Updated 4/15/2023
Some television coverage about the case has focused on the idea that Johnson was charged based on his Vision Statement, which some have characterized as a “false confession” that couldn’t be corroborated. Yet several elements of the statement are corroborated and, in fact, were acknowledged as truth in various court filings, and at trial. In fact, Johnson repeated several aspects of the Vision Statement to non-law enforcement individuals—representing them as truth–in the months and years after the trial, but then petitioned the Court to prevent the jury from hearing the statement at all 1. In addition, there is no evidence that Johnson had any kind of intellectual disability in 1998–a key risk factor for false confessions.
It was depicted on television that Johnson largely stuck to his story for the first 26 hours (over three days) of questioning, lapsing into the Vision Statement only in the final two hours. In truth, he lapses “in and out” of this version of events–some of which has been corroborated–multiple times. On August 22nd, after only one session of police questioning, he told the victim’s son “Maybe I was there [when Andrea lost her life].” According to his own legal filings, he made similar statements to detectives on August 23rd. Then, he made the set of potentially inculpatory statements a final time on August 24th. None of the statements involve actually killing Andrea, but many of them appear to describe either an argument that occurred immediately before the homicide, or actions he took relative to her body when she had already lost her life. Many readers are struck by the statement’s specificity, the fact that some elements appear corroborated by the autopsy report, physical evidence, or financial information, the fact that he introduced it earlier-than-reported, and the fact that he repeatedly came back to elements of it–even when not in the presence of police.
The Vision Statement: “False Confession”? Or An Incomplete One…
| VISION STATEMENT ELEMENT | RELEVANT FACT(S) |
|---|---|
| Argument about t-shirt | T-shirt: T-shirt found; tested positive for Johnson’s DNA Argument: “House” missing from Andrea’s calendar; she told friend she wasn’t going; she emailed about getting “bought out” of “her half” of beach house; Leonard’s testimony that she felt “betrayed” by someone she trusted; Andrea sounding “excited and agitated” to her friend |
| Johnson strikes Andrea on head; head hits desk | Bruise on top of forehead (at hairline) found at autopsy |
| Johnson collapses “on her left side” | Internal injury to 3rd left rib found at autopsy |
| Johnson drapes his arm around her upper chest and attempts CPR; specifically mentions doing chest compressions but not mouth-to-mouth | Male DNA found on buttons of Andrea’s blouse and on bra; no evidence of fluid exchange |
| Johnson straddles the body to perform CPR | Compression mark found at autopsy is consistent with Johnson’s shoeprint |
| Rolled coins aren’t actually missing; Johnson hid them behind the desk | Rolled coins found on shelves from which Johnson reported approximately $107 worth of rolled coins missing |
| The killer may have left or destroyed evidence in the building’s trash room | Johnson had the key to the controlled access trash room; he admitted (in other statements) to throwing away soda bottles (Leonard said he left a bottle of root beer at the scene) and old papers (Andrea’s will was missing and the piece of paper with Leonard’s contact information was never recovered) in the trash room |
| Long delay in calling 911 after finding body; conceals body in closet | Johnson reported (in other statements) that her hair was damp or had recently been damp, and that there was no blood. Crime scene photos show that her hair was dry and there was blood. The hair-drying and blood-forming would characteristically happen with the passage of time. This could be suggestive that Johnson initially saw the body earlier in the evening. |
1 Commonwealth Response to Motion to Suppress, p.2
We have documented before that forensic scientists concluded that a marking on Andrea’s body was likely Johnson’s shoeprint, describing the likelihood that any other object made the print as “remote.” When speaking with the victim’s son, Johnson claims that the shoeprint is “one of the lies” that police told him. When the son confronts him, asking how he knows it’s a lie–or how he knows there isn’t really a shoeprint–Johnson doesn’t deny leaving the shoeprint. Instead, he attributes it to lack of sleep:
Johnson claims that detectives’ correct statement that his shoeprint was found on Andrea’s body is a lie. When asked how he knows it’s a lie, he doesn’t deny this critical element of his vision statement. Instead, he cites his own lack of sleep.
Presumably, Johnson was more rested on the day prior to the Vison Statement–August 23rd. Yet, incredibly, he gave a version of the Vision Statement on that day as well. Here is the beginning of that statement:
It was reported on national television that Johnson largely “stuck to his story” for 26 hours of questioning, over three days, before “breaking down” on August 24th. Yet he made a Vision Statement, with many of the same elements, on August 23rd.
Johnson also suggested to the victim’s son that he may have been involved on August 22nd, stating “They keep saying I was there, and maybe I was there.” This statement is especially puzzling, because about 90 minutes before that, according to the police file, he had told the victim’s father that the police are saying it was a natural death:
Notes from the police case file. Johnson tells the victim’s father than “police said it looks like a natural death.” About 90 minutes later, with no additional police interaction, he finds the victim’s car. He then tells the victim’s son that not only do police suspect foul play, but police suspect he was involved–and maybe they are right. All of this occurs on August 22nd, well before he gave his ultimate “Vision Statement.”
The evidence suggests that the treatment of the Vision Statement on television was inappropriately narrow. This is related to a more generalized post about certain claims made on television: “The Big Lie.”
Johnson provided one final statement that is generally consistent with the Vision Statement several weeks after he gave it. Outside of police presence, Johnson told a co-worker that he wished the police would just “hurry up and arrest” him for the murder:
The file shows that the co-worker was alarmed enough by this to confront Johnson: “What are you saying; what the hell are you saying?” The co-worker went on to report the interaction to police.
Justice for Andrea Cincotta 