Jury selected in Kathy Phillips murder trial

by Nora Gathings (hsgathings@wsbt.com)

Tools

Kathy Phillips jury trial

Jury members were brought back to court Tuesday for questioning before participating in the case of Kathy Phillips. (WSBT photo)

By Tiffany Griffin

LAPORTE — After two days of questioning, lawyers picked 12 jurors and two alternates to hear a local murder case late Tuesday night. The jury is split almost evenly among men and women.

Most the jurors are older. They will begin hearing the case Wednesday morning.

Kathy Phillips is accused of giving birth and leaving the baby girl near her home, but Phillips claims she never gave birth.

The judge did individual screening interviews Monday because of the pre-trial publicity. Tuesday, half of those potential jurors were back, being questioned as a group. Many of them claimed to have never heard of Baby Jane Doe or Kathy Phillips.

Kathy Phillip's husband found the newborn in a garbage bag near their home in March 2006. Six months later, Phillips was arrested.

Police say DNA evidence proves she is the mother, but she and her family deny a pregnancy.

A total of 120 potential jurors were pre-screened on Monday, 36 said they have no prior knowledge of the case.

But some people believe finding fair jurors in LaPorte isn't possible.

Cyle Lambert remembers when her 2-year-old daughter Anna was born.

“Motherly instincts kick in and you want to take care of that baby. That was around the same time someone else decided not to take care of a baby girl and left her in a LaPorte field.That baby had no chance to live and that person should be punished,” said Lambert.

“Everyone deserves a fair trial, so it should have been taken out of LaPorte County,” said Betty Floyd.

“I feel if the lawyers do their job in questioning people, they should find a fair jury.”

While questioning potential jurors, one said, "Being it is a newborn and it would be a lot of graphic pictures, I can't look at it. It would upset me."

When the prosecutor asked if that potential juror would be able to put those feelings aside, they said, "No.”

That juror and another, who said impartiality would be a problem, were struck.

But another potential juror told attorneys she knew someone who said she [Kathy] wasn't pregnant at the time.

And that person is on the jury.

Lambert says, like many people, she wants closure and wants to find Baby Jane Doe's parents.

“You're mad that that mother didn't give that baby a chance and didn't give it up for adoption or to a safe haven.”

From the questions Tuesday morning, WSBT got a preview of some of the evidence that should be presented including graphic photos and DNA evidence.

The DNA issue already got heated because the defense attorney felt some questions this morning presented evidence, which isn't allowed prior to the trial.

This trial is expected to last one and a half to two weeks.

Tuesday, Jul 22 at 9:54 PM Christian Sister wrote ...

I met Kathy at church several years ago, after she was charged with this crime. I sat by her, prayed with her, and - yes - observed her during the time when she was pregnant with her last child. It's impossible to imagine how she could have hidden a pregnancy - since she is a rather small woman. I have known her to be a gentle mother and devoted daughter. I cannot say that I understand all of the facts which are being presented. I pray for Kathy, her children and her Mother.

Saturday, Jul 19 at 5:37 PM JACKIE wrote ...

SOSINSKI YOU SAID KATHY WAS YOUR BEST FRIEND AND THAT SHE WAS NOT PREGNANT AT THE TIME WELL NOW HOW CLOSE WERE YOU REALLY BECAUSE SHE WAS INDEED PREGNANT AT THE TIME

Thursday, Jul 17 at 4:20 PM R. wrote ...

This is like the O.J case. Although This time the glove fits. Common sense.

Thursday, Jul 17 at 8:57 AM Sosinski wrote ...

Kathy is one of our best friends and I know for a fact she wasn't pregnant at that time and no baggy clothes to cover anything. If you are judging this by what you read--than you have proven the ignorance in this community. There is so much info about DNA and the different types of testing--KNOW THE FACTS!! And yes the police are licensed to do whatever they want. You hear about it all the time and I have lived it. So please use your brains a little and know the facts before opening your mouth.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 7:46 PM Anonymous wrote ...

There are different types of DNA tests. Yes, some (the more timely, expensive ones) can be 99.999% accurate. But speaking from a field that works very close with family DNA testing, I can say that some aren't quite so accurate. I have seen situations involving siblings and when paternity tests were done, the results were not clear in determining the father. Therefore, more extensive tests had to be completed. So just keep that in mind.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 4:57 PM Losing weight, jumping to conclusions wrote ...

I'm only throwing this out for discussion. If her husband knew she was pregnant, why didn't he hide the body or at least claim to find it somewhere else? Finding it on their property immediately pointed to her. Finding it somewhere else might have eliminated the DNA test on her. Did she hide the pregnancy from him? I find that hard to believe. Did he find it and realize what she did, and decide to make her go to jail? Don't know. I only hope justice is done.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 4:18 PM Anonymous wrote ...

The DNA is the smoking gun. There is a .001 chance that she's NOT the mother. You don't get much better odds that this folks. Sorry.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 2:22 PM Anonymous wrote ...

I agree with R. The baby was found in March. The winter months are the perfect time to wear heavy and baggy clothes.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 2:09 PM Willy wrote ...

I agree with smitten. I'll keep her under house arrest. Handcuffed. In the basement. Might even let her get off for good behavior.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 12:31 PM R. wrote ...

Maybe she hid her pregnancy and that baby was ill because of it. There are ways of hiding pregnancies.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 11:56 AM R. wrote ...

DNA is something you cant deny I hope they take away their unborn child before they kill him or her also!

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 10:48 AM Smitten wrote ...

Crazy? maybe. Guilty? probably. Smokin Hot ? Hell yes! Shame she's married and going to jail. oh well, back to eharmony.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 10:23 AM Anonymous wrote ...

To all of the people that are in denial about the DNA and what this horrible woman is capible of, the DNA testing said there is a one in a trillion chance that baby was not hers. There are not that many people in the world! So how can you argue a DNA test with such daming results? Not to mention that the DNA test had to be done two times with the same results on both. I can't believe people do not believe she did it, just think of the baby and how she felt.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 10:08 AM anonymous wrote ...

For all you people who say that dna isn't enough, that's bull. There aren't enough people in the world for that .001 chance of it not being hers. And if it were a relative the dna test would have come up a match to family dna. Do your research before you start knocking dna testing. They wouldn't use it in court if it wasn't a sure thing. Why do you think Lie detectors are admissible? And some people can hide pregnancy, you never know for a fact that she wasn't pregnant. Only she knows that.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 9:55 AM anony wrote ...

Kathy is a wonderful mother and a great person with a big heart. God knows the truth of what happened and soon everyone else will to so until then lets try to keep an open mind. Our prayers are with you and your family. We love you.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 8:59 AM Anonymous wrote ...

Chief, nice way to use a tragedy to push your agenda.

Wednesday, Jul 16 at 12:49 AM Mike wrote ...

dna is only 99.999 percent accurate, Theres a .001 percent chance its not her hmmm?

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 8:45 PM Anonymous wrote ...

she's innocent!!!

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 7:29 PM Chief wrote ...

What do you expect from a society where 40 plus million abortions have taken place since 1972? Life is cheap. Death and mayhem fill the Earth from Iraq and Darfur to LWW in South Bend. God went to a lot of trouble to create Life and this beautiful blue marble. We are urinating on Him and His Plan. Expect revenge soon. Perfect Justice will prevail.

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 6:18 PM me wrote ...

the jury will give a judement not you.

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 5:45 PM mishawaka wrote ...

the women is crazieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 5:33 PM child of god wrote ...

shes a good women mom and friend i can say i dont believe media .they say anything mostly wrong to get a story.May God bless her family.soon it will all be over and we'll know the truth.shes innocent for those who think shes not.quit this assuming let her have her fair trial.

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 4:56 PM I can't believe this wrote ...

everyone is already so quick to judge and assume she is guilty becuase the prosecuter has DNA evidence. There has to be something wrong with the dna test results, how can someone who was not pregnant have given birth to a baby? Everyone who knows her, knew she wasn't pregnant prior to finding the baby in the field!

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 4:36 PM sad truth wrote ...

you know there is women out there like me, who are not able to have children, and this just makes me sick, i would have easily cared for that child, loved that child, but the poor child never had a chance, its monsters like this that make me sick.

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 3:53 PM curious wrote ...

And what if it were a relatives child, like a sister or something, and the father is this womans husband?????

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 3:53 PM Tim wrote ...

then that would be murder of another human being. which is the same thing your doing to the person who murdered. smacking a kid while your telling him not to smack is... well.... dumb.

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 3:45 PM Anonymous wrote ...

If the Jury dont get her she will have to answer to god. And whats she going to tell them. She looks like she not playing with a full deck anyway. When they find her guilty they need to put her in a garbage bag and leaver her by the can and let some one find her six months later or longer.

Tuesday, Jul 15 at 2:51 PM Anonymous wrote ...

I think if a person kills a child and DNA points the fingers at them , it should be an automatic guilty and sentenced to death,

Add a comment

Name:

Comment: 500 Characters Left

Comments are moderated and will not appear on this story until after they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting.

WSBT and its affiliated companies are not responsible for the content of comments posted or for anything arising out of use of the above comments or other interaction among the users. We reserve the right to screen, refuse to post, remove or edit user-generated content at any time and for any or no reason in our absolute and sole discretion without prior notice, although we have no duty to do so or to monitor any Public Forum.

WSBT Weather

icon
Current Temp 27
°
More Weather
More On Demand

Stock Quotes

YouNews

This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled. Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.
This content requires the latest Adobe Flash Player and a browser with JavaScript enabled. Click here for a free download of the latest Adobe Flash Player.

Tonight On WSBTFull Schedule

7.00
Wheel of Fortune
7.30
Jeopardy!
8.00
NCIS
9.00
The Mentalist
10.00
Without A Trace
11.00
WSBT News
11.35
Late Show with David Letterman

Question of The Day

When was the last time you bought a car?

E-mail your comments. We'll pick some to read during WSBT News at 5.