Saturday, August 17, 2013

Ex-cop elk killers: DA seeks to combine two cases into single trial

COLORADO -- Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett argued Wednesday that the cases against two former Boulder police officers charged in the New Year's Day killing of a trophy elk on Mapleton Hill should be combined because text messages show the two men conspired together to kill the animal.

Garnett has filed a motion to join the cases against Sam Carter and Brent Curnow on the basis that "each defendant was complicit in the criminal actions of the other defendant." The motion states that "the evidence against the defendants is identical."


Carter, 36, and Curnow, 39, neither of whom attended Wednesday's hearing, objected to the motion.

Curnow's attorney filed a motion for separate trials on the basis that it is "increasingly likely that the defense of Mr. Curnow and Mr. Carter will be antagonistic."

Both sides delivered arguments before District Judge Roxanne Bailin on Wednesday, but she did not rule on the matter.

Both men are facing charges of tampering with physical evidence, forgery, attempting to influence a public official, illegal possession of a trophy elk and conspiracy to commit illegal possession of wildlife, among other charges.



They are free on $20,000 personal recognizance bonds.

Carter's attorney, Marc Colin, said he plans to file a motion Thursday seeking a change of venue in the case.

An arrest warrant affidavit discusses text messages between Carter and Curnow leading up to and immediately following the shooting of the elk. Garnett highlighted a text from Curnow to Carter sent around 2:45 p.m. Jan 1, which read, "You should have killed it," to which Carter responded, "Oh, he's dead tonight."

"These are the text messages that both defendants deleted from their own phones, obviously knowing that their phones would be seized in the course of the investigation," Garnett said. "With regards to each charge -- the felony charges, the misdemeanor charges and then the poaching charge -- both defendants knew what was going on. They were involved and worked together, and the evidence that is admissible to each of those charges is going to be equally admissible against both of them."


Curnow's attorney, Patrick Mulligan, argued that the evidence is fundamentally different in each case.

"We do think the defenses in this case will be antagonistic," Mulligan said. "It is our position that Mr. Carter acted having seen, and having had the opportunity to see this elk. That Mr. Curnow acted for the most part in reliance on representations made to him by Mr. Carter. That, as I just described it, is the crux of an antagonistic defense."

Bailin said she planned to issue a ruling soon.


Carter and Curnow are scheduled to appear in court again for a motions hearing Sept. 4.

(Daily Camera - Aug 7, 2013)

Earlier:

No comments:

Post a Comment