homicide defense attorney nyc

Driving to work in a company van, Michael O., an employee of Emerson Electric Company, swerved to avoid a young man on a bicycle who suddenly appeared in his lane. Tragically, Michael and the bicyclist, who had been traveling in opposite directions on Flatbush Avenue in Brooklyn, both swerved in the same direction to avoid each other. Michael could not avoid hitting the young man, an 18 year-old college student, who died at the scene.

At 28, Michael was only ten years older than the cyclist. He had earned his Associates degree and was maintaining a high average while finishing his Bachelors in Electrical Engineering at SUNY. He was married and worked full time as an Emerson customer engineer. Distraught after the accident, Michael told the police how the cyclist had suddenly crossed into his lane, and how he had tried desperately to avoid him. Nevertheless, the police arrested Michael, charging him with criminally negligent homicide and related charges. A judge ordered him held without bail, even though he had no criminal record and had not been drinking or taking drugs. Emerson’s in-house counsel retained attorney Gary Farrell to prepare a writ of habeas corpus that resulted in Michael’s release on bail. Gary then went to work on the defense of the case.

Michael was indicted based on allegations that he was speeding, blew through a red light, and the fact that he was driving with a suspended license because of his failure to pay a $250 surcharge on a previous ticket; even though the fine was paid, the city now adds a $250 surcharge in certain circumstances. At trial, the District Attorney produced a truck driver who testified that he was stopped at the light and that Michael flew by him, running a steady red light and striking the cyclist. Several witnesses corroborated the trucker’s story, and the DA called an accident reconstructionist to testify as an expert witness.

Michael’s attorney, Gary Farrell, told the jury a different story — one the jury members could see with their own eyes. Mr. Farrell played a surveillance tape from a nearby restaurant that showed Michael had gone through the light, which was not red, a full eleven seconds before the trucker even arrived at the intersection. Mr. Farrell said, “The video was the key to the case. It showed that the other witnesses, including the expert witness, were wrong.”

Mr. Farrell also produced a New York City bus driver who testified that he had seen the young cyclist driving erratically before he cut in front of Michael. Michael testified on his own behalf. It took the Kings County jury just a few hours to acquit Michael of Criminally Negligent Homicide, Reckless Driving, and going through a red light. Michael’s acquittal was covered by the New York news media.

In this case, Mr. Farrell’s client was a 28-year old man, a conscientious employee of a kosher food plant. Accused by the police of murder in the second degree, the young man faced 25 years to life. The police said he was guilty of strangling his sister to death but no evidence connected him to the murder except for a written statement that he made to the police after 17 hours of interrogation. In the statement, which he wrote out but refused to sign, he admitted to killing his sister because she played the TV too loud. Although his intelligence was perfectly normal, the young man did have a disability that had autistic features. He told defense attorney Gary Farrell that he was coerced into making the incriminating statement during the hours-long interrogation by a total of six detectives. The man had no criminal record and his mother, who was also the mother of the deceased, insisted that her children never fought. Mr. Farrell conducted a thorough investigation, which led to another suspect. He called in a psychologist who confirmed that young man’s confession was not made voluntarily, an assessment with which the District Attorney’s own psychologist agreed. Mr. Farrell convinced the DA’s office to request a dismissal of the case, which it agreed to do. Judge Reichbach promptly granted the motion to dismiss, telling the defendant, “You are actually innocent of this crime.” As a result of his false arrest and malicious prosecution, Mr. Farrell’s client sued, and reached a settlement with the New York Police Department.