Motion filed requesting new trial for man convicted of 2004 Pocatello murder
Published at
POCATELLO — Defense attorneys for Brad Scott Compher have filed a motion challenging his first-degree murder conviction and requesting a new trial.
Compher, 49, was found guilty of stabbing Nori Jones to death in 2004 following a jury trial that began on Feb. 21. As is common in these types of cases, his defense team has filed a motion to vacate that conviction and have the matter set for a new trial.
As part of the instructions provided to the jurors before they went to deliberation, they were told to find Compher guilty if they believed beyond a reasonable doubt that Compher killed Jones in the commission of another felony — either rape or burglary.
According to the motion, jurors were not given correct instructions regarding the offense of burglary.
“The motion is made on the ground that the court instructed the jury that the offense of burglary is committed when entry is made with the intent to commit any felony, without defining what constituted a felony offense,” the motion says.
RELATED | Brad Compher found guilty of murdering Nori Jones 20 years ago
Jones was found dead in her home the morning of Sept. 29, 2004 by friends. An autopsy determined her death to have been caused by numerous knife wounds.
Though there were suspects who emerged quickly while investigating, Compher was not immediately identified as one of them. It wasn’t until an episode of the TV series “Cold Justice,” which aired in Jan. 2015, revitalized the investigation and aided the Pocatello Police Department in collecting much-needed DNA evidence linking Compher to the crime.
With no eye-witnesses or murder weapon to present during the trial, the prosecution relied on the DNA evidence in order to earn a conviction.
That evidence included the existence of Compher’s DNA in Jones’ home, on her body and on jewelry she was believed to have been wearing at the time of the murder.
The defense relied on evidence it believed pointed at another suspect — Robert Spillett.
Compher elected not to testify during the trial. Spillett was called to the stand, but was allowed to step down after he informed the court of his intention to plead his Fifth Amendment right to silence.
The defense’s motion for a new trial, filed by defense attorney Scott Andrew, states the court’s “failure to define a specific offense, along with its elements, left the jury with no guidance as to what would satisfy the requirement that the defendant had the intent to commit a felony.”
It goes on to claim that the lack of clarity regarding the burglary claim was “further exacerbated” by statements made during prosecuting attorney Jonathan Radford’s closing argument. Comments Radford made, the motion continues, “improperly” informed the jury of Idaho law beyond what was provided to the jury in its instructions.
The defense objected to Radford’s statements, but the jury had already received the its only standard for “determining what constituted a felony.”
“The defendant (Compher) was denied a fair trial and is entitled to a new trial based on the misconduct of the prosecuting attorney during closing arguments,” the motion says.
The defense has requested a complete transcript of the trial and time to review that transcript.
Due to the filing of the motion, Compher’s sentencing hearing, which had been scheduled for April 30, has been vacated. The matter is now set for a status conference on June 4.