wavePod

Get Wave AI

Episode 07: The State Rests - SEQUESTERED Podcast | Wave AI Podcast Notes

Back to SEQUESTERED Podcast

Episode 07: The State Rests

SEQUESTERED Podcast

Mon Mar 17 2025

Summary

SEQUESTERED Podcast: Episode 07 - "The State Rests"

Host: BP Productions

Introduction

In Episode 07 of SEQUESTERED: A Juror’s Perspective on the Murder Trial for Jasmine Pace, titled "The State Rests," Juror #11, Sarah Reed, delves into the pivotal moment when the prosecution formally concludes its case against Jason Chen. This episode offers listeners an in-depth exploration of courtroom dynamics, witness testimonies, and strategic maneuvers that shape the trajectory of the trial. Through Sarah’s firsthand account, we gain a comprehensive understanding of the complexities and emotional weight carried by both the jury and the parties involved.

Prosecution Concludes: The State Rests

The episode opens on Saturday, January 18, 2025, marking day six of the intense nine-day trial. Sarah reflects on the transformation of the jurors from detached observers to integral participants deeply invested in the proceedings:

“By now, we were no longer the fresh, wide-eyed jurors who had entered the courtroom on day one. The gravity of this case had settled in, and with each passing day, the weight of our role grew heavier.”
[00:02] Jane Reed

As the prosecution's final witness takes the stand, District Attorney Cody Womp unexpectedly announces, "The state rests their case," abruptly signaling the end of the prosecution's presentation. This moment marks a significant shift, moving the focus towards the defense’s strategies and responses.

Defense Strategies and Motions

Before the defense can present its case, the judge requires a brief recess to address necessary motions. During this interlude, jurors engage in mundane activities, underscoring the tension and anticipation building within the courtroom. The defense proceeds with crucial legal maneuvers:

Motion for Judgment of Acquittal: The defense formally requests the dismissal of some or all charges, contending that the prosecution has not provided sufficient evidence for a conviction.
Consideration of Lesser Included Offenses: The defense seeks to instruct the jury on alternative charges, such as second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter, providing a spectrum of options beyond the primary first-degree murder charge.
Request to Introduce a Forensic Psychologist: Defense attorney Weiss attempts to bring in Dr. Douglas Lewis to testify about Jason Chen’s mental state, aiming to challenge the notion of premeditation. However, Judge Patterson denies this request, citing the speculative nature of Lewis’s opinions and the untimeliness of the motion.

Presentation of Defense Witnesses

With the prosecution’s case concluded, the defense begins to present its own witnesses, aiming to introduce doubt and alternative narratives.

1. Courtney Paglino Brewer: The Neighbor’s Testimony

Courtney, a neighbor from apartment 110, recounts the night Jasmine Pace disappeared:

“There was a scream that started me out of my sleep. I checked my phone to see the time because I was going to call 911. It was around 2 AM. There was a voice that was screaming words. The words I couldn’t understand fully.”
[09:05] Travis Pace

Courtney describes hearing distressed screams, arguing voices, and the sounds of footsteps chasing towards the apartment’s front door. Initially dismissing the noise as a typical apartment dispute, she later connects the sounds to Jasmine’s disappearance after seeing her missing person flyer.

“After hearing the scream and the arguments and the footsteps, what did you do?”

“I laid there awake for a minute because I couldn’t go back to sleep. [...] It wasn’t until days later, when Courtney saw Jasmine’s missing person flyer on Facebook, that she realized what she had actually heard.”
[12:43] Travis Pace

This testimony establishes a timeline of events and emphasizes the initial confusion and fear surrounding Jasmine’s disappearance.

2. Travis Pace: Jasmine’s Father

Travis Pace provides a compelling account of the family's frantic search for Jasmine:

“When I walked into the apartment, there were no persons in the bedroom. So now I turned around with a different goal of not looking for a person but to look for evidence.”
[20:02] Travis Pace

Travis details his discovery of Jasmine's driver's license and credit cards in Jason Chen’s apartment, leading him to call 911. His emotional testimony underscores the desperation and urgency felt by the family.

“I took them out of the drawer and I spread them apart widely, distinctly from left to right. Why’d you do that?”

“Without a search warrant, they could not open a drawer and look for those themselves. I tell them that they were there; it was hearsay. But if I lay it across the countertop and they flashed their light on it and recorded it, they can show that to Missing Persons.”
[20:55] Travis Pace

Defense Cross-Examination:

Defense attorney Weiss attempts to cast doubt on Travis’s credibility by highlighting discrepancies in his and Katrina Bean’s testimonies regarding the method of entry into the apartment:

“Did a resident of the apartment building open the door for you and support you to come in the building?”

“I do not.”
[23:17] Travis Pace

The cross-examination aims to create uncertainty about the consistency of the family’s accounts, though Travis remains composed and maintains his narrative.

3. Johnny Lawrence: Private Investigator and Crime Scene Expert

Johnny Lawrence, hired by the defense two weeks post-investigation, provides an analysis of the crime scene:

“This crime scene had been contaminated multiple times. There was nothing that could show where she died.”
[43:47] Johnny Lawrence

Lawrence’s testimony introduces the concept of evidence contamination, suggesting that the crime scene has been compromised by prior non-official searches and actions taken by Jasmine’s family. However, his qualifications and the timing of his involvement raise questions about his objectivity and the reliability of his conclusions.

Cross-Examination by the Prosecution:

Prosecutor Paul Moyle challenges Lawrence’s assertions, specifically targeting the interpretation of blood stains and the presence of a potential handprint:

“Isn't it possible, sir, that what we actually see on the screen is not a bloody handprint or bloody fingerprints, but where the cloth that had been folded over and the transfer happened that way?”

“Not necessarily, because you have to understand what this stain is showing is variants of the fingers that have blood on them.”
[42:28] Paul Moyle and Johnny Lawrence

This exchange emphasizes the speculative nature of Lawrence’s expertise, further undermining the defense’s case.

Media Coverage and Public Perception

Latricia Thomas from NewsChannel 9 provides a recap of the day’s proceedings, highlighting key moments and presenting visual evidence to the public. Her analysis underscores the ongoing uncertainties and challenges faced by both the prosecution and defense in solidifying their narratives.

“These comparison images are pointing out a few different things. They’re saying a door was closed. The blind position is different. And then if you can see in the right-hand image, there’s a pair of underwear that’s on the floor that isn’t there in the first image.”
[47:08] Latricia Thomas

Jury Interaction and Questions

A notable aspect of this episode is the active role of the jurors in questioning witnesses, fostering a sense of engagement and participation:

“Do you think it’s possible that Jason Chen moved items on November 27 after the body cam footage was filmed?”
[50:50] Juror’s Question

This segment illustrates the jurors’ commitment to unveiling the truth and their critical evaluation of the evidence presented.

Conclusion: The Defense Rests

As the defense concludes its case, Sarah reflects on the effectiveness of their arguments:

“For a case of this magnitude, it felt underwhelming.”
[51:16] Sarah Reed

Despite multiple witness testimonies and attempts to introduce doubt, the defense's case primarily revolved around speculation and inconsistencies in testimonies, without providing substantive alternative explanations or alibis. This leaves jurors with unresolved questions, heightening the suspense leading into the trial’s subsequent phases.

Final Thoughts

Episode 07, "The State Rests," masterfully captures the intricate dance between prosecution and defense within a high-stakes murder trial. Through Juror #11’s perspective, listeners are afforded a rare glimpse into the deliberations, emotional toll, and procedural intricacies that shape the pursuit of justice for Jasmine Pace. The episode sets the stage for the concluding segments of the trial, promising further revelations and critical decisions that will ultimately determine the outcome of this gripping case.

Stay Tuned

Join us for the next episode, where the prosecution and defense deliver their final arguments, bringing the trial to a suspenseful conclusion. Explore more insights and behind-the-scenes content at SequesteredPod.com.

Loading summary...

Transcript

Sarah Reed (0:02)

Hey, it's Sarah. Juror number 11 from the sequestered podcast. Here's exciting news. Dateline NBC has just released a new episode titled the pin at apartment 210. In this episode, DATELINE correspondent Blaine Alexander explores the investigation, the trial, and the key moments that define the search for justice in the murder of Jasmine Pace. If you've been listening to Sequestered, you know how personal this case became for me. I had the opportunity to briefly share about my experience as a juror in this episode, and I feel incredibly honored to be a part of something that helps amplify Jasmine's story on a national level. This episode isn't about the trial or the jurors. It's about Jasmine. Her voice, her family, and the lasting impact of what happened. Now streaming on Peacock. You can watch this episode of Dateline tonight or anytime you want. So check it out and help us continue to honor Jasmine Pace's memory. Go to peacocktv.com to start your free trial. Before we begin, please be advised that this episode contains graphic descriptions of violence as presented during the trial. Please take care while listening. It's Saturday, January 18, 2025, day six of the trial. By now, we were no longer the fresh, wide eyed jurors who had entered the courtroom on day one. The gravity of this case had settled in, and with each passing day, the weight of our roll grew heavier. We had listened to hours of testimony, examined evidence, and watched the state methodically build their case against Jason Chen. We'd seen Jasmine's family take the stand, heard the pain in their voices as they recounted the frantic hours they spent searching for her. We had listened to expert witnesses break down crime scene details, some with precise conclusions, others with more uncertainty. We had watched DA Cody Womp and her team present their evidence with confidence, reinforcing over and over again that this was a premeditated act. Not a crime of passion, not an accident, but a murder. The days of feeling like outsiders in the courtroom were over. At this point, we weren't just observing the trial, we were part of it. This didn't feel new anymore. We were here to finish what we started. And apparently, so was the State. This is sequestered. A juror's perspective on the murder trial for Jasmine Pace. I'm Sarah, juror number 11. Each episode, I'll take you inside the courtroom, behind the scenes, and into the weighty moments of this trial as we honor Jasmine's life and navigate the complexities of seeking justice. Let's begin. This is episode seven. The State rests as the Courtroom took their seats. Judge Patterson turned to the prosecution and asked if they had any more witnesses. D A Cody Womp stood and to our surprise, simply said, the state rests their case. Just like that, the prosecution was done. A brief explanation followed from the bench. Now it was the defense's turn. But before we even had a chance to absorb the shift, we were asked to exit the courtroom. The judge and attorneys needed to cover a few motions before the defense could begin. We returned to our coffee, card games and books in the jury room. Meanwhile, in the courtroom, we the defense did something pretty standard in criminal trials. They filed what's called a motion for judgment of acquittal. This is a formal request for the judge to dismiss some or all of the charges, arguing that the prosecution didn't present enough evidence for a reasonable jury to convict. It's a way of saying, even if you take everything the state just presented at face value, it's still not enough to legally support these charges. Now, this motion is rarely granted in high profile cases like this, especially in a murder trial, but it's a critical procedural step because it preserves the defense's ability to appeal later on if needed. And in this case, the defense also made a separate request for the judge to allow the jury to consider what's called lesser included offenses. Lesser included offenses are exactly what they sound like. They're charges that are still illegal, but they're considered less severe versions of the primary charge. In this case, the primary charge was first degree murder, which requires proving premeditation, meaning the killing was planned. The defense asked the court to also instruct the jury on lesser charges, like second degree murder, which doesn't require premeditation, or voluntary manslaughter, which could apply if the killing happened in the heat of the moment. This kind of legal maneuvering is common, but it's also strategic. It gives the jury more options. So instead of choosing between convicting on the most serious charge or letting the defendant go free, they could land somewhere in the middle. It's one of those moments where you could feel both sides preparing for the end game. The defense protecting their client from the harshest sentence possible, and the state holding firm that this was a premeditated intentional murder. The defense had one more move up their sleeve. Mr. Weiss renewed a motion he'd already tried once before. He asked the judge to allow a forensic psychologist named Dr. Douglas Lewis to testify for the defense. Now, this wasn't just a random request, because earlier in the trial, the state's Expert medical examiner, Dr. Steven Cogswell, actually said that the best kind of expert to speak to Jason Chen's state of mind would be a forensic psychologist. That's exactly who Dr. Lewis was. And the defense wanted to bring him in to testify about Jason's ability or inability to form premeditation. This is important because premeditation is what separates first degree murder from the other lesser charges I mentioned. If Jason didn't have the mental capacity to form premeditation, the jury could consider a lesser offense like second degree murder or even manslaughter for a second time. Judge Patterson denied the request, and the reasoning was layered. First, Judge Patterson said Dr. Lewis opinions were too speculative, meaning they didn't meet the legal standard of certainty needed for expert testimony. Basically, his opinion didn't cross that line from this could be possible to this is what happened to a reasonable degree of psychological certainty. Also, because the defense had waited until after the trial started to formally request Dr. Lewis testimony, Judge Patterson ruled it would be unfair to the state to allow it at this point in the trial. So the motion was denied. Again, the defense took a break here to organize their witnesses. And about 30 minutes later, we entered the courtroom and took our seats in the jury box. The defense calls their first witness to the standard Courtney Paglino Brewer. Courtney was the neighbor who lived in apartment 110, the unit directly below Jason Chen's apartment. Let's listen in to defense attorney Weiss asking Courtney about the night Jasmine Pace went missing.

Sarah Reed (13:43)

Courtney testified that in the early hours of November 23, the night Jasmine was murdered, she was jolted awake by a loud, panicked scream. It startled her so much, she immediately grabbed her phone to check the time, thinking she might need to call 91 1. According to her, it was 2:11am it was the voice that stuck with her. The scream she heard came from a woman. And after that initial burst of terror, Courtney could hear her trying to talk through sobs, like she was crying and arguing at the same time. The words were garbled and Courtney couldn't make out exactly what was being said. Then came what she described as chasing the sounds of two people running from the floor directly above her toward the front door of the apartment, followed by the distinct sound of the front door slamming. 20 minutes later, Courtney heard the TV in the bedroom turn on loudly. And about 30 minutes after that, she hears the garbage disposal turn on and then the washing machine, which she described were both running at the same time. It wasn't until days later, when Courtney saw Jasmine's missing person flyer on Facebook, that she realized what she had actually heard. According to the flyer, Jasmine's last known location was at 110 Tremont street, apartment 210, the apartment directly above hers. That's when Courtney knew she had to say something. She immediately submitted a tip to Crime Stoppers, sharing everything she remembered from that night. As I sat there listening to Courtney, my mind couldn't stop racing with questions. Questions, of course, that no one could fully answer. Was the TV turned up to cover the sound of something no one was supposed to hear? What was Jason washing in the middle of the night? Sheets. Clothes? Something worse. And the garbage disposal. What did he put down there? Was it something small? Or was it evidence of something that could never be recovered? None of us knew for sure. But what haunted me the most was the realization that Jason wasn't just up late tidying his apartment. He wasn't cleaning the house. He was covering up a crime scene right above Courtney's head. The next witness was Jasmine's biological father, Travis Pace. Something to be aware of is that Travis and Jasmine's mom, now Katrina Bean, are divorced. With Mr. Weiss leading Travis took us through the night Jasmine's family realized she was missing. November 26th, into the early morning hours of the 27th. On the 26th, Travis was out to dinner with friends, celebrating Thanksgiving, when his daughter Gabby called in a panic. Jasmine wasn't answering her phone and no one knew where she was. Travis and his girlfriend drove to the last location Jasmine's phone had pinged, a building near Tremont Street. When they got there, they found Gabby and some of Jasmine's friends all trying to figure out how to get inside. They managed to get into the building through a back door and started knocking loudly on every door they could. They were desperate to make noise, to wake people up and find someone who had seen Jasmine. And that's when they learned about Jason Chen. A neighbor told them Jason lived on the second floor and that Jasmine had been there recently. That's all they needed to hear. Travis went straight to Jason's apartment and knocked. There was no answer. The door was locked, but Travis managed to force the handle open. What he found inside made his stomach drop. The apartment was empty, but it was clear someone had left in a hurry. The bed was unmade and there were female items in the bathroom. When Travis opened a desk drawer, there was Jasmine's driver's license and credit cards just sitting there in a neat little stack. That's the moment he knew something was terribly wrong.

Sarah Reed (32:29)

You know, during sequestration, I had a lot of time to think. And honestly, I kept wishing I had a speaker so that I could just listen to a great book. That's why I love audiobooks. Whether I'm driving, walking the dogs, or traveling, I can just press play and get lost in an amazing story anytime and anywhere. One of my all time favorites is New York by Edward Rutherford. This epic historical novel spans over 400 years, following generations of families through the city's most pivotal moments, from its Dutch settlement days and all the way to 9 11. It was one of the first audiobooks I had ever listened to. It felt like the narrator was reading the story just for me. I was completely hooked. Here's some good news. You can listen to New York or any other book for free. Audible is giving sequestered listeners a free audiobook with a 30 day trial. Just go to audibletrial.com sequestered that's one free book, yours to keep forever. So find something you love and get listening. Go to audibletrial.com sequestered as we sat there listening to Travis walk through how the family pieced all of this together, how they knew without a doubt that Jasmine would never post something like that, it was one of the clearest windows we got into who Jason Chen really was. This wasn't just about hiding evidence. This was about control. Even after Jasmine was gone, Jason was still trying to control the narrative and manipulate how the world saw her. Once Travis finished his testimony, Judge Patterson let the jury ask questions. This was the part where we could write down anything we still wanted to know. The judge and attorneys would review the questions and if they were appropriate, he would ask them directly to the witness right there in open court. There was something incredibly human about this part of the process. It wasn't lawyers trying to make a point. It was us regular people, a jury of peers, trying to understand what really happened that night and trying to make sense of the choices Travis and the rest of Jasmine's family. Family made in those desperate hours. The first question was simple. How well did Travis even know Jason? Did he know they were dating? Had Jasmine ever mentioned him directly? Travis admitted that Jasmine had never brought Jason up to him, but she had talked about him to other people she trusted. And Travis knew they'd been close enough to take a trip to Chicago together recently.

D (47:08)

Images of the day came from this. A maroon sheet that was found in Jason Chen's apartment. But how it was found and in what direction and in what specific part of the bed remains to be seen. And that's when. Because what Johnny Lawrence testified himself about, which is the changing in the crime scene from the first time Chattanooga police officers went in with their body cameras on, which would have been November 27, in the early morning hours after Pace's mother and father called them there, to when those crime scene photos were later taken by CSI investigators from the Chattanooga Police Department. Now, we've seen these images before in hearings about this case. Let's take a little bit of a look about what some of them show. We're not going to show all of them to you. You can see here in these comparison images, they're pointing out a few different things. They're saying a door was closed. Again, these were. There's a lapse of several days in between these two different items there on the floor, the blind position is different. And then if you can see in the right hand image, there's a pair of underwear that's on the floor that isn't there in the first image. Another thing that the prosecution brought up on cross examination of Mr. Lawrence was the direction and the shape of these supposed handprint blood transfers there. They pointed out, if you look at that first big spot there, that could be a finger, the edge is very straight. And the prosecution asked Mr. Lawrence, if you have a handprint, is the edge of it usually straight? Well, let me just read you the, the transcription of the testimony there. This is homicide investigator Paul Moyle from the prosecutor's office. He asked Lawrence, isn't it possible, sir, that what we actually see on the screen is not a bloody handprint or bloody fingerprints, but where the cloth that had been folded over and the transfer happened that way. And then Mr. Lawrence answers, not necessarily, because you have to understand what this stain is showing is variants of the fingers that have blood on them. And then, then we don't know how much blood was on there, if this was a hand. So again, on cross examination, the prosecution getting Lawrence to say that he's not sure that it was a hand either. So a lot of doubt about what we were actually seeing in some of these photographs raised, and something I thought was very interesting. Again, we've been talking in this case about how the jury is allowed to ask questions of the witnesses after the state and the defense are done. And the judge, Judge Boyd Patterson, has actually commended the jury on how good of notes they're taking and how specific their questions are. So one juror asks about the items that are moved in the apartment. Again, these items from Mr. Lawrence's own report. So the judge reads, reads the jury question there at the end. Do you think it's possible that Jason Chin moved items on November 27 after the body cam footage was filmed? Since cellular records, again, this is from earlier testimony in the week show him in that same area later in the day. So a cell phone expert who extracted the locations of Jason Chin testified earlier in this week that he was in the same location of Tremont street later on the 27th. And then this is kind of where this all comes down. The expert witness, Mr. Lawrence, says, there's nothing that gives me any information about who the items he's talking about. There's nothing to lock in who it was.