drdªv€
03-07-2005, 06:26 AM
By Jerrie Whiteley
Herald Democrat
The capital murder trial known as the State vs Andre Thomas has been complicated and tense from the beginning, and Friday's closing arguments were no different.
The jury will begin to deliberate Monday morning. If jurors find Thomas knew what he was doing when he killed Laura Boren Thomas, Andre Boren and Leyha Marie Hughes last year, they could convict him of capital murder. The trial would then move into a second phase with the jury deciding if he should spend the rest of his life in prison or die for his crime.
If, however, jurors find Thomas was controlled by a delusion at the time he killed his estranged wife and her children, they could send him to a mental hospital for the immediate future.
Attorneys had up to 60 minutes each to address a jury that has heard from a handful of expert psychiatrists and dozens of other witnesses in the case.
Grayson County District Attorney Joe Brown started the marathon session by reminding the jury where the whole thing began - with a mother and her two small children.
Brown said the jury has heard a great deal about Andre Thomas and the problems going on in his life. But, the trial isn't about Thomas, Brown said. It's about getting justice for Laura, little Andre and Leyha.
Brown was all energy as he entered the courtroom just a little before 1 p.m. and the energy stayed up as he gave what has to count as the closing of his life. In the first part of his second term in office, Brown has tried a few prominent cases, but none as serious as capital murder, and none as off-the-chart, high profile as a triple murder.
"I want you to remember Laura and kids. She died not quickly. She died not painlessly," Brown said as he recounted how Mrs. Thomas must have felt as she fought off her estranged husband's assault on her. Brown told the jury she was probably alive when Thomas left her bleeding on the floor and headed for her children.
Members of the Boren family and friends cried loudly as Brown talked about the pain and fear the children must have felt during the attack. Brown showed the jury photos of the young mother and her children smiling. Then, he held up the large photos of them after the attack. The prosecutor said Thomas knew what he was doing as he viciously stabbed the three.
Brown said Thomas did what he did to his wife and her children, "because he is mean and he was jealous. He wanted Laura back and she wouldn't take him back. He wanted to take everything from Bryant Hughes who had what he couldn't have."
Brown said Thomas drank and took drugs until he worked himself into a rage-filled stupor and then went to Laura's apartment and killed what he couldn't have for his own. The prosecutor then warned the jury about what they would hear from the defense. Brown said lots of people tried to get Thomas the help he said he wanted. He reminded them that each time, it was Thomas who left or failed to show up to get the help.
"His brutality brought us to this courtroom," Brown said pointing at Thomas in the last few minutes of the state's opening remarks.
When Brown sat down, the jury got a break. As they left the room, defense attorneys R.J. Hagood and Bobbie Peterson prepared to give the jury their side of the case. This is not the first capital murder case for either of them. Dressed in a dark suit and carrying an ever-present Coke bottle, Hagood patted his client on the back once or twice while the jury was out. Between the time when the jurors returned and Hagood began his statement, he fished under a nearby bench for a large wooden dowel he had brought into the courtroom.
As he walked into the space between the jury box and the judge's bench, Hagood talked about how both the human mind and the piece of wood are generally considered to be strong and reliable under normal circumstances.
"In the right time and under the right circumstances, the board snaps," Hagood said as he broke the piece of wood into two sections. He then continued that his client's mind snapped just as surely as the dowel had and he shouldn't be held responsible for what he had done.
"How could a man do something like this?" Hagood said, acknowledging the question he said he knows the jurors have been asking themselves.
"I think in a case like this, you have to look not only at the facts and circumstances, you have to get into the mind of Andre Thomas," Hagood said. He then told the jury they have to start with the fact that Thomas suffered, at the time of the crime, from a mental illness. He then reminded them of the expert witness, Dr. Edward Gripon, whom the defense called to help the jury see what the defense has called Thomas' "journey into madness."
Hagood reminded them that the doctor had said someone suffering from schizophrenia can have moments of clarity and rational discussions as long as the discussion veers clear of the delusions. Hagood said the defense is asking the jury to look at the whole of Thomas' behavior from early 2004 until the killings and see a pattern of disintegration in Thomas' mental state.
The state, Hagood warned, wants the jury to look only at pieces of Thomas' life before and after the crime. Hagood reminded them that Thomas has repeatedly told people he thought he was doing God's work when he killed the three people and that a God-fearing person wouldn't consider answering God's commands to be wrong. It is key to the defense case that Thomas did not know what he did was wrong because, in order to find that Thomas was insane at the time of the killings, the jury must find that he suffered from a mental illness so severe it kept him from knowing his actions were wrong.
To try to bring the jury closer to that decision, Hagood reminded them of Bible verses that refer to Jezebel and the suffering she should have endured for her sins. Hagood said it is beyond insane for anyone to take such a verse literally enough to actually kill someone he or she thought to be Jezebel. Then, Hagood reminded the jury of the other Bible verse his client took literally and the damaged right eye the verse caused. He then pleaded with them to follow their own minds.
"What we are asking you to do will take some courage and conviction. Perhaps we ought to have a verdict that says guilty, but insane. But you don't have that option. You have to wrap your arms around the not guilty and then go to insane," Hagood told them.
He then sat down and left it up to Peterson to complete the closing. She used a computer and a large screen to walk the jury back over the evidence she said proved her client was insane at the time of the crime. She told the jury that they should stop looking for rational explanations for what Thomas did because there aren't any. The actions and the man, she said aren't rational and can't be viewed as such no matter how one tries.
Peterson tried to dispel the state's major theory of reason in the case. The state says the combination of alcohol, marijuana and DXM that Thomas was ingesting caused him to go into a drug induced psychosis and that state caused him to kill his three victims. Peterson said there was no way Thomas had that much of the drugs in his system at the time of the killings. She reminded the jury of testimony about how long those drugs stay in a person's system and how little of the drugs Thomas had when he was tested at the hospital after the crimes.
Then, she centered in on the DXM. She grabbed a grocery bag and walked toward the jury. Peterson took from the bag a number of cold remedies and spread them along the bar in front of the jury. The name-brand products included items made for children. Peterson argued how can a substance Americans give their children every day cause the kind of brutal violence Thomas displayed on his victims. Especially, she stressed in the low levels he would have had in his blood at the time of the killings. It just couldn't, she asserted.
"You have to look at his actions in the context of his delusions," Peterson said. She said the jury must remember that the Thomas who took duct tape to the crime scene (an act which the prosecution says proves he knew what he was doing was wrong) was the same man who took three knives because he didn't want to cross contaminate the blood of the people he fully intended to kill. Those, she said are not rational thoughts.
She said Andre Thomas didn't go to his estranged wife's apartment to kill her and their son and her daughter. He went there to kill Jezebel, the Antichrist and a demon. He went there to save the world and be redeemed in the eyes of God. How any one jumps from murder to redemption with God is only possible to understand if one is as crazy as Thomas was on the day he committed the crime, Peterson said. She also reminded the jury that every time Thomas attempted to get help he was left alone or allowed to leave without getting it. She said a rational person wouldn't seek help and then leave without getting it, but Thomas wasn't rational.
First Assistant Grayson County District Attorney Kerye Ashmore was the last person to address the jury Friday. A former district attorney for Lamar County, Ashmore has tried a number of high profile cases. His mission in the Thomas case was to put the jury back on the track Brown had laid earlier. He did so by reminding the jury of the burdens the defense must bear in the case. He said it was up to Hagood and Peterson to prove "by the greater weight of the credible evidence" that Thomas was insane at the time of the crime. Ashmore reminded the jury that the law presumes Thomas to be sane and that, if jurors, individually, haven't seen enough in the defense case to make them think Thomas was insane, they must also presume him sane.
He said the defense case rests on the assumption that Thomas was so wrapped up in the religious delusion that he didn't know he was killing his wife, their son, and her daughter. In order for that to fit the insanity defense, Ashmore contended, then Thomas would have had to stay with that delusion.
Ashmore reminded the jury of the number of times that Thomas asked to be forgiven in the days and months after the crime. If, Ashmore said, Thomas had just killed three people he thought were so evil that God wanted them killed, why was he asking for forgiveness?
Ashmore said Thomas even used the word "murdered" when he turned himself into the police department. He said he had just "murdered my wife." Murder is a legal term that means to kill without justification.
Further, Ashmore said, Thomas left the scene of the crime rather than staying there and showing, proudly, what he had done at God's command. Ashmore restated testimony that reflected Thomas' repeated admissions to people that he thought what he did was wrong and that the drugs caused it. That admission is likely to be key since Texas law says a person who commits a crime while intoxicated at his own choosing, is guilty of that crime. Choosing to use drugs, Ashmore contended, was not a directive from God. If the drugs drove Thomas to commit the crimes, or even if they drove Thomas to think that God wanted him to commit the crimes, then the jury must not find him insane.
http://www.heralddemocrat.com/articles/200.../iq_1766896.txt (http://www.heralddemocrat.com/articles/2005/03/06/local_news/iq_1766896.txt)
Herald Democrat
The capital murder trial known as the State vs Andre Thomas has been complicated and tense from the beginning, and Friday's closing arguments were no different.
The jury will begin to deliberate Monday morning. If jurors find Thomas knew what he was doing when he killed Laura Boren Thomas, Andre Boren and Leyha Marie Hughes last year, they could convict him of capital murder. The trial would then move into a second phase with the jury deciding if he should spend the rest of his life in prison or die for his crime.
If, however, jurors find Thomas was controlled by a delusion at the time he killed his estranged wife and her children, they could send him to a mental hospital for the immediate future.
Attorneys had up to 60 minutes each to address a jury that has heard from a handful of expert psychiatrists and dozens of other witnesses in the case.
Grayson County District Attorney Joe Brown started the marathon session by reminding the jury where the whole thing began - with a mother and her two small children.
Brown said the jury has heard a great deal about Andre Thomas and the problems going on in his life. But, the trial isn't about Thomas, Brown said. It's about getting justice for Laura, little Andre and Leyha.
Brown was all energy as he entered the courtroom just a little before 1 p.m. and the energy stayed up as he gave what has to count as the closing of his life. In the first part of his second term in office, Brown has tried a few prominent cases, but none as serious as capital murder, and none as off-the-chart, high profile as a triple murder.
"I want you to remember Laura and kids. She died not quickly. She died not painlessly," Brown said as he recounted how Mrs. Thomas must have felt as she fought off her estranged husband's assault on her. Brown told the jury she was probably alive when Thomas left her bleeding on the floor and headed for her children.
Members of the Boren family and friends cried loudly as Brown talked about the pain and fear the children must have felt during the attack. Brown showed the jury photos of the young mother and her children smiling. Then, he held up the large photos of them after the attack. The prosecutor said Thomas knew what he was doing as he viciously stabbed the three.
Brown said Thomas did what he did to his wife and her children, "because he is mean and he was jealous. He wanted Laura back and she wouldn't take him back. He wanted to take everything from Bryant Hughes who had what he couldn't have."
Brown said Thomas drank and took drugs until he worked himself into a rage-filled stupor and then went to Laura's apartment and killed what he couldn't have for his own. The prosecutor then warned the jury about what they would hear from the defense. Brown said lots of people tried to get Thomas the help he said he wanted. He reminded them that each time, it was Thomas who left or failed to show up to get the help.
"His brutality brought us to this courtroom," Brown said pointing at Thomas in the last few minutes of the state's opening remarks.
When Brown sat down, the jury got a break. As they left the room, defense attorneys R.J. Hagood and Bobbie Peterson prepared to give the jury their side of the case. This is not the first capital murder case for either of them. Dressed in a dark suit and carrying an ever-present Coke bottle, Hagood patted his client on the back once or twice while the jury was out. Between the time when the jurors returned and Hagood began his statement, he fished under a nearby bench for a large wooden dowel he had brought into the courtroom.
As he walked into the space between the jury box and the judge's bench, Hagood talked about how both the human mind and the piece of wood are generally considered to be strong and reliable under normal circumstances.
"In the right time and under the right circumstances, the board snaps," Hagood said as he broke the piece of wood into two sections. He then continued that his client's mind snapped just as surely as the dowel had and he shouldn't be held responsible for what he had done.
"How could a man do something like this?" Hagood said, acknowledging the question he said he knows the jurors have been asking themselves.
"I think in a case like this, you have to look not only at the facts and circumstances, you have to get into the mind of Andre Thomas," Hagood said. He then told the jury they have to start with the fact that Thomas suffered, at the time of the crime, from a mental illness. He then reminded them of the expert witness, Dr. Edward Gripon, whom the defense called to help the jury see what the defense has called Thomas' "journey into madness."
Hagood reminded them that the doctor had said someone suffering from schizophrenia can have moments of clarity and rational discussions as long as the discussion veers clear of the delusions. Hagood said the defense is asking the jury to look at the whole of Thomas' behavior from early 2004 until the killings and see a pattern of disintegration in Thomas' mental state.
The state, Hagood warned, wants the jury to look only at pieces of Thomas' life before and after the crime. Hagood reminded them that Thomas has repeatedly told people he thought he was doing God's work when he killed the three people and that a God-fearing person wouldn't consider answering God's commands to be wrong. It is key to the defense case that Thomas did not know what he did was wrong because, in order to find that Thomas was insane at the time of the killings, the jury must find that he suffered from a mental illness so severe it kept him from knowing his actions were wrong.
To try to bring the jury closer to that decision, Hagood reminded them of Bible verses that refer to Jezebel and the suffering she should have endured for her sins. Hagood said it is beyond insane for anyone to take such a verse literally enough to actually kill someone he or she thought to be Jezebel. Then, Hagood reminded the jury of the other Bible verse his client took literally and the damaged right eye the verse caused. He then pleaded with them to follow their own minds.
"What we are asking you to do will take some courage and conviction. Perhaps we ought to have a verdict that says guilty, but insane. But you don't have that option. You have to wrap your arms around the not guilty and then go to insane," Hagood told them.
He then sat down and left it up to Peterson to complete the closing. She used a computer and a large screen to walk the jury back over the evidence she said proved her client was insane at the time of the crime. She told the jury that they should stop looking for rational explanations for what Thomas did because there aren't any. The actions and the man, she said aren't rational and can't be viewed as such no matter how one tries.
Peterson tried to dispel the state's major theory of reason in the case. The state says the combination of alcohol, marijuana and DXM that Thomas was ingesting caused him to go into a drug induced psychosis and that state caused him to kill his three victims. Peterson said there was no way Thomas had that much of the drugs in his system at the time of the killings. She reminded the jury of testimony about how long those drugs stay in a person's system and how little of the drugs Thomas had when he was tested at the hospital after the crimes.
Then, she centered in on the DXM. She grabbed a grocery bag and walked toward the jury. Peterson took from the bag a number of cold remedies and spread them along the bar in front of the jury. The name-brand products included items made for children. Peterson argued how can a substance Americans give their children every day cause the kind of brutal violence Thomas displayed on his victims. Especially, she stressed in the low levels he would have had in his blood at the time of the killings. It just couldn't, she asserted.
"You have to look at his actions in the context of his delusions," Peterson said. She said the jury must remember that the Thomas who took duct tape to the crime scene (an act which the prosecution says proves he knew what he was doing was wrong) was the same man who took three knives because he didn't want to cross contaminate the blood of the people he fully intended to kill. Those, she said are not rational thoughts.
She said Andre Thomas didn't go to his estranged wife's apartment to kill her and their son and her daughter. He went there to kill Jezebel, the Antichrist and a demon. He went there to save the world and be redeemed in the eyes of God. How any one jumps from murder to redemption with God is only possible to understand if one is as crazy as Thomas was on the day he committed the crime, Peterson said. She also reminded the jury that every time Thomas attempted to get help he was left alone or allowed to leave without getting it. She said a rational person wouldn't seek help and then leave without getting it, but Thomas wasn't rational.
First Assistant Grayson County District Attorney Kerye Ashmore was the last person to address the jury Friday. A former district attorney for Lamar County, Ashmore has tried a number of high profile cases. His mission in the Thomas case was to put the jury back on the track Brown had laid earlier. He did so by reminding the jury of the burdens the defense must bear in the case. He said it was up to Hagood and Peterson to prove "by the greater weight of the credible evidence" that Thomas was insane at the time of the crime. Ashmore reminded the jury that the law presumes Thomas to be sane and that, if jurors, individually, haven't seen enough in the defense case to make them think Thomas was insane, they must also presume him sane.
He said the defense case rests on the assumption that Thomas was so wrapped up in the religious delusion that he didn't know he was killing his wife, their son, and her daughter. In order for that to fit the insanity defense, Ashmore contended, then Thomas would have had to stay with that delusion.
Ashmore reminded the jury of the number of times that Thomas asked to be forgiven in the days and months after the crime. If, Ashmore said, Thomas had just killed three people he thought were so evil that God wanted them killed, why was he asking for forgiveness?
Ashmore said Thomas even used the word "murdered" when he turned himself into the police department. He said he had just "murdered my wife." Murder is a legal term that means to kill without justification.
Further, Ashmore said, Thomas left the scene of the crime rather than staying there and showing, proudly, what he had done at God's command. Ashmore restated testimony that reflected Thomas' repeated admissions to people that he thought what he did was wrong and that the drugs caused it. That admission is likely to be key since Texas law says a person who commits a crime while intoxicated at his own choosing, is guilty of that crime. Choosing to use drugs, Ashmore contended, was not a directive from God. If the drugs drove Thomas to commit the crimes, or even if they drove Thomas to think that God wanted him to commit the crimes, then the jury must not find him insane.
http://www.heralddemocrat.com/articles/200.../iq_1766896.txt (http://www.heralddemocrat.com/articles/2005/03/06/local_news/iq_1766896.txt)