Prosecution gives closing arguments in Renfro case

Published: Oct. 3, 2019 at 6:34 PM AKDT
Email this link
Share on Pinterest
Share on LinkedIn

Closing arguments in the Bradley Renfro murder trial started today, but there wasn’t quite enough time to get both sides in, leaving just the prosecution time to speak.

“If a person says hundreds of lies, can you believe anything that person says?” the prosecuting attorney, Roman Kalytiak said during the closing argument.

Kalytiak was also the prosecuting attorney in the trials of Erick Almandinger and Dominic Johnson.

Johnson and Almandinger are two other teens involved with the murder of David Grunwald along with Renfro and Austin Barrett, who has yet to be on trial.

Before he really got into his closing argument, Kalytiak elaborated on the different crimes Renfro could be guilty of and how he could be found guilty, meaning he explained the parameters for things like 1st and 2nd degree murder and being an accomplice.

His closing argument was split up by each crime scene involved in the murder: the camper where Grunwald was beaten, inside Grunwald’s Ford Bronco that the other teens kidnapped him in, the woods by the Knik River where the body was found, and the scene where the Bronco was set aflame.

Renfro admitted to being the one who suggested the location to get the gas cans to burn the Bronco, and that he was the one who actually lit it aflame. He also admitted to offering suggestions on where to take Grunwald, albeit he testified that he was picking places where he thought people might see them so he could get away from the others.

Kalytiak made sure to remind the jury.

“Even the defendant says in terms of this kidnapping that at some point, David Grunwald would be killed,” Kalytiak said, “and he says he knew that before he made certain suggestions of where to go.”

One piece of evidence Kalytiak referred to throughout closing arguments was Renfro’s testimony itself, including emphasizing the things that Renfro couldn’t recall.

“He remembers stuff like, ‘I’m not one of the bad guys, I didn’t do this, I didn’t do that, I didn’t beat David, I know for sure who beat him,’” he said, “Now he’s saying, ‘but I don’t remember this important piece of evidence that the troopers discovered in the last trial.”

At the end of his argument, Kalytiak told the jury not to forget that being a juvenile is an excuse to do a lot of things like experiment with drinking and skipping school, but it isn’t an excuse to harm people.

Copyright 2019 KTUU. All rights reserved.

Latest News

Latest News