Haun Jurors Begin Murder Trial Deliberations

The jury in the Diana Haun trial began deliberations Friday in a sensational case that spanned nearly two months and culminated in a call to convict the accused killer of murder.

The case was given to the jury after an emotional rebuttal statement by Deputy Dist. Atty. Lela Henke-Dobroth, who urged the panel of seven men and five women to convict Haun of first-degree murder for butchering her lover’s wife.

“Every single bit of evidence that you have--that you need to make that decision--points to only one reasonable interpretation, and that is that she, Diana Haun, killed Sherri Dally like a lamb to the slaughter,” Henke-Dobroth said.

The prosecutor’s remarks concluded one of the most compelling trials in Ventura County history, a murder case involving allegations of conspiracy, human sacrifice, witchcraft and a love triangle turned deadly.

During the past seven weeks, the jury--composed of Santa Barbara County residents because of heavy pretrial publicity locally--has listened to testimony from more than 125 witnesses and viewed more than 300 exhibits.

After listening to the prosecutor’s argument and instructions from the judge, jurors retired to an anteroom at 2:20 p.m. and began dissecting the case.

After about 1 1/2 hours, the jurors boarded a bus and headed home for the weekend. They are scheduled to return Monday to resume deliberations.

If they find Haun, a 36-year-old grocery clerk from Port Hueneme, guilty of first-degree murder and related special circumstances, she could be sentenced to death following a second phase of the trial.

In addition to murder, Haun faces charges of kidnapping and conspiracy for allegedly plotting the slaying of Sherri Dally with her longtime lover, Michael Dally, and carrying out the killing.

Sherri Dally, a 35-year-old homemaker and day-care operator, was abducted from the parking lot of the Ventura Target store on May 6, 1996, and was never seen again.

Her skeletal remains, which showed evidence of a fatal stabbing and beheading, were found 26 days later in a steep ravine between Ventura and Ojai.

During the prosecution’s two-hour rebuttal argument Friday, Henke-Dobroth tried to pull together a complex puzzle of circumstantial evidence to prove Haun was the killer.

Henke-Dobroth also responded to statements made by Haun’s attorney during his closing argument Thursday.

Deputy Public Defender Neil Quinn told jurors that the prosecution failed to prove its case and altered its murder theory during the trial to remain consistent with changes in evidence.

*

And he suggested his client had been set up by Michael Dally to take the fall.

“Let me make it abundantly clear,” Henke-Dobroth began in her response to those arguments, “that there is no change or switching of gears. Our theory is that Diana Haun conspired with Michael Dally to kill Sherri Dally and that Diana Haun is the actual killer.”

“That’s what happened,” the prosecutor asserted firmly. “That’s what we believe the evidence shows in this case.”

In part, the evidence includes Haun’s purchase of a blond wig, tan pantsuit and size 9 canvas shoes two days before Dally was reported missing. She paid for those items with personal checks.

*

Witnesses described Dally’s abductor as a blond woman in a tan suit. Haun, the prosecutor reminded the jury, wears a size 9 shoe.

Records also show that Haun rented a teal-colored Nissan Altima a day before the kidnapping, reserving the car in her name, Henke-Dobroth said.

Witnesses saw the same blond woman in a Nissan at Target on May 6, and a criminalist testified that Dally’s blood was soaked into the back seat and floorboard.

Defense attorneys argued that despite the trail of circumstantial evidence linking their client to the crime, no one identified her as the kidnapper and no one saw the killing.

*

As a result, Quinn argued, it is entirely possible that someone else fatally stabbed Sherri Dally.

But Henke-Dobroth said that scenario is “preposterous” given the mountain of circumstantial evidence against Haun.

Rarely in a criminal case is there a videotape showing exactly what happened, the prosecutor added. But that doesn’t mean a crime didn’t occur.

“You don’t have to exactly know,” she said. “You can look at the surrounding evidence and make inferences based on what you do know.”

What the evidence does not show, she argued, is that Haun was set up by Michael Dally--a suggestion raised by Quinn in his closing argument.

He also questioned why Haun would leave such an obvious trail of evidence if she was planning a murder.

“To say that she would not have done this foolish thing does not equate with her innocence,” Henke-Dobroth countered.

“No, she is not ‘dumb as a post,’ but her stupidity and that of Michael Dally is born out of arrogance,” she said, referring to a remark Quinn made Thursday. “They were cocky and they thought they’d never get caught.”

Quinn also told the jury in his closing argument that Haun’s story about getting in a bike accident on the day of the killing was a lie--a point the prosecutor pounced on during her summation.

“She made up the story because she killed Sherri Dally,” Henke-Dobroth argued.

*

According to court testimony, Haun told police that scratches on her face were the result of a bike accident in Camarillo in which a small truck bumped her back tire, sending her toppling over the handlebars.

But the defendant had no other obvious injuries as a result of the incident and the bike was not damaged, testimony showed.

Quinn admitted the story was a lie, but challenged the district attorney to explain how the scratches occurred.

If they were caused during a scuffle between his client and the victim, that would technically mean that a murder while lying in wait had not occurred, according to his reading of the law.

That issue was not discussed by the prosecution Friday.

One of the other critical issues of contention during the trial was the height difference between Dally and her abductor--an issue the prosecutor tried to put to rest.

Two eyewitnesses described the woman in the tan outfit as two to four inches shorter than Dally. Quinn argued that his client was the same height--if not taller--than Dally and therefore could not have been the abductor.

But Henke-Dobroth asked jurors to rely on their common experiences when examining the evidence, and she used a specific example. Without looking at him, she asked, how tall do you think the courtroom bailiff is? And what color is his hair? And did he shave his mustache last night or is it still there?

“These are people we have seen for weeks,” she said, trying to further illustrate the difficulty in accurately determining a person’s height.

Henke-Dobroth also criticized a tactic employed by Quinn in his closing summation: a large rainbow-colored chart with a movable arm described as an “evidence meter.”

Quinn switched the arm from the “true and reliable” side to the “false and unreliable” side to comment on the reliability of evidence in the case.

“You folks are the meter,” Henke-Dobroth told the jurors shortly before they got the case. “And you do that with your hearts, your souls, your minds and your common sense.”