Right off the top, I want to say thank God for honest investigators and prosecutors. When presented with a tip on a crime that already had indicted suspects, they still ran it down.
What they found caused a dramatic course change in their murder case. The indictments were dismissed against the original two suspects – the murder victim’s own son and daughter-in-law – and two others are now being held for the crime.
Still, something went terribly wrong in the grand jury hearing that produced those indictments.
What was the proof of guilt that prosecutors presented?
It all came down to “inconsistencies” in the stories the son and daughter-in-law gave of what happened the night of the murder.
The two said they had come to the house the night of the murder and surprised “two or three” intruders. They were bound with zip ties and threatened that if they told anyone about what they saw, the intruders would hunt them down and kill them.
One even took the son’s driver’s license.
After they were gone, the couple freed themselves and found the body of his father slumped over the tub in a small bathroom with his throat stabbed and slashed. By all accounts, it was a horrifyingly vicious scene.
They called 911.
Shock gripped them. After finding dad dead, they feared the intruders were more than capable of carrying out their threats. They knew where they lived.
So, their initial descriptions to investigators of the intruders were vague and according to some, even misleading. Son and daughter-in-law thought they were protecting themselves, when in reality they were planting the seeds of suspicion in investigators.
They would become their focus.
There are many problems with the theory that developed against them. I will mention just one: Where were the guns that were stolen from the father’s extensive collection?
Utah County Sheriff Jim Tracy said that if they found the guns, they would know the story. So, where were they?
Detectives got a search warrant for the couple’s Payson home. They weren’t there.
They put out descriptions and serial numbers on the weapons – some of them very valuable – but nothing was showing up.
It wasn't until after they tracked down the tip this week that they finally got the answer to this key question. At least some of the guns had apparently been hidden in various locations around Vernal, Utah -- hidden by others who allegedly confessed to the robbery and murder and are now their suspects.
Still, back in July, the lack of answers and evidence did not stop prosecutors from presenting their case against the son and daughter-in-law to a grand jury. And they got what they wanted at the time: indictments.
I cannot imagine the horror that son and daughter-in-law went through. Jailed. Jobs lost. Rejected by family and friends.
What went wrong?
Defense attorneys tell me it’s because the grand jury system is not adversarial. The system is stacked against the defendant. Jurors meet in secret and they hear only one side of the story – the story prosecutors craft for them. There is no defense. No cross-examination. No argument.
What’s the alternative?
It’s called a preliminary hearing. It’s like a mini-trial. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys can make arguments, call witnesses and cross-examine. Unlike the grand jury proceeding, a preliminary hearing is adversarial and held in open court.
At the end of the preliminary hearing, a judge decides whether to dismiss or go ahead with a full-blown trial before a jury.
The drawback?
A preliminary hearing takes up precious court time in an already overburdened system.
On balance … given what just happened … I’d say it’s worth it.
