Defense calls for mistrial; jury warned about photo

Jurors returned to the jury room after a motion by co-defense counsel Jerry Crisel during Friday’s proceedings in the double-murder case against Afton D. Ferris.

After jurors left the courtroom, co-defense attorney Matt Vaughn called for a mistrial after a photo was published to the jury that depicted a photo within a photo of a woman and a young child.

Franklin County State’s Attorney Evan Owens was questioning a crime scene investigator with the Illinois State Police when the photo was shown to jurors and the courtroom.

Vaughn called the photo and the questioning “inflammatory,” saying the photo was “unnecessary” and could potentially prejudice members of the jury.

Owens apologized to the court and Judge Barry Vaughan warned the panel of jurors when they returned to the courtroom. The judge asked jurors to “disregard the last question and answer.”

The state also concluded the lengthy testimony provided by witnesses called to the stand the trial of Ferris, 21.

Owens recalled a few of witnesses to discuss the presence of blood found on the linoleum taken from the kitchen floor of the home at 213 N. Douglas St. in West Frankfort where two bodies were recovered.

Ferris is accused of two counts of murder, home invasion and armed robbery  in the Oct. 18, 2009, deaths of Terri Ann Seibeck and Kandis R. Majors. Co-defendant Michael A. Schallert, 31, is expected to go on trial in September.

A captain with the West Frankfort Police Department testified that samples of the stains were sent to the crime lab for testing.

Schallert’s and Ferris’ handwriting samples were also admitted into evidence along with shoes.

A sergeant with the Larimer County Sheriff’s Office in Ft. Collins, Colo., also returned to the witness stand to say one pair of men’s jeans entered into evidence may have been mislabeled.

Another member of the West Frankfort Police Department also retook the stand and testified about Ferris’ handwriting sample taken with her attorneys and former state’s attorney Tom Dinn present.

She stated that handwriting samples of Schallert were also taken with his attorneys present along with a captain of the West Frankfort Police Department.

A forensic scientist with the Illinois State Police Crime Lab retook the stand, saying stains taken from shoes, clothing and the linoleum all tested positive for a blood-like substance.

The scientist testified that samples of shoes and clothing were consistent with the DNA of Majors and Seibeck.

Fingernail scrapings taken from the victims matched the two women, the scienteist said, but did not match either defendant.

The scientist said swabs were used on the firearm but said she “could not say with scientific certainty” that DNA was deposited on the 22-caliber Ruger by “handling or shooting” the gun.

She testified that some samples were run more than once after the scientist did not get the results she expected. The forensic scientist said the samples may have been switched, which would have caused “the absence of DNA.”

Owens asked the scientist further questions about the firearm. She said the firearm was not tested because “handguns tend to be handled by many people, and the results don’t typically tell you anything.”

Assistant State’s Attorney Phillip Butler also called a forensic scientist to testify about the handwriting samples.

She said “no two people write exactly alike,” adding that the samples have sets of “repeating habits” that “individualize that person.”

Vaughn cross-examined the witness, who said a note recovered as evidence had similarities to the sample provided by Schallert but not Ferris.

The witness said 26 handwritten pages taken into evidence “were awkwardly produced.”

She said it was difficult to identify the author.

Defense counsel asked if writing could be “altered to avoid the long arm of the law.”

Owens called another forensic scientist to the stand who said his specialty was in footwear imprints, tire tracks and hair samples. He said footwear is made in certain designs that wear differently.

The scientist said he compared impressions left on the linoleum, saying there were seven impressions, with some overlapping.

He said the general design of the footwear matched a pair of men’s brown sandals that had been entered into evidence.

Another design replicated that of a pair of black shoes, the witness testified.

Later, a crime scene investigator discussed the number of live and spent rounds of ammunition and shell casings recovered from the scene. He said casings were fond near the victims, with footwear impressions leading from the living room to the kitchen and bathroom sinks.

Metal bullet fragments taken from the victims during the autopsies were also entered into evidence.

More photos were also submitted as evidence including photos of the victims’ bedroom, where the contents of a purse were scattered onto the floor and onto a chair.

Crisel asked questions of a witness who testified that scales and a green box containing a $20 bill, a $5 bill, a bag containing a green leafy substance and rolling papers.

The defense attorney asked if the substance had been weighed or tested, with the scientist saying he “did not know how much was there.”

Another forensic scientist testified about photos taken of the shell casings and spent bullets, confirming that he had tested them against live rounds fired from the handgun. He said the grooves of one of the bullets showed scratches left by the bullet as it left the barrel of the gun.

The witness also discussed the number of rounds that would load into the gun’s magazine. He said he had “some difficulty loading 10 rounds” of ammunition into the magazine, saying “the first cartridge would jam.”

The scientist said he had no trouble loading nine rounds into the magazine.

Owens quizzed the witness about one of the rounds of ammunition that “had a gash in the projectile part.” The witness said when the first round jammed, it “left a similar mark.”

Defense counsel is expected to call witnesses on Monday.