"Why did the wardens not interview any of Armando's eyewitnesses?" was my second question.

"What you are asking me, Mr. Davenport, is private information," he answered. "There's more to the story than what came out in court."

"How can this be private, Captain?" I replied. "Armando Pioppi Jr. was convicted in public court."

After that the conversation went downhill and Captain Eisenhain hung up on me. Before he hung up he said he didn't care if the story appeared on the "Oprah" show.

After interviewing one of the eyewitnesses and talking again to Armando, my opinion swayed in Armando's favor. It certainly seemed that New Jersey

Fish and Wildlife had convicted an innocent man. I wrote New Jersey Governor Jon S. Corzine and Acting Fish and Wildlife Director David Chanda. The certified letters detailed Armando's plight and my encounter with Eisenhain, and posed five pertinent questions about the Kille and Leonard investigation. I received no reply.

ARMANDO'S POLYGRAPH
Because Duncan Dobie and I had strong feelings that Armando might be innocent, I made arrangements to send him to one of the top polygraphists on the East Coast, Kelley Investigative Security Service. Owner Paul Kelley was a decorated Commander of the Centreville Barracks Division of Maryland's State Police. He was assigned to the Maryland Polygraph Unit in 1991, but has since retired and begun his own polygraph and investigation service.

Paul spent four hours with Armando and asked all the pertinent questions involving the harvest of his buck. The results were conclusive: Armando was telling the truth on all aspects of his kill. Armando's polygraph test was also read by the John Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory Poly Score Program and further supported Paul Kelley's analysis. Armando had indeed killed the buck with a bow exactly as he had claimed.

It is a common misconception that a polygraph test is not admissible in court. This is not true. A polygraph can be entered into evidence if both the defendant and prosecutor agree on admission. Had Armando taken the polygraph before his first court date and given the Division of Fish and Wildlife the results, its admission still might have been denied.

According to Armando, prior to the first court appearance the Division's prosecutor offered him and his lawyer a plea bargain. If Armando pleaded guilty, he would receive only a $100 fine but New Jersey would keep his buck. Had the deal been accepted, Armando would have saved thousands of dollars and multiple court appearances. Armando strongly refused the plea bargain and decided to fight for his innocence in court.

Did New Jersey's court system and Wildlife Division fail Armando?

page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6