Calvin Harris, pictured to the right, steps outside of the Schoharie County Courthouse after the jury is charged on Thursday. Standing next to Calvin Harris is his attorney, Bruce Barket. Sitting is Calvin Harris’ father, Dwight Harris. Behind Dwight Harris, news crews converge. (Photo by Wendy Post)
By 11:13 a.m. on Thursday, Judge George R. Bartlett III was charging the 12-member and 4-alternate jury on their responsibilities as jurors, and as to what the charges are and an explanation of the law regarding the second-degree murder charges facing Calvin Harris.
But this didn’t come without several arguments early in the morning between the defense and prosecution, as well as an apology rendered by the defense and by Calvin Harris for the abrupt outburst displayed on Wednesday afternoon by the defendant.
Calvin Harris, on Wednesday afternoon, had yelled at the judge, telling him he was not being fair, and asking why he was always siding with the prosecution before leaving the courtroom.
The defense attorney, Bruce Barket, introduced the apology, saying his own behavior was to blame and that everyone working at his table was picking up on his own abrupt style – to include Calvin Harris.
With that said, Calvin Harris looked up and said, I’m sorry judge. Judge Bartlett, who was almost smirking from the analogy that Barket offered, said, “Apology accepted.”
The morning arguments were requests by Barket to have part of the summations rendered by the prosecution stricken from the record to include comments that Calvin Harris vomited in the sink, and the word “distract”, which was utilized by the prosecution in their summation to describe what the defense was trying to do.
After review, the judge let the comments remain, and deemed them as proper.
But the summation surrounding the vomit was most bothersome to the defense, and they argued for quite some time about this.
According to the defense, previous testimony quoted Barbara Thayer as saying that the Harris’ son Tanner was the one who vomited, within the days prior to Michele Harris’ disappearance in September 2001. The difference, the defense described, is that the prosecution was giving the jury the impression that Calvin Harris killed Michele Harris and then vomited because of it.
“We had someone tweet last night that his [Calvin Harris’] goose is cooked,” said Barket of someone who heard about the prosecution’s summation regarding the vomit.
“They can’t use arguments that are proven different in evidence,” Barket added, but it fell on deaf ears.
Judge Bartlett, moving forward, began to charge the jury, telling them that it is not his responsibility to judge the evidence, that it is theirs.
Bartlett read the one-count indictment of the crime of murder in the second degree, and explained to the jury that they have to enter into deliberations with the presumption of innocence.
“The jury has to find the defendant not guilty,” said Bartlett, “unless the People presented a case beyond a reasonable doubt.”
He then explained the definitions of reasonable doubt, stating, “It is not right to find that someone is probably guilty.”
He also explained that the jury needs to evaluate each witness and determine if they were honest. He also explained the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence, and the difference between motive and intent, which a second-degree murder charge has the elements of.
“Murder in the second degree is when, with intent to cause the death of, another person causes the death of that person,” Bartlett instructed.
He also told the jury that a verdict must be unanimous.
Bartlett then dismissed the jury, and opened up for exceptions to his charge, in which Barket took one exception in that his blood expert was not identified as a blood expert.
He then called the jury back in, and told them to proceed with their deliberations. This was approximately noon on Thursday.
The five women and seven men went to the designated area where their deliberations will take place, with the four alternates sent to a different room.
At 2:30 p.m., the jury requested a read back of testimony given by the babysitter, Barbara Thayer. They specifically wanted details of her testimony surrounding Sept. 12, 2001.
At 4:10 p.m., the jury requested Thomas Turner’s direct and cross-examination around the statement that blood found was the size of a loaf of bread. The jury also sent out a note that they wanted to be done by 5 p.m.
A short time after this request, the jury requested more information surrounding what was marked as “Area M” into evidence. According to the defense, Area M was on the wall, and was proven to be dog’s blood.
And by 5 p.m., Judge Bartlett instructed and then excused the jury for the day. The jury will resume deliberations at 9:15 a.m. Friday at the Schoharie County Courthouse.
