St. Charles County juries show strong cultural attachment to the death penalty
In the wake of jury's death sentence from St. Charles, advocates point to declining public support & judge's authority to choose life
by Elyse Max, Executive Director of Missourians for Alternatives to the Death Penalty
While the executive branch is busy scheduling back-to-back executions, everyday Missourians (potential jurors) are moving away from viewing the death penalty as an appropriate punishment. Missouri had not had a death sentence since January 2018 when Judge Montjoy in Greene County overrode a deadlocked jury and sentenced Craig Woods to death. No judge has not upheld a jury sentencing of death since 2013 in Laclede County. According to pollsters, approval of the death penalty is the lowest it has been in half a century. That is except in St. Charles County, where twice this year, jurors voted unanimously to impose the ultimate punishment.
Just this week, on October 4th, St. Charles County jurors chose to sentence Darren Emery to death on four counts of first-degree murder. Prosecutors claimed he was a mastermind and that jurors needed to “send a message” that St. Charles won’t “tolerate this in any way.” The defense argued that Emery was mentally deficient, diagnosed with borderline personality disorder, and was in a “dreamlike state” during the crime. Witnesses for the defense included Emery’s mother, Ella Jo Roe, his father, Richard Emery, and other loved ones, who spoke about Darren’s caring nature and how unexpected what happened on that fateful night in 2018. After less than two hours of deliberation, jurors came back with a verdict recommending the state muder of Darren Emery.
Just last April, St. Charles County jurors voted unanimously to recommend a sentence of death for Marvin Rice. It was Missouri’s first jury recommendation of a death sentence in nine years. At the sentencing hearing, Judge Daniel Pelikan reduced Rice’s sentence to life. Missouri law authorizes judges “to reduce the punishment… if it finds that the punishment is excessive.” Judge Pelikan issued no written opinion, but an email from Rice’s trial attorney noted that he had found that the mitigating circumstances substantially outweighed the aggravating circumstances presented by the prosecution. More plainly, the jury got it wrong; the death penalty would be an excessive punishment in light of the evidence presented in court.
Much research has been done on capital juries, and the inherent biases of the “death qualification,” which requires jurors' fitness to serve in death-eligible cases, depends on their views on capital punishment. For example, jurors opposed to the death penalty are disqualified from service in capital cases, and those who serve are inherently biased toward the prosecution. Judge Pelikan is not the first justice to note that a jury was not able to weigh the facts in a capital case, instead believing they were there to perform the duty of giving the harshest punishment possible.
[Jury selection in death penalty cases] creates an atmosphere in which jurors are likely to assume that their primary task is to determine the penalty for a presumptively guilty defendant. -Justice John Paul Stevens, 2005
As Judge Micheal Fargas read the sentence of death, tears filled the eyes on both sides of the courtroom. The ultimate sentence will explicitly link the victims’ families for the next 20-30 years. Over time, any hopes for closure dissipate. The cycle of violence and trauma will be prolonged and in the public eye until Emery dies in jail or until the state kills him. And when he finally completes his sentence, the only thing gained is more victims.
Emery is scheduled for sentencing in St. Charles County Court in Division 4 on November 3rd. Judge Fargas can decide that the facts of the case do not warrant the ultimate punishment, or he can uphold the jury's recommendation and continue the cycle of violence.