Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Grand jury investigating Jimmy Snuka's role in Nancy Argentino's death


Bix

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 1 year later...

http://www.mcall.com/news/breaking/mc-jimmy-snuka-grand-jury-announcement-20150901-story.html

 

charged with 3rd degree murder

 

slight nitpick, but when breaking this news on Observer Live Alvarez said he was being charged for a crime that happened 22 years ago. I know he's bad at math and bad at details, but come on man, this happened in the 80's pre-WM1, not the f'n 90's. How do you even make that mistake? Not a big deal, but I was totally like "WTF" and he never corrected himself. Meh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Soyons désinvolte, n'ayons l'air de rien."

 

(this quote would go over so much on a French board)

 

(ok, this is a quote from a very famous song by french rock band Noir Désir, whose singer Bertrand Cantat killed his wife, famous actress Marie Trintignant, by basically beating her to death. He was sentenced to jail though and served his time, unlike some others...)

 

(and it means "let's be jaunty, let's be nonchalant", as in "let's pretend nothing happens", of course the song predates the incident by a good 10 years, but still, applied to that Snuka case, well...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if the scope of this includes investigating possible evidence tampering? Just curious.

 

It doesn't appear that they were looking at anything beyond Snuka.

 

Looking at the statute of limitations in PA:

 

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/LI/CT/HTM/42/00.055..HTM

 

§ 5551. No limitation applicable.

 

A prosecution for the following offenses may be commenced at any time:

 

(1) Murder.

 

(2) Voluntary manslaughter.

 

(3) Conspiracy to commit murder or solicitation to commit murder if a murder results from the conspiracy or solicitation.

 

(4) Any felony alleged to have been perpetrated in connection with a murder of the first or second degree, as set forth in 18 Pa.C.S. § 2502(a) or (B) and (d) (relating to murder).

 

(5) A violation of 75 Pa.C.S. § 3742 (relating to accidents involving death or personal injury) or 3732 (relating to homicide by vehicle) if the accused was the driver of a vehicle involved in an accident resulting in the death of any person.

 

(6) A violation of 18 Pa.C.S. § 2702(a)(1), (2), (4) or (7) (relating to aggravated assault) if the accused knew the victim was a law enforcement officer and the law enforcement officer was acting within the scope of the officer's duties.

(Oct. 5, 1980, P.L.693, No.142, eff. 60 days; Dec. 14, 1984, P.L.986, No.199, eff. 60 days; Dec. 19, 1984, P.L.1089, No.218, eff. imd.; Apr. 5, 1990, P.L.113, No.27, eff. 60 days; July 17, 2007, P.L.123, No.37, eff. 60 days)

 

 

Snuka got charged with 3rd degree murder and involuntary manslaughter, so the no limitations wouldn't apply. Given it's a 30 year old case, the statue would have run ages ago. Also, it appears that tampering with evidence is a misdemeanor:

 

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/LI/consCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&ttl=18&div=0&chpt=49

 

You'd have to sift through that to ponder all the things the WWF/Vince may have done and maybe they're a felony in there. But the clock would have run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would think that someone tampering with evidence would reset the clock, because otherwise you're basically rewarding the person who did it. Seems kind of gross that Snuka could go down for this alone when it seems pretty damn apparent it just didn't magically go away in 1985.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vince didn't do the murder, so he's not benefiting from the tampering. It would be Snuka, and the clock didn't run out on him. He's up under #1.

 

Though I don't know how they got him for involuntary manslaughter as it's voluntary manslaughter that is specifically set out as having no statue of limitations. That would seem to indicate involuntary manslaughter has a lesser statute. I've seen it listed in several places as 2 years, though seem to be overlooking it in the code.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if the scope of this includes investigating possible evidence tampering? Just curious.

 

Two years ago, presiding DA James Martin said this about the Argentino case:

 

 

Don’t get me wrong. I feel empathy for the Argentino family, but 30 years ago there was not sufficient evidence in this case to charge anybody with a crime. The (Lehigh County) DA at the time was William Platt. For 5 1/2 years, I was his first assistant. He's now a judge in the superior court. I've got a lot of respect for the guy. If he didn't think there was enough evidence to charge anyone with a crime in connection with her death, I doubt that I'm going to think there's enough evidence based on basically the same information. There’s an inconclusive pathology report on the autopsy. It hasn’t been ruled a homicide. And basically what we have is Snuka giving some inconsistent statements. Procanyn knows the case better than anyone who’s still alive and he’s probably one of the most tenacious investigators I’ve met. So as far as I’m concerned, the sisters’ complaints and Muchnick’s (e-book) observations are unfounded. It’s unlikely that we’re going to talk to Snuka at this point. We’re going to look at the files. If [Chief Deputy District Attorney] Charlie Gallagher thinks that there’s an avenue of investigation that was not done, or not done adequately at the time, we may talk to other people. We may not. It's going to depend on what his review is. I've asked him to look at it. I told the sisters I didn't want to raise any false expectations and I wasn't making any commitments. We may not put it in front of the grand jury if we don't think there's any more to be discovered by a grand jury investigation.

 

It was clear from his comments then that Martin wasn't interested in investigating his colleagues for possible incompetence/misconduct, despite evidence that might have actually happened (Irv Muchnick has resolutely argued for many years that Lehigh County Det. Gerry Procanyn lied to him about Snuka's account of what happened remaining consistent). Procanyn even continued helping with the case, despite those concerns being voiced!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the most damning thing from a law enforcement perspective was when the Allentown Morning Call got their hands on th autopsy report, where the coroner ruled Nancy's death a homicide pending investigation. Well, if it was a homicide and the only person of interest admits being the only person with her the whole time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/lehigh-county/index.ssf/2015/09/jimmy_superfly_snuka_murder_ca.html

 

In the 30-page grand jury presentment dated July 17, the Lehigh County grand jury said it was recommending charging Snuka with homicide based on three sources of information:

  • Medical and autopsy evidence
  • Snuka's "numerous statements" made to the media and in his autobiography, "Superfly: The Jimmy Snuka Story"
  • His prior assaults of Argentino and his ex-wife
Snuka was subpoenaed by the grand jury and appeared with an attorney, Martin said, but refused to testify.

 

"The weight of the evidence clearly indicates that James Snuka repeatedly assaulted Nancy Argentino on May 10, 1983 and then allowed her to lie in their bed at the George Washington Motor Lodge without obtaining the necessary medical attention," the presentment says. "His asaultive acts and his failure to obtain medical attention resulted in her death by homicide at 1:50 a.m. on May 11, 1983."

 

 

Bix or Keith: if you get your hands on the presentment, or find a link to it, please share. That would be an interesting read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/lehigh-county/index.ssf/2015/09/jimmy_superfly_snuka_murder_ca.html

 

In the 30-page grand jury presentment dated July 17, the Lehigh County grand jury said it was recommending charging Snuka with homicide based on three sources of information:

  • Medical and autopsy evidence
  • Snuka's "numerous statements" made to the media and in his autobiography, "Superfly: The Jimmy Snuka Story"
  • His prior assaults of Argentino and his ex-wife
Snuka was subpoenaed by the grand jury and appeared with an attorney, Martin said, but refused to testify.

 

"The weight of the evidence clearly indicates that James Snuka repeatedly assaulted Nancy Argentino on May 10, 1983 and then allowed her to lie in their bed at the George Washington Motor Lodge without obtaining the necessary medical attention," the presentment says. "His asaultive acts and his failure to obtain medical attention resulted in her death by homicide at 1:50 a.m. on May 11, 1983."

 

 

Bix or Keith: if you get your hands on the presentment, or find a link to it, please share. That would be an interesting read.

 

Irv uploaded it earlier. Haven't gotten a chance to do more than skim it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, the most damning thing from a law enforcement perspective was when the Allentown Morning Call got their hands on th autopsy report, where the coroner ruled Nancy's death a homicide pending investigation. Well, if it was a homicide and the only person of interest admits being the only person with her the whole time...

 

The damning thing is that there's really not all that much new information that led to today's indictment (although that's not the way the DA spun it). The forensic information was there (although not public record). Snuka's rapidly changing story was known. If they didn't discover during their first investigation that Snuka had been arrested for attacking Nancy in a hotel room a few months earlier, then that would be shockingly bad police work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

To me, the most damning thing from a law enforcement perspective was when the Allentown Morning Call got their hands on th autopsy report, where the coroner ruled Nancy's death a homicide pending investigation. Well, if it was a homicide and the only person of interest admits being the only person with her the whole time...

 

The damning thing is that there's really not all that much new information that led to today's indictment (although that's not the way the DA spun it). The forensic information was there (although not public record). Snuka's rapidly changing story was known. If they didn't discover during their first investigation that Snuka had been arrested for attacking Nancy in a hotel room a few months earlier, then that would be shockingly bad police work.

 

I don't know why you don't believe that this is just police work. The first time I heard about this story was probably 10 years or so ago and wasn't really all that surprised he didn't get arrested. This is kind of just how these type of cases work. The police don't really do as much investigating as people think. If there is a reason for them to stop looking into a case, they generally just move on to something else. The only reason people think that the cops are out here solving crimes is television. In the real world they kind of just arrest the first suspect, if they don't feel like they'll get a conviction they just kind of drop it and move on. That is why the vast majority of people in prison are there on petty drug crimes, it is easy to prove you caught someone with a bag of weed, but if there isn't a witness to a murder it is hard to prove someone killed someone. The cops get to act like they're fighting crime and the people get to pretend that they're safe, but in reality the vast majority of violent crimes don't lead to a conviction. That doesn't even take into consideration that a lot of crimes aren't even counted. This woman's death was never even officially ruled an accident or a homicide. As far as the law was concerned she died of natural causes. Jimmy Snuka most likely killed that woman, but since no one really bothered to investigate he was never charged with anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the huge list of testimony they have the whole thing reads like a pretty straight forward thing to me (without knowing anything about law further then what you see on TV or in movies).

 

Funny things in the reports:

- Youtube links nowadays are valid exhibits.

- The people writing report did not realize that "Buddy Rogers" is not the real name of the original Nature Boy and therefore his wife wasn't named "Debbie Rogers" (either that or Rogers changes his name to his work name).

- Muraco is transcribed as "Morocco" (as in "This is even before his match with Morocco.").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

To me, the most damning thing from a law enforcement perspective was when the Allentown Morning Call got their hands on th autopsy report, where the coroner ruled Nancy's death a homicide pending investigation. Well, if it was a homicide and the only person of interest admits being the only person with her the whole time...

 

The damning thing is that there's really not all that much new information that led to today's indictment (although that's not the way the DA spun it). The forensic information was there (although not public record). Snuka's rapidly changing story was known. If they didn't discover during their first investigation that Snuka had been arrested for attacking Nancy in a hotel room a few months earlier, then that would be shockingly bad police work.

 

I don't know why you don't believe that this is just police work. The first time I heard about this story was probably 10 years or so ago and wasn't really all that surprised he didn't get arrested. This is kind of just how these type of cases work. The police don't really do as much investigating as people think. If there is a reason for them to stop looking into a case, they generally just move on to something else. The only reason people think that the cops are out here solving crimes is television. In the real world they kind of just arrest the first suspect, if they don't feel like they'll get a conviction they just kind of drop it and move on. That is why the vast majority of people in prison are there on petty drug crimes, it is easy to prove you caught someone with a bag of weed, but if there isn't a witness to a murder it is hard to prove someone killed someone. The cops get to act like they're fighting crime and the people get to pretend that they're safe, but in reality the vast majority of violent crimes don't lead to a conviction. That doesn't even take into consideration that a lot of crimes aren't even counted. This woman's death was never even officially ruled an accident or a homicide. As far as the law was concerned she died of natural causes. Jimmy Snuka most likely killed that woman, but since no one really bothered to investigate he was never charged with anything.

 

 

They actually did investigate it. The presentment walks through the evidence that was there at the time. The inconsistencies from one day to the next, along with the number of different witnesses he made statements to, is pretty much what they're looking for if they want to chase the case. There was plenty to charge him with. Convict him? Quite possibly enough of a scare for him to perhaps cop a plea to involuntary manslaughter and a low end sentence rather than risk a murder rap.

 

It's not a great case to defend. Snuka is a shitty witness who is accused of killing his mistress while his wife & kids are back home. You have all his statements others who have built in credibility to a certain degree (doctor / nurse / paramedic / cop). How do you counter that they're full of shit? Put Jimmy on the stand? He'd be a trainwreck. Offer up other witness on what Jimmy told them? Those would most be people in the wrestling business, which is another trainwreck. This was in the era before some jury folks felt the need to see everything on video tape to convict, or had watched loads of CSI and thought they were super geniuses.

 

Then work the case a bit deeper, and you get Jimmy The Coke Head, and the prior violent act which. I don't recall of the Allentown Cops were aware at the time of his incident in Syracuse in January 1983 involving Nancy. If not and they dig deeper, then they get that as well and drag it in.

 

My guess is that a decent lawyer representing looking at the case at the time with charges filed and seeing just how shitty of a witness Jimmy is would work to get a plea.

 

* * * * *

 

My "brutal" comment earlier was less aimed at what Jimmy did (which has been largely known nationally for 20+ years), but in how much the cops had to work with right from the start. This wasn't a hard one compared to a stone cold whodunit that they would work knowing there was little chance of cracking it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...