The following transaction has occurred in: The People v. Scott Edgar Dyleski Case: A115725, 1st District, Division 1
Disposition date (YYYY-MM-DD): 2009-04-27 Disposition description: Affirmed in full Disposition status as of 2009-04-27: Final
For those of us who feel that Scott Dyleski's conviction for the murder of Pamela Vitale is a travesty of justice, we await the news concerning the direct appeal of his conviction that was presented by Scott's appellate attorney Philip Brooks. Scott's brief was filed in January of 2008, and Mr. Brooks presented an oral argument to the court on March 11, 2008.
There was little news coverage when Scott's appeal was initially filed, and no coverage when his case was argued before the court, however the following article appeared in the Contra Costa Times back in January of 2008:
Scott Dyleski files appeal of life sentence for murder conviction By John Simerman, STAFF WRITER
"SAN FRANCISCO -- Scott Dyleski's sentence of life without the possibility of parole in the October 2005 bludgeoning death of Lafayette resident Pamela Vitale amounts to unconstitutional cruel and unusual punishment because he was only 16 at the time, his lawyer argued in a court appeal this week.
The 183-page brief, filed Wednesday in state appeals court, also argues that there was not enough evidence during the trial of burglary -- the special circumstance that allowed Judge Barbara Zuniga to sentence Dyleski to life without parole.
The judge also should have allowed a change of court venue because of the local notoriety; held a hearing on the reliability of DNA testing that linked Dyleski to the murder; and should have thrown out evidence from a home search that attorney Philip Brooks claims was based on a "recklessly inaccurate" search warrant affidavit, the brief argues.
In reading the article above one can see Attorney Phillip Brooks raises several important points. Similar issues have been raised on this website. Scott Dyleski was only 16 years old at the time of the murder. He weighed all of 110 pounds. Although the implication of Scott's age at the time of the murder as raised by his appellate attorney concern Scott being a juvenile who was subject to the laws designed for an adult, one can't help but wonder how a boy with no history of violence whatsoever beat an adult woman to death in an ongoing battle when she weighed 178 pounds, and by all accounts was described as a very capable and strong woman. The prosecution would like us to believe that Pamela was attacked in her home as a complete surprise by the boy and quickly became incapacitated. That theory is absurd. For a review of what happened to Pamela, CLICK HERE.
Mr. Brooks raises the point that there was not enough evidence during the trial of burglary. The prosecution wanted us to believe that Scott went to Pamela's home to commit a burglary. They never explained what he was trying to steal, and nothing was missing from the home. To realize the complete lack of motive in this case it is important to understand two things. One, Scott never expected any of his ordered merchandise to be delivered to the Vitale home. Documentation of that FACT can be reviewed HERE. Two, analysis of the trial testimony reveal Scott did not know Pamela Vitale, and consciousness of innocence is clearly demonstrated as he realizes he saw her the morning of her murder. Something that he would not have to realize after the fact if he had killed her. Those facts can be reviewed HERE.
DNA remains a hot topic in this case. Aside from the strong reliability issues that allegedly linked Scott to the scene of the crime, there was no DNA from Scott Dyleski found in the alleged murder glove. To review the issues surrounding the bloody glove CLICK HERE.
Lastly in the article above mention is made of the "recklessly inaccurate" search warrant affidavit. To review the lies by Jason Barnes and the corruption associated with this warrant CLICK HERE.
