— OPINION —
While we wait for the three-judge appellate panel’s decisions in Stewart and Michael Parnell’s habeas corpus motions, there is something to discuss.
In some side comments during the Sept. 26 oral arguments, the panel of appellate judges wondered out loud why the government ever agreed not to include as evidence the deaths associated with the multiple-state Salmonella outbreak caused by the Parnells.
In that outbreak, nine people died and at least 713 were sicken.
Department of Justice attorney Stuart E. Walker, who opposed the Parnell motions in the oral arguments, was not around when the government agreed to keep death out of the evidence during the 2014 jury trial. He did say the DOJ trial attorneys were confident they had enough evidence in the Salmonella illnesses to make their case, which was beyond true.
But going back, with a look at the moldy jury trial records from 2014, it’s clear the DOJ fought hard to include the deaths. Coming shortly before the jury trial, defense attorneys for Stewart Parnell, in a Motion In Limine, asked the court to exclude any evidence related to any illness or deaths.
Excluding any mention at trial of the illnesses or death was paired with a request that the court seal one “highly prejudiced” email where Parnell told a family member to lie about company sales if doing so saves money.
Here’s what DOJ Patrick Hearn wrote at the time:
“Defendant has asked the Court to prevent the Government of the United States from presenting proper direct, intrinsic, and inextricably intertwined evidence proving the charges and facts alleged in the Indictment. The evidence directly establishes conduct charged in the Indictment. Furthermore, the evidence is intrinsic to the government’s case; it is inextricably intertwined evidence and is part of the chain of events the government intends to present to prove its case.”
The top prosecutor in the 2014 trial, Hearn argued that in a criminal case, the government has broad latitude “to prove its case by evidence of its own choice, or, more exactly, that a criminal defendant may not stipulate or admit his way out of the full evidentiary force of the case as the government chooses to present.”
The government, however, agreed not to bring up deaths and went with its thick illness files.
And then about 10 minutes after the 2014 jury trial finished convicting the Parnell’s and the other Peanut Corporation of America managers, it leaked out that the deaths were discussed by at least some of the deliberating jurors.
A motion to vacate the Parnell’s convictions and sentences is currently before the three-judge panel at the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals that includes Chief Judge William H. Pryor Jr., Judge Robert J. Luck, and Senior Judge Edward Earl Carnes.
During the oral arguments, the panel asked why the government ever agreed to not bring up the Salmonella deaths at trial. One judge said it was like only charging the underlying traffic offense in a vehicular homicide.
The panel on. Sept. 26 heard back-to-back oral arguments on behalf of Michael and Stewart Parnell. Its ruling could come at any time.
The brothers, associated with a deadly Salmonella outbreak blamed on the now-defunct Peanut Corporation of America, filed motions for the vacation of their convictions and sentences under federal Habeas Corpus proceedings.
Savannah attorney Amy Lee Copeland, who represents Stewart Parnell, and Virginia attorney Elliott M. Harding for Michael Parnell, tried to use their time to make all their arguments effectively.
The attorneys argue that the Parnells’ constitutional rights were violated because of ineffective counsel during their 2014 jury trial.
They also argue that their trial attorneys should have sought a venue change, moving the trial from Albany, GA. Improper jury conduct has been alleged because some jurors knew that deaths were involved.
Stewart Parnell, 70, and Michael Parnell, 65, are inmates at the Butner, NC, federal prison known as “Butner Low.” It is a low-security facility for less than 1,000 inmates.
At the time of the outbreak, Stewart was PCA’s president, while Michael was associated as a peanut broker. Stewart was convicted of conspiracy, mail, and wire fraud, selling misbranded food, and introducing adulterated food into interstate commerce. Michael Parnell was also found guilty but on fewer counts.
If successful with their Habeas Corpus motions, Stewart Parnell’s sentence could be shaved by 14 years, and Michael Parnell’s sentence could be cut by the seven remaining years.
(To sign up for a free subscription to Food Safety News, click here.)
