WOODLAND, CA – In the ongoing Harry Henry Stanley felony domestic violence case, a Yolo County Superior Court jury found Stanley to be guilty on two of the three counts Tuesday, but has been unable to come to a unanimous decision on the third count.
The jurors unanimously found Stanley to be guilty of Count 1 and 2 felonies, threatening a crime with the intent to terrorize and inflicting corporal injury on a spouse.
For the third count, assault by force with intent to produce great bodily injury and an enhancement for circumstances in aggravation, jurors could not come to a unanimous decision, leaving the count at 11 to one for a mistrial and leading to further jury deliberation.
Deputy District Attorney Michelle Serafin provided the case for several aggravating factors that serve as evidence for count three against Stanley.
DDA Serafin expressed Stanley’s callousness and lack of sympathy, given his committing violence and spousal abuse, and “viciousness… deliberate infliction of physical and mental suffering,” supported the third count, or an enhancement for circumstances in aggravation.
Deputy Public Defender Monica Brushia called into question the aggravated counts and presented counter arguments to DDA Serafin’s claims.
DDA Serafin also emphasized Stanley’s planning, sophistication, and professionalism when committing the crime. These three parts partially define the alleged aggravated circumstances used to find the third count guilty or not guilty.
DDA Brushia said there was no evidence of the crime being premeditated or pre planned.
In the presentation to the jurors, DDA Serafin noted Stanley’s refusal to let police into his home on their arrival to conduct a welfare check.
DPD Brushia argued that, according to the body cam footage worn by officer Leo Gonzalez during the dispatch, Stanley refuses to have them enter his home but asks them if they would like to talk to Stanley’s wife, Megan Marie Duncanson, days before she was found dead in their shared home.
DDA Serafin repeatedly told jurors Duncanson was a “particularly vulnerable victim” given their differences in stature and the “physical and mental suffering” inflicted by Stanley on Duncanson.
DPD Brushia maintained Duncanson was not a particularly vulnerable victim saying, “She was fit, she was an acrobat.” She also argued Duncanson had access to her laptop and phone and thus access to help from friends and emergency services and was never isolated from accessing help.
DPD Brushia added Stanley and Duncanson were two equal partners, whereas DDA Serafin emphasized their height and weight difference, sharing that Duncanson was 4’11 and 110 pounds while Stanley stands at 5’11 and 145 pounds.
The jury deliberation resumes Wednesday on the third count.
