Lawyers cautious in selection of jurors for Binion retrial

By Matt Pordum (contact)

Tuesday, Oct. 12, 2004 | 10:51 a.m.

Defense lawyers and prosecutors are moving cautiously in the selection of a jury for the re-trial of the most publicized murder case in the history of Clark County.

The prosecutors and defense attorneys representing Sandy Murphy and Rick Tabish in their retrial for allegedly murdering Ted Binion in 1998 spent roughly 10 hours questioning potential jurors on Monday.

Throughout the questioning, attorneys for Tabish and Murphy attempted to decipher between "who simply wants to get on the jury and who can wade objectively through the evidence" as they worked toward selecting a 12 jurors and five alternates.

The defense teams want jurors who not only consider their clients as innocent until proven guilty but who also do not believe that infidelity is indicative of bad character.

"We're not going to be naive as this case has received some publicity," Judge Joseph Bonaventure told the packed courtroom of prospective jurors. "The jurors selected must base their decision on the end and not from any outside predetermined opinion or attitude."

Prosecutors Christopher Lalli and Robert Daskas told the potential jurors that justice required jurors who would listen carefully to the evidence and return a verdict based solely on the evidence.

Murphy, who lived with Binion, and Tabish are accused of the September 1998 murder of Binion, the former part-owner of Binion's Horseshoe. Binion was found dead in the Las Vegas home he shared with Murphy, after which Tabish and Murphy were convicted of the murder in 2000 and were sentenced to life in prison. The Nevada Supreme Court later overturned the conviction.

The Clark County district attorney's office has maintained that Tabish and Murphy, who had an affair, killed Binion as part of a conspiracy to steal his silver and assets. Lawyers for Tabish and Murphy have argued that Binion died of a drug overdose.

One major twist in the re-trial is Tabish will take the stand to testify, said his lawyer, J. Tony Serra.

Murphy's attorney, Michael Cristalli, wouldn't say if his client would also take the stand.

Serra said one the most difficult things a person can do is to shed a bias or predetermined opinion. He said it was tough to"un-ring the bell." Serra spent much of the roughly 10 hours of interviewing the jury pool trying to determine if people could allow his client to "start with a clean slate."

Both Serra and Cristalli, tried to ascertain who had been sincere in responding to the 49-page jury questionnaire.

Several people told the lawyers that although they wrote that they believed Tabish and Murphy were guilty, those opinions were only based on the first trial and if given the opportunity to serve they would presume both of them innocent until proven guilty in accordance with the law.

The jury selection is compounded by the fact that two are co-defendants and they have separate legal teams. Attorneys for both teams indicated they were pleased with how jury selection was proceeding.

Tabish attorney Joseph Caramagno said one of the main concerns he has is that "There is the person out there that has an agenda, who thinks my client was guilty and they weren't happy the first trial was over turned and will say anything to get on the jury. I feel we're doing a great job at weeding out these stealth jurors."

Tabish appeared calm, confident and very involved during the jury selection process. He was constantly whispering with his four attorneys during roughly 10 hours in court. Murphy, however, sat emotionless for much of the day not engaging much if any with Cristalli. It wasn't until the end of the day that Murphy showed any hint of emotion as she smiled and rubbed Cristalli's shoulders.

Lalli and Daksas kept their questions to the jury pool brief in stark contrast to Serra's involved and often more probing questioning.

Bonaventure excused seven people from the 180 making up the jury pool either because of personal reasons such as financial or health issues and also because of possible conflicts stemming from relationships they may have had with witnesses expected to take the stand in trial.

One woman was excused because she said that she had eaten dinner with and watched videotapes of the first trial with several members of the Binion family. Additionally she spoke of her days as a cocktail waitress and "hanging out" with Bennie Binion in hotel rooms at the Horseshoe Club.

Prosecutors and the defense each used two of the 10 pre-emptory challenges they are allowed. Each side also will have five challenges in regards to selecting alternate jurors.

The prosecutors' first challenge was against a married salesman with two 4-year-old children who said he had been convicted of a felony after getting in a dispute years earlier. He also told the court although he felt being unfaithful "goes against the principles of marriage," he knew that infidelity didn't automatically lead to murder.

The prosecution's second challenge was used against a former chef and mother of three who said she felt infidelity was not "a moral determination as to a person's character."

The defense's first challenge was used to remove a married heavy equipment mechanic with three children who told the court in his questionnaire that he "would rather be in contempt of court than serve as a juror." In his questionnaire he made the puzzling statement that both Tabish and Murphy were guilty and as a man of Jewish faith infidelity was "a sin only forgivable through God's son."

The defense's second challenge was used to excuse a single mother of two children who is a college student. In her questionnaire she repeatedly said both Tabish and Murphy were guilty of murder.

Jury selection resumed this morning and is expected to last for several more days.