Jonathan Turley on the Borukhova Murder Case: 'Hell Hath no Fury'
February 11th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
George Washington University Law School professor Jonathan Turley has some interesting things to say about the appalling Borukhova murder case in his recent blog post Wife Pays Hitman to Drill Dentist Husband. In that case, a mother apparently had her husband murdered after she was unable to drive him out of his daughter's life by making allegations of sexual abuse in their custody battle. The father was murdered in a playground in front of their 5-year-old daughter.
Turley writes:
"Dr. Mazoltuv Borukhova in Queens has been arrested for paying a hitman $20,000 to kill her orthodontist husband, Dr. Daniel Malakov. What is most striking about the attempted hit is how sloppy it was with a trail of money and evidence leading back to the wife.
"It appears that Hell hath no fury like a doctor scorned. Dr. Mazoltuv Borukhova wanted Malakov killed on a playground in front of their 5-year-old daughter amid a custody battle. She allegedly used a relative, Mikhail Mallayev.
"The whole effort no doubt has the Russian mob recoiling in embarrassment. The wife left a phone record of 90 phone conversations in the weeks before the shooting and three more shortly afterward.
"Then there was the bank deposits totaling $19,800 in 10 different bank accounts.
"Then there was the botched hit itself. The assassin used a makeshift silencer, which was left at the scene with Mallayev’s prints on it."
The Associated Press article on it is below. Any ideas on what her defense will be?
Prosecutors: Wife Paid Suspected Gunman
By TOM HAYS
NEW YORK (AP) — A woman charged in the execution-style slaying of her orthodontist husband exchanged scores of phone calls with the suspected gunman, then paid him nearly $20,000 after the shooting, authorities said Friday.
Dr. Mazoltuv Borukhova was arrested at her Queens home on Thursday and ordered held without bail on charges she conspired to have Dr. Daniel Malakov killed on a playground in front of their 5-year-old daughter amid a custody battle.
One of Borukhova's relatives, Mikhail Mallayev, was arrested in November on charges he was the triggerman.
"We believe she paid the shooter, Mikhail Mallayev, to kill Daniel after the couple separated and he won custody of their daughter," Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said at a news conference.
District Attorney Richard Brown said evidence against the wife included phone records showing she and Mallayev had 90 phone conversations in the weeks before the shooting, and three more shortly afterward.
Bank records also show that, following a meeting in Borukhova's office, Mallayev deposited a total of $19,800 in 10 different bank accounts.
Borukhova's attorney did not immediately respond to a phone message Friday. Both Borukhova and Mallayav have previously denied any wrongdoing.
A gunman using a makeshift silencer and wearing a black leather jacket and a dark hat, shot Malakov in the chest in broad daylight on Oct. 28 and vanished, police said.
The victim had gone to the Queens playground to take his 5-year-old daughter to see his ex-wife, a specialist in internal medicine. The couple's daughter was placed in foster care following her father's death.
Police said they recovered the silencer at the scene and later determined that Mallayev's fingerprints were on it.
"));
19 queries. 0.385 seconds.
February 11th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
The biggest victim here is clearly the child.
I'm guessing she will play the mother card.
February 11th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
I should probably clarify:
By she, I meant the mother, not the child. By this I meant that the mother will probably claim that she can't go to jail because she is a mother and needs to look after her kid.
There was a story on this site a few weeks ago about how Marion Jones tried to do this.
February 11th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Glenn says
"The whole effort no doubt has the Russian mob recoiling in embarrassment."
= = =
Careful Glenn the Russian mob is not to be trifled with and do not take jokes about them lightly . . .
b
JRP,
Agreed she will state that a child needs a parent however there will be the conspicuous lack of the word(s) stable, sane, non-murderer of dad in front of parent
February 11th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
What stands out to me, glaringly, is the lack of attention on the criminal or the horrendous nature of the crime. There is no condemnation (or similar tone). In fact, the thing that smacks me in the face the most is that the stories seem to focus on the "strategic errors" of her plan, almost in a dark-humorous way. It makes fun of her errors.
Could you imagine if the genders were reversed? The vilification of the man would merciless. They wouldn't be making off-handed remarks about how her murder plot was so devoid of any real planning.
Ridiculous. Am I the only one who sees that? No horror at the heinous crime. No condemnation of the culprit. No sympathy for the child, the family of the victim. "Dumbass dropped the silencer with his prints on it and she made a lot of phone calls and bank transfers" ...she could have done this so much better...
February 11th, 2008 at 5:17 pm
The poor kid.
Anyway, this was very sneaky of the father. The way he has framed his wife is stunning. The details of getting a relative of his wife to assassinate him, and having him spread the money into different bank accounts after meeting with his wife. What the patriarchy won't do in order to demean and oppress the women.
Pretty amazing stuff. I am hopeful this can be turned into a Meg Ryan, Tom Hanks "reunion" picture.
February 11th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
The main stream media run this story of a woman ordering the murder of her husband, yet the Drew Peterson-missing-wife story is popular.
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&tab=wn&ned=us&q=Drew+Peterson&btnG=Search+News
February 11th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Bernie -
Glenn was quoting Turley.
__________________________________________
GS. wrote: "Any ideas on what her defense will be"?
Agreed...
Glenn you should start posting polls here, where visitors can vote on things like this. Not only the defense, but on punishment as well.
Off-topic, but with regard to polls. It would also be interesting to see a poll of us visitors (CP/NCP. custody won/lost/sought, etc. etc.)
February 11th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
"No horror at the heinous crime. No condemnation of the culprit. No sympathy for the child, the family of the victim. "Dumbass dropped the silencer with his prints on it and she made a lot of phone calls and bank transfers" ...she could have done this so much better..."
Par for the course, chum, absolutely bog standard fare.
February 11th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Well, What kind of sentencing discount will she get?
Another sterling example of the "fairer sex."
February 11th, 2008 at 5:44 pm
From the NY Times:
In Queens Family Court a week after the murder, Dr. Borukhova cried and said that her husband had abused her on her birthday, Nov. 10, 2003. “He physically abused me,” she said. “He said in order for me to stay with him, I have to clean the house with my tongue. He punched me all night. I couldn’t stand it anymore. It was the first time he started beating me up. I left.”
February 11th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
The defense will undoubtedly be that the mother could not get the system to protect the “best interests” of her daughter, by keeping her away from an abusive father, so she was compelled to take the law into her own hands. An unfortunate, but all too common occurrence, in a society that allows abusive fathers free rein in our courts.
I guess it’s so obvious that I was the only one gullible enough to take the bait and spell it out verbatim.
Kevin Merck
February 11th, 2008 at 6:00 pm
Michael H.
The abuse card is not knew but on her birthday is a nice touch. I'm sure if this beast "punched her all night" surely there is physical evidence of this???
February 11th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
No, David, women are so pure that even their blood washes away without a trace.
February 11th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
The Ex-Husband said...
What stands out to me, glaringly, is the lack of attention on the criminal or the horrendous nature of the crime. There is no condemnation (or similar tone). In fact, the thing that smacks me in the face the most is that the stories seem to focus on the "strategic errors" of her plan, almost in a dark-humorous way. It makes fun of her errors.
Even Prof Turley's blog uses the cutesy headline "Wife Pays Hitman to Drill Dentist Husband". Lets all have a laugh eh?
February 11th, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Damn. Didn't close that tag.
read as...
Even Prof Turley's blog uses the cutesy headline "Wife Pays Hitman to Drill Dentist Husband". Lets all have a laugh eh?
February 11th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
Yeah, no mention of DV. No mention labeling her as an abuser or 'estranged wife'.
February 11th, 2008 at 6:48 pm
(Glenn) -- "Any ideas on what her defense will be?"
Why does she need a defense?
She is female.
Enough said.
February 11th, 2008 at 7:30 pm
q Says:
February 11th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
Bernie -
Glenn was quoting Turley.
= = =
Thanks for the correction
b
February 11th, 2008 at 7:36 pm
Let us not forget the pretty (physically) girl discount . . .
b
February 11th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Why is it that the fact that a man has been brutally murdered and a child left with no father ( and hopefully with this cold calculating mother as well ) has been turned into a joke?
Is it really necessary to make jokes in an article that's supposed to be covering someone's death? This is why I'm getting fed up with the media.
February 11th, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Danny Says:
February 11th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Why is it that the fact that a man has been brutally murdered and a child left with no father ( and hopefully with this cold calculating mother as well ) has been turned into a joke?
= = =
Are you kidding? It is because it is FUNNY! I hope you understand now . . .
b
February 11th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I bet she'll get less of a sentence than him. Not because she should, by law she should get the same sentence for conspiracy. She'll get the classic female sentencing discount.
February 11th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I get it now Bernie Misiura. Violence against women and children are a bad thing violence against men is comedy. I suppose I haven't watch enough Three Stooges to realize that!!
February 11th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
"I bet she'll get less of a sentence than him. Not because she should, by law she should get the same sentence for conspiracy. She'll get the classic female sentencing discount."
I suspect this featured highly in her thinking before she did the deed Callum, thus the lack of any great care in covering her tracks.
Being tried for murder of a husband is unlikely to court any great penalty with the standard, but effective, defences available to wives now. There are, after all, two men who can be arranged to take full blame rather than the usual one.
It wouldn't surprise me if the murderess is actually looking forward to her trial as a drama opportunity, somewhat like a wedding only more formal and the dominant colour will be black rather than white. Once again she takes centre-stage with an excited world looking on.
Does anyone know if she is entitled to her husband's estate to pay for her defence?
February 11th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
"I bet she'll get less of a sentence than him. Not because she should, by law she should get the same sentence for conspiracy. She'll get the classic female sentencing discount."
I suspect this featured highly in her thinking before she did the deed Callum, thus the lack of any great care in covering her tracks.
Being tried for murder of a husband is unlikely to court any great penalty with the standard, but effective, defences available to wives now. There are, after all, two men who can be arranged to take full blame rather than the usual one.
It wouldn't surprise me if the murderess is actually looking forward to her trial as a drama opportunity, somewhat like a wedding only more formal and the dominant colour will be black rather than white. Once again she takes centre-stage with an excited world looking on.
Does anyone know if she is entitled to her husband's estate to pay for her defence?
February 11th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
What's the next step, killing men in public?Wow, and she wanted it done in front of the kid. What was she thinking? Glenn, I hope you keep up with this story. I'd like to know the verdict.
February 11th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Danny Says:
February 11th, 2008 at 7:59 pm
I get it now Bernie Misiura. Violence against women and children are a bad thing violence against men is comedy. I suppose I haven't watch enough Three Stooges to realize that!!
= = =
BINGO! Now do the Curly shuffle for your self and celebrate! (-;
b
February 12th, 2008 at 12:53 am
The rate at which women murder is greatly under-estimated. Their use of surrogates (hitMEN) and poison often conceal their involvement. The "gentler" sex? Right. Not when it comes to money, children, and jealousy.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:27 am
I wonder if there have ever been any studies done on this? Any stats collected?
February 12th, 2008 at 2:15 am
One possible defense is "Insane before, during and after the murder, as proven by how many mistakes (i.e. how sloppy she was) before, during, and after the murder. A person with a doctor's intelligence would not have made so many mistakes unless she was insane at the time".
February 12th, 2008 at 2:19 am
#Jay R. wrote: "The rate at which women murder is greatly under-estimated. Their use of surrogates (hitMEN) and poison often conceal their involvement."
Norman: yeah, no kidding..and then the DOJ counts it as a "multiple-offender killing" instead of spousal murder. ( I think it was in one of Farrell's books that I read that.)
February 12th, 2008 at 2:23 am
#Bernie wrote: "Let us not forget the pretty (physically) girl discount .."
Norman: Yeah, but but then again, she's not blond , and she looks over twentynine. Also she's a little dark-skinned - that doesn't help either.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:25 am
Of course she'll get a light sentence. He was already accused of sexually abusing his daughter. In court that will come up and he will be vilified as a sexual predator and the only way the mother could protect her daughter was to hire a relative to kill her husband.
The mother will get off easy. The man she hired will get life. As soon as the trial is over and whatever puny sentence she gets is served the mother will get out and get custody of her daughter again. After all she might be a murderer but she's not threat to her daughter.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:32 am
#Rob case wrote: "Does anyone know if she is entitled to her husband's estate to pay for her defence?"
Norman: No, her husband's parents have to pay for her defense. She can't collect on the estate until her ten weeks of house arrest are over.
February 12th, 2008 at 5:18 am
"Any ideas on what her defense will be"?
Obviously, she will admit to the judge and jury that she is a worthless excuse for a human being, that she wanted her husband killed in front of their daughter because she likes scarring children for life, and that she deserves whatever the state cares to throw at her.
As i wrote the above i was trying to be funny, but then it ocurred to me that one day that might actually be considered a viable defense- if you're a woman.
February 12th, 2008 at 8:25 am
Anyone who has spent much time in Russia would recognize this as perhaps more of a reflection of the misguided contemporary Russian ethos of conflict resolution and revenge.
Of course she should be held as accountable for this crime as if she had pulled the trigger.
But also, it is important to send a message to the world that this way of conducting "business" is one "import" which America will not tolerate from Russia.
Ergo, she needs to get the maximum penalty under law if convicted.
February 12th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Those COMMIES!!!
February 12th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Russians really seem to be the most tragically-minded people on the planet.
Well, if you lose 30 million people during WWII, I guess you are entitled to a few decades of reflection...
"The maximum penalty" in Russia has usually been a bullet in the back of the head.
Without much due process.
February 12th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Careful folks I have Russian roots.
It seems to me that no epithets are acceptable in this country anymore EXCEPT if it is Russian or German I find that highly offensive because of my roots and because I married a girl with German roots.
b
February 12th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
I don't think Bill C. used an epithet. He is more referring to a system of government in a foreign country.
February 12th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Um, they are no longer communist
and what about the Germans?
b
February 12th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
I wonder.....Will the good Dr. end up like Darren Mack ????
I see no difference between them except the gender...which will make all the difference in HER trial.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I would have called them Nazis! And I am German! Take an F'n joke. And what about Cubans? Their still Commies. Lighten up Bernie.
February 12th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
I meant "they're still Commies."
BC
February 12th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
I do not need to lighten up I am not the one swearing, I am trying to make a point, what is good for one is good for all, I cannot imagine the backlash if someone here were to use the word nigger not in context or as a joke. It does not matter if you are German or not . . . I do not tolerate black or white using the word nigger. Take a look at the backlash that people here received just because they do not believe in gay marriage, I think that words like commie, pinko, better dead than red, nazi, kike, pollock, dago, chink, slope, gook, nigger, spic, froggie, etc., should not be used in jest, the only appropriate time would be in context, not as an epithet but rather in something like a quote.
I cannot imagine someone becoming so angry unless they realize that they have done wrong
Do not make me have my daughter hop on her and respond to you (-:
b
February 12th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Bill C Says:
February 12th, 2008 at 3:39 pm
I would have called them Nazis! And I am German! Take an F'n joke. And what about Cubans? Their still Commies. Lighten up Bernie.
= = =
One more point about your Cuban comment this is an article about Russians so that statment is moot and you were refering to Russians.
b
February 12th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I am truly sorry if you were offended. That was not my intent. There is no need though for you to use the "n" word as an example though. I was only referring to "Commies" in light of their heritage. I like Russians, and do business with quite a few in my area. Once again, I did not intend to insult anyone, and I am sorry.
Bill C
February 12th, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Er, Mack tried to kill a judge. Their sentencing will not be comparable, despite what we think of these judges.
I
February 12th, 2008 at 8:34 pm
Bill C Says:
February 12th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
I am truly sorry if you were offended. That was not my intent. There is no need though for you to use the "n" word as an example though. I was only referring to "Commies" in light of their heritage. I like Russians, and do business with quite a few in my area. Once again, I did not intend to insult anyone, and I am sorry.
Bill C
= = =
No reason to be sorry, I truely was just trying to make a point and am only offended when others receive more respect because of their heritage than I do. You did just help me make that point by saying that there was no need for me to use the "n" word as an example, compleatly ignoring all the other offencive racial words. I do not and will never have a problem using the word nigger in context. I do not understand why people feel free to use all other forms of slurs and think nothing of it. People who are black are no better or worse than I am and deserve no more or less respect than my heritage or anyone elses for that matter. Be proud of who you are and do not demean your roots with such slurs.
b
February 12th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
@Bernie: [the Russians] are no longer Communists.
Norman: Okay, so they're no longer Communists. Apparently some people don't realize that.
Bernie: What about the Germans?
Norman: What about them? My father's side of the family is largely German, and I don't myself see much if anytthing these days, as far as epithets made toward Germans. I'm not even sure what epithet someone could make - unless it is a reference to the Nazis. I think 99.9% of people know that Germans now living are not/were not Nazis. I've never had anyone call me a Nazi, and if someone called me a Kraut I'd probably laugh and blow it off.
Maybe there's some vetige of prejudice I'm not aware of? I'm not saying I have the entire picture of what's out there. Besides, there's always people looking for a way to hate someone for what they are.
February 12th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Sorry if I offended you:)
February 13th, 2008 at 2:08 am
Naw, I have broad shoulders, it is just an observation and a point of order that we should not accept any form of hate speach or everyone should be told and have your attitude to "laugh and blow it off" including the black community. I guess my point is being missed, to put it more into prespective I guess that all the commercials that are male bashing should be laughed off by us males also.
b
February 13th, 2008 at 2:15 am
I have a large base of intelligent people here to draw on and I guess I am just trying to understand for myself why most of the public does not see a problem with derogatory terms against any other race.
b
February 13th, 2008 at 7:58 am
Commies was not a derogatory remark toward another race. Communism was not a race, but a form of government, so Bernie, I just don't get your point. Maybe you are a Socialist, or Communist or whatever form of government that you chose to follow and reside in, but that has nothing to do with race. This overwhelming attitude of over intelligence cracks me up. So many geniuses, so little space. I may not be the Einstein here, but I was not refering to race.
I really enjoy reading some of these posts, especially the ones that think they have all the wisdom in the world. Overthinkers.
February 14th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Under thinking is a problem too. To answer your question of "I just don't get your point." You have done what many do and have for so long that you do not even realize it. This is an article about a Russian woman, husband, realitive and child. Your quote
Bill C Says:
February 12th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Those COMMIES!!!
Intention or not you directly linked commie and Russian there by making it derogatory. I lived during the cold war and with Russian heritage and that era taught us that commie and Russian are interchangable like it or not that is the way it was and is. You cannot be seriously telling me that you saw the difference between Russian and commie when you posted. So you were telling me "those or that form of government and not those Russians? I do not buy it because you were reffering to people and not a government and this article has nothing to do with a government it has to do with people.
b
February 19th, 2009 at 9:51 am
"The whole effort no doubt has the Russian mob recoiling in embarrassment..."
Turley shouldn't perpetuate a universal belief that Americans lack geographical understanding and lack of worldliness. it should be embarrassing for supposedly competent writer to make such foolish ethnologically erroneous statements. Non of the defendants or accusers have anything to do with Russia. They are Bukharian Jews, a separate ethnic tribe that lives in Central Asian nation of Kazakhstan. Traditionally a nation with Persian roots that is thousands of miles away from Russia. A rather embarrassing, insular people who are quite deluded by their religious beliefs and superiority complex.
March 4th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Dear Glen
Please do a contrast piece on the when a women murders her husband and the very little media attention it receives in comparison to the Peterson circus.