E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Jim Cole / AP
Seth Mazzaglia, bottom center, is seen during his video arraignment from the Strafford County jail in Dover, N.H. to the district court in Dover on Monday. Mazzaglia was charged with killing Elizabeth "Lizzi" Marriott, a 19-year-old University of New Hampshire student.
Updated at 6:45 p.m. ET: A missing 19-year-old University of New Hampshire student was either strangled or suffocated to death, a judge said Monday.
The New Hampshire judge's comments in Dover District Court came during Monday's arraignment of 29-year-old Seth Mazzaglia, who has been charged with second-degree murder in the slaying of college student Elizabeth "Lizzi" Marriott, the Boston Herald reported.
"You caused the death of Elizabeth Marriott," the judge said, according to the Herald. "The circumstances that manifested in an extreme indifference to human life by strangling her and/or suffocating her."
Mazzaglia, a martial arts instructor and actor, was charged Saturday, though Marriott's body has still not been found. The two reportedly met over the summer, while working at a Target store in Greenland, N.H., the Worcester Telegram & Gazette in Worcester, Mass., reported.
Watch US News crime videos on NBCNews.com
The search for Marriott’s body could “take days,” New Hampshire Senior Assistant Attorney General Jane Young said at a press conference Monday afternoon, according to the Herald. Authorities are focusing their search near Peirce Island in Portsmouth, N.H.
AP via Dover (N.H.) Police Dept.
This photo provided by Dover police shows Seth Mazzaglia, who was charged with murder in this case.
"The search in that area may last several more days. They have not exhausted that search," Young said, according to the AP. "We have not discussed an end date. We have discussed continuing this until we find her."
Authorities in Maine and Massachusetts also have been notified in case her body washes up there, Young said, according to the AP.
Marriott, a marine biology major, was last heard from on Tuesday. She was from Westborough, Mass. She had been living with an aunt in Chester, N.H., and commuting to the university in Durham, N.H.
Mazzaglia is being held in jail without bail and is due back in court on Oct. 29, the Herald reported. He did not enter a plea, the newspaper added.
The Associated Press contributed to this story.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Skateboarders, riot cops clash after movie premiere
- Police: Two held after tot's drive-by shooting
- Musician in Jerry Lee Lewis' band killed in Memphis shooting
- Worker cooked to death at Bumble Bee seafood plant
- Search for UNH student's body temporarily put on hold
- Lemonade stand vs. cancer: Boy raises $80,000 to aid research
- Video: Musical prodigy, 7, next Mozart?
Leave a Comment:
Holy cow! Watch out who you become friends with ladies!
My heart goes out to her family.
I think the article should have at least one photo of the victim instead of 2 of the suspect. She should remain the most important part of the story.
i still want to know how they know she was strangled without an actual body. there must have been something in the car they found on campus.
brian-397693,I am wondering the same thing.This is the second time that the story has appeared and still only an inkling more information.I'm guessing that he confessed to the crime.
He probably confessed to police.
How can they write articles as uninformative as this and say they are reporting the news? She went missing on Tuesday, they haven't found a body, they charged the guy on Saturday. How do they know she is dead? How do they know he did it? Did he say so? There must be more information available. Whoever wrote this article should at least include enough information so that the article makes sense. Sometimes I wonder about anyone who would write an article like this and anyone who would pay them to do it. Come on journalists. At least read your article before you submit it to see if it makes sense.
I imagine it has to do with prosecuting him. The only thing the public really needs to know is that she is dead, and that they caught who killed her.
If you had read the byline at the top of the story, you would realize that this is a compilation of stories from AP, Boston Herald, and the Worcester Telegram & Gazette through the wire services, and summarized by the NBC News staff. Most of their stories are just clips or direct links from wire services unless they carry an individual's name in the byline. That is the way the online news services all work.
Heartlight3 - The attorney general office in N.H. particularly Jane Young, is tight lipped about what happened and doesn't share much information. They say they don't want to jeopardize the integrity of the investigation. I say bunk. They've done the same on a couple murders of two girls in the past two years. Looking at those with hind sight now; the secrecy didn't help. The public could have helped more, but in ways they won't let them. Not good. The reporters try hard to get answers, but are just given the I can't comment routine.
This is a real tragedy and if the guy is guilty, then he needs to pay whatever penalty the law mandates. With that said, let me see if I understand this. Under the legal system, innocent till proven guilty. At an arraignment (trial is probably months away) the judge says 'You caused the death of ...'. Anyone see a problem there.
That is exactly what I thought when I read what the judge said. It doesn't matter what he knows, he has already caused bias in the case. The "future" jurors in this case will certainly remember this. I hope the prosecutor has "without a doubt" proof of this guy's guilt, otherwise, I see a possible mistrial in this case.
And that is why this is news. It is not the fact that she is missing, it is that the judge has shown a clear lack of objectivity and tainted the legal proceeding.
Read it again, folks. The judge charged him! The process differs by state, but this was the charging proceeding. The judge is acting on some information (likely a confession to police).
All this is about is that the guy has been charged, and the body not yet recovered. No bias, no taint. Aren't we glad you're not lawyers?
All a judge is supposed to do in an instance is to determine if there is enough evidence available to make a prima facie case against the defendant. The judge should have said "You are accused of murder. There is enough evidence for you to stand trial". You don't taint the process by declaring the person "guilty". The fact is that he is "not guilty" until proven otherwise.
mapa: I think the overall consensus, based on comments, is that I think I can speak for all when I say aren't we all glad that YOU are not a judge. It is people like you that are really screwing up this country. The process may differ from state to state, but NO judge should be voicing his personal opinion before the "process" has even begun. The jury pool and the case itself is now TAINTED. The man will not get a fair trial, which every person in this country is entitled to.
This reminds me of the show "The Killing" where the cops keep arresting and charging the wrong guys just to make the family of the victim feel some "closure".
I am from Westborough MA and I am as frustrated as anyone regarding the lack of information on this case - but from what we have heard so far, this guy admitted to the crime based on evidence recovered. An arraignment is not the place where pleas are entered.
I am familiar with Portsmouth Harbor. The tides are very strong there and if Lizzi Marriott's body went into the water, it might have gone out to sea, which which would just compound the suffering of the family.
Impartial Judge...
NOT
Don't misunderstand my comment. If the guy is guilty of this hienous crime (and I consider any male violence against women as being heinous), then not only would I agree with the most severe penalty the law allows, but I would be happy to pull the switch myself. However........... the comment of the sitting judge in this case, publically declaring the man guilty leaves me shaking my head in bewilderment. There is (1) much more to this than has been reported, or (2) the judge has deliberatly tainted the jury pool and the court of public opinion by such a statement. I can't fathom a reason he would sit at the bench and make such a declaration. Even assuming the guy confessed, this is merely a preliminary hearing. There's something very wrong with this. I'm sure his defense attorney is salivating.
This article provides almost no information. Well written.
I guess the suspect admitted to killing her otherwise stating she died of either strangulation or suffocation seems a bit premature. I also am assuming the search of the lake and lake area is due to what he has told police. I think it would be better for the case if not so much was released - sounds rather unprofessional.
New Hampshire IS rather unprofessional. No body, yet a cause of death, can only mean one of three things: 1) he's confessed, with details, or 2) the state has blown their case, or 3) both.
For the sake of her family I hope they do find her.