Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
StumbleJudge: Cops won’t be barred from trial involving Metro officer’s slaying
Judge hopes to schedule trials for four defendants at April hearing
Mona Shield Payne / Special to the Sun
Metro Police officers sit in a North Las Vegas courtroom during the arraignment Dec. 2, 2009, of six alleged gang members charged in connection with the slaying of Metro Police Officer Trevor Nettleton.
Thursday, Feb. 9, 2012 | 12:48 p.m.
Sun Archives
- Judge expected to set death penalty trials in Metro officer's fatal 2009 shooting (12-2-2009)
- 2 men sentenced as accessories in slaying of Metro Police officer (12-2-2009)
- Man accused in Metro officer's death faces new charge (12-8-2009)
- 6 charged in Metro officer’s death appear in NLV court (12-2-2009)
- 6th arrest made in officer’s death; 5 face formal charges (11-25-2009)
- Metro officer remembered as ‘protector’ of family, community (11-25-2009)
- Funeral procession for slain officer includes Las Vegas Strip (11-24-2009)
- Hundreds mourn slain Metro officer, denounce violence (11-23-2009)
- Report details events leading to officer’s fatal shooting (11-23-2009)
- 3 arrested in shooting of Metro officer appear in court (11-23-2009)
When defendants facing capital murder charges in the 2009 shooting death of Metro Police Officer Trevor Nettleton eventually come to trial, uniformed police officers will be allowed in the courtroom.
And their numbers won't be limited.
That was the decision Wednesday of Clark County District Judge Jessie Walsh, who took extra time to think about the question — would all those uniformed cops packing into a courtroom coerce a jury into a guilty verdict?
That was just one of the decision Walsh has made this week as she sorts through the pre-trial motions filed for the defendants charged in Nettleton's alleged gang-related shooting death.
More than two years ago, Nettleton was in his North Las Vegas garage when he lost his life in a short gun battle with what authorities claim were members of the Woods gang on a robbery spree.
This week, three of the alleged remaining four defendants have been watching their attorneys conduct what has become a lengthy legal battle with prosecutors.
And there’s no clear end in sight — their cases are continuing to grind through the court system, with the next set of motions coming before the judge at 1 p.m. April 16.
At the end of Wednesday’s lengthy hearing, Walsh told attorneys to get together before that time and work out a schedule for the trials of the four defendants: Prentice Marshall, 20, the alleged shooter; Saul Williams Jr., 22; Adrian Pena, 20, and Quadrae Scott, 20.
Defense attorneys and prosecutors told Walsh that a trial could last five to seven weeks. And one of Marshall’s attorneys told the judge seating a jury could be a lengthy process because a lot of people in the community will have heard about the case.
The multiple-defendant case involves the Nov. 19, 2009, death of Nettleton, a three-year Metro Police veteran. Nettleton had arrived home from work shortly after midnight when he was confronted and shot in his garage in the 1100 block of Emerald Stone Avenue, near Lone Mountain Road and Donna Street.
Before being killed, Nettleton returned fire, authorities said.
Marshall, who was then 18, was arrested the day of the slaying at University Medical Center, where he was being treated for a gunshot wound to the testicles.
Detectives said Marshall at first claimed he was shot when someone tried to rob him. They said Marshall later changed his story and told them had shot Nettleton in the gun battle.
Nettleton was not wearing his uniform when he was shot — first in the leg, followed by a fatal shot to the chest, authorities have said.
Marshall has been charged with Nettleton’s death as well as with an armed robbery of an 18-year-old North Las Vegas man that took place shortly before the gun battle, about 11:45 p.m. Nov. 18, 2009, in the 1800 block of Grand Prairie Avenue.
Since Marshall’s arrest in the shooting, police linked five other men — who allegedly belong to the Woods gang — to the officer’s death and the armed robbery.
Two of the men, Michael and Emmitt Ferguson, who are brothers, have pleaded guilty to reduced charges of accessory to murder. Each were given sentences of from 12 months to 30 months in state prison.
On Wednesday, Walsh made some progress sorting through several motions filed by the defense attorneys. Among them:
• The number of law enforcement officers in uniform allowed in the courtroom will not be limited. One of Marshall’s attorneys, Christopher Oram, had argued on Monday that if a jury saw dozens of officers packing the courtroom, the jury might be swayed into giving those officers a guilty verdict. He said that happened during the arraignment and he was concerned about the number of law enforcement officials who would show up at the trial. Walsh said Wednesday she didn’t see any legal reason to bar them. However, she indicated she would be open to change her decision if attorneys brought it up during the trial and convinced her there were problems.
• The grand jury indictment against Adrian Pena will stand, despite arguments from his attorney, Alzora Jackson, that prosecutors let the grand jury "spin out of control" and that the prosecutor’s use of inflammatory questions "whipped the grand jury into a mob."
Also this week, the judge decided:
• The two facing the death penalty, Marshall and Williams, will be tried together, sitting side by side at the defense table. The judge ruled against arguments from Marshall’s attorney, Anthony Sgro, that it wouldn’t be fair to either one of them because they will each be laying blame on the other. Pena will have a separate trial, but the judge has not yet ruled on whether Scott will have a separate trial.
• Prosecutors will be allowed to seek the death penalty against Williams and Marshall. Williams’ attorney, Deputy Public Defender Danny Silverstein, had argued that it was cruel and unusual punishment and violated the 8th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. But Walsh ruled against it.
Discussion: 12 comments so far…
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
Post a comment
Most Popular
- Viewed
- Discussed
- E-mailed
- Photos: Olivia Culpo, 20, of Rhode Island is crowned 2012 Miss USA at Planet Hollywood
- US Navy hopes stealth ship answers a rising China
- Photos: Derek Hough celebrates 27th birthday at Tabu Ultra Lounge
- Learning about fans of the Electric Daisy Carnival will help Las Vegas court them long-term
- On the horizon: A quick look at projects poised to shape Downtown
Everything Under the Sun
Blogs
The Kats Report
Las Vegas Philharmonic says search for new music director to begin 'immediately' (1 Comment)
With Shenandoah project stalled, Wayne Newton hits back legally (7 Comments)
Where does a Playmate play when she turns 21? Vegas! (3 Comments)
Ice Ice Billy
The road to six-toed cats and Mayor Bubba
The Kats Report
David Itkin tells L.V. Philharmonic officials he's on his way out (14 Comments)
Diamond Dave sells it well as Van Halen pours out the power at MGM Grand (2 Comments)
Entering debut at Tryst, Nick Hissom is a model for a rapid rise to prominence (3 Comments)
- Locally owned and independent since 1950; Winner of the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, best news website in the nation & DuPont Award for broadcast journalism
This is an excellent decision and if I may point out, this is a court of law and due respect should be given. Take the sunglasses off your forehead nimrod.
I have mixed feelings on this ruling.
Logically, I see nothing wrong with it.
But in the real world, a cop-killing is always an emotional issue and I know that if I were a juror I would not feel comfortable handing down a "not guilty" verdict (*if* justified) after having a bunch of cops knowing what I look like.
Add in the level of mis-trust between Metro and the populace and it is even worse.
Jury intimidation does occur, and it is always bad no matter where it comes from.
There won't be a not guilty verdict.
In reference to Quadrae Scott....the article indicates the judge has not yet ruled on whether he will have a separate trial. If you look on the Clark County District Court web site and look up Mr. Scott's case, you will see that he is set for his sentencing on 04/11/2012.....all the information is not being reported!
In order to prove that they truly are in favor of civil liberties for everyone, the ACLU has filed suit against the Officer's killers. "This was a clear civil rights violation by these killers" said the head of the ACLU. (HAHAHA: JUST KIDDING).
They will compete with those who sit in the courtroom wearing gang T-Shirts. Nothing wrong with that.
Senior Airman R'Chardrick Markray survived two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan only to be shot and killed in North Las Vegas outside a baby shower in May 2007. The case is still OPEN and police haven't made any arrests.
Airman Markrays shooting was a mile from where the Officer was killed. COINCIDENCE?
Las Vegas Police -- Please re-open the case and dig deeper to find his killer...
Bad decision to allow an unlimited number of uniformed cops in the courtroom. When a guilty verdict is returned, which it should be, this unnecessarily creates an additional appealable issue that will result in a new, second trial for the defendants, force Officer Nettleson's widow and family to go through the process a second time, and cost the tyaxpayers a lot more money.
If the evidence is overwhelming, all the cops aren't going to be needed to sway the jury, and why give the defense an avenue to appeal and create more grief for his widow and more cost for us taxpayers.
I'm sure the defense lawyer is happy as a clam this dumb judge just gave him a good claim to make on appeal. He sure isn't going to win the case on the merits.
What a bunch of idiots.I like the one where the cops would know what he looked like and possible retaliation if they wore their uniforms to court. I suppose if cops showed up in civilian clothes, they wouldn't be able to see what the jury looked like. How are the cops going to intimidate the jury, give them extra traffic tickets.Any intimidation would from the gangbangers and thoughts of being shot, ect.
So now, add another entry to the books used to keep track of what taxpayers have to pay under the auspices of law enforcement for what has little to nothing to do with patrolling the streets and preventing crime, courtroom spectators.
Really though, the economy is smoking, government at all levels is flush with surplus cash, and full employment make being concerned about paying officers to literally sit around is an obvious waste of time.
It's not just all those uniformed cops and the intimidation factor they add to the courtroom, it's all of them sitting there on our dime. They have as much right as anyone else to attend, of course -- on their own time, in their own clothes, no badges, no guns, and required to take off their shoes and belts before going through the "FOURTH AMENDMENT EXTRACTOR" with the rest of us sheep.
"Indifference to personal liberty is but the precursor of the State's hostility to it." -- United States v. Penn, 647 F.2d 876 (9th Circuit, 1980), Judge Kennedy dissenting
I agree with Killer-B, to an extent. If you are on your lunch and want to attend (in uniform, on your break) that is one thing, but packing the audience with cops in uniform is witness intimidation, and an abuse of taxpayer money.
They are going to be held accountable anyway, because all of us (jury included) can relate to this crime. You get off work, the MIL is visiting so you go work on stuff in your garage and people try to rob you in your own home?
I'll bet the shooter with his blown-off testicles will be popular in prison.
Chunky says:
He doesn't see any place in this story where it indicates the officers attending the trial are on the clock and being paid. If they are in fact getting paid then Chunky has a problem with that part of it.
They are honoring a fallen colleague, his widow and child.
The thugs that did this crime deserve a fair trial but the family, friends and coworders of the deceased officer are entitled to show support as well.
That's what Chunky thinks!
Don't get me wrong, if the accused in this are found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt I want them in prison for life. If they can be found guilty beyond *ALL* possible doubt I would favor the death penalty.
That said, our justice system *must* be allowed to function as intended, and jury intimidation should not be a part of it, from either side.
"...packing the audience with cops in uniform is witness intimidation, and an abuse of taxpayer money."
The_Next_O -- the worst part is if packing is done in the presence of the jury. Your point about the shooter's huevos being blown off sounds like a measure of justice has already been done!
"They are honoring a fallen colleague, his widow and child."
Chunky -- normally I ignore your posts, just something about anyone who constantly refers to themselves in the the third person is just too weird. But your counterpoint is a very good one. A courtroom is not the place for that, for the reasons I posted earlier. Their fallen comrade rituals is where they accomplish that.
"...our justice system *must* be allowed to function as intended, and jury intimidation should not be a part of it, from either side."
boftx -- excellent point. I've read case law where a self-representing accused had his case reversed because the judge refused to allow him to be in view of the jury without the usual jail garb and shackles. Same principles apply here.
"If the exercise of constitutional rights will thwart the effectiveness of a system of law enforcement, then there is something very wrong with that system." -- Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 490 (1964)
Look at all those thugs in the classroom. They couldn't care less what they're being told. Once they get in their Crown Vic and their guns all they have on their mind is intimidating and beating the crap out of law abiding citizens in this city. I'm sick of this crap. These arrogant pricks need to go through a thorough mental evaluation before they are ever allowed to interact with the public.
UGh!!!.....my heart is breaking for his family and I am in tears........I could care less about the rights of the pond scum!
VegasFireGuy....I feel for you. Being born in American where our founding fathers had the audacity to construct a Constitution with its silly Bill of Rights and such. If only you had been born a woman in Iran where the only "rights" you had to worry about are the ones from your husband after you've displeased him.
Just for the record. As a rule I COULDN'T care less what someone thinks who was daft enough to write "I COULD care less."
The accused should be happy. This will clearly result in a successful appeal based on jury intimidation. And jury intimidation by police officers has resulted in successful appeals in the past.
Can I be there with Amnesty International wearing T-shirts that say "lethal injection = State sanctioned murder"?
Imagine if abortion were illegal. Our society would have 10x's more of these fatherless thugs roaming the streets looking for someone to rob, kill, rape, etc. We should encourage single, poor black women to have abortions, not make it illegal.