Nevada County Picayune and Gurdon Times Newspaper Archive

Jury Trial Date Set in Dansby Murder Case

There will be a death qualified jury for Joe Louis Dansby, the accused killer of Jeff Lewis and Malissa Clark.

This was decided during a motion-filled day of court Monday, Dec. 11. It was also agreed to move the date for the trial to July 22 because of the complicated assortment of evidence involved.

Dansby's attorney, Gene Hale, filed almost 40 motions to be heard before the court and Eighth Judicial District Circuit Judge Joe Griffin.

The Dansby motions were not heard until after 1 p.m., as Judge Griffin disposed of other matters first in order to have plenty of time for Hale and the prosecution, Eighth Judicial District Prosecuting Attorney Brent Haltom and his deputy, Danny Rogers.

Griffin informed the attorneys the jury wouldn't be prejudiced if it heard both cases simultaneously. The court agreed to record all of the proceedings for the record, and will address the possibility of videotaping the proceedings at a later date.

However, he informed Hale it would be nearly impossible to have the daily transcripts typed up during the trial phase.

Griffin said a camcorder should suffice to videotape the trial, though.

The prosecution argued the tapes, if they are made, should only be used for the attorneys involved and not as official court records. Those, Rogers said, should come from the court reporter.

Many of the motions were standard for a capital murder case involving the death penalty as a possible sentence.

The court and prosecution agreed to individual questioning of potential jurors in the case, with the attorneys to meet later and settle on questions the jurors will be asked.

Hale also asked for the prosecution to disclose any leniency or immunity offered to any of the state's witnesses. Haltom said there were no such witnesses at this time, but he would keep the defense apprised should the need arise.

A motion to introduce polygraph results brought serious discussion from the state, as Rogers said he didn't understand it as the motion was worded.

Rogers said if the defense wants to have the defendant polygraphed and the results entered into evidence the state had no problem.

Hale withdrew the motion until the pre-trial hearing on Jan. 8, 1996.

Dansby's attorney also requested the court appropriate funds for expert assistance, including a juristic psychologist to help select jury members. The motion also sought a ballistics expert and an investigator.

Griffin denied the juristic psychologist and did not mention a ballistics expert. He said he would hold further rulings in abeyance until the defense shows a need for them.

Hale then presented a motion asking for money for a forensic expert. He said because of the nature of the state's evidence, blood testing, blood samples, DNA testing and results, he would need an expert to help him wade through their meaning.

Haltom said the concerns of medical experts reports and findings must be done independently of the prosecutor's office. "These people aren't witnesses for either side," he said. "They're independent witnesses."

The prosecution said there has been no disagreement to the cause of death in this case and asked for a showing of need before the state would agree to the motion.

Hale informed the court he wanted to get more specific with this request and asked the motion to be withheld until Jan. 8. Griffin agreed.

The 36th motion filed requested Dansby be allowed to wear street clothing during the trial instead of the orange prisoner uniforms provided to inmates.

Griffin agreed, but stipulated this would be for the jury trial and those articles of clothing must be made available to Dansby prior to his appearing in court.

Because of the complexity of the evidence involved, Hale asked the court for more time.

Rogers argued the Dec. 1 deadline should have given the defense plenty of time to get all motions it wanted prepared and introduced at the Dec. 11 hearing, and to give the state time to investigate and respond to them.

He said any motions filed after Dec. 1 should show why they are late. "We don't want to wait until the last minute and file (motions) to delay the case," Rogers said. "He's had time to file motions for mental evaluations before now (if this is the defense they plan to use). Whether the motions are timely need to be addressed motion by motion."

Griffin informed the prosecution the first 35 motions were filed prior to the deadline, and asked Hale if he had any others to be presented at this time.

Hale said yes, but based on the scientific and physical evidence involved he needs more time to get the information to the defense experts. "We need more time," he said, "to allow us to file motions."

Haltom didn't object to the request, basing his statement on rulings made by the court during the hearing.

He said a case such as this needs to be set far enough off to give both sides adequate time to prepare their respective cases. "This case requires a lot of preparation on our part also," he said.

Rogers, however, called the request a "defense tactic to delay the trial to claim mental defect."

Rogers referred to Dansby's 1979 battery case saying a mental evaluation was done at that time. He said the defense should have until Jan. 8 to raise the mental defect question and not hold it until the trial date, then ask for a delay.

Hale informed the court and state he did not plan to use the insanity plea as a defense in the case. "It won't be an issue," he said.

Rogers continued his argument, saying mental defect may be relevant on mitigating circumstances during the punishment phase (should Dansby be found guilty during the trial phase).

Griffin said there could be problems with further motions because the original trial was set for Jan. 16, 1996, and there are holidays in between now and then.

"There will be some complex issues raised in the evidence part of the trial," he said. "Both parties are interested in resolving the matter, I am too."

Griffin then checked his calendar to see when he would have time to hear the entire trial. He told the attorneys he had originally set one week aside in January for it, but this wouldn't be enough time.

He then said the first available time he would have to conduct the trial would be in July, 1996, with all parties agreeing to Monday, July 22 as the starting date.

Rogers brought up the problem of air conditioning in the Nevada County Courthouse, saying the units are noisy and make hearing difficult.

Haltom said the attorneys would just have to talk louder.

Griffin, though, said they may have to run the air conditioner at night before the trial and during breaks to make it relatively comfortable for all involved.

He said the new deadline for getting mo