Experts: Yale case tough for defense

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) — Defending a Yale lab technician charged with murder against what appears to be a mountain of forensic evidence might mean trying to convince jurors that the crime scene was contaminated because police didn’t immediately shut down the lab where the victim was eventually found, legal experts said.

Raymond Clark III, 24, is charged with murder in the death of Yale graduate student Annie Le. She vanished from a research building in Yale’s medical school complex Sept. 8; her body was found hidden in a wall recess five days later, on what was to be her wedding day.

Police charged Clark after reviewing some 300 pieces of evidence, including DNA samples taken from Clark a day before he was arrested. Officials reportedly found DNA from Le and Clark in the ceiling and in the recess where Le’s body was found.

The evidence is so overwhelming that police believe they don’t necessarily have to uncover Clark’s motive for the killing to convince jurors of his guilt, according to a law-enforcement official who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing.

That likely leaves Clark’s attorneys with going after how that evidence was gathered — rather than what it showed — and have prosecutors defend their decision not to seal the lab building until Le’s body was found.

“You attempt to attack the investigative process as well as the conclusions,” said William Dow III, a prominent New Haven-based defense lawyer, who does not represent anyone in this case.

Clark’s court-appointed attorneys did not return calls seeking comment Saturday.

Yale students were allowed into the basement of the research building for at least three days after Le disappeared. The Hartford Courant reported that Clark was in the lab cleaning while police were conducting interviews shortly after the grad student disappeared and that he tried to hide lab-cleaning equipment they later discovered contained blood spatters.

At the time, police said they were not sure whether the Le case was a homicide or a missing-persons case. The building wasn’t sealed until Le’s body was found and the case declared a homicide.

Prosecutors won’t be able to deny that the area where the body was found was different from the scene when the murder took place, attorneys said.

But the attorneys also said the prosecutor’s case appears very strong.

If they have Clark’s DNA in the crawl space where the body was found, Le’s DNA on his clothing, scratches that an expert can say were defensive wounds, and more, it will be much harder to base a defense on problems with collecting that evidence.