Man accused of stalking woman before killing her in Oak Brook

[udbcrzy2]

Source: Chicago Sun Times

A 20-year-old Canadian man methodically stalked and tracked a Westmont woman before killing her Wednesday night in Oak Brook — even stopping to reload his gun and continue shooting during the attack.

DuPage County Judge Michael Wolfe denied bail Thursday for Dmitry Smirnov of Surrey, British Columbia, who is charged with the first-degree murder of Jitka Vesel, 36.

In court Thursday, DuPage County State’s Attorney Robert Berlin said Smirnov met Vesel in 2008 through an Internet dating site. After they met, Smirnov moved to the United States.

But the relationship soured, and Smirnov moved back to Canada. Since 2009, Berlin said, he has been harassing Vesel. She filed a complaint that year with the Berwyn Police Department over harassing e-mail and telephone calls, Berlin said.

Read more: http://www.suntimes.com/4828757-573/man-accused-of-stalking-woman-before-killing-her-in-oak-brook.html

---

In the article it says that he searched the internet to see if Illinois had the death penalty. He discovered they did not and decided to go ahead with the murder shooting the victim 11-times.

[Critters2]

1. You're trying to make this a pro-death penalty thing? Really?

He'd been harassing the woman for years. He wasn't emotionally healthy. The situation probably would've ended this way sooner or later, death penalty or no. And I'm okay with this guy spending the rest of his life in prison, however long that life is.


Oh, and I'm a resident of Illinois.

[Drale]

2. No I heard that on the news as well

but I think this is more of a crazy person who would have tried to kill her one way or another no matter what.

[RaleighNCDUer]

3. I suspect the internet search was more in the line of "what can I expect

after I kill her" than "I wonder if I should kill her or not".

You'll note, it was not HE who said he only decided to kill her after finding out there was no death penalty - it was the District Attorney. Most DAs are pro-death penalty.

He'd been stalking her for well over a year - since some time in 2009. Buying the gun, the GPS tracker BEFORE checking on the penalty clearly indicates he planned to kill her anyway.

[udbcrzy2]

4. Do you think the DA made this story up?

I guess we will have to see the evidence or legal documents or later his appeal to actually know the facts in the case.

However, the article does state that...



edit: here is another article

In a statement videotaped by police, Smirnov indicated that he researched whether Illinois had a death penalty, Berlin said. Illinois has recently abolished the death penalty.

http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/streamwood/newsnow/x1225322018/Woman-murdered-in-Oak-Brook

________________

So, I guess the DA didn't make up this story. He did a video confession.

[EFerrari]

5. He's was a stalker. Most stalkers are unbalanced any way.

It's not like we should set up our legal system in response to irrational criminals.

[udbcrzy2]

6. Yes, he is a very dangerous man and all his actions leading up

to the crime shows premeditation in many ways.

[EFerrari]

9. Right. Stalking usually involves some kind of compulsion.

As in, there is no reasoning with a stalker. They take everything you do as evidence that they are right and should continue their attempts to contact you.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. No, I think he expressed his opinion about the the internet search

as a fact.

And the article very explicitly says "Berlin said..." It did not say "the suspect said...".

The FACTS show that the crazy guy intended to kill her BEFORE finding out if there was a DP or not - he did not do the search, THEN buy the gun; he bought the gun, THEN did the internet search.

The DP is not, and never has been, a deterrent - particularly if the perp is nuts.

[udbcrzy2]

8. No, he did confess on video

I really don't consider the media as fact, but that's all we have here on DU mainly is news articles.


Now, this article says he did confess on video.

http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/streamwood/newsnow/x1225322018/Woman-murdered-in-Oak-Brook

[RaleighNCDUer]

10. From that article:

In a statement videotaped by police, Smirnov indicated that he researched whether Illinois had a death penalty, Berlin said. Illinois has recently abolished the death penalty.

"He was aware that the death penalty had recently been abolished. So he knew then he could go through with his plan," Berlin said. "Clearly, it's premeditated."

Break it down:

In a statement videotaped by police, Smirnov indicated that he researched whether Illinois had a death penalty, Berlin said. FACT

Illinois has recently abolished the death penalty. FACT

He was aware that the death penalty had recently been abolished. FACT

So he knew then he could go through with his plan, OPINION

Clearly, it's premeditated. FACT

Of the five statements, four concern themselves with what he DID. One is about what he THOUGHT. It is the DA's opinion that knowing there was no death penalty led to the murder - despite the fact that the stalking, the purchase of the gun, the internet tracking of her with a GPS make it clear what his intentions were already.

Do you really think that a person who would be deterred by the death penalty, would NOT be deterred by the idea of living the next fifty years or so in a 8x10 cell with a guy named Bruno?

So why did he research the DP? To find out if there was a DP, of course. DP murders involve far more appeals, longer time in jails, rather than prisons, because of the appeals process, more court appearances (interestingly, these greater number of court appearances, through the appeals process, provide a greater number of escape opportunities - making a DP state a preferable place to commit murder). IOW, he was going to kill her and he simply wanted to know what would likely happen after the fact - deterrence had nothing to do with it.

[udbcrzy2]

11. We (the public) won't know anything until the trial

We have never heard the video or read the transcript of the interview. He may have made a full and complete confession or may not have. I am sure the defense will try to have all the evidence thrown out.

We now have a death penalty case Christopher Coleman and they are still seeking the death penalty, but I think it has more to do with the funding than anything. They claim that they can still get the death penalty until July 1. Which I say is bullshit because Quinn will fix that sentence just like he did with the other 16 who he commuted.

I don't even know if this is a death penalty case (have not seen evidence for aggravating factors), but I do think this is 1st degree murder. I am assuming that when a Prosecutor goes for the death penalty that they HAVE to have aggravating factors to bring to the Judge. They cannot just pull that out of their ass.

We will just have to wait and see what happens and hope that justice is served. I do think that the legal system is slanted more toward the defendant rather than the victim. They usually will not even allow a photo of the victim in the courtroom, yet allowing the defendant to be dressed to the nines. Not saying that allowing the defendant to dress in street clothes is wrong, but not allowing the victim to have a presence in the courtroom is wrong.

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. You don't get what I'm saying.

I am not arguing that this is or is not a DP worthy case.

I'm saying, the DA LIKES the DP - and he is slanting the interview to favor that, regardless of what happens. He is trying to make the case - in a state that has no DP - that if there WAS a DP, this murder would not have happened.

And that is bullshit. He's playing politics with the murder of this young woman. And that is inexcusable.

[udbcrzy2]

14. I agree this is inexcusable to make it a political thing

I feel grief for the woman and her loved ones. If the DA is making this a political ploy then it's totally wrong and ironic because this is National Crime Victims' Rights Week. I also think the media shouldn't be making this political either, but they only care about their headline regardless of how it affects the victim or the suspect. Which I could care less about the suspect, I'm only concerned about the rights of the victims.

I am a member of Parents of Murdered Children and the victims are many times forgotten in the legal process.

[bettyellen]

18. Interesting take on it- I thought he brought up the sentence search to make him seem saner and more

calcualting. Anyway, that was the impression I got.

[RaleighNCDUer]

19. That's a good point - fending off a potential insanity plea.

Of course, the guy IS insane, but not necessarily by the legal definition, and understanding consequences is one of the ways the law decides 'legal' insanity.

Of course, we knew he was calculating, that there was pre-meditation in the stalking, the gun purchase, the GPS, and all - premeditation does not exclude the possibility of insanity.

Obviously not the take I had on it, but still potentially valid.

I actually hope that's the case. I hate it when DA's use their office as a springboard to higher office or to push a political agenda - one hot case can put a guy in the Governor's seat. Politics should have no place in the justice system.

[bettyellen]

20. my cousin was pre- meditatively killed by an ex boyfriend, he called it a crime of passion and did

maybe 4- 5 years because he insisted they were still dating, and his mother was dying with cancer. He was a control freak who still wanted her back more than a year after they broke up. Bought the rifle days before, never used it for anything else. Had many of their mutual friends trash her and brought up an abortion she had years later, Her poor Mom didn't need to see and hear all that.
Interesting how I took the view of someone protecting my cousin rather than see the political angle, huh? I just think the spectrum of abuse heaped on women that used to always be chalked up to "passion" or her fault makes me want to make sure none of these guys get off as crazy. Even though I'd say most murders are. If it;s one more fact that makes him easier to convict, I can;t blame the DA for going for it. But your point is also well taken. Not good to mix politics in it this way.

[RaleighNCDUer]

13. And, BTW, giving the victim a 'presence in the courtroom' does NOTHING

to influence the facts of a case. What it DOES do is prejudice a jury to give less attention to the facts, causing them to convict on scantier evidence than they otherwise would.

If a prosecutor has a solid case, he doesn't need those emotional appeals. He only needs them if his case is weak - and it is not mere coincidence that very often when a case is overturned based on facts, such as DNA evidence, that the prosecutor relied on coerced confessions and emotional appeals to the jury to get convictions.

You want the victim to have a presence in the courtroom, fine - but keep it at the sentencing phase, not the trial phase. The fact that the victim had a nice smile and loved dogs and children has nothing to do with if the accused killed that person or not.

(edit for typo)

[udbcrzy2]

15. The victim is part of the evidence - the main evidence

The jury will see photos of the victim's body bloodied, mutilated and very dead. The photos may not even look like a person at all especially if they were dismembered or decomposing or mutilated in another scenario. They will not know what that person looked like before depending on what happened to them. What's wrong with displaying a photo of them without a dog and children of being alive without the mutilation.

The defense will try to de-humanize the victim and make them seem like more of a thing instead of a person. I guess they don't want them to see just how different they looked alive? And there is a difference.

If the defendant is allowed to appear unshackled and in street clothes like they were before the murder, then so should the victim, and the only way to do that is to have a photo.



edit:

Just wanted to say thank you for a good discussion on this subject without getting nasty. I hope you have a great weekend!

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. Thanks, and same to you.

We're battening down the hatches for tomorrow's storms, but Sunday looks to be nice.

And my sincerest sympathies for your loss. I hope you got justice in your circumstance.

[bettyellen]

17. I think it could have gone either way, he may have thought he could handle the jail time but not

being executed. Most people on death row appeal and delay as long as they can too. I don't think it's easy to guess his state of mind.
All we can say is, he did know what the potential penalty was when he did the crime. Why it mattered so much, will always remain a mystery.