Reichel guilty of manslaughter in 2010 crash that killed pregnant girlfriend; verdict called ‘repugnant’


Jurors convicted a two-time drunken driver Friday night of second-degree manslaughter in the 2010 death of his pregnant girlfriend but cleared him of driving drunk even though his lawyer conceded he was intoxicated at the time.

The split verdict in the case of Timothy Reichel, 32, of Colonie, prompted acting Supreme Court Justice Dan Lamont to immediately ask the jury to leave the courtroom. The judge said he anticipated Reichel’s defense attorney, Cheryl Coleman, would argue the verdict was inconsistent and should be tossed.

He guessed right; Coleman made the request to set aside the conviction. But Lamont upheld the verdict.

With his two prior DWI convictions, Reichel faces up to 7 1/2 to 15 years in prison in the Oct. 29, 2010 death of Crystal VanEpps, 21. The black Mitsubishi Gallant they were inside sped off Lisha Kill Road in Colonie at 76 mph and crashed into a tree, splitting the car in two. Reichel awaits sentencing in December.

“It’s good,” said VanEpps’ mother, Kelly Dagner, who was joined by several family members. “He ain’t walking. He’s still going to prison.”

Coleman fumed that the verdict was legally “repugnant,” which means it is logically inconsistent. Her client was acquitted on the most serious charge, aggravated vehicular homicide, which carries up to 25 years in prison. He was also acquitted of two charges of driving while intoxicated. The manslaughter charge on which Reichel was convicted indicates he recklessly caused the death of VanEpps.

Coleman argued the verdict was inconsistent because the jurors already determined he was not driving the car when they acquitted him of the first charge. Assistant District Attorney Mary Tanner-Richter argued the elements of the manslaughter charge could be proven without a finding that Reichel was drunk.Lamont said it was conceivable the jury believed Reichel was driving too fast but was not intoxicated.

See the story

Categories: General
Robert Gavin

16 Responses

  1. Jim f. says:

    Doesn’t Tim Reichel know who drove? He was in the car. If he wasn’t the driver, as his attorney claimed, why didn’t he tell the jury that? Why didn’t his attorney want him to tell the jury he wasn’t driving? By their verdict, the jury believed he was driving and caused Crystal Van Epps death.

  2. Laurie says:

    While I won’t argue with the jurors’ decisions, I’m curious what they were trying to say?

  3. Tammy says:

    Having sat through this trial during motion hearings and the trial part every day, this trial was premised on sympathy and inuendo. It was clearly evident that there was a lack of integrity and competency on behalf of both the police personnel and the DA. It was interesting to see the facts unfold in a “show and tell” fashion. I was honestly wondering when the “milk and cookie” cart was going to appear. The indictment in of itself was proof that the DA intended to throw everything out there in hopes of “something sticking”, it was a crap shoot from the beginning placing Reichel under arrest prematurely and making sure it was published in the media instantly. Their investigation was lacking to say the least and never did they consider his blood being on the passenger side nor the fact that the keys were found under Crystals body. It should be noted that the majority of the evidence ie. their own witnesses and video trying to establish the timeline of events contradicted itself. The reason the defendant did not take the stand was due to priors being exposed. However, Crystals driving record was not allowed into evidence as a result. Bottom line is the prosecution could not prove what they set out to and it was evident by the look on the DA’s face after the verdict. I found it interesting that the evidence was thrown in the back of a trunk for days yet during trial the latex gloves came out, a “new” pair for every item. As well, the fact that the first responders noted no shoes on Crystal however, all of the town employees indicated shoes were on as they looked to the DA for guidance under cross examination. I would ask if the shoes were secured in a bag upon ambulance transport, just how they would have made it to Reichels bag of clothes in the emergency room, considering they were transported in separated ambulances and treated in separate trauma rooms. This was the first case investigated by the rookie accident reconstructionist where both parties were ejected, and hopefully the last. During trial they all passed the buck to someone else with respect to their part in the investigation. The DA prosecuting the case also being on the scene at the time of investigation raises serious question. Although the DA attempted to discredit the defendants expert witness it was not successful and during cross he was teaching her many things about physics and body mechanics. Of interest, the DA theorized that the defendants expert was paid a great deal of money, as he should have for his expertise. However, what wasnt revealed was that he gave the Reichel family a reduction in fees stating ” he wouldnt be able to sleep if he did not testify on Reichels behalf”. The jury clearly didnt know how to digest what was fed to them by the prosecution and if they really felt Reichel was driving beyond any reasonable doubt we would not have seen the verdict rendered in this case.

  4. Jango Davis says:

    Cheryl Coleman is a parasite. She and Terrance Kindlon should go into business together.

  5. NMI says:

    Tammy — Why does the ADA reporting to the crime scene “raise serious questions?” How did the timing of the arrest impact the case? Even your boss knows Reichel is guilty.

  6. fbfriendofcc says:

    Jango, you are so wrong. If there was no Cheryl the cops could do whatever they wanted. She raises the bar. I think she is awesome. Remember, if the cases are investigated and prosecuted properly no one, not even Cheryl, could deconstruct it. Go Cheryl GO!

  7. For the People says:

    New York laws protect the guilty. These lawyers need to get a grip, they even know their clients are guilty as sin. They can raise doubt in anything. Most, not all, cops want to do what is right, but New York’s protect the quilty party laws making it impossible to find anyone guilty. This system is borken from the top down. I know he does not need to testify, but what is he going to be Joan Porco and claim he doesn’t remeber? Come on now–and by teh way 50% of the case can’t even go in front of the jury it is too slanted towards the prosecution. GO New York keep protecting the guilty-not those who can no longer speak. Anyway the guy si guilty-cherly should be asking was the jury stupid? I told them he was drunk adn they said he was not! Only in New York.

  8. Ann says:

    Wow! I’m befuddled.

  9. Tammy says:

    NMI- It raises serious question since clearly she knew all of the DNA evidence was tossed in the back of the trunk at the accident scene..breeding cross contamination which was clearly admitted to by their own expert. Take it a step further, the NYS police lab would not even accepted the items if they knew that was the case prior to receiving all the evidence. Did she not anticipate this case actually being disputed? Is that the proper way in the DA’s eyes to handle evidence in “any” case, much less a complicated one such as this? Further, there was clearly limited and incomplete investigation, even with her presence at scene. The arrest was made the night of accident did she not know that happened as well? The investigation with respect to “who was even the driver” was not completed until “months” after the accident happened. The guilty assumption made by the arresting officers the night of the accident clearly guided the remainder of the investigation. Are they to recant their original “assumption” after the media was immediately advised to place articles stating he was guilty? There was no turning back after the arrest was made. So when the DNA result did come back which noted Reichels DNA on the passenger side, when at point of impact everything flew to the left was well as keys found under Crystals body. It was “inadvertent” that these key investigative elements were ignored. Get the transcripts. As far as comments with respect to Cheryl Coleman, she is an excellent attorney and a wonderful person in general. At least she plays fair and with integrity. I can not say the same for the police department or the DA. Sit through a trial sometime, you want to see how your “serve and protect” representatives really conduct themselves? Just hope you are never placed on the receiving end of their “excellent investigative skills”. Did you know that a third of their reconstruction was based on priors, illegal. Did you know the longest indictment seen drawn up by the DA’s office also illegally indicated priors as basis? If the DA was overseeing the investigation here, then clearly she is not equipped to handle investigations such as this.

  10. Tammy says:

    BTW NMI- wrong Tammy, Cheryl Coleman is not my boss..good try though. Based on your incorrect presumptions can I “assume” you work for the Town of Colonie. If not, I believe you would be a suitable candidate for employment.

  11. COPPER says:

    @ For the People:
    Criminal cases are not impossible to make, quite the contrary. The sad thing is that you do not understand that it is not about winning or losing and unfortunately that might be what is going wrong. The police are not staying objective and we all lose if that is the case. It is about finding the truth and making a proper case to bring to court.

    No attorney, not even CC can “beat” a case that is investigated properly with diligence, thoroughness and objectivity.
    Not to take anything away from CC because she is quite skilled, the police work is so damn sloppy in these cases.

  12. Tammy says:

    I completely agree with For the peoples post. I would also like to state that my intention is not to stereotype all police officers. The fact that Officer Musser and Sgt Donnelly could be subject to perjury charges will hopefully guide them to conduct themselves in an ethical manner for future investigations they become involved in. Objectivity was non existent from the start in this case, and it was evident that it became a “win at all costs”..even if unethical, prosecution. The hard evidence was lacking and the subjective evidence was clearly manipulated for that purpose. The one and ONLY issue conceeded to by both the defense and prosecution was that Reichel was in fact intoxicated the night of the accident and he was found NOT guilty with respect to that issue. I anticipate the verdict in this matter will be overturned.

  13. HL says:

    Having to agree with Tammy on everything, I too sat through the trial and learned more facts that the “media” does not put out. Not only were the keys left out, but the wonderful “PAID” town paramedic that worked on Crystal conveniently forgot to note in his medical report that that Crystal had lower body injury which included a pelvic fracture. The ADA had Reichel tried and convicted before this case even went to trial.
    Colonie is the safest town in the US..EVERYBODY living in the town of Colonie should testify that’s because they do NOT take police reports. No paper trail equals one safe town. The only thing they have to report is high profile cases. Well they made Reichel’s just that and had to prove him guilty even if it included purgery.
    To all the people commenting on this blog, DID you sit through this particular trial to make your own verdict? Unless you can answer yes, don’t convict Reichel without evidence because honestly you can’t have much more than the ADA had…

  14. Tammy says:

    I just want to clarify the information given in the media. Reichels DNA was not on the passenger “seat”. It was on the passenger side “air bag”- big difference. It was conceeded by both parties that everything in the car went to the left at impact. A little difficult to be sitting in the drivers seat and yet your blood defies laws of physics and goes to the right landing on the passenger side airbag. I might add this was the ONLY piece of evidence they werent able to “chuck in the trunk”. Not only is Reichels blood pretty acrobatic defying laws of physics, but he must be superhuman to bend a steering wheel with his bare hands in the 3/4 of a second before he was thrown from the vehicle, prosecutions own contention. The engineer from MIT calmly explained that the force caused steering wheel to the strike A-pillar, now that I can believe. In addition, at no time did I hear testimony from witness Rowe state that Reichel said “I’m driving”. What she actually said was she didnt know who was driving in her first contact with Officer Musser at Albany Med. Of course, her testimony was tweaked after her coaching session with the ADA. However, “I’m driving” was never testified to.
    ADA- if there is any chance I could get some of those fast acting “memory pills” you fed to all your witnesses I’d appreciate it. How do you not remember facts and then after a break suddenly remember every detail (testimony coaching perhaps). I’m also left wondering how the surveillance video showing white shoes on Reichel all of the sudden changed to grey to match slippers you found in the car in the middle console area..hmm part way through the video..kind of strange.
    For all intensive purposes, Reichel was the ONLY occupant in that car that night. Take a look at their reconstruction report, half complete with no inference as to when or how Crystal left the vehicle AT ALL. Maybe “2 week” training courses aren’t enough? You are dealing with peoples lives here publishing information that the public has no choice but to believe and base judgements. These are real people involved and emotionally will never be the same because of the immense losses and I am speaking of both Reichel as well as the family of the Crystal.

  15. Len says:

    Beyond the courtroom, there were terrible choices that were made. What would possess someone to drive 75Mph at night on a Colonie street…Drunk or Sober???? Would a pregnant woman with young kids be insane enough to do something like that? Was one of them suicidal or homicidal? Someone was going to meet their final destination that night.

    I feel terrible for the woman who died, but it is a lesson to women not to pick a bad boy loser with TWO DUI convictions. And he was STILL driving under the influence. Why did she get in the car with him if that was the case? Bad choices can cost your life. Now (if he has a conscious) has to live for the rest of his life with the fact that he took two lives.

  16. Tammy says: This article in the Times Union is the reason the photo candidly being shown of Reichel in the paper exists. Please note bogus charges of felony assault of an officer were dropped. Colonies officers still not taking their oaths as officers seriously. The “bretheren code” will forever be in existence.