Sentencing of Byron Case

Conclusion of State of Missouri v. Byron Case

June 28, 2002
Pages 1249-1290

1249Opening of Court
1250 Defendant's statement
1256 Ruling on defense motions

Victim impact statements

1260 Francesca WitbolsFeugen
1262 Robert C. WitbolsFeugen

Testimonials for defendant

1266 Mike Myers
1268 Evelyn Case

Remaining proceedings
1273 Defense plea for leniency
1279 Judge's findings
1285 Imposition of sentence

Page 1249

THE COURT:

We'll go on the record in the case that's been styled State of Missouri vs. Byron C. Case, cause
number CR2001-03527. Record should reflect Mr. Case is here in person represented by his counsel, Mr.
Lance, and that Mr. Fry is here on behalf of the people of the State of Missouri.

The case comes before the Court for the purpose of dealing with a motion for judgment of acquittal
not withstanding the verdict of the jury or, in the alternative, for a new trial; and also, should that motion be
denied, the Court intends to take up the issue of sentencing at this time.

So with that being said, the first matter I wish to address, Mr. Lance, do you want to make any other
additional record on your motion, other than the written document that's been placed before the Court?

MR. LANCE:

No additional record, Judge. I believe the matters -- the issues raised were thoroughly discussed at
the trial. I don't think it would benefit anyone to reargue all the issues today.

Page 1250

So at this time, the defense will stand on the written motion previously filed. I would add my client
has an additional issue I think he wants to speak to.

THE COURT:

Is it one that we need to deal with before or after I rule on the motion?

MR. LANCE:

I think it Is an issue related to the idea that he would request a new trial -- grant him a new trial.
That's why I bring it up at this point. I think it will be brief.
 THE COURT:

All right. Hold on for just a moment. Before I ask you to make any comment, Mr. Lance -- in other
words, your client wishes to make a statement regarding new trial issues?

MR. LANCE:

Yes.

THE COURT:

All right. Mr. Case, although you are represented, if you have a statement you wish to make at this
time, I'll allow you to make that statement.

THE DEFENDANT:

Thank you, Your Honor. If for no other reason than to make it a matter of record, I would like to
bring to the attention of the Court an issue of serious concern.

Page 1251

During the course of my trial, some people made my attorney, Mr. Lance, aware that they witnessed
Your Honor repeatedly nodding off to sleep. Mr. Lance never said a word of this to me until I later
confronted him about it.

THE COURT:

Excuse me. Who nodded off to sleep?

THE DEFENDANT:

You did, sir.

THE COURT:

Okay.

THE DEFENDANT:

By that point, the trial was already over, however. Then, to compound the matter, he never
mentioned this as either an amended version of his motion for new trial or as an addendum to that
document.

I feel this is one of the examples of my counsel's, frankly, ham-handed way of dealing with my
defense and of what I feel is a blatant disregard for my right to fair trial. I don't think it's any excuse of
professional embarrassment that can possibly be acceptable when dealing with the issue of deciding
people's lives.

Page 1252

The only viable resolution that I see, and I hope that you see as well, sir, is that at this point I think
the best thing would be to overthrow the jury's verdict and declare a mistrial.

THE COURT:

Okay. Anything else that you want to say?

 THE DEFENDANT:

No, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

All right. Do you want to address the issue either of Mr. Lance's motion or the comments made by
Mr. Case?

MR. FRY:

I'll do both, Your Honor. I do agree with Mr. Lance. The issues raised in the motion for new trial
presented by Mr. Lance are timely and ruled upon by the Court were thoroughly litigated, very aggressively
litigated by defense counsel and aggressively litigated by the State. We have no further argument to make.

We think the Court made the right rulings, obviously, during the case, except for those rulings where you
kept evidence that the State had that we wanted to get in out, and that's not an issue anymore.

Page 1253

In regard to the last remark made by the Defendant, I think the record should reflect that I was here
present the entire time, and I don't think the record is reflecting any insinuation that I fell asleep at the
switch at any time. I was alert, and I noticed that the Court was totally at all times aware and not nodding
off. And if needed to testify, would testify as such. I think any insinuation that you were not attentive at all
is incorrect.

THE COURT:

All right. I'm just sitting here pondering the issue of -- my distinct recollection is I'm very confident
that I didn't nod off at all during this trial, because I recall this trial very well. And I recall, among other
things, that I thought it was an extremely well-tried case by both sides. The only hesitation that I have is I'm
trying to decide what -- it's sort of a novel -- it's a novel position for a defendant to take, and I'm sitting here
trying to think if there is any other way I should respond to it. So that's my hesitation.

MR. LANCE:

Judge, if I may.

Page 1254

THE COURT:

Yes, Mr. Lance.

MR. LANCE:

The reason I allowed my Defendant to raise that, even though I never raised it, he views it as an
additional point that should have been in my motion for new trial. He's concerned that, if the Court was
nodding off at various times, how could proper rulings have been made on evidentiary objections.

He views it as a concern that I should have put in the motion for new trial. That's why I allowed him
to raise it.

Now it's just an additional point we would argue today for granting him a new trial. That's our only
belief or only ruling that we're asking.
 THE COURT:

Well, I hate to put you in this position, Mr. Lance, but are you suggesting that you witnessed the fact
that I was nodding off or sleeping during the trial?

MR. LANCE:

I personally did not observe that, but I understand other people in the courtroom claim they did see
this happen.

THE COURT:

Okay.

MR. FRY:

Do you want to hear evidence on it?

Page 1255

THE COURT:

Well, I'm going to be very candid with everyone. I'm very much aware of what happened in this
trial. I basically find the allegations -- to be charitable, I find them frivolous. But at the same token it's a
murder case, and I want to make sure that if someone wants to put forth the evidence, I'm trying to figure
out exactly how we should deal with it on the record. I don't want this record in any way to suggest that I
take any credence in those statements, because it is just simply not true.

MR. FRY:

I would make the suggestion, Your Honor, to go ahead and rule on it. It sounds like it would be
inappropriate for you to make a ruling on any kind of accusation against yourself and that it's properly
preserved for review by another court at this time.

THE COURT:

Well, I think what I'm going to do is, first of all, I'm going to consider the motion for judgment of
acquittal, and for a new trial.

Page 1256

I'm going to consider it in two separate fashions. I'm going to consider first the motion filed by Mr.
Lance in its entirety. Then I'm going to consider the motion filed by Mr. Case.

As relates to the motion filed by Mr. Lance, I have reviewed the motion, and I believe that the
motion recites issues that were, in fact, raised at the trial and deals with evidentiary issues that were
properly presented and ruled upon.

I think that the new trial motion does, in fact, renew those objections, and, in fact preserves those
issues. The objections that are raised in the new trial motion, my rulings on them would be the same, and I
believe that they were correct legal rulings at the time.

I also believe that, under the standard of Jackson vs. Virginia, in which, in order for me to submit a
case to the jury, I am to do two things. I am to, one, give all due deference to the State as relates to the
posture of the case; and then, with that standard I am to then ask the following question:
Page 1257

Could a reasonable juror under the circumstances find the Defendant guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt. And I find that the State did, in fact, meet that burden and it was properly submitted.

So, for those reasons, I find that the motion filed by Mr. Lance, motion for judgment of acquittal
notwithstanding the verdict of the jury or, in the alternative, for a new trial, I find that motion -- I do hereby
overrule that motion.

As relates to Mr. Case's motion, I further make the following comments that those -- the issues that
are suggested by Mr. Case I find not supported by evidence. I find that they are untimely made and not
properly before the Court, and further, I find that they are without merit.

It seems to me that, if I were to allow a Defendant, independent of counsel, after the time of filing a new
trial motion, to raise issues of judicial misconduct that I would open the floodgates to all kinds of problems,
especially considering that post-sentence Mr. Case, as would any Defendant, would have the opportunity to
proceed in a post-conviction motion, and he could litigate these issues and present evidence on those issues.

Page 1258

And further, for the benefit of Mr. Case, at this point in time, if such issue is raised in a post-conviction
motion, I would likely recuse myself on post-conviction motion and make myself available to testify.

I just think that logistically, for me to treat it in any other way, would create a serious dilemma and a
very bad precedent. Considering the fact that I consider the position absolutely and completely meritless,
and I also find that it was raised at a point in time beyond the time for filing a new trial motion, and thus, I
don't have jurisdiction to hear it, it is untimely filed, for all of those reasons, I'm going to deny Mr. Case's
motion.

With that being said, we'll now proceed to the issue of sentencing. Here is how I intend to proceed.

If there is evidence -- testimonial evidence the State wishes to present, I will allow the State to
present that evidence.

Page 1259

Once the State has concluded with any testimonial evidence, if there is testimonial evidence the
Defendant wishes to present, I'll listen to that evidence.

I will, in that realm, couple of things to be noted. One, Mr. Case, as does every Defendant that
appears in front of me, has a right to make a statement -- an uncross examined statement in Litigation,
which I will allow him to make.

And secondarily, I have had the benefit of correspondence that has been submitted to me that I have
reviewed and will make part of the record. But, if there is additional testimonial evidence the Defendant
wishes to present, I'll allow that to be presented.

Then, thereafter, I will discuss with counsel any issues that may result from the pre-sentence investigation,
which I suspect not to be substantial. And then I will hear any argument from the State, any argument from
the Defendant, and then I intend to impose sentence.

Page 1260

With that being said, Mr. Fry, is there testimonial evidence you wish to present on behalf of the
people of the State of Missouri?
 MR. FRY:

Yes, there is, Your Honor. We have two witnesses.

THE COURT:

You may proceed.

MR. FRY:

Thank you very much.

(The witness was sworn by the Court.)

THE COURT:

Ma'am, couple things I might suggest. As counsel is aware, in this type of testimony, I would allow
substantial flexibility as relates to narrative responses.

Secondarily, ma'am, I'm going to ask that you follow one rule, that you address your comments to
me and no one else.

THE WITNESS:

Yes.

THE COURT:

With that being said, you may proceed, Mr. Fry.

FRANCESCA WITBOLSFEUGEN, having been duly sworn by the Court testified:

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FRY:

Q.

Tell the court your name, please.

A.

Francesca WitbolsFeugen.

Page 1261

Q.

What is your relationship to the witness in this case?

A.

She is my sister.

Q.

Do you have remarks for the Court regarding the sentencing today?
 A.

Yes, I have something prepared. I would just like to thank the Court for its invaluable service to the
community and my family. The wait, no matter how difficult, proved to be worth it. Justice served in this
way is better than any act of personal vengeance. We know the truth, no matter how difficult it is to accept,
and punishment will be given to the murderer.

Anastasia can now rest in peace. We can stop mourning her loss, and instead remember all the
wonderful times we had together without the grief of her crime unsolved.

That is all I have.

THE COURT:

All right. Is that all the questions you have, Mr. Fry?

MR. FRY:

No further questions.

THE COURT:

Mr. Lance, do you wish inquiry of this witness?

MR. LANCE:

No, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

Thank you very much, ma'am. Appreciate your testimony.

Page 1262

(The witness was excused.)

ROBERT WITBOLSFEUGEN, having been duly sworn by the Court, testified:

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. FRY:

Q.

Would you tell the Court for the record your name, please.

A.

My name is Robert Christian WitbolsFeugen.

Q.

Sir, what was your relationship to the victim in this case?

A.

Anastasia was my daughter, my oldest daughter.

 Q.

Did you come to court prepared with remarks regarding the sentencing?

A.

Prepared? Yes. But my words won't fit on a page. They come from my heart and, therefore, my
remarks are not prepared on paper. I do apologize, but I do wish to address my feelings. I wish first to thank
the Court and Your Honor. As my daughter has stated, the execution of the penalties is in your hands. We
thank you for listening to the evidence. We know that justice is illusive and that it doesn't always seem to fit
into the laws that are provided by man.

Page 1263

We have faith that you will be guided by higher powers to address the crime that has been
committed and find justice as it is permitted in this world.

I am pleased that I do not have the power or the authority to make that decision, for that decision
should be made in a calm and orderly fashion. My life has been anything but that these past years without
my daughter.

I felt anger, I felt pain, and much frustration. I tried to address that in the venues provided, and they
were wholly inadequate in addressing what I was feeling or what I thought should happen.

This Court was able to put into perspective by bringing the truth to light and I now feel that I can
live with the decision of this Court. My friends, my family, have been pulled apart and reassembled so
many different times and so many different ways, that it's difficult to express exactly what we are today.

We do know that the Defendant here today has set in motion many terrible things, many difficult
things that will last for a lifetime to deal with.

Page 1264

Anastasia's life is no more. Our memories are intact. However, she will not be able to live beyond
the 18 years which she was given.

Byron's life will most certainly be behind bars and in a very controlled situation. The victim's
family, much of which were separated from our past memories, our present is in turmoil, and our futures
are uncertain, but they will be better today because of the decision that this Court will be able to make
based upon the evidence that was presented in this court.

There was much unsaid, much silence, much of the truth probably would never come out. Justin,
another young man, lost his life. Witnesses that came forward, not knowing the entire truth. Witnesses that
came forward knowing the truth and not telling it. And still others that never had a chance to speak. We'll
all go our separate ways and deal with the decision of this Court.

But I can tell you, that I have faith in your decision, and your proclamation, and I will welcome that
today.

Thank you.

THE COURT:

All right. Any inquiry you wish to make, Mr. Lance?

Page 1265

MR. LANCE:

No, Sir.

THE COURT:

All right. Thank you very much.

(The witness was excused.)

MR. FRY:

Those are all the testimonial witnesses the State has, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

No further evidence from the State, testimonial evidence?

MR. FRY:

No, Sir.

THE COURT:

It's come to my attention that someone may have a recording device on in the courtroom. Candidly,
if they do, that's fine. I really don't care.

Obviously, I'm going to make available -- I'm going to order a transcript of these proceedings just so
if there is any question about it in the future litigation. I think clearly what occurred in this courtroom is --
there is nothing that has occurred in this courtroom that's not been a matter of transcript Ms. Fox has taken
down. So, if someone here wants to record what I have said or what goes on, that's fine with me in an audio
kind of situation.

Page 1266

But, obviously, I intend to prepare a transcript for the benefit of both appellate review and for
anyone else's review, and that transcript will be available to anyone that wants to purchase a copy of it.

So should we get to the point that there is litigation after today, I think it should be clear there is
nothing going on in this courtroom that's not being done in open court with the presence of Ms. Fox here,
and that record should certainly be the record that should be utilized in any future litigation.

With that being said, Mr. Lance, do you have any testimonial evidence you wish to put forth?

MR. LANCE:

Yes. We have two witnesses also, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

All right. You may proceed.

MR. LANCE:
 Michael Myers.

MICHAEL MYERS, having been duly sworn by the Court, testified:

DIRECT EXAMNATION BY MR. LANCE:

Q.

For the record, please state your name.

A.

Mike Myers.

Q.

What is your relationship to the Defendant, Byron Case?

Page 1267

A.

Friend of the family.

Q.

How long have you known Byron?

A.

Since he was seven.

Q.

On behalf of Byron Case, do you wish to address the Court?

A.

Yes.

Q.

Go right ahead.

A.

Your Honor, my name is Mike Myers. I have known Byron Case since he was seven years old. He is
very intelligent, passive, and completely nonviolent. He is always well-mannered, soft-spoken and well
liked. During the four day trial, only one person had anything bad to say about him.

Byron has never been a threat to society, nor to his friends or family. I believe he is innocent, and I
am very concerned for his safety in our prison system.

Also, I'm horrified that his life depends on the dramatic performance of the prosecutors and the
testimony of a crack addict.
 I beg the Court to overturn the jury's verdict against this wrongfully accused young man whom we
all love. Thank you.

THE COURT:

All right. Anything further, Mr. Lance?

Page 1268

MR. LANCE:

No.

THE COURT:

Do you wish inquiry, Mr. Fry?

MR. FRY:

No, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

All right. Thank you, Sir. Appreciate your testimony.

(The witness was excused.)

MR. LANCE:

Evelyn Case.

EVELYN CASE, having been duly sworn by the Court, testified:

DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. LANCE:

Q.

For the record, please state your name.

A.

My name is Evelyn Case.

Q.

What is your relationship to Byron Case?

A.

I'm his mom.

Q.

Do you wish to address the Court on behalf of Byron Case?

A.
 Yes, I do.

Q.

Please go ahead.

THE WITNESS:

Good afternoon, Your Honor.

Page 1269

THE COURT:

Good afternoon.

THE WITNESS:

I wish we could stop meeting like this. However, this tragedy has been overwhelming on our mental
balance. Life has been totally unfair, and we all, the WitbolsFeugens, the Brutons, are living proof of this.

So as we take the next unfamiliar steps, I have the moral courage to speak up on behalf of my only
son.

He has been dealt a bad hand in this game of life on pure speculations and made a scapegoat. A lot
of people had a strong emotional interest in seeing Byron convicted. He had no motive to falsify and has
been telling the truth from the beginning.

One of our favorite quotes by Mary Brown, "The elegance of honesty needs no adornment." I
implore you to please read the statements of supporters, if you haven't yet, for a positive look for a change
before you decide his future.

I personally not give up our journey to justice until his good and all his foot soldiers will name is
cleared.

Thank you for listening.

THE COURT:

All right. Thank you, ma'am. Just a moment, if I might.

Did you have any questions, Mr. Fry?

Page 1270

MR. FRY:

No, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate your testimony.

(The witness was excused.)

 MR. LANCE:

That's the only testimonial witnesses we have.

THE COURT:

All right. Mr. Fry, have you had an opportunity to review the pre-sentence investigation in this
cause?

MR. FRY:

I have, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

Keeping in mind, if there are matters in the document you wish to bring to my attention during the
course of any statement you may make, you're certainly welcome to do so. But in a factual sense, do you
believe the document in any fashion is inaccurate?

MR. FRY:

The State believes it's accurate. We know nothing that's inaccurate.

THE COURT:

Mr. Lance, have you had a chance to review the document with your client?

MR. LANCE:

Yes.

THE COURT:

Have you reviewed it yourself also?

Page 1271

MR. LANCE:

Yes.

THE COURT:

And, obviously, I'm aware of the fact from the pleadings and the statements that have been made,
obviously, the version of the offenses as recited in the State's case, I understand that is in agreement. That's
why we had the trial.

I understand to that extent. But other than that, in terms of background information and other
information in the pre-sentence investigation, do you wish to make any record regarding the factual
accuracy of this document?

MR. LANCE:

No, Your Honor.

THE COURT:
 All right. Mr. Fry, do you wish to be heard on the issue of sentencing?

MR. FRY:

I do, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

All right. You may proceed.

MR. FRY:

There really is only one sentence that's provided for murder in the first degree, the State, having not
sought the death penalty, and that is life without parole. And I know that's just the plain fact.

Page 1272

You do have an armed criminal action charge that you have to address, and I think the armed
criminal action charge can be used by the Court to express ft gravity of this me and the depth of the harm
that was done and the jury to the family.

Quite frankly, I see or sense a tone that there is always some degree of mistrust in the criminal
justice system, be it from the Defendant who wants to continue to claim that he's not guilty, but from the
family of the victim who feels like sometimes it doesn't work and the truth doesn't come out and verdicts
aren't right.

The distrust that I think could be remedied is to have you give a life sentence on armed criminal
action. And in the event that somebody in the future somehow says, well, life without parole is now cruel
and unusual, that you express some depth on this case by running these sentences consecutive so that, if
there is ever any future consideration for mitigating the life without parole sentence, that the significance
and consequences of the Defendant's actions that flow from this murder are reflected in your sentence and
allowed to be reflected by any parole board consideration in the future.

Page 1273

Other than, that, Your Honor, I have no further remarks for the Court. Thank you.

THE COURT:

All right. Mr. Lance, I'll allow you to make any statement in mitigation, and I'll also allow your
client to make a statement in litigation also. You can proceed in either order you deem appropriate.

MR. LANCE:

Judge, on behalf of Mr. Case, we are asking for leniency on Count Two. In response to the State's
argument, I would remind the Court of the weakness of the State's evidence, that it was basically reliance
on the testimony of one witness.

It's clear you already have a feel for Defendant's position and his family's position, that the jury
made an error -- tragic error -- but an error. And I think you consider that possibility in considering leniency
on Count Two.

Page 1274
 My final report is I would remind the Court of the many, many letters of support that the
Defendant's attorney provided to the Court. Basically, there were two packets of letters that were provided
to the Court.

One basically in the form of a petition for everyone to sign the same form letter, but also numerous letters
in the other packet, very personalized letters, asking for, basically, the letters as a whole are talking as a
plea for innocence, actual innocence. But if a plea for innocence can be regarded as also a plea for leniency,
we would ask you to consider those many numerous letters in that regard.

I believe that's all I had to say.

THE COURT:

Mr. Case, do you wish to address the Court before the imposition of sentence?

THE DEFENDANT:

No, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

All right. Is there any reason why sentence should not now be imposed?

MR. FRY:

Not from the State, Your Honor.

MR. LANCE:

No legal reason, Your Honor.

Page 1275

THE COURT:

All right. Give me a moment, if you would. I did grant allocution, did I not?

MR. FRY:

Yes, you did, Judge.

THE COURT:

Well, obviously, I had the opportunity to preside over the trial, which includes some pretrial matters
where we discussed the evidence to some substantial extent.

In fact, as the record will reflect in the pretrial matters there was evidence that was sought to be
excluded by both sides. And although some of the evidence I allowed, substantial amounts of the evidence
the State wished to put on I excluded. I was aware of all those circumstances.

I then was the trial judge that heard the evidence in the case, not only in terms of the statements and
arguments of counsel and lawyers, but I heard the witnesses, and I saw the demeanor of the witnesses.

I have had the opportunity to review the pre-sentence investigation, motion for judgment of acquittal; and I
have had the opportunity to review the pre-sentence investigation, obviously.
Page 1276

I've had the opportunity to review two separate sets of documents that have been provided to me by
Mr. Case or by Mr. Lance on behalf of Mr. Case, one of which is a set of documents that I consider to be, as
I think was described and I consider it to be the equivalent of a petition signed by many members and
friends talking about Mr. Case and suggesting that I, if at all possible, consider leniency as best that I can.

I have reviewed the -- they are signed by a number of different people.

The substance of those letters are identical, but I have reviewed those.

There is also a series of letters by different individuals that have been presented to me by Mr. Case
or by Mr. Lance on behalf of Mr. Case. And I have considered those letters also.

Those letters to a degree -- at least to some degree talk about the fact that -- the dismay with the
verdict and the fact that Mr. Case is mild mannered, loving kind of person, saying good things about Mr.
Case.

Page 1277

And I don't have any reason to question the veracity of those letters from the folks that said those things.
The letters also contain a variety of comments regarding the trial itself.

And everyone, not only in a legal sense, but in a First Amendment sense, has a right to judge what
occurred in this courtroom. it's a public courtroom and anyone who saw the trial or witnessed it or sees a
transcript of it has every right to take any attitude they wish and to make any appraisal of the trial that they
wish to make.

Included in this appraisal is criticism of Defendant's counsel and also criticism of the prosecutor.
And although it has no bearing on this sentence that I intend to impose today, I will tell you that, in the
short time that I have been on the bench, which will be in two months six years, I would suggest that this is,
if not the best as good as any case that's been tried in front of me.

The lawyers were professional. They were to the point. They understood the law.

Page 1278

They were persuasive. They were excellent, excellent advocates. And whatever the result of this
verdict if the verdict had been not guilty, I would be saying the same thing.

I think, in an objective sense, it's unfair to characterize the conduct of these lawyers on either side as
anything but exemplary. In particular, in cases such as this where there is substantial emotion and much at
stake, it's often easy to second-guess the side that loses.

And I will tell you, in my opinion, that Mr. Lance tried an excellent case for this young man and he
did nothing but reaffirm my extremely high regard for him.

And so while those of you who wrote these letters have a First Amendment right to say what your
appraisal of the trial, and I respect that, I ask that you respect my statement; that from a professional who
has been involved in the criminal justice system now for over 20 years, this was an extremely well-tried
case, and the performance of these lawyers was truly excellent.

Page 1279
 And I would hope -- if comments on whether the trial was fair or not, I can only tell you that it was
this Court's effort and desire, as it is every time I take this bench, to try to be as even-handed and as fair as I
possibly can be.

Whether that was the result of this trial, maybe a higher court will decide some day. But with that
being said, I have reviewed these letters, and I have taken them into consideration.

The system that we have I think can be described as an imperfect system, but I am firmly of the
belief that it is the best system on earth, and it is one that I am proud to be a part of, and I think it is the
most just system that the people of this earth have ever designed.

In this case, it was a case, as everyone realizes, in which there was the death of a young girl, brutal
murder of a young girl. It was undisputed that the likely last three people to see this young girl was this
Defendant, Ms. Moffett, and Mr. Bruton.

Page 1280

We are uncertain of what Mr. Bruton's version of what happened that night is because he committed
suicide shortly after the death of Anastasia WitbolsFeugen.

From the outset, Mr. Case and Ms. Moffett initially claimed no knowledge of the events that led to
the death of this young lady, and the case remained unsolved for I believe over three years, if memory
serves me correctly.

The evidence then changed when Ms. Moffett came forward and gave a detailed version of what she
said happened in the cemetery that night, which included her version of the facts which was that Mr. Case
shot Anastasia WitbolsFeugen to death.

Mr. Case testified in trial and denied those allegations and denied that that happened.

Ms. Moffett had made a variety of statements previously contrary to her testimony at trial. And she
had readily admitted that from the time of this event, when she was approximately 15 years old, until now
that she has certainly traveled a rough and tortuous road. She has admitted to drug abuse, being involved in
a variety of rehab type programs, and being addicted to narcotics, being a runaway, and all those kinds of
things.

Page 1281

Based upon that evidence, if a jury had considered that and considered that as the credibility of this
witness and returned a verdict of not guilty, I would have accepted that verdict; and I would not have
quarreled with that verdict and that a jury could have rendered such a verdict.

But, equally so, there was very persuasive evidence that this Defendant is guilty of the murder of
Anastasia WitbolsFeugen. The witness -- the evidence against Mr. Case is more than just the testimony of
Kelly Moffett.

First of all, the version of events that were described in the police statements after the homicide by
Mr. Case and by then Ms. Moffett, in the Court's view, in many ways, defy believability.

Page 1282

The Defendant's version of this case was that somehow in a fit of rage this young woman left the car
at the area of I-435 and Truman Road and just happened on the way home to matriculate into a cemetery
and just happened to run into some wanton person who just happened to have a shotgun and who just
happened to be able to inflict a wound upon her that was clearly a contact wound consistent with the
testimony of Ms. Moffett; and further that it just so happened that this person was able to do it with
absolutely no struggle from this victim, because there was no forensic evidence of such struggle, I find that
to be a difficult story to believe and to consider to be reasonable.

Although certainly not dispositive, the suicide of Mr. Bruton after the fact is certainly very
troublesome. And as I say, not dispositive, but certainly fits, is consistent in many ways with the theory of
this Defendant committing this murder.

I also believe from the testimony that was presented that there really was no motive that I think is
believable that would give Kelly Moffett a reason to lie and to incriminate this Defendant.

Page 1283

The evidence was that their relationship had long since severed well before she came forward; that
the contact with each other was very insubstantial at the time she came forward; and I found no evidence
that would suggest a real motive for her going from claiming innocence to putting herself in a trick bag for
conspiracy to commit murder, and somehow putting in prison an innocent person who she had once had a
relationship with.

I just didn't find a motive that seemed reasonable to me. I suspect the jury may well have thought
that also.

Another thing that I think needs to be suggested it was more than just the testimony of Kelly
Moffett in that the testimony of Kelly Moffett, as much as you can criticize it, based upon her background
and her drug use and the like, but for her version of the events in the cemetery, her testimony in many ways
is corroborated by other witnesses favorable to the Defendant, and also witnesses that were independent,
including the people at the Dairy Queen and witnesses that Mr. Case put on himself.

Page 1284

Where they stopped, who they talked with, phone calls at 87th and I-35, stopping in the Plaza,
virtually everything Kelly Moffett said, except for the homicide itself, was corroborated by the Defendant's
own testimony. I think that was a persuasive consideration.

The jury, as did the Court, the jury also had the opportunity to view the demeanor of both Mr. Case
and Ms. Moffett, Ms. Moffett and Mr. Case. And they did and had the right to consider that in the verdict
that they rendered.

It is clear to me that the verdict that was rendered by the jury is supported by the evidence and that
the verdict, in a legal sense, is a verdict that should be sustained, and I have done so.

There is much to the evidence the State presented that presents a compelling picture that this
Defendant is, in fact, guilty of the charge and that the jury did the right thing.

Page 1285

It's an imperfect system, and my job is not to judge or prejudge the jury except in a legal context. I
find that the jury's evidence is supported by the verdict, and the evidence presented by the State presents
evidence of a very methodical and cold-blooded homicide and close to execution style.

For that reason, as to Count 1, as required by law, I hereby sentence the Defendant to life in the
penitentiary without the possibility of probation or parole.

As to Count 2, 1 hereby sentence the Defendant to life in prison for the crime of armed criminal
action.
 I hereby order that those sentences shall run concurrently with each other.

Can I have an acknowledgment form, please. Mr. Lance, would you pass this to your client if you
would.

MR. LANCE:

Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

Mr. Case, this is what's called an acknowledgment form. It sets forth what are called your post-
conviction rights.

I'm going to allow you to keep this form so you can have it for your use. I'm going to explain to you
what the form says. If you have some questions, you can ask me, or you can confer with Mr. Lance also.

Page 1286

Any Defendant that is sentenced to a term of imprisonment in the Missouri Division of Adult Institutions
has what are called post-conviction rights.

I feel obliged to advise you of those rights as dictated by the Missouri Supreme Court. I'm not
necessarily suggesting you do or say anything. I'm merely telling you what your rights are.

You, as a convicted person going to prison, once you arrive at prison, you have 90 days to file a
motion in order to set aside your judgment and conviction in this case.

Since you went to trial, that motion would be governed by what is called Rule 29.15 of the Missouri
Supreme Court rules.

That rule provides that, within the first 90 days, you may file a pro se motion on what's called a
Form 40. Once you file such a motion, a lawyer will be appointed to represent you, and that lawyer will
have the ability to modify or amend that motion.

Page 1287

That lawyer will be required to do so within strict time limits as set forth by the rule itself.

Failure by you to follow the time constraints of the rule or failure for the lawyer to follow those
time constraints will likely result in you giving up the ability to ever raise this issue in state court or in
federal court.

I should correct myself. Since you were convicted, Mr. Case, by trial, actually the 90 days runs --
you're required to -- you have appellate rights first. And once the appeal has been -- if the appeal is, in fact,
denied, and the appellate court issues what's called a mandate, the 90 days runs from what's called the
mandate of the appellate court. I stand corrected.

Since you went to trial, it's different than if you had pled guilty. It's 90 days from the mandate of the
appellate court.

You can raise basically one of four general grounds. You can suggest that the sentence that I gave
you or allege is beyond the excess of that allowed by law.

Page 1288
 You can further suggest that the sentence I gave you, that I did not have the jurisdiction to enter
such a sentence.

And lastly, you can claim that your sentence was contrary to the law of the State of Missouri or of
the United States. That can include constitutional claims touching, among other things, including
allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel.

I'm sure Mr. Lance can advise you further of these rights. Do you have any questions you wish to
ask me about your post-conviction rights?

THE DEFENDANT:

No, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

I'm going to show that you've been duly advised. Do you need to deal with an issue of a lien, Mr.
Lance?

MR. LANCE:

Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

Do you want to present that?

MR. LANCE:

In every case I'm required to file for attorney fees.

THE COURT:

All right. Due to the posture of this case, I'm going to exercise my discretion and deny the lien.

MR. LANCE:

Yes, sir.

Page 1289

THE COURT:

Okay. Anything further?

MR. FRY:

Not from the State, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

Mr. Lance?

MR. LANCE:
 Will there be an appeal bond in this matter?

THE COURT:

By statute, once he's been sentenced to murder in the first degree, I am without discretion to allow
an appeal bond is the way I read the statute. I denied it on my own discretion pending appeal, but I believe
the statute is quite clear, that I can pull the statute if you want me to, Mr. Lance.

MR. LANCE:

No. I just want it in the record if it's being set or denied.

THE COURT:

I will tell you this, that I would likely not set a bond if I had the discretion to do so, but I believe
under the provisions of Chapter 544, it is clear that I do not have the discretion to set a bond in certain
cases, and murder in the first degree is one of those cases. So there shall be no appeal bond.

Page 1290

MR. LANCE:

Judge, do you need the signed acknowledgment form?

THE COURT:

No, you can keep that. I have an acknowledgment form that shows he was advised in open Court.

MR. LANCE:

Final motion is file an appeal as a poor person.

THE COURT:

All right. That will be sustained.

MR. LANCE:

I can pick that up later.

THE COURT:

I'll enter it right now, and we'll send it to you. How is that?

MR. LANCE:

That's fine.

THE COURT:

Anything else?

MR. FRY:

Nothing from the State, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

It was a well-tried case, gentlemen. We'll be in recess.

(The case was concluded.)