POCATELLO, Idaho – After a lengthy trial at the Bannock County Courthouse, the fate of Brad Compher now rests in the hands of the jury. Closing arguments concluded on Monday morning, with both the prosecution and defense presenting their final appeals.
Prosecutor Jonathan Radford started his closing arguments by urging the jury to use common sense in evaluating all the evidence. He detailed the sequence of events, alleging that Compher discovered Nori Jones’ residence, tampered with the porch light, cut the screen to her window, and entered her home. According to Radford, Compher proceeded to assault and fatally stab Jones. The prosecution emphasized the DNA match on a fingerprint found on the window, stating that it was a match to Compher, calculated as less than 1 in 93 trillion probability of being anyone else.
Disturbingly, Jones had suffered 17 stab wounds in her trunk alone. Radford presented graphic images of the murder scene to the jury, seeking to emphasize the brutality of the crime. Additionally, Radford addressed the Y chromosome DNA evidence, asserting that it matched Compher and advising the jury to not be misled by potential doubts.
Gary Proctor, Compher’s defense attorney, delivered the closing statements on behalf of the defense. Proctor focused on highlighting reasonable doubt and asserting Compher’s innocence. He referred to Doug Coffin’s testimony, suggesting that Compher had visited Jones’ house in order to have a drink while assisting Coffin with some work. Proctor also highlighted the absence of blood on the fingerprints as potential evidence contradicting the prosecution’s case.
Raising questions about the DNA evidence, Proctor alleged contamination of the crime scene, speculating about additional male contributors to Jones’ sexual assault kit other than Compher’s DNA. Proctor further criticized the investigation, arguing that crucial evidence from the scene remained untested, including blood DNA on the doorknob, cigarette butts, sheets, and a bedspread with puncture wounds. Proctor argued that the flawed handling of evidence created reasonable doubt in the case.
During the prosecution’s rebuttal, Radford refuted the defense’s claims of contamination, emphasizing the lack of evidence proving such assertions. He also dismissed the defense’s attempt to shift focus onto another individual, Robert Spillett, stating that none of the DNA testing conducted at the crime scene belonged to Spillett.
The jury began their deliberations at 11 a.m., and a verdict is expected in the coming days. This developing story will be updated regularly to provide the latest updates on the case.
(Note: AP News or any other news company is not mentioned anywhere in the article.)