Daker trying for new trial in attacks
by Lindsay Field
August 04, 2013 12:28 AM | 3193 views | 8 8 comments | 15 15 recommendations | email to a friend | print
MARIETTA — The man convicted of killing a Marietta mother and stabbing her 5-year-old son 18 times is pinning his hopes for a new trial on the testimonies of numerous witnesses and experts at a hearing Wednesday in Cobb Superior Court.

Waseem Daker, who was sentenced to life in prison plus 47½ years in 2012 for the 1995 killing of Karmen Smith and the assault of her son, Nick Smith, will appear before Judge Mary Staley on Aug. 7.

He has been housed in the Jackson State Prison since his conviction.

Daker was found guilty of stabbing Karmen Smith twice in the back and then strangling her with a rope on Oct. 23, 1995, and then stabbing her son. The child survived.

Wrangling in the subpoenas

Among those who have been subpoenaed are Daker’s former counsel during the murder trial last fall, Jason Treadaway and his father Mike Treadaway, metro Atlanta news reporters who covered the case and even the owner of Mamie’s Cupcakes on the Marietta Square, Mamie Doyle.

No one was able to give the exact number of subpoenas issued, including the Cobb County Sheriff’s Office, which is responsible for issuing the court documents, or the Cobb County Clerk of Courts.

The Cobb District Attorney’s Office wasn’t aware of the final number either and no one was willing to speak about the hearing prior to Staley’s ruling, said Kim Isaza, spokesperson for District Attorney Vic Reynolds.

Mike Treadaway, who was in court briefly last fall as a standby attorney for Daker before Daker decided to represent himself, said he too has heard that a lot of people have been subpoenaed for the case, including his son and himself, but no number has been revealed.

“(Daker has) allegedly subpoenaed so many people that the judge may have some questions prior to testimony, as to how a witness would help the motion,” he said.

Blatz recants, could retake stand

It will be Staley’s decision as to whom Daker can call to testify, as well as who will be allowed to submit information, and Treadaway said one of those people could be Loretta Spencer Blatz.

Blatz, who was the state’s star witness in the 2012 trial, filed two affidavits in March recanting a majority of what she testified to under oath at Daker’s trial last fall and during a previous trial in 1996 that ended in his conviction for aggravated assault against her.

Courthouse officials have not said if Blatz is among those who have been subpoenaed.

“(Her testimony) would have to be explored because it could be an issue of irregularity in the case,” Treadaway said.

He also said that during the hearing, Daker will be allowed to ask any questions that he might feel will help his case in a request for a new trial.

“The key component on these types of things, though, are ineffective assistance of counsel but with him not having any counsel, that’s not helpful to him here,” Treadaway said.

The judge typically has about 90 days to make a ruling and Treadaway estimated that requests for new trials are granted in only about 5 percent of requests. And when Staley decides in favor of or against Daker’s motion, either party could file for an appeal afterward.

Comments
(8)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Bee Fare
|
August 08, 2013
This whole thing is a 21st Century Leo Frank Lynching in legal attire. Daker may not be a likeable fellow but that should not be the reason to grossly deny him a fair trial. Like Leo Frank this injustice will spook Marietta for years to come.
Justice is NEEDED
|
August 06, 2013
WHAT THE JURY DID NOT HEAR

Karmens ex-husband had a history of being abusive. He fought with Karmen the evening before the murder and the morning of the murder. He called in sick to work the day of the murder. Her ex-boyfriend was harassing her, left the State of GA the day AFTER the murder before being questioned by the authorities. There were OTHER ex-boyfriends Karmen had problems with and even threatened to kill her and her son. The murder weapon (the rope) had 2 DNA profiles, neither were Dakers. Other hairs, head and pubic NOT Dakers, OTHER evidence that was crucial enough for the Detective to fly to the private lab in Texas for testing but once the evidence was coming back as NOT DAKERS, the detective called and stopped all further testing. Just hours after Nick was attacked he was questioned by the authorities and he said his attacker HAD BLUE EYES. (I can’t think of a better time to question a witness) DAKER has BROWN eyes. Blatz recanting some of her testimony and the newly discovered evidence. WASEEM DAKER NEEDS TO GET A FAIR NEW TRIAL. UNFORTUNEALTY, IN COBB COUNTY, IT WON’T HAPPEN. This is such a gross miscarriage of justice. It is all about convictions and NOT justice. If I were a juror, I would be UPSET that a LOT of evidence was withheld.

Someone who knows
|
August 07, 2013
You obviously are very, very misinformed and a complete idiot.

please go crawl back into your hole
GAgirl3
|
August 05, 2013
Lets just hope Judge Mary Staley is FAIR this time around. NOT allowing Daker to present crucial evidence to the Jurors at his 2012 trial was NOT justice! Staley allowed the Prosecution to present circumstantial evidence that was found on Daker's lap top and trunk 15 years after a crime. Where is the justice? He was convicted for ONE fair. One hair that may have come from one of the bedding that Blatz gave Karmen Smith pryer to the murders.
anonymous
|
August 06, 2013
You must be his mommy.
Just Wait
|
August 04, 2013
For all the people who complain about the Justice system not being fair, this guy is a prime example of how the system bends over backwards to allow everyone their day in court.
CobbRES
|
August 06, 2013
Our Justice system is NOT perfect but when you have a clear bias in the courtroom from the Judge who is suppose to uphold the law and NOT show favoritism, it WAS NOT and CAN NOT be fair. This is a prime example of how the system bent over backwards to make sure they secured a conviction instead of seeing true justice served.

Just because you allow someone their day in court does NOT mean the Judge would be fair or they would get a fair trial. CLEARLY the Judge favored the prosecution and clearly did NOT like Daker. It was OBVIOUS to all who observed.
*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides