Just what does or doesn’t constitute murder?
Determining the answer to that question highlighted testimony Wednesday afternoon and this morning in the tampering with physical evidence trial of Juan and Nicole Barron in 132nd Judicial District Court.
The Barrons are accused of altering and concealing evidence in the wake of the fatal shootings of Joshua Hoover and Benjamin Bruns in the 2100 block of Ave. Z in the early morning hours of Jan. 24, 2016.
They were acquitted on two of three murder charges during a trial in October. Juan Barron was convicted and sentenced to two years in prison for murdering Hoover.
The question of defining what constitutes murder, as it pertains to the tampering with evidence trial, is important because one of the elements of the offense that District Attorney Ben Smith must prove is that the defendants knew they had committed the offense of murder.
Although the defendants were acquitted on the grounds of self-defense, it is Smith’s contention that murders were still committed, and that assertion was backed by the testimony of two law enforcement officers.
Texas Ranger Phil Vandygriff spoke plainly on the subject during cross-examination by defense attorney Bruce Patton.
“If you shoot and kill someone, if you intentionally use a weapon to kill someone, that’s murder,” Vandygriff said. “You may have acted in self-defense, but a murder still occurred. Self-defense is simply a defense (to prosecution).”
Vandygriff’s testimony was echoed by that of Snyder Police Department Lt. Mike Counts, who also stated that, self-defense or not, the Barrons murdered Bruns and Hoover on the date in question.
Smith asked Counts, “Can you murder someone if you acted in self-defense,” to which Counts replied, “Yes.”
The Texas Penal Code states that murder has been committed if a person intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual, intends to cause serious bodily injury and commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual and commits or attempts to commit a felony other than manslaughter, and in the court of the commission or attempt, commits an act clearly dangerous to human life that causes the death of an individual.
It is Patton’s contention that if the defendants acted in self-defense, then no murder occurred, therefore disproving an element of the tampering charge, and he repeatedly objected to Smith soliciting testimony from Vandygriff and Counts that Hoover and Bruns were, in fact, murdered. His objections were consistently overruled by District Judge Ernie B. Armstrong.
Prior testimony showed that Bruns and Hoover arrived at the Barrons’ home at about 4 a.m. on Jan. 24, 2016, dressed all in black — including black masks — with one of the men brandishing a .45-caliber Glock pistol.
After the men were killed, the defendants placed their bodies underneath the home and watered down and attempted to clean blood stains at the scene. They also dug up several blood stains and stashed the dirt elsewhere.
About five hours after the killings, the Barrons surrendered to police and subsequently admitted to altering the scene, according to video statements by both of the defendants.
Patton has repeatedly asserted during the trial that if a person was faced with that situation and killed the men in defense of himself and his family, then the killings were not, in fact, murder.
In related testimony, Counts said that a safe was discovered near the Barrons’ home some months after the killing. The contents of that safe included Nicole Barron’s Texas driver’s license, Social Security card, cash, other personal affects, marijuana and a white powdery substance believed to be cocaine.
That recovery is relevant to the case, Smith said, because it points to a motive as to why the defendants attempted to conceal evidence of the shootings.
The white powdery substance was later tested and proved to by approximately 1.9 grams of cocaine, according to testimony from Department of Public Safety crime lab technician Jacqlyn Lockridge.
Image
Body