6 jurors picked in slaying case
By late Monday afternoon, six Fayette County jurors had been selected to sit in the criminal homicide case lodged against James VanDivner, who could face the death penalty if he is convicted of first-degree murder. VanDivner, 57, allegedly shot and killed his ex-girlfriend, Mary Cable, outside her Grindstone home on July 5, 2004. He also is charged with attempted homicide for allegedly shooting Cable’s son, Billy, and other offenses for allegedly pointing a gun at another man outside the home.
Among the jurors selected to sit on the case were a receptionist and an unemployed laborer, both of whom live in Mill Run. Attorneys for both sides were continuing to question jurors Monday evening.
The jury selection process in potential death penalty cases moves slowly because attorneys individually question jurors to determine their views on various issues involved in the case, including their ability to sentence someone to death.
During yesterday’s questioning, defense attorneys Susan Ritz Harper and Mary Campbell Spegar, both of the county’s public defender’s office, asked potential jurors about their opinion on drinking and gun ownership.
Jurors can be precluded from service for a number of reasons like the inability to impose the death penalty, if they believe the testimony of a police officer over others or if they have a fixed opinion about VanDivner’s guilt. Those jurors can be challenged for cause.
But attorneys for both sides also have a set number of pre-emptory challenges that allow them to strike jurors for no reason at all.
The panel will be comprised of 12 primary jurors and two alternates.
Judge Gerald R. Solomon read a list of 25 potential commonwealth witnesses who may take the stand during the trial. If jurors then convict VanDivner of first-degree murder, they will move into a penalty phase where they will hear both aggravating and mitigating factors. If those jurors determine that the aggravating factors outweigh the factors presented on VanDivner’s behalf, they may then impose the death penalty.
Twice before the case went to trial, VanDivner’s penalty phase attorney, Dianne Zerega, attempted to block prosecutors from seeking a death sentence.
Zerega first argued that prosecutors had to present evidence of the aggravating factors at VanDivner’s preliminary hearing. She later argued, through mental health experts and members of VanDivner’s family, that he was mentally retarded, and could not be subject to a death sentence.
A U.S. Supreme Court ruling has precluded imposing the death sentence against mentally retarded people because it constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.
County judges denied both requests.
Jury selection will pick up this morning before Solomon.