Jury in Triple Murder Deadlocks on Penalty : Crime: Panel’s 10-2 vote against execution of convicted execution-style slayer leads judge to declare mistrial.

After eight days of deliberation, an Orange County jury Wednesday deadlocked, 10-2, against the death penalty for a man convicted of the execution-style murder of three former co-workers at a Tustin auto parts store.

Superior Court Judge Donald A. McCartin declared a mistrial and scheduled a hearing for June 19, when prosecutors must decide whether to have a new jury decide the fate of Gregory Allan Sturm, 21.

The Tustin man was convicted May 8 of shooting to death three employees at a Super Shops outlet, where Sturm once worked and then returned to rob. Prosecutors said the purpose of the Aug. 19, 1990, robbery, which netted $1,100, was to obtain money for drugs.

One of the jurors, Roberta Pharney, 63, of Santa Ana, said she voted for the death sentence three times, then changed her mind.

“I was for death, and then when I had to weigh it out. . . . It was not an easy thing for us to do,” she said. “We kept bouncing back and forth . . . we were in such a quandary.

“This is the hardest thing I’ve had to do, besides raising my children,” she said. “It was something that I hope I don’t ever have to ever do again.”

Last month, after the same jury convicted Sturm on three counts of first-degree murder and robbery and one count of burglary, Judge McCartin predicted that the jury would not recommend the death penalty for Sturm, based on its 8-4 split on whether the murders were premeditated.

McCartin said in an unusual statement outside the presence of the jury: “The reason I’m saying this publicly is because I know there are a lot of people on both sides, and I’m trying to save people the heartache, trauma and so forth in the penalty phase of this trial.”

A sentence of life without parole “is where this jury is leading,” the judge said.

Under those circumstances, and without meaning “to interfere with the administration of justice,” McCartin suggested that prosecutors consult with their superiors to determine whether to proceed with the penalty phase.

Nonetheless, the penalty phase went forward.

After Wednesday’s deadlock, Deputy Dist. Atty. Lewis R. Rosenblum said: “I realized it would be a difficult decision from the start, and obviously I’m a little bit disappointed. I can respect that fact that people see things differently. It’s a very difficult decision to make, and I don’t fault the jury for their decision, but we’ll have to look a little bit further and see what’s appropriate.”

The prosecutor had argued that the killings were a coldblooded, “despicable” and “depraved” act, done to eliminate witnesses to the robbery.

The three victims, shot in the head at close range while bound and begging for their lives, were Darrell Esgar, 22, of Huntington Beach; Chad Chadwick, 22, of Orange, and Russel B. Williams, 21, of Seal Beach.

As for a retrial on the penalty phase, Rosenblum said: “There are things we need to look at to make the appropriate decision. That’s something we’ll be discussing over the next week.”

Sturm’s attorney, Deputy Public Defender William G. Kelley, said: “I’m surprised at the number (of those jurors voting for life), only because the crime is so bad. Obviously, I’m very happy that we had 10 for life.”

Kelley had argued that Sturm had been the victim of regular physical abuse in his home and had witnessed sexual abuse of another family member.

Sturm, Kelley said, was “actually shaking” after the deadlock was announced.

“His initial reaction . . . was, he’s quivering,” Kelley said. “I’m not sure how to interpret that. I think he’s glad that he didn’t get the death penalty . . . but he certainly still has some uncertainty because there can be another trial. . . . He’s unbelievably remorseful.”

Jurors said the initial vote was 7-5 for death, gradually shifting to 10-2 for life.

One juror, Lisa Nichols, 23, of Orange, said she supported a death sentence from beginning to end. “I wasn’t shown that he had hit rock bottom with his cocaine problem, and that he had hit rock bottom with his family,” she said. “Everyone has a dysfunctional family. It wasn’t shown to me that it was that bad.”

Yvonne Herrell, 31, of Irvine said she voted for life at the outset and the conclusion but shifted in between. Over the eight-day period, she said, “I moved more toward the death, but I did remain on the life side.”

Herrell said the key factors for her were the defense’s expert witnesses on cocaine use.

“That carried a lot of weight with me, along with the chronic depression,” she said.

Sturm, Herrell said, “was definitely responsible for his actions. However, I believe that the drugs impaired his reasoning ability.”

Ironically, the deadlock came just a day after another county jury recommended the death penalty for Maria del Rosio Alfaro, a 20-year-old mother of four young children. Alfaro was convicted of stabbing 9-year-old Autumn Wallace more than 50 times, leaving her to bleed to death in her burglarized home.

Apart from the sex of the defendants and the ages, sex and number of victims, the parallels between the Sturm and Alfaro killings--both of which took place in the summer of 1990--are striking.

Key prosecution evidence in both cases were tearful, taped confessions to police. In both cases, defense attorneys argued during the guilt phase that the defendants acted while under the influence of cocaine.

During the penalty phases of the trials, defense attorneys offered evidence of their clients’ troubled upbringing but also police records clean of previous violent activity. In each case, juries in the penalty phase deadlocked: 10-2 for death in Alfaro; 10-2 for life in Sturm. However, a second jury reached a unanimous death verdict for Alfaro on Tuesday.

Alfaro’s attorney, William M. Monroe, said he is “troubled” and “destroyed” by the jury’s deadlock in the Sturm case.

“Apparently, he had a better defense lawyer than Rosie Alfaro had,” Monroe said ruefully.