Whether he should live or whether he should die, based on the seriousness before you. One of the most important decisions you will ever make Alwaus remember..by knowledge You are here because of him, because of what he did, almost 4 years ago. It’s his very humanity and make moral choices to accept the consequences of his choice to brutally murder 5 people. I do not have the burden of proof any longer. 4:06:23 Death is the only appropriate punishment for these crimes, whether it is pity or whatever it might be to vote for a sentence of life. One issue I will instruct you on. Although there is no burden of proof on me, whether death sentence of life imposd. I think that’s what you need to hear…he’s instructed to return a death verdict…agrevating circumstance compared with mitigating that it warrants death rather than life without parole. Are the aggrevating factors so substantial that death is the appropriate sentence. One aggrevating factor can be enough. If you find, then you can and I would argue should vote for death.
2 Aggrevating factors:
Then discuss the mitigating factors that might exist.
The primary factor is called factor A, the primary factor in this case.
4:08:59 The judge has told you you shall consider all the evidence received in this case…shall consider and be guided factor A is the circumstance of the crime convicnted in present proceeding.
That is all the evidence you heard over 2 and half months…the trup in april, the trip in July. That is the primary reason that death is the appropriate sentence. Each said felt in the abstract the death penalty is approrpaite for multiple murder. In the abstract…because knew nothing about this case 5 people killed, 3 were children. I’m sure never imagined the actual horror what you now know to be true. The cold, calcutated premeditated way in which the defendant killed a sleeping mother and her children…killed a grandmother by shooting 2 in the face…the way killed his son as his father shot him in the right temple. I’m sure you see the brutality of these crimes..it is appropriate to say this murder in of itself is so brutal, so immoral deserves death penalty on circusmktance alone. But under factor A, more you can consider. The harm to the community, to Kern County, and to the victim’s family. About the purpose or weight assign to Eddie Harper’s testimony and to the photos in life..victim impact evidence falls under factor A, because it helps you assess he specific harm to the people who loved them and to the community as a whole. You can consider the type of women they were…you can consider how much they were loved…4:12:51 You heard a little about Joanie Harper, she was as good athlete, she was loving mother, and a loyal daughter. 4:13:07 When I heard Kelsie Spann, Michelle Baptiste and even Rose Browning it reminded me of quote by Maya Angelou…people will never forget how you made them feel. In the way her friends and her family gelt about her and still feel about her 4 years agter death. Didn’t really know about her and to give you a sense of loss…a strong woman when not fashionable…she was a working woman when it wasn’t fashionable…raised Elain Byrd…intilled of both of her sons becoming ministers…and even her daughter Joanie who faithfully attended church. Up into the last day of her life. She tried at all times to better herself so she could better her family…she was so well-loved by one grandson…went from buying house on T street…remained true to her principals for 70 years on earth…so what does all that say about her…when you deliberate Eddie Harper will never see their mother again, their sister again, their nieces and nephews again. Will all have a scar that will never heal. The approrpate penalty for the harm that has cuased.
The presense or absence of criminal acitivty other than which tried…the use or attempted use of force…to use violence…4:16:32 This involves the incident Shann Kern described…repeadetly punched her in the face…can only consider this if beyond a reasonable doubt he committed the crime…all 12 don’t have to agree….The crime of which the defendant..one of two…corporal injury of cohabitant or a battery…requires they live together…which she testified she did…inflicted a traumatic injury on her…the bruising on her eye, and had a dating type of relationship. You heard her testimony about that…will see medical records corroborate that. Although testified Shann Kern hitting her eye with a shoes…recalling an incident 20 years ago and did not involve him…as far as Shann medical records corroborate…a laceration under right eye, swelling and bruising…nothing consistent with what Keith Powell described. 4:19:06 He beat here with his hands and fists…he hit her again like somehow it was her fault and not his….if that’s the crime it does not require a traumatic injury…cohabitation…She was 2 months pregnant and he knew that…
Absense or Traditionally in mitigation…under influence of emotional disturbance…no evidence of that.
Factor E participant or consented to that..4:21:17 Moral justification or extentuation of his conduct…
Factor I age of the defendant…factor in mitigation. I would say factor I is not a factor because at the time he was 41 years old. Typically, factor I argued when client is very young, 18 19 20..argue Typically argue factor I to suggest didn’t know any better. In this case with the defendant, he was 41, committed in premeditated way clearly did know better…would suggest not a factor.
Accomplice to an offense…and relatively minor. The only factor that any of the defense evidence falls under factor K> The catchall provision…sympathy, pity for the defendant.
You are consider character or record…he has none…for basis of sentence less than death. 4:24:41 The merciless killing of two women and three children…offerend co-workers childhood friends to say various kind things about him…he was a good teacher, a good vice prinicipal, a good administrator…he knew what it took for them to behave to fall intoline. Those were the first 13 witnesses called to the stand. I want you to, and you must. Consider educators, employees of the school and weight to assign it, ask yourself…why was VB unable to show the same kind of attention to his own daughter Margraet…made him incapable of becomnign formidable part of her life. His niece Tonyas’ graduation and not his own daughters. I would also ask yourself..what was the common theme…I think it was..it was they only knew in a professional capacity…not one of them knew him….This man did not have any friends…he simply didn’t 4:26:51 And if the truth be told, no one knew him. Elixabeth Marques, Esther Quiroz…didn’t talk with those women either. That was separate…we see that pattern repeated in childhood friends..to knowing him as a teenager…he was studious polite, shy athletic…They came here to standup and testify from memory…and you know the 12 know the boy these men described is not the same man you’ve seen and heard in this courtroom…the man who testified during the guilt phase…they want to believe he is. They don’t want to believe he could change and commit these crimes, but you know better and you said so in your verdict. The boy Kevin Bethay, Donald Collier knew and described in Belport is not the man before you. Would you expect them someone is capable of murdering his family…very hard for people to accept that a father would murder his children…if they knew him as a child had sat here would be convinced at tha tpoint…because who would believe someone is capable of what happened in this case…of killing entire family. 4:29:35 His two sisters and his niece…I am sure those people are good people..they are god faring people from testimony, I submit they do not know him either…when they did no evidence it was close. 4:30:12 I ask you is any of that enough to return a verdict of life…does any of what they said mitigate what he did? Does any of what he said make you feel VB deserves to spend rest of life eating, breathing laughing? 4:30:43 Because the boy who did that 30 years ago that person does not exist any more, and you know that. The man you see before you today is the face of evil and there is no sugar coating that. 4:31:21 Is there anything 25 witnesses offered by way of testimony that caused you to say this is an extenuating circumstance…for a verdict of life…no never. 4:31:52 part of my obligcation is anticipating what he would say….lingering doubt…if you had any doubt no matter how slight…to return a verdict less than doubt…it does not rise to that levell? Keep this in mind…I know I talked about this at the guilt phase…remmber during the trial he took an oath to tell the truth…and he lied..He not only died he made up a story to convince you he was in Columbus, OH, murdering his entire family..I don’t know what you found persuasive…must have come to the conclusion the defendant lied…you just remember those lies…innocent people don’t lie. His demeanor along what he said will erase any lingering doubt he is able to conjour up. I do know the evidence is relatively fresh. Bear with me….4;34:26 Exhibit 10…crime scene video the day they were killed.
