When Dianna Siveny was falsely accused of murder she couldn’t believe it. Dianna not only lost her life partner, her life as she knew it was torn from her. She lost her adopted family who were convinced by authorities that she was involved with Lara Plamann’s death. With no prior criminal record she lost her freedom, her reputation, and her life savings. Imagine being treated like a criminal everywhere you go, but having done nothing wrong. In the world of public opinion, there is no such thing as innocent until proven guilty.
DIANNA SIVENY RESPONDS TO DISMISSAL
When Dianna Siveny was falsely accused of murder she couldn’t believe it. Dianna not only lost her life partner, her life as she knew it was torn from her. She lost her adopted family who were convinced by authorities that she was involved with Lara Plamann’s death. With no prior criminal record she lost her freedom, her reputation, and her life savings. Imagine being treated like a criminal everywhere you go, but having done nothing wrong. In the world of public opinion, there is no such thing as innocent until proven guilty.
And upon what evidence were these charges brought? Not only do authorities have no idea who actually killed Lara Plamann, they intentionally avoided investigating material evidence that exonerated the Sivenys. Early on they knew Kandi Siveny’s phone never left the state of Minnesota. The phone had numerous calls during the time of the murder, yet rather than simply ask witnesses whether they were speaking with Kandi at the time of the murder, they knowingly avoided those questions. In fact, they implied they might be implicated if they acknowledged speaking with Kandi.
When the investigators were asked under oath why they did not ask that obvious question, Sheriff’s detectives inexplicably stated they didn’t think the answers would be credible.
Defense investigators tracked down these people, revealing that Kandi Siveny never left Minnesota at the time of the murder. Nonetheless, investigators and the DA continued to assert that Kandi travelled to Wisconsin and shot Lara Plamann.
Some other concerning conduct of the authorities:
It was falsely presented that Lara was having an affair.
It was falsely represented that Lara’s will was changed.
Detectives failed to disclose payments of money, food, and cigarettes to known
criminals and drug addicts in Minnesota in effort to implicate the Sivenys.
Detectives destroyed key witness drawn maps they claimed proved a conspiracy.
Detectives failed to confirm the alibi of key suspect. They ignored a witness who
told them Lara was seen in a pushing match with a person that matched this
suspect’s description on the afternoon of her murder.
Detectives/DA asserted that the Sivenys conspired to vandalize this suspect’s
vehicle, yet failed to mention that Dianna Siveny paid for the repairs because she considered the person a friend.
Out of options and under scrutiny to solve the case, detectives coerced a so-called confession from Rosie Campbell, an admitted drug addict who was intoxicated on drugs during the interview, and suffering from mental health issues. They fed Campbell information asking her to regurgitate facts as though she was originating an eyewitness account.
Even having been given details by the officers, Campbell was unable to provide a statement which in any way corroborated the known physical evidence at the crime scene. She claimed the victim was standing when she was sitting. She said it was outside when it was inside. She said it was day until the officers had her change it to evening. She denied even being there until the officers convinced her she was repressing memories.
Unfortunately, the ugly truth is that sometimes detectives gamble, arresting a suspect in hopes to pressure a confession. And when the gamble fails, they can either cut bait or hope the DA can pressure a plea agreement, much like what happened with Campbell. The prosecutor opted to proceed without sufficient evidence, ignoring proof they charged the wrong people, and took this game to the brink of trial.
The tragedy of this case is that a murderer remains at large and will likely never be charged. The failure to properly investigate this case has left the victim’s family, and her partner, without justice. This is a hard lesson that unfortunately repeats itself whenever investigators and prosecutors fail to keep an objective, unbiased perspective and hold true to being ministers of justice, not advocates for unsupported hunch and innuendo to publicly claim triumph in cases the investigative leads for which they themselves allowed to run cold.