Connecticut Woman Accused Of Violent Home Invasion . . . And Then Leaving A Copy Of Her Resume

23461238-mmmainThis is not going to look good on Lily B. Bodenlos’ resume. Bodenlos, 29, (left) and Melissa Mimitz, 37, are accused of an armed home invasion in Springfield, Massachusetts.  Bodenlos made police work a tad easier by leaving her resume at the scene.

The two Connecticut women allegedly posed as cable television workers when they knocked on the door of a woman who was then told that her daughter requested an upgrade in service.  The woman was ill and asked for the two to return.  Later, the two women came back and Bodenlos asked to use her bathroom.  When the women went into the bathroom, they curiously came out with Bodenlos wearing a mask with carrying a firearm, even though she was not wearing the mask up until this point.  They tied the homeowner to a kitchen chair and demanded to know where the safe was.  When the woman said she did not have a safe, Bodenlos reportedly pepper-sprayed her and Mimitz (who was wearing construction boots) kicked the woman in the midsection.

The victim was able to free herself and run to a neighbor.  When police arrived, the two robbers were gone; along with $8,000 in cash, a small amount of medical marijuana, and prescription pills.
That’s when the police found a folder with the resume of Bodenlos, including her work history, phone number and email address.  If the resume and eyewitness were not enough, earlier surveillance video showed the robbers arriving at the home in a white Honda Pilot that was tracked down in Connecticut. Inside was Mimitz’s ID along with $3,000 of the missing money and a black BB gun. Also in the car were two sweatshirts with Comcast logos. Mimitz is a former Comcast employee.

Three weeks after the home invasion, both women were arrested and hit with seven felony counts, including home invasion with a firearm, armed and masked robbery with a firearm, and kidnapping.

The use of a BB gun might not remove the armed robbery element. Here is the definition:

”Firearm”, a pistol, revolver or other weapon of any description, loaded or unloaded, from which a shot or bullet can be discharged and of which the length of the barrel or barrels is less than 16 inches or 18 inches in the case of a shotgun as originally manufactured; provided, however, that the term firearm shall not include any weapon that is: (i) constructed in a shape that does not resemble a handgun, short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun including, but not limited to, covert weapons that resemble key-chains, pens, cigarette-lighters or cigarette-packages; or (ii) not detectable as a weapon or potential weapon by x-ray machines commonly used at airports or walk- through metal detectors.


However, in 2015, the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that a BB gun was not a firearm for the purposes of an armed robbery charge.

The trail of evidence and weird choices made in the course of the crime leads one to suspect drug abuse elements in the culprits.  New England is experiencing an opiate crisis that has fueled crimes of this kind.

69 thoughts on “Connecticut Woman Accused Of Violent Home Invasion . . . And Then Leaving A Copy Of Her Resume”

  1. Were they high at the time? Why the heck would she carry her resume in a folder into a home invasion? It just boggles the mind. Not only should these two thugs be behind bars, they shouldn’t be driving, either. Doesn’t sound like they are sober enough. The drug epidemic is at critical mass. See the article below. I had no idea that overdose deaths were so rampant that medical examiners run the risk of losing their accreditation just trying to keep up with the caseloads. There are so many drug overdose deaths in America now that it lowers our statistical life expectancy.

    So sorry for what the victim went through. The pepper spray could have killed her if she had any respiratory difficulties.

    As for the deadly weapon, air guns no longer all use round BBs. It’s common for them to use sharp projectiles, such as for killing squirrels. I don’t know if that meets the definition of a firearm in terms of the law. It might depend on what ammo it was loaded with. As Paul mentioned, kids shoot each other with BB guns, and it hurts, but is not usually deadly. The new hunting air gun ammo is different.

    1. Generally a b.b. will sting, but not cause any harm. I do recall a news article, however, about a boy who died because he was hit in the eye with a b.b. and it passed through into his brain. Highly unusual, but it can happen.

      1. Generally a b.b. will sting, but not cause any harm.
        Generally a .45 cal. won’t hurt unless it hits someone. So pray the perp is a terrible aim if you want to see justice served.

  2. both women were arrested and hit with seven felony counts, including home invasion with a firearm, armed and masked robbery with a firearm, and kidnapping.

    Using the BB gun as a weapon served its purpose. The only thing that should matter is that it was used to threaten the victim in the process of committing the crime. Otherwise, the onus for the appropriate amount of fear is being put on the victim as they have to recognize the type of weapon used, determine whether it’s truly loaded and measure the mindset of the criminal’s intent to use it.

  3. I would just love to know. . .for which job or jobs was this meth-head applying? Probably counter work, at either the DMV or the post office.

    On a more serious note, missing is the age of the woman, who was the victim in this story. It was, unfortunately, never revealed, and her age, I believe, is relevant. Only the ages of the two skanks, who proceeded to pepper-spray and kick the victim, while wearing, of all things, construction boots. Were there external and internal injuries resulting from such an attack? While an attack, such as this, would traumatize anyone, the elderly are even more susceptible to such trauma, not to mention, the potential long-term consequences and complications which could result from being kicked in the midsection by these two animals. Some damage is not always readily apparent and will present itself in various ways at a later date. So, did these hillbilly losers shorten this woman’s life with this attack? Cause her to require psychiatric help to cope with this incident? Until and unless these questions, among others, are answered, it is impossible to assert what a possible punishment should be for these two miscreants. Funny how we react, for the most part, with so much zeal and utter disgust, when we witness a tape of a woman, in an elevator, mercilessly kicking her defenseless puppy. This woman was restrained, in her own home, and kicked by someone wearing construction boots. Interestingly, I don’t sense the same degree of outrage over this incident, where there are calls to hang ’em high. Interesting how abuse of animals often elicits more compassion and rage than when the victim is human.

    1. bam bam – I am sympathetic to the woman who was beaten in her own home, however, she did let them in without checking on them. The weight factor between the victim and the robbers was probably about the same. The puppy, however, is a victim in my view. Now a few people have held they don’t see enough to show actual abuse, however, that is not my take on the video. She abused the puppy enough that the puppy did not want to be with her either in or out of the elevator. In this case, the kicker outweighed the kickee about 100-1. The puppy was way out of her weight class as we would say in boxing.

      1. however, she did let them in without checking on them. The weight factor between the victim and the robbers was probably about the same.

        However nothing! These aren’t some fictional vampires one ignorantly invited in. Oops, sorry maam but it’s partially your fault for letting them in. Let that be your lesson. Weight factor means squat when a weapon is pointed at you. Damn Paul, I get you are a contrarian but sometimes it just comes off as stupid.

        1. Olly – I was talking about the kicking of the two victims, evidently, I was not clear enough.

          1. Oh, you were clear alright. You were comparing criminal activity against a human and a dog. It was a stupid comparison. Own it.

            1. Olly – I was comparing it in special circumstances and I would again. I am happy to own it. I am not going to walk away from the truth regardless of how uncomfortable it may make some people feel. You see me as a contrarian, I see myself as a teller of truths others often do not see.

              1. You see me as a contrarian, I see myself as a teller of truths others often do not see.

                You have admitted as much in prior discussions. One of your most common statements is their country, their laws. While a truth, it often avoids the obvious egregious infringement of rights. As human beings, we must have the moral integrity to disavow this abuse wherever it exists, instead of simply dismissing these violations as not our problem. Otherwise, we become a part of the morally relevant crowd that makes such crimes against our fellow human beings an acceptable outcome if one is considered somehow deserving of their misfortune, due to a misplaced trust in the sinful nature of others. In other words, the law and public sentiment should be in favor of the most ignorant of victims, not the most enlightened, of those willing to abuse the gaps in the law.

                1. You have admitted as much in prior discussions. One of your most common statements is their country, their laws. While a truth, it often avoids the obvious egregious infringement of rights. As human beings, we must have the moral integrity to disavow this abuse wherever it exists, instead of simply dismissing these violations as not our problem.

                  The trouble is that Turley’s posts take the culture of the greater Washington professional-managerial class as a given. That tends to blunt one’s capacity to appreciate some other way of life and diminish one’s inclination to suspend judgment when prudent. One of his posts was almost comical: a complaint that an ad for above ground pools had been modified for marketing in Saudi Arabia. That degree of prescriptiveness cannot make sense of or give due deference to the liberty of domestic dissidents of a sort which were quite common 60 years ago – much less any foreign country. And, in fact, the legal profession is abusive of those dissidents by default. See nonsense decisions like Roe v. Wade or Obergefell.

                  Keep in mind that the mode among the legal profession, academe, and the media has been to go to bat for the liberty of various exotics contra community standards. Communists, pornographers, and sexual deviants have all had their time in the sun. Ordinary people going about their business in adult pursuits – e.g. merchants and landlords – get no consideration. Neither do dissidents despised in and among the class of people who manipulate words and images for a living. (Evangelicals and old school Catholics, to name two).

                2. Olly – I am an isolationist. I see no reason to interfere in the laws of another country unless they affect our citizens directly. Hence, their country, their laws. We don’t allow Saudi Arabia to interfere in the laws of the US, what right do we have to interfere in theirs. None.

                  1. I see no reason to interfere in the laws of another country unless they affect our citizens directly.

                    Well aren’t you the good Samaritan. Isolationist, as you’re using it is the absence of reason. Not my job, not my country, not my problem. Calling out abuse whether it’s in the house next door or a country on the other side of the planet is not interference, it’s having a conscience. It’s having right reason.

                    So no, opining about an armed robbery next door or a stoning in Saudi Arabia is not violating your Isolationism. Unless of course you don’t have a conscience or right reason; which I don’t believe is the case with you.

                    1. Olly – if the Human Rights Commission of the UN wishes to get involved, I think they are the correct institution. I think I did support suspending aid for the country, but it has been many comments back and I cannot be sure. I do believe we are responsible for helping both Canada and Mexico if they need it.

        2. The b.b. gun wasn’t used to gain entry into the home. The two women knocked on the door, wearing Comcast sweatshirts. They claimed the victim’s daughter (presumably an adult) had requested an upgrade in service. The victim said she wasn’t feeling well and asked them to come back later. Which they did; this time requesting to use the bathroom. The victim voluntarily let them in her house. They emerged from the bathroom, with Bodenlos wearing a mask and displaying the gun for the first time. The other perp, Mimitz, a former Comcast employee, kicked the victim. The article doesn’t indicate whether the “construction boots” were real, ANSI certified steel or composite toe safety boots, or just cheap women’s knockoffs styled to look like construction boots but no more harmful than any other type of women’s boots or shoes. In any event, the fact that the victim allowed these criminals into her home is evidence of gullibility but in no way lessens their crime. People are often more sympathetic to children or animals because they are deemed more innocent. Even though children and animals can provoke anger, the adult is expected to control himself and react appropriately. With an adult victim, people may wonder why the person didn’t show more common sense, by not letting a stranger into his/her home, or avoiding a sketchy neighborhood. But conflating the naïveté, or even stupidity or risky behavior of the victim with the criminality of the perp is misplaced, although understandable.

      2. Paul, sadly and unfortunately, you prove my point. You don’t see the woman–the living, breathing, human being–as being as much of a victim as the animal. . .a puppy. A bizarre and utterly stange take on things. Your rationale? Because the woman, to her great misfortune, had the audacity to be conned, by two apparent drug addicts, into allowing them access to her home? Outrageous. Simply outrageous. Yes, this woman–and we don’t even know if she was elderly or in some other manner, compromised, either physically or mentally–allowed two individuals into her home based upon a ruse. . .and for that you pity the assault on the puppy to a greater extent than that which this woman suffered? Very sad, Paul. Really. Very sad. Remember, Paul, that medical marijuana in your cabinet is only supposed to be used for your aches and pains and not smoked, continuously, all day long. Your brain, along with your conscience, is turning to mush.

        1. bam bam – the original Turley article does not mention an age for the victim. Where you got it from is beyond me. Is your reference to medical marijuana a jibe that I am smoking it? That is an outright lie. Although I have supported medical marijuana, I do not use it myself. I do not use any illegal drugs. I just had my annual physical which now requires a mental test and I passed that with flying colors. So, for my age, I am in great mental health.

          I am sorry to play blame the victim, however, she did let them in without checking their bona fides. That is something they taught us to do in Blockwatch. She should have called either her daughter to check on their story or the company, both would have been glad to help.

          Regardless of her size, she probably is not less than 2-1 to the attacker in weight ratio. So the damage to her will be minimal since she was in a chair which makes the angle of attack awkward. If they had her on the floor and had steel-tipped boots, they could have done a lot of damage. Both could have worked her over at the same time.

          1. I’d check the results on that mental exam, once again. From the things that you are claiming, including blaming the victim for the mistake of allowing in individuals she thought were there for a valid reason, to some nonsense about the weight of the human victim, as opposed to the weight of the puppy who was victimized, you sure don’t seem to be firing on all cylinders. Perhaps the lab results were switched?

            1. bam bam – so you have injuries from someone whose weight difference is somewhere between 1-1 and 2-1 and the other 100-1. Who do you think is going to get hurt worse?

              1. Paul, while I strongly suspect that nothing, at this point, is going to permeate your dogged determination to claim your assertions as normal and logical, against my better judgment, I will attempt to explain to you why you are so off base. While I love animals and would vote to fully prosecute anyone found abusing them, there is a difference, in terms of gravity and seriousness, when a dog, as opposed to a human being, is kicked and attacked. You may not view it as so, but them’s the rules. A woman, restrained in her own home, without the ability to resist the full blown force that another human being’s kicks could inflict, is not something that you, Paul, despite that mental exam and its promising results, can measure. Sure, a human kicking a dog has the dog outmatched in size and weight, but you are clueless as to various facts in this particular case, involving this specific woman. What don’t you know? Here is a list of some, and not all, of the potential factors involved: what was the age of the woman who was attacked? what was her physical condition prior to and after the attack? what was her mental condition prior to and after the time of the attack? how serious were her injuries, both physical and psychological, after this occurrence? are there any long-term issues that she will face as a result of this attack?

                So, you see, Paul, this is about more than just the size of a human as compared to a puppy. Individuals have died from being kicked or stomped to death, and the perp, in this case, used industrial boots. And, yes, this is a HUMAN BEING, as opposed to, a PUPPY. Heartless? No. Human lives are valued more than those in the animal world, regardless of whether you agree with that or not. Trying to assess blame by claiming that your block watch parties instruct you not to open doors for strangers is nothing but a bunch of huey. This woman assumes no blame for trusting individuals who claimed that they were there on business.

                1. bam bam – I don’t agree although I know how you got to your point. I own an abused rescue animal that took me a year of hand feeding to get it to come to me on its own. Now I cannot get it to leave me alone. 😉 I have known abused women, beaten by husbands and boyfriends that recovered fairly rapidly. They still respond to other people, including males. Abused animals have psychological damage, too. Mine only lost a hip which was replaced with sinew. Plus, she was feral for a while. So, yes, I take the beating of animals personally because I have skin in the game.

                  1. Oh, that poor dog. I’m glad she has a safe home with you where she is loved.

    2. Bam Bam – I think kicking a puppy elicits a similar amount of rage as kicking a toddler, because of the vast difference in power and strength. Anyone hurting the elderly tends to bring out public outrage, too, as well as a man punching a woman. In terms of numbers, female on female violent crime would elicit lower national rage.

      But whether she was elderly or not, sick or not, getting tied up and kicked in the stomach with construction boots is egregious and horrifying. It’s true we know nothing about her, not her age or her illness. She could have cancer or the flu or morning sickness.

      I’m glad you are drawing attention to the victim. She deserves sympathy and support.

      1. I forgot to mention that seeing a video of violence against anyone or any animal, always elicits a more visceral reaction than reading about it. Please don’t think that the world doesn’t care when people are tied up, frightened, and kicked in the stomach in their own homes.

  4. Another item for the “Least Competent Criminals” section of “News of the Weird” in The Funny Times.

    New England is not experiencing any ‘crisis’ re the use of street drugs any more than it’s experiencing a ‘crisis’ re burglary. Street crime is a social condition, not a crisis. Some jurisdictions have a more difficult population than others and some contain the trouble they might have much better than others.

    1. I don’t agree with that, SOT. I posted an article about the exponential increase in drug overdose deaths in New England, although I think this is a nationwide epidemic. I found it surprising in its scale, so you might, too. It’s sad. Whether its brought on by socioeconomic factors or not, it’s a crisis when that many people succumb.

      1. It’s not an epidemic. It’s not an infectious ailment.

        Overdose deaths account for about 1.6% of all deaths in this country. Street drugs have cycles. There was a huge increase in the prevalence of heroin use between 1960 and 1970, followed by a gradual decline. It’s a reasonable wager that much of the current trouble is derived from physicians prescribing more readily.

        The CDC is run by ideologues who take a great interest in behavioral issues in lieu of taking much interest in real diseases.

        1. I see what you’re saying. Epidemic is not used in this case in reference to a communicable disease. Drug addiction is a self inflicted problem.

          It’s scary to see so many people succumbing to drug addiction that they are overwhelming medical examiners. I don’t know what to do about it.

    1. Liberty Second – I know people who keep a lot more than $8000 in cash in the house, however, it is probably above the norm.

  5. Bodenlos should update her resume work history: 30 years making license plates in prison

  6. Off topic but I thought I would share a delicious soup recipe I made tonight. It’s coming to the end season and time to freeze soups for the winter.

    All organic used and I do not add salt to my meals. You might elect differently.

    1. Set oven to 375 degrees.
    2. Cut one delicate squash in half lengthwise, scrape out seeds and strands
    3. Rinse squash to add moisture then place cut side down on tray in oven. Cook 40 minutes.
    4. In a large pot, place inside 1/2 chopped large onion with olive oil and cook to translucent
    5. while onions cook, place into pot 2-3 minced cloves garlic, a 2″ peeled and shredded ginger root.
    6. Grate cinnamon sticks over mixture to preference
    7. When completed cooking, stir in squash. Discard Skins.
    8. Add four cups water and bring to boil
    9. While this is occurring, Dice 1 1/4 lbs carrots. Add to pot when water boils
    10. Reduce heat and simmer for twenty minutes or until carrots are fully cooked.
    11. Remove from heat and allow to cool slightly. Scoop soup into a blender to puree.
    12. Serve hot. Add extra boiling water if dilution is preferred. Note this is a thick soup and tastes better that way.


    1. That is the same recipe I made last week, already in the freezer (glass, never plastic), though for the life of me I cannot remember its origin. The only difference, I always use salt.

    2. That sounds delicious, Darren.

      What kind of knife do you use to halve winter squash? I need a better weapon for my favorite squash, the butternut.

      My deba is sharp and strong enough to cut up a whole chicken, but the spine is too thick to halve a squash without cracking it. (I know you like to buy fish in bulk. Check out this supplier from the Island of Tanegashima My chef knife isn’t up to the task. I’ve asked several Japanese knife suppliers, and they were horrified at the thought of using a good knife on any hard vegetable. The edge is too fine. They all said use a knife you don’t really care about. Which is great, but I’d really like to half a butternut without worrying it will roll and present my fingers. Cooking it first does not always work with the recipe.

      I’m seriously considering a battle axe. What do you use?

      1. I use an old strong breadknife. It’s the serrating on the blade that does the work. I mostly saw the squash with a little more downward force than that used with bread.

        1. Thanks, Darren. I will try the breadknife. If that doesn’t work I’ll probably go with a Sawzall!

    3. Could we cook up some soup and throw the scalding liquid on the perps? It would probably wake them from their drug-induced haze and sober them up, allowing them to appreciate the gravity of their actions. Other than that, no clue as to why a soup recipe is inserted in the comments regarding an article about a woman who was assaulted and robbed. Must say, however, I suddenly have a craving for some hot soup.

      1. bam bam – it is going to be in the high 90s today here. Too hot for soup. Soup should be for nice cold or nippy days to warm your innards. 🙂

  7. I don’t hold with pepper spraying her or kicking her in the stomach, but a BB gun is not armed robbery. When I was a kid we used to shot each other with BB guns. Under this law, we would all be up for attempted murder. We could have put an eye out. 🙂

    1. BB gun can refer to guns with very different capabilities. Some of them fire projectiles that approximate the ballistics of a 22 rifle. I think I would want to know exactly the capabilities of the weapon they used before I made a decision regarding the charges.

      1. I believe you are thinking of “pellet guns.” BB guns are specifically those which fire BBs, which are metal shot like that found in shotgun shells.

      2. Crimes are typically overcharged to give the D.A. bargaining power when “reducing” the charges to what they actually should have been in the first place. Assault with a “deadly” weapon should require that the weapon actually be deadly. And home “invasion” shouldn’t include a situation where someone is invited into the home. These charges will be dropped, and the perps will plead out to assault, battery and robbery.

        1. “And home “invasion” shouldn’t include a situation where someone is invited into the home. ”

          I don’t think I can agree with that. It seems to me that how the perps gained entry is irrelevant to the issue of home invasion. If anything it would seem the charges should be enhanced if the perps use trickery or subterfuge to gain entry.

          In this particular case, it seems clear the victim did not invite the perps in to beat her and take her money. The perps did not state their purpose for gaining entry. They used deception to gain entry for an unlawful purpose – the penalty should be even greater.

          1. bfm – the one asked to use the bathroom and was allowed in to use it. After using it she came out with a mask on. Now, there is no reason to believe that she really didn’t need to use the head. In that case, no fraud or deception was used for entering the 2nd time.

            1. So you believe that a woman who twice approached the victim and carried paraphernalia for the crime into the bathroom just happened to need to use that particular bathroom???


              It seems to me the evidence suggest, if not proves, the perp requested to use the bathroom with the intention of committing the unlawful act. Even if the perp actually used the bathroom, the act of carrying the mask into to home proves the home invasion was planed prior to entering the home.

              The perp clearly did not communicate her real purpose for entering the home.

              1. Then I think trespass is a more appropriate charge than home invasion. But I am not a criminal law specialist and haven’t read the elements of the home invasion statute; I’m simply thinking in terms of the common perception that is is a violent “invasion” into a home, often by kicking in the door.

                1. Typically in criminal law an assault/battery converts a trespass into a burglary/home invasion.

                  In jurisdictions where the definition Home Invasion is used, it is enacted to differentiate a standard burglary, such as a warehouse or business, from crimes committed against homeowners or homes. All states that I am familiar with consider a burglary of a home to be a greater violation than one of a business. So, when a Home Invasion crime is prosecuted it will bring higher penalties against the accused and greater protection of the victims than would be the case with a burglary charge.

                2. “I’m simply thinking in terms of the common perception that is is a violent “invasion” into a home, often by kicking in the door.”

                  I would agree that in common perception, a home invasion requires violence. But, it seems to me that the violence we are most concerned with is the violence against the occupants of the home, not violence against the structure of the building.

                  Are we really any less concerned if the perps find a door unlocked and casually walk into the home before they start beating the occupants. I don’t think so.

                  Finally, our discussion raises the question could it be a home invasion by intimidation, without violence. I think so. Suppose the perps walk through an unlocked door and demand money or other items. There is no physical contact but the perps make it clear they are armed and will do anything to force cooperation.

                  Isn’t the essence of home invasion the taking control of the occupants to force them to accede to the perps demands?

    2. It looks like a gun, fires like a gun, and can put your eye out. You could then bleed to death. Assault with a deadly weapon.

      1. Liberty Second – in my day, it was a bit smaller than a regular pistol or rifle and was a boy’s first entry into semi-manhood. Manhood came when you got your first .22, usually a bolt action, hand fed. Then you went with the men to the shooting range to sight it in.

    1. You might improve the quality of topical commentary and civic life by taking a vow of silence.

  8. Looks like with her drug use, Ms. Bodenlos is spiraling down a bottomless pit

  9. Didn’t have wait till the last paragraph to know drugs were involved. It was going to be that or really bad genetics. Or lack of filming permit for a new TV pilot.

  10. My friend’s son committed a violent home invasion 20 years ago. He had served 2 years in prison before that on relatively minor drug charges, but his prior record and the fact that he and his accomplices tied up and threatened their victims led the judge to give him consecutive sentences. Oh, there was a gun involved too.

    He’s still in prison.

    Let’s see what kind of time these ladies get. Bet they don’t serve 3 years.

    1. Twenty years is excessive for robbery and burglary unless there was an attempted murder, a kidnapping, or a maiming assault incorporated in it. In general, the courts are not severe with defendants, but you do have these anomalies in the tail of the bell curve. Judges should be allowed very little discretion over much of anything.

Comments are closed.