Bakersfield.com: Kern County news, events, classifieds, shopping, & search

Potential jurors quizzed on death penalty views

This story originally appeared January 30, 2007

By JESSICA LOGAN, Californian staff writer
e-mail: jlogan@bakersfield.com | Friday, Feb 16 2007 12:44 PM

Last Updated: Friday, Feb 16 2007 12:44 PM

Jury selection in the Vincent Brothers case hit some bumps Monday because many jurors were confused about questions on the death penalty.

Kern County Superior Court Judge Michael Bush quizzed about 30 potential jurors with Deputy District Attorney Lisa Green and defense attorneys Michael Gardina and Anthony Bryan.

In this phase of jury selection, the judge and attorneys hope to weed out jurors who cannot fairly consider the death penalty or who have been overly influenced by publicity.

The judge and attorneys asked many of the potential jurors if they would automatically vote for the death penalty if they found Brothers guilty of planning and executing the deaths of his wife, three children and mother-in-law.

Many said yes. But Green insisted this line of questioning wasn't fair because the jurors do not understand the process.

First the jurors must decide if Brothers is guilty of first-degree murder. If he is convicted, each side presents further evidence before the jury decides on a sentence -- life in prison without the possibility of parole or the death penalty.

Without this explanation, many jurors didn't realize they were expected to listen to more evidence before making their final decision, Green argued.

The judge explained in greater detail during the afternoon session, which eased some of the juror confusion.

After much questioning, some of the potential jurors said they would consider both options.

But others said that if Brothers killed five people and planned the killing, they would vote for the death penalty without considering the other evidence at the penalty phase. The people who said they could not consider both options were dismissed.

A few jurors said they were against the death penalty and could not sentence anyone to death for any reason.

One woman welled up with tears after intense questioning about the death penalty. She was dismissed.

Another woman said she was against the death penalty and discussed the issue at length during college classes.

But she said she could vote for the death penalty in this case because of the severity of the alleged crime.

"This isn't the abstract," Green told the woman. "This is looking this man in the eye and because of what you say, he dies. He dies. ... Do you have what it takes to return a death penalty verdict?"

"Yes," the woman said quietly.

She was kept in the jury pool.

The names of the jurors have been withheld from the public to protect their privacy.

Only about nine jurors were asked to return for further questioning.

The rest were dismissed for various reasons.

Brothers, a former vice principal, is accused of killing his wife, Joanie Harper; their three children, Marques, Lyndsey and Marshall; and Joanie Harper's mother, Earnestine.

Brothers has pleaded not guilty.

His family was found dead on July 8, 2003, and he was arrested in April 2004 on suspicion of committing the murders.

More jurors will be questioned today.