NORWICH – A pattern again emerged Tuesday in the Peter M. Wlasiuk murder retrial as the prosecution continued to attack the defendant’s changing story while the defense carried on its critical examination of errors made during the police investigation.

Prosecution points out Wlasiuk’s inconsistency

Testimony was set to begin Tuesday where it left off Monday with Sheriff’s Lt. James E. Lloyd taking the stand, but instead District Attorney Joseph McBride requested that Civil Attorney Hugh Leonard be allowed to testify first.

Leonard read a transcript from a July 18, 2002 interview with Wlasiuk that took place at the old Chenango County Sheriff’s Office.

Leonard was contracted by New York Central Mutual Insurance to perform an investigation into an claim made by Wlasiuk attempting to collect on a policy over the damages done to his 1998 GMC dual-wheel one-ton extended cab.

The vehicle was the one involved in the fatal event that claimed Patricia Wlasiuk’s life on April 3, 2002. She was 35 years old at the time.

According to Wlasiuk, he and his wife were traveling east on County Route 35 in the Town of Guilford to retrieve their three children from a baby-sitter when they were involved in a fatal accident.

Police arrested Wlasiuk on April 8, 2002, accusing him of staging the accident to cover up the murder of his wife.

However, the exact cause of the accident has been in dispute and the prosecution has continually drawn attention to the inconsistencies in the defendant’s version of events given to investigators.

These issues were again brought into focus Tuesday as Leonard read aloud a record of an examination performed under oath with Wlasiuk. The interview took place just three months after the incident in 2002. In the six-year-old court record, Wlasiuk detailed a completely different story at the vehicle insurance inquiry than the one he originally gave to police.

During the 23-minute interview, Wlasiuk told Leonard that the couple was traveling to get their children from Joyce Warden’s house on Mechanic Street in Guilford when Peter allegedly made Patricia turn the vehicle around while in a heated dispute because he suddenly realized she had been drinking.

According to Peter, Patricia stopped the vehicle and began a K-turn in the middle of County Rt. 35 and while in the course of this maneuver, she mistakenly accelerated the truck off the road, through the guardrail and into Guilford Lake.

Leonard told the court that Peter Wlasiuk told him he never told anyone he was driving the truck and lied to investigators about swerving to miss a deer because at the time he didn’t want the police to arrest his wife for DWI.

“I’m sitting in jail because I tried to cover for my wife,” Leonard said, quoting Wlasiuk.

In his initial statement to police on the night of the murder, April 3, and the following interview three days later with Lt. Lloyd, Wlasiuk said Patricia swerved to miss a deer just after flicking a cigarette from the window. He also told the two investigators Patricia had not been drinking. Police investigator’s Lloyd and Sgt. Detective Richard Cobb testified Monday that the physical evidence did not match any story given to them by Wlasiuk.

According to the insurance inquiry transcript, Wlasiuk said he was fighting with Patricia, who threatened to drive the truck into the lake during the argument, just prior to the alleged accident.

At the inquiry, Leonard asked Wlasiuk, “Do you have any reason to believe your wife may have driven the truck into the lake on purpose?” Wlasiuk is recorded as initially saying, “Yes,” but then the transcript indicates that he goes off the record to confer with his attorney at the time, Frederick J. Neroni. When the record resumes, Wlasiuk modifies his answer and responds, “I don’t know.”

The claim was ultimately denied by the insurance company because in either version of events, one where Peter murdered his wife or in the story given in his July 2002 interview, both were considered “intentional acts” by the company.

On cross-examination by Defense Attorney Randel Scharf, Leonard told the court, “In my opinion, sir, Mr. Wlasiuk was indicating his wife intentionally drove the truck into the lake.”