Reporter Jessica Noll gives you the minute-by-minute report of the Cheryl McCafferty murder trial.
WEEK 3
Attorneys Talk After Sentencing: 11:25 a.m.
As Cheryl is escorted from the holding room of the courtroom to the hallway and elevator, supporters shout, "We love you Cheryl. We love you Cheryl." Spectators and supporters on both sides of the case hug each other and cry just outside the courtroom this morning. And Frank Mungo, defense attorney for Cheryl was nothing but smiles for the media. "No appeals. That was a part of the negotiated sentence. It’s final. This is it. We worked with the Commonwealth to spare everybody any more grief and we think its a very good result for both sides." He explains that the defense negotiated that a lesser percentage had to be served before the eligibility of parole was offered. Normally, he said it is 85 percent, by law, but this was part of the agreement that was specified he says. Defense attorney Deanna Dennison says that Cheryl will be "eligible probably for parole in 3.7 years again with the specification we think she has a good chance of getting out." She says that the resolution between all of the families and the children was a key thing in the agreement. "Nobody is a winner here. I don't think the prosecution is a winner neither is the defense a winner in this whole thing," says Dennison. "I think it’s the best resolution for those children and the best for Cheryl and for all the families involved." She says that Cheryl is the one who wanted to take it to trial. And while they weren't as successful as they originally hoped they would be, she says that Cheryl wanted to take that chance. "She took the risk. We're happy. We're pleased it's manslaughter. We knew it was not murder. We knew it was not murder." Dennison says that she will contest to this day that Cheryl was the victim of domestic violence. "That was basically the entire fight. If we could get the 20 percent eligibility, that was what we were concerned about. We entered into the agreement and that makes it OK for us." After speaking with the press, Dennison walks over to Tom Lampy, a member of Bob’s family and says, "I wanted to say I'm sorry for your loss." The focus then shift to Commonwealth’s Attorney Michelle Snodgrass and Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Anita Fleckinger, standing in the hallway between the courtroom doors and her own office door. "The family very clearly wanted a message to be sent that Bob's death will not go unpunished." She says that the family doesn't have to worry about appeals. "It’s over. As of today, they can start their emotional healing. They can put this stage behind them and move on, and try and figure out how their family moves on from here." She tells the media that there have been two families devastated by this crime and the friends’ and family’s actions have concentrated on the well being of the children. From all of the stories that family and friends told her about Bob, she says that she felt as if she knew him during the investigation and trial. "I felt like we were doing this for Bob," she says. "Bob was an all-around great person." Snodgrass says that while Cheryl will have the eligibility for parole after serving 20 percent of her sentence, prosecution reserves the right to fight the parole. There is no guarantee, she tells the media that Cheryl will be paroled and let out in three and a half years. Furthermore, she says, "[We] may exercise the right to do that." J. David Bender, the family attorney for Bob McCafferty, also gave the family’s statement just outside the courtroom after sentencing. "Bob's family continues to grieve the loss of a wonderful loving person. They are thankful for the prayers they have received from friends but still continue to ask for your prayers and support."
Cheryl McCafferty Sentenced To 18 Years: 11:16 a.m.
The judge enters the courtroom unannounced and takes a seat at the bench. At this point, Cheryl is brought into the courtroom from the holding room. She tells the court, of which does not include the jury yet at this time, that she has talked on and off the record with council and they have "negotiated a deal" for Cheryl’s sentencing. Cheryl McCafferty is sentenced to 18 years in prison for killing her husband. The Fort Thomas 44-year-old mother of two will have to serve at least 20 percent of the time – about three and a half years – before being eligible for parole. She will also not be able to appeal the decision per the agreement. As the judge asks Cheryl if she agrees with the sentencing and the agreement that she will be able to appeal the decision, she looks at her defense attorney Frank Mungo, who nods and she nods, and says "yes." Michelle Snodgrass acknowledges to the judge and to the court, that on behalf of Bob’s family that it was "desired today, to be the end of it. [It’s] most important them—it’s the end." Prosecution and defense agree that they are "all in agreement in its entirety." Cheryl, who requested sentencing happen today, appears emotionless when Judge Reinhardt Ward reads the sentence but breaks down into tears as she is led from the courtroom's holding room, down the hallway and onto the elevator. Per Cheryl’s request for a speedy sentencing, the judge proceeded by officially pronouncing Cheryl’s sentence of 18 years, with credit for time served. She again, will be eligible for parole after serving 20 percent of her sentence, nearly three and a half years, minus her time served already. Cheryl will also have to pay a $155 court cost upon her release. She may be up for parole as early as 2011. Court was dismissed at 11:21 a.m. when the jury was brought in and explained that while their services were appreciated, they were done with this case. The judge also told the jury that the media has requested a list of their names; however, they are not obligated to speak to neither the attorneys nor the media. She tells them to come to her if they do not want to speak and feel that they are being hassled by anyone after the trial.
Courtroom Sits, Waits For Sentencing: 9:55 a.m.
Sentencing proceedings for Cheryl McCafferty which were scheduled for 9:30 a.m. have not started nearly 20 minutes later, much like how the rest of the days in the trial were started. Spectators were allowed into the courtroom at about 9:35 a.m., but no jurors have been brought in. Cheryl is also not in the courtroom although she was brought to the holding room shortly after 9:15 a.m. in handcuffs, wearing her hair halfway up, in a periwinkle blue sweater, dark gray skirt, black shoes, holding her prayer card and photo of her children clutched close to her stomach. What is taking place is a flurry of meetings as prosecution and defense attorneys come in and out of the holding room, outside the courtroom, as well as in Campbell Circuit Judge Julie Reinhardt Ward's chambers for conferences lasting up to 20 minutes at a time. The McCaffertys’ civil lawyer, J. David Bender, comes in and out of the judge’s chambers twice himself. Officer Hunt, Det. Metz, as well as other Fort Thomas Police officers are present in the courtroom. The court-appointed guardian for the McCafferty children comes in and out of the judge’s chambers, as well as the holding room where Cheryl waits, sits in the front row behind the defense table, alongside the McCaffertys, who also fill the front row. As the prosecution team comes back into the courtroom, Commonwealth’s Attorney Michelle Snodgrass leans down and gives Bob McCafferty’s father Dick, a kiss on the cheek, then heads into the judge’s chambers. She later takes him out of the courtroom.
DAY 10, March 9
VERDICT IN: 1st Degree Manslaughter: 6:23 p.m.
Jury deliberates less than four hours before coming out from the jury lounge with a verdict of manslaughter in the 1st degree. They were asked to decide a verdict between murder, 1st degree manslaughter, 2nd degree manslaughter, reckless homicide or not guilty, through their deliberations. Deputies brought Cheryl, who was facing murder charges, back to court from jail, early this evening. No reaction was seen as Cheryl heard the verdict in the case. The jury, who munched on Frisch’s for dinner, has been asked to return Tuesday morning at 9:30 a.m. for sentencing. She faces 5-20 years.
McCafferty Kids Enter Courthouse: 3:48 p.m.
Molly and Patrick McCafferty are driven up to a side door of the Campbell County Courthouse and escorted inside to presumably to see their mother Cheryl. Molly, who is wearing slacks and a white blouse, is clutching the same blonde cloth doll that she had with her on the stand as she testified earlier in the trial. They were taken inside by their court-appointed attorney/guardian.
Mungo Comments Outside Courtroom: 2:50 p.m.
Frank Mungo, Cheryl’s defense attorney comes out to the hallway just after the jury was dismissed for deliberation. "[We’re] satisfied that we got a fair trial. It's in the hands of the jury, where it should be," he says. He continues that he is confident that the jury will go "through the evidence with a fine tooth comb and decide this for themselves." "We put on the best case we had," he tells the media. "And we believe they are going to listen."
Fate Now Rests With Jurors: 2:47 p.m.
Cheryl McCafferty's fate is now in the hands of jurors. Shortly before 3 p.m. closing arguments in the McCafferty murder trial were wrapped up and jurors left for the jury room to begin deliberations. The judge tells the jury that the bullets and the bed, as made up for the prosecution’s closing arguments, would remain in the courtroom. If they need to review them for evidence, they will have to come back into the courtroom to do so. Two men’s names were drawn as the alternate jurors and dismissed, as they were not needed to deliberate on the case. This leaves eight men and four women to decide Cheryl’s verdict. Police begin to carry all other evidence to the grand jury room for their review and deliberations. Jury is dismissed at 2:47 p.m. for deliberations. Bob’s sister, who has sat in the front row this week, breaks into tears, hugging other family members, as the jury leaves the room.
Snodgrass Closes In On Deception: 1:05 p.m.
"One shot to the head, into a man—a man who was sleeping, unarmed," Commonwealth’s Attorney Michelle Snodgrass starts out her closing statement. "That shows intent to kill and in [the state of] Kentucky that’s murder."
She tells the jury that they are not responsible for her freedom, or for taking it away and giving it to her.
"One shot, one shot that was a fatal gunshot," she tells the jury, that is what decided Cheryl’s fate. There is no one to blame, she says, but herself. "It’s not your burden to bear."
Snodgrass tells the jury that Bob McCafferty was unarmed right before he was killed and that he was sleeping. But that putting a bullet in his brain is murder.
"Intentionally taking another’s life—one shot, one intention."
The prosecutor tells the jury that the defense tried to use a smoke-in-mirrors tactic but that it had no bearing whatsoever in the case.
"No point in time did Det. Metz say that the scene was ruined," because he allowed paramedics on the scene.
Bob had a heartbeat, she tells the jury, what if there was a chance that he was still alive, why not bring the paramedics into the room? she questions the jury. She answers, but saying, because nothing happened on that scene.
There was no loss of integrity at the scene, "no broken eggs here," she says, mocking a quote from defense attorney Mungo’s cross-examination last week.
"We’ve got evidence. We’ve got information. We’ve got testimony—nothing was contaminated," she tells the jury during closing.
She tells them that in a perfect world we’d leave Bob in the bed and Cheryl would still have to be in the bed kneeling over him, pointing the gun at her husband. But it’s just not possible, she tells the jury.
In fact, she says, it’s the nature of the GSR particles to transfer. She reminds the jury that a worker from the livery testified earlier about putting the victim’s hands one on top of the other—"that’s transfer."
Lead would be on head from the fatal gunshot, she says, but placed on T-shirt after the shirt is removed at the morgue.
Snodgrass shows the jury five crime scene photos on the projector screen. She points out that there is no contamination in these photos that are from throughout the evidence collecting. In fact, she shows that Bob’s right hand is in the same position from beginning to end, when there are no sheets, comforters or blankets left on him in the bed. His right hand is still up and above the comforter, with his right index finger raised.
"There’s no contamination," she says, of a tactic that the defense tried to use to make the jury look one way, keeping them from focusing "over here" (she says to the jury, as she points to the McCaffertys’ bed sitting in front of the jury box.)
She says that the Commonwealth is not obligated to prove motive. "We have evidence to show why this crime might have occurred."
As the defendant told her "rehearsed story" we were all waiting for the truth, a reason, she tells the jury, but that they didn’t get it. It was, the prosecutor says, a deception in marriage—and he found out about it.
Did it matter, Snodgrass questions to the jury, that Bob could pay off her debts, or that he had to? "It was a matter of affording it vs. losing control, violating trust—it’s the deception that matters."
And the deception, she says, only grew. She tells the jury that she doesn’t think that Bob knew about the credit card being sent to her mother’s house at the time of his death.
Snodgrass shows the jury a blown-up version of a letter that Cheryl wrote to Bob prior to his death.
She reads to the jury: "‘the real, despicable, pathetic me is out,’ ladies and gentleman, I think we’ve seen that real despicable, pathetic Cheryl."
Cheryl keeps her head down during the prosecution’s closing against her, as a photo of her dead husband’s body lay in a photo next to her in plain view for the jury to see throughout Snodgrass’s testimony.
More on the money:
Snodgrass says, the ATM withdrawals were neither for Mexico nor the Cayman Islands, she says. The dates don’t match the bank records, nor do they match the credit card records that Bob spent in those places.
She tells the jury that Cheryl could not accept reality. That it wasn’t about the money and how much or how little she made or the fact that she had to try and stick to a budget.
"This has nothing to with the numbers, has to do with the deception in that marriage."
It was about forged checks, she says, and "it was deception, after deception, after deception."
Maybe he was going to tell Snodgrass tells the jury, maybe that was exposure that she couldn’t handle.
As for the modeling, Snodgrass says that the defense tried to make the modeling issue, a non-issue. But two days prior to his death, she says, Cheryl was talking to a friend about moving to LA for her daughter Molly’s modeling career.
"We don’t have to prove motive. We don’t have to answer why?"
"It was deception and exposure of that deception," Snodgrass tells the jury about the McCafferty marriage that ended in one’s death.
The only appropriate verdict, Snodgrass tells the jury, is "guilty to murder."
"This is not a case of self-defense, but absolutely a case of murder."
Then she begins to describe to the jury what exactly each verdict would mean in this case.
She was not in imminent danger, which has to be existing right then, she tells the jury.
Nor, was it a repeated pattern of serious abuse. While Snodgrass agrees that Cheryl may have suffered "isolated incidents" she does not believe that there was impending danger.
In fact, she says, in May she says in a mocking voice, that Cheryl said that her husband ‘cut me, swung a bat at me.’ Snodgrass says, "Sounds like a Lifetime movie, but don’t have the evidence to support it."
She tells the jury that he only allegedly cut her by the tip of the knife—how does someone have precision of straight line if they drunk, as Cheryl said that he was, the prosecutor questions.
And if deathly afraid of knives, she says, then why keep it, and why hold the blade to put it away, leaving a fingerprint behind? She tells the jury that Cheryl saved the knife as evidence, but that she didn’t see her attorney until more than a month later.
"She was planning, just not for a restraining order," she accuses.
She then shows the jury photos of the closet, where Cheryl says that she was locked in. However, Snodgrass points out, there are no locks on the closet doors. "Sounds good—doesn’t mean it’s true," she tells the jury.
During the argument that was witnessed at the lake in Tennessee, a week prior to Bob’s murder, witnesses testified earlier to Cheryl yelling at Bob, pointing fingers at his face—Snodgrass tells the jury, as she points in their faces.
In fact, Snodgrass says, she "told a friend ‘I hate him’—not ‘I’m scared’ ‘I hate him.’"
At this point in her closing, Snodgrass puts a bold, red ‘X’ through the words: "Repeated Pattern of Serious Abuse" on the easel in front of the jury, as she tells them that there is no pattern.
"This is a woman who had options. She had many options."
The prosecutor tells the jury that while Cheryl had the chance to tell someone about her abuse, she did not tell the nurse in the ER. And without a pattern of serious abuse, she cannot claim imminent danger, she says.
There was one witness (the defense objects at this point—and after approaching the bench and discussing, Snodgrass continues) that the prosecution says that they wanted to call, but that Cheryl made sure that they couldn’t. It was Bob, says Snodgrass.
"Bob wasn’t given the chance—she took that away, she decided on her own that he was guilty and he needed to die."
But how can deadly force be justified when the victim is an unarmed man, Snodgrass questions the jury in her closing.
"If the threat is gone, right to use deadly force is gone," she says. " She thought that she silenced her only witness—[but] her words contradict her story."
For example, she says, if a person is shoving a gun at someone’s mouth it would cause chipped tooth, bleeding—but there was nothing. As she tells the jury this, she shoves the actual gun into the side of the podium for effect. It’s loud and hard.
Cheryl says that she was hit in the head with a gun, Snodgrass continues, but then isn’t sure if it was a gun or his hand. And to the defense’s theory that the photos from the hospital weren’t up to par? Snodgrass disagrees. She tells the jury that the photos are good. The "injury just isn’t there."
"If really hit with gun, you’d have a concussion, or more serious injury."
Snodgrass tells the jury "the truth lies in the details."
She says that for example, if Cheryl was thrown into the closet, then into a cabinet in the closet, wouldn’t that have jarred some of the objects on the shelving within the cabinets? There was nothing out of place in the photos, nor was there anything out of place in the closet where the shooting allegedly occurred. She shows the jury the closet photos as she tells them this information.
She folds the gun up in the white T-shirt that was found in the closet, as she describes that Det. Eric Smith testified that the shirt was wrapped at the time of the gunshot.
Cheryl had said that she could see the gun out of the corner of her eye, on the side of her head—but Snodgrass tells the jury that that is impossible since it was wrapped. She continues to tell them that anything circular could’ve caused the bruising to her face.
"Evidence doesn’t match the story."
The pile of clothes and other items in the closet that officers had to sift through to get to the bullet, including a pair of sunglasses resting on the top of the pile, was placed by Bob after the shooting? she questions the jury.
Cheryl’s claim of self-defense is meaningless, says Snodgrass; because of what happens next—he goes to sleep.
The prosecutor then climbs into the bed from the crime scene that they have set up in the courtroom in front of the jury. "That right there is when we need to stop, self-defense is gone. Can’t use deadly force against an unarmed man."
She goes to the easel with a large piece of paper attached to it, and crosses out in thick red marker, the words: "Impending Danger."
As she begins to re-enact the story verbally, Snodgrass gets into the bed and under the covers in front of the jury.
She gets on all fours, asking the jury why Cheryl couldn’t see the gun clearly—and furthermore, why she didn’t lay in the bed and felt around for the gun to cause less movement on the bed, less chance of waking him. Nonetheless, she gets on all fours and then turned gun around, lifted it slowly, stared at him—he opened his yes and she shot. Snodgrass pulls the trigger of the gun, making a clicking noise, on the bed, as she still kneels upward at the pillow. She shows the jury the directionality and the angle of the gunshot from where she is kneeling, by using the gun on the pillow on the bed and clicking it again.
Two witnesses for the prosecution testified, she reminds the jury, that Bob’s head was on the pillow at time of his death and one witness for the defense testified that his head was on or near the pillow. She acknowledges that there was a 4-inch window of adjustment regarding where his head was or wasn’t at the time of his death. She holds a small blue ruler to the jury, showing them four inches.
"[This] doesn’t mean he attacked her."
There was also no explanation for the blue fleece, she says.
"Fleece was draped over the gun when Bob was killed," she tells the jury, as she drapes the fleece over the gun and lays it in the bed. "One shot at close range."
"How can that be anything other than an execution," she questions the jury. "Bob didn’t defend himself. Bob didn’t react and attack."
In fact, she says the two things that Cheryl testified that she wouldn’t leave in that house were her children and that gun. But, Snodgrass points out, she left both.
"Isn’t that the greatest loyalty—kids to parents," she says of Cheryl’s children who testified early on in the trial and showed her love even from the stand, as Mungo closed with. "They’ve only got one [now] that’s where loyalty lies."
She gets back on the bed and tells the jury that Cheryl "hated Bob, she hated him. She testified, ‘I did not aim, or plain or think about it, it just happened.’" But a plain and aim, that’s "exactly what it was."
Then she asks the jury "What do you think he saw?" She shows them a photo projected on the large screen in front of them of a gun, barrel end facing them, as if pointing to shoot the jury. Snodgrass says, he saw his wife standing in front of him holding a gun up to his forehead.
As she closes her final argument to the jury, she places a white board on the easel in front of them that has a hospital photo of Cheryl’s face and below it the bloodied face and head of her dead husband from the crime scene. Next to Cheryl are the not-equal-to sign and the words SELF-DEFENSE and next to Bob’s photo are the equal sign and the word MURDER.
"Today is not the day that will set someone free. In fact, the truth will lead to a conviction for murder. Bob’s life ended way to soon," Snodgrass instructs the jury, including all those that he left behind, children, sisters, and family.
"There is no justification for his death," the prosecution continues.
She says Cheryl came up to the bed, with the fleece draped over the gun and shot him. And "for that, there is no doubt."
"We ask that you find Cheryl McCafferty guilty of murder."
Bed Set Up In Courtroom: 12:40 p.m.
As part of the prosecution’s closing arguments, four police officers and one prosecutor maneuvers the bloodied mattress and box spring into place in the courtroom, displaying it directly in front of the jury box.
The prosecution begins putting the entire bed together, setting the blood-soaked mattress, still wrapped in clear plastic sleeves, into the mahogany wood frame. The frame includes detailed, wood-carved posts at each corner.
Setting the scene of the master bed, where Bob McCafferty was killed, the police setting up the bed place the final two pillows at the top of the bed.
The headboard is still wrapped in brown wrapping, similar to the material from brown paper bags, with bright red evidence tape covering it from side to side.
A large photo of Bob McCafferty is set against the bed, and then moved to the easel for the jury to see during prosecution’s closing. It is the same photo that was used in the opening argument. In the photo, the victim is wearing a pair of belted pants and a white T-shirt, standing in front of greenery.
Prosecution also sets up a large projector screen in front of the jury, displaying photos of the gun, the crime scene and the victim, during their closing.
At 1:04 p.m., the jury returns from a recess after Mungo’s closing.
Mungo: Husband Was Her Captor: 12:20 p.m.
"I can’t overstate or overstress just what you’re about to do for Cheryl—decide whether or not she keeps her freedom, there is no greater task," Mungo begins his closing argument to the jury. He tells the jury that there are men and women on the other side of the world fighting for freedom and that freedom is "the most cherished thing," and that their sole purpose is to decide what happens to Cheryl. "Cheryl has been waiting to tell you her story. You folks are her last hope to hear her story," he pleads with the jury. He tells them that it took 50 minutes to arrest Cheryl and three days to indict her. "They want you to take her freedom away. She acted to protect herself," Mungo says of his client. He tells them that she told the 911 dispatcher that ‘I shot my husband, he was going to kill me.’ But that no one heard her and 50 minutes later she was arrested. Mungo tells the jury that Det. Metz got on the stand and admitted that he made a mistake in allowing the paramedics in on the scene before the evidence was documented. "That’s honor that he told the truth." But, he says, the crime scene lost its integrity at that moment, after six photos were taken. "It’s her evidence too" that they ruined, he says. The defense attorney tells the jury that the gunshot residue should not have been on the victim’s chest because he was "cocooned in the comforter"—also that the blood spatter on the shoulder shouldn’t be there. Attorneys approach the bench. Upon returning, Mungo continues about GSR. It was on the victim’s hand, he tells them, because he fired the gun in the closet. "The evidence is in the closet." The bullet and clothes that were shot through were in the closet, he reminds the jury. "When it hurt [the prosecution] the crime scene was ruined—when it helped them, it was golden. You can’t have it both ways." Regarding the prosecution’s experts who stated that the victim’s head never moved Mungo tells the jury that the GSR on his left hand, the muzzle flash and blood spatter, "all prove that the head moved prior to the shot." "More indication of movement than non-movement," he continues. They [prosecution] must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that self-defense didn’t happen, Mungo tells the jury of the prosecution against his client. "She was in a hostage situation," he says. Cheryl puts her head down, as Mungo closes to the jury, and as he re-enacts the last moments of the victim’s life and the alleged struggle between husband and wife that morning. Mungo says that if this were an intruder that was shot, we wouldn’t be here. "Only reason we’re in this room is this band of gold," he says, pointing at the wedding ring on his hand. "…Because the folks were husband and wife. He was a stranger to her that night," he says of Bob to Cheryl the night he died. He continues by telling the jury that Bob’s wedding ring was sitting on the nightstand the morning of his death. Cheryl begins to cry as Mungo re-enacts the struggle in the closet as she testified to on the stand. He points down toward the floor as if he had a gun in his hand and he says that her husband shot next to her "boom!" Cheryl covers her eyes, crying. Her capture, her attorney says, may, as well been a stranger because "she didn’t know him anymore." The defendant’s worth at the time of her husband’s death was $485,000, Mungo tells the jury. In fact, he says, Cheryl could’ve paid off her debt eight times with the money that she had at the time of the murder. "[They are trying to] brand her as a liar because she can’t remember what she did two years ago." Mungo questions the jury, would you blow your husband’s brains out over a modeling contract, "Are you kidding me?" He continues, is that justification for taking a man’s life—that’s what they are bringing to you? Mungo says of the prosecution’s arguments for motive. "If I sound frustrated, it’s because I am. I don’t understand why we’re here," Mungo says to the jury, continuing that the physical evidence matches her defense. In fact, he says that her defense of abuse history has never been contested. "[Bob] was not an evil being, she loved him, hoping she could fix it, work it out," he says of his client. But the most reliable testimony in the case, Mungo says, was not words, but a look. The look of two children. "The two that lost the most from across the room embraced their mother with their eyes—nothing but love, nothing but love." Cheryl sobs loudly, as Mungo discusses her children and their testimony with the jury. If the Commonwealth had any credibility, he says, those children should not have had those faces. "They know what happened behind closed doors." He then tells the jury that they cannot come back with a verdict of murder, manslaughter or reckless homicide if they believe her story of self-defense. "Cheryl’s freedom is now in your hands and she welcomes that."
Jury Receives Instructions For Verdict: 12:07 p.m.
Judge Julie Reinhardt Ward takes her seat and begins to read theinstructions to the jury about how to come to a verdict, includingdefinitions of terms regarding verdicts and whether or not thedefendant is guilty or innocent. She assures the jury that they willreceive all pieces of evidence after the closings for review whiledeliberating. Instructions: Choose a foreperson or chairperson on the jury Remember the defendant is innocent until proven guilty Authorized verdicts are as follows:
-Murder
-Manslaughter, 1st degree
-Manslaughter, 2nd degree
-Reckless homicide Self protection—whether or not defendant proved self-defense Murder—intentionally caused death, not under extreme emotional distress, not self-defense. Manslaughter, 1st degree—intended to cause death or serious injury Manslaughter, 2nd degree—wantonly, not self-protection, caused death Reckless homicide—caused death, recklessly, not self-protection Not guilty—believed in necessary to save herself from injury or death
No One Leaves For Lunch Break: 11:13 a.m.
The prosecution decides to call no more witnesses before the courthears final arguments. At 11:11 a.m., attorneys approach the bench. The male-majority jury may start deliberating the case as early as today after court lets out. Courtadjourns for lunch at 11:13 a.m., but with the tooth-and-nail fightover chairs in the morning, no one leaves for lunch. Everyone sitstight in their chairs only getting up to use the restroom, leaving allthose left behind in the hallway, there for the rest of the day. Thejudge tells the jury that after lunch, at 12 p.m., they will beinstructed and then will hear about three hours of closing argumentstotal.
Jury Expected To Get McCafferty Case Monday Afternoon: 11:15 a.m.
Three hours of closing arguments are expected to be made Monday afternoon in the Cheryl McCafferty murder trial.
That'show long Campbell Circuit Judge Julie Reinhardt Ward anticipates itwill take before the jury gets the case and retires to the jury room todeliberate the fate of the Fort Thomas woman on trial for shooting herhusband to death.
The jury is at lunch now but is due to return at noon when instructions will be given.
Detective Called To Stand Again: 10:49 a.m.
The prosecution is calling rebuttalwitnesses and pulling only key pieces of testimony that they need thejury to know now, at the end of the trial’s testimony. Butbefore Fleckinger can ask Det. Brad Adams any questions, the attorneysapproach the bench. All for attorneys in their gray, black or charcoalsuits line the front of the judge’s bench to discuss the witness andevidence in quiet whispers, so that the jury cannot hear theirconversation. Questioning gets underway as Fleckinger asks thewitness to read over the defendant’s checking account record fromFifth-Third Bank in April 2007. He reads the following cash withdrawals to the jury: April 30 $20 Cincinnati ATM April 30 $60 Cincinnati ATM April 30 $60 Cincinnati ATM April 30 $100 Fort Thomas ATM April 30 $100 Fort Thomas ATM
…and Also,according to a Sage document of travel for Cheryl and Bob, they were inthe Grand Cayman Islands from April 17-20. Expenses on Bob’s AmericanExpress while in Mexico were for April 21, 2007. And after abrief recess, the witness also establishes that April 1-5, 2007 otherAmerican Express purchases were made on Bob’s credit card in Mexico. There was no cross-examination for this rebuttal witness.
Officer Hunt Called As Rebuttal: 10:42 a.m.
Prosecutor Vanita Fleckinger calls Officer William Hunt back to the stand as a rebuttal witness. Sheconfirms with the witness, who testifies while in uniform, that he isin fact an officer with the Fort Thomas Police Department. Sheasks the officer to identify Commonwealth’s exhibit no. 154; he does soas the master bed. He testifies that he helped to disassemble the bed,including the headboard, box spring, side rails, footboard, mattress,etc. To confirm, she shows him photos and then the jury, of himdismantling the bed one part at a time. Fleckinger asks Hunt ifthe photos and the evidence are in the same condition as the day hedisassembled the bed, except for any lab work or testing done to theitems. He says yes. Attorneys approach the bench at 10:49 a.m. Defense does not cross-examine.
Courtroom Is Packed As Trial Heads To A Close: 9:25 a.m.
The courtroom where Cheryl McCafferty is on trial for killing her husband is packed as we wait for the trial to resume. About 20 spectators who would like to be inside are standing in the hallway outside. No attorneys are in the courtroom and the jurors remained in the jury room.
Evidence Carried Into Courtroom: 9:15 a.m.
Starting just after 9 a.m., large brown bags, marked with blood-red tape, are carried in to the courtroom as evidence. Some of the larger items that enter the courtroom at this time are the master bedroom’s headboard, mattress, box spring and footboard, among other items in the bedroom suit.
The morning starts earlier than scheduled and the courtroom fills up quickly leaving a few dozen in the hallway, not allowed to enter the trial for possibly its final day.
Many McCaffertys take up the entire front row, as does the McCafferty children’s court-appointed guardian.
Attorneys are talking about the evidence in the courtroom and get files together in preparation for their closing arguments.
They are still not ready to begin with rebuttal witnesses on the prosecution side at 10:17 a.m.
Cheryl is still in the holding room, from her morning walk from the elevator at 9:15 a.m.
Attorneys exit the judge’s chambers at 10:39 a.m. and then Cheryl is brought in to the courtroom. She is wearing her gray skirt with a slim black belt, and a white shirt, with black cardigan sweater over it. She wears her hair half up, exposing her single pearl earrings.
The jury takes their seats at 10: 41 a.m. and the judge enters, greeting the courtroom, reminding everyone that if they are wearing any visible items of support that they must remove them at this time.
Closing Arguments Slated For Monday
After a three-day weekend for the jury, court resumes Monday for closing arguments, possibly from both sides.
Cheryl McCafferty, the 44-year-old Fort Thomas, Ky., mother of two, accused of killing her husband, rests her fate in the hands of the jury today. Once the closings wrap up the two-week trial, the jury will deliberate for what could be an hour, or days.
The jury will have to decide if she is guilty or innocent based on the self-defense theory that the defense has introduced during Cheryl’s testimony.
The prosecution spent two weeks trying to prove that Cheryl shot her husband Bob McCafferty while he slept, while her defense was that he attacked her earlier that morning that she shot him while he was awake in their bed.
After more than 100 pieces of evidence and several dozen testimonies, it will come down to the jury and what they decide is the truth regarding that June 25 day in 2007.
| 
