Ivan Teleguz
No one disputes that Ivan Teleguz did not kill Stephanie Sipes. The man who killed Stephanie, Michael
Hetrick, is serving a life sentence. Hetrick’s accomplice in the murder is scheduled for release from prison
in 2018. Both these killers faced possible death sentences until they agreed to testify against Ivan.
In their lengthy interrogation of Hetrick, police gave him extensive information about how and why police
thought Ivan was involved, going so far as to share the investigator's affidavit to the court outlining the
case against Ivan. Hetrick absorbed the information and agreed to testify in order to avoid a likely death
sentence, ultimately offering testimony consistent with the police’s theory of the case. His accomplice also
agreed to implicate Ivan.
AL trial the two men testified that Ivan hired them to kill Stephanie so that Ivan could avoid making
payments to support their two year-old son. Of course. death of one parent does not relieve the other of
child support responsibilities, and Ivan had faithfully made his payments without complaint.
But jurors accepted the two men’s testimony and convicted Ivan and sentenced him to death. When the
Supreme Court of Virginia reviewed the case, it found that the evidence against Ivan was so thin that it
required testimony from Hetirck, his accomplice, and a third man, Alexsey Safanoy, to convict Ivan.
After the trial, both Safanoy and the accomplice recanted their trial testimony in sworn statements. The
accomplice admitted that he wanted to avoid the death penalty and was willing to implicate Ivan as
required by the . Safanov that he ised to provide the information in exchange for
the prosecutor's promise to help him keep from being deported. Based on this information and other
evidence, the federal courts decided to hold a hearing to consider Ivan’s innocence.
But prior to the hearing, the State again raised the threat of a possible death sentence for Hetrick and his
accomplice - this time if they veered from their original trial testimony. Not surprisingly, Hetrick stuck to
the story that meant he avoid a death sentence. The accomplice refused to answer any questions at all, and
the State never asked him whether his testimony or his recantation was the truth. Safanov was living in
Kazakhstan and outside the authority of the federal court to be made to testify.
Despite the fact that the case against Ivan was thoroughly dismantled, the federal court refused to vacate
the conviction or death sentence unless Ivan proved that someone else was responsible for Stephanie’s
death, Unable to identify who this person is, Ivan remains on death row
Ricky Jovan Gray
Ricky and Ray Dandridge were convicted of a string of crimes during a crack-induced binge over
several weeks. The spree began when Dandridge was released from prison and found Ricky
attending trade school in Pennsylvania. At the start of trial, Gray’s defense attorneys conceded that
his confession alone was sufficient to prove his guilt. Other than he expressions of remorse, however,
the details in Ricky's confession came from his co-defendant. Gray was so deeply under the influence
of crack, that he coutd not recall the crimes. Dandridge’s account blamed Ricky for almost all of the
crimes against the Harveys and, as a result, was allowed to plead guilty and avoid the death penalty
for any of the crimes he committed. This, jurors heard only a Dandridge's side of who was responsible
for the deaths of the Harvey family.
Ricky had an uni ji and deeply disturbing childhood. He and his sister were severely neglected
by his mother and father, and regularly sexually abused by their older brother, who the parents left in
charge of the younger children. Ricky and his sister were locked-up for long periods of time, made to
perform sex acts on adults and one another, and regularly left unattended at home and in automobiles
on streets and in alleyways.
Jurers who had to determine Ricky's sentence appear to have struggled. They refused to find him a
future danger to society; they deliberated for more than 12 hours about the appropriate sentence; they
asked the judge to explain what would happen if they were not unanimous about a sentence;
ultimately, they did not sentence Ricky to death for three of the capital charges.
Ricky's sister testified about her abuse, but the only other person to testify was Ricky’s mother who
was, herself, responsible for his neglect. As a result, Ricky’s sentencing jurors heard only the “tip of the
iceberg” of the extent of the childhood abuse Ricky suffered.
Gray's postconviction attorneys tried to develop and present all of the evidence that his trial attorneys
failed to investigate but was refused the opportunity to subpoena evidence or call witnesses to testify.
Ricky's case was dismissed in part because he failed to present evidence from a psychological expert
to explain the impact all of the abuse had on Ricky’s behavior even though he had requested the
assistance of a psychological expert to explain the impact all of the abuse had on Ricky’s behavior and
was refused. A defense investigator gave a sworn statement that Ricky had told the defense that he
could not remember the crimes, but the court simply ignored this evidence and defense counsel's
failure to follow-up about it.
Ricky has for years sought and been refused the chance to determine whether his death sentence and
Dandridge’s life sentence are based on what really happened to the Harveys or simply are arbitrary
sentences handed out based on who made a deal with the prosecutor first.
