UPDATE: Defense rests without calling a witness in LaPorte murder trial

by Nora Gathings (hsgathings@wsbt.com)

Tools

Kathy Phillips on trial in LaPorte

In court on Wednesday, July 23, 2008, jurors were shown a home video of Kathy Phillips with her daughter Ella, then 2 years old. Prosecutors say the video shows evidence Phillips was pregnant. (Photo provided)

By Beth Boehne

LAPORTE — The defense rested its case without calling any witnesses in the Kathy Phillips murder trial. The prosecution finished its case earlier Wednesday after about a week of testimony, and the defense was expected to call three witnesses. Closing arguments will now begin.

Kathy Phillips is on trial for murder in connection with a newborn baby found dead in a field next to her LaPorte County home in 2006.

After the prosecution rested Wednesday, the defense requested the case be dismissed, claiming the prosecution had not proved the baby was born alive.

The judge then reviewed criminal case law to see if he had the authority to dismiss the case since testimony had already taken place. Just before 2 p.m. Wednesday he announced the case would continue.

Wednesday morning, jurors were shown a home video of the Phillips family. The prosecutor says it shows Kathy Phillips’ midsection getting larger — evidence of a pregnancy.

During Tuesday’s testimony, Phillips' mother denied Kathy Phillips was pregnant.

In the home video shot by Garry, jurors saw Phillips playing with her giggling daughter Ella, then 2 years old. Kisses were exchanged between mother and daughter.

It was the first time jurors showed emotion in the courtroom. They were smiling, nodding along to music in the video. Kathy Phillips had a similar reaction as she watched the video.

There was discussion Wednesday morning about Garry testifying. He does have a public defender, but the defender says he cannot council Garry about whether to take the Fifth Amendment until he sees the prosecution's evidence.

Reporter Nora Gathings is in the courtroom and will have details of this afternoon's testimony on WSBT News at 5 p.m. and 6 p.m.

Thursday, Jul 24 at 9:04 AM Anonymous wrote ...

HAS ANYONE OUT THERE EVER HEARD OF MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. MISCARRIAGE HAS TWO MEANINGS............

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 6:43 PM L wrote ...

The DNA only proves it is their child. It does not prove a crime was committed, nor who committed it. Whether we believe she killed the baby or not is irrelevant. He "found" the baby; he could have done it. Wasn't the autopsy inconclusive? It is possible the defense did not call witenesses because the prosecution did not effectively prove their case. When it is over and the jurors can talk, we will know more.

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 6:27 PM Jen wrote ...

The judge said that he would have dismissed the case had it been a bench trial. What does that tell you people that are calling her a killer? But since there was circumstantial evedince presented in court, the jury must decide. THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE PEOPLE THAT THE BABY WAS BORN ALIVE. THEREFORE=NO MURDER. NO NEGLECT. Good luck Kathy. I hope you can have a decent life once this is all behind you!

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 6:21 PM me wrote ...

deborah you are the sick one making fun of the baby as well...how can you makes jokes ..may God bless her and her family..and may he change your way of thinking

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 6:20 PM L wrote ...

Why are they denying the fact it is theirs? It is defninitely suspicious, to say the least. I believe a crime was committed, but where's the proof?

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 6:03 PM Anonymous wrote ...

You cannot go by what you read in the paper and hear on the news. A lot of details are left out and what the jury hears is often very different. I have sat on a jury and been involved in cases in various roles. The one thing I do know is that jurys take their role seriously and are very impressive. Gives you faith in the system.

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 5:46 PM Kit Kat wrote ...

If the wife is found guilty can the husband be charged with something? What about a lie detector test..even though courts to not use them..

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 5:35 PM Just Wondering wrote ...

I'm trying to understand this. The DNA appears to prove that she and husband were indeed the parents. Regardless if the baby was born alive or stillborn, what was the intention of keeping the whole pregnancy a secret?

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 5:30 PM IDIOT wrote ...

I don't think that the evidence is there.

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 4:29 PM R. wrote ...

Shes guilty anyone who doesnt believe that is an idiot.

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 4:22 PM Nicholas wrote ...

She might have been able to argue the defense of the infant being still born had she not denied be pregnant. But she stuck to that story for too long now it's time to pay the piper. I would like to see her sit in prison for life.

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 4:18 PM Mom of 2 wrote ...

She is obviously guilty, we have known that right along! I hope the judge gives her a harsh sentence and then goes after her husband...he can't be innocent in all of this either! I will never understand people like this...life is precious-period!

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 4:04 PM Linda wrote ...

Why would they call anyone to testify for her. Didn't the forensics do the talking already?

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 3:36 PM helen from goshen wrote ...

dna does not lie,nor do the traces of blood, nor do the same type trash bags.i hope justice will be served for another dead child

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 3:36 PM Chris wrote ...

Moving for the case to be dismissed is called requesting the judge issue a directed verdict, which he has the right to do if he believes that the prosecution has not met its burden of proof on the charge. In my opinion, they did not. How can you accuse someone of murder if no one can testify that the victim was alive at the time the alleged murder took place? But the jury convicted Scott Pelley of Lakeville on no evidence whatsoever, it was a theory of "who else coulda' done it". Scary.

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 3:05 PM Anonymous wrote ...

My guess is that this jury is going to find her GUILTY. Dna points the finger at her. I just hope the Judge doesn't take this lightly and she is sentenced properly.

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 2:25 PM Kit Kat wrote ...

how did we know they were looking for the case to be dismissed..

Wednesday, Jul 23 at 2:24 PM deborah wrote ...

" MOMMY, WHERE ARE YOU??? oh, the crying stopped!!!

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 67
°
More Weather
More On Demand

Stock Quotes

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
11.00
Without A Trace
11.35
WSBT News
12.35
Late Show with David Letterman

Question of The Day

How are you enjoying the unseasonably warm weather?

E-mail your comments. We'll pick some to read during WSBT News at 5:30.