By DAN CROWLEY
Daily Hampshire Gazette
NORTHAMPTON — The state Supreme Judicial Court ruled Thursday that a third murder trial can proceed against Cara Rintala, who is accused of strangling her wife, Annamarie Rintala, to death in March 2010 in their Granby home.
The decision comes three days after the court heard oral arguments in Boston by Assistant Northwestern District Attorney Steven E. Gagne and Rintala’s defense attorney, David P. Hoose of Northampton. The ruling came quickly by SJC standards. Justices typically deliver opinions within 130 days of hearing oral arguments and decisions often take months.
“The speed of the ruling was a surprise and a pleasant one at that,” Gagne stated in an email to the Gazette.
In its concise, two-page opinion, the Supreme Judicial Court wrote that “the evidence against Rintala was sufficient to permit the jury to conclude that she strangled the victim in the basement of their house.”
The parties are due back in court on Jan. 27 at which time prosecutors intend to ask the court to schedule the case for a third trial. Gagne said the district attorney’s office will push for a trial this year.
Cara Rintala has pleaded not guilty to a charge of first-degree murder, maintaining she was running errands with her daughter when her wife was killed. She has been free on $150,000 bail since February 2014 and must remain in western Massachusetts as part of her bail conditions. She was tried twice for first-degree murder (in 2013 and 2014), though juries deadlocked both times when they were unable to reach a unanimous verdict.
Hoose had appealed to the court to dismiss the case on the grounds that it was barred by double jeopardy principles because the evidence presented at Rintala’s second trial was insufficient to sustain a conviction.
The appeal earlier was denied by Hampshire Superior Court Judge Mary-Lou Rup who presided over both trials and then by a single Supreme Judicial Court justice before the matter was brought to the full SJC.
Hoose argued Monday that the prosecution’s case against Rintala was “entirely circumstantial” and that the evidence it presented to jurors was insufficient to sustain a conviction. Cara Rintala attended the oral arguments in Boston on Monday along with her parents and other family members.
Hoose could not immediately be reached for comment Thursday because he was in court.
The Supreme Judicial Court wrote that after reviewing the record, including the transcript of the second trial, it found that Rintala could be retried without violating her rights against being subjected to double jeopardy or a second prosecution of the same offense.
“Based on the state of the victim’s body at the time she was found by first responders, the testimony of the Commonwealth’s medical expert, the activity on the victim’s cellular telephone (and abrupt stoppage thereof), and Rintala’s own statements, the jury could rationally conclude that, at the time that the victim was killed, she and Rintala were the only adults in the house,” the Supreme Judicial Court states.
The SJC also noted evidence to suggest that an attempt had been made to compromise the crime scene shortly before first responders arrived at the home and took into consideration “a tumultuous relationship between Rintala and the victim, and of Rintala’s consciousness of guilt,” according to its decision.
Dan Crowley can be reached at [email protected].
