The attorney for Richardson Dangleben Jr., the St. Thomas man charged in the 2023 shooting death of VIPD Detective Delberth Phipps Jr., is seeking a change of venue out of the territory, or at least to the district of St. Croix, given the intense publicity surrounding the case.
A 37-page motion requesting the change is one of 13 that Public Defender Matthew Campbell filed on his client’s behalf Wednesday in V.I. District Court, including to sever certain counts and dismiss others, and to suppress police interrogations of Dangleben while he was being treated for injuries at the hospital after the July 4 shooting, and again in the parking lot of the federal courthouse before his initial appearance three days later, on July 7, 2023.
Dangleben faces 13 counts including: first-degree murder; two counts of first-degree assault; two counts of third-degree assault; attempted first-degree murder; use of a firearm during a crime of violence resulting in death; two counts of discharge of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence; possession of firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime; possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number; receipt of a firearm while under indictment for a crime punishable by more than one year imprisonment; and wearing body armor during the commission of a violent crime.
Separately, Dangleben also faces murder and other charges in V.I. Superior Court, for the February 2023 shooting death of Keith Jennings. Both that and the Phipps incident occurred in the Hospital Ground area of St. Thomas.
Dangleben has pleaded not guilty in both cases and is currently scheduled to stand trial in the Jennings case on March 25. A trial date has not been set in the Phipps case, according to publicly available records on the District Court docket.
According to Wednesday’s motion for a change of venue, the pretrial publicity in both cases “has been constant, widespread, inflammatory and emotional such that selecting a fair and impartial jury in this community will be impossible.” It has been so great that Campbell sought leave of the court to file an “overlength motion” to fully detail the “depth and breadth” of public discourse around the Phipps case in particular.
The motion details months of media coverage of both cases, as well as publicity fueled by statements from government officials at the time of Phipps’ death and then after when he lay in state because he was an officer of the V.I. Police Department killed in the line of duty, during his funeral, and beyond.
“There has been a constant and detailed stream of articles regarding this case as well as the Superior Court case. Most of those articles link the two cases together, so any reader familiar with one case is most assuredly familiar with the other. The articles are emotionally-charged and have figuratively convicted Mr. Dangleben of both murders before any trial is held. A large number of public officials have weighed in, alternately praising Detective Phipps and demonizing Mr. Dangleben. To call the press coverage ‘one-sided’ is a vast understatement,” the motion states.
“Several dignitaries are quoted making emotional statements — all of which presume Mr. Dangleben’s guilt — including Governor Bryan who described the incident as ‘a devastating blow not only to [Phipps’] family, friends, and colleagues but to the entire Virgin Islands community,’” the motion states.
In some cases, Dangleben was outright convicted, it says.
For example, most local news outlets published a press release from U.S. Attorney Delia Smith on Oct. 16, 2023, regarding the grand jury’s indictment in the case, that stated “Officer Phipps bravely responded to a criminal act in progress when his life was taken during the cowardly act of murder,” the motion notes. “Thus, the press release stated as fact that Mr. Dangleben is guilty. The release went on to personalize the event for all readers by adding that the ‘death of an officer in the line of duty is a loss that affects the entire community, and we expect justice to be served in a manner that reflects the ultimate sacrifice he made,’” it says.
“Quotes from the Virgin Islands Chief of Police and the FBI Special Agent in Charge made it clear that in their opinion, Mr. Dangleben was guilty and the result in this case was all but a foregone conclusion. The press release then went on to cite to unnamed court documents (likely the affidavit to the complaint) and summarized the ‘facts’ the government intends to prove, as if they were already proved. It also summarized evidence purportedly found, including firearms, ammunition and marijuana,” according to the motion.
Adding fuel to the fire were comments on social media in reaction to the news articles, including several calling for Dangleben’s execution, and many others posting sympathetic emojis for the victims, the motion states.
Compounding the issue is the tiny population of the Virgin Islands, which by itself will make it challenging to seat an impartial jury that is not familiar with some aspect of the case, the motion states. According to the 2020 Census, the U.S. Virgin Islands’ total population was 87,146, with 42,261 residing on St. Thomas, 41,004 on St. Croix, and 3,891 on St. John. However, only 70,060 of those residents are 18 or older and eligible for jury duty, according to the Census Bureau, meaning a pool of around 37,000 people in the St. Thomas-St. John District, it says.
“The small size of the Judicial Division of Saint Thomas and Saint John supports a finding of presumed prejudice,” the motion states, citing high-profile cases in other jurisdictions with larger populations that in some instances led the Supreme Court to reverse convictions because a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial was violated by intense pre-trial and courtroom publicity.
“The drum beat of this press coverage has been steady and constant. It began the day the shooting began and has continued every time any event occurs in this case or in Superior Court,” according to the motion. “Routine court proceedings (such as expert notices or status conferences) have caused publication of articles that cover those proceedings as well as recitations of the allegations in both shootings. There is no sign that press coverage will abate. Rather, it appears likely that as motions are litigated and this case gets closer to trial, the frequency and intensity of press coverage is likely to increase, not decrease,” it says.
In addition to a change of venue, Campbell is also seeking to suppress interrogations of Dangleben when he was recovering from surgery and on pain medication for gunshot wounds to both thumbs and his leg after the July 4th shooting, and again on July 7 when he was taken to the courthouse from the hospital for his initial appearance, alleging violations of his Miranda rights among other issues.
In addition, Campbell has filed motions to:
- Dismiss count 5, possession of a firearm with an obliterated serial number, because it is unconstitutional;
- Dismiss count 6, receipt of a firearm while under indictment for a crime punishable by more than one year in prison, because it is unconstitutional;
- Dismiss counts 1, 2 and 3: Use of a firearm during a crime of violence resulting in death; and two charges of discharge of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, because none of the counts states an offense under the United States Code as the underlying crime of violence is based on a V.I. Code offense (the murder counts);
- Sever count 4, possession of firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, because as a non-violent offense it is joined with offenses not of the same character;
- Sever count 6, receipt of a firearm while under indictment for a crime punishable by more than one year imprisonment, because it relates to the Superior Court case and unfairly prejudices the District Court case;
- Exclude any evidence addressing the separate charges currently pending in the Superior Court;
- Exclude the expert testimony of DEA Special Agent Joseph Pittaluga as unnecessary and unhelpful because “every defendant has a right to be tried based on the evidence against him or her, not on the techniques utilized by law enforcement officials in investigating criminal activity.”
