In a 10-page ruling released Thursday, Judge Bill Mathesius rejected both of Robin Lord’s arguments.
By John Tredrea
In Trenton Thursday afternoon, Superior Court Judge Bill Mathesius denied two motions to dismiss first-degree murder and fourth-degree evidence tampering indictments against accused wife-killer Jonathan Nyce.
The motions were filed Oct. 18 by Robin Lord, Mr. Nyce’s attorney.
On Tuesday before Judge Mathesius, Ms. Lord argued that the indictments should be dropped because of prosecutorial misconduct and improper use of a tape recorder during the April grand jury proceeding that yielded the indictments.
In a 10-page ruling released Thursday, Judge Mathesius rejected both of Ms. Lord’s arguments.
In court Tuesday, Ms. Lord maintained that Assistant Prosecutor Thomas Meidt was guilty of misconduct when he did not make it clear to the grand jurors that they would retain the option of indicting Mr. Nyce on a lesser charge if they did not indict him for first-degree murder.
Ms. Lord also said the clerk operating the tape recorder during the grand jury proceeding was inadequately trained for her job. The tape machine is supposed to be shut off during conversations between grand jurors and left on during conversations between the prosecutor and the grand jury.
In ruling against the motion to dismiss the indictments on grounds of prosecutorial misconduct, Judge Mathesius wrote: "The defendant misconstrues the questions of the grand jurors and the responses of the prosecutor and seeks, selectively, to take each question and answer on its own. However, viewing the transcript in its entirely, it is abundantly clear that the prosecutor properly advised the grand jury as to the lesser-included offenses of murder. Further it was not prosecutorial misconduct for the prosecutor to ask for a vote on murder only. As such, the defendant has failed to meet his burden of proving prosecutorial misconduct and his motion to dismiss the indictment based upon those grounds is denied."
In ruling against the motion to dismiss the indictments on grounds of improper use of the tape machine, the judge wrote: "Viewing the transcript in its entirely, it is manifestly clear there was ‘no improper influence’ exercised by the prosecutor over the grand jury members and the court so finds. The prosecutor made it clear to them that the decision to indict rested with them alone and properly stated that he was seeking only a vote on murder. Although the recording device should have remained on . . . there is no indication whatsoever that the prosecutor attempted to and did improperly influence their decision-making . . . The prosecutor is not in control of the sound recording equipment. The grand jury clerk operates the reorder. This court declines to expand or constrict their respective responsibilities and finds those responsibilities to have been executed in good faith and competently so. In light of the above reasoning, the motions of the defendant to dismiss the indictment are denied."
BEFORE Judge Bill Mathesius in state Superior Court in Trenton Tuesday, Ms. Lord, said her review of the 160-page transcript of the grand jury proceeding indicated that Mr. Meidt deliberately left the grand jurors with the mistaken impression that if they did not indict Mr. Nyce for first-degree murder, then they couldn’t indict him for anything.
"He should have told them they could indict on a lesser charge," Ms. Lord argued.
Speaking on Mr. Meidt’s behalf as he sat beside her in court Tuesday, Assistant Prosecutor Doris Galuchie said that, at the beginning of the four-plus hour grand jury hearing, Mr. Meidt summarized for the grand jurors the litany of lesser homicide charges on which they could indict Mr. Nyce. Those charges included manslaughter and manslaughter/passion-provocation as well as first-degree murder.
Ms. Galuchie said the fact that Mr. Meidt did not repeat those instructions at the end of the grand jury hearing does not constitute prosecutorial misconduct as Ms. Lord alleges. Ms. Galuchie characterized Ms. Lord’s argument as "nothing more than making a mountain out of a molehill." She added, "This was an extremely fair grand jury presentation."
After adjournment on Tuesday, Ms. Lord said that nowhere in the transcript of grand jury proceedings does Mr. Meidt specifically say to the jurors that they would retain the option of indicting Mr. Nyce on a lesser charge after voting against indicting him for first-degree murder. She maintained his failure to say this to the jury left them "with the mistaken impression" that they had "the all-or-none option" of either indicting him for first-degree murder or "doing nothing."
Contacted Tuesday afternoon after Ms Lord made those statements, Mr. Meidt referred all questions to Ms. Galuchie. "Since I’m the one accused of prosecutorial misconduct, it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment," Mr. Meidt said.
Contacted a short time later, Ms. Galuchie stated unequivocally that Mr. Meidt did tell the grand jurors they would have the right to indict Mr. Nyce on a lesser charge after voting against indicting him for first-degree murder. She said Ms. Lord was taking short sections of the lengthy transcript "out of context" as a tactic for seeking dismissal.
After adjournment, Ms. Lord read to the press directly from the last few pages of the transcript, as follows:
"Meidt: ‘Right now, what you’re voting on is murder and tampering (with evidence.)’"
"Female juror: ‘And then you’re going to keep going on to the …’"
"Meidt (interrupting the female juror): ‘No. You’ve got to determine whether there is sufficient probable cause to indict for murder and tampering.’"
"Female juror: ‘So, alternately, you might have proposed the passion (charge) but you chose not.’"
Ms. Lord said that, at that point, Mr. Meidt should have made it clear to the grand jury that they could still vote on a lesser charge if they voted against a first-degree murder indictment.
The grand jury transcript came from an audiotape of the proceedings. The tape is supposed to be running during exchanges between the prosecutor and grand jury and shut off during discussions between grand jury members.
Clerk Frances Rosario, who ran the tape recorder during the grand jury hearings on the Nyce case, testified that it is sometimes difficult to turn the tape recorder on and off fast enough. This is particularly true, she said, with a grand jury that is dealing with its first case. The Nyce case was the first case dealt with by the grand jury that returned the first-degree murder indictment against him.
In addition to seeking dismissal on charges of prosecutorial misconduct, Ms. Lord was seeking dismissal on the grounds of what she maintained was an inadequate tape-recording procedure. Ms. Lord decried the fact that Ms. Rosario, who has been on the job six years, received no training other than on-the-job instruction from her predecessor.
"We don’t know what happened when the tape was shut off," Ms. Lord said.
Ms. Rosario testified that Mr. Meidt never told her or signaled her to shut the tape machine on or off during the grand jury proceedings.
Mr. Nyce is accused of beating his wife to death Jan. 16 in the garage of their Hopewell Township home. Prosecutors say he then tried to make her death look like the result of an automobile accident by putting her corpse in her SUV and sending it into Jacob’s Creek, near their home.
Ms. Lord says Ms. Nyce’s death was an accident, the result of a fall during a struggle with her husband in the garage.
The prosecution says Ms. Nyce’s massive head wounds are not consistent with an accidental fall. The prosecution says Mr. Nyce killed his wife by repeatedly slamming her head face down onto concrete floor of their garage.
Ms. Nyce was returning home with a Route 1 motel-room tryst with her lover of one year the night she was killed, the prosecution says. The lover had worked as a landscaper for the Nyces.

