By Ollie Reed, Jr.

Tribune Reporter

Nine of the 12 jurors voted to convict Shaun Wilkins in the Torreon cabin killings.  By law, a verdict must be unanimous.

SOCORRO –  Mistrial. It’s an outcome only the mother of a defendant could love. District Judge Neil Mertz declared a mistrial in the Shaun Wilkins murder case after the jury announced it could not reach a verdict Thursday.

            A hung jury.  No decision.

            Wilkins’ mother, Cathy Wilkins-Jaquez, was happy about it.

            “I’d rather have a hung jury than a guilty verdict,” she said, a smile brightening up a face worn by tears and tension.

            But there were not a lot of smiles in the Socorro County  Courthouse – especially in the prosecutors’ corner.

            The prosecution was disappointed it had not won a conviction of the person reputed to be the triggerman in the infamous Torreon cabin killings.

            “We are going to retry this, and we’re going to get the judge to set it again as soon as possible,” 7^th Judicial District Attorney Ron Lopez said.

            The defense was disappointed when it learned that nine of 12 jurors had voted for conviction.

            “It’s an eye-opener, because I felt there was no good evidence to put (Wilkins) at the scene, but nine good people felt otherwise,” defense attorney Steve Aarons said.

            The 20-year old defendant was disappointed when he found out he would have to remain behind bars while awaiting a new trial.

            Wilkins wept as he was led away in handcuffs on his way to the Torrance County Detention Center near Estancia.

            The families of the four victims were devastated because they say the killer of their loved ones is getting away with the crime.

            “My feeling is he is a murderer, and we’re coming after him again,” said Porfie Sedillo, mother of one of the victims and grandmother of two others.  “This time we’ll get a conviction.  He killed my babies and he’s going to pay for it.”

            Wilkins-Jacquez said her son and her family will be ready for the next trial.

            “Shaun’s upset now, crying,” she said.  “He thought he was going to be able to come home tonight.  But Shaun’s tough.  He can handle it.  We’re ready for another trial.  I think Shaun will be stronger.  At least he knows what to expect.”

            Wilkins is one of four people arrested and charged with murder in the deaths of Ben Anaya Jr. 17; Anaya’s girlfriend, Casssandra Sedillo, 22; and Sedillo’s  two sons, Johnny Ray Garcia, 4, and Matthew Gene Garcia, 3.

            The decomposed bodies of the four were found on April 14, 1996, at a cabin in the Manzano Mountains near the town of Torreon.

            According to the state’s case, Anaya and Sedillo were shot to death in December 1995, and the boys were locked in the cabin with the bodies, where they starved.

            Besides Wilkins, those arrested and charged with first degree murder in the case are Lawrence “Woody” Nieto, 20; Shawn “Popcorn” Popeleski, 19; and Roy Buchner, 20.

            The prosecution contends that Anaya and those charged with his murder were members of the same Albuquerque gang and that the cabin killings were prompted by gang rivalry and the theft of guns and drugs.

            But Aarons says his client was never at the cabin and the killings were committed by Popeleski, who was angry at being kicked out of the Albuquerque gang and blamed Anaya, in part, for that.

            Statements by Popeleski, who awaits trial, and Nieto, who was convicted as an accomplice and sentenced to more than 130 years in prison, are the only pieces of evidence trying Wilkins to the scene.

            Attorneys representing Popeleski and Nieto refused to allow them to testify in Wilkins’ trial, but videotapes and audiotapes of their statements were played for the jury.

            In those statements, Popeleski and Nieto said they were outside the cabin when the shooting happened but Wilkins and Buchner entered the cabin moments before gunshots were fired.

            Without any physical evidence – murder weapon, fingerprints, DNA samples – to back them up, the statements were not enough to convince all the jurors of Wilkins’ guilt.

            Two were holding out for acquittal and one was undecided when the jury threw in the towel.

            “They were on the right track, but … they couldn’t find a murder weapon.  There was not enough physical evidence, “ said one juror, obviously upset at the outcome of a trial that started with jury selection on Aug. 28.

            Another said there were jurors who were not convinced that Wilkins was at the cabin at the time of the killings.

            “I’m sad for us,” Charles “Chuck” Bonet, assistant district attorney, said.  “I’m sad for the families of the victims.  The families have suffered.  They continue to suffer.  Wilkins is the one, and we’re going to continue to go after him.”

            By law, the verdict must be unanimous.  If a jury cannot agree on a verdict, a mistrial can be asked for by attorneys and granted by a judge.  The order declaring a mistrial for jury disagreement must be in writing and must expressly reserve the right to retry the defendant.  A new trial must be held within six months.

            Aarons said he and his team will have more time to develop its theory that Popeleski returned to the cabin in March 1996 and tried to burn it down.

            “There’s always more work to be done,” he said.  “We will be just as determined next time.”

            Aarons admitted he was disappointed that nine jurors voted for conviction.

            “We were hopeful that the jury would see that the lies of Popcorn, Popeleski and Woody Nieto had no basis in fact,” he said. “But you never underestimate the difficulty in an emotionally charged trial such as this of convincing the jury that they have the wrong man.

            Aarons has contended all along that the prosecution used grisly photos of the victims’ bodies to whip jurors into an emotional lynch-mob frenzy instead of presenting evidence to prove its case.

            Attorney Ray Twohig, who represents co-defendant Roy Buchner in a trial scheduled to start October 14, observed part of the Wilkins’ trial.  He said Aarons did very well in Socorro considering the odds there were against him.

            “The prosecution had the best possible situation in Socorro,” Twohig said.  “It is the district attorney’s hometown,  The judge is a former prosecutor who ruled consistently for the prosecution despite all the law to the contrary.  The deck was stacked and jury was still hung.  So that means a less biased situation, which I should have, should yield an acquittal.”

            Buchner’s trial is set for Truth or Consequences, but in motions hearings in Estancia today, Twohig will ask that the trial be delayed for a couple of months and that it be moved.

            Popeleski’s trial is scheduled for March 16, but it’s anyone’s guess as to when Wilkins’ new trial will take place.

            Aarons says it will be after the Buchner and Popeleski trials, a situation he considers beneficial.

            “The good news is that the state of New Mexico will likely adopt much of our position in the Popeleski trial, which is that he killed those people,” Aarons said.  “That may serve to bring more truth to light.”

            Twohig, however, believes the state is not that concerned about the truth and that the new Wilkins trial will be set between the Buchner’s and Popeleski’s.

            “The prosecution is fundamentally schizophrenic in this case.”  He said.  “They simply cannot choose which evidence to rely on.  They hope their lies in one venue will not hurt them in another.”

            Assistant District Attorney Bonet said prosecutors aren’t even thinking about when or where they will retry Wilkins – only that they will.

Editor's Note: The DA never did retry Wilkins. Eventually the prosecutors dismissed the death penalty case for lack of evidence.