COLIN VAN VLECK - 4 Weeks (2009) - Arlington/Bennington VT

Trial of man charged with killing son will continue on Monday

KEITH WHITCOMB JR.
Posted: 10/21/2011 12:08:12 AM EDT

Thursday October 20, 2011
BENNINGTON -- The trial of an Arlington man accused of causing the death of his infant son in 2009 will resume on Monday.

Russ C. Van Vleck, 28, is charged with one count of manslaughter. A state medical examiner ruled the 5-week old child's death the result of a homicide, something Van Vleck's attorney is contesting by saying the internal injuries were caused by a condition the boy had at birth that involves skull plates fusing prematurely and putting pressure on the brain.

The state, meanwhile, has contended the injuries are more consistent with the infant being shaken or thrown.

Friday is a pre-scheduled furlough day for Vermont courts. They were implemented by the judiciary to deal with budget woes. The trial began Monday and as expected has made heavy use of expert witnesses in addition to medical professionals involved with the case.

Recorded interviews between Sgt. Robert Patten of the Vermont State Police and Van Vleck were played for the jury. The emergency technicians who responded to Van Vleck's 911 call two years ago were also called as witnessed.

The state also called pediatrician Karyn Patno as an expert on child abuse. Attorney Joyce Brenner, who is assisting Van Vleck's attorney William Wright, questioned Patno's status as an expert on child abuse trauma, which Patno testified wasn't a recognized specialty within pediatrics until 2009. She testified she'd undergone a 6-month version of a 2-year fellowship on the specialty, but prior to 2009 child abuse was considered part of the pediatric discipline.
Judge David Howard ruled Patno had shown she was qualified to be an expert witnesses.

The proceedings have been starting around 8:30 a.m. and running until about 4 p.m. Howard reminded jurors they're not to speak about the case outside of court, even to each other, and said they must take special care to avoid talking about it on the long weekend. They've also been cautioned to avoid media reports on the trial, which is expected to last much of next week.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/local/ci_19160500

Van Vleck defense team opens case

Wednesday October 26, 2011
KEITH WHITCOMB JR.

BENNINGTON -- Defense attorneys for an Arlington man accused of killing his 5-week-old son began establishing their case Wednesday, and the trial is expected to continue into early next week.

Russ C. Van Vleck, 28, pleaded not guilty in 2010 to a charge of manslaughter after the Vermont State Medical Examiner's Office ruled his son's October 2009 death to be a homicide. The state finished with its witnesses Wednesday morning, while attorney William Wright, who represents Van Vleck, called Dr. Ronald Uscinski, a nuerosurgeon from the Baltimore area, to provide a counter to the state's expert witnesses.

Wright said Uscinski testified that Colin R. Van Vleck, the deceased infant, did not die from being shaken, thrown into a soft object, or from a non-accidental injury, but died from a combination of a birth injury and a skull defect.

It's been the state's position, backed up by Chief Medical Examiner Steven Shapiro and Dr. Elizabeth Bundock, a neuropathologist at the State Medical Examiner's Office, that the infant was killed by being shaken or thrown into a soft object. The state has said the internal bleeding, in addition to other injuries, along with there being no external injuries on the child's body, implicate Van Vleck, as he was the only one with the child the night of the death. He was the one who called 911, saying Colin Van Vleck wasn't breathing.

Wright said Uscinski supports the defense's position that the boy was born with some difficulty, and that it caused bleeding in his brain. Colin Van Vleck was also born with plates in his skull fused together.
Normally, when a child is born the plates in the skull are able to shift to accommodate both being born and the brain's subsequent growth. Wright and attorney Joyce Brenner, who is assisting him, are working to lay a case that says pressure built up in the baby's skull, causing a host of problems that explain his internal injuries and some of his behavior in the days before his death.

Deputy State's Attorney Christina Rainville has had experts testify that there's no recorded case of the type of plate fusing Colin Van Vleck had causing an infant's death, and that he had a stomach virus not long before he died that accounted for his fussiness and vomiting, which she said is not because of "intracranial pressure."

Wright said he plans to call two medical examiners from the Miami-Dade County (Fla.) Medical Examiner's Office to testify in addition to Uscinski, who concluded his testimony late Wednesday.

The trial began Oct. 17 and was scheduled to run for two weeks, but Judge David Howard informed jurors that it may stretch into Nov. 1. He said it's also possible the trial may be in session Saturday morning, although that won't be determined until today.

There are four alternate jurors. Two had mentioned they may have scheduling issues early next week, while another indicated Saturday might be difficult to make time for.

Wright said the number of expert witnesses called and their scheduling issues have contributed to the pace of the trial, and that was somewhat expected.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/local/ci_19201793

Defense expert witnesses testify in Van Vleck trial

KEITH WHITCOMB JR.
Posted: 10/28/2011 10:59:09 PM EDT

Friday October 28, 2011
BENNINGTON -- Expert witnesses for the defense concluded their testimony Friday in the trial of a man accused of causing the death of his 5-week-old son in 2009.

Russ C. Van Vleck, 28, of Arlington, pleaded not guilty last year to one count of manslaughter. His trial began Oct. 17 and was expected to run for at least two full weeks.

Judge David Howard told jurors Friday after calling a recess that it’s likely the trial will go until at least Tuesday, and to not make plans for Wednesday. He said he does not want jurors starting deliberations at the end of a long day.

The case has relied heavily on expert witnesses. The state has called doctors from the Vermont Medical Examiners Office who performed the autopsy on Colin R. Van Vleck, as well as Burlington-area pediatricians.

Bennington attorney William D. Wright, who represents Van Vleck, has called experts from the Baltimore, Md., area as well as two pathologists from the Miami-Dade County (Fla.) Medical Examiners Office. He said he will now move into calling "fact witnesses" and will determine who that will be over the weekend.

The last person to testify Friday was Benjamin Corcoran, who lived in Arlington for over 20 years and is friends with Van Vleck. He said Van Vleck has a reputation in town as being "peaceable" and "meticulous."

It’s the state’s contention that one October night in 2009, while he was alone with his son, Van Vleck either shook the infant or threw him into a soft object causing internal injuries which led to his eventual death. He then called 911 and was coaxed through CPR until paramedics arrived. The infant died some hours later at the hospital.
The defense’s case has been that Colin Van Vleck died of a combination birth injury and birth defect. The injury, bleeding in the brain, caused the organ to swell, while a defect had caused two plates on his skull to fuse prematurely, thus not giving the brain room to expand.

Wright said Friday there hasn’t been much disagreement between experts on the evidence itself, but they don’t see eye to eye on what the findings mean or what caused the infant’s death.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/local/ci_19219556

Jury deliberations set to begin today in Van Vleck case

Posted: 10/31/2011 10:54:57 PM EDT

KEITH WHITCOMB JR.

Staff Writer

BENNINGTON -- Jurors who’ve heard evidence for the past two weeks in an infant death trial will get their instructions today and are expected to begin deliberations.

Russ C. Van Vleck, 28, of Arlington, pleaded not guilty last year to manslaughter, a charge stemming from the October 2009 death of his 5-week-old son, Colin R. Van Vleck, which the State Medical Examiner’s Office ruled a homicide.

The defense concluded its case Monday, and the state’s rebuttal testimony from an expert witness at the medical examiner’s office was short. Judge David Howard decided to recess in the early afternoon, as closing arguments plus jury instructions would have jurors beginning deliberations in late afternoon or early evening, something Howard wished to avoid given the complex nature of the case.

Both the state and Van Vleck’s attorneys have made heavy use of expert witnesses, who have testified to the meaning behind the medical examiner’s findings. Deputy State’s Attorney Christina Rainville has argued the infant’s injuries could only be the result of being shaken or thrown into a soft object, and has called the chief medical examiner, members of the ME’s office, and Burlington-area neurosurgeons and pediatricians to testify.

Bennington attorney William D. Wright called a Baltimore-area nuerosurgeon, plus two pathologists from the Miami-Dade County (Fla.) Medical Examiner’s Office to testify in support of the scenario they’ve put before the jury to explain the infant’s death.
Wright has argued that Colin Van Vleck had a brain injury when he was born, which coupled with a birth defect causing two plates in his head to fuse prematurely, caused him to stop breathing. Normally, the plates in infant skulls aren’t fused, allowing the brain to expand and the skull to contract during birth, but two of the infant’s skull plates weren’t free to do this.

The defense has said these two things caused pressure to build inside the boy’s skull, accounting for his other internal injuries as well as some of his behavior beforehand. It was reported to police that Colin Van Vleck had been vomiting and was fussy, signs the defense has said are symptoms of pressure inside the skull.

The state has argued a stomach "bug" the infant was recovering from account for the vomiting and fussiness, and have had experts testify that the level of pressure needed for death would cause more than fussiness and vomiting.

There’s been little disagreement on what evidence has been presented, but the interpretations by experts have been different. Friends, family, police, doctors, and emergency medical technicians have all testified in the case as to what happened the last day the infant was alive.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/news/ci_19235962

Van Vleck jury struggling with deadlock

Posted: 11/01/2011 10:09:55 PM EDT

KEITH WHITCOMB JR.

Staff Writer

BENNINGTON -- After announcing Tuesday evening that it was deadlocked, the jury in an infant death case will reconvene this morning in an attempt to reach a verdict.

On trial is Russ C. Van Vleck, 28, of Arlington, who in March 2010 pleaded not guilty to manslaughter. The Vermont State Medical Examiner’s Office ruled his 5-week-old son’s October 2009 death to be the result of a homicide.

The jury got the case at 1:30 p.m., after hearing closing arguments from both the prosecution and defense attorneys. At 7:25 p.m., they announced they were deadlocked and both the state and defense discussed with Judge David Howard the possibility of a hung jury.

Before the deadlock could be addressed, the jury sent out notes asking to hear playback of the testimony given by Dr. Kenneth Hutchins, a pathologist at the Miami-Dade County (Florida) Medical Examiner’s Office, who’d been called by the defense as an expert witness to refute the state’s own experts.

The testimony in its entirety is roughly three hours long, and it was decided between the jury, the court and attorneys that jurrors would come back at 8:30 a.m. to listen to it.

The trial began on Oct. 17 with the state presenting evidence suggesting Colin C. Van Vleck, the infant, died from injuries he could only have received from his father on Oct. 2, 2009, by either being shaken or thrown into a soft object.
The defense has presented experts who examined the infant’s remains and suggested Colin Van Vleck died from two things working together, one being an injury at birth that caused his brain to swell, and a birth defect that fused two of his skull plates together, thereby not allowing the brain room to expand and killing him.

Earlier in the day, Deputy State’s Attorney Christina Rainville said in her closing arguments that when people recall a traumatic event, they can do so with clarity. She said Van Vleck gave conflicting statements as to the events of Oct. 2, 2009, giving different time intervals between when he set the baby to sleep and when he noticed he wasn’t breathing.

She also said Van Vleck told different stories about where he put the baby, on the bed or the couch, and said different things about what he’d been doing while Colin Van Vleck slept, playing a video game versus watching a movie.

She said Russ Van Vleck allowed investigators to take photographs of himself performing CPR on a baby doll in the same manner he did with his son. She said the seven photos are "seven lies," and that he held the doll in such a way as to explain the internal injuries.

Rainville said there were "axonal balls" found in the child’s spine. Axons are microscopic fibers found in the spine and brain that work like conveyer belts moving proteins. When they break, the conveyer mechanism keeps working and material piles up at the broken ends forming balls.

She said one of the state’s experts, Dr. Bruce Tranmer, a neurosurgeon at Fletcher-Allen Health Care with 30 years of experience, testified that trauma causes axons to sever.

Rainville said pressure inside the infant’s skull doesn’t account for the injuries like a detached retina (in the eye) and hemorrhages in his neck muscles. She said that even the defense’s experts agreed that there has been no documented case or study showing a child having died of intracranial pressure caused by a single suture craniosynostosis.

She said a child with the level of intracranial pressure needed to cause the damage Colin Van Vleck exhibited would not have been seen in an attentive, healthy child as the infant was reported to be earlier. She said experts testified that if the child were conscious, he’d have been in agony, blind, and unable to move.

Vleck was represented by Bennington attorney William D. Wright, who was assisted by attorney Joyce Brenner.

Wright, in his closing, said the case keys around the standard of reasonable doubt, and he criticized the Vermont Medical Examiner’s Office, referring to Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Steven Shapiro as a "zealot" who first came to a conclusion then looked for evidence to support it.

Wright said the fact there is disagreement among experts shows the "shaken baby" theory is at least still being debated.

"The state wants you to convict when all the experts can’t agree," Wright said. "All the child abuse zealots, they have had to give up the term ‘shaken baby.’ They now call it ‘accidental trauma.’"

He said that had Colin Van Vleck’s death been in Miami-Dade County, it would not have been ruled a homicide. "Who did the research before they came to an opinion?" he asked. "Not Dr. (Karyn) Patno, not Dr. Shapiro, not Dr. Tranmer. We know Dr. (Elizabeth) Bundock did a lot after. They went looking for what they wanted to find."

Patno is a pediatrician from northern Vermont and Bundock is a nuerosurgeon at the Vermont Medical Examiner’s office. All were experts called by the state.

Wright suggested the work by the state medical examiner was "sloppy" and the state’s experts didn’t expect their work to be reviewed by Florida pathologists, who Wright said found things they missed such as indications of a lung problem in the infant.

He countered an inference by the state that Wright’s experts get paid to testify in infant death cases. Wright said they are professionals and are being paid for their expertise, but their motives are just.

Rainville had pointed out, both in her closing and rebuttal, that Dr. Ronald Uscinski, a Maryland-area nuerosurgeon and the first expert Wright called, has made over $1 million testifying as an expert in similar cases, claiming "shaken baby syndrome" requires a broken neck.

Wright said in the days before Colin Van Vleck died he was exhibiting a number of signs that something was wrong. He said his head was misshapen, and that he was fussy and vomiting, things his parents and Dr. Michael Welther, who treated the infant, thought were because of a stomach bug he’d caught from Lindsay Van Vleck, his mother.

"The evidence the defense has advanced shows Colin (Van Vleck) died from a perfect storm of medical events that started before his birth," Wright said.

He said the boy showed signs he was suffering from intracranial pressure and that the Van Vlecks did their due diligence in getting him medical help. "They were looking for answers and they got nothing. (Van Vleck) and his family were betrayed by the medical professionals in Vermont."

Wright said the state has not been able to show Van Vleck caused the death of his son. The medical findings don’t point to that, he said, and there was a lack of findings that would, such as external injuries. He said experts have disagreed on the presence of axonal retraction balls in the child’s spine, and said the state is relying on things Van Vleck told other people to say he doesn’t have his story straight, in effect playing the "telephone game."

He said he had also been sedated when being interviewed by state police in a recording Wright played during his closing arguments and the trial itself.

Van Vleck did not testify, but in the recording, he gives great detail on his child’s eating and sleeping habits and appeared to become emotional when talking about the CPR he gave with coaching from a 911 operator.

He said the method they had him use was different than what he’d learned in the National Guard, and it seemed like he was doing it too slow. "I felt like I ate up 10 minutes of his life by not being able to do the CPR right for him," Van Vleck said in the recording. "I just wanted to get him to somebody who knew what they were doing."

Wright said the evidence shows Van Vleck is a meticulous man who cared for his son and wanted to spend time with him before being deployed.

"They can’t tell you what (Van Vleck) did, all they can do is call him a liar because it suits their purposes," Wright said.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/ci_19243378?source=most_viewed

Rainville said pressure inside the infant’s skull doesn’t account for
the injuries like a detached retina (in the eye) and hemorrhages in his
neck muscles. She said that even the defense’s experts agreed that there
has been no documented case or study showing a child having died of
intracranial pressure caused by a single suture craniosynostosis.

She
said a child with the level of intracranial pressure needed to cause
the damage Colin Van Vleck exhibited would not have been seen in an
attentive, healthy child as the infant was reported to be earlier. She
said experts testified that if the child were conscious, he’d have been
in agony, blind, and unable to move.

This backs up much of what I have read about this condition, which heretofore I wasn't even aware of. This is science in its purest form.

Wright, in his closing, said the case keys around the standard of
reasonable doubt, and he criticized the Vermont Medical Examiner’s
Office, referring to Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Steven Shapiro as a
"zealot" who first came to a conclusion then looked for evidence to
support it.
Wright suggested the work by the state medical examiner was "sloppy"
"They were looking for answers and they got nothing. (Van Vleck) and his
family were betrayed by the medical professionals in Vermont."

We have heard this defense story before. I believe it was in June of this year when throwing spaghetti at the wall and name calling became the standard procedure in that Orlando trial.

Today we are allowed to finally mourn Colin Russ Van Vleck. Today his father was found not guilty. My best friend, brother his family and all of us are finally vindicated by a jury of our peers. Take this verdict and shove it up your ignorant hateful asses. Good luck on trolling your future victims losers. You fucking lynch mob assholes. <3

UPDATE: Not guilty in infant death

KEITH WHITCOMB JR.
Posted: 11/02/2011 10:50:59 AM EDT

BENNINGTON - An Arlington man was found not guilty Wednesday on a charge he caused the death of his 5-week-old son in 2009.
Russ. C. Van Vleck, 28, along with his family and friends breathed sighs of relief as the verdict was announced, exchanging hugs and shedding tears.

"I can finally move on with my life," Van Vleck said to a friend.

The trial began Oct. 17 and was heavy on expert witnesses called by both sides. It was the state's contention that on Oct. 2 2009, Van Vleck shook or threw Colin R. Van Vleck in a moment of anger, and had a number of experts, including members of the Vermont Medical Examiner's Office, testify on their interpretations of the child's injuries.

Van Vleck's attorneys sought opinions from Florida medical examiners as well as a Maryland nuerosurgeon to advance the idea the infant died from a combination birth defect and injury. They said the injury caused Colin Van Vleck's brain to swell, while a defect prevented his skull from expanding properly, thus killing him.

Attorneys for both sides thanked the jury for its patience and careful deliberations, which began early Tuesday afternoon. Jurors were deadlocked that evening and decided to break until this morning to hear a bit of replayed testimony.

http://www.benningtonbanner.com/ci_19245932

dewbiez wrote:Today we are allowed to finally mourn Colin Russ Van Vleck. Today his father was found not guilty. My best friend, brother his family and all of us are finally vindicated by a jury of our peers. Take this verdict and shove it up your ignorant hateful asses. Good luck on trolling your future victims
losers. You fucking lynch mob assholes. <3

Wow, it is a shame you did not have it within yourself, to mourn the loss of this baby till now. I hope during this mourning-healing time, you can let go of this anger and hostility. How rude to discuss the death of an innocent child with such vulgarity.

I am pleased that the jury was not deadlocked and they came to a conclusion. Best wishes in the future for all.

ignorant hateful asses

At no time did I ever express any hate toward the father. I certainly would if he was held responsible.
Our purpose here is not to judge but inform and keep track of our justice system for the innocents.
Our purpose was, and always has been, to seek the truth.

imho i still think he was guilty