Victim's mother testifies at cold case trial

The girl scout murder trial has a confusing point. You say that the garage did not have a door but your at trial reporter says that it does. Please tell me which one correct?

Thanks

I truly feel sorry for the mother and I am sorry for her loss. However, I doubt that the mother's testimony did little to further the case for the prosecution except only to pull the heart strings of the jury. When you throw in the testimony of Marie Maxwell I think the case is steadily slipping away from the prosecution.

The mother's testimony definitely helped the prosecution. I think anyone with a heart would want to point the finger at someone. However, thank goodness for the DNA evidence because no matter what landmarks or events you can remember from 1977, its difficult to put yourself back that far, and someone should have been an eye witness in that day and age to a black stranger in the area in broad daylight.

Watching this mom talking about her baby girl has got to be hard on jurors and I can only hope they have the conviction to render a fair verdict according to the law

In most cases the jury is banking on hearing irrefutable DNA evidence
however, among MANY other disturbing issues in this trial...even the DNA evidence is beyond questionable.
I have no doubt (given this man's "other" conviction...which cannot be admitted into this courtcase), that he is guilty. Unfortunately, common sense (and me personally) aren't a factor in the trial.
I think the prosecution should have MADE ABSOLUTELY SURE they had ALL of thier ducks in a row before proceeding with this trial. They certainly did NOT do so and now that little girl's murder may go unpunished as a result of the prosecution's clearly "bungled" case! So sad!

In those days, it was more unheard of, and many parents were unprepared. Today, parents must be constantly vigilant, as it can happen anywhere, anyplace, in a blink of an eye today.

That is what our society has become......

I must disagree with Penny, for several reasons. 1). In this particular part of town, if there was a black man anywhere near it would have been reported. Even now, if a unidentified black man is seen in that part of town. He is noticed, even though there are some (not many) blacks that now live in the area. 2). I believe the DNA was transferred from the handling of the 1st case. In the 70's, they were not as careful with evidence as they are now. I think the young white guys that were spotted talking with Marsha are the murder/rapists. Which would also explain the sperm. As for the two convicts, their testimony was not creditable. I pray that someday Ms Trimble gets some closure, I just don't believe they have the right guy here.

Testimony in the trial is that the shed/garage where the body was found had no door. In fact the "body farm" expert testified that there being no door (shed was open to the elements) would not change his opinion of how long the victim was dead....
Also, testimony in the trial by women who saw the victim in neighbor driveway was that the shed/garage was "only 30 seconds walk from scene". This was a shed/garage within a slingshot range of where victim last scene and was searched "many times" prior to victim being found on top of bags in shed...defendent was in jail when body finally found...who put body there???
Jail house snitches had no credibility under cross.....
Much remains yet to be heard before this trial can be said to be over....defense sounds like it will have some very good witnesses when their turn comes...

Actually Rick, the murder rate in our country is lower than it was in 1975, and there is little difference between the violent crime rate then and now. Just because you didn't hear about it in the past, does not mean it did not happen. People are no more unsafe now as they were back then, it is just because the media reports it more often and Internet has become a news tool since the past couple decades.

@jerry : We'll see... the defense always want their witnesses to sound like they will be good. The guy they have should never had been out in the first place. If the DNA evidence matches Jerome, then he deserves what he gets.

One thing strikes me as being strange. Marcia Trimble was found in a neighbor's garage 33 days after she went missing. Why didn't the investigation at the time include searching garages owned by the neighbors. It appears that the police were lax in their investigation. Perhaps if she had been found soon after her disappearance, the murderer would have been caught. I don't have any opinion of the defendant's guilt or innocence. He says he's innocent. A person is innocent until proven guilty. I cannot see how the tainted DNA evidence can be used in proving his guilt. It is a sad thing when a 9-year old with her whole life ahead of her should have such a rragic end. My prayers go with her mother.

One of the bloggers stated that a black man would have been reported in the area because it was in "broad daylight." You might not have been thinking, but in TN, in Feb. at 5:30 PM, it would have been dark. So, there is a possibility that people would not have seen anyone, black or white. I remember this case fairly well because my family and I were in the process of moving from CA to Arkansas. When it was time for my daughters to sell and deliver their Girl Scout cookies, they did so with me tagging along. Its sad, but when a child is caught for a single second along with an adult, they cannot defend themselves. As another blogger wrote "this is what our society has become." Very sad, but true.

I wrote my first comment before I read Jerry's statement in which he said that the garage had been searched many times so part of my comment has no basis in fact. If it had been searched, there is something strange about the entire thing. When was it placed in the garage and by whom???? If it was not there when the garage was searched, it seems unlikely that the defendant would have returned later to place it there, which leads me to the conclusion that perhaps the defendant is not guilty and the authorities had best look elsewhere for the perpetrator..

My opinion of the dna evidence so far (its age, degradation, collection in pre-dna days, handling by labs in pre-dna days, and testimony by the witnesses that they didn't wear gloves, gowns, masks, or even know the exact chain of possesion of the slides) makes me think it should be given no weight....they testified they couldnt even find the victims dna on the vaginal swabs, and one lab found at least five different unknown peoples dna on some of the slides.....at this point I wouldnt be surprised if you couldn't make the case that Micky Mouse and half the New York Giants baseball team may or may not be found in the dna....maybe the defendent is guilty but the dna is sure suspect.

Clearly the prosecution has no case, they didn't "bungle" the case....THEY HAVE NO CASE!!!

The mother's testimony is to set the stage. we have gotten better and worse. At least we don't lie to ourselves and our children any longer that nothing will ever happen to them.
the more we caution them to be viligant AND TO PROVIDE THEM WITH PRACTICAL TOOLS FOR VIGILANCE we empower them to avoid such things.
if you think that allowing your child not to know that things can happen, you are not protecting your child.

This isn't about black or white, this is about DNA. How did his get on the child? Is there semen on her which is unknown? What was the testimony about two men being seen? I don't see any other source that said the garage was repeatedly searched. On the other hand, why wasn't it searched? So many questions, perhaps a bad investigation? But still, what is his DNA doing on her body? Only one person can answer that: maybe he should testify? Not that it matters. He is already imprisoned, why is the State going to this expense?

In 1975 with an empty home with the family out of the country no one would notice a man in a yard if he pertended to be doing yard work.

I would like to know why, if Marcia's body was in the garage for 33 days before it was discovered, that there was no odor eminating from her due to decomposition.
As far as the jail house snitches go, I believe the first "snitch" because he has a video that backs up his testimony, he isn't receiving any "deal" for his testimony either. Just because he's a "jailhouse snitch" does not mean he's lying.

OK so he is so totally guilty, the DNA evidence sais it all.....There's no way the DNA got contaminated with that guys DNA by accident 35 years ago....It totally links him to the body, he is a child killer plain and simple.

wheww...this case stunk....if the body was in the shed the whole time then police recruits that said they searched the shed lied.....if she was put in the shed later then the defendent didnt move the body there because he was in jail at the time..the evidence shows more people were involved in the crime and my guess is the defendent will go to prison as a child rapist/murderer and will then spill his guts to the law about who else was involved in the murder in return for protection from other inmates.....there had better be another trial with new additional defendents if this little girl is to get justice.

My heart goes out to the family but l strongly think you have the wrong man on trial. My opinion it was someone the family knew. Do u truely believe that a BLACKMAN would be able to walk around that neighborhood without being noticed and the police not be called about a suspecious man in the neighborhood. The town has covered that murder up and now using a blackman that rapes women to close the case and he already got life so he's a great suspect for their trial. Keep looking hes not your Killer.

he should have taken the stand.I belive he sealed his fate by not doing so.GUILTY AS CHARGED.

I agree with Regina. It is unthinkable that Barrett would have returned to put the body there. To my knowledge they had trained dogs to look for her. The dogs could not pick up her scent so close to where she was last seen? After a certain period wouldn't her body smell. How is it that it took looking for something lead to the discovery of her body? This whole thing is unbelievable. I don't believe Barrett would go into that neighborhood, kill that innocent child and take her cookie money. She was killed because she knew the perpetrator. TOO MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS!!! Such a tragedy.

This clown was stalking the neighborhood or a woman he thought he could get alone. He was either hiding or looking to hide when this poor girl discoverd him ,he lured her into the garage and murdered her. He was going after one of the housewives in this neighborhood. This little girl saved another family from tragedy.

i do believe that contamination indeed plays a possible role. If no-one in the neigborhood, being predomonitaley "white". How is it that Mr. Barrett wasn't seen out of place? In fact I think that it could well be someone in the neighborhood that knew the garage had no doors and that they also knew that it was only being used for storage and not for parking cars, which means they had to know they're neighbors very well, since everyone just about knew each other in the neighborhood, where you could look of your porch and see this everyday..

I have a really hard time just relying on the facts and not considering that this man is already serving time and is a convicted rapist/murderer. He is a monster and sits there so smug. It makes me want to puke! A black man in that neighborhood may have stuck out, but obvously, this career criminal was not just strolling around! He was a predator and I'm sure did all he needed to do to not be noticed.

A question about the Trimble case: The defendant in this case was convicted of another rape/murder very close in time to the child's rape/murder. This information cannot be provided to the Trimble jury. What is the legal line between prejudicial information and information that demonstrates a pattern of behavior?

Wouldn't the body smell after a few days, or was it cold enough to prevent that?

Even if there is a doubt as to where and when the murder occurred.....Mr. .Barret's DNA would not have been present on her if he were not involved. Being in jail for a couple weeks before the discovery does not explain that away for me.

Transferral DNA does not make sense to me either because it was from semen and not shed cells. I don't believe something that dense would be likely to be from anything other than "direct deposit".

Are you kidding me? I wish my ears deceived me. Did the host just ask why we should prosecute this criminal? Regardless if he is currently serving a life sentance or not – the 9-year old girl that was murdered and the family that lost this little girl back in 1975 deserve to find and prosecute the killer....finally. If the DNA matches, prosecute him regardless of his current status.

No odor. Not enough time from last seen to start of search. Black man in white neighborhood!!!! How did he get away if he killed her in that shed?? No match to internal dna. Nothing adds up. Not Guilty!!!

I want to convict but I have reasonable doubt. Would not want to be on the jury, the state has proved his DNA was there on her shirt, however, after 33 years, has it really been established that the semen was on the shirt for all these years.

It is clear that sooo many of you, that believe Barrett is innocent, have not had many dealings with the criminal mind. The.... most ....IMPORTANT factor of this case is that Jerome Barrett cannot explain his semen being on Marcia's jeans and blouse. That is indisputable!!!! Even his attorney's wouldn't touch that!! He killed her and left her body there. Have you ever misplaced something important?? Searched everywhere and didn't find it and then subsequently there it is in a place you would SWEAR you had already looked!! Of Course you have. That is because the Human memory is fallible!! We do our best, but it is not concrete. People wanting to commit a crime often hide, mask themselves, commit crimes a night. They do these things so as not to get caught!! That could explain why no one recalled seeing him. He is guilty of 1st degree murder. He deliberately went there to inflict violence on an unsuspecting victim because that is what, in his sick brain, gets him off and to do that he had to kill her. His DNA puts him at the scene. I can't believe so many of you are willing to just dismiss the irrefutable DNA evidence. Jerome Barrett is Guilty,Guilty,Guilty!!!!!

I have been watching the trial of the Girl Scout Murder. As I was watching this I found it very interesting that when the Mauphitt (spelling) man whos garage the little girl was found in was on the stand. He was being questioned about finding the little girl. He started laughing while answering questions. I told my husband, "if I found a dead little girl... I sure as hell would NOT be laughing while answering quesitons about it. Has anyone did their homework on that man????? Has anyone figured out what kind of car he drove since he could not remember???? I think that man is the guilty one. I think the little girl made him mad and he killed her. Moved her body and found this Barrett guy to pin it on.

I have questions regarding the finding of the body 33 days later and it being so close to the little girl's house. Why didn't they find it sooner? Also who was the other person that the neighbor saw with Marcia? The other DNA on the body, who does that belong to? During 1975, if a African-American man was in a predominately Caucasian neighborhood, I believe he would have definitely been noticed and possibly followed, especially in Tennessee? If really find it hard to believe that no one saw him. How much of his semen was on the little girl? So many questions. Puts doubt in my mind.

The body was not in the shed until just before it was found 33 days after the girl disappeared, and the defendent was in jail at that time:
1. the shed had been searched or entered by at least 4 police recruits we know of.
2. the shed was searched by citizens.
3. the shed had no door and the body was untouched by animals.
4. girl scout cookies found scattered with body and uneaten by animals.
5. people who owned shed had dog that roamed free and known to sleep in shed. dogs eat cookies. rodents and other animals eat cookies and dead people.
6. shed was 20 feet from house of owners.
7. shed was 100 yards (football field) from where girl last seen.

who put the body there???? it wasn't the defendent! that dosnt mean he didnt originally kill her, just shows he wasnt alone...somebody moved body while the defendent was in jail. Plus dna evidence of other unkown people on girls clothes. Girl may have been killed miles away by defendent. Body may have been kept miles away. This case aint over just because defendent found guilty.

Yes to the person who finally said in February in Tennessee at 5:30 p.m. it is already dark. I don't mean to sound disrespectful but I am wondering if the body layed in the garage for 33 days didn't anyone notice a foul odor. I realize it was cool that time of year, but yet the smell of a decomposing body should get someone's attention.

@cathy....witness lady who saw girl with two people at 5:30 pm was asked and said she clearly saw a short person and tall person with the girl, both of whom she described as "white" at the time, and that it was "still somewhat light" (is Nashville in est or cst in march 1975?) if cst it would be 4:30 pm est....my point is there was no doubt she saw two strangers with girl, and is possible if both were white they took her to where the defendent was if one of them was not the defendent....this crime had multiple participants and one or more had intimate knowledge of the neighborhood.

A few issues were raised during the In Session Discussion but I didn't hear some other explanations.

Q.Why would the DA prosecute such an old case if the defendant Barrett is already serving a life term for another crime?

A. One excellent reason is what if his other case is overturned or he is given a commute/pardon/clemency years down the road by a Governor based on Good Behavior, Health, etc.? He would then walk out the door. With the murder case, and I hope it is consecutive and not concurrent, he would then have to transfer to the Tennessee jurisdiction to serve the new sentence.

Q. Why is rape not being charged when semen was found on the child's clothing. The presence of semen does not prove rape. Numerouse killers have simply just masturbated on the body without sex. (RE: Serial Killers Andrei Chickatilo and Ed Gein)

prfsr1
Director of Justice Studies

His semen was on her clothes.. case closed.

Just one thing, No doubt the man was there, right? His DNA on the blouse. he said it himself, "i didn't rape her, i killed her". he strangled her his DNA got on her blouse that way. HE HAD HELP. HE'S STILL GUILTY, IF HE WAS THERE, AND HE WAS.
THANKS,

D.N.A kinda says it all don't Ya think?

It was very cold when this happened like below 30 degrees well below for a while it seems like at that time there had been snow
just before this happened.

Thank you GOD this man was just found QUILTY . it does not bring her back but....now we know. This brings back the pain of that sad day.

There are so many unanswered questions regarding this case. I have no opinion regarding the guilt or innocence of this defendant, since I do recall a recent documentation where two women, oceans apart, each had two separate DNAs, and the reason this happened was too complicated to comprehend. Where you have a DNA which, through the years, possibly became tainted, how can reasonable doubt exist.

From everything I've heard, how could her body not be found after a thorough search of the garage in which she was found. It has to be someone placed it there after the search. Also, how could the murderer get her into the garage without her putting up a struggle or crying out? Could it be she entered the garage with someone she knew??? I could not in good conscience, if I were on the jury, find someone guilty beyond a reasonable doubt with so many broken links. It could be he is guilty since he was convicted in the other murder which occurred about the time the Trimble child went missing. I am anxiously awaiting the jury's verdict and I'm sure their verdict will be a fair one, according to their consciences.

There is no worst nightmare than loosing a child, be they still small or be they grown. The phrase "your child is dead" forever rings in your ears and tears at your heart.

E Rad: There is a difference between believing a person INNOCENT and believing that guilt has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard for conviction in criminal cases.

Hmmmm
strang case,
i wounder if she was kept alive, for a few dys then killed and moved ,
there is no way that the body was in the shed for 33 days,
i think she was kept alive for some time then killed and moved
if i was on the jury i would have a lot of ?? about that shed and
who owned it you can't tell me that the owner never looked into that shed for 33 days ,
i have a shed 20x 18 ft and i can assure you i look or go into it 2/.3 /4,, times a week ,,
if that body was in that shedfor 33 day the anmals would of destroyed
it jim

Such a sad and horrific story. That poor little girl. May her soul rest in peace. But to say "...this is what our society has become" is understatement. "Our society" has always been one of evil, including murder of children as well as adults. So let's deal w/ reality. Children have to be educated that they are very vulnerable to sexual and murderous predators and predators can be everywhere, including one's own family and next door neighbors. Children should never approach strangers on the street and run if strangers approach them. The killer must have tricked this little girl into thinking he wanted to buy her Girl Scout cookies. May his soul be tormented until he confesses before men or before God. So sad for this child and her Mother.

I didn't get to watch much of the trial so I have some questions I hope some of you might answer. Did someone testify as to the time of death? Is it possible she wasn't killed right away – maybe kept alive for a period of time? I, too, think someone else was probably involved which would account for the other DNA. Was there any testimony as to the weather when all of this took place? I agree with Cathy – unless the temperature was freezing I would think the body would be badly decomposed in 33 days.

To Jerry

If it is 5:30 Central Standard Time, it is 6:30 Eastern, not 4:30. I live here in Nashville and it is definitely dusk by 5:30, and dark by 6 pm that time of year.

By the way, a neighbor was on record stating that a black man got off of a city bus at the bus stop on the corner and walked down into the neighborhood. After 34 years,that witness could not be found at trial time. Also, a black man fitting Barrett's profile and appearance had attacked and cut the throat of a young woman whose parents lived directly behind the Trimble home just two days before Marsha disappeard. They think Barrett came back to the neighborhood to finish the job and possibly Marsha was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

And he WAS seen in the yard pretending to do yard work but the DNA was the best eye witness.

I'm wondering where Alvaro Castillo got the money to buy all his guns.
Does anyone know?

So J. Barrett says he was framed....surprise....don't so many criminals say that? Except in this case I think he's partly right. I lived in that general neighborhood as a kid throughout 70's and there was always something weird going on. I don't think any kids on my block got snatched up (seemed like we averaged 2 kids per household, which would have made it target rich for predators), but that was because we always hung out and played in large groups. My point is that I always got the sense that the rapist(s)/murderer(s) in Trimble case had some connection to the neighborhood, other than random. NO, the neighborhood wasn't totally devoid of African-American faces (the elementary school down the road from Trimble house was deseged) but YES, Barrett's adult personage may have have been less conspicuous had he partnered w/ some white folk.