The evidence is far from over in the trial on whether Vincent Brothers killed five of his family members, but the last two days has shown the ebb and flow of "who's winning."

One could argue that on Monday when Vincent Brothers sobbed upon seeing the photographs of his dead family members that he wasn't the cold, calculating killer the prosecution has set him out to be.

On the other hand,  a critical hole was dug Tuesday in the defense contention that the defendant was in Ohio visiting the family of his brother, Melvin, when the July 6, 2003  killings occurred.

Melvin Brothers, 43, one year younger than the defendant, testified that he did not see Vincent,  from 7 p.m. July 4 to 11 p.m. July 7 that year.

But Melvin did use Vincent's credit card during that time. And he used the credit card in April for what the prosecution calls a "dry run" visit by Vincent to Ohio. The 2003 visits by Vincent in Ohio were the first in 10 years, Melvin testified.

 That testimony opens up possibilities that Vincent might be the killer.

But it's far from a slam dunk. The defense will argue Vincent couldn't  drive his rental car nearly 4,600 miles in that time frame.   And just because Melvin didn't see Vincent, doesn't mean Vincent wasn't in Ohio.  His rental car did have enough miles for the trip, the prosecution has said.

 District Attorney Ed Jagels said at the time Vincent was arrested in April of 2004 that this would be a circumstantial case.

That means both sides will be able to argue their position is more reasonable than the other.

It will be how all the evidence meshes together that will determine the outcome of the case. The trial is expected to last three months. It has a long way to go.

Posted by Steve E. Swenson

So I couldn't wait to see video on the first day of the trial. We've been waiting 3 and 1/2 years.

And then it happens and the first thing out of my wife's mouth was not about the evidence Deputy District Attorney Lisa Green was unveiling, but rather what a nice pink suit the prosecutor was wearing.

Yes, that's really how it is.

Posted by Steve E. Swenson

I had a Smith-Corona manual typewriter at my first newspaper job in 1970.

We have a little more than that going on at the Vincent Brothers trial.

We have a video camera, just like television. We post video on our website.

Reporter Jessica Logan has a Blackberry, which enables her to type updates during the trial via e-mail to the newsroom.

That means we can update stories while she's in court. We don't have to wait until she gets back to the office.

We bought the Blackberry for this trial. I've never even touched one until 5 minutes ago.

We're doing all this to provide the most up to date information as quickly as possible.
This beats my Smith-Corona all to heck.

But I do miss the smell of rubber cement which we used to paste copy paper together. We don't use copy paper any more. It amazes me that we continue to use me.

Posted by Steve E. Swenson

 

The time has come when the rubber meets the road in the Vincent Brothers murder trial.
Attorneys on both sides will present evidence on whether the former school vice principal murdered five members of his own family.

Both Brothers and Linda Piggee, the daughter of victim Earnestine Harper, the mother-in-law of Brothers, both cried as a 911 tape was played of family friend Kelsey Spann reporting the horrific crime.

Below is the story reported by Jessica Logan.


It was the sound of the names of her mother and sister killed 31/2 years ago that sent a crying woman from a Bakersfield courtroom Wednesday at the start of Vincent Brothers' trial. Brothers, who is accused of murdering his wife, three children and mother-in-law, also welled up when the prosecution played a 911 tape recording of the hysterical friend who found Brothers' family killed in their home in 2003. 

This was played during opening statements, during which Deputy District Attorney Lisa Green laid out her case for the jury.

"My sister, my best friend, she's dead," family friend Kelsey Spann told a 911 dispatcher. "Please help me."

Green believes Brothers flew to Ohio to establish an alibi, then drove back to Bakersfield to kill his wife, Joanie Harper; their three children, Marques, Lyndsey and Marshall; and Joanie Harper's mother, Earnestine. Brothers has pleaded not guilty.

Green believes the former vice principal killed his family in 2003 because he wanted to escape the emotional and financial strain of three children.

Much of the prosecution's case has already been aired.

But defense attorney Michael Gardina offered never-before-heard details. He said Brothers was spending time with a variety of relatives in Ohio at the same time the prosecution believes he was driving back to Bakersfield to kill his family. Gardina said Brothers stayed with his brother and his brother's family, went on a short road trip with another brother and made calls to his mother from the Ohio area.

The defense attorney promised all these people would testify on Brothers' behalf at trial. But the defense has much more to present, and will continue opening statements today.

Three of Earnestine Harper's children came to Bakersfield to watch those opening statements.

Earnestine Harper's daughter Linda Piggee started to cry when her mother's name was read to the jury in connection with the murder charges. And when her sister Joanie Harper's name was read, she started crying heavily and started walking out the door, appearing to faint into her brother's arms.

Earnestine Harper's son, Eddie Harper, and her daughter Elain Byrd remained to listen to opening statements. Little came as a surprise to the Harper family. Eddie Harper said Green helped put the pieces of the case together in his mind.

He and his two sisters said they are going to leave judgment to the jurors and to God.

But they all heard stories about Brothers from Joanie and Earnestine Harper that he was a distant father with little interest in his wife, children or their family.

"Meeting him, eye contact, shaking hands was difficult," said Joanie Harper's sister, Elain Byrd. "I told him I wanted to see his eyes ... you can tell a lot about a person by looking them in the eyes."

Joanie Harper's sisters said they gave Vincent Brothers credit for supporting her and the children financially.

But Eddie Harper said Brothers usually came up with money for Joanie Harper when she suggested establishing regular child support.

Despite these difficulties, they said Brothers would also be surprisingly helpful at times.

The Harper family peppered their language outside of court with praises of and devotion to God, and took advice from Scripture. They said God helps them through the loss of their family.

Before Wednesday afternoon's opening statements, the judge and attorneys wrapped up jury selection, which took several weeks.

Gardina accused Green of picking off all the black women from the jury and from the panel of six alternate jurors. A black man was sworn in as a juror in the case.

In turn, Green accused the defense of excusing mainly white women. Gardina excused 11 white women and one white man before he was satisfied with the composition of the jury pool, Green said.

Kern County Superior Court Judge Michael Bush asked Green to explain why she picked off the women.

The prosecutor said one of the women knew Brothers as a student when Brothers was a teacher; a second was removed because the juror didn't say she was for the death penalty; and the third because she only had an eighth-grade education.

Bush agreed these were good reasons to excuse these jurors.

The judge said he did not want to pursue Green's objection because the only possible remedy would be to empanel a new jury.

Before jury selection began Wednesday, Bush told Green she would not be allowed to present evidence during trial that Brothers was an unloving father, a crucial element of the prosecution's case.

But Green was able to present this during opening statements.

Green believes Brothers killed his family because he did not want to have to care for them or pay child support. Brothers has an older daughter and Green wanted to show that Brothers was an unloving father to all four of his children.

"I don't see the connection between being a distant father and being a murderer," Bush told Green. But the judge will still allow her to argue that Brothers may have killed his family to get out from under hefty child support payments he would have faced if he divorced his wife.

Green objected to how late the motion was filed. The defense filed the motion to have this evidence excluded Tuesday and Bush heard the motion Wednesday.

"It's taking the guts out of my argument," Green said.

Bush said he would allow Green to argue later that she should be allowed to introduce evidence that Brothers was an unloving father.

The trial of Vincent Brothers, a vice principal accused of killing his wife, three children and mother-in-law in one of Bakersfield's worst crimes ever, is set to begin today.

Most of the groundwork has been laid.

For the most part, jurors have been selected and the judge has ruled on what evidence can be presented. Kern County Superior Court Judge Michael Bush hopes to tie up most of the loose ends today.

The first big job will be the final round of selecting a 12-person jury from the 69 jurors remaining.

Deputy District Attorney Lisa Green fears this won't be enough because both sides can pick off 20 people, they still have to select alternate jurors and each time the jurors return, some are excused.

But Bush said he will worry about running out of jurors if that happens.

Once the jury is seated, attorneys will present opening statements.

Green said she will take about an hour. She will be assisted with a three-dimensional model of the house where the bodies were found.

During the trial, jurors will also tour the house itself, Bush ruled after visiting it Tuesday.

But even if things run smoothly, opening statements won't wrap up today.

Defense attorney Michael Gardina said his opening statement will take about a day.

Meanwhile, Bush did not rule on two defense motions filed Tuesday.

In one, the defense requested the prosecution not present evidence of Brothers' character.

In the second, it asked that Green not be allowed to present evidence that Brothers failed to return a telephone call to a Bakersfield police detective in the hours after the family was discovered killed.

The defense said Brothers never got the call, but the prosecution believes he could have.

These final arrangements follow weeks of hearings on motions and jury selection.

Brothers, a former vice principal, is accused of killing his wife, Joanie Harper; their three children, Marques, Lyndsey and Marshall; and Joanie Harper's mother, Earnestine.

Brothers has pleaded not guilty.

His family was found dead on July 8, 2003, and he was arrested in April 2004 on suspicion of committing the murders.

As attorneys in the Brothers case poked and prodded potential jurors for
biases against "the system" one name returned again and again - O.J.
Simpson.
The foot-ball star, turned movie star, turned accused murderer was tried and
acquitted for the murder of his ex-wife and companion more than a decade
ago.
But the case still leaves a bad taste in the mouths of many potential
jurors.
Given a lengthy questionnaire, some of the jurors said they at times lacked
confidence in the courts. When asked why, they gave a short answer - O.J.
Simpson. And the attorneys did little follow up on this, as if the name
alone is enough to convey their worries that intense media scrutiny spoiled
the case.
If the media attention in the Simpson case were the plague, the media
attention Brothers has received would be a sneeze. After the initial rush of
nationwide attention, Brothers has barely registered a blip outside of Kern
County.
But the defense worried that the hundreds of local articles, and television
and radio newscasts would turn the most important group of people, Kern
County residents, who would sit on Brothers jury, against Brothers.
They even hired a consultant, who researched the effect, and testified that
indeed the jury pool was contaminated.
But Kern County Superior Court Judge Michael Bush said the trial would be
held in Kern County.
Bush added several questions about media coverage to the questionnaires to
remedy this problem.
People from the other side of the Tehachapi mountains such as Ridgecrest
usually never heard about the case.
Many people from Bakersfield knew the name, but few facts.
A few read a lot about the case, thought Brothers is guilty and were
promptly excused from the trial.
In the end, Bush had a much harder time finding people who could afford to
sit on the jury for three months.

Who can afford to sit on a jury for three months?
Kern County is a working-class community. And like most working-class
people, many Kern County residents called to sit on the Brothers trial said
they would lose their house and car if they didn't receive a paycheck for
three months and they were excused from the case.
Which begs the question, who can afford to sit on a jury for three months?
Are there employers out there who pay for unlimited jury service?
You bet there are.
The city, county, state and federal governments.
That means teachers and correctional officers and the like were in something
of the majority in the pool of potential jurors for the Brothers case.
Many teachers pleaded with the judge to let them go because they would
basically miss an entire semester of school, but the judge said that because
they are paid, they have to serve.
Some of the correctional officers said they couldn't afford to sit because
although they would be paid for their regular pay, they would not be
reimbursed for overtime. Which apparently makes up a hefty portion of their
salary. They were excused.
And let's not forget our retirees.
They get the same pay if they are at home playing Canasta or if they're
spending their golden years in court.
Many private employers would pay 5, maybe 10, maybe 20 days. But unlimited
pay for jury duty seemed to be the norm mainly in government jobs.
(Note - The Bakersfield Californian pays 15 days of jury duty)
 
Posted by Jessica Logan and Steve E. Swenson

The judge in the Vincent Brothers case drew a delicate line Wednesday between photos that illuminate an issue and those that show little but gore.

Kern County Superior Court Judge Michael Bush explained he will allow photos that reveal an important point the prosecution would like to make in the case against the man accused of killing five family members.

For instance, the judge will allow Deputy District Attorney Lisa Green to show photos of the foot of Brothers' daughter, Lyndsey.

The defense believes there was blood on her foot, but the prosecution thinks the discoloration came from decomposition. The prosecution can now show the photo to the jury as an expert talks about it.

But overly gory photos, like autopsy photos, won't be shown, because they won't reveal anything in dispute to the jury, the judge ruled.

Both sides agree that everyone in the family was shot and Brothers' wife, Joanie Harper, was also stabbed.

Other decisions include:

* The defense can present an expert to testify about how police can elicit lies from people through improper questioning techniques.

But the judge said the expert could not discuss the Brothers case specifically.

Defense attorneys Anthony Bryan and Michael Gardina believe investigators pressured a witness into giving incriminating statements against Brothers. The prosecution denies this.

* Bush allowed the prosecution to present an expert witness from the FBI to interpret the crime scene.

For instance, he will tell the jury that the killer staged the crime scene to look like a robbery even though nothing of monetary value was taken.

 

Reporters Jessica Logan and Steve E. Swenson will bring you a continuing blog on the Vincent Brothers trial.

Brothers, a former vice principal, is accused of killing his wife, Joanie Harper; their three children, Marques, Lyndsey and Marshall; and Joanie Harper’s mother, Earnestine.

His family was found dead on July 8, 2003, and he was arrested in April 2004 on suspicion of committing the murders. He has pleaded not guilty.

The blog will link to the latest stories and videos.

The story on Feb. 14 describes how questioning began for 85 new potential jurors, the the excusing of 30 jurors who have previously been questioned.

Jurors are slated to return to court Feb. 21 for the final selection process. The trial is estimated to last three months.