See the website http://www.krausneck.comfor a more complete history of the case. That site is produced by journalists Nancy Monaghan and Laurie Bennett who are writing a book about the case.Also, I have written articles about the case and Nancy Monaghan’s involvement in writing about it which are available at the Archive here. The posts are dated June 22, 2020 and April 5, 2021.
James Krauseneck’s arrest–37 years after the crime was committed– for his wife’s 1982 ax murder continues to wind its way through the New York State court system. Krauseneck was indicted on one count of first degree murder by a county grand jury late in 2019 based on evidence gleaned from an FBI cold case review and the contents of 2018 interviews with Krauseneck and his daughter, Sara K. Young. He was released on bail following his arrest and returned to his home in Arizona. A trial date originally set for January 2021 was postponed due to Covid.
In June 2021, New York State Supreme Court 7th District Judge Charles Schiano Jr. heard four days of pre-trial motions made by James Krauseneck’s defense attorneys, Michael Wolford and William Easton, and expert witness testimony presented by the Monroe County District Attorney’s Office. Defense motions have argued that the Brighton Police department failed to investigate suspects other than Jim Krauseneck, presented their own expert testimony conflicting with a prosecution expert’s testimony about the time of death, and have argued that the prosecution cannot produce new evidence that was unavailable when the crime was committed, asking that the case therefore be dismissed. Prosecution witnesses rebutted defense claims. Presiding Judge Schiano is currently reviewing those motions and the additional witnesses’ testimony.
Before a trial date can be scheduled, the judge will hold one final proceeding, a Huntley Hearing, to consider the legal admissibility of some statements that were not made in a courtroom. The Hearing is expected to be held later this month.
In summary, here are some of my own unanswered questions: If Krauseneck returned from work at 5 p.m. as he testified, why did it take him an hour to carry his toddler daughter across the street at about 6 p.m., as his neighbor told detectives at the time, to ask her to call police? Why didn’t he or his family members maintain contact with Brighton police about the status of the investigation? Doesn’t it seem unusual that he closed the family dog (who was not heard by neighbors to bark during the crime) in the basement before he left for work? Why would anyone expect Sara Krauseneck Young to ever think her father– the parent who raised her from age 4 and selected all the information she ever heard about her mother’s murder– might be guilty of the crime? I’ll save the rest of my questions until the legal proceedings have concluded!
True Crime Mama Site Changes
If you are a long-time follower, the posts you may have seen in the last few days may seem familiars. If so, you are not losing your mind! –I am re-arranging the site by subject categories and have changed some titles to better reflect their content. Thanks so much for reading!
I want to increase my readship and encourage readers to stay on the site longer, so I will be adding some different types of content–like book reviews of true crime works and more digital video content– in coming weeks.
Stay tuned, and please encourage people you know who may be interested to check out the site and become a Follower. I am actively seeking a book publisher now and understand that a vibrant social media presence will help me with that. Stay well, get vaccinated, and keep reading everything, everywhere!
Journalist and editor Nancy Monaghan discusses her career in journalism and how and why she began writing the story of the 1982 Cathleen Krauseneck ax murder.
Nancy and her colleague Laurie Bennett were once reporters who wrote about crime for two competing newspapers in Rochester, New York. They covered Krauseneck’s shocking murder, a case that gripped the Rochester area and made national headlines.
In the early evening of February 19, 1982 in the Rochester, New York suburb of Brighton, 29-year-old Cathy Krauseneckwas discovered at home dead with an ax in her head. Her 3 ½-year-old daughter Sara had been alone all day with her mother’s corpse. Cathy’s husband Jim, an economist for Eastman Kodak Company headquartered in Rochester, reported discovering his wife’s body when he came home from work just before 5 p.m. He told police his wife and daughter had been asleep when he left for work that morning about 6:30. While he spoke with investigators at police headquarters immediately after his wife was discovered, he did not appear as promised at the Brighton Town Hall the following morning to continue their conversation. His parents had driven from their home in Mt. Clemens MI the night before. They took their son and granddaughter back with them to Michigan. Jim hired a Rochester criminal lawyer to represent him, and neither he nor his daughter spoke again to investigators for many years. Without enough evidence to charge anyone, no arrest was made.
The case grew cold for 37 years. Then in 2019 a Monroe County NY Grand Jury indicted Jim Krauseneck for the murder of his wife. Monaghan and Bennett have resurrected their research and are currently writing a book about the case. Krauseneck is currently out on bail and awaiting trial at his home in Arizona.
An Interview with Nancy Monaghan
SK: Hi, Nancy! Thank you so much for taking the time to talk about the Krauseneck murder case. I understand that Jim Krauseneck’s Covid-postponed pre-trial hearings are under way and that his trial date may soon be set. You and your fellow journalist Laurie Bennett are collaborating on a book about the case and have done a lot of work coming up to the trial, is that right?
NM:Yes, we have. Laurie has done most of the case reporting and has reams of information, and I’ve done a variety of interviews and background research. Between us, we’ve interviewed many of the original players in the case and have extensive details about the investigation, but we can’t finish the book until the trial is over. The next court hearing is scheduled for June, but I don’t hold out much hope that the trial will be scheduled any time soon. So many cases have been postponed due to Covid.
SK: How did you first become interested in writing about murder?
NM: Besides the fact this story has so many fascinating aspects, my initial interest began well before the Krauseneck case. In the 1970s I worked as a legal secretary for the U.S. Attorney’s Office. I was really interested in law more than crime, and writing had always been a passion. I worked my way into journalism starting at a weekly newspaper helping out as a volunteer covering night meetings.After more than a year writing stories and features for the paper, then known as City East, I was hired as the paper’s first staff reporter.
At that time Rochester had two daily newspapers owned by the Gannett Company, the morning Democrat and Chronicle and the afternoon Times-Union. After four years at City East I applied to the D&C and was hired, then after three months was assigned to the court beat, which I covered for more than four years. Both Laurie and I have covered all sorts of criminal court cases, including murders. In 1981 I was promoted to Day Metro Editor, and then I became the first female Metro Editor. Those were interesting days for local journalists: A Mafia war was raging, which I covered as a reporter, and then in early 1982 the Krauseneck case happened and was big news for months. Laurie was the court reporter for our competitor, the Times-Union, so of course we knew each other well. She did some of that early reporting on the Krauseneck case and much much more in the years that followed. I was Metro Editor when Cathy Krauseneck was killed, and I’m sorry to say Laurie’s paper was beating us pretty badly on developments. In July 1982 I left the D&C to join the start-up team for USA Today.
Laurie moved from Rochester and took a job in Michigan with The Detroit News and later, the Detroit Free Press. While she was in Detroit, near the Krauseneck family home in Mt. Clemens, she did substantial reporting on the case and got to know Cathy’s family members. Along the way, she knew the details of the case would make a rich foundation for a book.
By 2015 we had both retired from the newspaper business. Laurie called me out of the blue and asked whether I would be interested in collaborating on a book about the Krauseneck case. I didn’t hesitate for an instant before saying yes. The connections between us from so long ago and between us and many of the people involved in the case at the time on a story like this are impossible to pass up.
SK: What prompted her interest then?
The case had gnawed at the Brighton Police Department for more than 30 years, starting with Eugene Shaw who was the police chief when it happened in 1982. He told Laurie shortly before his death in 1993 that he had suspected Jim Krauseneck early in the investigation, but there was not enough evidence to present to a grand jury. Homicide cases never close until they are solved, and he hoped for a future confession or more evidence. Shaw was tortured by the case for the rest of his career.
In 2015 Police Chief Mark Henderson requested the assistance of the FBI Cold Case Unit to re-evaluate the case history, to look at it with fresh eyes and current forensic tools. The Cold Case Team did an extensive review of every aspect of the considerable file, and a decision was made to take the case to the grand jury.
SK: I have read that Michael Baden, former medical examiner for New York City, will testify for the defense. Tell me about that.
NM: I am currently researching a chapter about Dr. Baden for the book. Baden is a nationally known pathologist who was chief medical examiner in New York City and later was medical examiner for the New York State Police. But he has also been at the center of some controversial cases. He testified for the defense in the O.J. Simpson case and disagreed with the Los Angeles medical examiner on some key issues – namely the timing of the deaths. He was also a consultant in the murder investigations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Medgar Evers. More recently he was engaged by Jeffrey Epstein’s brother and gave evidence suggesting that Epstein may have been strangled while he was in prison in Manhattan, despite an official finding that he committed suicide.
SK: Is there enough substance in the Krauseneck case for a book? Can you write it if Jim Krauseneck is found not guilty?
NM: The book will be important whether Jim is convicted or not. The verdict will determine the theme of the story. Laurie is following the specifics of the case while I am writing about the broader issues: How do expert witnesses like Dr. Baden affect the trial outcome? Do ax murderers have common characteristics? There are different legal standards in states that can also affect outcomes? This has always been what is called a circumstantial case, with no “smoking gun” so to speak pointing directly at Jim Krauseneck. In New York State, for example, there are certain legal requirements the prosecutor must meet to overcome the possibility someone other than the defendant on trial committed the crime. For people like Laurie and me, who love trials as intricacies and surprises of a case unfold in a courtroom, this is going to be one interesting trial.
SK You make me very excited to read your book! How can readers keep up with your progress investigating the case?
NM: We have a website with a lot of background information about the Krauseneck murder. It will be updated as the case progresses. It is online at www.krauseneck.com.
SK:I will follow the website and look forward to seeing your progress with the case; Maybe 2021 will be a year of resolution and will finally bring some peace to Cathy’s family. The best of luck, Nancy!
On February 19, 1982 I was a 34-year-old stay-at-home mom living in Rochester NY when my sister phoned to tell me a woman about my age had been murdered in her home near where we lived. Her 3 1/2-year-old daughter Sara had been left all day in the house: Upstairs Cathy Krauseneck’s body, an ax embedded in her head, lay where she had been asleep in the master bedroom of their neat suburban house in Brighton, a Rochester suburb.
Unsubstantiated rumors spread like wildfire: The husband, an economist with Eastman Kodak Company, did it. Theories about motive abounded. The single fact that most stunned and horrified me was that a little girl, only slightly older than my two baby boys, had been left alone in that house.
My sister and I had long been intrigued about murders without apparent motive, particularly murders by strangers. I had been writing mainstream fiction for many years. In the summer of 1991 I decided to research and begin to write a non-fiction book about the Krauseneck murders, the first of my true crime writing projects. I began by having breakfast with Detective Gary Printy, then retired, who was the primary investigator on the case. He told me that the house appeared to have been staged to look like a burglary attempt, but no valuables were taken. More oddly still, he said there were no fingerprints at the murder scene. I interviewed Brighton Police Chief Tom Voelkl who described the investigation, answered my questions, and arranged to have me spend a day with one of his investigators. A friend hosted a meeting with a woman who knew Cathy Krauseneck in Rochester and who offered her opinions and described conversations she had with Cathy near the time of the murder. I drove to Mt. Clemens MI, the home of the Krauseneck family and the Schlossers, who were Cathy’s family, where I interviewed family members and conducted research at the County courthouse and public library. I toured the Krauseneck home on Del Rio Drive and photographed all the rooms.
After several years of research, conducting interviews, and writing, I hit a dead end. There had not been an arrest for the crime and so my story could have no satisfying end. I put my notes away. Eventually I retired and moved with my husband to Florida. Then, in November 2019, 37 years after the murder was committed, I got an email from a Rochester friend. A Monroe County NY grand jury had indicted James Krauseneck for the murder of his wife.
Advances in forensic technology had allowed detectives, with assistance from an FBI cold case task force, to re-examine the case and develop refined evidence they felt was sufficient to prosecute the case. Krauseneck was arrested and is now out on bail living with his fourth wife in Arizona. He awaits a trial that was scheduled to begin this month before the coronavirus slowed down the world.
I will never know why I kept all my notes and drafts and photos about the case, but I did. And in November, I got a call from Nancy Monaghan who had been a reporter, editor, and publisher for Gannett News Service and U.S.A. Today. She and her colleague Laurie Bennett, also a reporter who had worked for a Rochester newspaper at the time of the Krauseneck murder, had begun to write a book about the case. Would I be willing to discuss it with her if she flew to Sarasota to meet? I would. I did, and I gave her my case files to add to the mountain of information she and Laurie had already collected and were analyzing. They have a website with greater detail about the case that I have embedded below. I hope to be in Rochester for the trial, and look forward to Nancy’s and Laurie’s book.