Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: Robert Keith Ray - Colorado

  1. #1
    Guest
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,534

    Robert Keith Ray - Colorado


    Vivian Wolfe, 21, and her fiance,
    Javad Marshall-Fields, 21





    Facts of the Crime:

    Ray was sentenced to death on May 5, 2010 for the 2005 deaths of Vivian Wolfe and Javad Marshall-Fields in Aurora. Fields was going to testify against Ray.

    Also sentenced to death in the crime was Sir Mario Owens. For more on Owens, see: http://www.cncpunishment.com/forums/...rado-Death-Row

  2. #2
    Guest
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    5,534
    May 5, 2010

    Aurora witness killer formally sentenced to death

    CENTENNIAL — If Robert Ray had been found guilty of being an accessory to a murder in 2004, he might have been out of prison by now.

    Instead, Ray will pay with his life for killing a witness who was scheduled to testify against him.

    Arapahoe County District Court Judge Gerald Rafferty today formalized what a jury did almost a year earlier: sentenced Ray to the death penalty for killing Javad Marshall-Fields.

    "Mr. Javad Marshall-Fields observed the rule of the law," Rafferty said. "Mr. Ray did not and he suffered the consequences."

    During the sentencing hearing, several relatives of Marshall-Fields spoke out on his behalf and said Ray should pay the ultimate price.

    His mother noted what an honest young man her son had become and praised him for his courage. His step-father talked about what a trying five years it had been for the family. His sister had nothing but contempt for the man who took her brother away.

    "On Robert Ray's tombstone it should say, 'Those who kill witnesses must and will die,' " said his sister, Maisha Pollard. "I'm done with Robert Ray."

    The judge sentenced Ray, 24, to be executed by lethal injection in August. But since appeal and review by the Colorado Supreme Court automatically kicks in on death penalty sentences, it could be a decade or longer until his sentence is meted out.

    Defense attorney Mike Root, who seemed visibly shaken by today's outcome, said after the verdict that his client should not have to die.

    "I think it's an injustice Mr. Ray received the death penalty," Root said.

    Marshall-Fields and his fiancee, Vivian Wolfe, were shot and killed in June 2005 as the 22-year-olds were heading out for the evening. Ray plotted and ordered the hit on Marshall-Fields because he agreed to testify against Ray in the July 4, 2004 murder of Gregory Vann at Lowry Park in Aurora.

    Sir Mario Owens, the trigger man in the shooting deaths of Wolfe and Marshall-Fields, is already on death row for the crimes.

    A third man, Parish Carter, who drove the getaway car, goes on trial later this month. Prosecutors are not seeking the death penalty against Carter, who is currently in prison for other crimes not related to the shootings.

    The last execution in Colorado was in 1997, when Gary Lee Davis, 53, was executed for a murder 11 years earlier.

    Judge Rafferty today also affirmed Ray's life-without-parole sentence for Wolfe's murder and several other sentences. He did not rule on a request for a new trial based on "new evidence" Ray's defense team said prosecutors kept from them. It was not clear what that was, but a hearing is scheduled on that matter later this month.

    After Ray was sentenced to death by a jury in June, his defense team filed numerous motions trying to delay the formal sentencing as long as possible. That delay frustrated family members of the victims.

    The jury foreman also attended today's hearing. The 39-year-old computer programming engineer said the jury struggled on whether to sentence Ray to death, but in the end they felt that killing a witness was too heinous of a crime to let him live.

    "It was serious enough to deserve the highest penalty," he said.

    Rhonda Fields, Javad's mother, had mixed emotions after the hearing. But she said she was proud of her son for agreeing to testify against Ray, even after he received threats on his life just before the trial.

    "It's taken so long to get to this day," said Fields, who since her son's murder has been a champion for witness protection.

    "The right time to do right is always," she said. "We need people to feel comfortable to come forward."

    http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_15024146?source=rss

  3. #3
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217
    10SA341, In Re People v. Ray

    In yesterday's Colorado Supreme Court orders the court held that the trial court abused its discretion when it ordered the prosecution to disclose to the defendant’s post-conviction counsel the addresses of thirteen witnesses, eight of whom are in the witness protection program.

    The Supreme Court held that when deciding whether to disclose witnesses’ addresses to post-conviction counsel during post-conviction review of a death sentence, the trial court must balance the threat to witness safety against any demonstrated materiality to post-conviction counsel of learning the trial witnesses’ addresses.

    In this case, post-conviction counsel’s minimal showing of materiality did not overcome the prosecution’s showing of an extraordinary and compelling threat to witness safety, based on the fact that the defendant was sentenced to death for murdering a witness in a previous case and made threats to witnesses in this case. Therefore, the supreme court held that the trial court abused its discretion when it lifted a protective order and required the prosecution to disclose to post-conviction counsel the addresses of thirteen witnesses, eight of whom are in the witness protection program. Hence, the supreme court reversed the trial court disclosure order.

  4. #4
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217
    Colo. Supreme Court: Witness Murderer’s Lawyers Shouldn’t Get Witness Addresses

    Lawyers for Robert Ray, who’s on death row for conspiring to murder two witnesses who were to testify against him in a murder case, isn’t allowed to have the addresses of other witnesses during the appeal of his death sentence, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled Monday.

    Ray was convicted in Arapahoe County District Court of the murders of Javad Marshall-Fields and his fiancée Vivian Wolfe. Marshall-Fields was a key prosecution witness in another murder case against Ray, Sir Mario Owens and Perish Carter.

    Ray’s appellate lawyers sought the addresses of prosecution witnesses so they could be interviewed in the appeal process. Arapahoe County District Judge Gerald Rafferty gave permission for defense lawyers to contact 13 witnesses, eight of whom are in the witness protection program. But none of the addresses were disclosed until the state Supreme Court had a chance to review.

    In a 4-3 decision Monday, the high court held that the threat to witness safety outweighed the potential benefit to Ray’s post-conviction counsel. Chief Justice Michael Bender wrote the majority opinion, which was joined by justices Gregory Hobbs, Monica Marquez and Alex Martinez. Justice Nathan Coats agreed that the witness addresses should be denied, but thought Bender’s opinion included “unnecessary dicta.”

    “To the extent the majority opinion could be read not only to prohibit disclosure where considerations of witness safety outweigh the defendant’s need but also to imply that disclosure of witness addresses is required except where considerations of witness safety are sufficiently weighty, I disagree,” Coats wrote in a partial concurrence and partial dissent on which Justices Allison Eid and Nancy Rice joined him.

    The 18th Judicial District Attorney Carol Chambers and Chief Deputy DA Ann Tomsic represented the prosecution in the successful appeal. Ray’s appellate attorneys were Maria Liu of Greeley’s Collins Liu & Associates; Mary Clair Mulligan of Boulder’s Mulligan & Mulligan; and Christopher Gehring of Denver’s Gehring Law Firm.

    The case returns to trial court.

    http://www.lawweekonline.com/2011/04...ess-addresses/

  5. #5
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217

    The letter from convicted killer Robert Ray


    A letter from death row

    Denver Post reporter Carlos Illescas received an unexpected letter from death row last week. And, while most inmate letters we receive here at the newspaper run to multiple pages of small-type print, this one — from convicted killer Robert Ray — had an economy of words:

    Ray was convicted in 2009 of masterminding the killing of a witness, Javad Marshall-Fields, and Marshall-Fields’ fiancée, Vivian Wolfe, to keep Marshall-Fields from testifying against Ray in another murder trial, at which Ray was also convicted. Prior to Marshall-Fields’ murder, Ray had bribed and threatened the Colorado State University graduate not to testify. Prosecutors argued during various trials that Ray and two accomplices stalked Marshall-Fields and staked out his apartment prior to his killing.

    The jury convicted Ray after less than three days of deliberation.

    Ray contended during his trial that he was innocent and is appealing his death sentence in the courts. One suspects he’ll have to put forward more evidence than he did in his most recent appeal to the court of public opinion.

    In the meantime, information about the Fields Wolfe Memorial Fund can be found here.

    http://blogs.denverpost.com/crime/20...death-row/350/

  6. #6
    Administrator Heidi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    33,217
    Defense in Death Penalty Cases Seek To Open Court Files

    The Colorado Supreme Court is asking prosecutors to explain why court records in the death penalty cases of two Aurora men should be kept secret.

    The move comes more than 5 years after an Arapahoe County District Court judge barred the files from public review.

    On Tuesday, the Supreme Court issued an order to attorneys of both men, Sir Mario Owens and Robert Ray, to explain why they want the court files opened. In previous filings, defense attorneys have claimed misconduct by the prosecution.

    They are asking that the case files be made public, including transcripts, a registry of actions, pleadings or motions and court orders that had names blacked out.

    The court also asked for written arguments from the Colorado Bar Association, the state attorney general and the Colorado Press Association. The court set an Oct. 3 deadline.

    It's unusual that parts of the case files haven't been made public, said Denver attorney Dan Recht, who is not involved in the case. Add the fact that the Supreme Court is seeking outside opinions, including from the press association, the court action this week is a significant step in potentially getting the case open, he said.

    "This is a big deal," Recht said. "It says to us that the Supreme Court is taking this very seriously.

    "They see this as a First Amendment issue, and they want the input from the Colorado Press Association to flesh out these important issues. That's highly unusual."

    Owens and Ray are on death row for the 2005 shooting deaths of Vivian Wolfe and Javad Marshall-Fields, who was to testify against Ray in the murder a year earlier of Gregory Vann at an Aurora park.

    Attorneys for Owens and Ray declined to comment on the recent developments, citing a continued gag order.

    However, in court documents, Owens' lead attorney, Jim Castle, and his team write that the court's refusal to unseal and make names public ensures the case will remain sealed "for many years" to come.

    "His family, as public citizens, has also sought access to and disclosure of these items. His mother ... has pleaded with the district judge on behalf of the entire Owens family for access," the court document said.

    (Source: The Denver Post)
    An uninformed opponent is a dangerous opponent.

    "Y'all be makin shit up" ~ Markeith Loyd

  7. #7
    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/

  8. #8
    Administrator Helen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    20,875
    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. #9
    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. #10
    Senior Member Member Big Jon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    120
    Related

    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 1 of 2 12 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
  •