New Trial Sought In Baby’s Murder

Serving his 28th year in prison for one of New Haven’s most notorious murders, Adam Carmon returned to court seeking a new criminal trial to argue his innocence based on new evidence.

Carmon was convicted for the 1994 murder of 7‑month-old Danielle Taft. When 14 bullets ripped through the window of the infant’s grandmother’s apartment on a February night, one of them pierced Danielle’s skull, taking her life. Another bullet paralyzed the grandmother, Charlene Troutman. Word of the killing reverberated throughout the city and ignited outrage across the state, leading to passage of gun-control legislation.

Adam Carmon was convicted of Danielle’s murder in 1995 and sentenced to 85 years in prison. He has asserted his innocence throughout the decades since.

He was in Courtroom 5A of the Church Street state courthouse Monday as his lawyers began arguments in a civil case they’ve filed on his behalf. Carmon is suing the State of Connecticut and the commissioner of correction seeking a new trial via a habeas corpus petition.

Habeas petitions can succeed in light of new evidence that could not have been discovered at the time of the case, as long as a judge rules that the new evidence has enough relevance and significance to the convicted person’s case. If Carmon wins the civil case, he will be able to defend himself once again before a jury in a criminal trial, which will determine whether he walks free.

Carmon has made three other habeas attempts over the course of his imprisonment, none of which have been successful so far. His lawyers, a team led by David Keenan and Douglas Lieb, are arguing this time that new revelations and scientific perspective undermine Carmon’s original conviction.

They are arguing that prosecutors withheld or misrepresented potentially compromising details about the photo lineup that an eyewitness used to identify Carmon, as well as criminal charges against a key eyewitness.

There were at least two other suspects for the murder, one of whom confessed to the killing before recanting and attributing the statement to police pressure.

Carmon’s attorneys are also drawing upon new science to question the reliability of the eyewitness testimony and firearm identification that led to Carmon’s arrest.

In special defense and memorandum documents submitted to the court, meanwhile, the state — led by Senior Assistant State’s Attorney Craig Nowack — questions why Carmon didn’t raise the arguments in previous habeas appeals.

While few in Courtroom 5A wore face masks as the trail got underway Monday, sheets of plexiglass enclosed every desk. At the start of the hearing, Superior Court Judge Jon Alander agreed to admit hefty binders of evidence submitted by Carmon’s attorneys, without deciding on the truthfulness of that evidence. Carmon gazed forward for much of the proceedings, occasionally turning back to smile at the lawyers and audience members he recognized during court recesses.

The day’s proceedings centered on Glenn Conway, who worked as an intern on Carmon’s original defense team and returned on Monday as a witness for the petitioner.

Defense attorney Katie Campbell walked Conway through a series of police reports, notes, and other records related to the original 1995 trial — many of which, Conway testified, prosecutors and police did not provide to the defense before the trial.

Some of that evidence pertained to eyewitness accounts from Jaime Stanley and Raymond Jones. Jones had been driving Stanley past 810 Orchard St. at the time of the shooting. Police later showed Stanley a series of 18 photographs, two of which were of Carmon. The words ​“look-alike” were handwritten on the back of one photograph — an image not of Carmon, but of another man apparently unconnected to the case — suggesting that Stanley identified the other man as resembling the person she saw shoot at the Orchard Street family.

Those photographs were revealed to the defense midway through the trial.

“Prior to the trial, did you have any indication that Jaime Stanley had been shown a photograph of the petitioner?” Campbell asked Conway.

No, Conway responded.

“Do you recall anything unusual about the way the prosecutor indicated he had found the array?” Campbell asked.

“I do,” Conway said. He said that on a Sunday evening ​“late” in the trial, after Stanley had testified, the prosecutor, Michael Dearington, called Carmon’s defense attorney, Richard Silverstein, to share that he had learned of the photo array. Silverstein was able to examine the photographs in question during a court recess, but he could not question Stanley about the photo array, and did not appear to have seen the note that another person had been called a ​“look-alike” to the shooter.

If the photographs had been turned over to the defense with information about Stanley’s identification, ​“would the defense have used that in the trial?” asked Campbell.

“Definitely,” Conway said.

Campbell later walked Conway through another component of Stanley’s discussions with police: The police detective on the case, Anthony DiLullo, brought Stanley to an arraignment hearing at which Carmon was detained in connection with another shooting, standing among others facing arraignment. Stanley identified Carmon as the shooter; DiLullo obtained photographs of the other individuals before arraignment court that were not disclosed to the defense, according to Conway.

On the witness stand, as he reviewed the photographs of those accused individuals, Conway observed, ​“none of them are close to Carmon’s age [at the time], some of them are white, some of them have facial hair… [Stanley is] trying to make an ID and there is only one person who comes close to what she described.”

“Especially since she had been shown Mr. Carmon’s photograph twice in a previous array,” the process was ​“highly suggestive,” Conway said.

Campbell raised numerous other documents left out of discovery, and out of the defense team’s reach, as Conway testified. That evidence pertained to Raymond Jones’ criminal history and relationship with certain police officers, and to police interactions with the two other suspects for the murder and others close to them. Again and again, Campbell asked if Conway ​“would have wanted to have that evidence,” and Conway affirmed that he would have. 

On behalf of the state, Nowack stipulated that much of that evidence had not been disclosed to Carmon and his representation at the time of the trial. But he did not concede that the non-disclosure of those documents was illegal or improper. 

The state’s attorneys will have a chance to cross-examine Stanley as the trial continues this week.

Click here to read articles published at the time of Danielle’s murder about the circumstances both in the case and the surrounding neighborhood, as well as an interview with the man who owned the gun stolen to commit the killing. Click here for a story about how the family and neighborhood were faring 20 years after the murder, and here for an account of Danielle’s posthumous 21st birthday birthday.