• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Jury finds man not guilty of killing wife's lover.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ripclawe

Banned
I don't know what to make of the wife....

http://www.omaha.com/article/20131108/NEWS/131108701/1694

A jury wrestled long and hard with whether Anthony Utterback acted in self-defense the night he trailed his wife and stabbed the man who had been having an affair with her, a juror said.

The jury of six men and six women initially voted 10-2 to convict Utterback of manslaughter in the slaying of Ryan P. O'Donnell in O'Donnell's front yard.

But in nine hours of deliberations, the two holdouts slowly persuaded their fellow jurors that the state hadn't proven that Utterback had done anything but act in self-defense, said the juror, a 61-year-old retired Omahan.


As the courthouse closed Friday, the jurors acquitted Utterback of all charges in the Feb. 14 stabbing near 40th and Y Streets.

The acquittal left Utterback a free man — and his family and attorneys in tears. “We're very happy,” said Assistant Public Defender Jeanine Tlustos who, along with Brenda Leuck and Cindy Tate, represented Utterback.

The acquittal left open the possibility that Utterback could get back with the woman at the center of the love triangle — Ashley Killian.

Utterback, 24, and Killian, 23, remain married, despite Killian exhaustively testifying to how she repeatedly cheated on Utterback with O'Donnell, before and after their wedding day.

Even after pleas from her husband, Killian continued the affair right up to the deadly encounter. That Valentine's night, she exchanged gifts with her husband only to then go over to O'Donnell's house.

Utterback confronted Killian and O'Donnell there.

In a 30-second confrontation, the two exchanged blows -- though it wasn't clear who struck first. O'Donnell hit Utterback in the leg with a crow bar. Utterback stabbed O'Donnell once — striking him in the heart.

Utterback then walked away, telling Killian: “You might want to get him to the hospital.”

After the late Friday acquittal, Killian wrote on her Facebook wall: “NOT GUILTY!!!!!!! NOT GUILTY!!!! Anthony Utterback is a free man!!!!!!!!!!! Praise the lord!!!!”

Killian posted those comments just above pictures of her and her new boyfriend.


In tears outside court, Killian's mother, Tami Freer, said she was relieved that Utterback was acquitted.

“She's struggling with what happened,” Freer said of Killian. “She's obviously made some mistakes. . .And we're all very sympathetic to the loss of Ryan O'Donnell.”

O'Donnell's family -- including his parents and siblings — rushed out of the courtroom in tears.

O'Donnell, 24, leaves behind a young daughter.

Asked if Killian and Utterback will remain married -- despite Killian's posts about her new boyfriend — Freer said: “I hope so.”

The juror did not share that sentiment.

In an extensive interview, the juror said he and his fellow jurors were at odds over several points in the case. But there was one major issue they agreed on: their disdain for Killian's actions.

“Put it this way — I hope (Utterback) moves on with his life,” the juror said. “He's obviously in love with her. Hopefully he realizes he doesn't need that kind of drama.”

The jury's deliberations shifted dramatically from Friday morning to Friday evening.

The 61-year-old juror gave this account:

After getting the case at 3:30 p.m. Thursday, the jury took their first vote Friday morning: 10-2 to convict Utterback of involuntary manslaughter, the unintentional killing of another during the commission of an unlawful act. The juror said no jurors advocated that Utterback be convicted of second-degree murder, as prosecutors wanted.

Prosecutors had pointed out that Utterback stabbed O'Donnell just below the left nipple — and his knife plunged an inch-deep into O'Donnell's heart.

“There was no way he could have planned to hit him in the heart — unless he was a doctor,” the juror said.

Still, the juror said he and others weren't convinced that Utterback acted in self-defense. They noted that Utterback had beaten up O'Donnell in December as O'Donnell slept next to a naked Killian.

He also noted that Utterback was on Dougherty's property — and had every opportunity to leave. The juror said he rejected the defense's contention that Utterback was afraid that O'Donnell would kill him with the crow bar.

The juror said he also was bothered by Utterback's first comment to his wife as he walked away from O'Donnell: “You might want to get him to the hospital.”

But in the end, the jurors were hung up on one critical question: Who struck first?

No juror knew for sure. Killian was standing nearby, but she said she saw only an exchange of blows.

“Did O'Donnell swing the crow bar first or did Utterback stab him first? No one could say,” the juror said. “The state just didn't prove its case.”

That was a tough realization for jurors.

As others peeled off throughout the day, he and two young women held out for manslaughter. But shortly after 4 p.m., the three agreed: there wasn't proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

“I felt (Utterback) should have never gone to the house, should have never gotten out of his car,” the juror said. “But that didn't answer the question of who swung first.

“I have a lot of pride. But your pride gets whittled down -- and doubt enters in.”

The jury had no doubt about their feelings about Killian's actions, the juror said.

In detailed testimony, Killian openly acknowledged that she would pawn off the couple's toddler son on relatives while she cheated on her husband. Under defense questioning, she admitted that she had stoked O'Donnell's anger at Utterback by falsely claiming that Utterback had laid hands on her.

And in the immediate aftermath of her boyfriend's killing at her husband's hands, she acknowledged she had two questions for police:

1. When would she be able to take her prescription medications -- two mood stabilizers and an antidepressant?

2. Would her interrogation end in time for her to make her nursing classes the next day? She told police she feared she would get kicked out of school.

“Nobody could understand her,” the juror said. “It was just so far from normal that you can't even comprehend it.”

The juror said the case will linger with him and his fellow jurors — several of whom were crying as they filed out of the courthouse. “It's just a bad deal all around — especially for the victim's family,” he said.

Stepping off of the courthouse grounds and onto Farnam Street, he shook his head and sighed.

“Tough day.”
 

Cyan

Banned
The jury of six men and six women initially voted 10-2 to convict Utterback of manslaughter in the slaying of Ryan P. O'Donnell in O'Donnell's front yard.

But in nine hours of deliberations, the two holdouts slowly persuaded their fellow jurors that the state hadn't proven that Utterback had done anything but act in self-defense, said the juror, a 61-year-old retired Omahan.
Wow, that's some Twelve Angry Men shit. Very interesting.
 

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
Sounds like every single person involved in this case is a horrible person.
 
D

Deleted member 80556

Unconfirmed Member
So essentially:

-Woman cheats husband repeatedly.
-Tells the lover that her husband has punched her.
-Husband has already beaten up lover, and sees him in his frontyard.
-They get into a fight (unclear who started it) and husband stabs the lover in the heart (the irony is strong in this one).
-Husband is acquitted because there's no proof he started the fight.
-The woman posts on her Facebook ecstatically how her husband is acquitted, along pictures of HER NEW FUCKING BOYFRIEND.

What in the actual fuck. This woman loves to be the center of attention. She clearly made them get into this fight. Heck, with her nursing classes, I wouldn't be surprised if she exhibited Munchausen's Syndrome.
 

Valnen

Member
Well, he did walk away from the dude after stabbing him. Also he's still with the woman.

I'm not entirely willing to call him a terrible person over this considering the fact that he seems to be with someone who gets off on manipulating people to their breaking point.
 

Valnen

Member
The US jury system is in serious need of an overhaul.

This I'll agree with. The fate of people shouldn't be thrown in the hands of regular people. It's just asking for trouble. Your average person just doesn't have the qualifications to make decisions regarding someone's legal fate.
 

zhorkat

Member
From what I saw the husband, was the most reasonable out of these people. So what do you mean darkage?

The husband had previously beaten up the victim, and later got into the fight that resulted in the victim's death after following his wife to the guy's house. Also, he probably should have gotten a divorce a long time ago. The one who appears the most reasonable is O'Donnell since we know barely anything about him.
 

Village

Member
The husband had previously beaten up the victim, and later got into the fight that resulted in the victim's death after following his wife to the guy's house. Also, he probably should have gotten a divorce a long time ago. The one who appears the most reasonable is O'Donnell since we know barely anything about him.

I missed that part.
 

Valnen

Member
The husband had previously beaten up the victim, and later got into the fight that resulted in the victim's death after following his wife to the guy's house. Also, he probably should have gotten a divorce a long time ago. The one who appears the most reasonable is O'Donnell since we know barely anything about him.

Dude repeatedly slept with someone else's wife. Nothing reasonable about him.
 

Bikola

Member
Should've been charged with Voluntary manslaughter. He killed someone. It may not have been murder, but it doesn't negate the fact that he killed someone.
 

Valnen

Member
Should've been charged with Voluntary manslaughter. He killed someone. It may not have been murder, but it doesn't negate the fact that he killed someone.

In self defense. You shouldn't be charged with anything when you kill someone in self defense.
 
D

Deleted member 80556

Unconfirmed Member
In self defense. You shouldn't be charged with anything when you kill someone in self defense.

They weren't sure if he started the fight. The husband might have thought of the outcome all along.
 
The husband had previously beaten up the victim, and later got into the fight that resulted in the victim's death after following his wife to the guy's house. Also, he probably should have gotten a divorce a long time ago. The one who appears the most reasonable is O'Donnell since we know barely anything about him.

Yeah knowingly continuing an affair with someone after being found out and beaten up sounds pretty reasonable to me.
 

Bikola

Member
In self defense. You shouldn't be charged with anything when you kill someone in self defense.

But there isn't substantial evidence to suggest he was acting in self defense. Also he had a knife, he knew what he wanted to do with it. CMON, if i had a knife chances are i intend on causing great harm.
 
They weren't sure if he started the fight. The husband might have thought of the outcome all along.

It wasn't a fistfight, the other dude had a crowbar, he clearly dragged it out trying to start something. Luckily for the husband he had a hidden switchblade or something and some balls of steel.
 

Valnen

Member
But there isn't substantial evidence to suggest he was acting in self defense.
This is backwards. It's innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent. If he's claiming he acted in self defense, it should be on the court to prove he wasn't, not the other way around.
 

Polari

Member
Same problem as the Zimmerman case. If you can't establish who acted first you have to give the benefit of the doubt. America should probably look at making carrying guns and knives in public illegal like in the UK though.
 
But there isn't substantial evidence to suggest he was acting in self defense. Also he had a knife, he knew what he wanted to do with it. CMON, if i had a knife chances are i intend on causing great harm.

So what does that saw about the guy who dragged A CROWBAR all the way out onto his lawn and confronted him?

Crowbar v. Knife. Logic dictates crowbar man should win, but somehow this guy just said fuck it and stabbed him straight in the heart (the irony is too good).
 

The Adder

Banned
But there isn't substantial evidence to suggest he was acting in self defense. Also he had a knife, he knew what he wanted to do with it. CMON, if i had a knife chances are i intend on causing great harm.

The other guy hit him with a crowbar before he stabbed him. If I saw a guy with a crowbar whose ass I'd laid out before I'd come armed too.
 
Same problem as the Zimmerman case. If you can't establish who acted first you have to give the benefit of the doubt. America should probably look at making carrying guns and knives in public illegal like in the UK though.

What about crowbars? Because that is what the other guy was carrying, a lot more lethal than a knife to be honest. And this wasn't in public btw, it was in the dude's lawn, so those laws might not have even mattered.
 

Polari

Member
What about crowbars? Because that is what the other guy was carrying, a lot more lethal than a knife to be honest. And this wasn't in public btw, it was in the dude's lawn, so those laws might not have even mattered.

I dunno but it might strengthen the case in terms of intent. If the guy took a knife over there he would already have been breaking the law.
 
I'm comparing how reasonable he is relative to the other people involved in the story.

While we don't have the info, I'm not going to say the husband confronting him was all that unreasonable, at least not unexpected. How it turned into a fight with weapons and who started it I guess we'll never know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom