ShareThis Page
Defense rests in Pokorny slaying trial |

Defense rests in Pokorny slaying trial

| Monday, October 22, 2007 12:00 a.m

Testimony concluded this morning in the trial of a Knoxville man accused of gunning down a state trooper.

The jury will hear closing arguments Tuesday morning and then will decide the fate of Leslie Mollett, 32, who is accused of fatally shooting state police Cpl. Joseph Pokorny.

Mollett could face the death penalty if he’s convicted.

The defense called one witness this morning, a criminalist who disagreed with prosecution witnesses who have testified that Pokorny was on his knees with his hands in the air when a second and final shot was fired into Pokorny’s head.

Pokorny, 45, of Moon, was gunned down Dec. 12, 2005, outside the Extended Stay America hotel in Carnegie. His hands were found above his head on the ground.

Forensic scientist Larry M. Dehus testified this morning that Pokorny’s arms would have gone immediately limp and would have fallen to his sides before he hit the ground and that Pokorny could not have had his arms above his head.

Dehus also testified that he could find no wet spots or snow on Pokorny’s knees that would indicate the trooper was kneeling when he was shot.

“After the second shot to the neck, the first thing that would have happened was that the arms would have dropped, then he fell backward,” Dehus said. “The position the arms were found in did not result from the arms being over his head.”

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.