!


	Email Me

Kay Weden - Jason Weden

There were facts that were known by defense counsel prior to and during my trial that pointed away from me and which pointed directly to Jason and Kay Weden as the perpetrators in the death of Catherine Miller. Unfortunately, when the defense had a chance to bring these facts out to the jury, they failed to do so.

First, Joyce Petzka testified as an expert for the state in the field of latent fingerprint identification. Petzka, a fingerprint expert with the N.C. State Bureau of Investigation, testified that Miller’s entire residence had been examined for fingerprints. She told the court and the jury that she had eliminated me, Kay Weden and Jason Weden as the source of any of the fingerprints found inside Miller residence. She also stated that she had gone back at a later time and identified two law enforcement officers palm prints inside the Miller residence (Volume IV, TP. 1495). She also testified that two unidentified prints were found inside Miller’s residence. These prints were located on some boxes, paper bags and some magazines that investigators had removed from the Miller’s residence as evidence (Volume IV, TP. 1501).

During trial, evidence was presented that the magazines had been knocked off the coffee table in Miller’s living room during the time the murder was committed (Volume IV, TP. 1502).

However, defense counsel had Agent Petzka’s own laboratory report prior to and during the trial, that clearly showed that Petzka was not truthful during her testimony when she testified under oath that Jason Weden had been eliminated as the source of any prints found inside Miller’s residence.

Petzka’s laboratory report dated June 17, 1997, some three and one half years after Miller’s murder and just six days before the start of my trial, showed that she had identified Jason Weden’s left palm print on the magazine that had been knocked off the coffee table during the Miller murder (Exhibit M, S.B.I. Lab Report).

Of course, if the evidence had been presented, the state could have argued that Jason Weden was Miller’s grandson and had access to her home and that he had read the magazine and that was how his print got onto this piece of evidence. Yet, the state would not have been able to explain how Jason Weden’s left palm print was only found on an item of evidence that had been disturbed during the murder and not anywhere else throughout the residence.

Second, in Jason Weden’s statement to the police on December 10, 1993, he gives them information about drug deals he had been involved in that had gone bad (Exhibit N, Interview of Jason Weden). Evidence at trial showed that Miller’s purse and credit cards were found in a known drug area in Salisbury, North Carolina [404(b) Hearing, TP. 147].

Third, Kay Weden testified that she nor her son Jason Weden ever went into her mother’s residence the day her mother was discovered murdered on December 9, 1993. She also testified the she nor her son ever went back into her mother’s residence after the crime scene was processed by the police. She also testified that she hired someone to go into her mother’s home to clean and remove her mother’s possessions (T., Volume I, pp. 231-233) [404(b) Hearing, pp. 82-83].

Trial testimony from investigators revealed that Kay Weden nor Jason Weden were told the condition of the crime scene nor of the body’s condition or what police discovered inside the Miller home. These were facts known only to the investigators themselves.

Yet, Jason Weden was able to tell investigators during his interview on December 10, 1993 that he had told his friends that Miller’s bedroom had been ransacked and there was blood found on Miller’s head. All of these facts proved to be true from the evidence presented at trial (Exhibit N, Statement of Jason Weden).

A fact never brought out to the jury was that Jason Weden was able to tell investigators facts about the condition of the crime scene and Miller’s body in his statement on December 10, 1993 without being told these facts and without ever going into the residence. Investigators never questioned Jason Weden about how he knew facts about the crime scene that were known only to them during their interview with Weden on December 10, 1993 (Exhibit N, Statement of Jason Weden).

Fourth, during Jason Weden’s interview with investigators on December 10, 1993, Weden was asked “Did you kill her”? Jason Weden responded “No I was in school” (snickered) (Exhibit N, Statement of Jason Weden, Pg. 6, paragraphs 14-15).

On the evening of December 10, 1993, the police did not have a time frame established yet as to when Miller was killed. However, Jason Weden knew exactly where he was and when the murder took place. The two biggest unanswered questions that were never asked by investigators or defense counsel were 1) how did Weden know his grandmother was killed while he was in school and 2) how could he have known his grandmother was killed while he was in school to be able to tell investigators this fact when the investigators had not yet established a time frame on December 10, 1993 that showed what time Miller was killed?

Defense counsel was aware that just five days after the murder, evidence was developed that pointed directly to Kay Weden, Miller’s daughter, who had the most powerful motive of all to commit murder: greed and money.

By December 14, 1993, five days after Miller was found murdered, investigators had discovered evidence that Kay Weden, Miller’s daughter stood to inherit several hundred thousand dollars and insurance money from her mother’s estate.

Investigators also learned that after Miller’s death and after her estate was settled, Weden quit her $26,000.00 a year job as a teacher at West Rowan High School.

The police were also aware that Kay Weden had money troubles and that her son was into drugs and had drug debts.

Investigators learned that shortly after her mother’s death, Kay Weden moved into a $140, 000.00 home with a swimming pool and also bought herself and her son a new car and began taking trips.

Although investigators considered Kay and Jason Weden suspects in the death of Catherine Miller, my attorneys never raised the issue during the trial. Neither attorney offered an alternative theory for Catherine Miller’s death, although there was plenty of circumstantial evidence to indicate that her daughter, Kay Weden, and grandson, Jason Weden, had the means, motive and opportunity to commit the crime.

Prosecutors never had to explain:

	How Jason Weden’s palm print was found on a piece of evidence that had been moved during the murder, but was not found anywhere else inside the home.
	Why Kay Weden’s prints are not found anywhere inside Miller’s residence even though she was in and out of the house on a daily basis.
	How Jason Weden knew facts about the crime scene which he was able to tell investigators about in his statement on December 10, 1993 which proved to be true, yet these facts were only known by investigators.
	How Jason Weden knew when his grandmother was killed and where he was during the murder in this statement on December 10, 1993 when investigators had not yet established a time frame for Miller’s murder.
	Why the police never investigated Kay or Jason Weden for Miller’s death when they had the oldest motive known to man, money and greed.
	Why Kay Weden bought a new $140,000 home with a pool, started buying new cars and taking expensive trips, yet refused to visit her mother’s grave.

Back to Top

Very Strange Behavior

In October 1995, shortly after my arrest, a California business man named Sang Wong began communicating on-line with Kay Weden and they met in person for the first time two months later.

Wong, who never knew me or met me, soon learned that Weden had inherited several hundred thousand dollars from an insurance claim, a house, land and other assets following her mother’s death.

“She didn’t seem to really be grieving”, Wong said. “She was enjoying the money. We went to Atlanta and she was shopping left and right. We went to Cancun with her son, Jason, and she spent a lot of money there as well. She told me she and Jason had also gone to Montego Bay.”

Wong said while in Cancun both Weden’s drank heavily. “They both downed five, six, seven shots of Tequila at one sitting. She also told me her son had been busted for drugs several times. He had drug paraphernalia with him.”

In January 1996 Wong suggested they visit her mother’s grave. “I never saw anyone so upset and petrified,” Wong said. “She got pale and almost went into shock. I suggested it again two months later but she still refused. She said she couldn’t handle it.”

Wong said she showed him clippings about Underwood’s arrest and told him she was convinced that her mother’s death and Gunnarsson’s were related.

“The more she talked to me the more I doubted her story,” Wong said. “She seemed worried that I didn’t believe her. She kept insisting that it was Underwood who killed her mother, but I kept thinking, guys date women all the time whose parents don’t like them, but they don’t kill them.”

Wong said he went through the evidence with Weden with him playing Underwood and her playing Gunnarsson.

“I wasn’t convinced that in talking to Weden that Underwood had killed anybody,” he said.

Wong said the Wedens seemed like obvious suspects.

“I don’t understand why no one looked at Sandra Weden or her son as suspects in the death of her mother because of the high value of the insurance money and inheritance,” he said. “Even that wasn’t enough. She told me she had an ongoing lawsuit with her ex-husband and was suing him for child support and wouldn’t allow him to see their son.”

Wong said he broke up with Weden in April 1996 but that she flew out to California twice to see him, spending $1,000 for last minute reservations after the two had a fight.

“She got mad because other women were calling me while she was there,” he said. “She broke some of my dishes. She had a flight the next day to Chicago but spent $400.00 on a ticket to San Francisco that same day. Then she skipped that flight and spent $645.00 on another ticket four hours later.”

“She kept telling me that it was her boyfriend who was jealous and he killed Gunnarsson out of jealousy. But I’m convinced that she was the jealous one in the relationship.”

Wong said he was so intrigued by the case the he periodically sent e-mails to the Salisbury Post and Charlotte observer for news of the trial. “I was convinced that Underwood would not be convicted,” he said. “I was hurt and shocked that he was because I don’t think he killed anybody” (Exhibit O, Knight Chamberlain's Letter).

Again, so many questions with no answers. Yet when defense counsel had ample evidence that pointed directly to the Wedens in the death of Catherine Miller, they failed to present the evidence to the jury. When defense counsel could have gotten the answers to all these questions and many more that have been raised in this story, they did absolutely nothing. Only my defense counsel can provide those answers now. But it is now too late because I stand convicted of a murder I did not commit. That is unless my new Attorney, Gordon Widenhouse, Jr. can convince the Federal Courts that I did not get a fair trial, and that I had ineffective trial and appellate counsel.

Back to Top