Evidence missing in 1987 slaying; Suspect's lawyer seeks dismissal.

Byline: Gary V. Murray

WORCESTER - The lawyer for a prison inmate accused of raping and murdering a 64-year-old woman 20 years ago in her West Side home is asking that the charges be dismissed because of missing evidence, including a hammer recovered at the crime scene.

Steven M. Siemietkowski, 47, is awaiting trial in Worcester Superior Court on charges of murder and aggravated rape in the June 4, 1987, slaying of June Lynch in her home at 21 Sunny Hill Drive. An autopsy determined that Mrs. Lynch died of "asphyxia from smothering associated with blunt impact injuries," according to court records.

In February 1987, Mr. Siemietkowski worked in the victim's home, cleaning up after a furnace malfunction filled the house with soot.

He became a suspect in the murder investigation but was not charged until 2004, after a computer comparison revealed what prosecutors said was a match between his DNA profile and a genetic profile developed from biological evidence recovered from the victim.

The defendant's appointed lawyer, Terry Scott Nagel, filed a motion July 13 seeking dismissal of the charges against his client, who remains in custody on a parole violation and denied any involvement in the killing when questioned by police.

In an affidavit supporting the motion, Mr. Nagel said he discovered - when he went with Assistant District Attorney Thomas E. Landry to examine the physical evidence in the case at Worcester police headquarters - that "at least one box" of evidence could not be located. Among the missing items was a hammer recovered from the crime scene, according to the motion.

"Subsequent efforts by the police to locate these items have been unavailing," Mr. Nagel wrote. The defense lawyer also noted in his motion that there were no "evidence tags" establishing the movement and chain of custody of various pieces of evidence in the case.

Citing case law, Mr. Nagel said dismissal of the charges would be warranted if the court determined that evidence favorable to Mr. Siemietkowski had been lost as a result of the government's "culpable mishandling."

As an alternative to dismissal, Mr. Nagel asked that the court exclude the use of DNA evidence obtained from items "whose provenance cannot be adequately established," and that the prosecution be required to detail, before trial, the chain of custody of each piece of evidence it planned to introduce.

Timothy J. Connolly, a spokesman for District Attorney Joseph D. Early Jr., said yesterday that the missing evidence had not been found.

"We're preparing a response to the motion," he said, declining to comment further.

Mr. Nagel has also filed a motion asking Judge Frances A. McIntyre to reconsider her denial, last year, of a motion to suppress DNA evidence in the case.

Mr. Nagel argued in that motion that state correction officials unlawfully collected Mr. Siemietkowski's DNA sample in 2003, while he was serving time for a parole violation from a 1988 breaking and entering conviction.

Mr. Siemietkowski's criminal history at the time did not include convictions that would have placed him on the list of felons whose DNA could be collected under state law. Charged in 1980 with armed robbery, Mr. Siemietkowski later pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of larceny from a person.

An incorrect data entry made on Mr. Siemietkowski's Board of Probation record, however, reflected a conviction for the original charge of robbery and his DNA sample was taken on the basis of that error, according to an agreed statement of facts submitted by Mr. Nagel and Mr. Landry in connection with the suppression motion.

The law has since been changed to allow the collection of DNA samples from all convicted felons.

In denying the motion to suppress, Judge McIntyre said responsibility for the error in Mr. Siemietkowski's criminal record that resulted in the collection of his DNA sample rested with probation officials or the Criminal Offender Registry Information board and not with police or correction officials.

In his motion to reconsider, Mr. Nagel cited publicity surrounding problems recently uncovered at the state police crime lab, including DNA profiles of a dozen sex crime suspects that were wrongly placed in the lab's database of convicted felons.

The 12 suspects were convicted of misdemeanors, but state law limits the database to convicted felons, officials said.

Mr. Nagel said in an affidavit that he was requesting reconsideration in light of "revelations of malfeasance by the DNA lab, including an apparent pattern of seizing and testing DNA from individuals who did not fall under the statute authorizing such seizure and testing."

Mr. Siemietkowski's case has been continued to Aug. 28.

NOTE: 1987 INCIDENT

ART: PHOTO

CUTLINE: Mr. Siemietkowski