Slowly, the wiles of justice churn
Wednesday, September 8, 2010 at 8:52PM PLEASE READ THIS POST FIRST
“Carla was my very best friend. We talked about everything and anything together. It didn’t matter where we lived. If Carla was there, it was home to me. Now I feel very alone.”
- Jim Larson in 1999
When John Huggins was arrested for the murder of Carla Larson in 1997, several ministers who knew him said no way. He was not capable of doing such a horrible act. After all, they proclaimed, this was a gentle giant, anointed by God to do great work. He had become a born-again Christian. He volunteered to go on many missionary trips to Haiti to help build schools, churches, and to run clinics. No, the preachers collectively agreed, John was a good man. For the sake of Carla and all her loved ones, law enforcement thought otherwise.
On her final day, Carla drove to a Publix supermarket a mere five minutes away from where she worked. Located at the intersection of International Drive and Osceola Parkway, she spent $8.63 for pita bread, pretzels, grapes and cherries. She never had a chance to eat any of her purchase.
While Carla’s life came to an abrupt end in 1997, John Huggins is still alive and kicking, and it’s taken some strange twists and turns along the way. This is what happens on death row, and this is why a life sentence without the possibility of parole may be a better punishment than the torture victims’ families must endure for many, many years to come. In some cases, it’s worth the wait. In others, it’s not. I guess it depends on who justice truly belongs to. It is not us, it is the likes of Jim Larson and all who suffer to this day. It is for Carla’s soul which still cries out. It is for John Huggins to own up, something he has never done, and to accept the punishment the state of Florida doled out to him. Like most murderers, he never will.
Here is the twisted journey of John Huggins.
Toward the end of January 1999, Huggins went on trial for the brutal murder of Carla Larson. A career criminal, he had already been convicted and sentenced to life in prison for robbing a bank just three months before he committed murder. This is a man who duped ministers of God, but he would never be able to fool the Almighty. Ultimately, he couldn’t fool a jury, either, and on February 4, less than a month later, he was pronounced guilty as charged; convicted of first-degree murder, kidnapping, carjacking and robbery.
In the fleeting moments after he heard the verdict, he looked at Jim Larson. Larson met his gaze and thought, bye, bye. It was his way of saying go to hell. If anyone had a right to ask for death, it was him, and death he wanted. One week later, a nine woman, three man jury concurred by an 8-4 vote, after deliberating a mere two hours.
The prosecutor had asked the jury to imagine Carla Larson’s last moments. She must have realized she was going to die. “When those hands went around her throat, she was fully and completely aware the last face she would ever see was that one. As she slowly lapsed into unconsciousness and died, that was her final memory.” [To anyone following the Anthony case, does that sound vaguely familiar?]
Incidentally, the jurors were never told about Jim Larson’s sister, murdered seven-and-a-half years earlier in Gainesville, by Danny Rolling.
On February 26, Carla may have thought justice was served had she been around, because the judge agreed with the jury. Her father, Mert Thomas, said,“That’s the way it should be. It still doesn’t bring her back.”
What the judge had to say was very damning to John Huggins. In his 14-page sentencing order, he read, “One can only imagine the alarm, the anxiety, the apprehension, the fright and the terror that she felt as she was forced to ride to her demise.
“What fear and horror she must have felt when she was forced to walk from her vehicle into the wooded area - Carla Larson’s own death march to Bataan. No one can truly know the emotional strain and physical pain she had to endure as she struggled to breathe as the defendant strangled her to death.”
The judge spoke a total of 30 minutes. “John Steven Huggins, you have not only forfeited your right to live among us as a free man, but under the laws of the state of Florida, you have forfeited your right to live at all… You shall be put to death in the electric chair by having electrical current passed through your body in such amount and frequency until you are rendered dead… John Steven Huggins, may almighty God have mercy on your soul.”
This did not bring the Larson and Thomas families any happiness, but they were willing to move on. Sadly, if you think this is where it ended and the world went merrily on its way, guess again. This was only the start of things to come.
♦
Within weeks of the conclusion of the trial, Preston Ausley, an engineer working for the Orange County Courthouse, contacted Huggins’ defense attorneys and told them about information the state knew but never disclosed. On March 25, 1999, his defense filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in court, alleging that the state withheld evidence that would have been favorable in direct violation of Brady, which consists of exculpatory (or impeaching) information that is material to the guilt or innocence of a defendant. It’s based on the U.S. Supreme Court case, Brady v. Maryland, where the court ruled that suppression of evidence by the prosecution to the defendant who has requested it violates due process.
In a detailed written order, the same trial court and judge found that the state violated the dictates of Brady and granted Huggins a new trial. Of course, the state appealed the ruling and lost. Here’s what the trial court ordered:
On June 16, 1997, an individual named Preston Ausley spoke with Detective Daniel Nazarchuk of the Orange County Sheriff’s Office. Mr. Ausley had contacted the Sheriff’s office with information regarding the Carla Larson case. Mr. Ausley told Detective Nazarchuk that a white Explorer cut him off in traffic [in Orlando] and that he had written down the tag number. Mr. Ausley told Detective Nazarchuk that he had verified within one digit that the license plate number he had recorded was the same as that of Carla Larson’s Explorer. As a result of this conversation, lead sheet 302 was created from Detective Nazarchuk’s notes. The lead sheet wasprovided to the defense during discovery.
At the evidentiary hearing, Mr. Ausley claimed that he told Detective Nazarchuk that the individual he saw driving the vehicle was a white female in her late twenties to early thirties with blonde hair justbelow the shoulder. However, Detective Nazarchuk’s notes indicate that Mr. Ausley said he saw a white male of the same description driving the vehicle. Detective Nazarchuk recorded the date of thesighting as June 12, 1997. However, Mr. Ausley believes it was June 11, 1997. At the hearing, Mr. Ausley explained that he is very bad with dates and came to the conclusion that he encountered Ms.Larson’s truck on June 11, 1997, by verifying the date through other sources.
Thereafter, on February 1, 1999, the day after seeing Angel Huggins on television during coverage of Defendant’s trial, Preston Ausley went to the Office of the State Attorney to speak with the State Attorney for the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Lawson Lamar. Mr. Lamar was unavailable. Mr. Ausley was directed to Assistant State Attorney Dorothy Sedgwick who spoke with him briefly. Ms. Sedgwick asked Pat Guice, an Investigator with the State Attorney’soffice, to speak with Mr. Ausley and take a tape recorded statement.
In the recorded statement provided to Mr. Guice, Mr. Ausley stated that when he saw Angel Huggins on television it struck him that she resembled the white female with blonde hair he had seen driving the white truck with a license plate that matched Carla Larson’s within one digit on the morning of June 11, 1997, on International Drive.
After he had given his statement, Mr. Guice requested that Mr. Ausley return the next day so that the attorneys, who were at that very time prosecuting Defendant’s case in Jacksonville, could speak with him.
The next morning, the Assistant State Attorney who was prosecuting the case in Jacksonville spoke to Ausley by phone. After this conversation, the prosecutor determined that Ausley’s name had been given to the defendant in lead sheet 302, and that his statement did not support what he ”believed the defense’s theory of the case would be, and Mr. Ausley’s statement was of little value.”
Therefore, the state decided not to disclose the tape recorded statement or the information about what Ausley said he saw. As a matter of fact, this particular prosecutor was in court that same day and never disclosed it. The trial concluded later that week.
In overturning the verdict, the trial court judge analyzed every bit of evidence presented at trial and determined that prejudice ensued as “the suppression of Mr. Ausley’s statement resulted in a verdict that is not worthy of confidence.”
With that, John Huggins was granted his new trial. All charges against him were vacated and upheld by the Florida Supreme Court on appeal. Of course, he was still in prison for the bank robbery, if that had any redeeming value.
♦
To Jim Larson and all of Carla’s family and friends, it was like living through another devastating nightmare, but justice came once again. This time, the trial took place inside an Osceola County courtroom, but it didn’t serve Huggins any better. Hours after firing his lawyer, which seems to be consistent with the strange minds of convicted derelicts, he was convicted again on July 25, 2002. Jurors deliberated for five hours instead of two before deciding he was guilty of first-degree murder, carjacking, kidnapping and petty theft. What brought one charge down from robbery beats me. A pear-shaped diamond engagement ring and other jewelry isn’t petty, in my opinion.
His defense attorney this time was Orange-Osceola Public Defender Bob Wesley, if you remember him from Casey’s indigence hearing. He failed to sway jurors that it could have been his friend Kevin Smith, the man who let Huggins keep the SUV at his house until he torched it. The Assistant State Attorneys showed proof that Huggins had been staying at the Days Inn directly across the street from the Publix where Carla was abducted.
Like the Casey Anthony case, the evidence was primarily circumstantial. Witnesses testified they saw a man driving a white Ford Explorer that looked like hers. The man behind the wheel looked like Huggins, too, and her jewelry was found hidden in his mother-in-law’s back yard shed. Very incriminating, indeed, but still circumstantial.
As soon as Huggins fired his Public Defender, he told the judge, “We’ve come to an impasse on strategy for the penalty phase.”
The judge cautioned him, but agreed. He then ordered Wesley to remain on stand-by. “I think nothing is more personal than a decision to live or die,” Wesley said of Huggins’ decision.
Foolishly, he did represent himself during the penalty phase, one which showed him to be unemotional. It lasted all of one hour. In his argument against death, he said that he had a difficult childhood. He spoke of the wonderful work he did serving the sick and poor people in Haiti, tending to the afflicted no one else wanted to help. Imagine how much good he could “contribute to the prison community if given a sentence of life without parole.”
With no reservation, the judge told him, “You have not only forfeited your right to live among us as a free man, but under the laws of the state of Florida, you have forfeited your right to live at all.” Shades of deja vu.
Clearly, the judge had considered those mitigators, but in the end, he said they were far outweighed by five aggravating factors, including his prior felony record and the fact that Larson was kidnapped before she was killed. He also noted that jurors, who recommended the death penalty, unanimously found Larson’s murder to be “especially heinous, atrocious or cruel.”
“The horror, the agony, the emotional strain and fear she must have felt knowing of her impending death is beyond comprehension,” the judge exclaimed.
♦
Four years later, in November of 2006, John Huggins had a new attorney willing to take up his cause. While we may question why, this is the way the justice system works, and this is why I will never deny Casey Anthony a proper defense, no matter what. If scum like Huggins deserve it, so does she.
This time, it was a matter of his competence., and it was the first time it had come up in his case, according to his Tampa-based attorney, Eric Pinkard, who said he became concerned when he had trouble communicating with his client, according to a report in the Orlando Sentinel. [I do find it interesting that death row inmates tend to lean toward incompetence when all else fails, but that’s just my own personal observation and opinion, and one that Casey may pursue many years down the road if she is convicted and sentenced to die.]
The following day, the judge decided he was incompetent after three doctors agreed that Huggins couldn’t help his defense prepare his appeal case, and that he needed psychological treatment, including anti-psychotic prescriptions. In the state of Florida, an inmate on death row cannot be executed while receiving treatment. Slowly, the wheels of justice turn.
The judge ordered him to remain in the custody of the Department of Corrections and to be treated by doctors from the Department of Children & Families. “I’m OK with this,” said Jim Larson. “This is how the system works.”
The judge also ordered DCF officials to submit a report in 90 days.
John Huggins knows how to manipulate the system. After so many back and forth arguments over his competency - yes he is, no he’s not - the trial judge decided on October 20, 2009 that he was, in fact, competent. This came after he heard testimony from a psychologist who found him to be a liar who also exaggerated the truth. For three years, he was in a legal state of sanity limbo; in and out of a world of competency. Finally, he was deemed sane enough to proceed with his legal appeal! Or so we thought.
In November, only a month later, his attorney had another evaluation done by Tampa-based psychologist Richard Carpenter. At a July [2010] hearing, Carpenter testified that Huggins demonstrated signs of mental illness. “He expressed these delusions about the Feds, the Dixieland Mafia and that he was being framed,” and here we go, all over again, twelve years after the murder of Carla Larson.
In that July hearing, prosecutors noted that the issue of Huggins’ competence has lingered for years and suggested that his repeated evaluations could have taught him how to trick those tests. The judge expressed frustration over the time it took from tests done in November and when the motion was filed, more than six months later, and to complicate matters even more, Huggins filed his own documents requesting that his legal team be removed. He refused to meet with his attorneys and Carpenter. Quite clearly, this has been one mess after another, and it clogs up the system. Had John Huggins only put his talents to good use.
Meanwhile, his attorney argued that an upcoming hearing on post-conviction appellate claims should be delayed until the question of his competency is settled.
The judge insisted that the hearing would take place next month while that is being decided. Also, there are remaining issues over claims involving ineffective counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. “This case is mired in quicksand,” he said, and he’s not convinced whether Huggins is delusional or trying to delay the process.
Now, we come to August, and how far have we advanced? Once again, the judge asked court-appointed experts to try to come up with an opinion regarding Huggins’ competency by reviewing doctor’s notes. “I am competent,” he told the court. “My mental condition is sound and always has been sound.”
Huh?
During the hearing held in the final week of the month, guards had to forcibly remove Huggins from his cell at Florida State Prison in Starke so he could attend. An electronic stun belt was attached to his body that would shock him if he acted out. A deputy stood by ready to zap him with 50,000 volts. Needless to say, it wasn’t necessary, although he was anything but cooperative, and he has shown a history of animosity toward this particular judge.
As the latest hearing wrapped up, Jim Larson said he was planning on taking a trip up to Gainesville to attend the 20th anniversary remembrance of his younger sister, Sonja, murdered and mutilated by serial killer Danny Rolling, now executed, as John Steven Huggins continues to legally mutilate the justice system.
Larson said he was confident this is the countdown to Huggins’ execution. “I was there for the last one [at Rolling’s execution] and I’ll be there for this one, front row. Maybe he’ll send for me.”
♦
Oh yes, there’s just one more thing of special importance. After attending Casey’s last status hearing, I spoke to Jeff Ashton about John Huggins on the way out of the courtroom. You see, he was the prosecuting attorney when it all began. He was the one throughout all these years of trials and motions. It was Jeff Ashton who represented the state time and time again. I asked him what he thought. How would this latest hearing turn out? “I don’t know. I really don’t know. It’s in the judge’s hands.”
The judge? Oh, yes, that would be Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Jr., the same one who found Huggins to be incompetent, but the same judge who sentenced him to death. Twice.
See also: Commission on Capital Cases
Dave Knechel | tagged Bob Wesley, Carla Larson, Danny Rolling, Jim Larson, John Huggins, Preston Ausley, Publix | in Casey Anthony, Caylee Anthony, Chief Judge Belvin Perry, Dave Knechel, Human Interest, Jeff Ashton, Marinade Dave, Marinade Dave’s Caylee Anthony Posts, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Orange County Circuit Court | Share Article 
LEGAL NOTICE
©David B. Knechel. All Rights Reserved. No portion of this site can be reproduced in it's entirety or in part without expressed written permission by the owner/administrator of this site in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Section 512(c)(3) of the U.S. Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. §512(c)(3). The charges against defendants are mere accusations and the subjects are presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law.
Reader Comments (62)
Finally! I've been F5'ing forever. Just kidding. Thanks. Now I'll go back to being quite and reading...
Wow Dave! Your meticulous details are amazing. I expect that Ms. Casey will have years and years of appeals and b.s. She will equate herself to possessing the knowledge of a degree'd attorney. IMO, it's almost simpler for the proscecutor to just go for a life sentence. Not to say that she can't do the same thing with this sentence. But as Judge Perry says, "Death is different".
This one was a lot of work. I spent hours scouring for information in order to be as detailed as possible. I sure hope it's worth a few F5s. Yes, this also proves how different death is. Very different, indeed. Thanks.
Truly amazing! Judge Perry "ain't no new kid on the block, for sure!"....after the jury hears how little Caylee was "slaughtered" by her own mother, I think there's a very strong chance that she will
get the DP. She STILL shows no remorse. imo
PS. Meant to also say: GREAT article Dave! Hope you'll start that book !
No, Toasty1, Judge Perry is no stranger to justice. Let's see if Casey shows remorse if and when she's convicted. Even so, she never once reacted to her daughter's death - until her remains were found and her odds dropped significantly.
Thanks. This one was almost a book. Over 3,000 words.
Dave~~it looks like Huggins will end up dying of natural causes. A good article and I see alot of effort was put forth to make it another excellent post.
Dave, what an excellent post! This one surpasses the first part of this case you wrote about. You write with such detail that it seems like we are right in the court room hearing all of this first hand. I feel for Jim Larson and everything that he has been through. Sometimes I think the accused have more rights than the victims. It shows how easy it is for certain individuals to manipulate people. Casey is one of those that finds it so easy to manipulate others to get what she wants. I don't think she will get the verdict she wants from the jury that hears her case and I know Judge Perry will not be afraid to issue the death penalty. I just cannot imagine the horror that Carla or Caylee had to indure. I know this post was a lot of work for you and I want to thank for for such a excellent post and for all that you do for us! We appreciate it!
Thank you, Snoopy. I tried to make it clear that a murder charge with a penalty of death is nothing simple. Here is a very complex case, and in this particular case, it wasn't just the defense making mistakes. I fully expect Casey's trial to be just as crazy.
Thanks, Mary Jo. Yes, this one was a lot harder to write. I wanted to expand on how law works and what can happen in a trial and subsequent conviction. It's also interesting to note that once John Huggins was convicted, he seemed to have dropped off the face of the earth, yet this is as sad as Caylee's death in that Jim Larson suffered twice. Had I not written about this, how many people would even know who he is? Like Snoopy said, Huggins may just die of natural causes, but if that's the way it works, he'll still die alone in a jail cell.
Dave,
WOW!! Just WOW!! This story is a real eye opener! I watched Huggins in court when he was wearing the stun gun belt but did not realize who he was or who he had murdered. Was making supper and so I missed a lot of the news report but I did catch the fact that he had threatened the judge in the past and that it was the general consensus that he might try something in court. I did NOT know that the judge was Judge Perry!!
For the pasat 2 years I have had my nose so far into the Casey Anthony circus that other important cases have slipped by me. I had no idea that he was the one that murdered Carla Larson. He has cost the state a bundle of cash just as Casey will in the end.
Thank you for the lesson on keeping my eyes open to other cases where the system is manipulatedd by those who seek to get away with murder.
Checked out his website and of course he is "innocent" and wanting help proving it. I don't think there is anyone on death row that is guilty........to hear them tell it........
Toasty1,
He better be on chapter 10 by now!!!
Thanks, Carole. Yes, it's an eye opener and it very well should be. Unfortunately, too many people think that Casey is the only person who matters. Thousands of trials and tribulations and hearings go on every day, and no one is any more important than the next person. Here was a very good civics lesson in the mechanics of a crime and the ultimate punishment, and how long it takes. I don't see Huggins being executed for at least another 10 years. Here's a no good, low life bum, who learned how to manipulate the system. He's bucking for a reduction to LWOP.
Can't wait for Caseys trial now more than ever!!!
It will come, Jelly. Slow, but sure.
OMG, OMG, OMG, What a tangled web of justice/injustice/justice/injustice/ in the end JUSTICE! If it does not come from the hand of man in the legal system it will need our patience for it will surely come from the higher court we all will face in our day of judgement. So what you are conveying here Dave is that we might as well go on with life because in thinking that by the end of May 2011 the Casey Anthony case should be over and done and Caylee's justice finalized, the truth is it may never end in the legal system but go on and on and on out living those who are waiting and waiting. I hope Jim Larson does have the opportunity to see John Huggins finally come to his end. Excellent piece or work Dave,
Dave, it is also very appearant how much research you do to get the facts together into a cohesive and informative article. This is not something that is easy to do but you have a God given talent for writing and we all do appreciate what you do!
P.S. did you catch that "chapter 10" comment??
Yup, New Puppy, that's what it could boil down to, and you want to know something? I left tons of information out. To just list case law that went to the Florida Supreme Court on appeal was staggering. I just hope my message came out loud and clear. Thank you, I'm really glad you liked it.
Yes, Carole, I caught that chapter 10 comment. Thank you for thinking I have a God given talent to write. That's very reassuring.
Great post Dave - I of course followed the Rolling case but did not realize Jim Larson was still having to deal with all the crazyness of Huggins. If anybody was crazy it was Rolling. Everybody almost passed out in his trial when he just stood up and said "I did it" and then told all about the killings. He also did not fight his appeals as hard as Huggins as he said he wanted to die.
Huggins is not crazy he is just trying to manipulate the courts. It always makes me angry when they fire their lawyers just to get a delay. I really think we will see this in the Anthony case. I hope Jim Larson will soon get this all behind him. How he can stay so positive I'll never know.
What an excellent post Dave. Both part one & part two. When you put your mind to it, you really have exceptional writing skills. If you ever decide to take a stab at writing a book, rather than short articles, with enough focused time and patience, you could very well have the makings of a best seller. The Casey Anthony case, along with all of the sideshows that have happened over the past two years would peek anyone's interest, and you have way of telling a story that keeps people reading.
~Dave~ Thank you so much for this information. I took the liberty of researching this specific case after I was done reading your post. What I found very interesting was...that after following several links starting from his personal web page, It led me to the new Lawyer appointed to the Anthony team. Hmmm...I also went further and read Ms. Sims bio and found several interesting things about her. The more I read, the more clear it became... All of this "charity" work being done for Casey is becoming an endless cycle of confusion, just as Baez had intended. He keeps adding more spice to the sauce mix... I guess he is experimenting until he finds the perfect recipe. I hope we all don't starve to death while waiting for the first bite.
F5'ing? Is that a new cuss word? lol
What a story! Victims' families have to have the patience of a saint waiting for justice to finalkly be served. Judge Perry is a stickler for doing things properly according to law and even shows he can deal with some rather sticky wickets within the legal system. Perhaps the slowness in this case shows how thorough Judge Perry is.
Great writing for such a horrible case, Dave. It had to take some thought in how to lay it out for us to understand and I know I did. Thanks for that~
I feel I know Judge Belvin Perry and the events that have shaped his courtroom demeanor a lot more thoroughly now, reading this. Although I hugely doubt this trial will last no more than 2 months (!- 4 months at least I'd say) I now have some hopes that come Labor Day next year we'll have a verdict and maybe even some answers. Judge Perry has truly seen it all.... great post. Hang tough, Mr. Larson.
Wow! Another interesting article. I think they should remove all law books from the prison library, and all psychology books.. these people have nothing better to do than find just one more way to manipulate the system. The entire time I was reading about the Larsons and Huggins I was thinking of Jeffrey MacDonald. I don't know if you remember him but he killed his entire family in 1970 at Fort Bragg in NC. He was only sentenced to life x 3 but to this day maintains his innocence and constantly petitions the court for one reason or another... and his case involved hard evidence, not circumstantial. That's 40 years! So the people who get life sentences are just as bad as Huggins. At least Mr. Larson will eventually see the end of that one.
That's also why I think Casey Anthony shouldn't get the death penalty. I think she should get life without any chance of parole. That way when someone asks why she's there she will HAVE to remember Caylee for even that little bit of time it takes to answer. The way her legal team is dropping like flies I have to wonder if she would even have anyone around to go through the appeals process with her.
Thank you Dave for another great article and I truly appreciate all the time you put into writing these for us.
I wanted to mention that Kyron Horman's birthday is today and he turned 8 years old. Maybe everyone could say a prayer for him and his family that they will be reunited real soon.
God Bless you Kyron and Happy Birthday!
Have a nice day everyone!
Thank you Dave.
Hi Dave. Your post was extremely captivating. Your best writing yet!!! It was like reading a crime novel. I saw so many similarities between the Huggins case and the Anthony case and never in a million years would have known that Jeff Ashton and Judge Perry were involved. As Judge Strickland said about the defense, “The Irony is Rich”. Personally I’d like to see Casey receive life without the possibility of parole because I’d like to see the avoidance of the automatic appeal process should she received the death sentence. Dave, keep up the great work and write that book! :)
Chief Judge wants to know why jurors are no shows
By Anthony Colarossi, Orlando Sentinel
12:20 p.m. EDT, September 8, 2010
One by one the no shows appeared before Chief Circuit Judge Belvin Perry Wednesday, each offering explanations and excuses about why they failed to show up for jury service.
This was no feel-good exercise in reminding the would-be jurors of their legal obligations, however. Perry ordered a few dozen people who failed to report to jury duty to appear in his court Wednesday to hear exactly why these folks did not obey their summonses.
His orders resulted in a series of shotgun-like hearings in which residents explained why they couldn't — or wouldn't — appear for jury service when called upon back in January.
No show juror Kevin Smyth of Orlando told Perry: "I would be a terrible juror."
Smyth, 68, explained that he has smoked 2-and-one-half packs of cigarettes a day for 53 years and suffers from COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease).
Before he is called for jury duty again, Smyth said, "I will probably kill myself, not intentionally, but through my bad habits."
Perry said it was not up to Smyth to decide whether he would be a good juror or not
"You may have somebody who wants you. Maybe a tobacco case," said Perry, adding that Smyth could also get a medical excuse from his doctor. And that's exactly what Smyth said he plans to do.
Most of the 47 or so people ordered to show up before Perry Wednesday had their citations dismissed and a new jury service date scheduled. Some, who had serious language barriers, were excused and not rescheduled.
But Perry still reminded them, "If you receive a future summons for jury service, please do not ignore it."
Perry's mass mailing of orders "to show cause" is due to a dramatic decline in the response rates of potential jurors in Orange County. His orders asked those who received them to show "why you should not be held in contempt of court."
The document also reminded the recipients that if they do not appear for jury service, "you may be held in contempt of court, which is punishable by a fine, imprisonment or both."
Ninth Judicial Circuit statistics indicate about 50 percent of jurors summoned for jury duty in Orange are not showing up in court when they're supposed to. Court officials issue several thousand summonses each month for jury duty.
Many of the no-shows are the result of bad address information based on outdated driver's license details. In many cases, it's not certain whether the summonses are getting to the would-be jurors.
For instance, the Sheriff's Office could not serve Perry's recent orders on some 208 would-be jurors who were no shows probably due to bad address information. Another 85 were served, but were rescheduled or excused. And, finally, another 47 received the orders and were expected to appear in court to explain themselves Wednesday. Not all of the people in that group showed up.
But Jeremy McPherson, 33, of Ocoee, did. He told Perry he simply didn't get the summons in the mail, but he's willing to serve now as he has twice in the past.
"They gave me a date now so I know exactly when I need to show," he said. "I can prove I've been [to jury duty] before and I haven't ditched. I was actually on a jury"
McPherson said being on a jury is "not bad."
"They take care of you when you're on," he said.
At the same time, McPherson said he could see how hourly workers might find jury duty to be a hardship.
Smyth, the smoker, said he can't sit through a movie without lighting up. He can't imagine sitting through a trial that might last several days and require jurors to sit and listen to testimony for a couple of hours at a time.
"I wake up every hour during the night to smoke a cigarette," he said. "I'm a ridiculously addicted smoker."
But he agreed that Perry's response was appropriate in his case because the court was not aware of his condition or his addiction.
"The problem is real and it doesn't serve anyone's best interest to have me on a jury," he said. "It would be agony for me."
Still, court officials urge potential jurors to report to the courthouse on their designated dates or simply contact jury administrators before those dates and provide legitimate explanations so their jury service dates can be re-scheduled.
Perry may hold more hearings to get the message across that responding to a jury summons is a requirement – not an option.
Potential jurors are selected randomly based on driver's license information. While part of the problem may be outdated address information, another factor may be language barriers keeping the potential jurors from required duty.
Daniel Ayala, 42, a computer technician from Orlando, did not have such a strong excuse.
"I accidentally misplaced it," Ayala told Perry.
After Perry dismissed his citation, Ayala also had his date to report to jury duty rescheduled for later this year.
Ayala said he remembered receiving the summons, but acknowledged misplacing the document and accepted the blame.
His wife, he said, normally "handles all the mail and the paperwork at home." But in this case, he simply lost the document and then the date to report for jury service passed. He doesn't plan to miss his new date.
"You've got to do your service," Ayala said. "It's important. It's part of your duty here."
Hi, Carmen! That dude Smyth has more to worry about than trying to wheedle out of Jury Duty!
I read that Carmen and it was hilarious. I've always had this feeling that if I didn't go to jury duty I'd be the one in 10 million who'd get caught. I guess it does apply lol. (no I'm not on that list lol) They must like short round gray haired women because I seem to be the one people want on certain juries because I've only gone once and not been picked. The last time they kept coming back to me in the questioning and when the judge asked if I would have any problem sitting on that jury all I said was "no, the only problem I'd have is getting here on time because I don't have a car and don't live near a bus stop". Haven't been notified again so far.. knock on wood.
Hi Karen and Connie - Judge Perry doesn't mess around and I wouldn't want to get on his bad side which makes me think that Baez and his team are either mentally challenged or just plain stupid. You don't know how glad I am that he is the presiding judge in the Anthony case. He knows his stuff and will do everything possible to avoid an appeal. Have a great day.
Hi everyone. I just wanted to thank Dave for a great article. I know it took time and research. I think we watch to much csi and law and order and we think we can solve every crime. Thank goodness we have Dave to give us all sides and to let us know what really goes on in the court room.
Nika1 -Sorry, I was in bed when you came in and I had a couple of appointments this morning.
Unfortunately, Jim Larson is destined to have to deal with this nightmare for years to come. One of the obviouse reasons why I wrote this post is that the system if full of holes and if Casey is found guilty and sentenced to death, expect the same thing. Rolling was an ananimal. The difference with him is that he stopped all appeals after a few years and accepted his fate. He wanted to die, but it was more of a torment inside over his own demons than it was any remorse.
The lawyers, all lawyers, take advantage of laws. If the laws weren't written a certain way, or they were never written to give more rights to the accused than the victim, a lot of this would disappear. Today, everything has to be so politically right, I expect Huggins to live for many more years.
Thank you. I sure am glad you liked it.
Ahhhh! Thank you, sempre invictus. Your compliments are very much appreciated. As a writer, I never know how well anything of mine is going to be greeted. I hope I can write a book about this and dedicate it to victims of murder. I must say I have given it some serious thought. What I need is a starting point, one of my own, not necessarily from tracking the Anthony case back to July 15, 2008. When I figure that out, I'll begin.
I still don't understand what it is about my writing, though. I just write as it pops into my head.
IceMistress - My pleasure giving you the information. I think, after reading this, you can clearly see a very confusing picture Huggins keeps painting. This is what they do. It's legal and there's nothing we can do about it. It frustrates the heck out of us, so I try to write something that puts it all in perspective, if anyone is really capable of doing that for real.
Thanks.
Anne Rule has made what appears to be a very successful career writing about police cases (usually murder cases) in the Pacific Northwest. While I initially was engrossed reading of the intrigue, over time each account sounded alltogether too familiar to the previous. I understand there must be certain similarites, but it's up to the author to make each recounting distinct and compelling, unique in its own way.
You write better than Anne Rule, so suggesting you become her national kitty-corner counterpart is actually not very respectful of your talent. You have been covering events in the Caylee Anthony murder for a very long time, yet each blog is completely different and has the ability to stand independently. You have demonstrated time and again your gift to explain the most complex legalities into language we can all understand. You compel our interest by challenging us to think, to empathize, to demand justice and not lose sight of our humanity in the process.
In response to Carole's suggestion to write a book, you questioned, "How would I write it? I mean from what vantage point?" I recall the words of a favorite English teacher from decades ago who always urged us to, "Write what you know." If your vantage point is from that of a blogger, than that's your answer. Something is keeping you interested in this case. I assume that "something" is satisfied each time you write. Consider the large number of followers you have. They're connecting with that "something" as well.
There's enough information in your two most recent blogs to constitute a truly engrossing book. Your sensitivity to the issues has the makings of a best-seller. Your experience with the "trolls" is filled with far-reaching implications and could become another whole book.....and of course there's the Anthony case. Crime was the link in Anne Rule's books and in many she grouped several accounts, not just one. Maybe you can take a suggestion from that and write every chapter of the book about the Anthonys from a different perspective; one main theme, but many component parts (Jose, Cindy, Casey's sociopathy, Judges Strickland and Perry, etc.) Following the advice of that teacher I mentioned, you are well qualified to make each a stand-alone story that weaves into an intriguing whole.
I can't remember where I read this, but someone once said they imagined on the day of judgement God was only going to ask one question of us and it would be, "What did you do with the gifts I gave to you?"
Food for thought.
Hi, Sherry - Patience is a virtue most victims' families must learn if it doesn't come naturally. Or they die first. That's what happened to Carla's father. He died about 5 years ago. You know, as thorough as Judge Perry is, will it really speed the process all that much in Casey's case? Sure, the trial will be over around the end of June, but if she's convicted, one look at the Larson case and, well, you get the picture. I wonder whether the end of her trial and possible sentencing will be the end of the public's interest. After Huggins was sentenced to death the first time, he faded from people's memories. Will it happen again, with Casey?
Yup, it took me some thought in peicing this post all together in a fluid semblance. Thank you, I am happy it was good to read.
My guess, Karen, is that we'll have a verdict before my next birthday.
Wow! Thank you, Connie, I'm glad you enjoyed it, as frustrating as the actual story is. You know, if all law books are removed from the prison library, the lawyers would still be there to read them, and, after all, they are books about LAW, meaning that someone might get out of jail because the law says so. In the case of Huggins, yes, it's too bad, but the whole system of laws would have to be revamped and that's not going to happen. I remember when the MacDonald slaughter occurred and he's been fighting it ever since.
If Casey is convicted, trust me, plenty of lawyers will be more than willing to take up her cause. Perhaps... Andrea Lyon again.
And thank you, ecossie possie. It is always my pleasure to serve you.
Hi Dave - another fabulous article, your reporting & insights are unmatched. I really enjoy your blog… read it regularly!
Hello, Carmen... it was extremely captivating? How gracious of you. And my best writing yet? Well, thank you very much. Just for that, I will keep my mind on writing a book.
Hi, Marsha - Thank you so very much for thanking me, and thank you again! Yes, this took plenty of time and research. It's comical, too, because too many people have the patience of a 1-hour TV show, as if real life ever works like that. No, it doesn't. Hopefully, I'll be able to attend all hearings from here on out, and write about each one of them. Your words certainly encourage me.
Oh, how nice of you, marymac. Thank you. Writing this story was a lot of work, but call it a labor of love. I hope I can keep bringing you quality posts. If I ever slip up, let me know, and I mean that.
Wow, COL, I don't know what to say. I'm speechless. I've never read Anne Rule, so I don't know anything other than she's a very accomplished writer and I'm not. That, in itself, isn't enough to say that I am a better writer than her, nor does it mean I am not. I guess it's a matter of taste. I will say I have been writing about this case for 22 months now, so I must have a keen interest in following the story. I know I like to write. Tremendously. I enjoy the feedback and the back and forth from readers. To me, the comments are just as much of an integral part of my blog as my articles, but I am aware it is my job as a writer to do my best to capture the reader's mind; to see things the way I see them (or saw them) without a strong element of prejudice. Compassion, yes.
I like to interpret the law because I need to understand it in order to write about it. If I understand it, why shouldn't the reader? This way, we all see what goes on in a court of law and instead of making random claims with no idea of the truth, we can modestly grasp why motions are filed and deals are done. As for my style of writing, I never really knew I could do it. It wasn't until other writers came along and told me they enjoyed my stories. Flattery is always encouraging, but I won't let it go to my head. I like to write the way it happened. I like to picture myself in that scenario when I write, and I write it the way I see it. What surprised me at first was the one thing people told me over and over again; that when they read me, they feel like they are along for the ride. It's as if they are standing next to me. Now, I won't come out and say that, but it's very much a compliment when people tell me.
If and when I write a book, I'm still not sure how I will approach it. I must take a lot of factors into consideration. Should I try to write it like a fictional story of a true event? I certainly don't want it to read like a documentary. I don't think I'll know until I actually sit down and begin, although I did start many months ago, so I will readdress that piece before proceeding.
One of the givens right now is the absolute fact that the trolls are going to copy every word of this response and rip it to shreds. In my book, I have the opportunity to let them have it with both barrels, but I won't. They aren't worth a roll of toilet paper they don't know how to use. Oh, they'll taste my bitter pen, but it will be fleeting.
I think I will have to go over every post I ever wrote about this case and cull information from each one. Then, I will attempt to wrap each article together in a flowing manner. I'm sure I will need some coaching, and I hope you are there to help.
Thanks, COL, that was very nice to read. It made my week, actually. You really impressed me.
hiya Dave..wow..i was checking every few hours waiting for the second part..of course this is all new to me, i have never heard of this story.. its a nitemare, and this is most likely what will happen in Caseys case too... its beyond believe that this can happen and go on for so many years, well once again your writing has had me glued to my screen, thank u so much , take care and again keep up the great work :)
oh and i nearly forgot !!! if u write a book i definately want one .... please please let it be available to get here in ireland :))
Hiya, cinta! I didn't know you live in Ireland.
Yes, the murders of Sonja and Carla Larson created many nightmares and one still lingers. This goes to show you the justice system in America. It's very complex and tightly woven with loose fitting laws. Thank you for coming in to read and comment. Your words are very much appreciated and I will continue writing. People like you really do inspire me, and if I ever get a book published, I will make sure you get one.
WOW Dave, another amazing post. With it so quite on the Casey front, it is nice to see another one of your posts. You have this most amazing way of writing, letting us know what has happened, what is happening and what will happen. Dave, how is that book about the Case against Casey coming, you have that book in you and it, as our sweet Laura said, it could be a best seller. There are going to be a lot of books written about the case and yours could be the first one in print as soon as that verdict comes out.
How horrible for the family and friends of Carla to have to not only loose this young woman to a horrible murder but have to go through two trials before justice is served. I would like to believe that when he does die Carla's family and friends will finally get some closure.
What a pathetic excuse for a human being, John Huggins is. How ironic that the Judge is Judge Perry and the Attorney for the State, Jeff Ashton. Casey may want to read your new post and see what just may happen to her. I will never say that Casey will not get the Death Penalty because she just may.
Thank you, my dear Peggy. If a book is in me, then so be it, a book will be written. Time will tell.
One of the unfortunate aspects of the Huggins trial and everything else is the astute possibility that he may see a third trial. The judge has said a decision should be coming in 6-8 weeks, and that was on Aug. 26. I have another follow up post I can write and I may just do that, to tidy things up a bit.