A sibling relationship between a juror and the owner of property where Alfonso Barajas Sr., 50, was killed briefly halted proceedings in the trial of Ferman Hernandez, who is accused of manslaughter in the shooting death of Barajas on March 21 of this year.
Hernandez, who was 31 at the time of the shooting, also is charged with hunting without completing the hunter safety education course required by the state of Kansas.
The trial opened Monday in Lyon County District Court before District Judge Jeffry Larson.
The sibling relationship between juror John Gilligan and property owner Charles (Chuck) Gilligan became known as Larson gave the newly seated jury instructions in the case.
Larson told jurors that in order to convict on involuntary manslaughter, the prosecution would have to prove that the defendant unintentionally killed Barajas, that it was done recklessly or in the commission of or attempting to commit a violation of hunting without a hunter safety education certificate, and that the incident took place on the date, time and place alleged.
To prove the hunter safety education charge, Larson said, prosecutors would have to prove that the defendant was “unlawfully, intentionally and willfully hunting in the state of Kansas without a valid hunter education certificate” and that the incident took place when and where alleged.
“You should presume the defendant is not guilty of the crimes charged,” Larson said. “... Depending on the evidence presented, I may also instruct you on lesser offenses.”
Larson had told jurors that, among other constraints, they were not to go to any site connected with the case.
Juror John Gilligan told Larson that his brother, Chuck, owns the property where the shooting took place. Because Chuck Gilligan is somewhat handicapped, John Gilligan feeds animals daily on the property, 1231 E. Logan Avenue. He also had fed hay to livestock owned by the victim.
Larson sent the jurors from the courtroom to discuss the situation with the prosecution and defense attorneys before deciding whether Gilligan could continue to sit on the jury.
“I’m hesitant to have to use the alternate not even five minutes into this, but if we have to, we have to,” Larson said.
Assistant County Attorney Amy Aranda said that John Gilligan did not mention being related to Chuck Gilligan during questioning of prospective jurors. County Attorney Marc Goodman added that he thought that John Gilligan was beginning to say that he had fed the defendant’s animals when Gilligan was interrupted.
Gilligan was returned to the courtroom for additional voir dire.
“What did your brother tell you?” Aranda asked.
Gilligan answered that his brother had told him nothing he didn’t already know from hearing talk in the workplace and media reports.
“It’s common knowledge,” Gilligan said.
He said that he knew the deceased because he had fed hay to Barajas’s animals.
Aranda asked if he was acquainted with the defendant.
“I may have seen him at work,” said Gilligan. “I believe it was at Tyson, but I’m not familiar with him.”
Gilligan said that he did not have a friendship with the deceased or any of his family members.
Aranda asked if he would be able to act as if he had not seen the property before with the other jurors.
“I’ve been around it for 30-some years,” Gilligan responded.
Defense attorney Don Krueger said he had no questions, saying that he believed Gilligan had answered questions frankly.
After Gilligan was excused from the courtroom to rejoin other jurors, Krueger said that he was ready to proceed with the case.
“As much as I can imply common understanding to what Mr. Gilligan is saying,” Goodman said, “he still has knowledge that no other juror has. ...”
Goodman said he was concerned that having Gilligan on the jury would make the case “open to error” that could be appealed later.
Krueger said that he did not believe Gilligan had extraordinary knowledge of the case.
“There’s evidence in the police report that someone moved the table where the rabbit was cleaned after the gun was fired,” Krueger said. “I don’t think Mr. Gilligan has any knowledge of that.”
Krueger said the defense would be “willing to waiver on behalf of the client any complaints of Gilligan serving.”
“Is it correct, sir, that you are waiving any objection to Mr. Gilligan serving as a juror on this case simply because of familiarity with the property?” Larson asked.
“That is correct, sir,” Krueger answered.
Aranda and Krueger offered opening statements after the jury, including Gilligan, returned to the courtroom.
Aranda told the jury that Hernandez, Barajas and a group of friends had gathered to celebrate Good Friday at a small barn rented by Gilberto Ortiz on Chuck Gilligan’s property on Logan Avenue. The men had a fish fry, talked and drank beer.
She said that Ferman Hernandez had brought a .22 rifle with him to the fish fry, and when the fish ran out, Gilberto Ortiz took the rifle and killed a wild rabbit.
“Alfonso, being the only one capable, skinned that rabbit and prepared it to cook,” Aranda said.
When the fish ran out, Barajas moved the rabbit to a small table that contained condiments and other items, and Hernandez grabbed the rifle.
“Without any warning, he stepped up near the table where Mr. Barajas was preparing the rabbit ... and fired (the rifle) at a bird that he saw in a tree just beyond where Alfonso was standing in front of him,” Aranda said.
“As he pulled the trigger, Alfonso Barajas either raised or turned, and the bullet struck Mr. Barajas in the head, killing him.”
Krueger described a different scenario at the fish fry.
“Contrary to what Ms. Aranda has advised you of, we don’t believe Mr. Ferman Hernandez brought the rifle to the property,” Krueger said, identifying Gilberto Ortiz as owner of the rifle.
“The fact of the matter is my client made a statement, ‘I’m going to shoot that bird in the tree,’ pulled the gun up, checked the line of fire on both sides ... and all of a sudden the deceased stood up in the line of fire.”
Krueger said that at least three people at the fish fry made statements that the shooting was accidental.
“And I think at the end of the trial, the evidence will show just that,” Krueger said.
“He wasn’t hunting. He was shooting at a bird, and it’s unfortunate that somebody’s deceased because of it, but there was no intent, no criminal act on his part.”
Krueger said the only problem he could foresee with the evidence was that the table Barajas used to clean the rabbit had been moved after the shooting.
“All the photographs which depict the area adequately don’t depict the scene at the time of the shooting to show where the deceased was when he stood up in the line of fire,” Krueger said.
Lyon County Deputy Sheriff Jeff Briggs, who was called to the shooting along with Emporia Police Department officers and Emporia-Lyon County emergency medical technicians, testified about details of photographs he had taken of the scene of the shooting. The prosecution submitted 21 photographs taken by Briggs.
madpoet (anonymous) says...
I don't see how it matters if he announced he was going to shoot a bird or not. His line of fire was NOT clear when he was shooting over or around people. Period. It probably was an accident. So was Beau's death. In both cases a person was reckless in firing a gun and killed an innocent bystander.
I'm really surprised they let Gilligan sit the jury. I would think the same last name would have prompted extra questions from the lawyers. I fear an appeal is in the making if the guy is convicted. But I'm no lawyer (thank goodness!).
September 9, 2008 at 3:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )