RutlandHerald.com - We Are Vermont

Suspect in shooting death faces new charges



Toolbox

By Josh O'Gorman STAFF WRITER - Published: October 21, 2009

WHITE RIVER JUNCTION — Nearly a year after a murder charge was dismissed, the parents of a man slain in Chester watched as their son's alleged killer faced new charges.

Kyle D. Bolaski, 25, of Springfield, pleaded innocent Tuesday in White River Junction District Court to a felony charge of manslaughter, misdemeanor charges of marijuana possession and violating his conditions of release and a Fish and Wildlife violation of transporting a loaded rifle.

Bolaski is accused of shooting Vincent Tamburello Jr., 32, of Springfield, in the back following a confrontation in August 2008 at MacKenzie Field in Chester. Numerous witnesses told police Tamburello had a splitting maul in his hands when he chased Bolaski, who drew a hunting rifle from his pickup and shot Tamburello, according to affidavits filed with the court.

Tamburello died from a gunshot wound to his back, according to the coroner's report.

"I can't stop shaking. I can't believe I was that close to him," said Tamburello's mother, Ronnie Tamburello, following the arraignment. She was two rows behind Bolaski when he took a seat in the courtroom and awaited his arraignment.

Bolaski, wearing a white shirt, white pants and a tie, did not speak during his arraignment and let his attorney Kevin Griffin enter innocent pleas on his behalf. He did not appear to acknowledge the roughly dozen members of the Tamburello family who were spread across the gallery.

"I'm happy they've finally brought charges," said Tamburello's father, Vincent Tamburello Sr., after the arraignment. "It's been a year we've waited for justice to happen, and now that it's started to happen I hope they're sincere about pursuing justice."

Bolaski originally pleaded innocent to second-degree murder, as well as aggravated assault with a weapon for allegedly beating Tamburello in the head with the rifle stock as he lay dying. In November, Windsor County State's Attorney Robert Sand dismissed the murder charge after a grand jury decided the evidence did not support either a murder or a manslaughter charge.

A supplemental affidavit contains new information in support of the new charges. According to the affidavit, a search of Bolaski's pickup turned up a pipe and some marijuana.

The affidavit also contains information about Bolaski's arraignment in Brattleboro District Court in August on a felony charge of prescription fraud for allegedly altering a prescription for Percocet, which would support a charge of Bolaski violating his conditions of release because he is not supposed to be charged with a new crime.

The supplemental information also states that the day of Tamburello's death, Bolaski had a loaded rifle in his truck as he traveled to MacKenzie Field — a Fish and Game violation — although it was not the rifle he used to allegedly shoot Tamburello.

The supplemental affidavit does not contain any new information to support a manslaughter charge, and following the arraignment, Sand did not explain why he had filed the recent charge.

"My job is to file the charges that are fair and appropriate with the evidence as presented," Sand said.

Vincent Tamburello was cautiously optimistic following the arraignment.

"They're asking us to trust them to bring justice to Vinnie," he said. "It's been 14 months of pain and anguish that we've gone through and I hope they mean what they say."

Bolaski remains free on $100,000 bail with his existing conditions that he observe a curfew and check in with Springfield Police as well as a new condition he not possess or consume regulated drugs unless prescribed by a doctor.

josh.ogorman@rutlandherald.com








READER COMMENTS


Mark, only a coward shoots from the back. If you had a brain in your head it means the threat is over and they are retreating. BTW there were at least 7 guys with the shooter why the need for the guns? the second guy with the rifle managed to get away without a scratch.Come to think of it so didnt the shooter. i guess you also believe its self defense to beat someone in the face when they are bleeding to death. I guess the wounded guy was still a threat duh
-- Posted by Deb Auch on Wed, Oct 21, 2009, 2:46 pm EST

report this comment



My sense is that this case is really about the government of our power-hungry State of Vermont reminding the citizen that he doesn't really have a right of self defense. That's the subtext here.

They are making an issue that the assailant was shot in the back; how many citizens would have the presence of mind in the midst of being assaulted by an ax-wielding lunatic to be careful of exactly where you shot him? Even Vermont police are not held to this standard (compare with the church killing of Bob Woodward by Brattleboro Police in 2001 in which the mentally distraught virtually unnarmed man was shot several times including in the back -- no police were held responsible for his killing).

The clear message: It's OK for VT police to shoot you in the back, but if someone is trying to kill YOU, you had better not think you have a right to defend yourself.

Why is this so? Ultimately the reason is economic. VT has a very high number of government employees-- including police-- who all work generally easy jobs with high pay and ample benefits. If VTers remember that they have civil liberties -- like a right to self-defense-- then that might very well threaten those cushy police jobs out there, as people realize they simply don't need as many of them.

And imagine if this sense of independence and self-reliance were to spread? If the spirit of Ethan Allen returned to his homeland, there would be many civil "servants" out of work here in the Green Mountains. To those who butter their bread on the backs of the hard-working taxpayer, this would be simply unacceptable.
.
-- Posted by mark on Wed, Oct 21, 2009, 8:56 am EST

report this comment


You must be logged in to leave a comment. Register | Log In

Logout

Related Contents