because some counts may be proven against one defendant does not mean that all counts will be proven beyond a reasonable doubt against both defendants. and it became clear that the defense strategy was to point the finger at the other brother. jonathan carr s lawyer argued that neither andy schreiber, the carjack victim or ann walenta who survived long enough to talk to police, identified him as the second assailant and no physical evidence connected him to either crime. the only evidence connecting jonathan carr is the simple fact that he is the brother of the co-defendant reginald carr. only guilt by association. jonathan carr s lawyers called no witnesses. their only evidence, an unused train ticket to cleveland, ohio, good for the night of the murders. he was actually supposed to leave very early during the morning hours of december 15th, 2000. he was supposed to board an
that s the ultimate decision any person could make on someone s life. i didn t take it lightly. we have to have that weight on our shoulders for the rest of our lives, and i don t think anyone that would know what that felt like unless you had been through the situation. the jurors were unmoved by the testimony about the brothers difficult childhood. we re accountable for the choices that we make in this life. there s a lot of kids that go through a lot worse things that they went through and they re not out killing people. then, on november 14th, 2002, exactly 23 months after the carr brothers had knocked on that condominium door, the vote. i ll approve the verdict as to form. ms. marcus, publish the verdict, please, ma am. at 5:30 in the afternoon the jury filed into the packed courtroom. i just remember my heart was pounding. that s all i could hear, was my heart just pounding. we find that the proper sentence for reginald d. carr jr. is death. we find the that
wichita, kansas, december 2000. in the days immediately following what came to be known as the soccer field murders, investigators found connections between jonathan and reginald carr and the two earlier crimes in the same area, the carjacking of andy schreiber and the shooting of ann walenta. remember the watch andy had been wearing on the night he was abducted? it was found in reginald s girlfriend s apartment, and the bullets recovered at all three crime scenes matched. investigators believe both schreiber and walenta were targeted because they drove expensive cars. but the home invasion at the nearby condo didn t make any sense. that is, until a neighbor told police that she d been followed home on the night of the murders by someone who drove away when she stopped at her mailbox. i think they made a mistake, they picked the wrong house. all right i want to know about the search warrant. district attorney nola
the car with andy schreiber, the gunman schreiber never saw. did any of you think jonathan was there? i did. you did? i still do. i think we all did, but there was no evidence. that just drove me nuts. after 11 hours, they reached a decision. guilty of capital murder. guilty of the capital murder. guilty of the capital murder. guilty on all counts for reginald carr. his brother jonathan carr guilty of all but the carjacking of andy schreiber. reginald and jonathan were sitting there expressionless. they didn t show you know, they weren t upset by it. they weren t, you know, happy by it. reginald was sitting there putting chapstick on. that s how much it affected him. for more than six weeks, jurors said they had been hearing and seeing evidence that kept them awake at night. but the toughest task was yet to come, deciding if two men who seemed to kill so easily deserved the death penalty.
him. that was the last the jury would hear about a mystery accomplice. reginald carr s lawyers next probe for inconsistencies in the prosecution s case, challenging h.g. s ability to identify reginald carr. do you recall telling the detective, i never really got a look at his face because he kept it pretty much hidden? i don t know if those were my exact words or not. val wachtel argued that h.g. was not credible because she had been unable to make a positive identification of reginald carr at a preliminary hearing a few months before. as you look at mr. reginald carr sitting here today, does he look to you substantially the same as he did at the preliminary hearing? he s more shaven right now. when you were asked to identify reginald carr at the preliminary hearing, were you able to see his eyes? he had on glasses. are you able to see his eyes now? you can, but glasses are