Judge denies motion to dismiss triple homicide case
JANESVILLE Janesville’s triple homicide suspect believes evidence proving his innocence was lost when the crime scene was destroyed nine months after the killings.
James Koepp, 49, also believes evidence collected off his shirt and jeans was obtained from an illegal search.
Koepp’s attorney wants the case dismissed based on the trailer home’s destruction, and he wants any evidence obtained from his clothing barred from the trial.
But a judge denied both requests.
Koepp’s attorney never showed that evidence proving his innocence was lost when the trailer was scrapped, Judge Alan Bates decided.
And Koepp voluntarily gave investigators his clothing, Bates decided.
The evidence inside the trailer and the clothing were part of two key motions in the murder case against Koepp, who is charged in the January 2007 slayings of Danyetta Lentz and her teenage children, Nicole and Scott.
Attorneys on both sides—District Attorney David O’Leary and assistant public defender Walter Isaacson—in November argued the motions to dismiss the case and suppress the evidence. Bates issued a written decision Dec. 17.
The trailer home where Lentz and her children were killed was locked from January 2007 to August 2007. Fingerprints, blood samples and other evidence were collected from the home. The home later was recycled for scrap metal.
In Koepp’s request to dismiss the case, Isaacson argued the charges should be dropped because the trailer was not preserved.
But the judge said investigators made several trips to the trailer to collect evidence. He said investigators took photographs of the scene.
“These items have been tested and preserved and are available for (Koepp),” Bates said.
After the homicide, investigators spoke with Koepp at his home. They said Koepp showed them the clothes he wore on the night of the homicide.
Investigators suspected the clothes had bloodstains. They confiscated the clothes. Prosecutors say a state crime analyst later linked the victims’ DNA to blood stains on the clothes.
In Koepp’s request to suppress evidence, Isaacson argued Koepp was deceived and never told he didn’t have to give up the clothes.
But the judge said Koepp voluntarily answered the investigators’ questions about his clothing. He said Koepp offered to show his clothes to the investigators.
“The state has shown by clear and convincing evidence that voluntary consent was given by the defendant,” Bates said.
Isaacson said Koepp could appeal the judge’s decisions if Koepp is convicted. He said he expects Koepp will stand trial.
O’Leary could not be reached for comment.
Koepp is charged with three counts of first-degree intentional homicide. If convicted, he faces three life terms.
Koepp remains in prison serving a sentence for felony fleeing. A trial date on his three murder charges has not been set.
Other pretrial motions are pending in the case.
Koepp is scheduled to appear in court Feb. 11 for a motion hearing.

Jan 21, 2009 at 1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
ya kno i think this is somewhat fair...b/c he in some articles they are sayin koepp pleaded guilty and now they are trying to plead for his innocence, this is bull..seriously the family needs peace and most importantly Danyetta and the kids need to be put to rest..i have been followin this story closely and the reason being is b/c scott was in my health class the day b4 this tragic thing happen..and we were all wondering what had happen to him and the entire class thought he was skipping. so i think we should just "skip" so to speak his trial and throw him in prison!
Dec 26, 2008 at 10:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
I like this fair and objective reporting. Good job!
Dec 25, 2008 at 5:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hello, their blood is on your clothes! Be a man and just admit your guilt. Stop wasting the taxpayers money.
Dec 25, 2008 at 11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
James Koepp, 49, also believes evidence collected off his shirt and jeans was obtained from an illegal search.....
And murder isn't illegal?? I wish we had the death penalty for this guy.
Dec 24, 2008 at 2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
I say cook him.
Dec 24, 2008 at 10:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Well, that wasn't exactly a compelling rationale for misconduct. But it's the defense lawyer's job to make these motions, and the judge's job to give them fair consideration.
Dec 24, 2008 at 7:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
Thank GOD! There IS a Santa Clause!
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.