The NYPD cop accused of torturing and killing his autistic 8-year-old son threw a whiny tantrum in court Monday when his new lawyer walked off the case.
Murder suspect Michael Valva, a 15-year police force veteran, was left without a barrister when Suffolk County Supreme Court Judge William Condon agreed to take defense attorney Robert Del Col off the case over a potential conflict of interest.
Del Col said he inadvertently gave Valva’s ex legal advice last year in the couple’s custody case, enough for the judge to determine that Del Col can’t now represent the disgraced cop.
“I am going to give you a week to retain counsel,” the judge told Valva. “Trying to represent yourself in a case of this complexity would be a fool’s errand.”
“I can’t represent myself,” Valva whined back. “I don’t know how to represent myself.”
“Is it a problem of having the funds or access to the funds?” the judge asked.
“Both,” the cop said. “I don’t have funds and I don’t have access.”
Valva, 40, is charged with murder in the death of his son Thomas, who died from extreme hypothermia after the cop allegedly locked the boy in his garage on a frigid Jan. 17 night.
The couple is also charged in Suffolk Family Court with abusing their shared six children — including Valva’s two remaining children with his ex-wife, Justyna Zubko-Valva, who now has custody of both.
Valva pulled a similar poverty plea in that case on Feb. 13, when he told Family Court Judge Frank Tantone, “I don’t have access to funds or anything.”
In the criminal case, Del Col was appointed to represent Valva at his Feb. 6 arraignment.
But Del Col said it wasn’t until Thursday, when he ran into Zubko-Valva, when he realized she was both his new client’s ex-wife and the woman he spoke to in matrimonial court last April.
“I checked around and was informed it could be a problem for Mr. Valva, for me, and for the prosecution if this case went to trial,” Del Col said in court Monday. “And if I was put in the position of cross-examining someone who I had a conversation with, that could be considered privileged.”
The judge agreed, but Zubko-Valva did not — saying she doesn’t remember meeting the lawyer.
“If he’s got the evidence to prove, let’s see the video images from those times when he allegedly spoke with me, because I don’t remember those times,” she said outside the courtroom.
Valva is due back in court March 5.