On Friday, July 25, 2025, Utica Observer Dispatch reported that the Oneida County District Attorney, Todd Carville, has filed a motion seeking the recusal of New York Supreme Court Justice Bernadette Clark, who is currently presiding over the Kaitlyn Conley case. The motion was submitted on June 25, 2025, amid concerns regarding Judge Clark’s alleged bias and behavior during court proceedings.
Carville’s motion outlines several issues, including comments made by Judge Clark at a holiday party in December 2025, which Carville argues demonstrate a lack of impartiality. According to court documents that were recently unsealed, Carville expressed concerns about Judge Clark’s demeanor and responses during opening arguments and noted that she appeared to be hostile towards the prosecution. He stated that the prosecution did not receive adequate notice regarding the sealing of evidence, which undermined their ability to respond effectively.
The Kaitlyn Conley case revolves around the 2015 poisoning death of chiropractor Mary Yoder. Conley, who was previously convicted of first-degree manslaughter, had her conviction vacated on January 31, 2025, by the Fourth Department Appellate Division, which found that she had been denied effective legal representation. The court highlighted that her defense attorney failed to properly challenge the seizure of evidence from her phone, which the court ruled was obtained unlawfully.
After the vacating of her conviction, Conley appeared in court on February 4, 2025, to request the sealing of her records. The Oneida County District Attorney’s Office did not object to this request, leading to Judge Clark sealing the records. However, on May 28, the Sheriff’s Office filed an application to unseal those records, claiming they were necessary for an ongoing investigation. This application was subsequently denied by Judge Clark, who noted that there was no current investigation into Yoder’s death.
In his motion for recusal, Carville emphasized that Judge Clark’s order to seal evidence contradicted itself, as the prosecution was still permitted to present the case to a grand jury. He argued that sealing the evidence could render the prosecution’s efforts futile, raising serious concerns about the integrity of the judicial process.
Additionally, Carville cited a deposition from former Oneida County District Attorney Scott McNamara, who claimed that Judge Clark expressed her opinions regarding Conley’s innocence during a conversation at a holiday party. McNamara stated that Judge Clark’s comments suggested a belief that Conley was wrongly convicted, which further fueled the concerns over her impartiality.
The motion for Judge Clark’s recusal is scheduled to be heard on August 7, 2025, at 11 a.m. in Oneida County Supreme Court. This upcoming court date will be critical in determining whether Judge Clark will continue to oversee the Conley case, as the implications of bias could significantly impact the judicial proceedings moving forward.
Source: Utica Observer Dispatch
