Judge declares mistrial in Cairo murder case

CAIRO, Ill. -- The murder case against Chauncey Hughes Jr. went back to square one Friday after a day of unexpected events that began with the early departure of a juror and ended in a mistrial.

Hughes, 30, is accused in the Nov. 1 shooting death of his wife, Heather Davis, 22.

Hughes and his attorney, public defender Zach Gowin, maintain the shooting was an accident, while Alexander County, Illinois, State's Attorney Jeff Farris contends Hughes intentionally killed his wife after she told him she wanted a divorce.

Testimony in the case concluded Thursday, with Farris and Gowin delivering closing arguments Friday morning.

The jury began deliberating before noon, but during lunch, a juror left for reasons Judge Mark Clarke said were unrelated to the trial, and an alternate was recalled.

At 1:10 p.m., the jury started over with the new juror.

About 20 minutes later, the jury sent Clarke a note asking what to do, as one juror had stated she didn't believe either side.

After conferring with Farris and Gowin, Clarke sent a note back to the jurors, telling them to reread their instructions and continue their deliberations.

At 1:55 p.m., the jury sent Clarke another note.

"The juror is refusing to even talk, refusing to believe either side, won't even agree that Chauncey shot the gun," Clarke read.

Clarke told the attorneys his options were limited, especially with no alternates left.

"I'm responding, 'Continue your deliberations,'" Clarke said.

The jury originally had two alternates, but Clarke had to use one when he excused a juror Wednesday after the man realized he used to live next door to the victim's father. With the departure of a second juror Friday afternoon, Clarke ran out of replacements.

At 2:25 p.m. Friday, Clarke received another note from the jury.

"The juror is refusing to deliberate, is done and refuses to talk, not willing to discuss facts or evidence," he read.

After further discussion with Farris and Gowin, Clarke called the jury back into the courtroom, reiterated some of his instructions and sent them back into deliberations.

An hour later, the jury sent Clarke a note asking about the propriety of placing a battery into a cellphone that had been entered as evidence. The phone and battery had been sent to the jury separately, and the contents of the phone -- including photographs, text messages and other information -- had not been presented as evidence in the case.

Clarke sent a note back, advising the jury not to put the battery into the cellphone.

"It would be wrong of you to perform experiments or to attempt investigations," he wrote.

No sooner had Clarke called a recess than he received another note complaining about the uncooperative juror.

After calling court back into session, Clarke sent a note back, reminding the jurors of their duty and again instructing them to continue deliberations, before calling another recess.

Less than 10 minutes later, the jury sent yet another note.

"Judge Clarke," the latest note stated, "I think you misunderstood us. I will reword the letter. We did put the battery in the phone ... . Just wanted to let you know."

Clarke discussed the issue with Farris and Gowin, then sent a note back to the jury, requesting clarification: Had they simply put the battery into the phone, or had they turned the phone on and looked at its contents?

"They did something they were not supposed to do ... but in fairness to the jury, they were not instructed not to do it," Clarke said to the attorneys.

After receiving a somewhat confusing response from the jury, Clarke announced he would call in the jurors individually to find out what they had seen.

"Since grade school, I have found passing notes to be an inefficient way to communicate," he said.

"It's awfully tedious, Your Honor," Gowin agreed.

Clarke called in one of the jurors, who told him two phones given to the jury as evidence -- one with a battery in it, and one without -- had been turned on.

"We were trying to prove phone calls that was made or not made, but then there was a text message that was something about 'disrespect,'" she said.

As soon as the juror left the courtroom, Gowin entered a motion for a mistrial, which Clarke granted, citing concerns the jury's exposure to information contained on the cellphones could compromise the integrity of the trial.

The mistrial -- which means Hughes will receive a new trial, with a different jury -- was the latest in a string of oddities that have arisen during the case.

During jury selection Tuesday, a man was disqualified from the jury pool after insinuating he thought Hughes should be lynched. His comment about having a rope in his truck drew a stern response from Clarke.

At a motion hearing in June, after Clarke denied a defense motion to suppress some statements Hughes had made to investigators, a visibly frustrated Hughes spoke sharply to Clarke in court and overturned his chair as he left the courtroom.

At the conclusion of that hearing, one of Hughes' supporters became upset and shouted profanities on her way out of the courthouse, prompting Clarke to call for additional security during the trial.

Farris said the problems with the uncooperative juror Friday were unlike anything he had ever seen.

"The answer is 'never,'" he told a reporter on his way out of the courtroom at one point. "... That's the answer to the question I see on your face."

epriddy@semissourian.com

388-3642

Pertinent address:

Cairo, IL