Defense says Johnson case mishandled
Motions would preclude police interviews, jailhouse talk from double murder trial
By GREG STAHL
Express Staff Writer
Sarah Johnson
|
|
Defense attorneys this week contended that Blaine County mishandled the case it built against alleged teenage murderer Sarah M. Johnson, 17.
The 5th District Court in Hailey this week fielded a half-dozen motions from defense attorneys that, presumably, could have a significant effect on Johnson?s scheduled Feb. 1 trial.
Her defense attorneys, Bob Pangburn and Mark Rader, argued that police interviews with Johnson that occurred between Sept. 2, 2003, the day of her parents? murders, and her Oct. 29 arrest should not be admissible during the trial because her right to an attorney was violated and because she was using sleeping pills at the time.
Also of significance, they argued that testimony offered by any of Johnson?s former Blaine County Jail cellmates should not be admissible because the inmates were over the age of 18. Idaho law does not allow minors and adults to be paired in incarceration, they said.
The court also entertained defense motions that would bar Johnson?s medical, school and counseling records from the courtroom during trial.
Prosecuting attorneys argued against the motions on all counts.
Fifth District Judge Barry Wood did not immediately rule on any of the motions, and Pangburn would not speak specifically about the importance of the arguments to the defense team?s case.
?All motions are important,? he said.
The hearings, which occurred on Wednesday, Oct. 6, and Thursday, Oct. 7, comprised the biggest continuous block of courtroom time in the case so far. A number of people involved in the case took the stand to testify, including Blaine County Sheriff Walt Femling, local attorney Doug Nelson, Blaine County Sheriff?s Detective Steve Harkins and Johnson?s aunt, Linda Vavold.
Johnson is accused of murdering her parents Diane and Alan Johnson, early in the morning on Sept. 2, 2003, in the family?s Bellevue home. She was indicted by a grand jury immediately preceding her arrest. She was 16 at the time and attended classes at Wood River High School.
She is charged as an adult for two counts of first-degree murder, but the state is not seeking the death penalty.
In arguing to suppress information garnered in police interviews with Johnson prior to her arrest, Pangburn called investigator actions a ?wholesale avoidance of Sarah Johnson?s right to her attorney.?
On Wednesday, local attorney Doug Nelson testified that Johnson retained his services on Sept. 2, the same day Alan and Diane Johnson were discovered shot to death in their Aspen Drive home. The next day, Sept. 3, Johnson participated in a police interview without Nelson?s presence.
?If Mr. Nelson had been notified of the communication, he testified yesterday, that, ?No, I wouldn?t have let her talk with the authorities?.? Pangburn said. ?It was entirely inappropriate for them to communicate with her after she had an attorney.?
But prosecuting attorneys argued the point.
?She waived the right to have him present,? Whatcott said. ?Even if he (Nelson) did invoke here rights, she waived them.?
Wood zeroed in on the crux of the matter. Johnson said during the Sept. 3 interview that she had been instructed by her lawyer not to talk with anyone.
The question is, is the phrase, ?My lawyer says,? sufficient to invoke her right to an attorney? Wood asked.
From Pangburn?s perspective, Johnson?s intent was clear.
?She told them she was represented, but they questioned her anyway,? he said.
Furthermore, Rader said Johnson was under a lot of stress and the influence of sleeping pills at the time of her initial questioning.
?She was sleepy. She was acting strangely. Under those conditions, under all those circumstances, it is clear that Sarah Johnson, at age 16, did not knowingly waive her right to her Miranda rights.?
Rader indicated that Johnson?s family and friends did not encourage her to seek legal representation.
Blaine County Prosecuting Attorney Jim Thomas said he had an explanation.
?The reason is, nobody could believe that Sarah would actually kill her own parents. Linda (Vavold) said she couldn?t believe Sarah was involved. They thought Bruno (Santos) did it.?
Santos was Johnson?s fiancé at the time of the killings, and authorities have reported that the engagement was a bone of contention between the young lady and her parents.
Wood scheduled another hearing for Oct. 29 to hear further testimony related to the motion to suppress the investigator interviews.
In arguing to suppress testimony from Johnson?s former adult cellmates, of which there are roughly 30, Pangburn said the law was broken when Johnson was paired with adult cellmates.
?The state should not be able to benefit from its willing violation of the law,? he said.
But Blaine County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Justin Whatcott said it is not that clear cut.
?Clearly the defendant is being treated as an adult,? he said. ?She is charged with first degree murder. We have to keep her away from juveniles, not adults.?
After the Thursday hearing, Pangburn said that if the motion to suppress all of the former cellmates? testimony is denied, he would pursue a separate motion to suppress testimony from one of Johnson?s former cellmates in particular: convicted drug trafficker Malinda M. Gonzales.
Finishing the day?s business, prosecution and defense attorneys agreed that Nov. 5 would be a suitable date to establish a deadline for pre-trial motions.
?We?ll get a decision out on the rest of these promptly,? Wood said. ?Feb. 1 is coming fast. We?re running out of time, frankly.?
