Defense attorney argues DNA evidence should exonerate Rochat – NorthJersey.com

Daniel Rochat, left, is on trial in the killing of Barbara Vernieri in 2012.(Photo: TARIQ ZEHAWI/NorthJersey.com file photo)

HACKENSACK The DNA evidence in the slaying of East Rutherford real estate agent Barbara Vernieri should exonerate Daniel Rochat, his lawyer told the jury during the defense's closing arguments on Tuesday.

Rochat, who knew Vernieri since he was a young child, is accused of beating her and setting her on fire in September 2012. Vernieri worked with Rochat and hisfather at Kurgan-Bergen Realty at the time of her death.

Jim Doyle, one of Rochat's attorneys, said the testimony ofMelissaHuyck, who was the prosecution's DNA expert, was "without a doubt one of the most disappointing things [he's] ever seen by a scientist on the stand."

During his summations, Doyle attempted to cast doubt on a number of pieces of evidence, includingthe DNA evidence, noting that Rochat's DNA was not found in Vernieri's home and Vernieri's blood was not found anywhere it was not supposed to be. It was not found in Rochat's apartment in Wood-Ridge, it was not found in the family shore house in Toms River, it was not found on his shoes, it was not found in either of his cars, he said.

From left, Daniel Rochat, accused in the killing of Barbara Vernieri in 2012, with his attorneys Jim Doyle and Richard Potter, before Superior Court Judge Margaret M. Foti.(Photo: Tariq Zehawi/NorthJersey.com)

Doyle continued his argument by sayingthe DNA that was found in the Van Winkle condo, which Rochat's father was the property manager was, was not proven to be blood and that the tests done by the crime scene unit investigators only presumed blood was present. He argued that Vernieri's DNA could have been transferred to Van Winkle at a different point in time due to how often she came into contact with Rochat and his father.

Additionally, Doyle noted that the DNA found underneath Vernieri's fingernails could belong to a number of men in the population. It was testified that one in 333 men, including Rochat and his paternal relatives,could have the same DNA profile. Doyle said that one of the detectives, Sgt. Gary Boesch, used an inappropriate tool to collect the fingernails. Boesch used a piece of computer paper to collect Vernieri's fingernail clippings and Doyle said it is possible the DNA could belong to any other male at the scene or anyone who had ever handled the paper. Doyle also told jurors to remember that the DNA of two unknown males were found in Vernieri's home.

Doyle reminded the jurors it was their job to find Rochat guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

"Certain phrases sound trite until you have to use them," he said.

Doyle said the prosecution will argue that Rochat's conduct the day of and in the days following Vernieri's death establishes motive and conscience of guilt, but he feels differently. He said numerous people testified that Rochat's behavior was nothing out of the ordinary for him including a friend he was with when he found out about Vernieri's death.

Daniel Rochat, left, with his attorneys Jim Doyle and Richard Potter before Superior Court Judge Margaret Foti in Hackensack.(Photo: Tariq Zehawi/NorthJersey.com)

Doyle also made arguments against the prosecution's seemingly most damaging evidence. Rochat's cellphone pinged off a tower that is directly by Vernieri's home at 10:39 a.m., a time that Rochat said he was sleeping in his apartment over a mile away. The prosecution's cellphone expert testified that it would be impossible for Rochat's phone to ping on that tower due to the number of towers in the area. The defense's cellphone expert argued differently, stating that a cellphone could potentially ping on that tower almost 11 miles away.

Doyle said the Bergen County Sheriff's Office use of Verizon's Real Time Tool records, used to approximate where a cellphone is located at the time of a call, is the wrong way to determine an individual's locationand that triangulation and GPS were better tools.

According to Doyle, the prosecution is throwing motives at the wall "to see what sticks" and that they do not have a clear motive and do not really know who killed Vernieri.

Prosecutor Danielle Grootenboer will begin her closing arguments Wednesdaymorning before jury instruction anddeliberations.

Read or Share this story: https://njersy.co/2sq496V

Read the original post:
Defense attorney argues DNA evidence should exonerate Rochat - NorthJersey.com