RSS Feed
Print Story
E-mail Story
Five-year-old murder case goes to jury
| Wednesday, Mar 26 2008 5:20 PM
Last Updated: Thursday, Mar 27 2008 7:32 AM
The guilt or innocence of accused murderer Glenn Maurice Johnson hinged on the credibility of one witness — and the persuasive powers of two attorneys — as the jury began deliberations Wednesday in Johnson’s third trial in the murder of Lamar Rufus.
BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS:
Loading Stories
Advertisement
Photos:
Glenn Maurice Johnson in Kern Country Superior Court at his third trial for the murder of Lamar Antawon Rufus in 2002.
The prosecutor argued in his closing statement Wednesday that Curtis Rufus had no reason to lie when providing eyewitness testimony recounting his cousin’s murder in 2002.
The defense argued that Rufus did indeed lie to police regarding the details of a separate shooting — so why should he be believed this time?
After listening to passionate closing statements by both Deputy District Attorney Arthur Norris and Deputy Public Defender Michael Lukehart, the jury retired to consider conflicting evidence of an incident that happened five and a half years ago.
Johnson is facing three felony counts, including second-degree murder, conspiracy and accessory. More specifically, he is accused of driving the getaway car following a fatal shooting behind a Fastrip convenience store in south Bakersfield in September 2002.
This is Johnson’s third trial. He was convicted in 2003 of second-degree murder in the death of Rufus. But that conviction was tossed in 2004 because the jury did not receive proper instructions on the law. And his conviction of second-degree murder in 2005 was thrown out in August 2006 by the 5th District Court of Appeal because the court said Norris withheld key evidence from the defense.
Wednesday morning, Norris cited the 911 tape that recorded Curtis Rufus’ voice as he begged for medical assistance to save his fatally wounded cousin.
“You heard how distraught he was,” Norris reminded jurors.
In the hours after the shooting, Norris said, Curtis Rufus would identify the gunman as Arthur Lenix, and the driver of the getaway car as Johnson, the defendant.
“Ladies and gentlemen, use your common sense,” Norris said.
“Why would Curtis want to frame an innocent person?” he asked. “What motivation would he have to make this up?”
On the contrary, Norris said, Curtis Rufus risked lethal retribution by identifying Lenix and Johnson.
When it came his turn, Deputy Public Defender Lukehart also cited the 911 call, during which Curtis Rufus told the operator he didn’t know who was in the alleged getaway car.
“I don’t know who it was, Ma’am,” he said. “I don’t know. I don’t know!”
“That rings true,” Lukehart told the jury. “You hear the hurt, anxiety and fear.”
After Rufus made the 911 call, he made 26 other calls and received 19 calls and text messages, Lukehart said.
Police essentially ignored reports of another car, a red Chevy El Camino, that was seen leaving the Fastrip store after the shooting, Lukehart argued. Though it was stopped by police and contained burned clothing, no written report detailed that potential evidence, Lukehart said.
“I don’t know if he’s a gang member,” Luke hart said of the star witness. “But he sure knows a lot of them.”