Alaska

[JimHow]

The jury has gone home without a verdict, they'll come back tomorrow morning for a third day of deliberation.
We've been here 40 days. We like Fairbanks a lot, but we're anxious to get home.

[Nicklasss]

40 days in hotel and restaurant is long. We're comfortable at home, with the regular food and our cellar...

We have to plan something in Maine when you can. I feel like ready for a road trip after all this covid stuff.

[JimHow]

I hope to be home Thursday, Nicola.

[DavidG]

Talk about cooling your heels…
I keep checking the news every morning and evening.
Does the length of time tell you anything other than they’re not all in agreement?

[JimHow]

I’ve done this long enough David to know you can’t read anything into this. They could be 11-1 for conviction, or 11-1 for acquittal, or 6-6, or just still going through the evidence. I’ve done over 150 jury trials over the years and I’ve had only 3 hung juries. My last one was last May, they were 6-6 in an aggravated trafficking case. If they start to get deadlocked they’ll likely write a note to that effect to the judge, who will instruct them to keep deliberating. A hung jury would be a victory for us. But the likelihood is that we will get a verdict one way or another. It has been clear to us from the beginning that we have a thoughtful jury, they have taken a lot of notes, etc. It’s stressful but as I’ve told my team throughout the trial, we can only control what we can control. I feel we left it all on the field. The judge was very fair. It was an amazing trial and overall experience, I look forward to recounting my tales over some fine northern Medocs in the near future. We’ll be on the first available flight home after the verdict, but we’ll be here at least one more night.

[DavidG]

All you can ask for is a fair judge and a thoughtful jury willing to listen. From my perspective the prosecution did seem desperate, just as you characterized them.

I didn’t see the whole trial but watched a fair amount. I’m convinced he had consensual sex with her at some point and didn’t want his girlfriend to know. I’m 50/50 at best on whether he killed her. Not even that much - seems more likely he didn’t. Waaay too many unknowns to vote guilty.

Hope you get an acquittal today. Forty days is a long time to be living in a hotel. Never mind the biblical angle.

[JimHow]

Yeah it’s a classic reasonable doubt case, all bullshit aside.
If they apply the law and the reasonable doubt standard, he’ll be acquitted. If they base it on emotion or some sort of rough justice, he could be convicted. I think we’ll know the answer pretty soon today.

[JoelD]

I didn't get to watch a lot of the trial but from the information I have, I basically agree with David's assessment. Although maybe closer to 60-40 that he didn't kill her. But a lot of that is on my gut instinct about how the pieces add up. Maybe I'm biased. Either way, it seems like a clear cut case of reasonable doubt here and the prosecution is grasping.

Good work Jim. You've earned that Yquem either way. I hope you get to go home soon and get back to your regular life.

Here's a decent summation of the defense's witnesses if anyone would like to read:

https://www.webcenterfairbanks.com/2022 ... ven-downs/

[JimHow]

That’s a good summary of our defense, Joel, I hadn’t seen that. I’m utterly exhausted. I’ll hold my comments about the prosecution team, It has been, um, an adventure. I have stories to tell about this case, truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.

[JoelD]

It would be my pleasure to open a 2021 BWE wine of the year for us and hear these stories whenever you come down to collect your bottles. Hopefully it will have a happy ending.

[Jay Winton]

That’s a good summary of our defense, Joel, I hadn’t seen that. I’m utterly exhausted. I’ll hold my comments about the prosecution team, It has been, um, an adventure. I have stories to tell about this case, truth is sometimes stranger than fiction.

Sounds like a book to me

[jal]

"Important to get the facts right in a murder investigation,” Howaneic (sic) rebutted.

Sounds like Jim should be the one playing Jack Reacher

[JimHow]

Jury sent home without a verdict, coming back tomorrow for fourth day of deliberations. This is aging me. I really, really need to retire.

[JoelD]

Anyone know where we can get some sort of announcement or notification when the Jury comes back so we can turn on the video? Assuming that's how it works.

[marcs]

Is there any recording of or way to see the closing arguments? Still regretting I missed those...

[JimHow]

Thanks for your support, guys, the jury came back with guilty verdicts after about 20 hours of deliberations over four days. It was a very emotional scene in the courtroom, with a number of jurors in tears. We feel we fought as hard as we could. Now we’re off to the airport and heading home. I’ll talk to you all soon!

[JoelD]

Very sorry to hear, Jim. I know you guys did everything that you could against a stacked deck. Safe travels home.

[jal]

Darn.

[AKR]

Safe travels. Thanks for sharing parts of this interesting tale.

Lavelle's will be saddened by the departure of their patron!

[DavidG]

Nuts. Really sorry to hear this.

I imagine that the emotional aspects of the case and the fact that he initially lied to the police about knowing her at all is what led the jury to a guilty verdict.

Take home message for anyone unfortunate enough to be interviewed by the police about a crime: don’t say anything without your lawyer present.

[Dionysus]

Incredibly disappointing Jim, so sorry to hear.
Not for the lack of trying...watched a good bit of the trail and, while not exactly shocked, I am surprised.

Keep the head up, you couldn't have done any more.

[smoore4]

I just read the local paper write-up.

https://www.sunjournal.com/2022/02/10/a ... n-in-1993/

40(!) witnesses. You must be wiped Jim. I hope you get some rest. I suggest a good glass of red.

Steve

[PghMike]

Very unfortunate to see. I find it hard to understand from what I've seen and read that I personally would've gotten to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.....

[JimHow]

Thanks for the interest in the trial gang, it was certainly a roller coaster. Now that the trial is over (subject to state and likely federal appeals), I can talk more about what happened at trial on the public record. First, just got back home in Maine, gonna sleep for a bit.

[stefan]

>>
I find it hard to understand from what I've seen and read that I personally would've gotten to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.....
>>
My reaction, too, Mike.

[Nicklasss]

Sorry to read that Jim, especially for that poor man. I'm sure you and your team did everything you can in that case. And even with the verdict, i guess you have to be proud of you guys, not an easy task. But from beginning, you knew it would be a very tough case...

Take some rest, open a good bottle tomorrow, watch the Superbowl Sunday, and look for your next murder case on Monday...

[s*d*r]

Do you anticipate any of the jurors will eventually explain the rationale for their vote?

[JimHow]

Good question, Stuart. I've done over 150 jury trials over the past 36 years and, with one exception, I've never spoken to a juror. A few years ago a woman approached me at a funeral, she had been on a jury in which I had gotten an acquittal for a guy on 7 rape and other serious sex felonies, and it was interesting to hear her talk about all the things she thought the prosecutors had done wrong, etc.

In my last two trials now, both murder cases, we have had lawyers for the media intervene to get more access to information and, in the end, access to the jurors. I've basically taken no position, and the judge has allowed pretty much free access. The media contacted all of the jurors in my Walmart shooting murder trial here in Maine, and none of them would comment. The media lawyer in this case has filed a motion for access to the jurors in the Alaska case, it'll be interesting to see if any of them comment on their verdicts.

It was pretty clear to us that there was a division after about 6 hours of deliberations, based on the notes that were coming back. They came back with a verdict after 20 hours of deliberations. It looked like about 5-6 of the jurors grabbed tissues, some were outright sobbing as the verdict was read. It was a very emotional trial. I had two jurors crying in my Walmart case, including the forewoman. in this case it was very difficult because I was so far away from most of them, we were all wearing masks, but I could clearly see at least three of them crying out in the room as I was doing my closing. It was the toughest closing of my career.

We ended up losing juror #1, the large lone African American on the jury. He was clearly with us from the beginning. He was nodding very expressively during my closing, practically giving me thumbs up. We knew he was our strongest juror from the very beginning of jury selection. He ended up being one of the three alternates excused by lottery after closings, and did not participate in the verdicts.

I've got a lot more thoughts on the trial, including possible appeal issues, after I get some energy back.

[DavidG]

Would love to see you with a nice N. Medoc in hand riffing on all the ins and outs of the case.

If/when you feel up to it, maybe we can do a zoom.

[JimHow]

I can’t wait David!
There is so much about this case….
Much of it is truly truth stranger than fiction.

[DavidG]

Next weekend?

[JimHow]

Possibly! I’ll know more about my schedule when I get back to the office tomorrow.

[JimHow]

I’ll be in the NYC area and I could possibly get down your way for a dinner with you guys? I hear there’s a vino man in the area.

[DavidG]

Would love to. Keep us posted. You’re welcome to stay with us.

[JimHow]

I’ll get back to you by tomorrow.

[Claudius2]

Jim
Are they any reasonable grounds for an appeal?
Your comments so far gave me the idea that an acquittal would be possible if not probable.

[marcs]

Would be great if you could get down to DC! I for one would roll out some great wines for you.

[JimHow]

I think we had a very uphill battle, Claudius, nobody has ever won one of these genetic genealogy cases. This case has haunted the State of Alaska for nearly 30 years, my biggest fears were realized, i.e., that the jury would base its verdicts on emotion rather than an application of the reasonable doubt standard. That's not a shot at the jury, they were very thoughtful, and were clearly conflicted over 20 hours and four days of deliberations. These are just tough cases. Having said that, I thought we had a shot but in the end I think it was just too much emotion for the jury to overcome. It was an extremely emotional case, I would not be surprised if some jurors are experiencing mental health issues following this trial. There are several interesting issues on appeal. The judge denied our motion to suppress my client's statements. We think this will be one of our strongest arguments, as he requested a lawyer and they nonetheless kept questioning him. We think that's a pretty clear Miranda violation. Also, the judge denied our motion to exclude the H&R.22 pistol that had been seized from our client's house, we felt we established it was clearly not the gun that was used in the murder and that therefore its consideration by the jury was unfairly prejudicial. The most interesting issue on appeal deals with the State of Alaska's warrantless search of millions of bits of DNA data in these ancestry.com-like data bases, that's an issue that a lot of legal experts are watching, this case could go all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. This SCOTUS court has actually been quite friendly to defendants in privacy rights issues, most recently in cases involving cell phone searches and blood sample draws in DUI cases. They have not yet considered these DNA searches as it's a relatively new law enforcement investigative tool since the capture of the Golden State Killer about five years ago.

I'll get down there Marcus!

[Claudius2]

Jim
I understand your point about the emotions and clearly it has been difficult for you and others. It seems crazy that your client got convicted 30 yrs after the event.

I imagine that jurors may have been overwhelmed by it all and I wonder if that became a factor in the verdict. After the deliberations went on for four days or so, I started to expect a hung jury but alas they came up with guilty.

Anyway I’ve found your experiences with the case interesting and I think everyone here was silently hope for an acquittal.

Cheers
Mark

[JimHow]

Thanks Mark, it has been fun to be able to post some of the experience here.
Of course there's a lot I haven't been able to talk about, only stuff that is in the public record.
Yeah, I was beginning to think there might be a hung jury as well, but in the end they almost always come to verdicts, hung juries are quite rare. I've had 3 hung juries in over 150 jury trials over 36 years.
Now a 3-5 year appeal process will commence.
In all honesty, it should have been an acquittal.
It was a classic case of reasonable doubt.
But the jury decides these things, not me, that's the way the system works.
It's a harsh process. The acquittal rate in jury trials in this country is about 10-15%.
My acquittal rate in 150+ trials is 85%. But it's a zero sum game.
When you lose, your 85% acquittal rate doesn't do much good for your client who is going to prison for 99 years.
We really had nothing to lose by going to trial here, though, the best plea offer the prosecution made to me was an "open plea" to murder, meaning my 47 year old client would have almost certainly gotten something between 50-99 years.
I've got 105 felony cases pending, including one more murder case.
This should take me to Medicare age in about 20 months, then I hope to hang up the cleats for good.