Why Revisit This All Now?

I needed to get my notes and my thoughts together for this post.
I've been asked why I feel so compelled to revisit this crime at this late date. The question wasn't a challenge to my efforts, it was a sincere and genuine question asked by someone who truly wanted to gain a glimpse into my motivation for learning all I can about Marian, her life and the crime commited against her so long ago.

I thought the answer would be difficult to explain but it's not.

Why revisit this all now, so many years later?

Because Marian Louise Baker deserves to have the truth told of her character, her person, her morals and her value and worth not only to those that loved her by blood, but also to those who knew her, worked with her, went to school with her and simply spent time in her company.

Marian made an impression on the people she met. Her goodness was apparent.
She had so many good qualities that I am sincerely sorry I never got to meet her.

But the drive behind my efforts are due to the misinformation and fallacious information that was disseminated by the press and by the author, Richard Gehman.

Facts were presented that weren't facts.

The motives behind the fallacies are numerous. I can't alter them now.

But I can make sure I tell the whole story of the person that is Marian Louise Baker.
She was much more than a simple county girl who happened to work as a secretary at Franklin and Marshall.
She touched lives and she was someone to be looked up to.
I need to correct the misinformation and tear down the fallacies in a concrete way.
She deserves to have the truth told. Once and for all.
She needs to be remembered for the good soul she was, not the subject of curiosity by those that love a good scandal.
I simply want to remove the undeserved innuendo and rumor that was intentionally placed on Marian Louise Baker to sell books and newspapers.
I simply want the truth to be known by everyone.

Fancy Footwork of The Defense...

Prosecutors bear the burden of proof.
Defense teams need only to create doubt.
While the prosecution can't be "all over the map" in laying out their case, they present to the judge and jury motive, means and opportunity in a cohesive package. It is their job to take the jurors step by step along the path that ends with the crime being committed. And if the jurors are convinced that the crime in question could ONLY have been committed by the accused, the prosecution has done it's job and a conviction is the expected outcome.

The defense doesn't have to take the jury down a path of one scenario. They can present several possible scenarios. And if any of those possible scenarios leads one juror to hold reasonable doubt about the accused's role in the events, an acquittal is the expected outcome.

In the State of Pennsylvania vs. Michael A. Roseboro, the DA's office has to have a plan, focused on one clear and continuous set of events that led to the death of Jan Roseboro.
They will have to show means.... Yes, Mike had the means to kill Jan. She was at home, with him, while three of their children slept. He's a strong man and could have beaten, strangled and struck her with an object.
Mike had opportunity. See above. Jan was there, fully accessible to him. He admits to being on the property with her in the time frame of the crime being committed.
Now for motive.
The DA has Angie Funk as star witness. She already had offered the emails Mike had sent to her, turned over her phone, and gave statements to them including details of her pregnancy.

In the article that follows, I was most interested in what Mr. Sodomsky had to say about Angie Funk..

The attorney for an accused killer told reporters Wednesday that Michael Roseboro did not murder his wife two weeks ago in northern Lancaster County.

"Contrary to published reports and widespread speculation, Michael Roseboro did not kill his wife," Reading defense attorney Allan Sodomsky said. Sodomsky said prosecutors are overlooking important information in the case.

Police said Roseboro killed his wife of 19 years, Jan Roseboro, on the night of July 22nd by beating her, strangling her and then throwing her in the family swimming pool in Reinholds. Roseboro called 911 that night and said he found his wife's body floating in the pool.

While prosecutors indicated there is no evidence a robber may have killed Jan Roseboro, Sodomsky said the killer could have been a robber.

"As soon as the body was released to the family, it was noted that there was approximately $40,000 worth of jewelry missing from Jan's person, that she had on," Sodomsky said.

Prosecutors said Roseboro had a motive to kill his wife because he was having an affair with another woman. Sodomsky said the woman claiming to be Michael Roseboro's mistress is not believable. "She struggles to gain credibility with the people that know her best," Sodomsky said.

Lancaster County District Attorney Craig Stedman reacted to Sodomsky's comments by issuing a statement in which he said he will not conduct the trial in the media.

Well...it's not a secret that Angie has been called a liar by many that know her. We all know by now that Angie and the truth aren't close friends.
But she is clearly pregnant. And claims the child is Mike Roseboro's.
She clearly handed over emails that she claims were sent to her by Mike Roseboro. I find it hard to believe that the DA would not have had all the emails investigated by a computer forensics specialist to make sure Angie didn't do some fancy footwork with her computer.
So what does that do for Mike and his defense?
All they can hope for is that the paternity test reveals another man as the father of the baby.

Mr. Sodomsky has had to regroup. His attempt at tearing down Angie's credibility has suffered much as the investigation has moved along. Angie revealed to investigators that she is pregnant. Mr. Sodomsky had to be aware of that thanks to discovery.
Despite her penchant for lying, it appears that so far she can back up her current claims.
All she needs is the correct result on the paternity test.

So what tack will the defense come up with now?
Possibly the robbery theory. I have one question...wasn't it Mike who was the one to receive the body and claim the jewelry was gone?

I hope Mr. Sodomsky doesn't underestimate the intelligence of a Lancaster County jury.

Maybe he'll present evidence that Angie wasn't the love of Mike's life, that he simply used the same lines on her that he used on many of the women he had affairs with.
Many are wondering how many of his former mistresses will testify. Especially the ones that he was sleeping with during the summer of 2008.
There have been stories, and they are as yet unsubstantiated by me, that Mike was known to frequent a local establishment with one of his women.
But I'm sure Mr. Sodomsky will tell us all that a cheater does not a murderer make.
And that is true in some cases.
Angie wouldn't be believable even now with out emails and a pregnant profile to back her story up.
If you were attempting to come up with a defense, what options would you have?

1. A robber hopped or opened the gate on the fence and beat, strangled and drowned Jan Roseboro. He or she then hung around, washed blood from the area around the pool, off of their hands, cleaned the bottom of their shoes to leave no traceable footprints and left themselves out the gate through which they entered, leaving no fibers, dropped jewelry, hair strands behind.
2. The aforementioned robber then NEVER hocked or pawned the stolen jewelry. They must have kept it for their own use.
3. The robbers just happened to choose that house, that night, and that person, fully unaware that the woman they were about to rob and kill had a husband who told his mistress that he was going to tell his wife he was leaving her. It is a total coincidence that they chose that night, hours after the woman's husband had emailed his mistress professing his love, telling her that he had to have her as his wife, and he had to become her husband.
   That qualifies Mike Roseboro for a spot on the show "Worst Week Ever".
   

Somehow, I just don't think so.......

Final Accountability: The Long Road To Justice

A date has now been set for The State of Pennsylvania vs. Michael A. Roseboro. On July 17, 2009 the long and tedious work will begin. The initial "housekeeping" and setting the stage will begin. When all of the "business" of the trial is completed, the testimony will begin.

Voir dire will be interesting to say the least. We can all only hope and pray that the jurors will be representative of the citizens of the county and rely only on facts in evidence. I know many people that have remained focused on this case since the first report of Jan Roseboro's death was made public are still claiming to be able to put all personal theories and feelings aside.
As heinous as the crime was, and as much as the loss of a beautiful Mom of four young children breaks my heart, even I could review the evidence at hand and render a vote to verdict based solely on that. Any other option would terrify me. And it should terrify you.
No matter the previous interactions anyone has had with any of the parties involved, Michael Roseboro is supposed to receive a verdict handed down by a jury of his peers after and only after the evidence is reviewed.
The Roseboro jury has a very painful and heartbreaking duty ahead of them. No matter the final verdict, no one will ever come out a winner. There are no fixes here.
I believe that being a juror in this trial will change the lives of those chosen.
Mr. Sodomsky has a long and successful history to bring to the table. His client deserves the best he's got. Sodomsky is skilled and eloquent, knowing that the jury has to accept him before they will listen to him.
DA Steadman has his battle ahead. He bears the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. He represents every citizen of the State of Pennsylvania when he rises to stand at the lectern.
The murder of Jan Roseboro was a crime of murder to her person, and it was a crime against the State of Pennsylvania, and thus, to the society of Pennsylvania.

The time for conjecture and speculation is about to end. Evidence will be presented that hasn't seen the light of day yet. Defense maneuvers that we could only imagine will take on a vivid and colorful life of their own.
This will be a battle.
Mr. Sodomsky bears not ounce of burden in this case or any case in which he defends. He, in all reality, has to do nothing. He could, in a perfect world, never rise from his chair, never enter one item as evidence. He could let the ball in the State's court.
That rarely happens, although there have been cases where the defense is so absent that it might as well as be deemed not presented.
In this case, Mr. Sodomsky simply has to confuse, create wonder and doubt. And that may not be a difficult thing to do.
Mr. Steadman has to convince twelve people of facts and a chain of events beyond a reasonable doubt. They can't "have a good feeling" Mike did it. They can't "bet a dollar to a dougnut" he did it. They have to be sure enough that there is no other answer as to who killed Jan Roseboro.
We can all be grateful for that caveat. Not all countries operate the way we do in the United States.
Now don't get me wrong. I watched every minute of the OJ trial that they televised. And the verdict that resulted sucked the air out of my chest. That still terrifies me. The scientific evidence in that case was over the heads of those jurors. That is clear. And the State of California dropped the ball. They needed to educate that jury in a much more effective way. And they never should have allowed OJ's team to orchestrate the trying on of the gloves. But I doubt today that even if the gloves would have fit, that they would have convicted him. There was far too much going on behind the scenes to get an honest result based solely on evidence. The woman who saw OJ racing away from the area of the murder at the appropriate time, had he been the killer, blew it. She sold her story to a tabloid and her testimony wasn't admitted.
She saw him. Period.
Let's hope there are no missteps in the Roseboro trial. For either side.
There is a time lag between Jan being taken to ECH and the authorities returning to the scene for evidentiary work. Only when the autopsy was done did they return to the scene. There were many hours available for extra clean up and disposal of evidence. I hope that doesn't come back to haunt the State.
Mr. Steadman has a target. Mike Roseboro.
Mr. Sodomsky doesn't need one, but he has several if not more. He has everyone.
The defense doesn't have to prove who did it. They just have to show that everyone and anyone else could have killed Jan. From a mistress of Mike's to a random thug intent on robbing, the candidates only need to muddy up the waters.

Testimony may be given that will reveal parts of lives never before known. Many had no idea that when they had a very temporary fling with Mike or Angie that they would be facing a bailiff or a clerk of the court with their hand on the Bible. It has to seem macabre or surreal to them at the very least.
The combination of Michael Roseboro and Angela Funk was lethal and toxic. And the damage and devastation will go on for years and years. Lives not yet begun will be affected forever. Lives that are so young will never be complete.
A guilty verdict will repair nothing. An acquittal might allow the Roseboro and Binkley families a chance to heal and try to get through the days of their lives with some comfort. The damage done to families throughout the county will remain.
But a true and honest verdict is what our system is all about.
Unless a person steps forward who witnessed what happened at the Roseboro home that night, we have to rely on the jury to sift through it all and make the right decision.
No one wants to see Roseboro get away with murder. And no one wants to see him convicted of a crime he may not have committed. The loss has been so great already.
And at the center of it stands Angela Funk. Due any day now.
I can't imagine being that child, years down the road, trying to make sense of the events that led to my life. People often feel that they carry the stain of their parents or families. That poor baby has been given the worst possible burden to carry. And that burden was given freely by it's mother.
Given the fact that Funk has never made an attempt to "lay low" or avoid public scrutiny thus far, I can't see her stepping off the stage she's created in her own mind anytime soon. Just as she blazed proud all over town in her pregnant glory, she will probably parade that poor baby all over the area as well. She did nothing to shield her daughter's from the glare. And this child will be no different. This child is her badge of fame. After all, why don't we just understand?
Mike loves her, he wants to be with her and have a family with her! Just ask Angie, she'll tell you!
He loves her? He wants to be with her? So he said.... now we'll see what he has to say.....now that he's had a chance to see his life as it really is.
If acquitted in the courts, he will never recoup what he's lost as a man and a father. Let's see if Angie is worth all that come trial time.
My guess is that Mike is shoving her under the bus. After all, it was well known that he was seeing other women while he was sleeping with Angie.
There was a woman that he was known to meet right in Reinholds, near the railroad tracks. There was at least one other woman Mike was seeing so often that when the story broke, men and women who knew Mike had mistakenly guessed that it was one of those women that the authorities were referring to when the news broke.
Let's see if they show up at the trial to testify. I hope Angie gets to meet her sisters-in-love.
The other members of Mike's "stable". She just may learn that she wasn't that special after all.
Or was that why she orchestrated the pregnancy behind Mike's back? Did she know? And sealed her spot with an "oopsie"?
Stay tuned...

Update To The Roseboro Possible Defense!

Earlier today I posted that a woman on the TB forum has claimed to believe that she was the intended target of the brutal attack and murder in July 2008 that took the life of Jan Roseboro.
Further investigation reveals that this is indeed the mother of the young man killed while in the attempt of a robbery early on the day of the Roseboro murder.
She states that she lives less than a mile and a half of the Roseboro's in Reinholds and that her son had extensive gang involvement.
She has clarified that she has spoken to County Detectives, Mr. Sodomsky and Mr. Roseboro's private investigator.
At this time, she has not been deposed, nor has she heard from either side in some time.
I can't read minds, but it would seem that if her theory had credence, she would have heard from either side often and more recently.
We'll have to keep our eye on this ........ I do think the "gang robbery" theory will have it's day in court.
Mr. Sodomsky has nothing to prove. He just has to muddy up the waters a bit..........

The Roseboro Defense! Gang Robbery or Mistaken Identity?

As of this morning, a poster on the Talkback Forum of the Lancasteronline site has indicated that she can't wait to tell her story in court!
My knowledge of this woman is limited, but I believe she is the mother of a young man shot and killed while attempting a robbery in Lancaster County shortly before the Roseboro murder.
Others have thrown the theory out there that a gang robbery was the impetus for Jan Roseboro's killing, with the nebulous mention of $40,000 worth of jewelry being missing. That claim came from Mike Roseboro via his defense attorney, Mr. Sodomsky.
It has yet to be confirmed whether the jewelry is, indeed, missing, or ever was.
The poster I refer to has made it sound as if she will be testifying for the defense.

A gang killing? A robbery?

There were no witnesses to the brutal attack on Jan. But what robber or gang hangs around and cleans up the murder scene? There was no overt blood evidence found anywhere on the Roseboro property. That pretty much negates the gang robbery theory.

But as we all know, the defense simply has to create reasonable doubt.
If Mr. Sodomsky can make 12 people believe that the gang came in the night, quietly and brutally attacked and killed Jan Roseboro, then hung out and worked like a well-oiled machine removing all possible clues of a beating or killing, then he is worth his weight in salt.


Or was it a case of mistaken identity? The poster claims that she was told to stay out of Lancaster after the murder of her son. I have no details about that at this point.
She claims that the "wrong blond" was killed and that she is the "other blond"!
This could get very interesting........