Connie King
And if so, whether possible degradation of that evidence is cause for dismissal.
King has been charged with first-degree murder in the 2012 death of Colucci, of Manchester, her fiancé.
Defense attorney Christina S. Stanford said in last week’s motion hearing that DNA evidence collected from the scene of Colucci’s murder, along with additional samples later collected from beneath King’s fingernails, is key to supporting King’s statement that on the day of the murder she was attacked by her estranged husband Troy King and a second, unidentified assailant in the home she shared with Colucci.
According to Stanford’s motion to dismiss, the evidence, collected in November 2012, was not tested by the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) until September 2014. At that time, the bureau reported that the samples, then nearly two years old, were either insufficient or too degraded to render specific details about the DNA profile or profiles discovered.
District Attorney General Craig Northcott begged to differ. Even if the DNA evidence had been sufficient to identify King’s assailants, he said, such identification would have done more to implicate either Troy King (who has already confessed to the assault on his wife) or an unknown third party than it would have done to prove King’s innocence.
“The state’s position is that Troy King attacked her. We agree. It’s not an issue. So we don’t need DNA to establish who it is.”
Even if there was a third party to be identified, Northcott said, “It doesn’t get her off the hook. Our theory is that she was working with Troy King and that’s why the whole thing was staged. Even if there was a third party involved in that, it doesn’t change our theory.” (Tullahoma News)
