Girlfriend pleads guilty in Chandler Grafner's death
Girlfriend pleads guilty after jury gets Phillips case
By Sue Lindsay, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published August 12, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
Photo by Javier Manzano © The Rocky
Prosecutor David Lamb uses closet doors to make a point to the jury during closing arguments in the Jon Phillips murder trial on Monday. The jury began deliberations later in the day.
The jury had barely begun deliberations Monday in the murder trial of Jon Phillips when his girlfriend, Sarah Berry, pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of second-degree murder.
Phillips, 27, and Berry, 23, were both charged with first-degree murder in the death of 7-year-old Chandler Grafner, who doctors said died of starvation and dehydration while being kept in a closet.
Berry's trial was to get under way today, but last-minute negotiations resulted in a plea bargain that spares Berry from a possible life sentence in prison. She will be sentenced to 48 years in prison on Sept. 29.
She faced the same charges as Phillips: first-degree murder, child abuse resulting in death and destruction of evidence.
The jury recessed in the Phillips case about 3:30 p.m. and a short time later Berry appeared in court in a khaki jail uniform, shackles around her waist.
Flanked by her public defenders, Jason Young and Willie Rios, she answered questions from the judge in a faint voice, barely whispering at times.
"Guilty," she said, choking back tears.
She left the courtroom with her eyes downcast, not looking at her family.
Prosecutors and Berry's public defenders declined comment because the jury is out in the Phillips case.
Chandler's family and friends also declined comment, as did Berry's family.
Earlier in the afternoon, prosecutor David Lamb jabbed his finger in the air toward Phillips and told a Denver jury that the only justice in Chandler's death is to convict Phillips of murder.
A 'prison cell'
"He chose to deprive this child of food and water knowing if you do that, the child is going to die," Lamb said, at times struggling to keep his emotions in check during his closing argument.
Lamb told the jury that Chandler was starved to death while kept in the dark on the floor of a locked linen closet where he was forced to wallow in his own feces and urine.
"That was his prison cell," Lamb said.
But defense attorney Darren Cantor said Chandler was not denied food and water by Phillips. Instead, he said, Chandler died of an undiagnosed form of diabetes that caused his body to feed on itself.
Lamb scoffed at that, noting that withholding food had long been a punishment for the boy, who came with his half-brother to live with Phillips and Berry after their birth mother lost custody.
Chandler was even made to eat oatmeal as punishment while the rest of the family had Easter dinner in April 2007, Lamb said.
When Chandler was examined by authorities after he went to school with a blackened ear and was asked if he had anything to eat that day, Chandler replied, "I'm not good, so I don't get things," Lamb said.
"What has to be done to a child of 7 to describe himself as not good enough for food?" Lamb asked.
Once Phillips got custody of the boys in January 2007, he "thought no one was watching Chandler any more and that's when things changed dramatically," prosecutor Verna Carpenter said. "But he forgot someone was watching - a really smart 5-year-old boy who led us to the evidence."
She was referring to Chandler's little brother, Dominic.
Carpenter and Lamb reminded jurors of the trial's key points:
* Pictures Dominic drew of Chandler showing him screaming for food and water.
* The cell phone call Berry made to Phillips after Chandler became so desperate for water that he threatened to escape from the closet, get a knife and kill them if he didn't get a drink. That call came eight days before he died on May 6, 2007.
* The feces-encrusted box and shower curtain retrieved from the garbage that Dominic said was thrown there by his parents after Chandler died.
Cantor attributed the stench from the apartment and the large number of air fresheners in use as efforts to deal with a pet cat that wasn't box-trained.
Carpenter retorted: "That cat basically must have exploded in the closet."
Carpenter said a cat couldn't account for the amount of feces found in the closet, on the box and the air mattress.
'Winds of emotion'
Carpenter contended that the defense failed to deliver on the promise made during opening statements to show that Chandler died of diabetic ketoacidosis.
By the time Dr. Stephen Factor testified, Carpenter said, his opinion changed.
"That's because there weren't any ketones in Chandler's body," she said. "There was no acetone in his blood."
Factor testified that Chandler's blood sugar was abnormally high and he believed Chandler had undiagnosed diabetes. He said Chandler could have suffered extreme dehydration and starvation because of it. But he did not find evidence of ketoacidosis.
Cantor said "the winds of emotion have blown through this case" from the moment paramedics arrived at Chandler's apartment and saw something they weren't prepared to see.
"Those people had every reason to be upset," he said, but Chandler's condition wasn't the result of intentional starvation by Phillips, he said.
Lamb disagreed.
"By May of 2007, Jon Phillips had had enough of Chandler Grafner" and wanted to raise only Dominic, his biological child, Lamb said. "He had an intense dislike for Chandler Grafner."
A verdict of "anything less than murder in the first degree is not the full measure of justice," Lamb said. "Anything less than that is a gift of mercy to a man who showed none."
lindsays@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5181
Denver lawyer says plea timing unusual
Taking a plea from one defendant while the jury is still deliberating the case of a co-defendant is an unusual move, said Craig Silverman, a Denver lawyer and former Denver chief deputy district attorney.
With the jury not sequestered, the move raises the possible risk of a juror being accidentally exposed to news accounts of the plea bargain obtained by Sarah Berry.
Such a development could result in a mistrial.
"The timing is interesting," Silverman said. "Obviously they (the jurors) have been told to avoid publicity. But this is a major news story that may be hard to avoid."
It's not unusual for a co-defendant to take a plea in exchange for testifying prior to the case going to a jury, he noted. But by offering Berry a chance to plead, both sides are minimizing risk.
"It's apparent that prosecutors consider Sarah Berry less blame-worthy," he said.
"There's an element of risk for both Sarah Berry and the prosecutors," Silverman added. "If the jury comes back with (a verdict of guilty of) first-degree murder, she's got to recognize that she might suffer a similar verdict."
"If the prosecution gets less than what they're asking for (in the Jon Phillips verdict) they're maybe in a weakened situation."
At a glance
* Monday's developments: Sarah Berry pleads guilty to a reduced charge of second-degree murder. Jury in Phillips trial hears closing arguments and begins deliberations.
* Today: Jury continues deliberations in Phillips' case.
* What's next: Berry will be sentenced to 48 years in prison Sept. 29.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Through Your Lens
Submit your photos or see the Editor's Choice slide show here.
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Holiday Lights
Is your house the jolliest on the block? Submit your holiday lights display.
-
Holiday Gift Guide
Looking to get a jump-start on the holiday shopping season?
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's midweek rant on the Chiefs.
-
Broncos Video
Get the latest from Dove Valley as the Broncos prepare for Sunday's matchup.
-
Calendar wallpaper
Download this month's desktop wallpaper calendar
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Stirrin' the Soup with Matt Iseman
August 12, 2008
12:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
SL10 writes:
The plot thickens. I hope the jury convicts him on the first degree murder charge. *fingers crossed*
August 12, 2008
6:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Hambone writes:
Well lady, 48 years is basically the rest of your life. Just know you will never go hungry in prison, but your conscience will always haunt you.
August 12, 2008
6:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
hdfresh writes:
I don't see how it is possible if Phillips is found not guilty when his girlfriend admitted guilt and plead guilty already. The defendant has nothing going for his case accept this absurd thinking that Chandler died of undetected diabetes. I guess they detected it pretty quick when he died but somehow it was unnoticed when he was alive. Any evidence of Chandler taken to see a doctor to find out why he was losing so much weight so quickly? I don't think so. Guilty of 1st degree murder, life in prison without a chance of parole.
August 12, 2008
7:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
mrfxx writes:
What I find frustrating is that the jury deliberating on Phillips' case is NOT allowed to know about this. How could this not be critical information in their decision-making process?
August 12, 2008
7:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
Billy writes:
At least these people can't have any other children to hurt and torture. Poor Chandler, such innocence lost.
August 12, 2008
7:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
bladerunner writes:
Hambone,
48 years but eligible for parole when? I bet in 20 years or less. I doubt her conscience will bother her. People who commit acts like this have no conscience. I think it's a travesty that we, as taxpayers, have to keep her alive at a cost of roughly 20k a year.
August 12, 2008
8:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
davies writes:
She was never called as a witness in Phillip's trial, was she? Were they common law-married, so she could not be compelled to testify against her spouse? Is that why?
August 12, 2008
8:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
SickNTired writes:
Too bad she didn't do the right thing a long time ago!
August 12, 2008
8:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
No Davies, she could not be called as a witness in the Phillips trial as long as her case was pending, as she would have invoked her right against self incrimination. The DA could have given her immunity and forced her to testify, but then they would have been subject to not using anything she said against her and that can mess up a case. Besides, they probably figured she was not going to say anything against him anyway. The DA had no incentive to give her a chance to explain away the evidence.
August 12, 2008
8:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
mrfxx
A plea by a co-defendant is never admissible (unless that person testifies). The idea is that the decision by the jury should be based upon the facts of the case, not a decision by a co-defendant to avoid trial. A plea deal is always a balancing of factors by a defendant trying to decide if the chance of conviction outweighs the chance of an acquittal. One defendant should not be prejudiced by the decision of another defendant. Besides, she plead to a lesser charge: would you be satisfied with a lesser charge for Phillips? Let the Phillips jury decide based upon the evidence, they know more than everyone on this board combined.
August 12, 2008
8:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
frosty writes:
Blade, I agree with you, too bad we can't bring back public stoning, that punishment might come close to fitting the crime.
August 12, 2008
8:35 a.m.
Suggest removal
mcmooreacctnt writes:
Big_D: What is so special about this case that makes you support the death penalty where other cases - with similar heinous crimes - you would not support the death penalty?
Why the relativistic opinion?
Your opinion doesn't make any sense. One eithers supports the death penaly or one doesn't.
August 12, 2008
8:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
mcmooreacctnt writes:
buffsblg: You are an attorney...what would make the DA want to offer Sarah Berry a plea deal? It's very probable that Phillips will be convicted of Murder-1, so one would think that a conviction of the same charge would be very probable for Berry as well. Does it boil down to economics; a trial for Berry is costly? Does the DA not have a good enough case against Berry as he had forPhillips? On the surface it doesn't make sense from the DA's perspective. It's almost like the DA has a civil duty to get the level justice that Chandler deserves. Thanks for your insight.
August 12, 2008
8:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Enough writes:
Buffsbig:
How long will Berry serve before she is eligible for parole in your opinion?
August 12, 2008
9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lil_Taz writes:
She is not eligible for parole until she serves at least 36 years!
But I doubt she will even last 5 in the general population. As they are probably just waiting for her to show. Her best bet is to ask for solitary confinement, though that would be perfect for such scum!!! Eye For An Eye!!
August 12, 2008
9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
The plea deal spares our community from going through the details of this horrific nightmare again. It also accomplishes the ultimate goal of confining one of these monsters to prison, essentially forever.
I actually hope she survives in prison... for a very, very long time. I hope she sits and stares through the bars and sees Chandler's face in that picture with the bars drawn over it.
I hope she sits on the toilet, in plain view of the other inmates and thinks about little Chandler, locked away with no toilet at all.
I hope she eats the meager, tasteless food that she will be given and remembers the child to whom she was entrusted who would literally have killed for just one bite of it.
I hope she shivers at night with one thin blanket and remembers an innocent 7 year old boy who had only an air mattress and a shower curtain.
I hope she relives the hell that she and Jon put him through ten times a day.
And I hope she lives a thousand years.
August 12, 2008
9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Who_Me writes:
She will do a hard 48. Not any different than Susan Adkins (Manson follower) who has been denied parole numerous times (well technically, yes, it is different: life versus 48, but parole was an option, denied, but close enough for comparison). She could be eligible in 60 to 80% of the sentence, but there is no way she is ever going to be paroled early.
August 12, 2008
9:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
The decision to offer a deal is often based upon considerations that are never made public. My guess is that there were a number of reasons: 1. The desire to not put Dominick through another trial, as testifying is a traumatic experience for a kid that age; 2. They may feel that Berry was only following the orders of Phillips and therefore is slightly less culpable; 3. They may be less sure of a 1st degree conviction than the posters are, as the DA's heard the testimony live and ; 4. Given the publicity this case has gotten, the DA may have been worried about finding an unbiased jury in Denver. A change of venue would have been inconvenient, expensive and resulted in a delay. Cost might have been a factor then, as paying witnesses to travel is expensive and moving the whole case out of town is even more so. There may also be other considerations that we do not know yet: i.e. mental illness, abuse etc. Finally, the life expectancy in prison is much lower. There comes a point where any sentence is a life sentence even if there is a technical chance at parole. I have a former client who is eligible for parole in about 2030 when he will be about 92: that may not be a life sentence, but he is not counting on walking free. (by the way for the proofreaders out there, I know my punctuation is probably wrong, I never did understand semi-colons)
As to parole, the rules have changed since I did a lot of criminal law, but assuming no substantial prior criminal history, she is probably eligible for first consideration in about 15 or 18 years, depending on how she does. Remember that first time eligible prisoners usually do not make parole. My guess is that she will serve more than 1/2, but I will check and try to be more informed.
August 12, 2008
9:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
jlong writes:
VICTORY FOR CHANDLER
I was so thrilled to hear that witch plead guilty, I will say a first degree murder conviction would of been better but either way she is going to jail and Chandler gets some sort of justice. This case has completely captivated me, every time I saw a picture of his innocent face I wanted to cry. She deserved the death penalty for what she did to that angel but jail is better then nothing.
August 12, 2008
9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
pattymarsh writes:
I do believe in the death penalty but in this case I would support death by torture also i.e. by starvation not the easy way out like every one else gets.i.e. the needle that would be to kind in this case.... and as for the girlfriend pleading guilty that is an easy way out she needs to be starved also but just not to death just feed her every 5 days a bowl of oatmeal and a drop of water.
August 12, 2008
9:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
BigSky182 writes:
Chandler's victory does not stem from the punishment of those who persecuted him. It stems from the awakening in all of us. The call to action that will save other children who are locked in hell.
If our society sucessfully punishes those responsible for Chandler's death, and then turns it back on the rest of them, Chandler loses.
August 12, 2008
9:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Who_Me writes:
mrfxx:
"What I find frustrating is that the jury deliberating on Phillips' case is NOT allowed to know about this. How could this not be critical information in their decision-making process?"
Your statement is a classic example of why jurors should be professionally trained as opposed to the current system of pulling "peers" off the street. You will never be my peer. You can take that anyway you want, but when you factor in education, jobs, life experience, etc., and ignorance like your statement (in the context of not being educated about something, not a personal affront), why would I want you on my jury? Or why would anyone, for that matter? You must be guilty of something since you're on trial, right?
You're on the stand, you know you are innocent. Your accused cohort in crime thinks there is no way he is going to be found not guilty, so he takes a plea to minimize time. Because your friend cracks, you should go under too? If so, you deserve what you get, I guess.
August 12, 2008
9:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Enough writes:
buffsbig: yesterday they mentioned that part of going for the plea agreement was the affidavit Berry gave after her arrest. Does that mean she incriminated herself in that affidavit? Is that public record? Thanks for all your insight.
August 12, 2008
9:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
mcmooreacctnt writes:
Thanks for you insight. What you stated makes perfect sense.
August 12, 2008
9:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
jlong writes:
BigSky182
I agree that Chandler lost, he was failed by every person in his short life who was supposed to love and protect him, he was failed by a a system supposedly designed to protect him. He had no justice in his life, but in his death he will recieve justice, they will rot in hell for what they did and as a society we are now aware and hopefully things will change and other children will be saved from the attrocities he endured.
Enough
yes that information should be public record anyone can go to the denver county building and get a copy.
August 12, 2008
9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Ringmaster writes:
Let Chandler's own words be their sentence. This is a powerless 7-year old so thirsty he is threatening to kill them over a glass of WATER!
If this case doesn't make you a supporter of the death penalty; then your heart is so hardened that I doubt anything would get through to you.
This POS has already lived his life and had the opportunity to make his own choices. Even the death sentence is less than he deserves.
August 12, 2008
9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
kitty writes:
To ease your mind, blade, it is my belief that when she is sentenced to 48 years, that is exactly what it is. I don't think there is any parole eligibility in these types of cases. And, if she is not in protective custody in prison, chances are pretty high that she won't survive.
August 12, 2008
9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Enough writes:
Big_D: I want these monsters to die a horrific death just as Chandler did. The law does not permit that in this case, so I had to accept that prison is the answer for them due to our laws. I do not want for parole for that waste of space as far as I'm concerned they need to be eliminated from the gene pool !!!!!!!!
August 12, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Hussie writes:
She will be housed in the Segregated Housing Unit, for her protection, and will never be allowed contact with the General Population...She will likely spend 23 hours a day inside of her cell, with 1 hour out for showering and exercise...Due to the magnitude of her crime, and her guilty plea, she will probably serve the better part of the 48 year sentence...Just because one becomes "eligible" for parole, doesn't necessarily mean it will be granted...
Hopefully there's a repeat conviction for Phillips on the 1st Degree Murder charge...Anything less would be a travesty...He was the "Legal Guardian", and bears much more responsibility as such...While she participated, he seemed to be the one who dictated the boys fate...
August 12, 2008
10:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
I did double check on parole. As Berry plead to 2nd degree murder, which is a crime of violence, she will not be eligible for parole consideration until she has served 75% of her sentence, or 36 years. Given the reduced life expectancy in prison here chances of walking around free are very slim. Essentially, by making this deal, the prosecution avoided a traumatic trial for Dominick, the cost of the trial for the taxpayer, and some risk of a lower charge and Berry got a hypothetical parole date.
August 12, 2008
10:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
airgirl writes:
What makes me sick about these two is that our tax dollars are going to feed them for the rest of their lives. And what is even scarier is that they probably aren’t the last people to abuse those precious children out there. And as for the non-existent father. He is trying to sue the State for not intervening sooner. What a pig…..trying to profit from his son’s death but couldn’t be bothered before. I do think social services should have intervened sooner but that doesn’t excuse his responsibility.
August 12, 2008
10:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Enough writes:
buffbig: THANKS for all your clarifications, it took me days to accept that death was not going to be a option for these monsters. I just wanted to thank you for helping me to understand the law.
August 12, 2008
10:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
jlong writes:
hussie
While I agree with most of what you said I have to say I think she played a bigger role then anyone will ever know. She was home with those boys and had the oppertunity to feed and care for him if she wanted to. I think because they were not her children they were just a bother to her. They only reason Dominic was not abused to that extent is because he was Jon's blood child otherwise I think it would of been two starved children.
August 12, 2008
10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
mcmooreacctnt writes:
Big_D:
Ah yes relativisim at its finest.
August 12, 2008
10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
HelpKids writes:
BigSky- I agree with you. Those scums being sentenced does give me some comfort that justice was made for Chandler. If we go on with our lives and don't keep pushing our state legislative to do something to CHANGE the system, then we have also failed Chandler.
I believe this has touched so many people including myself and it is Chandler's voice we are hearing to make some change.
Everyone do not forget to contact Lt. Gov. O'Brian. She may think all of this will calm down once those two are in jail but we cannot give up! Keep calling and emailing until something permanently is changed!
Buffsblg-I appreciate all of your comments throughout this trial. You've helped me understand the law and what is going on with this trial. Thank you.
I know Sarah Berry is getting 48 years but for some reason I think she deserves to serve more. Or at least NO Parole for her!
Will she be up for parole? Can the prosecution make this a part of her sentencing next month, NO Parole?
August 12, 2008
10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
Enough
Thank you for the note. This is such a hard case and there are times in my heart that I want just ten minutes in a room with Phillips and a baseball bat. However, I have to continue to support a system that despite its flaws is still trying very hard to be just.
August 12, 2008
10:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
HelpKids writes:
Hussie-How do you know where she will be housed? Why should she be protected when it was her role to protect Chander and she killed him?
We do not owe her anything in her protection!!
bluffsblg-thanks for clarifying the parole. Can they make it part of her sentencing though? 48 years with NO parole?
August 12, 2008
10:32 a.m.
Suggest removal
ShadyGrady writes:
Dear Sarah,
We are pleased to offer you the position of Chief Septic Tank Cleaner for the town of Hell. You will be paid at a rate of $0/day and will enjoy a generous benefits package including painful eternal hunger and periodic surprise beatings upon your ugly face and across your disgusting body LOL!.
My staff and I hope you are as excited to join us as we are to have you start...the position has been open since the beginning of time and there is quite a workload waiting for you, so to speak! ROTFLMAO!. As such we will be agressively attempting to pull in your start date.
Sincerely,
Satan
PS. We have had no luck finding your soul. Please be prepared to turn this over upon joining us, no matter how infintessimally sized.
August 12, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
Help
No the judge cannot change the parole rules. They apply across the board on each case. However, remember parole is optional and the board can reject her.
August 12, 2008
1:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mtn__Gator writes:
Hard to hold back the tears of this story. Anyone who has kid(s), makes you want to go hug them and tell them you love them very much.
August 12, 2008
2:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
FatTony writes:
Accepted her plea? Scoff. She's as guilty as this douche bag.
In my world, they both get the chair.
In the other world, they both get life without parole.
In the after life, they both go to hell...or something of the like.
August 12, 2008
2:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
buffsbig - I think there would be a waiting line for the first 10 minutes...
I know it's not a part of our penal system, but wouldn't incarceration without food or water for one month serve as punishment befitting the crime. I know, I know. We don't do things like this in the US. Sometimes I think that's too bad. Now is one of those times.