| Jeffs to appear in court today | |
|
By Patrice St. Germain patrices@thespectrum.com | |
HURRICANE - Warren Steed Jeffs will be back in court today, this time to hear his attorneys argue three motions filed earlier this month, including one to move the trial out of Washington County. Jeffs, 51, the self-proclaimed prophet of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, has been charged with two counts of rape as an accomplice for his role in arranging the marriage of an underage girl to her older cousin. The two charges, both first-degree felonies, carry a five-year-to-life prison sentence. Asking for a change of venue is typical in high-profile cases that see a lot of publicity, but granting the change isn't very common, said Brent Johnson, general counsel for the Administrative Office of Utah Courts. "Change of venues are more likely to be granted in very small areas where there has been a lot of publicity," Johnson said. "There is a larger jury pool in Washington County so it isn't as likely to happen, but it's still possible. If an attorney doesn't ask for a change of venue, they are not effectively representing his or her client." One of Jeffs' attorneys, Walter Bugden, has continually declined to talk about the case and the motions filed, stating he would save his arguments for court. Bugden's argument on moving the trial claims that because of media coverage, the size of Washington County and Hildale, one of the two communities where a majority of Jeffs' followers live being located in the county, makes it so that a fair and impartial jury cannot be found here. In the state's motion opposing the change of venue,it argues that the county is sufficiently large and free from prejudice to impanel a fair and impartial jury. In a previous interview, Washington County Attorney Brock Belnap said he was confident that a fair and impartial jury could be impaneled here. "Under law, a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty and I look forward to presenting our arguments in court," Belnap said. Other motions to be argued in court today include a motion by Jeffs' attorneys that Utah Code 76-5-406(11), which addresses sexual offenses against the victim without concern of the victim, to be unconstitutionally vague. Belnap's argument is that the code is not "void for vagueness" because the statute provides clear notice to the defendant that enticing a child to have illegal sex with an adult is prohibited conduct. In the motion to quash Jeffs being held, the argument is that the magistrate erred in holding Jeffs for trial on the two counts. The memorandum states the prosecution did not produce believable evidence on several issues, which the state countered by stating it produced sufficient believable evidence. | |
|
TheSpectrum.com Originally published March 27, 2007 | |
| Back | |
| For more information email: | |
