Resolution Reached in Mings Case to Avoid Second Trial

by Antoinnette Borbon

James Mings, who was convicted of attempting to kill his terminally ill friend Kevin Seery, will not be having another trial after all.

Deputy District Attorney Martha Holzapfel and Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson reached a stipulated resolution that would avoid a second trial on whether or not Mr. Mings committed his act with premediation, after a jury could not reach a unanimous decision in the first trial.

Their agreement of a seven-year term plus a credit of one year for the time he has already served allows Mr. Mings to avoid a potential life sentence while still holding him to a sizable term.  Mr. Mings agreed to waive a year of time already served in custody to arrive at the eight-year sentence.  Mr. Mings also waived his right to appeal the conviction.

Ms. Holzapfel stated that the family of Seery was supportive of the decision to resolve and will be at sentencing, although they remain troubled by the facts of the case.

Judge Fall asked Mr. Mings if he understood the terms, and he replied, “Yes your honor.”

Both counsel requested a sentencing report be on file for the next court date when Mings will be sentenced, on November 7, 2013.

James Mings was convicted of attempting to kill his friend, Kevin Seery. Seery, who had requested that Mings, along with another friend, help him end his life back in August of 2011, suffered from terminal illnesses. Seery had been terminally ill and wanted to die, stated Mings. Mings stated he was doing an act of charity, of love for another.

But what Mings did not know was that his attempt was fruitless. Kevin Seery’s cause of death was by a sock stuffed down his throat. According to Mings’ testimony on the stand and to detectives during his interrogation, he had no knowledge of a sock being inside the mouth of his friend.

It would turn out that Kevin Seery’s longer-time friend, Thomas McDermott, was allegedly the one who had stuffed the sock down Seery’s throat, ultimately causing his death. Pathologists would agree the time of death was consistent with the sock being placed in the throat of Seery, after the initial choke hold Mings put on Kevin that caused him to go unconscious, making Mings believe he had killed him.

Mings believed the job was done, stating to his friend McDermott, “It is done.” But sometime after this statement, it is alleged that McDermott had gone into the room to find Seery still breathing, and allegedly stuffed a sock down the throat of Seery, causing his death.

In the first trial, Mr. Hutchinson would put on the stand a doctor who had performed a test on some of the brain stock taken from Kevin Seery. In this type of testing, it revealed that the heart of Seery was still beating after the choke hold. It would prove Mings to be telling the truth about leaving the room after he choked Seery out, only believing he had done the deed, when in fact his effort failed.

Evidence also revealed there appeared to be vomit on the shorts of Seery and that he possibly had a seizure before his death. All of this evidence was after the act of Mings’ attempt to kill Seery, according to the pathologist for the defense. It was enough evidence to raise a reasonable doubt about the charge of first or second degree murder. However, there was enough evidence to prove an attempt was made to end Seery’s life.

In Mings’ interview with detectives, he had no knowledge of a sock being placed down the throat of his friend. Even in his confession to authorities, Mings made no mention of the sock.

A jury of his peers found Mings to be innocent of the homicide but guilty of the attempt thereof. But what jurors could not agree on were the special findings, the premeditation part of the charges.

People v. Ells Continues

by Kaiti Curry

Tuesday, October 15, jurors listened to another three testimonies in People v. Ellis. Each was questioned briefly and the jury was sent home by 10:30am. Judge Stephen Mock, Deputy Public Defender Joseph Gocke, and Deputy District Attorney Robert Gorman stayed after to discuss jury instructions which will be explained later in trial.

The final witnesses will testify Wednesday, October 16, followed by closing arguments Thursday, October 17.

Caroline Power, a contracted employee with the Family Healing Center in Fresno, California, was the first to testify in court Tuesday morning.  As one of two forensic interviewers there, Power conducted an interview with Child Doe Two on February 16, 2012.

The jury witnessed this interview on DVD during trial last week. Power explained that she had no contact with the children before or after her interviews with them.

Additionally, she had no way of knowing what had been said to the child before the interview or whom the child had told about the alleged abuse. On cross-examination, Gocke asked if Child Doe Two had mentioned, on the day of the interview, smoking marijuana with the defendant Kevin Ellis or seeing obscene photos of Mr. Ellis. He had not, she explained.

On redirect, Gorman asked if Ms. Power had interviewed children who alleged that they had been abused together. He asked her if they always reported the same details or explained the abuse the same way. To that, Power responded that it was “very rare to have two identical statements by two kids” and that she could not think of a single time where multiple children gave identical statements.

When asked why, Power explained that typically there is a delay between the time of the abuse and when the allegations finally surface. Furthermore, one child may remember things that others do not, or they may experience abuse differently.

Michelle Tate, the main detective on the case, was the second to testify.  In her testimony, she was asked by Mr. Gorman to explain People’s Exhibit 4, Mr. Ellis’s sex offender registration packet. Tate explained that in each packet was a list of the requirements Mr. Ellis was to follow.

The most important of the requirements was that sex offenders were required to re-register every year within five days of their birthday for the rest of their lives and notify the authorities if they moved out of or back into the state in which they were convicted.  Next to each of these requirements was Ellis’s initials.

Therefore, Ellis knew full well that he was required by law to register annually as a sex offender for the rest of his life.  The defendant’s records show that Ellis registered as a sex offender initially on October 3, 1995, after he was convicted for lewd or lascivious acts with a child under 14 years old.

From 1995 to 2002, Ellis re-registered annually. In 2002, Ellis notified the authorities that he was moving out of state to Maryland. By 2009, however, Mr. Ellis had relocated back to California and failed to register as a sex offender. There is no record of Ellis registering as a sex offender since 2002.

Categories: