Nathan Joe Ramirez is accused of raping a 71-year-old Mildred Boroski, then taking her to a field and fatally shooting her.
By ALEX LEARY
Published September 22, 2003
NEW PORT RICHEY - It was one of Pasco County's most heinous crimes, and eight years later, the story still awaits an ending.
On the night of March 10, 1995, two teenagers broke into a 71-year-old woman's house, authorities say, beat her poodle to death with a crowbar then raped her and shot her in the head.
The teens confessed to taking part in the killing and were convicted. Johnathan Grimshaw got life in prison. Nathan Joe Ramirez, who admitted firing the fatal shots, was sentenced to die in the electric chair.
He never did.
The Florida Supreme Court in 1999 threw out Ramirez's confession saying detectives had not properly advised him of his rights.
The case crumbled further when a judge said the prosecution could not use as evidence a ring that Ramirez allegedly stole from the victim.
Earlier this month, though, prosecutor Mike Halkitis won back the ring. The only piece of physical evidence, it could play a key role in Ramirez's retrial, set to begin today.
Confident the case will stick this time, Halkitis will seek the death penalty. "We're ready to go," he said Friday after a status conference before Circuit Judge Daniel D. Diskey.
Ramirez's attorney, Keith Hammond, who asked unsuccessfully Friday for a delay to collect hair samples from Grimshaw, declined to comment on the case.
Grimshaw is listed as a potential witness, Hammond said, but is not expected to testify. Ramirez is not expected to take the stand either.
The incident occurred on Mildred Boroski's 71st birthday. According to previous testimony and records, Grimshaw and Ramirez, classmates at Gulf High School, decided to break in and steal her presents.
Once inside the Seven Springs home, they were confronted by Boroski's miniature poodle, Chippy. The teens told detectives they beat Chippy to death with a crowbar.
Then, prosecutors say, the teens took turns raping Boroski, looted her home and drove her to a field a half-mile away. Prosecutors say Ramirez shot her twice in the head, using a service revolver stolen from the house. The next day, the teens used $30 they stole from Boroski to play video games at an arcade.
Aside from the three-stone ring, prosecutors have as evidence a taped conversation between Ramirez and Grimshaw, during which the two discuss details of the crime; testimony from a teen who said Ramirez gave him the murder weapon after Boroski was killed; and testimony from a girl who said Ramirez gave her one of Boroski's rings after the killing.
Among the potential witnesses who could testify against Ramirez are inmates who shared cells with him and Grimshaw.
One inmate, James Poff, said Ramirez once told him: "I killed some b---- ... But I'm going to get away with it due to a technicality."
To understand how this week's trial might unfold, it is useful to look at the 1996 proceeding.
Public Defender Richard Kiley painted the 17-year-old as afraid and manipulated by Grimshaw, who was 18 at the time.
"Grimshaw is running this horror show," Kiley told the court.
Ramirez fired without thinking, Kiley said. He asked jurors to find his client guilty of second-degree murder, not first.
But Halkitis, who worked the original trial, countered those assertions. If Ramirez did not plan to kill Boroski, why did he help his friend cut the phone wires to her house? Why didn't the teens leave her in the home after she was raped?
And why did Ramirez fire two shots?
"Why do you do it twice?" Halkitis asked. "You want to make sure she's dead."
