Jurors found Jason Scott Pearson guilty Friday of aggravated murder, a capital offense, and of three other related charges stemming from a 1993 chase on I-70.
Utah Highway Patrol trooper Dennis "Dee" Lund was fatally shot June 16, 1993, as he tried to stop the Indiana youth and a friend as the duo sped cross-country to avoid trouble in their home state. Pearson was 18 years old at the time of the shooting.Seventh District Court Judge Bruce Halliday will decide Pearson's penalty Monday - whether the 20-year-old Delphi, Ind., man faces life in prison without parole or may someday be released. Prosecutors have already said they will not seek the death penalty.
The 12-member jury returned their findings about 5:30 p.m. Friday, after more than six hours of deliberation. Pearson waived his right to have the jury decide his sentence - a decision resulting from "gut instinct," defense attorney Kenneth Brown said.
In addition to capital murder, Pearson was also found guilty of two counts of attempted aggravated murder, each a first-degree felony, and of failure to respond to an officer's signal to stop, a third-degree felony.
Pearson was found not guilty of the remaining count, an attempted aggravated murder charge stemming from shots fired at Utah Highway Patrol trooper Bruce Riches' car. Instead, the jury found evidence enough for a conviction of a lesser aggravated assault charge.
The sobs of Pearson's mother interrupted the court upon the first guilty verdict. Pearson, dressed in a suit and tie, his blond hair combed smooth, took the news of his conviction with little apparent emotion, aside from trembling chin and downcast eyes.
Outside the courtroom, Brown, himself emotional, said the most important decision - that of Pearson's prison sentence - has yet to be made.
"We just hope this boy gets a chance to get out of prison," he said. Of Pearson's reaction, he said, "We cried a lot and he thanked us."
Brown said he had no ill will toward jurors, saying they weighed the evidence honestly and to their best ability.
Prosecutor and Emery County Attorney David Blackwell said the evidence spoke for itself, that Pearson had many opportunities to change his mind during the chase with officers. The fact that Pearson shot again and again at his pursuers also spoke of his intent.
Of the not-guilty finding for the single attempted aggravated murder charge, Blackwell said the jury likely reasoned the shots were fired from too far away to be deadly.
Lund's widow was not in attendance Friday, having taken ill, the trooper's father said afterward. He believed she would be thankful, however, for the jury's decision.
"I think we're finally getting some justice for a crime that was uncalled for," he said, tearfully hugging his daughter and granddaughter. "We're all grateful this day for all the support we've had . . . ."
Of his son, the man said, "He's been looking down . . . we've felt his presence. Justice has been done for his family remaining here."
Pearson's intent of whether or not to kill a law officer was the focus of both parties' closing arguments Friday before jurors retired to deliberate the youth's future.
"It's been a long two weeks," prosecutor Blackwell reflected Friday morning. He proceeded to concentrate on the elements of Pearson's charge of aggravated murder, predictably spending extra time exploring the youth's intent.
"They drive along with a shotgun across their laps and a .22 (-caliber rifle) in between them," Blackwell said. He pointed to Pearson's first attempt at firing the gun, when the youth apparently pointed the shotgun across the traffic lane to the passing trooper's car and pulled the trigger but the gun didn't fire.
He also revisited evidence displaying the location of the first successful shotgun blast to Lund's vehicle. Blackwell suggested the strike, which appeared low on a rear window, was made as Lund bent over to avoid the gunfire - and constituted more evidence of Pearson aiming with intent to kill.
That theory and others that focused on Pearson's aim were later rebutted by defense counsel, who suggested the youth was firing recklessly and without pattern.
"If you strip away the emotion . . . when asked why he shot, he couldn't give you an explanation," Blackwell told the jury. "The truth is, the defendant intended to kill."
Defense attorney Brown approached the jury in a somewhat different manner, playing off physical evidence previously introduced to depict the chase and the trooper's death.
"This case is a tragedy. This case shouldn't have happened," Brown said. But that tragedy "doesn't . . . equate to aggravated murder," he said.
He also defended Pearson's emotional response when placed on the stand Thursday.
"This (youth) spoke from his heart (about) when he found out trooper Lund was killed," Brown said. Although Pearson could not recall many vital details of the incident, his account was not a fabrication, he said.
"If that was so, he could certainly make up a better story than you heard the other day," he said.
Brown recounted the number of shots Pearson fired from the .22-caliber rifle during the several seconds of gunfire. With evidence of no more than seven strikes, he suggested the youth missed more times than he struck the officers' vehicles. That and other factors suggest that Pearson shot fast toward a general area and without aim.
"We're not justifying this crime - never have," Brown told jurors, admonishing them to consider physical evidence in their decision of Pearson's fate.