Judge: No evidence yet of “widespread prejudice” in Canosa murder case

ORANGE – It remains to be seen if murder suspect Brenda Canosa, 50, will be tried in court here in October in the shooting death of her estranged husband because the judge ruled Friday it was premature to conclude that “widespread prejudice” existed in the community to prevent an impartial jury.

  Orange County Circuit Court Judge Daniel Bouton also ruled Friday that the defense team could inspect more than seven months worth of victim Bob Canosa’s personal cell phone records and text messages – from the time the couple separated in April of 2009 through the day he was gunned down in December.

Too soon to rule on change of venue
  In handing down his decisions around 5 p.m. after three hours of motions in the case, Judge Bouton said the defense did not provide ample proof in its change of venue motion to show that Brenda Canosa would not receive a fair trial in Orange.

  “Based on all the information before me today, in the court’s judgment, it would be inappropriate for me to deny the change of venue or to grant it at this time,” he said. “We don’t find at this stage in the proceedings that the evidence would be sufficient enough to grant the change of venue.”

  However, Bouton said, as the October jury trial neared he would consider additional evidence in the matter. The judge, in methodical fashion, read Virginia Supreme Court opinions in various change of venue decisions, stating the presumption is that a defendant can receive a fair trial from the citizens in the locality where the offense occurred.

  Brenda Canosa faces charges of first-degree murder and use of a firearm in the commission of a felony in the predawn shooting death of husband, Bob Canosa, Dec. 11 at his residence in rural Unionville. An Orange County Sheriff’s Office investigator at the time of the shooting who previously worked for the Culpeper County Sheriff’s Office, he died nine days later of his wounds.

  Brenda Canosa has been jailed in Orange since the shooting. At the time, she was a teacher at Madison Primary School and a Madison County resident.

  Present at Friday’s hearing, Mrs. Canosa had her now mostly dark hair arranged in a French braid and her handcuffs off for the first time so that she could take notes. As in other hearings, she was dressed in a gray and black striped prison jumpsuit.

Media coverage not “flagrantly inflammatory
  The defense, in making its argument for a new venue in the murder trial, claimed pretrial press coverage had been “extensive and relentless” and slanted against their client, leading to “a hostile atmosphere” and “pervasive gossip” in small-town Orange. 

  Judge Bouton agreed that media coverage of pretrial proceedings had been extensive, but said most of it had been factual. In his review of articles by the Star-Exponent and other publications, he said he did not find it to be “flagrantly inflammatory.”

  “There is no article that states she is guilty of the crime,” Bouton said.

  Orange County Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Rick Moore, likewise, said local newspaper coverage had been “largely factual.” In terms of the amount of coverage, “It is about what you would expect for a local murder case,” he said.

Security conflict?
  The defense also argued that the victim’s OCSO colleagues would be the ones providing courthouse security for the trial and interacting with the jury, presenting a potential conflict of interest because of their previous professional – and in some cases, social – relationships with Mr. Canosa. Bouton, in response, noted he had the authority to bring deputies in from another jurisdiction to provide security for the trial, if warranted.

  Defense attorney Christopher Leibig called Timmy Murphy, a lieutenant colonel with the OCSO, to the stand Friday to make a case that Bob Canosa had a lot of friends in the department. Leibig established that Murphy and the victim had been friends since Bob Canosa started his law enforcement career in the town of Orange back in the ‘70s.

  It was in a converted apartment on Murphy’s property where Mr. Canosa was found around 6 a.m. on Dec. 11 shot five times and bleeding profusely. He had been staying at Murphy’s in Unionville since he and his wife separated in April after more than 20 years of marriage amid allegations of infidelity on his part.

  Moore said the fact that the victim was a sheriff’s investigator was “not really significant” in the change of venue request since Bob Canosa was not killed in the line of duty, a more standard criteria for moving a murder case out of the county where the crime occurred.

  “This is a domestic violence homicide,” Moore said.

  Leibig later retorted, “(Brenda Canosa) is not guilty. We don’t know how (Bob Canosa) was killed. She is presumed innocent.”

Affidavits
  Leibig, in further making his case for a change of venue, presented sworn testimonies from 56 Orange residents stating they felt Brenda Canosa could not get a fair trial in Orange because of the extensive media coverage, gossip around town and “good old boy” network in effect in local law enforcement circles.

  “Mrs. Canosa has only one hope for this and that is you,” Leibig told the judge. “The fair thing to do is to not risk her fundamental right to a fair trial.”

  Orange County Commonwealth’s Attorney Diana Wheeler discounted about a dozen of the affidavits since the respondents claimed that they had not talked to anyone about the case or viewed any media reports about it. She also noted that those polled worked around the courthouse in the center of town and were not representative of the larger Orange County jury pool of about 27,000 adults.

  The defense also argued Bob Canosa was so well-known and well-respected in the Orange community that his wife would not and could not receive a fair trial here.

  Moore said Canosa – who worked for the OCSO for two years – was not from Orange and did not live in Orange until the time of his recent separation. 

  “This is not really an Orange County community case,” he said. “He lived in Culpeper and then in Madison and before that in New York,” added Moore of Canosa’s 20-plus years with a police department in upstate N.Y.

Phone records
  In another ruling Friday, Judge Bouton denied Wheeler’s motion to quash a request from the defense to AT&T seeking 11 months worth of cell phone records and text messages from Bob Canosa’s work-issued OCSO cell phone.

  After it was established that Mr. Canosa also used the work phone for personal calls, the judge said the information was relevant to the case, but reduced the length of records that would be released.

  “The commonwealth characterizes (the murder) as domestic violence,” Bouton said. “Therefore, the relationship between them and the contact they had for some reasonable amount of time would be material.”

  The judge stipulated that the commonwealth would have access to the phone records first, spanning April 2009 to December 2009, to “flag” confidential work calls and sort out the personal ones to which the defense wants access. Bouton also said the information from AT&T would be placed under a protective order and out of public view.

  Leibig, in successfully arguing for access to the phone records, said the commonwealth had put forth a possible motive in the murder, noting it was inaccurate, that the defense nonetheless needed “to explore” the infidelity theory.

  Leibig also said Mr. Canosa was calling Mrs. Canosa “constantly” after they separated, wanting “to get back together with her.”

  Further, Leibig said they had evidence showing Bob Canosa may have retracted his claim, prior to death, that his wife had pulled the trigger. Asked who did it, the defense attorney added, Mr. Canosa supposedly said, “Ask Roger.”

  “We have some more inquiries to make about this Roger that we need to investigate,” Leibig said.

  Finally, the judge did not make a decision on two media requests to photograph the upcoming trial, requiring the Star-Exponent and Channel 29 News arrange a camera demonstration and provide more details about the types of images sought.