Upvalley Councilman: Juror no easy task

Calistoga’s Gary Kraus remembers Douglas brothers trial

By JOHN WATERS Jr.
For the Register

It was a slam-dunk, easy verdict.

Some people keeping tabs on any murder trial in the country might feel that serving on a jury might be an easy task if they were to do it, but Calistoga City Councilmember Gary Kraus, who served on the jury that last week convicted two teenagers of the murder of former Calistoga teen Anthony Gee, tells a different story.

“Of all the years I’ve spent in public service — 38 in firefighting, much of that as a fire chief and two years as a Calistoga City Councilmember — I’d have to say that without a doubt, that was the hardest.”

Last week, the first-term councilmember wrapped up a stint as a juror, as part of a jury of seven women and five men who deliberated five days before unanimously convicting Vallejo brothers Junor Douglas, 18, and Marquis Douglas, 17, of second-degree murder. Two other teens also were arrested but did not stand trial at this time, pending the results of a plea agreement from the court.

“There are many times in public service when you make a tough decision, and in the end you come out feeling good because you know you made the right decision,” Kraus said early this week. “This was not one of those decisions. I came out knowing we made the right, unanimous decision, but I still didn’t feel good about it.”

Had the trial of the teen been a capital murder case in which the death penalty was being sought, Kraus said he would have had a much tougher time.

Gee, 16, died in January 2007 after he was hit by a stray bullet fired into the garage where a sweet-16 birthday party was being held for an American Canyon girl.

‘The system works’

When jury selection began in mid-May, Kraus estimated there may have been as many as 200 prospective jurors. Many were excused from service for various reasons, including financial hardship; extenuating employment circumstances; or because they had no grasp of a juror’s responsibility — offering the court explanations that they would support the death penalty for graffiti violations.

The jury experience renewed Kraus’ “faith in the justice system,” he said. “The judge and the lawyers for both sides of the case against the brothers very thoroughly explained to us the rules and definitions that we needed to understand our role in deciding the guilt or innocence of the boys. We were told not to concern ourselves with the punishment or what — if anything — the boys had been involved with before. For example, one of the two teens who had worked out the plea agreement with the court — and who was very much a part of the events of the night that would cost Gee his life, sparking the conflagration that ended in gunfire — had been already been on probation for attempting an armed robbery in front of two police officers.”

“We had to understand about enhancements to charges, which applied in Junor’s case because he used a gun in the commission of a crime,” Kraus explained. “We also learned about stipulations, situations the court was not disputing, such as there was a party, and the defendants were there, and that Junor had fired the gun — that and more was accepted as the truth by the court. Then the trial began.”

Anatomy of a murder

Both boys were originally charged with first-degree murder, but the jury rejected that and went for a second-degree charge, which carries a lesser prison sentence. The pair were found guilty of intentionally shooting into an inhabited building, intentionally discharging a firearm in a negligent manner causing death, and possession of a firearm by a minor.

“According to the evidence there was no alcohol or drugs at the party,” Kraus explained. “It was largely a family thing, but there were many friends of all races, so it wasn’t a racial thing that caused the series of unfortunate events that lead to Anthony’s death.”

It was patrolled by several chaperones and if anyone came to the party uninvited they could only be allowed in by approval of the guest of honor — the 16-year-old girl.

“As the party grew, it was this Alfonso that started the series of bad decisions,” Kraus said. “He had rubbed part of himself up against a girl named Diamond; that was mistake one. Instead of going to the chaperones to have him ejected from the party for his behavior, she gets on her cell phone and calls some friends — who were members of a rival group known as the Bridge Boys. That was mistake two. Alfonso, the two Douglas brothers and another boy named Eddie, are members of a rap group known collectively as ‘Young, Black and Restless,’ or YBA.”

When the Bridge Boys showed up and a scuffle ensued, Junor at one point ordered his brother to give him the “strap” or gun from the car “I’m gonna pop that n---er.” Another mistake.

Ultimately, gunshots thundered into the night: Allegedly only a pair of shots had been fired into the air, but one bullet found its way to Gee as he was attempting, like the others, to get out of any potential line of fire. Gee died in a Santa Rosa hospital the next day.

“There were so many lies and contradictions,” Kraus said. “I can tell you from my personal observation that (Junor’s) testimony pretty much sank his ship. It became very obvious that they were guilty of what they had been accused.”

Junor admitted he was holding the gun when he claimed it accidentally went off, striking Gee. Marquis owned the gun, brought it to the party and gave it to Junor, making him guilty of aiding and abetting and eligible for the charge of first-degree murder.

“I believed the family thought there was some chance that he would actually be found not guilty, but when the second-degree guilty verdicts came down there was a lot of emotion, shouting, chairs being thrown, and some members of the Douglas family had to be taken from the courtroom by four deputies,” Kraus said. “Outside of the courtroom there was more shouting, then the noise all went away.”

That last bit of Kraus’ jury experience was the hardest, he explained.

“That last 45 minutes of the trial — when we were to deliver the verdicts — were the hardest of all,” Kraus said. “Going into the courtroom after five days of deliberation, the sadness weighed heavily on every one of us. I don’t know that any writer could ever convey the feelings in a book, or a movie ever really accurately portray the gravity of the situation.

“If this had been a judge trial instead of a jury trial, I cannot imagine how a judge could have or would have reasoned with himself to come to any kind of a decision. Even though the 12 of us were unanimous in our decisions, I don’t believe any one of us felt good about it, even though it was the right thing [to do].

“Because of all that had been done to make sure the defendants were accurately represented and their actions that night fully understood, I believe the system worked — and I believe in the system even more than I believed in it when I went in there. The system works.”

Napa Valley Register Copyright © 2009