The Murder of Louis Davidson, M.D.
(“House Call,” Forensic Files)
The presence of a beauty queen, even if it’s Miss Southern Delaware Bartlett Pear, gives a true-crime story the allure of a fairy tale gone awry.
The Forensic Files episode “House Call” is especially hard to resist because it centers on a genuine heavy hitter — a former Miss Jamaica pageant finalist.
Pretty face, awful crime. Denise Davidson probably thought police would never implicate someone like her when her estranged husband turned up dead.
But her poise and fluffy hair didn’t help when it really counted, and she ended up in prison. So for this week, I poked around to find out whether she’s still incarcerated — and if so, whether she’s enjoying madcap Orange Is the New Black-like adventures or it’s just plain dismal living behind razor wire.
But first, here’s a recap of “House Call” with additional information from internet research:
In 1982, Louis Davidson, M.D., married onetime swimsuit model Denise Davis, and they moved into a large house in Carrollwood, Florida, a few years later. Both of them originally came from Jamaica.
Messy divorce. The doctor was described as kind and generous and “so smart he was almost scary” by Kathy Molino, R.N., a former colleague who appeared on Forensic Files.
But it turned out that the Bayfront Medical Center’s head of emergency pediatric medicine hadn’t made a wise choice for a wife.
The marriage soured, and Denise filed for divorce in 1989. The doctor reportedly believed she was cheating on him. She alleged there was violence in the relationship, according to a Jamaican Gleaner story.
The couple reconciled, but at some point Denise acquired Miami night club owner Leo Cisneros as a boyfriend. He had suspected ties to Jamaican drug trafficking.
By 1994, Denise and Louis Davidson were headed for divorce court again and a custody fight over their 8-year-old daughter, Natalie. Denise reportedly wanted to take her back to Jamaica to live.
The doctor had found a girlfriend, a paramedic named Patricia Deninno, and the two were engaged. Denise, 34, and Cisneros, 32, were expecting a baby together and also planned to get married.
Outsourced killers. But Denise and her new man wanted to avoid a dispute over Natalie and collect a life insurance payout of more than $400,000 by taking the doctor out of the picture permanently.
The first hitman they engaged was himself gunned down in Jamaica in 1993, before he could carry out the murder, according to what Denise’s sister, Ava Davis, told police, the St. Petersburg Times reported in a story by Craig Pittman.
The couple then arranged for two more hitmen, Robert Gordon, 32, and Meryl Stanley “Tony” McDonald, 47, to kill the pediatrician.
Pretending to be prospective tenants, the contract killers visited the rental office of Thunderbay Apartments, where the doctor lived in St. Petersburg, Florida, and obtained layouts of the entire complex and a two-bedroom unit.
On January 25, 1994, the doctor, 38, answered his door to find at least one of the killers on the other side. Court papers allege that one of the men had somehow chatted up the doctor in the parking lot, and they walked into the apartment together.
Whatever the case, once inside his home, the men roughed up Louis Davidson and drowned him in his bathtub, then left town pronto.
‘The Wire.’ Dennino found the doctor in the tub with his knees tied with a vacuum cleaner cord and a gag over his mouth.
The victim’s watch, camera, and money clip were missing, according to court papers. But thousands of dollars in cash and other valuables were left undisturbed, leading police to believe that murder was the real motivation.
By this time, Cisneros had fled to Jamaica.
Denise Davidson stayed in Florida, and authorities put her under surveillance.
She made the investigation easy.
Detectives followed her into a Western Union office, where they witnessed her wiring $1,200 to Robert Gordon and noticed that she signed the paperwork with an alias, Pauline White.
They eventually gathered enough evidence to prove that she had given Gordon and McDonald a total of $14,000 to $15,000 via a series of transfers.
Phone records revealed that she made numerous calls to Gordon the day of the murder.
Idle threat. Detectives found the local Days Inn room where Gordon had stayed and discovered a pair of Voit sneakers and a man’s sweatshirt that had Louis’s blood on them. One of the sneaker treads matched a footprint at the crime scene.
Meanwhile, once Denise realized the police considered her a serious suspect, she disguised her voice and left a threatening message (“You’ll be sorry, Denise…”) on her own answering machine in hopes of throwing off investigators.
No luck with that ploy, because detectives found evidence that Denise had made the call herself from Dooley Groves, the citrus fruit store where she worked as a manager. (A Snapped episode about the case says that she made the call from a payphone.) They also discovered evidence that Denise had bought a gray sweatshirt and Size 9 Voit sneakers – like those left behind at the Days Inn — at a Tampa Walmart, according to the Snapped episode that debuted in 2021.
The ultimate penalty. Police arrested Denise at Tampa International Airport as she was waiting to board a flight to Kingston, Jamaica. She was held without bail.
Florida investigators tracked down the assassins and put them as well as Denise on trial in 1995.
By this time, she had given birth in jail to Selena, her daughter with Cisneros. According to a St. Petersburg Times account, Denise’s face lit up when the baby made an appearance in court, which prosecutors complained was an attempt to win the jury’s favor.
At the trial, Davidson testified that Cisneros had masterminded the murder plot without her cooperation.
Nonetheless, the jury convicted her of solicitation for murder, and she got a life sentence.
At the hitmen’s trial, Susan Carole Shore, an accomplice who served as a driver for the hired killers, testified for the prosecution. She met Gordon and McDonald at a Hialeah race track and accepted their offer to take them to St. Petersburg for $100. But she said she knew nothing about a murder plot, and received probation and deportation back to England.
The jury found McDonald and Gordon guilty and voted in favor of the electric chair.
“Your honor,” McDonald read from a prepared statement, “God Most High told me to tell you that you should override the jury’s 9 to 3 recommendation.”
Circuit Court Judge Susan F. Schaeffer, known as “Ms. Death” for her harsh sentencing, was unimpressed and gave Gordon and McDonald the death penalty for first degree murder.
Slippery boyfriend. Pittman, who appeared on Forensic Files, remarked that Leo Cisneros was too cowardly to kill the doctor himself. That seemed a little strange. Reluctance to slaughter an innocent man with one’s own hands sounds more like evidence of a bit of humanity.
Regardless, no one ever got to hear Cisneros’ side of the story at the trials.
He had vanished and was still missing when Forensic Files first aired “House Call” in 2002. In 2008, America’s Most Wanted sought help in finding him, without success.
Cisneros remains at large.
Filing away. It should be mentioned that “Leo Cisneros” is a relatively common name, and the internet has stories about at least two felons by that name, but neither of them is Denise Davidson’s former boyfriend, whose full name is Leonardo Anselmo Cisneros.
The two hitmen clearly had no idea where Cisneros was hiding out. Otherwise, they would have used the information to win themselves plea deals.
They both made efforts to get new trials, however.
Gordon filed an unsuccessful 1997 appeal claiming that having an all-white jury didn’t count as a jury of his peers and that the court had neglected to hold Denise Davidson accountable to the same standards that had factored into his punishment.
He didn’t get anywhere with a writ of habeas corpus with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida in 2004, either.
Meryl McDonald filed a motion for rehearing, which was denied in 2007. (The Murderpedia page for each of the men provides links to the court papers.)
As of today, neither man has been executed. They’re prisoners in the maximum-security section of Union Correctional Institution in Raiford, Florida.
No deprivation camp. Regarding Denise Davidson, she is inmate #153691 at the Homestead Correctional Institution in Dade County, Florida.
It’s a prison with a minimum-security area that sounds a lot like the fictional Litchfield Penitentiary of Orange Is the New Black fame.
Davidson’s current custody status is “close,” which means limitations on off-premises activities. In other words, for OITNB fans, no van-driving gig like the one Lorna Morello and Tiffany Doggett scored.
But Homestead offers plenty of other diversions, including four softball teams and classes in art, creative writing, music, aerobics, yoga, and anger management.
Inmates also have the opportunity to study PC support services and automotive service technology.
On the down side, Davidson looks somber in recent photographs.
She probably regrets ending her marriage by soliciting two hitmen instead of one divorce lawyer.
That’s all for this week. Until next time, cheers. — RR
Thanks, RR – I recall this ep. Yet another murder for insurance, replete with basic mistakes such as leaving valuables at the ‘theft’ scene. As you suggest, what on earth prompts someone to murder rather than just divorce given just how difficult likely success is (to wit, prisons full of those with the same idea) — and that terrible price of failure? The answer: greed seems to shroud all rationality (and morality), perhaps with hatred/revenge (for what?) in the mix.
The aspect that strikes me is her getting off relatively lightly (not that a life sentence is light). Courts often target the ‘mastermind’ for the harsher punishment over the ‘muscle,’ but the reverse happened here. This sort of anomaly is one of the most taxing for loved ones (and the wider citizenry): how should we treat those who solicit for murder as opposed to the perpetrator(s)? Are they equally blameworthy; is the ‘customer’ more culpable, or those who ‘wield the knife’? There seems little or no consistency in how courts address this dilemma. I guess most of us would answer ‘equally’ — then the complexities of persons turning state’s evidence for a lighter sentence enter the picture.
Death would be too good for Denise. She needs to spend the rest of her life with this haunting memory of her evil deed.
I’m a Jamaican and was a good friend of Leo Cisneros. I also knew Denise well. My father was friends with Mr. Davies, that is how I first met Denise as a teenager.
First of all…Leo has passed away. He died a few years ago in Cuba.
I can say with 100% certainty that the murder of Louis was not his idea. I would put this at Denise’s door step. But Leo would have gone along with it to act macho for Denise. You can bet that he had very little to do with any aspect of this sorry situation. Leo fled to Jamaica before Denise tried to leave Florida. From there he fled to Colombia….. after that I lost track of him as he was smart and scared enough not to trust anyone but his mom, who loved him dearly.
I don’t know why Leo did not stop this madness and I have no idea what madness possessed Denise to see it through.
One thing is for sure…many lives were ruined.
Thanks so much for writing in — that’s a great scoop!
And here dear internet sleuths is Leo himself trying to make everyone believe he is dead.
I don’t understand if she had a successful boyfriend — why not pay good lawyers for custody instead of hitmen? How stupid can one be? So both of her daughters are denied their fathers because of what? And she could have been on the outside traveling and enjoying life with her kids/grandkids. Asinine!!
Pamela: The hitmen weren’t arrested at the scene – so we don’t know whether they had weapons or not; but we do know they used what was to hand – including themselves. This is a non-issue. Nothing you state is relevant to the case. They killed Louis; it matters not whether they intended to or not. And the evidence that Davidson knew this was planned is persuasive.
She is right where she belongs.
Shhe gambled on getting the $400,000 insurance settlement, which meant the good doctor had to be salted away.
Yes – there’s no question of her significant involvement in the murder, whether motivated by insurance or just to get rid of the man – in a respectable career as a doctor – who threatened her custody of the children (especially when she was associating with a known lowlife criminal).
The dr made a very poor choice in her: Ms Fancy Banana was rotten…
Unfortunately, the good doctor chose looks over character, not that he deserved to die for it. If only he could see her now. Yes, she needs to stay there and rot!
I know Denise and call her a friend, the whole of this story is tragic but media has never portrayed all sides of this case. She is not a monster, she is someone who made horrible choices in a horrible situation and is paying for it. She is a human with good qualities, she is intelligent, funny, caring and compassionate. She is remorseful, I know this from personal conversations, full of regrets. Some of you have wished her death in the comment section, seems to me, yall may be the very thing she’s being portrayed to be, a monster.
I don’t wish her death; I don’t support the death penalty – but as Davidson wasn’t very far from getting it, in that sense you’re saying that anyone who supports the death penalty’s a monster – which is a bit strong! It wouldn’t be unreasonable to consider that Davidson merited it – just as it wouldn’t for anyone instrumental in premeditated murder. You might tell that to her dead husband’s parents and son, who may be rather less generous in their assessment than yours… But there are many whose crimes are worse – granted.
Whatever qualities you believe Davidson had before the murder and has now are irrelevant: she plainly didn’t exhibit ‘intelligence, care and compassion’ when she committed the crime: the only relevant consideration. It’s good for her that she’s remorseful: she should be, though no credit’s due for a state of mind that’s only proper. Regrets as such have no moral significance as regret may be entirely centred on one’s own loss. When directed outwards it becomes remorse…
The only thing that can be said is that she’s where she should be, where she is indeed paying for her stupidity, disregard of life and cruelty. We all need friends: it’s good that you’re there for her, and attempt at a ‘moral makeover’ (that must fail) is unnecessary in being that friend, for you’re a friend to the person that is, not what they ought to be or you might like them to be…
Thank you, Marcus. Thank you all! The pain has not subsided after 36 years. That is all I am going to allow myself to say.
Marcus a lot of the countries that have abolished the death penalty mainly for the reasons of innocents being killed, many in the usa have been exonerated by dna etc. Not only that, the death sentence harks back to an eye for an eye, a barbaric medieval practice which very few western countries hold. I will never understand the risk Americans take with potentially innocent (some proven TOO LATE) people, or if guilty the fact they commit unintentional homicide and are no better than the actual murderer. Please don’t go back to the victims families. Would you tell them. Sorry we’ve just found out we executed an innocent man. But we hope you enjoy your vengence. I don’t think you realise the immense number of people that have been declared innocent. Still, vengence for the families by commiting murder (post unintentional homicide if you’re killing an innocent by the courts found innocent by Dna after death) seems to be a weak arguement for potentially killing innocent people. But hey whatever floats your boat for getting vengence. America in that respect isn’t any better than ISIS. In the murder of innocents by execution. And Saudi, by the number of executions. Cheers
No, she is not where she should be. She should be 6ft under soil. She should have gotten the death penalty along with the two hit men. This nonsensical “life in prison” sentence that is on the judicial books is ridiculous. It is not sustainable — this is why “life” typically means 25 or 30 years in the judicial system. And even then, these miserable creatures get out before even 25 years. I recently saw something on Forensic Files where the little savage poisoned her father because she wanted to go live somewhere else. She sat there and watched him suffer in pain until death. She got 47 years because some clown decided that if you are 17 years old you don’t understand that it’s wrong to murder someone. You wanna guess how many years this miserable creature spent behind bars? EIGHT years! Now, I am no mathematician but eight years is not even half or a quarter of 47.
We are rapidly heading to a time when murder isn’t punishable and just watch how quickly society will descend into utter mystery. Life in prison as you can see from the above article is nothing but a vacation in addition to the basic three square meals, medical care, shelter from the elements, free education, there are the perks –- such as yoga, creative writing, art class, etc. etc.– all at tax payers’ expensive. Including taxes paid by the victim’s family. How the hell is this fair to society and law abiding people?
One thing is for sure, she sure is no beauty queen.
Not these days – but it’s her character in significant question, not her looks…
Well she was unplaced in Miss Jamaica World in 1981. She’s average.
FF called her a finalist — but you’re not the first reader who’s written in to say she never placed. Perhaps she was in more than one beauty pageant.
Back in the early 80s, when she entered (1981), Miss Jamaica World was the only beauty contest on the island.
Thanks for letting me know. I did a quick internet search but didn’t find a list of contestants, only the name of the winner.
I know who else has “regrets”: her ex husband! Everyone (after they are caught) are either “regretful” or just plain “innocent.” The time for soul searching was BEFORE the crime!
If she’s remorseful, that’s good – but there’s a fine line between self-sorrow and that for the victim(s). If she’s genuinely remorseful she’ll accept her punishment as wholly justified, instead of diverting blame to the boyfriend (who’s doubtless guilt too).
The infamous killer here in UK, Myra Hindley, now thankfully dead, tortured and murdered children (their screams were recorded on tape, played in court). Given a life sentence, she claimed remorse and reform and sought release; she even got prominent people on side. It’s a testament to her perversion that she couldn’t see that if truly remorseful she could never deserve release: she would acknowledge that she deserved life for her unquestionably terrible crimes (committed with a man – though there was never a question she was equally involved).
When I hear people expressing remorse AND accepting they are where they should be is when I’m inclined to believe them. ‘I’m sorry, now release me’ doesn’t cut it…
Yes, i agree that SHE is REMORSEFUL…Only because she got CAUGHT…
How are her daughters doing? They were so young when this happened and I hope that they led productive lives.
Wow. She hired people to murder someone. And he’s dead. No other qualities matter!
A man is dead and his child doesn’t have a father; take Denise out of the picture and he would be alive! The things you say about Denise are not true; she is an evil, low down dirty whore and you know it and because you are still defending her bad behavior to some degree, morally, you will pay too! Thy shall not kill!
Amen 100 percent agree with you on this. That cold hearted bitch is not good human lol.
She killed a human being — that makes her a monster. When you turn from good to evil, the Kodak moment snaps.
Given the heinous stupidity of the crime, it does indeed seem like Denise got off easy. I’m sure that prison is prison regardless, but Homestead sounds like a pretty sweet gig as correctional facilities go. All they need is a well-written brochure and they could market themselves as a retreat. “Find Yourself at Homestead.”
For the sheer frequency of these sorts of crime, maybe sentences should be reduced. The perps only endanger their spouses, so society is fine as long is it doesn’t marry Ms. Davidson. Maybe five years in a bad bed and breakfast facility would be enough. Or else, the US should initiate a guaranteed standard of living and outlaw life insurance. It seems to pose a hazard.
Life insurance should be renamed “death insurance.”
Denied their mother as well. Shameless. Heartbreaking. Death assurance.
No one would ever recognize her as a beauty queen today!
Isn’t that a fact. If she currently had a husband, he’d have probably taken out a contract on her.
She aged badly, but I guess time in prison will do that. I consider it a price she rightly deserves to pay.
Any husbands says to me “Take out some life insurance on yourself, baby, case something, you know, happens,” I will say, “Baby, if I go, you will just have to find yourself someone new. Someone with cash.”
That’s only one trifling homicide by female to a passel of men did the same thing. Soon as women unite, we won’t have to marry men and do awful things like that. Once we all together, this stuff don’t happen no more. Men ain’t no good. Thank you, RR, helping us all.
That’s right, sister, men are no good ! But criminal behavior is dietary. People of all genders are eating meat. As soon as all men, women and children, transgender individuals especially, go total vegan we will all see a down turn in the homicide rate. You see a T-bone steak, vegans see a Las Vegas shooter. And how do I know men are no good? I used to be one. In the words of Iggy Pop, ‘No Walls.’
My uncle was a minor cult leader back in the hippy days. He always said ‘it takes a village to get rich through polygamy.’ Behind the times in some ways, Uncle Bjorne was far ahead in others. Now he’s comfortably retired. Uncle Bjorne attributes his success to clean communal living. He was a much nicer and truly more innocuous cult leader than a few I could name. But that’s not why I’m posting. Maybe concerned citizens should re-evaluate the work of Karl Marx. Then maybe people would quit hiring hit persons kill their spouse. There are other arrangements besides marriage with which to bumble through through chaos.
Where is the humanity in hiring two hitmen to kill an innocent man?
Pittman was right. Cisneros was a coward and remains a coward in hiding.
Maybe “humanity” was the wrong word.
Stephen, I am surprised they haven’t located Cisneros, with all of today’s technologies. He may just be dead!
She was just a contestant in Miss Jamaica who did not place so referring to her as a beauty queen is misleading.
Cindy, thanks for writing. I believe FF said she was a finalist — I’ll have to check again.
One thing Miss Bubonic Banana was: dumb.
Yeah it was 20 girls and then the field was narrowed down to 7, which she was not a part of.
It may be what FF selects, but doctors, either as victims or perps, seem to get more than their proportionate share of eps – or is that just my perception? Sometimes, again as victims or perps, it’s ‘cos they seem to have gone for the inappropriate woman – she was arm-candy on his money – and it all went wrong. Is there something about wealthy male drs and good-looking trailer-trash?
Project for me: find all the eps with drs as the protagonist… There are quite a few. Surely there are some dastardly dentists? I can think of one ep: a serial adulterer who killed his wife and staged it. He got off lightly and is now free, but I can’t recall the name. There may be another theme, too: these middle-class men with money seem to do relatively well at sentencing. Why could that be…?
Interesting point, Marcus. Maybe it’s the whole epic of the fallen hero that draws us to crime stories with doctors — whether they’re the perpetrators or the victims.
RR: I’m sure you’re right: the ‘first, do no harm’ dynamic, combined with the usual FF topic – money (though hardly movie star bucks), sex, and what people do about it.
The FF dentist story I found: ‘Dew Process’
https://www.thetimes-tribune.com/news/local-history-dentist-eventually-admitted-to-murdering-his-wife-1.1806044
and in so doing found some other cases such as this pretty gruesome one:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/14855137/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/dentist-admits-murders-wife-girlfriend/#.W1yya9JKjIU
which could certainly be an FF subject!
Bart Corbin in GA killed his dental school girlfriend Dolly Hearn in 1990, was not caught at the time, and 14 years later, killed his wife Jennifer Barber Corbin in a similar fashion (shot in the head, staged as a suicide. Dolly on her couch, Jennifer on her bed). He left Jennfier’s body for their 7- and & 9-year-old sons to find. They ran to a neighbor’s to get help. It was only when Jennifer’s family found out about Dolly (they’d never heard of her before) that the police were able to get the evidence about Bart.
Denise certainly was not trailer trash! She is from a very loving family. She was brought up well and happy. Loved by all her relatives in the UK. A truly beautiful young woman. How she got involved in this is a case of coercion and fear of her new partner. She wouldn’t admit to being involved as she couldn’t bear her family, especially her father, to think badly of her. Susan Shore was given probation for giving evidence against Denise and should have been been sentenced for the true nature of her involvement in the murder. Denise’s daughters are successful young women and supported and loved by their family. Denise’s dad died after many years waiting for her to come home. The boyfriend was the perpetrator who had coerced Denise into a situation so far from her own reality and background. For many years she hoped he would turn up and tell the truth so she could be released.
Pamela: Being from a good family, loved, etc., is wholly irrelevant. Indeed, it makes what she did even worse – “she was brought up well.” She committed an appalling crime – and that’s what makes her trash. Excuses for her can be made ad nauseam, but the fact that a wife could even contemplate – let alone have any part in – her husband’s murder is appalling, as the jury found.
You have a strange perspective on profoundly immoral conduct!
Marcus, I couldn’t think of a more perfect response. It wouldn’t surprise me as I scroll through the comments to find those who espouse what a lovely, refined, properly raised woman she was.
You want us to believe that Denise was a saint, corrupted by the new bf ?? So how did the bf learn so much about the doctor? ha ha ha. Denise is/was evil. She was motivated by the insurance$$$.
Bet when she wired hit money to her exes killers, she did so with her pinky “up”?
Divorce might’ve been a better option.
She didn’t really think it through…
I wouldn’t expect Miss Southern Delaware Bartlett Pear of 1991 to do much thinking…
She’s pretty seedy:)
Pamela, you’re an idiot for defending Denise. It’s creepy that you know a lot about the lives of the children, sound like you are friends of the family. CREEPY!!!
Mary: Pamela is misguided, not least ‘cos she unwittingly paints Davidson’s deeds in a worse, not better, light. What does a defence typically resort to in a case of overwhelming evidence against their client? A poor ubringing, rejection as a child, etc. This is precisely what Pamela says wasn’t the case… How many times do we hear the excuse of a female perp being ‘fearful of her partner’ so went along with him (the perp as a victim too argument)? She chose the partner! And he was indeed appalling. Pamela would have us believe that instead of walking away/going to the police (who could have put her/children in witness protection) she had no option but to conspire to murder her ex and pay men to do it. She clearly thinks we and the jury are fools.
Susan Shore’s role is irrelevant to the assessment of Davidson. So what that she was in it to? The court knew that and adjudged her. It doesn’t lessen D’s role. Good that Davidson’s daughters are ‘successful’ (no thanks to their mother) – but what’s that got to do with anything? They made their success despite, not because of, their ghastly mother. What does Davidson’s father’s ‘waiting’ have to do with anything? Had I been the father the stress of what my daughter did may have hastened my death…
I’ve read Davidson’s court papers. She *got* sentencing credit for having no criminal history, etc, which cannot be pleaded (by Pamela) a second time now (“so far from her reality and background”), as she attempts to. Had D not had that credit she could well have received a death sentence, as one of her co-conspirators did (and who, indeed, appealed on the ground that she didn’t and he did).
Pamela’s case is that the outcome of her trial was a travesty ‘cos she was just another victim. Tell that to Dr. Davidson’s family (and the woman he was engaged to who found him dead).
We have a saying in the UK: you can’t polish a turd (faeces). Pamela is trying to do just this.
I feel bad for their daughter. Her father’s dead, her mother’s doing a life sentence for murdering him. She’s probably 30 by now, I hope she’s doing well.
I am Denise’s cousin. I know she wasn’t wicked or trash. She was naive and sadly underestimated the man she became involved with. She had not known violence. Yes she was a victim. It’s a very sad case and I do not believe for a moment that she believed her husband would be killed. She stupidly went along with Leo and ended up with her husband dead and Leo escaped and Denise served 25 years in prison. The heart of this is that Denise was sucked in by a heartless streetwise selfish thug.
Are you serious with your excuses for this evil byatch, Denise?
She didn’t need the insurance. Think outside the box. She was under the control of an evil boyfriend who escaped as soon as his plan went wrong. Denise took his punishment. She was terrified of him.
P: I can assure you that here in UK Davidson would be convicted for murder. And no, she would NOT have avoided prosecution due to ‘coercion.’ Here’s a summary of the law in UK. Note that it (obviously and correctly) focuses on how the law can protect the Davidsons of this would who claim to be controlled/coerced by another, NOT HOW BEING ‘COERCED’ INTO INVOLVEMENT WITH MURDER EXCUSES YOU FROM IT!
https://rightsofwomen.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ROW-%C2%AD-Legal-Guide-Coercive-control-final.pdf
To be specific: coercion as a defense to criminal charges:
a criminal defendant may claim they were coerced into committing a criminal act, as long as they didn’t put themselves into the dangerous situation through negligence. This defense generally requires these elements:
there was an immediate threat of serious bodily harm;
the defendant had a reasonable fear that the other party would indeed carry out the threat; and
the defendant had no reasonable opportunity to escape, and was thus forced to commit the illegal act.
Even if the first two were the case, the third was plainly not. Davidson was followed by police for days (enabling them to film her sending payment to the hit men, for example). She was physically free from restraint or threat at multiple points to go the police before and at many points after the crime before arrest. THEREFORE SHE DOES NOT SATISFY DURESS CRITERION. She doubtless raised this in court, who rightly rejected it.
Anyone who connives with the death of their husband and father of their child is trash in my book – and you’ll find very few indeed who disagree on this site or elsewhere – remorseful trash or not. Who said anything about greed? Read my metaphorical lips, as well as the info linked: IF YOU’RE FRIGHTENED OF A ‘MADMAN’ YOU DO WHAT DECENT, NORMAL PEOPLE DO: GO TO POLICE FOR PROTECTION – NOT MURDER AT THE HIS BIDDING ‘IN ORDER TO PROTECT MY FAMILY’. She did a great job of the latter, too, didn’t she – depriving her child of both father and mother?
Pamela, you seem to occupy an alternate universe where appalling behaviour becomes understandable and justified, sensible behaviour is alien, and a jury was wrong (a jury aware of what a criminal shot Cisneros was). Both in the courts of law and public opinion Davidson is guilty – morally and legally – as sin. Might it just be the case that it’s you and Davidson ‘under the control of madness’? Wake up, woman! Full marks, however, for loyalty to a hopeless case…
Be advised that you don’t need to justify your love or friendship of Davidson by excusing her crime. They don’t need ‘reasons.’ But the crime is inexcusable – period (no ‘yes, buts’ etc).
Pamela Allman: This is of course a distressing matter for you. But wake up, woman! If plotting to kill one’s husband isn’t wicked I don’t know what is. She may have been naive (for which read stupid) – but she was also wicked. You seem oblivious to the argument that ‘not knowing violence’ could make her actions seem worse, not better, because she cannot, like many defendants do, argue that a background in abuse, violence, etc. perpetrated ON her is mitigation. I presume you mean she had no record of violence. That this was her first, awful, offence is one reason why she got life, not death, and is irrelevant to the assessment of her actions in this matter.
Since you believe she did not intend her husband to be murdered, you are arguing against what the court and jury found. Read her part here, for example:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-supreme-court/1254606.html
Are you asking us to accept that the meetings, calls and payoffs she was involved in, described here, are either invented or don’t implicate her as central to the murder plan? Please don’t insult us.
“She stupidly went along with Leo and ended up with her husband dead and Leo escaped and Denise served 25 years in prison.”
Undistorted: “She was stupid and wicked, and conspired with the trash boyfriend she chose, to murder her husband (depriving her child of his father).”
It’s good you’ve stuck by her – but don’t expect to garner sympathy for her. YOU are a victim – of naivety (putting it kindly) – and would do better extending your sympathy to the victim’s family (you don’t mention the victim, which doesn’t help your plea.) You’ll find none for Denise, I’m confident…
Of course I care about Louis. He was a wonderful, kind and dedicated children’s doctor. He was loved by Denise’s family. Her mother broke down when she heard of his heinous murder. Her father went to his grave in depression and despair. The whole family clung together and brought up the children. Louis was never forgotten. I am sure Denise was in some kind of insane fantasy at this time and sucked into a dark world by Leo. Make what you will of it. Denise was naive (very stupid) and her 25 years has almost been served. Nobody in our family can understand how Denise was involved. This is completely honest and true.
Pamela a: Well, I’m sorry this has affected you and other family members as awfully as it was bound to. When family and loved ones commit awful crimes there is typically incredulity, then attempt to comprehend, perhaps by rationalising – as you yourself have been traumatised by the horror of the story.
I have to say that ‘insane fantasy’ involves rationalising, as there’s no evidence that Denise was experiencing homicidal mental illness (I sense you didn’t mean it literally – but then what DO you mean if not offering excuse?) Wicked is as wicked does: if you do wicked things you are wicked – period. She did a wicked thing (which is not to say that she is ONLY capable of wickedness but must have the capacity for it). It’s also too tempting to conceive of her as under the spell of the ‘Svengali’ boyfriend: but she chose him, and at the very least, she chose to do his wicked bidding when she could have walked (if we believe that nothing was her idea nor initiated by her). She made wicked choices and moral responsibility must properly be assigned to her.
You have, per loyalty, described her as victim – she wasn’t; and insane – she wasn’t. And I doubt her children would so ascribe, either.
Making excuses for her serves no purpose. We have to confront and accept that people we love sometimes do wicked things, and deal with the trauma of our perception of them being shattered…
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100012928117104
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100020596329619
Leonardo Cisneros
The victim was loved by Denise’s family. I don’t understand how Denise got involved. It doesn’t make sense.
Pamela: This isn’t moral rocket science: there isn’t anything to ‘make sense’ of, for goodness’ sake! You seem incapable of seeing – as reflected in your constant obfuscation – that this woman committed a gravely evil act. Period. You – we – don’t need to ‘understand how Denise got involved.’ She did; that’s all you need to know. Wake up, women!!! You seem incapable of moral reasoning! Thankfully, the court did it for you…
Pamela, I know an attempted murderer, and his wife is brainwashed. I’m sorry for your family’s loss.
Marcus, please stop bullying Pamela, it’s unnecessary and you come off as shrill and judgmental.
Thanks for this post, RR. I watched this episode today and it was pretty dry. You did a lot of work to make it a much better story
Thanks, Lili — this one was fun to research.
Thank you Lili. You helped me feel better. Bullying is what causes so many problems and breaks our spirits.
Lili:
1. If a needed dose of ‘reality therapy’ is bullying to you, you undermine real claims to bullying;
2. if opinions different from one’s own, about very grave subject matter, are found disagreeable on a forum – don’t visit it;
3. the moral ambiguity Pamela expresses is certainly not shared, we can be sure, by the victim’s family, who continue to suffer from Davidson’s appalling behaviour. You seem to be confused about the greater victim in this scenario: not Davidson’s relative, who sadly can’t see her behaviour for what it was, but Louis and his family;
4. your laudable sympathy, therefore, is misplaced;
5. I’m highly content to be shrill and judgmental about murder and foolishness.
Pamela: “Bullying is what causes so many problems and breaks our spirits.” You don’t seem to have a problem making THIS judgement about my expressed view, but when it comes to Davidson’s murderous behaviour – murder causes even greater problems and doesn’t just break the spirit! – you are rather less opinionated.
Lili: You’ll find the jury got their ‘judgementalism’ in before mine about a woman whom Pamela has difficulty attributing moral agency to (because it was the wicked boyfriend’s doing and she was a victim to…) Sure. He’s a reminder of why the jury gave Davidson life – one that shouldn’t be necessary, and which makes clear her thorough wickedness:
https://www.newspapers.com/clip/15803761/denise_davidson_murder_planned_for/
She’s trash – period.
Ok Marcus. Enjoy the last word. Things aren’t always what they seem and there are people who judge and people who look further than the obvious. Perhaps further down the line in your life you will realise this.
Pamela: The ‘last word’ was had by the jury, not me. They heard the evidence and made the judgement. Why should any of us accept what you as a relative say rather than an objective jury – not that you offer anything that could make a difference, just character observation? She did it – end of. The thoughts and feelings of relatives of the perp are, and must be, irrelevant to the public. If you have information that may be exculpatory to Davidson, furnish it to the law. If you merely want to cast around further to blame her associates and minimise her culpability – which you do – it won’t wash. Specifically, if things are not “as they seem,” tell it to the judge (and insult the 12 people who judged Davidson by telling them they were myopic ‘cos they “didn’t look far enough” (into their crystal balls of what?)) Just where SHOULD they have looked?
You offer precisely nothing here that makes a jot of difference. I’m sorry she’s damaged you and all who are close to her, but you do yourself, the victim and his loved ones, the public and the concept of justice a disservice by attempting to make excuses (I say attempting as you actually offer none, just vagueries). The better response to her acts from you is silence, for you do not (and almost certainly cannot) offer any defence.
I’m sparing a thought for the victim’s family. Are you?
Reading all your comments through and you are completely and utterly correct in all you say. I looked at it from another angle. Knowing my cousin as a loving person, hard working and honest it was impossible to see her in the role of an evil participant in her husband’s murder. I had to think that she may have been threatened or hurt. Perhaps she had been told, as Susan Shore was that the men involved were going to collect a document. Perhaps Denise’s many phone calls were to ask the men not to hurt Louis. Perhaps Denise’s strict upbringing and loving family prevented her from the perception that a murder would take place. Only the men who committed the heinous act know what really happened. Susan Shore was dressed as a nurse to get the doctor to open the door. Her part was greater than reported. She did it for money – she must have seen blood on the murderers. She could have called the police. Marcus, you are entitled to your opinions and I respect them. Well 25 years have almost been served by Denise so she has been punished.
Pamela: Thank you. The relatives and friends of the perpetrators of murder typically suffer greatly to – tragedy all round.
Re the hitmen’s (alleged) guns and knives, I got that from a court summary document so took it to be the case and quoted it. I’ll try to find it and send the link. If you KNOW it to be incorrect then there’s been a significant error on the prosecution’s part. Two hitmen, perhaps powerfully built, mightn’t consider bringing weapons to attack a doctor needed but expect him to be relatively compliant initially and objects in his home to be available for use as weapons (as was the case). So while I would expect their default position to be as armed, it’s not VERY surprising. They weren’t raiding a cocaine dealer’s lair!
Best wishes.
Marcus dear. One more thing that bothers me. The two hitmen didn’t go to Louis’s apartment armed with guns or knives. Is that strange behaviour for hitmen? Perhaps Louis put up a massive fight and the men murdered him in the mayhem that they created.
Pamela: Not sure what your point is here. In law, whether they went intending to ‘talk’ or kill, they killed – that’s all that matters.
Pamela: Davidson has indeed been significantly punished for her crime – but when is X years’ incarceration enough for murder? The victim’s family might reasonably think it’s life… 25 yrs is, in my view, the minimum she deserves to serve, but in her case I would consider parole, as many have behaved more wickedly and in greater abundance.
Pamela: I said I’d come back with a link to info re the hitmen if found.
Here’s one re on the police’s assertion that Davidson’d planned a hit for months:
https://www.newspapers.com/clip/15803761/denise_davidson_murder_planned_for/
Court document describing the murder:
https://caselaw.findlaw.com/fl-supreme-court/1254606.html
NB:
“Initially we note the abundance of circumstantial evidence that this was a contract murder, a killing that was painstakingly planned for months, and which included harassment and extensive surveillance of the victim at work and home.”
This puts the lie to the claim in the above posts that somehow Davidson was ‘a victim’ (absurd!) of her appalling choice of boyfriend, as though the circumstances were out of her hands and she had no time/opportunity to prevent the murder. Of course she did! Never mind that this appears to have been the SECOND plan to kill her husband!
It may again need saying that any claim that Davidson wasn’t fully involved in, and desirous of, this murder short of committing it is nonsense. We public, like the jury, can only judge by fact as found and reported per law – not by friends and relatives of the perp(s), who are hopelessly unobjective and bound to minimise and rationalise (such as blaming Cisneros).
https://fall.fsulawrc.com/flsupct/86955/86955ans.pdf
I can’t find the reference to hitmen’s weapons – but their existence or not is academic: the docs show that they beat the victim very badly, including breaking ribs and either knocking unconscious or drowning. They were the weapons. Davidson may well have told them that he wouldn’t defend himself well or wasn’t physically strong.
Marcus, no sorry. Hitmen were without weapons. Susan Shore was believed, Denise was not. You say she has been plotting the murder. It was Cisneros plotting. It was an opportunity for him to ‘ponce’ off Denise as he had seen in her a chance to make money. She didn’t need to as she had assets and a family to turn to if need be. I think the likelihood of Denise probably having been threatened is clear. If you knew her, you would know. I promise you that. I am not a naive person. My children are lawyers, not in the criminal sphere but knowledgeable nonetheless. Having studied cases in the U.K., it is also clear that Denise’s part would have been much less here than in the USA. The murder was in the hands of the two men on death row and the fugitive Cisneros. I honestly believe Denise was drawn into a 25-year sentence by lies and manipulated by lies and threats. I know that the truth didn’t come out at her trial. Her family’s hearts were broken by Louis’ death and Denise’s incarceration. So things are always what they seem, Marcus. Best wishes to you.
Pamela. Hello. I’d read that the hitmen had weapons – but as I say above, whether they did or not is immaterial. They beat and likely drowned the victim, of which there’s no doubt, which is the significant thing. Are you placing some construction on their not having weapons, as though they only went to sell him a timeshare?
No, I didn’t say Davisdon plotted the murder – the courts did. How could I know? I’ve little doubt she plotted WITH Cisneros and the hitmen, but I don’t accept for a moment what you appear to suggest – that she wasn’t plotting/knew nothing and it was all him. The courts found the opposite, and neither of us is in a position to refute the courts’ finding. I must also take issue with your speculation that she was threatened by him to ‘go along’ with his murderous plan. There’s NO evidence in the court docs I’ve read (some linked above) that she was coerced to go along with the man she chose as her boyfriend. That’s pure speculation by your good self, and if Davidson suggested this (she doesn’t appear to have claimed it in court), well she would, wouldn’t she? Furthermore, if someone threatened me/my child to go along with murder that I didn’t sanction, I’d be off to the police and for witness protection. Coercion is no defence, moral or otherwise, to murder in this case. Davidson had every opportunity to get away. The only reasonable interpretation is that she didn’t want to go anywhere, and she wanted her husband dead… That’s what the courts found and that’s the only interpretation outsiders such as I could make – the one the jury made.
I’m unsure what you mean about her relative treatment by law in UK and USA. I’m afraid I must disagree with you as I can only judge by the facts as established in court, not claims by friends and family. That is that she was fully complicit in the murder and planned it (jointly) for some time before. As such, while UK and USA sentencing is different, I can assure you that she would be held just as responsible in UK jurisdiction as she was in the USA.
I’m not suggesting that things are only as they seem, just that it takes much more than friends/family saying ‘things aren’t as they seem’! If you have evidence of miscarriage of justice, as you imply, surely that should be in her lawyer’s hands!
Dear Marcus – if hitmen were hired to carry out a murder, it would be assumed that they would have weapons. They did not. They had a tennis ball that they played with outside Louis’ apartment until he got home from his hospital shift. Susan Shore, dresses as a nurse with uniform obtained from hospital. Louis opened his door to her. The ‘hitmen’ entered the apartment. Did they want a document? Did Louis refuse to give it to them and put up a fight? One of the hitmen was middle aged and the the other one not as fit as Louis. Did the hitmen cause a chaotic violent fight and try to torture Louis for this document? They chose to kill him. They left 18,000 $ and valuables in the apartment. Were they meant to frighten him or kill him? I don’t believe Denise knew that a murder was going to take place. Denise put up no defence in her trial. She believed Cisneros would come and tell the truth so she would be released. She had that hope for many years. She never heard from him again.
Pamela: Suffice to say she consistently lied to police, including that she didn’t know the perps when the opposite was proved; that she hadn’t sent them payment, under an assumed name, when she unquestionably had (her prints were on the payment receipt; the signature was matched as her writing – and why use a false name?- and she was surveilled making the banking transaction); and that the call she claimed to receive, and recorded, from the ‘real’ perp/s was made by her from her workplace (the call was traced to her workplace; she was surveilled entering and leaving the shop immediately before and after the call, and she had nothing to say when that was put to her).
The above alone convict her, though there was more. The evidence against her was described on FF as ‘overwhelming’ – and it is. You appear ignorant of the evidence against her. Instead of offering spurious explanation of matters not central to the case (the thugs-for-hire’s behaviour), address the above – except you can’t because there IS no other explanation than her guilt and lies.
She was described by the prosecution as evil and greedy (for $700,000 life insurance). Try explaining why she isn’t… You kind of do: “D put up no defence..” SHE HAD NONE – SHE WAS GUILTY AS SIN!!! Wake up and smell the coffee, woman!
Good debate Marcus. Still think it strange that ‘assassins’ had no weapons. Not how it’s usually done. Also, I do know that Cisneros was hiding in her closet when the police called at her house. She was afraid of him. Here we have a ‘reasonable doubt’ ….assassin’s are normally paid in cash. They do not mess around with transfers of money leaving a paper trail!
Hello Pamela. Thanks for yours. No, I certainly don’t think the points you raise constitute anything near reasonable doubt – and, significantly, neither did, or would, the law, the deciders of reasonable doubt – because she’d be out, wouldn’t she? Or is that just reasonable doubt in *your* mind…
You have, I’m afraid, misunderstood the basis of her conviction. While it’s assumed that the two ‘assassins’ went with the intention of murdering the victim – as they did – they need not have done. They may have gone to threaten / warn-off beat-up, and therefore didn’t consider they needed weapons (who says they didn’t have weapons apart from you? They were caught well after the murder and would have ditched them. Of course *they* would deny having them!)
The point that continues to elude you is that they murdered him with objects found to hand at the apartment. It’s legally irrelevant what their intention was in visiting (which can in any case only have been coercive) – because they ended up killing him. Now, are you denying that they killed him? For if not you make no relevant point in your assertion.
Normallys and usuallys are neither here nor there. Why you think it matters a jot how the assassins were paid is beyond me! The ONLY significant point is that in person she sent the blood money to these men – beyond question. What was she paying them for???
Cisneros being ‘in the closet’ is neither here nor there.
Pamela, forgive Davidson as you wish; she may well truly be remorseful (she damn well out to be), which makes that forgiveness fitting (mostly for those she most hurt). But don’t insult our, and the jury’s, intelligence with such absurd argument of the black-is-really-white variety.
Thank goodness the U.K. has a new law of coercion. Where people lose their right minds due to threats and controlling behaviour. Denise would have fulfilled the requirement for that defence here. I first got involved when Denise was referred to as ‘trash.’ I knew she certainly was not. She would not have trod on a spider. She was not greedy. She would rather 25 years in prison or even a death sentence to protect her family. She was under the control of a madman xxxx
Pamela, I hope you seek professional counseling for your loss.
I knew a killer when I was 17; our family almost adopted him when he was already in juvie for minor theft crimes. Three years later he robbed and executed a female shopkeeper. Yeah he was “nice” too. I read about the crime and the victim in the papers. They said she was “nice” too. So the question is: who was more “nice”? Bet OJ was “nice” once too!
I actually worked at BCI where she was incarcerated. She is a charming manupilator. If you are a weakling she will get you.
Just wanted to say I appreciate your write-ups, RR. They’re food for thought after sometimes overwhelming or just plain twisty and dramatic episodes, and I enjoy the extra information you include and your two cents.
Thanks so much!
So a good-looking white woman is incarcerated in a minimal security facility, the same woman who orchestrated the entire murder. And yet, the two African-American hit men are on death row? WOW, this country is definitely not racist.
I presume she was indicted for conspiracy to murder. That allows imprisonment for life. But in a death penalty state, the actual murderers could get death – and they did, otherwise they’d have had the same sentence as her. I agree that it’s unfair: she paid them to murder, and in most people’s opinion, I suggest, she’s every bit as culpable as they (some might say ore so). Given that I don’t think she could’ve got death, morally speaking at least, they shouldn’t – or rather, in a death state, if they were considered to meet the threshold for death, so should the person who solicits that death.
I don’t think, therefore, that discretion was exercised in her favour; rather, it wasn’t exercised in theirs. I think they appealed on the above ground.
Trouble for them is they murdered for money – even though it would never have happened had she not solicited it. And solicited or not, murder, with the aggravating feature of financial gain, qualifies for death in those states. So on that ground there was no basis not to sentence thus. The ‘legal’ issue is, then, whether the ‘solicitor’ of murder in those states should also qualify for death – particularly if the actual perps got it.
Many would agree that sentencing is sexist, racist, and ‘classist’ (more money buys better defence; bias favouring articulate defendants).
The black guys are on Death Row, while the mastermind is at a minimal security Club Med – with free vocational schooling provided by taxpayers.
Exactly! She and her bf set the crime in motion.