Dawn Bork - Wrongfully Convicted sign now

I am writing in regards to the wrongful conviction of Marguerite Dawn Bork. All relative information is what I truly and wholeheartedly believe to be true. She was accused of murder in Oneida County, New York, with absolutely no evidence. I understand that most people in this situation have this mindset of innocence, but if this is truly investigated, you should see that a serious miscarriage of justice has occurred. She is currently serving a 25 to life sentence at Bedford Hills Correctional Facility in Bedford Hills, NY. She was found guilty of 2nd degree murder by a jury trial on March 29, 2007 for the poisoning death of her husband, Terrance, with antifreeze on September 19, 2005. This occurred in Oneida County Court with Judge Barry M. Donalty and an appeal is pending. I sincerely and prayerfully request that this is looked into as soon as possible. Our judicial system should not have personnel working towards the goal of making their conviction records stand out at the expense of innocent people. It is not intended for the system to seek notoriety for themselves, but instead, to instill justice for all people. Unfortunately, some officials, as well as people in general, believe they possess an abundance of power and they certainly do not show concern or have proper ethics towards humanity.

I do not believe the jury went into this trial with an open mind, especially with continual, one sided media coverage since her arrest in November, 2006 and subsequent release on bail. I also do not believe that they upheld their civic duty as jurors to have reached a verdict in such a short time. This was a complicated and lengthy case and it was apparent that they could not have looked at all of the evidence presented in less than three hours. Furthermore, they had been instructed by the prosecutor to not do the math in her closing arguments, pertaining to the half-life of ethylene glycol. These calculations would have played a major role in the rightful outcome of this trial, as she would have been excluded from any wrongdoing.

To make this easier to comprehend, points are listed rather than written in letter form. The following information is directly from or in reference to pre-trial and trial testimony.

1. Investigative statements were based on hear-say, rumors, and family vengeance.
2. Homicide was considered by the prosecution, but suicide was not.
3. Marguerite was solely accused, harassed, and pursued by the Oneida County Sheriff Department.
4. A motive of gaining life insurance because of severe debt was alleged. We all have debt, some more than others. Their credit history was unflawed, which means all bills were being taken care of in a timely and sufficient manner. She cashed in on policies with the help and advice of a financial advisor. She then paid off most of their bills, repaired a leaking roof, and fixed her 1980s car. Is that not what a responsible person is supposed to do after a death? According to her husbands will, he clearly expressed his wishes of payment of all bills. She did not buy lavish items, go on trips, etc
5. A motive because of a mistress was also alleged. Her husband and the mistress denied any affair and always said they were only friends. Marguerite trusted her husband and what he said. She knew this woman went to several area homes, visited, and brought food, so she was not surprised at the actions of this woman.
6. Investigator Nelson testified that he could not shut Marguerite up to read her the Miranda Rights for a long time. What top investigator could not make a 62 year old woman stop talking?
7. Investigator Nelson testified that hours of the initial conversation were not taped because he had the lead plugged in wrong and had not tested the recorder. What top investigator does not know how his tape recorder works or pre-test it?
8. She was there for eleven hours without an attorney and offered information freely.
9. Investigator Nelson did not put all of his notes from the eleven hour session together until after the investigation began and did not finish until after her arrest. Most were based on his own recollection of the events of that day, several months after the questioning, all of which do not seem very professional for such a high profile case.
10. Investigator Nelson said she initially stated that she did not have antifreeze. Why would she say that, when she knew they did? If she had done this horrific crime, as they say, why would she keep the jugs of antifreeze, so called evidence, 3 months later? This is the North Country and they had several vehicles they used antifreeze for.
11. It was stated that they found no fingerprints on any of the antifreeze containers because they could not be lifted off of plastic. This seems very strange.
12. Investigators stated that many test results from the home were inconclusive or not back yet taken January, 2006 and the trial was March, 2007. Is this not a very long time for such crucial test results?
13. No evidence was found at her home, except one unopened jug of antifreeze in the mud room of the home, a jug filled with water on the porch, and various ones found in the barn area, 3 months later. Once again, not uncommon in this area.
14. There was a recent purchase of antifreeze stated in testimony but upon further questioning, it was shown that Terrys signature was on the receipt as the buyer.
15. One jug was found in the barn where Terry was staying with his mother. It was stated that this was untouched because of the footprint of dust left when investigators moved it in January, 2006. This was 3 months after death, in a garage/barn where cars are parked and moved in and out constantly. Of course, the dust would be around it by then, even if it had been moved by Terry himself 3 months prior.
16. A complete search of Marguerites home was done, but only the main part of his mothers home was searched. He was living at the latter prior to his hospital admission and subsequent death. He was found collapsed in an upstairs bedroom and no search of that area or testing was done.
17. How did he get upstairs from the living room, if in the hours before he went to bed, he was supposedly given such an enormous amount of antifreeze?
18. Why did he want to stay downstairs and watch TV while the rest went to bed?
19. Why did he not get violently ill and vomit right away?
20. Dr. Sikirica admitted that he did not know the time the alleged drink, if any, was given and did not know his prior health history.
21. Letters were found from the alleged mistress to Terry stating, I always knew you would go back to your family. Your best friend, Betty. Yet, in her initial statement to investigators and testimony, she said he was going to leave his family after his sons graduation and build a home with her. He did his will just prior to graduation, and everything was left to Marguerite Dawn. If he was planning on leaving her, why did he not leave everything to his son or his alleged mistress or his mother? The will was prepared by his cousin, so that could easily have been done.
22. Marguerite was the only suspect. Why not the alleged mistress or he himself?
23. A history of kidney problems in the family was finally admitted by Terrys mother when cross examined by Marguerites attorney.
24. A gentleman from an insurance company testified that Marguerite told him on the phone that she found [her] husband dead on the day of [her] daughters funeral. It was alleged that this was in order to make him feel sorry for her and pay. She was entitled to the benefits for her husbands death, why would she have to make up a story like that? In addition, a tape was previously played, which clearly showed that she speaks in a quite, soft spoken manner. Yet, he testified that she spoke loudly. What actually occurred was that after this man typed in all of the information, Marguerite politely thanked him for his help and explained the tragedies they recently had. These included her fathers death a few months prior and a good friends son being tragically shot and killed in Virginia. He was asked about the thousands of claims he processes and if he could have mixed her up with someone else or if father could have sounded like daughter.
25. No changes or amendments to existing insurance policies were made and no new ones were applied for.
26. The amount that would have been received on his and her disability would more than have covered any existing bills.
27. If they were to be divorced, she would have received alimony payments, half of his retirement, etc. Therefore, money would never be an issue, had there been involvement with a mistress.
28. He had been sick for several years and diagnosed with a fatal disease. Why would she have to kill him, as alleged?
29. If they had such severe debt as alleged, bankruptcy could have been an option.
30. Statements say Terry was at his mothers house to get away from Marguerite, but his mothers and sisters (Debbys) testimony stated that it was to be closer to the hospital, just as Marguerite stated all along. He went there initially after his surgery in Syracuse to recover and be closer to Rome Hospital. He was not improving at his mothers house, was readmitted July 6-10, and returned to his mothers home to recuperate, again.
31. His mother was vague in answering grand jury questions and at trial, she could not even remember her childrens ages.
32. His mothers and sisters testimonies were different. One said that one 8 oz. cup of something was given while the other said that two drinks were given. Neither one knew what was in it, but stated it came from their refrigerator. Marguerite and her son both stated Marguerite did not give him anything to drink and that young Terry and his father got their own drinks that evening.
33. Marguerite and her son had visited Terry every night, per testimony. How could this elderly woman, with obvious memory problems, remember that exact night and who gave what to whom, 3 months later.
34. Young Terry stated that he helped his father get onto the four-wheeler and had to walk beside him as they slowly went into the field because it hurt his father to hit the bumps. The prosecution, in closing, adamantly yelled, And he rode the four wheeler, insinuating that he was not sick at all.
35. Throughout the trial, whatever fit the prosecutions theory at the moment was utilized. For instance, Terry was either sick for a long time or was not sick at all.
36. His sister stated that he was fine with no problems, until cross examined by Marguerites attorney. He asked, Doesnt he walk with a walking stick/cane and doesnt he use that because he loses his balance and falls down? She then admitted, Yes, that is true.
37. Terry was treated for several years prior to his death for various medical conditions, including Parkinsons disease, mitral valve prolapse, chronic renal insufficiency, and high cholesterol. He had been on several different medications for extended periods of time. He was also in a depressed state, per counselors testimony.
38. Months prior to Terrys death, Marguerite was asked to pull the plug on her father as he was dying. She could not and Terry told her, If this ever happens to me, you cannot leave me as a vegetable. Consequently, he made his sister his Health Care Proxy because he knew Marguerite would never be able to do that to him. How could she ever kill him as they said she did?
39. It was stated that Marguerite showed no grief at the funeral. She actually did so privately at home and in the company of close friends. It is well known that in situations such as this, people are said to be stoic, so brave, holding up so well, this will certainly hit them later, and in shock. Why are peoples perceptions allowed to be used to bring a case against her?
40. On day six of the trial, the jury requested that the Judge tell them what it meant when an attorney would object and it would either be overruled or sustained. How can some of the previous days of testimony be understood by the jury?
41. Half way through the trial, a local newspaper did an update of the trial and printed an antifreeze poisoning article right next to it. In this case, the lady had previously killed her boyfriend and was again found guilty of such. The following day, the Judge asked the jurors, at Marguerites attorneys request, if they saw anything that would affect their judgment in this case. They said no, but this is a very small community in Upstate New York and the odds of none of them reading this are slim to none.
42. Most importantly the half life information, even without considering anything else in the trial, excludes her from doing what she is accused of. This information is very important, but the jury was instructed to disregard it in the prosecutions closing arguments when she said, we will not do the math or back count regarding the half life information.

These are just a few of the questionable issues that I sincerely hope you will consider. I believe the jury disregarded, misunderstood, or had their minds made up prior to entering into their civic duty. The media had one-sided information constantly publicized since her initial arrest on November 2, 2006. Most everything they published or televised was not alleged, however, it was publicized that the Oneida County Sheriff said she gave him a drink laced with antifreeze the night before he died.

I bring this case to your attention as I believe it was mishandled from beginning to end by the Oneida County Sheriff Department, District Attorney, Grand Jury, and Prosecution. The medical evidence they had would have shown from the beginning that she could not have given her husband a fatal drink the evening before he died, as alleged. This information was disregarded in lieu of statements based on hear-say and rumors in a small town which included her husbands alleged affair, vengeance by her family members, and miscommunications. Marguerite was a woman who seemed guilty because she grieved in private, instead of publicly, and was allegedly motivated to gain life insurance to pay a severe debt. Terry was sick for years, as records show and the amount of disability payments they were to receive would more than cover their debt. Again, all pushed aside as irrelevant by the prosecution. It seems as though the Sheriff Department intended on making a name for themselves and there was no turning back once they began their investigation nearly 3 months after his death. Some who were questioned were told initially by the investigators that they, the investigators, did not even know what they were doing. Many statements that did not help their case but would have certainly helped Marguerite were not shown at Grand Jury.

During sentencing, Judge Donalty made assertions about Marguerite, such as she has been a very cruel and calculating woman all of her life. These false characteristics were not part of the trial and definitely not a proper description of her, especially since he has not known her all of her life. They were most likely stated to gain sentiment from anyone who may have questioned the verdict. The prosecution threw in degrading, non-trial information during her closing arguments, as well, which was not supposed to have been allowed by the Judge.

Marguerite Dawn Bork is well respected by many in the Town of Ava. She has lived and been an active community member in Ava for most of her life. She has been a member of the Republican Party in the town of Ava for several years, following in her families footsteps. In the early 1990s, Marguerite applied for a seat on the Ava Board of Assessment Review, and still held the position of Chairperson at time of incarceration. One action taken by her in 1991, when the Historical Town Hall was scheduled for demolition, was organizing a Town Hall Citizens Committee which eventually stopped the demolition. Subsequently, the Town Board approved of her researching and applying for grants for the restoration and preservation of this 110 year old, historic site. She organized many successful fund raising projects, received numerous donations, and with the help of former Senator Donovan, secured a $100,000 grant. Eventually, she applied for and was granted for it to be placed on the NY State Federal Registers of Historical Sites. It stands today, restored and is a full time Town Hall for voting, meetings, and court cases. In order for the site to proceed as a polling place, it had to be supported with petitions. Fortunately, with the assistance of Marguerite, petitions were obtained and the ensuing legal battle was overcome.

Further accreditations should also be addressed. She obtained her Registered Nursing degree in 1965 and still held her license at the time of incarceration. Moreover, she holds a degree in accounting from the Utica School of Commerce. She is an active member of the Ava Hilltop Church, participating in all activities, including fundraisers, public dinners, Ladies Aid activities, etc. In the nearby town of Boonville, she held the position of Executive Secretary to the Boonville Area Chamber of Commerce for two years. Most recently in her nursing career, since the early 1990s, she has been a substitute nurse in the Adirondack Central School system, which encompasses five schools in the district.

Marguerite Dawn Bork does not deserve to be held accountable for a murder she did not commit. There was absolutely no evidence to convict her, but there was much to allow for reasonable doubt and the half life of ethylene glycol excludes her. Please do something, anything, to help her out of this situation as soon as possible, and do not allow this to happen to any other innocent people!

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook

If you already have an account please sign in, otherwise register an account for free then sign the petition filling the fields below.
Email and the password will be your account data, you will be able to sign other petitions after logging in.

Privacy in the search engines? You can use a nickname:

Attention, the email address you supply must be valid in order to validate the signature, otherwise it will be deleted.

I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing


Who signed this petition saw these petitions too:

Sign The Petition

Sign with Facebook

If you already have an account please sign in


I confirm registration and I agree to Usage and Limitations of Services

I confirm that I have read the Privacy Policy

I agree to the Personal Data Processing

1 / 50

Latest Signatures


Sharlene FriedmanBy:
Petition target:
Governor of New York


No tags


Invite friends from your address book

Embed Codes

direct link

link for html

link for forum without title

link for forum with title