Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Ex-Wife Found Guilty of Murdering Orthodontist Hubby

Wife, cousin face up to 25-years in prison!

A woman accused of plotting with a relative to kill her orthodontist ex-husband over a custody dispute has been found guilty of murder.

Mazoltuv Borukhova, an internist, and her distant cousin Mikhail Mallayev were both convicted of murder in the first degree and conspiracy to commit murder by a Queens court Tuesday.

They had pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder in the October 2007 death of Daniel Malakov. They face up to 25-years in prison.

Malakov, a 34-year-old orthodontist, was shot in the back by a gunman with a makeshift silencer as he was at a playground to drop off his 4-year-old daughter, Michelle, with his ex-wife, police said.

"The whole idea to do it on a Sunday morning in a park in front of people was to eliminate herself as a suspect," a prosecutor told jurors, referring to Borukhova. "Hide in plain sight. ... Who possibly would think she was a suspect if she had it done it in front of her kid?"

Malakov had been granted temporary custody of the child a week earlier after a judge said Borukhova was hindering their relationship. Borukhova had told her ex-husband's relatives: "He took my child. It's already been decided. His days are numbered," according to Leventhal.

"She couldn't bear the fact that he was going to have custody of that little girl," the prosecutor said.

Prosecutors also pointed to Borukhova's testimony that she never heard gunshots as evidence she plotted the shooting and believed a silencer would be used. Several witnesses testified they had heard shots fired.

“Malleyev killed Malakov for the $20,000 that Borukhova paid him,” prosecutors told the court.
Borukhova's attorney,
Stephen Scaring, argued that no direct evidence linked his client to the killing and said she bought a camera to document her husband's interactions with her daughter for the custody case.

Ex-Wife Found Guilty of Murdering Orthodontist Hubby NBC New York


Prosecutors: Woman had ex-husband killed to keep daughter -- Newsday.com

Queens Doctor Guilty in Husband’s Death - City Room Blog - NYTimes.com

NY1 24 Hour Local News Top Stories Queens Doctor Found Guilty Of Ex-Husband's Murder

Guilty on all counts in NYC dentist slaying - MashGet

New York - Wife, Uncle Guilty in Queens Dentist's Murder - Runnin' Scared - Village Voice

My Two Cents-

Even tho I couldnt be happier with the outcome of her trial.. I can't help but feel sickened by what this monster did to her little girls life because of her selfishness and her inability to do what was in her child's best interest.. now this little girl has no father or mother to raise her.. what now? She's certinally headed for a life of self destruction.. and pain. Pain not only for herself .. but pain for those she interacts with for the rest of her life.

I pray someone gets this child into therapy ASAP and she continues it into adult hood.. perhaps the results can be different for her future.

REFRESH - Go to Home-Page


Anonymous said...

There is something missing in these news stories which is skewing understanding of what is really going on. Parental alienation is not in most cases about mutual blame and "warring parents" where both sides are equally provocative and combative, and have armed themselves with equally unethical and unscrupulous attorneys and hired gun mental health experts.

It is usually about an extreme imbalance of power generated by one parent's manipulation of the emotional state of the children of the marriage to reject the other parent not unlike a cult leader whose will becomes paramount over the wills of the devotees in the cult.

There is a lot missing in these news stories. What has been the continuing role of the court in allowing an alienator free rein if that is the case to use the court system as a personal battlefield to destroy the other parent? Has the older brother been blind to the efforts of one parent to secure a remedy and has decided to pile on the parent who is trying to salvage relationship with the younger brothers.

How long before the court "got it" and decided to send the children to a deprogrammer? Did the court wait too long? Was the court an accomplice to the alienator until it was so entrenched and the remedy was made much more difficult?

Parental alienation is the deliberate destruction of one parent's relationship with the children by the other.

It is an extreme form of child abuse. Alienators are rarely held accountable for their actions and outsiders are led to believe that the rejected parent deserves to be excluded but there is no justification whatsoever. Judges often get passive at this point and refuse to do anything to support the alienated parent. This Ontario case seems to be the exception but the court did not go far enough and allowed the children to defy its orders. The integrity of relationships in the post divorce family is ususally the last thing on the mind of the judge. I am guessing that a judge finally put his or her foot down on parental alienation and the children were too impaired to cooperate on restoring relationship with the excluded parent. And the court got cold feet and refused to force the children to attend the
deprogramming. I hope the press begins covering this story more responsibly and starts answering the basic questions instead of throwing around words like voodoo and controversial in the same sentence as Parental Alienation. Parental alienation is as old as deception and manipulation for selfish ends. It is not about generic high conflict two scorpions in a bottle divorce war.

The mother was the alienated parent in this case.

Parental alienation is a severe form of domestic violence against the alienated parent and the children.

Where is the anti domestic violence lobby? They usually offer support to the victim.

Why are they being so silent? Is it because they have attached themselves to an indefensible position that PAS is voodoo science and therefore any remedy for deprogramming has to be suspect
since there is no such thing as programming a child to hate the other parent.

The Violence Against Women lobby have to know that they are a large part of the problem by failing to understand that parental alieantion is real and mothers can be victims of parental alienation too and in either event to not lose sight of the human problem that the alienated parent no matter which gender and the children need to be protected.

Anonymous said...

I am still not persuasive with the jury decision. There is something wrong with this case. How could jury decide the life of a person with only 6 hour of deliberation on the case. I feel that someone got the envelop! If you know what I mean. The DA just want to close the case. I do not believe the story.

Ajlouny said...

I too agree that she is a monster that didn't have a realization on the impact that her selfish actions will have on her child. It's sick that she would commit the crime, however way she chose, in front of her daughter. It's a disgusting gross act.