Another jury deliberates Manley’s fate in teacher’s death

Kim Smith

Thursday, March 9, 2000 | 10:51 a.m.

The fate of a Las Vegas man accused of murdering an elementary school teacher nearly five years ago is again in the hands of a Clark County jury.

Jurors in the Charles Edward Manley case, who began deliberating this morning, must decide whether Roxanne Logan died as the result of an accident or whether Manley, 53, purposely shot her in the back of the head.

An earlier jury decided the latter in 1997 and put him on death row, but the Nevada Supreme Court overturned the conviction, forcing prosecutors to try the case again.

It began more than two weeks ago before District Judge Joseph Pavlikowski.

Prosecutors Ed Kane and Christopher Laurent described Manley as a down-on-his-luck manipulator with no money who managed to convince Logan to allow him to move in with her after knowing him for two days.

The attorneys contend that Logan grew disillusioned with the relationship and that Manley, knowing that he was about to lose his "meal ticket," shot Logan behind the right ear with a gun she had purchased for him.

Defense attorneys David Schieck and Robert Langford, however, said Logan was accidentally shot when Manley tried to get the gun away from Logan, fearing she would hurt herself with it.

Langford, in his closing arguments Wednesday, said once a friend of Logan's told police that Manley was a "bad guy," the shooting took on a "sinister" quality that tainted their investigation and the results of Logan's autopsy.

"They really don't have a clue what happened that night," Langford said. "They are throwing a bunch of guesses, maybes and most likelys against the wall and they're hoping one of the maybes, most likelys or guesses will stick."

If Manley is the cold-blooded killer that the prosecution makes him out to be, Langford asked, wouldn't he have closed the drapes of Logan's house when he shot her? Wouldn't he have disposed of her body and the clip to the gun -- both of which were found in the house?

Kane questioned that if the shooting was an accident, why didn't Manley call 911?

"Before her body is cold he's on his way to California driving her truck," Kane said. "His actions matched what he was and is -- a cold-blooded killer."

Kane also argued that if the 6-foot, 4-inch, 225-pound Manley really had fallen on Logan during the struggle for the gun, her body would have shown evidence of some bruising, but it did not.

Aside from the jailhouse confessions Manley made, Kane said there are other signs that seemed to indicate Logan was murdered. They include a buckled door, a telephone without a battery and an answering machine with its tape missing.

Isn't it likely that Manley removed the battery so Logan couldn't call for help and the tape to remove incriminating evidence of some sort? Kane asked.

More importantly, if Manley were indeed innocent, then why did he flee prosecution twice, Kane asked. Not only did he flee the murder scene, he took off months after his arrest when he heard DNA tests implicated him.

Manley even convinced his daughter to unload and clean the murder weapon for him, thus knowingly destroying evidence that could be used against him, Kane said.