When Aniello Moscato returned to the witness stand, the defense attorney assured him that he only had a few more questions. Portale first wanted to know who shot the photographs on the island, but Moscato was not certain. He then took the investigator through another explanation of the difference between the Bannerman boat and the police boat.
Portale seemed intent on making Moscato erupt in anger. He’d gotten close on several occasions, but he eventually hit gold with the evidence tags, known in state police lingo as “general 40 tags.” The defense attorney feigned ignorance about the writing on those forms. He refused to accept that the word “defendant” could have been added after the case turned from a missing persons category to homicide. He insisted, despite Moscato’s attempt to educate him, that the incident date on the tag proved that Angelika was a suspect on the day of Vince’s death. Moscato’s frustration escalated with every accusatory question.
The defense once again requested a break. When they returned, Portale went on a different attack. “So, during the break, we saw each other in the hallway?”
“Yes.”
“You were with some individuals, speaking to them. Who were those individuals?”
“I spoke to everybody. I spoke to three law students. I spoke to another attorney. I spoke to the Viafore family. I spoke to almost everyone,” Moscato said defensively.
“I think you know what I’m talking about. When you and I saw each other, remember that?”
“Yeah.”
“Who were you with at that time?”
“Who was I with?”
“I’m asking you.”
“I was with a number of different people out there, was it the three law students?”
“At the time that you and I looked at each other, we did like a salute to each other.”
“You saluted me. I don’t think I saluted you back,” Moscato snarked.
“I thought I saw you do it?”
“I might have winked at you.”
“Careful of that,” the judge warned.
“I wouldn’t doubt it,” Portale grumbled.
“If you knew who it was, why don’t you help the investigator?” Freehill told Moscato.
“Right. Can you describe the person?” Moscato asked.
“I don’t know who it was,” Portale said.
“I told you, I spoke to a couple of lawyers.”
“There were two females.”
“Two females?”
“They were blond.”
“Young?” Moscato asked.
“No, about middle age.”
“Where are we going here?” the judge asked.
“I can answer it now,” Moscato cut in. “That was Laura Rice. That’s Vincent Viafore’s sister. And if—her mother was here, Mrs. Viafore. And I was also speaking to two younger—that’s why I asked you if they were younger ones—I was talking to two younger interns that are doing an internship with the DA’s office. They’re law students.”
“Okay. Thank you. No further questions,” Portale said, not visibly perturbed that he’d demonstrated his lack of concern for the victim’s family members by not even recognizing them.
ADA Julie Mohl approached the witness and began redirect. First, she took Moscato through a careful explanation of how evidence tags are created. She followed that by eliciting a description of a missing person investigation and the necessary contact with family members and the last known person to have seen the missing individual.
On recross, Portale dove back into the evidence tags as if he’d not heard a word of the redirect testimony. He kept making the same point again and again as if he couldn’t grasp the simple facts of the process. He repeatedly misstated Moscato’s testimony and twisted his words until Moscato had had enough.
The investigator leaned forward in the witness chair. “You’re wrong. You’re wrong. You are absolutely wrong.” His voice boomed through the courtroom, his angry tone underlining every word.
“Investigator,” the judge requested, “a little bit away from the microphone.”
Even after that, Portale kept reiterating accusations until Freehill interrupted.
“These questions have been asked over and over again,” the judge said.
“Withdrawn. No further questions.” Portale surrendered the floor, seemingly unconcerned that he had just made himself appear remarkably stupid to some observers.
Senior Investigator Aniello Moscato descended from the witness box, the unwelcome specter of possibly being recalled by the defense hanging over his head.
The day in court ended with a squabble between defense and prosecution. Attorney Chartier accused the state of withholding information that should have been provided in discovery and slammed the state police and the state with being dishonest. Julie Mohl insisted that much of the material that he had requested had already been provided and called the accusations “offensive.”
Judge Freehill requested some of the materials be provided and asked for another witness to clarify the details surrounding the requisition of the boat. He then dismissed the court.