is on him and he is afraid tha no one will believe him. that s why he buried th getaway bag, they said wasn t a sign of guilt, but of terror in fact it didn t turn u months after steve was arrested you never had any evidenc that mr. democker try to use that back to flee? did he try to use the bac to flee? yes that is precisely what he did. he never flood? we arrested him before he could flee you re using awe term befor he could fully, my question is very direct, he didn t flee, did he he was not able to, no. okay, here s another turn o art. it s a very simple question. did mr. democker flee or not it s a yes or no question. no, he did not flee and steve s sister, sharon, had a simple explanation for those coincidences the night o the murder, the circumstantial evidence, like his dead cell phone battery. i think most of us was cell
shooting. so, they got a search warrant for the place, and found nothing useful. there were other guns, but none of them fired the bullet that killed jason. that s a little frustrating, eight days later, he got a second search warrant. at this time, there was something new. doctor weigh in the garage search for the first time around. a blue backpack must of been hidden between searches. they opened up this blue backpack, and they discovered julie harper s wallet, credit cards, her i.d., her passport, a different gun, and jason harper s last will and testament. also jason s cell phone, batteries removed and call and text history cleared. the backpack gun was also clean. not the one used to shoot jason. this had to be a getaway bag, the prosecutor decided. she must have backed it up after she killed jason. that s the only reason to
had five years to put steve democker at the scene of the crime, but they cannot. reporter: anybody paying attention to the bizarre murder case playing out in fits and starts here in prescott was apt to be a little suspicious of steve democker s behavior after the killing. getaway bag? fake e-mail? defense attorneys craig williams and greg parzych could see that as well as anyone. but was he guilty of murder? no, they said. rather, he was the victim of some detective s tunnel vision, beginning with a sloppy investigation. there was kind of cavalcade of people roaming through this scene that they didn t lock down, tromping through footprints and tromping through the house. and they didn t seal it off correctly. to me, when somebody shows up on the scene and immediately points the finger at the ex-husband, and then that s all they ever did. it s always boom, right on him? it was always on him.