Deadlocked Jury Ordered to Continue Deliberations

After two days of deliberations, jurors in the Kenneth McKinzie murder trial returned to court Thursday and announced they were deadlocked 11 to 1 on whether the 39-year-old killer should be executed or sentenced to life in prison.

The jury foreman did not indicate which way the panel was leaning, but he told Superior Court Judge Vincent J. O’Neill Jr. that the group has been hung for more than a day and four formal votes could not break the impasse.

“There hasn’t been a change,” he said.

But rather than declare a mistrial in the penalty phase of the monthlong capital case, O’Neill ordered the jury to continue deliberations in hopes it could reach a unanimous verdict.

“This is not an attempt by me to coerce anyone to change their vote,” the judge said. “I know you’ve been working hard. I can see it on your faces.”

With those final words, the panel of nine women and three men filed back into the jury deliberation room for about 30 minutes of additional discussions. The group left about 4 p.m. and is scheduled to resume deliberations this morning.

Earlier this month the same jury found McKinzie guilty of first-degree murder, robbery, carjacking and related allegations in the December 1995 slaying of Oxnard resident Ruth Avril.

The 73-year-old divorcee was beaten inside her garage while turning off a light about midnight. The killer forced her into the trunk of her car, drove to a remote agricultural area of the city and strangled her before pushing her body in an irrigation ditch. Avril’s body was found by two surfers the next morning.

During his trial, McKinzie’s defense attorney argued that authorities had arrested the wrong man, and the defendant took the stand to declare his innocence while admitting he had used Avril’s stolen credit cards to get money for drugs. He said he got the cards from the “real killer.”

But prosecutors said evidence in the case clearly linked McKinzie to the killing, and the jury agreed.

During a one-day penalty hearing, the prosecution described McKinzie as a four-time felon and a batterer of women whose crimes against Avril warranted a death sentence.

In addressing the judge, the foreman, who was questioned individually by O’Neill, indicated some members of the jury were willing to discuss the matter further. But he cautioned that further deliberations may be futile.

“I can tell you, I didn’t want it to come to this,” the foreman said.

After speaking with the foreman, O’Neill called the other jurors back into court as a group and asked them whether they would be willing to continue deliberating. The responses were largely the same.

“I’m willing, but I don’t think we’ll reach a decision,” one juror said.

One female juror told the judge she is certain her position won’t change. Two indicated they were willing to talk further, but doubted it would break the deadlock.

Before ordering the group back to the deliberation room, O’Neill consulted privately with the attorneys. Prosecutors Donald Glynn and Cheryl Morgan urged further deliberations, citing case law that allows the judge to make such a request.

Given the willingness by some jurors to deliberate more, defense attorney Willard Wiksell agreed, and O’Neill issued his order.

“I would hate to play yo-yo with them,” Wiksell said. “This isn’t a situation where I can in good faith jump up and declare a mistrial with five people willing to come back.”