Killer to Face a 4th Death Penalty Trial

In an unprecedented decision, a Superior Court judge on Friday ordered a record fourth death penalty trial for a 24-year-old man who killed his parents and younger brother, then set them on fire.

The decision by Judge William R. Froeberg came five weeks after a third jury deadlocked Jan. 29 on the question of whether Edward Charles III should be put to death.

Froeberg said that with no similar cases to guide him in making his decision, he had to balance the interests of society with the rights of the defendant.

The murders took place on a Sunday evening in November 1994 after the defendant had shared a pasta dinner with his family in their posh home in the Sunny Hills area of Fullerton. The bodies of the defendant’s father, Edward Charles II, 55, his mother, Delores, 47, and brother Danny, 19, were found in a burning car in La Mirada. The father and brother were stabbed and beaten and the mother was strangled.

The judge said “the facts surrounding the murders speak for themselves” and noted that a total of 34 out of 36 jurors have voted in favor of death in three previous penalty trials.

The first and third juries deadlocked 11-1 in favor of death. The second jury reached a unanimous recommendation of death, but its verdict was thrown out after it was learned that one of the jurors had consulted a priest before making his decision.

Froeberg said that there is strong evidence against Charles and that there is a reasonable chance that a fourth jury could reach a death verdict. The judge said the only mitigating factor favoring the defendant is his lack of a previous criminal record.

Robert Pugsley, professor of criminal law at Southwestern University School of Law in Los Angeles, said he believes that Froeberg’s decision is legally sound.

“It’s a very reasonable decision in light of the 11-1 splits, the unanimity of one jury on which the mistrial was declared and the strong body of evidence against this defendant,” Pugsley said. “I think it’s certainly a reasonable and defensible decision on the judge’s part to go through the penalty phase one more time.”

Charles’ attorney, Thomas Goethals, argued unsuccessfully against holding yet another penalty trial and asked the judge to simply sentence his client to life in prison without parole. He said the prosecution already had enough chances to try to secure a death verdict and failed.

“There is nobody on death row who received death after a fourth retrial, and there are no fourth retrial cases pending,” Goethals said. “What that points out is that this is an extraordinary situation.”

But Deputy Dist. Atty. David Brent said that the particularly brutal nature of the murders make Charles a strong candidate for capital punishment.

“It is the right thing to do,” Brent said.

Outside court, Brent said he believes selection of a jury will play a key role in the outcome of the fourth trial. The prosecutor said that during the second trial, one of the female jurors “fell in love” with Charles and was excused before the case reached deliberations.

He said that in the most recent trial, another female juror “felt a bonding with the defendant” and refused to vote for death.

“This seems to be a case won or lost in jury selection,” Brent said.

Two of the jurors from the most recent trial were in the courtroom when the judge made his decision and applauded it.

“We felt strongly that he should be tried again,” said former juror Terri Ross.

The other juror, Julie Parry, said that reaching a decision to recommend death was emotionally difficult enough. But not being able to reach a unanimous decision only made matters worse.

“I want to see it to a conclusion,” Parry said. “The manner in which his family members were killed and for Eddie not to show any remorse, that was just unbelievable.”