Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Saturday Morning News

Jury Finds Brothers Guilty of Killing Father

Aired September 07, 2002 - 09:01   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

CATHERINE CALLAWAY, CNN ANCHOR: We're going to go first now to Pensacola, Florida, for reaction to the verdict against two young brothers who are accused of killing their father. A jury found Alex and Derek King guilty of second-degree murder and burning their home to destroy the evidence there.
Also a family friend was also tried separately for the murders, and he was acquitted.

CNN's Mark Potter joining us now with the latest on this complicated, complicated case.

I don't know if it's setting a legal precedent, but it's certainly getting our attention, isn't it, Mark?

MARK POTTER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. Everybody in the legal community is talking about this one, and this morning, Alex and Derek King are awaiting their October 17 sentencing date. The prosecutor says that they could get anywhere from 22 years to life in prison. He says if they were to get the minimum, and behave while in custody, they could get out maybe in 18 years, while they are still in their early 30s.

Of course, this will be up to Judge Frank Bell to decide.

Now, the boys were originally charged with first degree murder for allegedly beating their father to death with an aluminum baseball bat, and they were also charged with arson. They allegedly set the house on fire. But after five hours of deliberation, the jury came back with a lesser charge. They found the boys guilty of second- degree murder without a weapon. They also were found guilty of arson.

Now, the boys' paternal grandfather says that he was concerned by the boys' apparent lack of emotion in the trial and hopes that they can now be rehabilitated in prison.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WILBUR KING, KING BROTHERS' GRANDFATHER: The thing that struck me the most was their eyes. Their eyes were dead. There was no emotion, there was nothing but just, just a blank look in their eyes. And when Alex was on the stand describing how his father was killed, there was no emotion, no sobs, no regret.

And the only time that I saw him weep or cry was this afternoon when they said that he was guilty of first-degree murder. Then I saw him begin to wipe his eyes. (END VIDEO CLIP)

POTTER: After their arrest, the boys confessed to police, but later recanted, saying that they had been manipulated. They went on to blame 40-year-old Ricky Chavis, a convicted pedophile and family friend, for killing their father. In a most unusual legal move, Chavis was then indicted and tried separately on the same murder charges facing the boys.

But yesterday, when the verdict in his case was unsealed, Chavis was found not guilty of all charges. Legal experts have strongly criticized the prosecutor for presenting two separate theories of the same case in two different trials.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KENDALL COFFEY, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It was wrong in the sense of fairness, and it was certainly wrong in the sense of a prosecutor's duty to not hedge bets, not place bets on two different horses in the same race. But a prosecutor's supposed to decide who's guilty, present the case based on that. That didn't happen here, and it's very, very troubling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

POTTER: This morning, "The Pensacola News Journal" reported that the jurors in the boys' case actually believed that Chavis killed their father, that he wielded the murder weapon, and that the boys helped him by letting him in the house. That's why they were convicted of second-degree murder.

The jurors reportedly were aghast when they learned that the second jury acquitted Chavis.

Now, the prosecutor, David Rimmer, told CNN this morning that he's very disappointed by the jury's position. He says that he still believes that while Chavis may have indirectly influenced and motivated the boys to commit the murder, he still believes that Chavis was not in the house when the murder was actually committed.

Charles, back to you.

CALLAWAY: Well, Mark, it's Catherine. I just -- I'm curious...

POTTER: Catherine, excuse me.

CALLAWAY: That's all right. You know, what's next? Could Chavis be -- could there be further charges against him in any connection to this case?

POTTER: Well, there are further charges. He stays in jail even though he was acquitted. He's accused of tampering with evidence and obstructing justice in this case. He also faces a charge of having sex with the younger boy in this case, Alex.

CALLAWAY: Right. POTTER: He faces two very serious charges, and those trials, separate trials, are upcoming in the next couple of months.

CALLAWAY: You know, Kendall Coffey raised this earlier, and I'm sure there's lots of talk about it where you are down there, about what does this do for possible appeal for the young boys?

POTTER: Well, an appeal is guaranteed. The defense attorneys have already told us that they will ask for a new trial, and that they will appeal. But the appeal would have been a lot stronger, actually, if Chavis had been convicted. Can you imagine that?

CALLAWAY: No.

POTTER: Two different people in two trials accused of holding the same baseball bat at the same time.

CALLAWAY: Yes.

POTTER: That would really strengthen their case. It's going to be more difficult for them, but you can be guaranteed that they are going to appeal.

CALLAWAY: Has the prosecutor said anything? I know we're running out of time, I'm just curious, I think a lot of people want to know, how did this happen? What kind of communication was going on in the prosecutor's office in this case?

POTTER: Well, the prosecutor says that when he learned in the news media -- from the news media that the boys had changed their story, he felt compelled to take that to a grand jury to see how they felt about it. They -- the boys talked to the grand jury. The grand jurors decided to indict. And they went from there.

He always said that he wanted to argue that Chavis was a principal in the case, that he may have helped motivate, but when they got to trial, he was prohibited from arguing that by the judge, who said he just didn't have the evidence. So he was only left to...

CALLAWAY: Right.

POTTER: ... argue that Chavis did it. He didn't really feel comfortable doing that, and he told the jurors, It's up to you, and they said, Not guilty.

CALLAWAY: All right. That's a very good point you make, Mark, and I guess you got to base your charge on what evidence you have.

All right, thank you, CNN's Mark Potter.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com