Calvin Harris is pictured with his oldest daughter, Cayla, as they awaited the jury’s decision during the third trial. On Wednesday, closing arguments will be delivered in his fourth murder trial being held in Schoharie County, N.Y. Once closing arguments are given, the judge will take the case. (Photos by Wendy Post)
Tioga County District Attorney Kirk Martin, on the right, has withheld making statements or comments during Calvin Harris’ third and fourth second-degree murder trials held in Schoharie County. On Wednesday, Martin will deliver closing arguments for a second time. Martin was the prosecutor in the third trial, while Gerald Keene served as prosecutor for the first two trials for Calvin Harris.
Calvin Harris, in the back, exits the Schoharie County Courthouse with his attorneys Bruce Barket (left), and Donna Aldea and Aida Leisenring on the right. On Wednesday, Barket will deliver closing arguments for a second time. Barket served as Harris’ defense during the third trial. William Easton, Terry Kindlon and Joe Cawley, now a Broome County Judge, previously represented Harris.
For 15 years, 55-year old Calvin Harris, a Tioga County businessman, has been fighting for his freedom. It has also been 15 years since his wife, Michele Harris, disappeared into the night while the rest of the world was in shock over the events of 9/11. Neither her body nor a murder weapon has ever been found.
Now, on May 18, and following three previous trials in which two ended in a guilty verdict and one ended in a hung jury, the defense and prosecutors will render closing arguments in the fourth trial held for Calvin Harris in Schoharie County, and with presiding Judge Richard Mott.
The defense, throughout the fourth trial, which is now in its eight week, was allowed to introduce limited third-party culpability. Defense attorneys have maintained that someone else, other than Calvin Harris, is responsible for her Michele Harris’ disappearance and presumed murder.
The defense will argue that other parties were not looked at by investigators – men that Michele was known to be with. They will also argue that the investigation was biased.
The prosecution, on the other hand, will argue that Calvin Harris had the motive to kill his wife, and that he did so during the evening of Sept. 11, 2001. Prosecutors will argue that witness testimony proves that Calvin Harris intended to kill Michele and make her body disappear.
If the timeline doesn’t fit, should you acquit?
There are some key points in this case that the attorneys sparred over throughout the trial, to include a phone call made from the Harris residence to Michele’s cell phone at 7:13 a.m. on Sept. 12, 2001.
According to the prosecution, Barbara Thayer, the babysitter, rushed to the Harris home on the morning of Sept. 12, 2001 and in a panic, made the call.
The defense, on the other hand, argues that Calvin Harris made the call to see if he could find his wife. The defense also presented phone records showing that Thayer made a call from her own residence at 7:08 that same morning.
There was no message left on Michele’s phone.
The other part of the timeline that has been a point of many arguments is testimony from Kevin Tubbs, the farmer that came forward after the first trial, stating that he thought he saw Michele Harris hours after the prosecution claimed Calvin Harris killed her.
In Tubbs’ testimony, he cited seeing what he thought to be Michele at the end of the Harris’ driveway the morning of Sept. 12, 2001, and that she appeared to be arguing with a man that didn’t look like Calvin Harris. Tubbs later identified the man at the end of the driveway as resembling Stacey Stewart.
The prosecution will most likely argue that Tubbs is not credible, and that it was not light enough out to see anything at the time he claims to have witnessed this account.
The bloodstains
One of the most damning pieces of evidence the prosecution has presented, in all of the trials, are photographs and DNA results from bloodstains found in the Harris residence, specifically the garage and the kitchen alcove.
Much testimony has been given surrounding the bloodstains by various investigators and experts.
The defense has argued that the stains aren’t the right pattern to be conclusive to a bludgeoning, while the prosecution argues that the bloodstains prove Michele was murdered there, and that a clean up was attempted.
Third Party Culpability
The defense, in the fourth trial, was allowed to enter in limited third party culpability to prove their theory that someone other than Calvin Harris murdered Michele.
The defense will argue that witness testimony proves that Stacey Stewart was the last person to see Michele Harris alive on the evening of Sept. 11, 2001, and that he matches the description of the man that Tubbs saw with Michele at the end of the driveway.
While the defense tried to enter in evidence collected from a burn pit at the former residence of Stewart in Lockwood, N.Y., the judge did not allow the items, which included a bra strap, a key, a knife blade, clothing material and other items.
And although defense witnesses told investigators that Stewart and a man named Christopher Thomason had talked of burning bloody clothing at the time Michele disappeared, the entry of these items into evidence was not allowed.
The prosecution has argued that the defense is trying to point the blame somewhere else, and that their theory is not true. For closing arguments, the prosecution will most likely argue these claims.
Trial by Judge
When Calvin Harris’ fourth trial began in Schoharie, N.Y. on March 28, 2016, he made a request to waive a jury trial – meaning a judge will decide the verdict.
It is not known, as of this reporting, how long the judge will take to review the evidence entered and exhibits, before rendering his verdict.
During the fourth trial, Judge Richard Mott kept full control of the courtroom, and kept the arguments among counsel to a minimum.
It is hoped, following the closing, that the judge will give a timeline for rendering his verdict.
If found guilty, Calvin Harris faces 25 years to life in prison.
Click here to view a timeline of the case against Calvin Harris.
