Mistrial Ruled Out in Merriman Case

An incident of juror misconduct surfaced Wednesday during the penalty phase of the Justin Merriman murder case, but a Ventura County judge ruled it was not prejudicial enough to force a mistrial.

Superior Court Judge Vincent J. O’Neill Jr. issued the ruling after a dramatic disclosure that during deliberations last month a 63-year-old female juror and a county deputy sheriff discussed how the jury was going to “fry” Merriman.

While O’Neill, choosing his words carefully, said the misconduct did not influence other jurors or undermine their verdicts, legal experts said the defense may have a strong issue on appeal.

The issue arose for the first time this week after Deputy David Kadosono reported the incident to O’Neill.

Details of the incident were revealed in court Wednesday:

Last weekend, Kadosono, who has provided security throughout the Merriman trial, saw Senior Deputy Katie Baker at a bookstore.

Baker stated she knew a juror on the case and that the juror had told her “they were going to fry him.”

Baker, an eight-year veteran of the department, was called into court Monday for a closed-door hearing and admitted having a phone conversation with the juror, whose daughter is married to her brother.

The juror was excused from the case Monday because of an unrelated family illness.

On Tuesday, the same juror in a closed court hearing admitted talking to Baker about the case.

She said Baker had initiated the conversation and she denied the “fry” remark.

Both Baker and the juror were unclear about when the conversation occurred, but they believed it was on a weekend before or during jury deliberations in mid-February.

It also was revealed that Baker discussed the conversation with at least two ranking officials in the Sheriff’s Department, Capt. Bruce Hansen and Sgt. Rick Barber, neither of whom reported the incident to the court.

On Wednesday, the final day of penalty phase testimony, defense attorneys Willard Wiksell and Philip Capritto filed a motion for a mistrial.

“ ‘We are going to fry him’ means only one thing,” Wiksell said.

“This jury should be thanked and excused. This whole penalty phase has been compromised.”

But prosecutors said taking the juror off the case solved the problem.

They argued there was no evidence other jurors made up their minds about what penalty Merriman should receive.

The jurors were questioned in court Wednesday and denied any impropriety.

O’Neill took the matter under submission for several hours while testimony resumed Wednesday with a final prosecution witness, a Toronto neuropsychiatrist who disputed conclusions about a brain scan offered last week by a defense expert.