Jurors in a murder case involving a Nogales-area rancher accused of killing an unarmed immigrant on his property were unable to reach a unanimous verdict and disagreed on the charges.
After more than 15 hours of deliberation, Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Thomas Fink declared a mistrial just after 4:30 p.m. The court scheduled a status conference for April 29 at 1:30 p.m. so the Santa Cruz County Prosecutor's Office can decide whether to retry the case.
“They won't tire me out,” rancher George Alan Kelly told reporters after the nullity ruling was handed down.
The trial centered on the death of Gabriel Kueng Buitimea, a Mexican immigrant who was shot and killed on Jan. 30, 2023, after Kelly fired warning shots into the air, his defense lawyers said.
Kelly is charged with second-degree murder in Mr Vuitimere's death and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon for endangering Daniel Ramirez, who was looking for work in the US with Mr Vuitimere, whose body was found 115 yards from Kelly's home, about the size of a football field, hours after the shooting.
Attorneys and the judge, who were discussing what instructions to give the jury, noted that jurors appeared tired and frustrated when they had told the judge earlier in the day they were deadlocked.
Kelly's defense team called it a victory and a suboptimal outcome. One of the two lawyers, Texas attorney Cathy Rawthorpe, called the trial the longest in her 24-year legal career. Rawthorpe said she would represent Kelly if the case went to trial again. Rawthorpe called Arizona's discovery requirements “outrageous.”
“Everything is disclosed here, including depositions,” Lowthorpe said, “It's like they've tried the case several times before it has had an actual trial by jury. It just doesn't make sense to me.”
Kelly's wife sat in the front row of the courtroom on Monday, clutching a stuffed cat as she awaited the verdict.
Things you need to know:Jurors disagree in Nogales rancher murder trial
After the verdict, Wanda Kelly said she had felt anxious for the past year.
“I've been suspended for 15 months and nothing's been accomplished and I feel like I'm still on the same path and I have to wait a little longer,” Kelly's wife, Wanda Kelly, said after the nullity ruling was handed down.
Kelly said he was more worried about his wife than himself, noting that the trial had been difficult for her, saying he and his wife were stubborn and would never give up.
“They want ice water somewhere, and they don't have it. So that's the reality. … They're not going to give in to me,” Kelly said of the possibility of a mistrial and retrial.
The prosecution, led by the Santa Cruz County Attorney's Office, argued that Kelly was armed with an AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifle and opened fire on two unarmed men. The defense argued that Kelly's testimony was changed by police and that the investigation into the shooting was biased.
Kelly's defense lawyers argued that Kelly saw a group of armed migrants and fired a shot into the air as a warning. Prosecutors said Kelly hit Vuitimere with a barrage of bullets. Spent shell casings were found near the compound, but no bullets were recovered.
Last year, Ramirez, the prosecution's star witness, gave dramatic testimony at a February preliminary hearing in which he re-enacted how he saw Kelly shoot and kill Buitimere. It was later revealed that Ramirez had pleaded guilty to smuggling marijuana across the Arizona-Mexico border in 2015.
The prosecution and defense made different arguments about the shooting.
Vuitimea and Ramirez were in the US seeking work. Both were in the US illegally and were fleeing extreme poverty. On that fateful day in January, they were traveling south towards Mexico trying to evade US Border Patrol agents when Vuitimea was shot and killed.
The defense argued that Kelly's property was in a “highly trafficked area” and was home to “robbery gangs” engaged in criminal activity, including robbing and kidnapping migrants, drug theft and violent acts.
The county attorney's office argued that there was no evidence of drug trafficking, robbery or theft. Investigators also found no signs of a struggle or dragging. Furthermore, during the trial, one Border Patrol agent said there was no evidence that any grave robbers or AR-15 rifles had been found in the area in the past decade.
The county attorney's office also pointed out holes in Kelly's testimony, including why there was no damage to his home when gunfire occurred.
Prosecutors said Kelly's story changed in the hours after the shooting. He initially told police he was shot at and shot back. In another call, he told police he had been arguing with someone and heard gunshots coming his way. But Kelly's wife, who was inside the home at the time, said she didn't hear any gunshots.
Kelly's defence argued that his client was “not guilty” because he was in a state of heightened adrenaline and excitement, fear and agitation.
Contact the reporter sarah.lapidus@gannett.comThe Republic's coverage of Southern Arizona is funded in part by a grant from Report for America. Support Arizona news coverage with a tax-deductible donation. supportjournalism.azcentral.com.
