Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 32

Thread: Sir Mario Owens - Colorado

  1. #11
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    Arapahoe judge makes transcripts public in death penalty case

    By Carlos Illescas
    The Denver Post

    CENTENNIAL — A judge on Thursday ordered the unsealing of files in the case of Sir Mario Owens, who sits on death row for killing a witness and his fiancée.

    Arapahoe County District Court Judge Gerald Rafferty ruled in favor of a consortium of media outlets, including The Denver Post, and Owens' post-conviction attorneys, as well as the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition. Rafferty agreed to make public the courtroom transcripts and register of actions, or court filings, in the case.

    The documents, as well as other evidence, have been under seal for more than six years.

    "The public's right to know what transpires in its courtrooms was vindicated today," said attorney Ashley Kissinger, who represented the media organizations.

    Prosecutors argued that witness information should be redacted from whatever is released, but the judge agreed only to shield locations of protected witnesses.

    "We're disappointed and concerned for the ongoing safety of the witnesses," prosecutor Ann Tomsic said after the ruling.

    Owens was sentenced to death in 2008 for killing Javad Marshall-Fields and his fiancée, Vivian Wolfe. Marshall-Fields and Wolfe were gunned down on an Aurora street in June 2005 on the eve of another murder trial involving Owens and his friend Robert Ray. Marshall-Fields was to testify against Ray.

    Ray, who was found guilty of masterminding the couple's deaths, is also on death row. Owens and Ray are appealing their death sentences.

    The district attorney's office had argued that releasing the information could lead to retaliation against witnesses in the case. However, Rafferty didn't agree.

    "Is there a reasonable probability that retaliation will occur? I cannot get there based on the evidence that is in front me," Rafferty said. "The public's right to this is very, very strong."

    It will take several weeks for the register of actions to be released, and maybe longer for the transcripts. Locations of protected witnesses, which have yet to be determined, need to be redacted first. Then any transcripts that are requested will have to be compiled by one of the court reporters who worked on the court proceedings and turned back over to the court.

    New court filings going forward will also be public, but locations of protected witnesses will be blacked out.

    http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25...#ixzz2vG5IUFt4

  2. #12
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    Witness intimidation murder: It could be years before execution date is set for Sir Mario Owens

    One of Colorado's only death penalty cases may continue for months or even years before an execution date could be set.

    Sir Mario Owens was convicted in 2008 of double murder, to keep a witness from testifying against him, prosecutors said.

    Javad Marshall Fields was gunned down in Aurora back in June of 2005 along with his fiancée Vivian Wolfe.

    Fields was going to testify in another murder.

    Even now, nine years later, witnesses protection remains a concern.

    Prosecutors have said they have concerns about the ongoing safety of witnesses.

    The judge ruled in March the addresses of those witnesses must be blocked out, but the rest of the files should be released.

    However, the files were still sealed going into the Thursday morning hearing.

    In court Thursday, the judge considered whether the defense adequately represented Owens and whether prosecutors turned over all relevant evidence in the case.

    This is the beginning of a long series of hearings that may continue for months or even years, ‎Assistant District Attorney Mark Hurlbert told 7NEWS Reporter Tyler Lopez.

    http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...-after-9-years

  3. #13
    Senior Member CnCP Legend CharlesMartel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    FRANCE
    Posts
    3,073
    Death penalty conviction for Sir Mario Owens now in limbo

    AURORA, Colo. - Sir Mario Owens’ fate on death row could be changing.

    Owens was convicted in 2008 of double murder to keep a witness from testifying against him, prosecutors said. Javad Marshall Fields was gunned down in Aurora back in June of 2005 along with his fiancée Vivian Wolfe. Fields was going to testify in another murder.

    Now a judge could throw out the conviction, the death sentence or both because of new information gathered after the case —and a decision could come at any time. This move is the latest of several legal challenges.

    Owens’ attorneys said their client's case was far from fair. They are accusing prosecutors of giving the key witness a car after the trial -- yet not telling the defense team of the promise.

    Another informant is accused of receiving money for information -- an exchange that was never disclosed to the defense team -- and even a $500 dollar Christmas gift.

    "There were un-level playing fields and this is why it's such a big deal," said legal analyst David Beller. Beller said the public could be forced to spend millions of dollars on a new trial if that is what the judge decides.

    "It would be a message to the Colorado public that perhaps our court process is, in fact, unfair in certain circumstances," he said.

    This looming decision comes at a critical time in Colorado as the Governor's moratorium on the death penalty is still in place.

    Juries have also rejected the death penalty as punishment in the Aurora theater shooting trial and the Fero's bar murders.

    "The death penalty in Colorado very much relies on the idea that it's a fair process and that the court is fair to the defense," said Beller.

    Fields is the son of Colorado state representative Rhonda Fields. Fields feels the challenge is a desperate move, telling 7NEWS she was in court during the trial and describes it as ethical.

    http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news...s-now-in-limbo

  4. #14
    Senior Member CnCP Legend CharlesMartel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    FRANCE
    Posts
    3,073
    Colorado death sentence inmates moved to state penitentiary

    DENVER (AP) - Three Colorado inmates facing the death penalty have been transferred from a prison in Sterling to the Colorado State Penitentiary in Canon City.

    Adrienne Jacobson, a spokeswoman for the Colorado Department of Corrections, told The Denver Post (http://goo.gl/v73T0d ) on Monday that Nathan Dunlap, Sir Mario Owens and Robert Ray are now housed in “management controlled units,” among a group of five other inmates.

    The three were moved to the Sterling Correctional Facility about four years ago because of a lack of outdoor access. That issue has been resolved, prompting the move to the state penitentiary.

    The death sentence inmates typically are out of their cells for about four hours a day.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-to-state-pen/

  5. #15
    Moderator Ryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Newport, United Kingdom
    Posts
    2,454
    Lawyers for Colorado death row inmate called judge’s firing “literally unprecedented”

    In a bombshell new legal filing, attorneys for one of Colorado’s death row inmates say that state court officials — including the chief justice of the Colorado Supreme Court — broke the law by firing the judge overseeing the inmate’s appeal just as the judge was about to deliver a major ruling.

    The petition, filed Thursday afternoon, asks the full state Supreme Court to overturn Judge Gerald Rafferty’s dismissal and to order court officials to release more information about the decision to fire him. The document alleges that Rafferty found serious flaws in the case against Sir Mario Owens, one of only three inmates on Colorado’s death row, and that he was about to issue an order that could have dramatically altered the case — including possibly overturning the death sentence or ordering a new trial. Its filing also reveals chaos behind the scenes in Colorado’s death penalty system.

    “To remove a sitting judge … at exactly the same moment that he was issuing his final Order, which would largely decide Mr. Owens’ fate and whether he lives or dies, is literally unprecedented, not only in a Colorado case of this magnitude, but in the annals of law,” Owens’ lawyers write in the petition.

    Owens was convicted in 2008 and sentenced to death for the murders of Javad Marshall Fields and Vivian Wolfe in Aurora. Marshall Fields had been scheduled to testify against another man, Robert Ray, in an upcoming murder trial. Ray was also sentenced to death for Marshall Fields’ and Wolfe’s murders.

    Owens’ and Ray’s cases are the first two to test a new process for death-penalty appeals in Colorado, which lawmakers hoped would speed up the execution process. Instead, the system has bogged down, mired for years without even clearing the first step in the process.

    That first step is for the original trial judge — in Owens’ and Ray’s cases, that was Rafferty — to hear the first appeal and issue a ruling. Between 2012 and 2015, Rafferty held 37 weeks of hearings on Owens’ appeal. But, in January, he reached the mandatory retirement age for state court judges in Colorado and left the bench before issuing his final ruling on the appeal.

    The Office of the State Court Administrator struck a deal to hire Rafferty back to finish the case, beginning in March. He was working as a senior judge in Arapahoe County District Court on a contract basis when he was abruptly fired in April. State Supreme Court Chief Justice Nancy Rice signed off on the firing, issuing an order on April 13 declaring that Rafferty’s appointment to the bench was “rescinded effective immediately.”

    According to time sheets Rafferty filed hours before a human resources official cut off his access to the state court server, Rafferty’s final days at work were spent to, “Issue Owens’ post-conviction order.” But that order never surfaced and, now, state courts officials won’t tell Owens’ attorneys what the order would have found — or even whether it exists.

    That’s just part of the secrecy surrounding Rafferty’s firing. Owens’ lawyers say in their petition that court officials won’t tell them who raised the concerns that led to Rafferty’s dismissal, who made the decision to fire him, who was consulted on the decision and what procedures were followed. They say Rafferty’s punishment bypassed the state’s Commission on Judicial Discipline, the normal place to deal with complaints about judges.

    In a news release issued to announce Rafferty’s dismissal — which Owens’ lawyers say was an unprecedented public humiliation of a judge — the State Court Administrator’s Office says Rafferty was fired because he “breached the terms of the contract.” Between January, when he left the bench, and March, when he was hired back, Rafferty did legal work at the Denver law firm Collins & Coldwell. In that stretch, he filed one brief in a federal criminal court case, and his name continued to appear in the “signature block” for filings in that case even after he re-took the bench in Arapahoe County, though another attorney appears to be the author of those later filings.

    According to e-mails obtained by Owens’ lawyers, state court officials were aware of Rafferty’s outside work in February. In one e-mail on February 24, Mindy Masias, the chief of staff for the State Court Administrator’s Office, wrote to Arapahoe County District Court Chief Judge Carlos Samour Jr. that she spoke with Rafferty about his outside work and that, “he understands he cannot work as an attorney while on contract with us and does not intend to work for a firm that would cause a conflict of interest in the future.”

    Owens’ attorneys say they were never told of Rafferty’s outside work nor — until after the judge was fired — about concerns that Rafferty’s work at Collins & Coldwell may have been improper.

    “[F]or reasons that remain a mystery,” they write in their petition, “(court officials) made a monumentally consequential decision behind closed doors and have refused to provide even basic information that would enable the parties to accurately assess the situation.”

    The court’s secrecy on the matter, Owens’ lawyers contend, violates the state constitution and also, “call into question the reputation and integrity of Colorado’s judicial branch, as well as public confidence in that institution.” It is especially concerning to Owens’ attorneys, though, because they argue that Rafferty was about to find major problems with Owens’ prosecution.

    During the appellate hearings, Owens’ lawyers say they presented evidence that prosecutors didn’t tell defense attorneys about a number of gifts or promises that were made to key prosecution witnesses. One witness, for instance, was promised a car, according to the new petition. Two other witnesses were given thousands of dollars in gift cards and benefits. Several others were given lenient sentences for other crimes or probation violations, according to the petition.

    There were also allegations of undisclosed evidence and false testimony that Rafferty was set to rule on.

    A spokesman for the State Court Administrator’s Office declined to comment on the new petition.

    The 18th Judicial District Attorney’s office, which prosecuted Owens and Ray, has not formally responded to the petition but disputed its allegations of prosecutorial wrongdoing.

    “The Rule 21 filing is merely a series of allegations about which we disagree,” the office wrote in a statement, referencing the specific legal term for the petition.

    The statement said the office had no role in Rafferty’s removal, though prosecutors are “extremely disappointed” by the delays in the case.

    In a statement, one of Owens’ attorneys, Jonathan Reppucci said, “We are deeply saddened and troubled by the unprecedented turn of events that has now derailed this case. Mr. Owens has waited eight years for the truth to come out concerning the systematic errors that led to his wrongful conviction.”

    At the least, Rafferty’s firing will significantly delay Owens’ appeal. The case is now assigned to retired Jefferson County District Court Judge Christopher Munch, who, like Rafferty, will work on a contract basis. At a hearing on the case in April, Samour — the chief judge in Arapahoe County — told attorneys to prepare to do much of the appeal over again.

    “I think we’re going to have to have at least some of the evidentiary hearing again in front of the judge who presides over the case,” Samour said. “…In terms of witnesses testifying, I think they’re going to have to testify again.”

    https://www.denverpost.com/2016/07/0...-judge-firing/

  6. #16
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    Colorado Supreme Court denies petition over fired judge in death penalty case

    One-page order gives no details on decision on Judge Gerald Rafferty

    By JOHN INGOLD
    The Denver Post

    The Colorado Supreme Court on Wednesday quickly dismissed a petition asking for a mysteriously fired judge to be reinstated in the long-running death penalty appeal on which he was about to rule.

    Lawyers for Sir Mario Owens, one of three men on Colorado’s death row, last week asked the state’s highest court to put Judge Gerald Rafferty back on the bench and to release more information about why he was dismissed from the case he has presided over for a decade. The petition accused Colorado court officials and the chief justice of the Supreme Court — who also acts as the CEO of the state Judicial Branch — of breaking the law in Rafferty’s removal.

    On Wednesday, the Colorado Supreme Court issued a single-page order denying the petition. The order gave no explanation of the denial. Chief Justice Nancy Rice did not participate in the decision, according to the order.

    Owens and another man, Robert Ray, were convicted and sentenced to death in separate trials for the killings in Aurora in 2005 of Javad Marshall-Fields and Vivan Wolfe. Marshall-Fields was a witness who was scheduled to testify against Ray in a trial over the shooting death of another man.

    Rafferty oversaw Owens’ trial in Arapahoe County District Court. By law, that means he was also the judge to handle the first step of Owens’ appeal, which has stretched on for years and involved dozens of weeks of new hearings. In January, Rafferty reached mandatory retirement age but struck a deal to resume sitting on the bench on a contract basis in March.

    In between, though, he worked briefly as a defense attorney in private practice. In April, the State Court Administrator’s Office announced that the outside work meant Rafferty had violated his employment contract with the state. He was removed from the bench and Owens’ appeal was ultimately reassigned to another retired judge, who could have to conduct many of the appellate hearings all over again.

    At the time of his firing, Rafferty’s time sheets indicate he was about to issue his long-awaited final ruling on Owens’ appeal. Owens’ attorneys say that order would have addressed allegations of prosecutorial misconduct in the case, though prosecutors deny doing anything wrong. In the petition, Owens’ lawyers say they weren’t told of concerns about Rafferty’s outside work nor have they been told who ultimately made the decision to terminate Rafferty’s contract and what sort of procedures were followed.

    https://www.denverpost.com/2016/07/0...t-fired-judge/

  7. #17
    Senior Member Member Big Jon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Very disappointed with this. This is really going to add more ammo to repealing the DP in Colorado. I can honestly see the DP being repealed in CO within a year or two. Given Governor Hick's position on Nathan Dunlap and the fact that the just fired judge also presided over the other DP trail, there's a strong argument to repeal the DP here in CO.

  8. #18
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    Related:

    Questions raised in second death penalty case over judge’s firing

    Lawyer for death row inmate Robert Ray wants answers in Judge Gerald Rafferty’s removal

    By John Ingold
    The Denver Post

    A lawyer for a second Colorado death row inmate has filed a lawsuit seeking answers about why a judge who once presided over two of the state’s most high-profile appeals was removed from both.

    The lawsuit, filed last week in Denver District Court, accuses state court officials of violating open-records rules in not revealing more about what led to the dismissal of Judge Gerald Rafferty.

    Rafferty was fired in April from his contract position in Arapahoe County District Court as he was about to issue a final order in an appeal involving death row inmate Sir Mario Owens. The new lawsuit, though, also raises questions about why Rafferty was removed months earlier from overseeing the appeal of Robert Ray, who was convicted in connection with the same killings as Owens and was also sentenced to death. The two cases are the only ongoing death penalty appeals in Colorado.

    “If Judge Rafferty was removed from Mr. Ray’s case for reasons that have anything to do with the content of his finished order in Mr. Owens’ case, this would have as much of an effect on Mr. Ray’s case as it would have on Mr. Owens’ case,” the lawsuit states.

    Rafferty presided over the trials for both Owens and Ray, both of whom were found guilty of murder in the 2005 deaths of Javad Marshall-Fields and Vivian Wolfe in Aurora. By law, that meant Rafferty would also oversee the first review of the convictions on appeal.

    In January, after working for more than three years on a ruling in Owens’ appeal, Rafferty reached the state’s mandatory retirement age for judges and had to step down. In March, he was re-hired on a contract basis to finish his order in Owens’ case.

    However, in April, court officials abruptly ended his contract and Colorado Supreme Court Chief Justice Nancy Rice rescinded his appointment over allegations that Rafferty had breached the terms of his employment deal. The deal prohibited Rafferty from performing outside work while also serving as a judge. Rafferty had worked between January and March at the Denver law firm of Collins & Coldwell, a fact e-mails suggest the State Court Administrator’s Office may have been aware of prior to the start of Rafferty’s judge contract. Court officials have not said whether they believe Rafferty continued to work at the firm after resuming the bench.

    By the time he was fired, though, Rafferty was no longer in charge of Ray’s appeal. Court records show that Arapahoe County Chief Judge Carlos Samour Jr. transferred Ray’s appeal away from Rafferty and to himself in November 2015. The new lawsuit alleges that Samour “apparently did not tell Judge Rafferty” about the transfer for a month. Both Ray’s and Owens’ appeals have since been assigned to other judges.

    Earlier this month, lawyers for Owens unsuccessfully asked the state Supreme Court to order more information released about Rafferty’s firing and also to overturn his dismissal. Lawyers for Owens said they believed Rafferty, in his never-released final order in Owens’ appeal, would have addressed several defense allegations of prosecutorial misconduct that could have led to a new trial for Owens.

    In the new lawsuit, an attorney for Ray, Mary Claire Mulligan, is suing two officials in the State Court Administrator’s Office, alleging they violated the court system’s public-records rules by withholding information about why Rafferty was removed from

    Ray’s appeal and later fired. Mulligan says she asked for copies of e-mails about Rafferty going back to the start of 2015 but that much of her request was denied based on privacy justifications. Court officials have not yet responded to the lawsuit.

    https://www.denverpost.com/2016/07/1...se-robert-ray/
    "I realize this may sound harsh, but as a father and former lawman, I really don't care if it's by lethal injection, by the electric chair, firing squad, hanging, the guillotine or being fed to the lions."
    - Oklahoma Rep. Mike Christian

    "There are some people who just do not deserve to live,"
    - Rev. Richard Hawke

    “There are lots of extremely smug and self-satisfied people in what would be deemed lower down in society, who also deserve to be pulled up. In a proper free society, you should be allowed to make jokes about absolutely anything.”
    - Rowan Atkinson

  9. #19
    Administrator Moh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    13,014
    Colorado law to speed up death penalty is failing, advocates on both sides say

    “Unitary” appeal system was supposed to resolve Colorado state court litigation within two years

    By JOHN INGOLD
    The Denver Post

    Colorado’s only two death penalty appeals are stuck at a standstill, and now advocates on both sides of the justice system say that a law passed nearly two decades ago to speed up such appeals is failing.

    In 1997, Colorado lawmakers frustrated with the slow pace of executions in the state passed a bill they thought would fix it. By putting the most time-consuming part of capital punishment appeals first and setting tight deadlines, the goal was to resolve all litigation in state court within two years of a death sentence being imposed.

    Instead, the first two appeals to test the process — those for convicted murderers Sir Mario Owens and Robert Ray — have stalled at that initial step for more than seven years after the sentences were issued. The murders that brought the death sentences occurred 11 years ago this summer.

    And with both cases in turmoil — Ray’s attorneys recently tried to withdraw from the appeal over a dispute with a judge, while Owens’ attorneys say they are being improperly denied information about why their judge was fired — the delays look set to continue for months or years more.

    The gridlock has even the sponsor of the 1997 bill wondering whether something about the death penalty in Colorado has to change.

    “I’m almost to the point where I would say, ‘Let’s do away with it and save the taxpayers the money,’ ” said Jeanne Adkins, a former state representative from Douglas County.

    In any death penalty case, deciding the sentence is usually the quick part. What follows the jury’s verdict is a trail of appeals that reaches all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and back.

    Those on death row in Colorado are guaranteed two appeals in state court: the “direct appeal,” which challenges the integrity of the trial, and the “post-conviction appeal,” in which defendants introduce new evidence or raise claims of prosecutorial misconduct or incompetent representation. Prior to 1997, the direct appeal went first followed by the post-conviction appeal.

    But, because the post-conviction appeal is the lengthier of the two, lawmakers in 1997 flipped the order. Now, after a lower-court judge issues an initial ruling on the post-conviction appeal, the two appeals then move in tandem to the Colorado Supreme Court — in what’s been dubbed a “unitary” system. (Appeals that take place in federal court, after all the state-court appeals finish, are another matter.)

    The law says all post-conviction proceedings in state court “shall be completed within two years after the date upon which the sentence of death is imposed.”

    “There shall be no extensions of time of any kind beyond the two-year period,” the law states.

    Except the Colorado Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that’s not exactly true. Instead, the justices concluded the law allows them to adopt rules granting extensions, “upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances that could not have been foreseen and prevented.”

    That’s an important wrinkle, said Denver defense attorney Christopher Decker, because it provides necessary safeguards for a defendant’s constitutional rights.

    “If they just speed up the process and strip everyone of due process, we’ll have a very fast outcome that will be worth nothing,” said Decker, who is not involved in either appeal. “It won’t stand up to constitutional review.”

    But that’s also what has allowed Owens’ and Ray’s appeals to linger for years in state court without resolution. Ray’s post-conviction hearings haven’t even started yet in Arapahoe County District Court. Owens’ hearings could have to be completely redone after the senior judge presiding over the case was fired as he was about to issue his final order.

    “Two years may have been unrealistic,” said Tom Raynes, the executive director of the Colorado District Attorneys’ Council. “But eight years to not even get halfway there is absurd.”

    Raynes said the legislature might now need to rewrite the unitary appeal statute. Decker said other constitutional concerns — once briefly the subject of a lawsuit — could doom it altogether. And Adkins, once the biggest champion of the idea, is pessimistic about whether lawmakers can do anything.

    “The death penalty has become so politicized, truthfully, in the last decade or so in Colorado that I really think that a lot of what the legislature tried to do may actually be pretty pointless now,” she said.

    One of the lawmakers who could have a say on this, though, is one of the people mostly deeply affected by the delays. State Rep. Rhonda Fields’ son, Javad Marshall-Fields, was one of two people killed — along with his fiancée, Vivian Wolfe — in the murders that put Owens and Ray on death row. The wait for justice has been excruciating, she said. But she’s optimistic there is a solution.

    “I think there’s got to be something that we can do to protect the rights of the victims and protect the rights of the defendants,” she said, “that’s not dragging things out for 11 years.”

    http://www.denverpost.com/2016/07/25...y-law-failing/

  10. #20
    Senior Member Member Big Jon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Colorado death row inmate Sir Mario Owens seeks new trial amid juror misconduct allegations

    Arrest warrant issued for juror who skipped court date, case could overturn death penalty in notorious murder

    An arrest warrant has been issued for a juror who served on one of the most high-profile homicide trials of the past decade in Colorado, part of an inquiry into possible misconduct that could overturn two separate murder cases and a death sentence.

    A judge issued the warrant Feb. 17, after the juror failed to show up for a court appearance where she was to be questioned about her service in the trial 10 years ago. In a court document filed last month, defense attorneys for death row inmate Sir Mario Owens accuse the juror of numerous instances of misconduct during the first of Owens’ two murder trials, including:

    Repeatedly lying on her juror questionnaire.

    Having an undisclosed friendship with a relative of one of the victims in the case.

    Not revealing that she knew members of Owens’ family, which she told a fellow juror after the trial caused her to fear for her safety.

    Not disclosing that her son was friends with several witnesses who testified during the trial.

    Not revealing that she spoke with one witness at her son’s apartment as the trial was ongoing.

    Not disclosing that she personally knew several other witnesses — including at least one who she has since said mouthed the words “Hi, Mom” to her while she sat in the jury box.

    The Denver Post obtained the court document through a records request, which the judge overseeing the case granted after hearing debate between prosecutors and defense attorneys.

    Jurors are supposed to be impartial, and judges give strict warnings during trials that they are not to have contact with witnesses or attorneys in the case outside of the courtroom. Any contact is supposed to be immediately reported to the judge.

    If proved true, these allegations could be enough to overturn Owens’ conviction in the trial, which involved a 2004 murder in Aurora’s Lowry Park. That conviction was used to win a death sentence against Owens in a separate murder trial, which would also be thrown into doubt.

    “The number and types of issues that this juror had,” said Christopher Decker, a Denver defense attorney not involved in the cases, “are unlike anything I’ve ever seen in Colorado law.”

    Sentences and convictions have been upended in Colorado before based on much less extensive allegations of misconduct. For instance, the death sentence for convicted killer Robert Harlan was overturned in 2005 after it was revealed that jurors consulted a Bible during deliberations. A man accused of killing his wife was granted a new trial in 2014 when it was found that a juror in his first trial had not disclosed on her questionnaire that she was a victim of domestic violence.

    Attorneys for Owens declined to comment. In their court motion filed last month, they call the juror’s conduct “extraordinary and egregious.”

    Prosecutors at the Arapahoe County District Attorney’s office also declined to comment.

    In a written response to the defense’s motion, prosecutors argue that the allegations against the juror “have been thoroughly and repeatedly litigated in previous hearings.” In particular, they argue that Owens’ attorneys failed to prove that the juror’s friendship with a victim’s family member pre-dated the trial. They say the juror listened to the evidence in the Lowry Park trial fairly.

    “This juror has come in and testified under oath that the fact she knew a few people who were witnesses did not impact her service in this case,” Ann Tomsic, a chief deputy district attorney in Arapahoe County, said during a hearing on the issue Feb. 17.

    The defense’s most recent motion and other court documents show that the juror’s name is Stephanie Griggs. However, she is most commonly referred to in the records by her number: Juror 75.

    Owens is one of three inmates on Colorado’s death row, and the cases that put him there were among the most closely watched in the state’s recent history.

    In the Lowry Park case, Owens was convicted of first-degree murder in the shooting death of Gregory Vann. That conviction played a significant role for prosecutors in establishing a motive for Owens’ involvement in the 2005 shooting deaths of Javad Marshall-Fields and his fiancée, Vivian Wolfe. Marshall-Fields had been wounded during the earlier shooting that claimed Vann’s life. When he was killed, Marshall-Fields had been scheduled to testify against another man — Robert Ray, who is also on death row — accused of involvement in Vann’s death.

    Marshall-Fields’ and Wolfe’s deaths focused attention on threats to witnesses in Colorado and prompted legislation that improved protections. Marshall-Fields’ mother, Rhonda Fields, responded to her son’s death by becoming involved in community activism. She is now a state senator.

    The murder convictions, though, are still slowly working their way through the early stages of the appeals process — a process that has been marked by controversy.

    In 2012, one set of attorneys for Owens began investigating a report of juror misconduct after stumbling across an interview with a juror from the Lowry Park trial. In that interview, the juror said another juror — now identified by defense attorneys as Griggs — said after the trial was over that she “knew Mario’s family” and she “was afraid for her safety because she knew about the people Mario was with.”

    Owens’ attorneys dug deeper and turned up what they say are examples of misconduct. For instance, on the questionnaire that Griggs filled out prior to being seated on the jury, she said she had never been convicted of a crime, had no family members who had ever been victims of a crime and had never been involved in a court case. All three of those are false, defense attorneys argue. They also allege that she lied about her educational background.

    Further investigation found numerous apparent personal connections to the Lowry Park trial. Griggs’ son has told investigators he was present at the shooting — although it is unclear whether she knew that when she served on the jury. Many of his friends, who had often spent time at Griggs’ house, testified during the trial. She saw one friend at her son’s apartment the afternoon following his testimony.

    “Hi, Mom. I saw you today,” the witness is alleged to have said to Griggs, according to the defense motion filed last month.

    “I told her, you need to let whoever you need to let know that you need to get off of this, that you’re too close,” Griggs’ son later testified in a post-conviction hearing.

    Griggs has testified three times in court so far during the post-conviction process, according to court documents, and has repeatedly said she recognized witnesses during the trial — noting that at least one mouthed the words “Hi, Mom” to her in the courtroom because her son’s friends viewed her like a mother. However, apart from one instance where she told the judge she recognized someone sitting in the courtroom audience, there is no record of her having informed anyone during the trial about her connections to the case, according to the defense’s motion.

    In an interview with a police detective after the trial, Griggs said, “Knowing them didn’t weigh on me” and that she listened to evidence fairly. But in court testimony last year, she said she “should have been picked for a different jury or not picked at all.”

    Owens’ attorneys argue their client is owed a new trial for Vann’s death. If he is granted one, that would at a minimum put the death penalty case on hold and it would require a new death penalty trial if he is acquitted, said Decker, the defense attorney not involved in the cases.

    Even if Owens isn’t granted a new trial for the Lowry Park case, his attorneys say he should still be given a new death penalty trial because the state public defender’s office, which represented Owens in that case, received a tip prior to the death penalty trial about juror misconduct in the earlier case but failed to follow up adequately. That failure means Owens was denied his constitutional right to effective assistance of legal counsel, Owens’ current attorneys say.

    Judge Christopher Munch, a retired Jefferson County District Court judge who is now overseeing the first stage of Owens’ appeal, will have to decide what happens next. In the Feb. 17 hearing, he said he worried about the consequences for the justice system if jurors who serve on high-profile cases can expect to have their lives scrutinized during the appeals.

    If the misconduct allegations are not true, he said, “What this juror has been put through is extraordinary.”

    Owens’ attorney Jonathan Reppucci responded sharply.

    “What this juror has put our client through is extraordinary,” he said. “This juror is a fraud.”

    There is currently no deadline by which Munch must issue a ruling on the entire appeal, although he could decide soon whether to hold new hearings on the juror issue.

    Timeline in the Sir Mario Owens murder cases

    July 4, 2004: Gregory Vann, 20, is shot and killed in Aurora’s Lowry Park. Vann’s friend Javad Marshall-Fields is wounded in the shooting.

    July 13, 2004: Robert Ray is arrested and charged as an accessory in the Lowry Park shooting. He later posts bond.

    June 19, 2005: Marshall-Fields is threatened and warned not to testify against Ray.

    June 20, 2005: Marshall-Fields, 22, and his fiancée, 22-year-old Vivian Wolfe, are shot to death while driving on Dayton Street in Aurora. An intensive police investigation follows.

    Aug. 12, 2005: Ray’s charges in Vann’s killing are upgraded to first-degree murder.

    Sept. 29, 2005: An arrest warrant is issued for Sir Mario Owens on charges of first-degree murder in connection with Vann’s killing.

    March 8, 2006: A grand jury indicts Ray and Owens on charges of first-degree murder in Marshall-Fields’ and Wolfe’s killings.

    Nov. 3, 2006: A jury finds Ray guilty of attempted murder and of being an accessory to murder in the Lowry Park shooting. It does not find him guilty of first-degree murder.

    Jan 30, 2007: A separate jury convicts Owens of first-degree murder in Vann’s killing. Owens’ attorneys are now challenging the conviction based on allegations of juror misconduct.

    June 16, 2008: Owens is convicted of first-degree murder in Marshall-Fields’ and Wolfe’s killings. He is sentenced to death. Prosecutors used Owens’ conviction in the
    Lowry Park shooting as evidence in arguing for the death penalty.

    June 8, 2009: Ray is convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death for Marshall-Fields’ and Wolfe’s killings.

    Summer 2012: New attorneys for Owens, working on his appeal, begin investigating possible juror misconduct in the Lowry Park trial.

    March 2015 and Oct. 2016: Stephanie Griggs, the juror defense attorneys have accused of misconduct during the Lowry Park trial, testifies during appellate hearings.

    Feb. 17, 2017: Judge Christopher Munch issues a warrant for Griggs’ arrest, after she failed to show up for a court appearance she had been summoned to attend.

    http://www.denverpost.com/2017/03/02...t-allegations/

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •