FRANKLIN — A motion for a mistrial in the criminal case against Paul Morrisroe was unsuccessful Tuesday morning in Venango County Court after jurors were accidentally exposed to photos not admitted into evidence.
During the proceedings, McKean County District Attorney Stephanie Vettenburg Shaffer was questioning state police accident reconstruction specialist Cpl. Kurtis Rummel. She was using her laptop computer and a projector to project the images onto a screen on the back wall of the courtroom. When she opened a folder, thumbnail images of all the photos in the folder were displayed — including ones not admitted into evidence.
Defense attorney Robert Kinnear objected, and called for a sidebar discussion with Judge John Pavlock. Shortly thereafter, Pavlock dismissed the jury for lunch.
After the jury left, Kinnear addressed the court, explaining some of the thumbnails were visible and contained images of blood spatters and of part of the body of the victim, Dakota Heinaman, who was killed in the fatal hit-and-run crash in which Morrisroe was charged.
“My client is now prejudiced by this,” Kinnear said, making a motion for a mistrial.
Pavlock went to the jury box, with the images still on the projector screen, to sit in different seats to see if he could determine what the jurors might have seen. The judge went on to give some background about a prior ruling he had made excluding 61 photos from evidence.
The photos accidentally shown Tuesday were not part of the 61 excluded photos.
“The reason I’m getting into that,” the judge said, “this was the fear from the very beginning, that photos would come up” when they were not in evidence.
“From here and from the jury box, it’s certainly defined,” Pavlock said. He added, “there are much more graphic photos that have been excluded. These should not have been viewed by the jury.”
He ordered the display on the screen to be placed on the record — not into evidence — so should the case be appealed, the appellate court could see what the image in question was.
Following the lunch break, Pavlock addressed the jury. “At one point when there was reference to a photo from a witness on the stand, there were maybe 20 or 30 (images) up on the screen of other photos. Is there anyone who is here who viewed those other photos when they were up on the screen?”
None of the jurors indicated that they had.
The attorneys spoke to Pavlock for about five minutes, then the judge again addressed the jury. “As I’ve repeatedly indicated, we only decide cases based on evidence presented in the courtroom. Anything outside the court isn’t permitted.”
He asked again, now that the jury had had a few minutes to think about it, if they “realize that you did look, bring it to the attention of the tip staff. Is there anyone who believes, of you know, you looked at the other photographs?”
No jurors responded.
Pavlock denied the motion, and testimony continued.
