WILKES-BARRE — Testimony in the long-awaited murder case against Jessica Alinsky is set to begin this morning, more than four years after her boyfriend died of a gunshot wound to the face.
Much of the day Monday was devoted to selecting a five-man, seven-woman panel of jurors who will decide over the next week whether Alinsky, 32, a native of Shenandoah, murdered her boyfriend, Matthew Ryan Gailie, who was killed by a single shot on Sept. 2, 2011.
Prosecutors said Alinsky killed Gailie at a home on Muskegon Circle in Hazle Township, then staged the scene to make it appear he committed suicide.
The jury seated Monday includes a panel of alternates consisting of one man and three women. Luzerne County Judge Tina Polachek Gartley instructed them to return at 9 a.m. to get instructions and to hear opening statements.
Jury selection began after defense attorney Demetrius Fannick unsuccessfully sought a change of venue, citing news articles that appeared in Luzerne County newspapers Monday morning detailing the events and history of the case — including details jurors are not permitted to know about.
“There’s publicity regarding specific pieces of evidence which have been excluded,” Fannick said.
Those include Alinsky’s previous guilty plea to third-degree murder, which she later withdrew; and how she was accused of staging a burglary scene once before. Prosecutors unsuccessfully sought to introduce that detail to establish Alinsky had shown a pattern of staging crime scenes.
Assistant District Attorney Daniel Zola noted news articles appeared Monday morning in The Citizens’ Voice, the Standard-Speaker and the Times Leader. The Standard-Speaker article, he noted, appeared on the front page with the headline “Suicide or murder?” and contained a picture of Alinsky shackled in prison garb.
Gartley rejected Fannick’s motion, noting other high-profile cases have been successfully tried without a change of venue, despite extensive publicity; and that she had brought in a pool of 100 jurors, rather than 75, to help overcome any issues arising from pre-trial publicity.
“If we need to, I’ll address the issue again,” Gartley said.
During voir dire, 21 prospective jurors indicated they had heard about the case and 15 said they read about it Monday morning.
Attorneys were able to agree on jurors by mid-afternoon, though the panel was sent home early because they missed lunch during the selection process.