Death-row inmate seeks reduced sentence

By Marc Kovac

COLUMBUS — It was what Portage County Prosecutor Victor Vigluicci called “probably the most horrible crime committed in the history of my county.”

James Trimble shot and killed three people — a mother, her young son cradled in her arms holding a favorite Teddy bear and a Kent State University co-ed held hostage while the “cold-blooded killer” negotiated with police, Vigluicci said.

The trial resulting from the January 2005 murders included a display of about 20 of the defendant’s firearms and graphic photos — evidence that prosecutors argued was relevant to the case.

But legal counsel for Trimble countered that the displays were prejudicial and pushed the jury to choose the death sentence.

“My concern is ... the carryover effect,” said Nathan Ray, legal counsel for the defendant. He added, “You still are left with a jury that’s been exposed to all of this.”

Vigluicci and Ray offered oral arguments before the Ohio Supreme Court Tuesday on the defendant’s appeal of his death sentence. Justices are considering those arguments and will announce their decision at a later date.

Trimble was convicted of the aggravated murders of his girlfriend and her 7-year-old son (Renee Bauer and Dakota Bauer) and, in a separate home, KSU student Sarah Positano. He held the latter hostage and shot her during a standoff with police.

Trimble, now 48, has been on death row since November 2005. He admitted killing all three victims but said Positano’s death was accidental, and evidence did not prove he committed the crimes with prior calculation and design.

In his appeal, he argues for the convictions to be overturned or the sentence reduced to life in prison, based on 15 alleged legal and procedural errors and ineffective legal counsel.

Ray focused his comments Tuesday on guns and photos presented to the jury during the criminal trial. In addition to the two guns that were used to commit the crime, prosecutors also displayed about 20 others owned by Trimble to the jury, as well as dozens of photographs of the victims.

Ray said the display was unnecessary and irrelevant, since none of the firearms were used in the commission of the crime. Photos that were “duplicative and gruesome” caused a commotion and disturbance in the courtroom.

“It’s irrelevant, and in this case it was simply presented for the impact and prejudicial nature on the jury,” Ray said.

Justices also questioned Vigluicci about his decision to include the items as evidence, given what one called the “slam dunk” nature of the case.

Vigluicci countered that the guns showed Trimble’s familiarity with firearms, and that his selection of the two weapons used in the murders illustrated the deliberate decisions and the defendant’s prior calculation in committing the crimes.

The evidence showed that the killings were not accidental, he said.

“The evidence showed that Mr. Trimble, in his basement, had an arsenal of weapons from which to choose,” Vigluicci said. “The killings occurred in an upstairs bedroom. He had to go down to the basement with a combination, unlock a gun safe. He had to select which of those 25 guns he was going to use ... and he selected a gun that had a magazine that had 42 rounds in it.”

He added, “This man has three convictions, three death sentences and deserves every one of them.”