Lewis County Senior Deputy Prosecutor Will Halstead gives his closing arguments with an early 1980s mug shot of Ricky Riffe as a back drop.
Updated at 7:27 p.m.
By Sharyn L. Decker
Lewis County Sirens news reporter
CHEHALIS – Jurors in the Maurin murder trial listened all day yesterday to a prosecutor explain how Ricky A. Riffe is responsible for the December 1985 slaying of the elderly Ethel couple.
Lewis County Senior Deputy Prosecutor Will Halstead asked almost as many questions during his closing as he gave answers to.
“The state’s not going to stand up and tell you we know what happened in this case,” Halstead said. “We do not.”
His hours-long recitation of weeks of testimony left it clear that Ed, 81, and Minnie, 83, Maurin were shot in the backs with double-ought buck inside their car which was then parked and empty at Yard Birds Shopping Center in Chehalis on Dec. 19, 1985.
Ed Maurin had withdrawn $8,500 cash in $100 bills from his bank at about the same hour that day the couple was expecting guests to begin arriving to their home for an annual Christmas party.
Prosecutors believe the couple was forced from their home to drive to the Chehalis bank and had numerous witnesses who believe they saw the 1969 Chrysler Newport at various key places, mostly with the couple in the front seat and a man in the backseat.
But Jason Shriver saw the Maurins as well as Ricky Riffe and his now-deceased brother in the car driving west on U.S. Highway 12, Halstead reminded jurors.
“I want you to ask yourself, what motive does a 17-year-old high school boy have to make up a story?” Halstead asked. “To make this up?”
Shriver knows the Maurins, he knows the Riffe brothers, he said.
“Jason looks over, he sees Rick in the front passenger street facing straight ahead,” he said. “He sees all of them, recognizes them, IDs them.”
Halstead pondered what the Riffe brothers might have done.
“At this point, there’s no turning back, they are accomplices,” he said. “At this point, a burglary and kidnapping have occurred.”
Halstead reminded jurors of the white car seen leaving the Maurin’s driveway that same morning and to ask themselves who might have been driving it and if it were perhaps waiting on the side of the road.
“The question is, what happened to the other person in the back of the car?” he said.
Numerous witnesses have picked out both Ricky and John Gregory Riffe from photos, seen at various places. They’re brothers, they look alike, he said.
The deputy prosecutor pointed out at the bank, Ed Maurin told Pat Hull something like the kids were going to help them buy a car.
“If this is true, why don’t any of the kids know it?” Halstead asked. “He’s under duress, he’s being told what to do.”
Ed Maurin also said his wife didn’t feel good, he said.
“Why would they go to Seattle or Tacoma to buy a car if Minnie doesn’t feel good?” he said. “These people are 80 years old.”
Halstead recounted to the jury that William Reisinger who saw the green car speeding down Bunker Creek Road – near the logging road where the couple’s bodies were found five days later – remembered seeing the male driver’s two hands on the steering wheel, wearing gloves.
Remember how one witness said he saw the Riffe brothers standing next to the green car in the Yard Birds parking lot and detective Richard Herrington said he thought he’d find more finger prints on the car? he asked.
“But not if you’re wearing gloves. Not if you’ve wiped it down,” he said.
Numerous witnesses described seeing a man carrying a gun who could have been one of the Riffes at multiple places around the shopping center that day.
“My question is, are all these witnesses seeing the same person?” he said. “Or are there possibly two men walking around there with green jackets?”
Halstead spent the next several hours yesterday in Lewis County Superior Court recounting witness testimony that pointed to the Riffe brothers.
Rick and Robin Riffe had little money before the homicides but seemed to have money to spend afterward. His friend, long haul trucker Les George, testified Riffe has possession of his shot gun during that period, as he was cutting it down for him to use as a truck gun.
Halstead offered that the burglary could have been as as simple as someone knocking on the Maurin’s front door that morning, or walking through their back door with a gun. And that prosecutors believe Minnie was shot first while the car was still moving, having partially opened her door leaving a trail of her blood on the logging road.
As he concluded, he told the jury they were allowed to use their common sense to make inferences. In Washington, circumstantial and direct evidence can be weighed equally, he said.
“So, was it Rick or John? Who was the shooter?” Halstead asked.
“It doesn’t matter,” he said.
Both were selected from the montages.
“They’re both accomplices, it does not matter who was the shooter,” he said. “They’re both equally liable for all these crimes.”
“Could there be someone else out there who had a part in it? Absolutely,” he said.
Judge Richard Brosey sent the jury home before 5 p.m. with the same reminders not to read or listen to news about the case, and to return this morning when they would heard the defense closing.
“You’ve only heard half the closing arguments, so don’t jump to any conclusions,” Brosey said. “Remember what I told you, there’s always two sides to every story.”
Tags: By Sharyn L. Decker, news reporter
I am disturbed the state of Washington would bring a case for murder against a man where the prosecutors themselves are unsure of what “actually happened.”
It goes without saying that murder is a horrible crime–it’s arguably to worst of them all. Each of those who know the family, and others who have merely read about the case, feel sadness for the family’s loss. However, the severity of this crime should not influence a jury, or anyone else, to find guilt when guilt does exist. This would only compound an unfortunate circumstance by adding further injustice. Reaching a verdict that would send a man to jail for the rest of his life should not be taken lightly, I believe.
Luckily for all of us, the justice system shares this belief, evident by the use of the beyond reasonable doubt standard in criminal cases. This standard is a reflection of the well-founded belief that it is more important not to take the freedom of an innocent man, and never settle a crime, than it is to take the freedom of a man who’s guilt is uncertain. Imagine the opposite. Would any of us feel safe knowing the government has the power to take our liberty on uncertain evidence?
The evidence here is not sufficient to show guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecutor said himself he doesn’t know what actually happened. In spite of his own doubts of Mr. Riffe’s guilt, the prosecutor continues to fight for a guilty verdict, offering deals to current inmates–seeking what is likely false testimony–and arguing alternative and conflicting theories of guilt in his closing arguments.
I hope the jury has the good sense to avoid the political pressure and exonerate this man from what appears to be an abuse of our justice system.
I was just looking at his sheet ion Lewis County jail roster. Where/how does Rape and Indecent Liberties fit into this trial for the Maurins? I never hear anything about those.
My prayers go out to the Maurin family. The circumstances are unbearable. However, as any reasoned juror would realize- not only is there no direct evidence, but the circumstantial evidence is shoddy as well. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a hurdle that is hard to surmount.
What a horrible thing to happen to these victims and their family. Its human nature to desire justice for the perpetrator(s). This is much too vague for any guilty verdict and it seems as though satisfaction would be achieved if a random person were charged. Unfortunately, just not enough to get this guy.
So agreed….GUILTY!!!!!!
GUILTY! GUILTY! GUILTY! GUILTY!