Lindsay Partin Trial Prosecution Closing Argument

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: May it please the court, counselors, Ms. Parker, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, good morning. Good morning. It's been a long week and a half, almost two weeks. I appreciate sincerely the time and attention that you have given this very important case. And I told you about the dates of March 6th, 7th, and 8th in opening. And March 6th, March 7th, and March 8th of 2018 are important dates in this case. Because those were the last few days of three-year-old, 32-pound, three-foot-tall, Hannah Weshy's life. And on those last three days, you've heard testimony and you've been presented evidence regarding those last three days. We walk you through what happened in those last three days. And it's important to note, and Judge Stevens has already indicated this, that opening statements, closing arguments, those are not evidence in this case. Also, what is not evidence in this case are arguments, questions, comments made by counsel to various witnesses that stood on this witness stand. Unless that witness adopted the statement that the attorney was saying. So we've talked about this, you've heard evidence, you've heard testimony. What is the evidence in this case? What have you heard? And ladies and gentlemen, it's been a long week, and I'm going to draw your attention back to the beginning of this case. And you've heard testimony from EMT Evan Reedy. And he said he responded to 4050 Shank Road, Hanover Township, Butler County, Ohio, on March 8, 2018, in the early morning hours. He told you that when he arrived, he found, and you'll have that EMT report to look at. You can look through that. But when he arrived, he found three-year-old Hannah Weshey lying unconscious on the couch. He told you that he immediately noticed bruising on her face and on her chest. And I will draw your attention to State's Exhibit 41. [00:02:23] Speaker 2: Missy and I sincerely apologize. Please continue. [00:02:26] Speaker 1: Apologies, ladies and gentlemen. Technology sometimes fails us, and the best laid plans. Drawing your attention to State's Exhibit 41, Evan Reedy testified that upon seeing Hannah unconscious lying on that couch, he immediately noticed bruising to her face, her eyelids, and her chest. You'll have these photographs back in the jury room with you. State's Exhibit 50. Evan testified that when he lifted her shirt to put the weeds on her chest, that he noticed this bruising to her chest at that time. He said that her breathing was rapid and shallow. Her eyes were dilated and sluggish to respond. He sensed that she was in some trouble. And his partner picked up that three-year-old, 32-pound child, cradled her in his arms, protecting her head, and got her out of that situation to rush her to Fort Hamilton Hospital. And you heard testimony on this witness stand from Dr. Nguyen at Fort Hamilton Hospital. And he testified that he saw Hannah and that he treated her. He told you that he, too, observed this same bruising on Hannah. He told you how, at this point, her right pupil was no longer reactive. And he saw, during an exam, blood behind her eyes. He saw bruising not only to her chest. State's Exhibit 50 again. But to her chin, State's Exhibit 44. Dr. Nguyen noticed this bruising at that time. He ordered a CT scan to see what's going on in Hannah's head. What's happening here? And because they suspected a head injury, she was air-cared to Cincinnati Children's Hospital. And hospital personnel, both at Cincinnati Children's and at Fort Hamilton, knew that this was a possible head case, that there was possible injury to the head. And they treated that patient, three-year-old Hannah Weshi, extremely carefully as a result. Once at Cincinnati Children's Hospital, you heard testimony from Dr. Marguerite Coray, a radiologist at Children's Hospital. She sat here right on that witness stand. And she told you that she examined not only the CT scans that were taken from Fort Hamilton Hospital, but she also examined and looked at and interpreted the CT scan that they took at Children's Hospital after Hannah had underwent surgery at that point. And she determined that Hannah had a recent bleed to her head, to her brain, a subdural hemorrhage to the right side of her brain. And she told you that it was pushing the brain, that subdural hemorrhage was pushing the brain to the left side. There was a midline shift of that brain. And she told you that shifting of the brain is caused by injury to the veins inside that subdural space, injury to those veins, shearing to those veins. She told you that this was an acute bleed, acute, one that recently occurred, a recently occurring bleed. And she told you when there is this type of mass effect on this brain, subdural hemorrhage, midline shift, this was a recent injury. And what was the cause? Dr. Curry told you this was significant, significant trauma. She told you that she only expects to see this kind of injury in cases of abuse or car crashes. That's what she told you. And she told you that she would not see this type of injury in a garden variety. Her words, garden variety fall. Garden variety childhood fall. Or even, she testified, a series of normal, typical childhood falls. And, ladies and gentlemen, she showed you States Exhibit 18. States Exhibit 18. Dr. Curry went over this exhibit with you, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. And she showed three different CTs. The first being the initial scan taken of Hannah's head at Fort Hamilton Hospital. Between the time that she arrived, shortly after 740, 745, and before she left at 830 to be air cared to Cincinnati Children's Hospital. The follow-up CT, the middle image here, was done at Cincinnati Children's Hospital after she had had a craniectomy. And the brain started to herniate, and you can see it in this image, to herniate outside of that bone. At that craniectomy, they also evacuated that subdural bleed. They got rid of that bleed. They tried to drain that bleed to correct that midline shift, to try to save Hannah Weshu's life. And Dr. Curry told you this third image, that's a normal three-year-old brain. Not only is that a normal three-year-old brain, that's a normal three-year-old brain after a fall. It looks nothing like the other two images that we have here. Dr. Curry even told you that a fall from a second story wouldn't create the type of injury that we're seeing. And Hannah Weshu's brain. And what does it mean when there's no history of a motor vehicle accident? What does that mean? That means that somebody caused this injury to this child. Somebody caused it. And the one way she testified to cause this type of injury is by shaking. And once Hannah received this injury, Dr. Curry told you she would not be acting normally. She would not be acting normally. She told you that she would have been symptomatic within seconds of receiving this injury. She didn't say seconds. Your Honor, may we approach? Dr. Curry told you that she would not have been acting normally after receiving this injury. And within seconds, within seconds, she would have been symptomatic. That was her testimony. You also heard some pretty technical testimony by Dr. Young. He's the ophthalmologist at Cincinnati Children's Hospital. He told you in addition to observing the bruising, because he did observe bruising to Hannah's face, he identified, not in one eye, but in both eyes, extensive hemorrhages, extensive hemorrhages in all three layers of her retina. And ladies and gentlemen, you'll have these exhibits as well. He took multiple photographs of Hannah's eye, of that retina, of those hemorrhages in all three layers that he saw. I'm showing you just a few, but feel free to go through those exhibits when you're in the jury room. State's Exhibit 31. This is a exhibit of her right eye, and it shows the bleeds. It shows the hemorrhages. It shows the blood that is not supposed to be in a normal eye. State's Exhibit 34. The patient's left eye. You can also see the bleeding, the hemorrhages, the extensive hemorrhages that are contained in Hannah's left eye at the time these photographs were taken. He testified such findings are consistent with non-accidental trauma, specifically abusive head trauma. He told you that even a motor vehicle accident wouldn't produce the kinds of extensive injury, extensive hemorrhages that he saw in Hannah's eye on that day that he did this exam. And ladies and gentlemen, you heard from Dr. Kathy Makaroff, an expert in child abuse at Cincinnati Children's Hospital within the Mayerson Center. In addition to reviewing her pediatric records, her children's records, the radiology film, she actually said that she met with the radiologist on this case, and she went through that film with the radiologist. She also met with Hannah. She saw Hannah in person. She evaluated her. She made her observations. Not from photographs, ladies and gentlemen. She looked at this child. She detailed for you all the injuries that she saw to Hannah. States Exhibit 41 through 68. She told you that this is how she observed Hannah. She saw the bruising to her eyelid. She saw the bruising to her face. She saw the bruising to her chest. States Exhibit 42. The bruising to her chin. States Exhibit 43. States Exhibit 44. showing the bruising that was to both sides of this child's chin. The laceration that was to the right side of her chin. The bruising to the left. States Exhibit 45. States Exhibit 46. A close-up of the injury that Hannah had to her eye. She detailed that this was on the eyelid, under the eyelid, on the inside of the eye. States Exhibit 47. The laceration to the left side of her face. That laceration, ladies and gentlemen, you can still see that at autopsy. The injury to her ear. And Dr. Makaroff told you, this isn't an injury that, oh, it's just in one part of the ear. It was in three parts of that ear. The top, the middle, and the inside. And when she flipped that over, she showed you there was discoloration. Didn't know if this was a bruise. States Exhibit 48. States Exhibit 49. Hannah had bangs. Dark hair. When they pulled it back, this is the bruise on her forehead. States Exhibit 49 that you can view. States Exhibit 50. The extensive images. The extensive bruising seen on that chest. States Exhibit 51. States Exhibit 52. The bruising to the flank of this child. The side. States Exhibit 53. The same. She also noted injuries that maybe were less concerning. Injuries that maybe were from just being a normal toddler. A normal three-year-old. They get bumps and bruises. They get scrapes. But she did a thorough examination. She has no agenda here. She wants to show you everything that she saw. States Exhibit 54. States Exhibit 55. She pointed out that a bruise on the knee, that's pretty typical. Not a bruise to the inside of the knee. That is not a typical place that a toddler gets an injury. States Exhibit 56 the same. States Exhibit 57. A small cut to her foot. In States Exhibit 58 the other leg, the right leg in the bruising scene there. Again, not necessarily concerning injuries, but ones that should be made part of the record. States Exhibit 59. States Exhibit 60. The other side of the flank. The other side of this child. And she did say this was concerning. States Exhibit 61. The injury to her shoulder. Again, a concerning bruise. States Exhibit 62. Some redness to her arm. States Exhibit 63. She pointed out the bruise on this child's left arm. That was concerning. That's not from the IV. She said she had two IVs. This is not bruising from that IV. States Exhibit 64. Ignoring the red mark. She said that that was from medical intervention. The mark to her shoulder. States Exhibit 65. The two injuries noted to Hannah's buttocks. The bruise and then the laceration like bruise on top. You can also see some evidence of some bruising on the back in States Exhibit 65. States Exhibit 66 the same. States Exhibit 67. Again, the bruising. That laceration at the top of the butt cheek. And the injury to her back. States Exhibit 68 the same. Dr. Makaroff told you that she had, Hannah had bruises to protected areas of her body. Areas that you would not injure in a fall. She told you Hannah was a normal, developing, medically healthy child. With no exposure to any illness that would predispose her to injury. To abnormal bleeding. Not even hepatitis C. They checked that out, ladies and gentlemen. They're looking for other explanations other than child abuse. If Hannah has hepatitis C, does she have a clotting disorder? Are her platelet counts down? Are they elevated? What's going on here? Dr. Makaroff told you, hepatitis C is not in play here. They checked Hannah's levels. They checked those levels and they were within normal range. There's no organic cause here, causing this type of bruising to Hannah. She told you that the location and the pattern of these bruises is highly suspicious. And concerning for child abuse. And even before Dr. Makaroff saw Dr. Young's ophthalmology results. She didn't even see those yet on March 8th, 2018 when she examined this child. She diagnosed definite child abuse. Child physical abuse, including abusive head trauma. She told you that the trauma to Hannah's brain, it's not accidental. She sees simple falls all the time. She works with children all the time. She sees simple falls. She sees multiple simple falls. She's seen falls that are from a caregiver's arms. They don't cause that type of bruising that you saw in the state's exhibits. They don't cause the type of injury to Hannah's brain that you've heard testimony about. She said this type of injury was the result of shaking and or impact. We don't know. It's consistent with both. And she unequivocally testified that you can shake a three-year-old. Absolutely. Unequivocally told you that. And she told you with this degree of injury and Hannah's progression that Hannah would not have been acting normally. She would not have been walking. She would not have been talking. She would have not been taking off her coat, asking for don'ts. She would not have been acting normally. And she would have started showing symptoms soon after receiving, shortly after receiving this injury. Potentially, potentially even immediately. And ladies and gentlemen of the jury, going into this case, you know that she did not survive these injuries. We know that going into this case. And we know that that damage to her brain was just too much. And she succumbed to those injuries on March 18th of 2018 at Cincinnati Children's Hospital. She stayed there 10 days. But she never regained consciousness. You heard from Dr. Dorothy Dean. She's the forensic pathologist who was not consulted in this case. She actually did Hannah's autopsy. And she noted bruises that were still visible on Hannah's body 11 days later. Bruises that are still visible. She testified that she saw two bruises on the back of the head. Bruises that were only visible after shaving Hannah's hair. States Exhibit 76. Ladies and gentlemen, she testified that after removing Hannah's hair, after shaving her hair, that's when these injuries became evident. Nobody saw them before that. Because how could they? She has dark brown hair. Her hair is covering this. She's not telling us what happened. It's not until autopsy that we find these two. And it's only after Dr. Dean, and she tells you that these were deep bruises. These weren't superficial bruises on the layer of the skin, on the scalp. These are bruises that went deep. And when she made an incision and pulled back that scalp to see what was going on, she discovered additional bruising there as well. Dr. Dean looked at every aspect of Hannah's body to see exactly what is going on, what happened, what's something that doctors, treating physicians, couldn't see, just because of the nature of we can only go so far inside the body of a live person. She found, in addition to what Dr. Young found, tremendous retinal hemorrhages, when she removed that eyeball, she could examine it. And she found optic nerve sheet hemorrhages. She explained that nerve that connects that eyeball. There's extensive hemorrhaging in there as well. And she told you she found a hemorrhage in the spine and that she had hemorrhages in the deep tissue of her neck, in the deep tissue. She told you that Hannah suffered significant injury to her head and eyes, significant brain damage, brain swelling, subdural and subarachnoid hemorrhages, amongst others. She told you that Hannah died of a traumatic brain injury due to blunt impacts to the back and sides of the head. This was a homicide. And a lot of force, what she described as a shearing force, would have had to go through Hannah to cause these injuries to her head and to her neck. Dr. Dean likewise told you, and I hate to be repetitive, but she told you that a simple fall or a fall from a caregiver's arms would not create this type of injury. There's just not enough force there. There's just not enough force. And she told you, she was able to give you a better time. She told you that Hannah would have been symptomatic and not acting normally immediately after receiving this injury. Ladies and gentlemen, you heard a lot of medical testimony. But you also heard some testimony from some lay witnesses. And one of those witnesses was the defendant herself. But before you heard from the defendant, you also heard statements that the defendant made that was presented in the state's case in chief. You heard the first version of events that the defendant in this case gave first responders. You heard that 911 call, State's Exhibit 88. You can listen to it again. You can listen to that in the jury room. You heard the defendant tell 911, the EMTs, and first responder, deputy mayor. She told all of them that Hannah just collapsed. Just collapsed on a carpeted floor. She also mentioned, though, that Hannah had a fall the day before. She makes sure to mention that. And then, ladies and gentlemen, you heard the next version of events that she gave to detectives on March 8, 2018. And then another version of events and multiple versions of events in the March 9, 2018 interview. And, ladies and gentlemen, you watched those interviews. And they're lengthy. But you will have the opportunity to watch those again. You can watch the parts you want to watch. You don't have to maybe watch her just sitting there. State's Exhibit 93 and State's Exhibit 95. If you would like to re-watch those. Each time she was interviewed, she was read her Miranda rights. She acknowledged that she was read those, that that was her writing on that card. She received those warnings. She knew her rights. She knew her rights, and she continued to talk to police. You heard the defendant tell police on March 8 about Hannah's earlier falls in the week. You heard her tell Sergeant Whitlock that, or I'm sorry, you heard Sergeant Whitlock tell the defendant, ask the defendant, hey, how long was it before you called 911? And he says, an hour and 20 minutes. And the defendant stops. That looks bad. Wait a second. No, I didn't. I didn't wait an hour and 20 minutes. That's not right. She pushed back. She knew that wasn't right. She wasn't going to admit that she waited. She knew she called pretty immediately. She wasn't going to admit. She was going to tell Sergeant Whitlock, hey, that's not what happened. That's not what happened. And guess what, ladies and gentlemen? After this interview, she was allowed to go home. She went home. On March 9, 2018, defendant comes back for some more questioning. But this time, this time, it's not a general fact finding. This time, Detective Turner and Detective Hensley, they have photographs now of Hannah's injuries that they can ask the defendant about. Explain these. Do you have an explanation for these? Can we get some more information on how Hannah got hurt? And you saw the defendant go through these exhibits. The exhibits that we presented you in court, the defendant looked at those exhibits and went through one by one trying to identify where the injuries came from. And I'll submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, there were no tears. There was no looking upset when she was handed these photographs of that child with these injuries lying unconscious in that bed, in that hospital bed. No tears, no emotion. But more importantly, ladies and gentlemen, you heard the defendant's explanation for Hannah's injuries. States Exhibit 50. They handed this exhibit to Ms. Parton, said, please explain how these happened. And on March 8th, in her first interview with Detective Sprague and Detective Lampert and Detective Whitlock, she said, I thought those little bruises were from, like, falling in the gravel. On March 9th, the next day, at 10.17 a.m., we hear a slight twist on it. We're getting more details. She had on cowboy boots. And she was running on the gravel, and she tripped on the heel of her boot. She went down. And it looked like she got those pebble bruises from where she fell. An hour later, March 9th, she tells you, I was like, Hannah, you know you can't do this. And she mimics poking that child's chest. And she mimics poking that child's chest. And she mimics poking that child's chest. And she mimics poking that child's chest. Angrily speaking to that child while poking her chest. March 9th, two minutes later, she tells you, I remember grabbing her and squeezing her. She was also asked to explain the eye injuries. How did that happen? How did that happen? State's Exhibit 46. You heard her tell 9-1-1, well, she said she fell pretty bad yesterday. You heard her in her interview with Detective Turner on the second day. Well, she was standing up doing that surfing thing. I think she demonstrates. Standing up doing that surfing thing on the train. And she went down. And she smacked the right side of her face. Ladies and gentlemen, look at the bruises. It's not the right side of her face. It's not an explanation. And then, about 9 minutes later, she says, yeah, I think that bruising's from when she fell off that choo-choo train. You saw that train, ladies and gentlemen. You saw that train. You saw how high it was off the ground. She said, I noticed her eye then. Within that same time frame, 10-34. Well, she fell on her face when she fell off that choo-choo train. Oh, but yeah, it was the left side of the face. That's right. It was the left side. And then later, she says, you know, she slipped on that concrete step, March 8th, that morning. She slipped on that concrete step. And you know that metal part on that step? Yeah, she hit the metal part on her eye. That's not the train. That's how that happened. The chin injuries. How did that happen? State's Exhibit 44. March 8th, initially her interview with Detective Sprite and Detective Lambert. She tells them, I mean, she already had like a bruise on her chin from falling in the gravel. She already, yeah, she already had, she had that from falling in the gravel. Four minutes later, when she fell on the driveway, it busted up her chin. Now we need to explain that scrape on her chin. 20 minutes later, you know what? That, that bruise on that chin, that was there before. And then when she fell in the gravel, now it's worse. It got worse. But it was there before, but it got worse when she fell in the gravel. The next day, March 9th, 1018, yep, that's exactly where she fell on her chin. I mean, she didn't even, her hands didn't even, it was just bam. Her hands didn't even go out. Her hands went back and she somehow fell, chin first, chest first, right into the ground. 1109. I smacked her on the chin for doing the ketchup. One minute later, I said, Hannah, you can't do the ketchup. And I got mad. And I just slapped her on the side of the head and went like that. Detective Turner illustrated what she did. Closed fist. Went like that. A couple times. The facial injuries. State's exhibit 47. We don't really hear an explanation about that on the first day. Her hair's down. No one saw her ears. She tells Detective Turner at 1030 a.m., well, she went to take her jacket off and she fell. This would have been March 8th she's referring to. And there was like a pink cart laying there and I think, you know, she might have scraped her face on that going down. So now it's no longer she just collapsed on this carpeted floor now that she hit something on the way down. We gotta explain the bruise. We gotta explain the cut. So yeah, she hit that pink cart on the way down. March 9th. And she fell like that and she, well, there was a wheel. She's referring to the cart and I think she might have hit that. Okay. More details. More details. She had a wheel. March 9th, 1107. I slapped her upside the head. Three minutes later, I got mad and just slapped her on the side of the head. Ladies and gentlemen, Hannah lost consciousness on March 8th, 2018. She never regained it. What's the explanation there? State's Exhibit 41 shows how Hannah looked that day. You heard the 911 call on March 8th. All of a sudden, she just passed out. You heard her tell the EMT. He testified that Hannah, that she, the defendant, told the EMT that she fell the day before and hit her head hard. She told the sheriff's office through deputy mayor she fell forward and hit the carpeted floor. March 8th, 1142, her interview with Detective Sprague and Detective Lambert. She went to take off her jacket and fell forward. March 9th, the next day. Again, she went to take off her jacket and she just fell. Twelve minutes later, she fell on the door and hit the concrete step. Well, that's new. That's new information. New detailed information that she provided. 1054, a few minutes later. Well, when I opened the door, I dropped her and I slipped and fell and then she hit that concrete step and she hit that concrete step really hard. But, yeah, I was carrying her and I dropped her on that step and she hit. She hit that step. When did she lose consciousness? The detectives ask her. Well, we fell and I did shake her but I shook her and woke her up. I mean, she was unconscious and I was shaking her to wake her up. Finally, 1131, I shook her and I remembered picking her up and squeezing her. so we have a shake. We have a squeeze and then I picked her up and then, and then, yeah, we did fall. I mean, that was true. We fell but, you know, and she admitted. Yeah. She was in trouble. Ladies and gentlemen, you were present yesterday. You heard the defendant, Lindsay Parton, get up on the stand. She testified in open court and now she tells you, and what version are we on? I lost count. Three, four, five. We are a new version of events and in that testimony, the defendant has now landed on a year later, over a year later, she didn't do anything to Hannah. Nope. Wasn't me. I didn't do anything. She says now that I just told the detectives what they wanted to hear and why did I do that? Well, I wanted to protect everybody. Well, okay, let's break that apart, ladies and gentlemen. So, defendant said, I just said what the detectives wanted to hear. Yet, she didn't tell the detectives what they wanted to hear on March 8th. She sat down in that interview room. They wanted to hear what happened to Hannah. She didn't tell them anything and what happened as a result? She was allowed to go home. They didn't keep her until she confessed. She went home. and defendants said that she felt bullied. She felt bullied when talking to Detective Turner and Detective Hensley. She felt bullied. And she felt more comfortable with a woman. when she spoke to Sergeant Whitlock on March 8th, the sergeant that told her that this child died, the sergeant that told her, hey, you waited an hour and 20 minutes before you called 911. That's weird. She had no problem standing up to Sergeant Whitlock, who's not a woman, first of all. Tall, large, bald, booming voice. Sergeant Whitlock, no issue standing up to him and saying, no, what you're saying is not right. And I'm not going to admit to that. And on March 9th, 2018, defendants said, well, Detective Turner and Detective Hensley, they led me where they wanted me to go. They kept saying it was an accident, whatever. And she said, I just kept telling them what they wanted to hear, but the state would submit to you that she didn't just tell them what they wanted to hear. She provided detailed explanations for what happened. They never prompted her to say anything about dumping ketchup. They never prompted her to say anything about Hannah being mischievous. they never prompted her that she, you know, hit Hannah or that Hannah fell on a concrete stab or that defendant must have been holding her and dropped her. They never said that to her. And in fact, and you saw it on the video, when she says, I was holding her and we fell and I managed to catch my weight, but Hannah, I mean, she just hit hard. And I, you know, I didn't have a bruise on my hand. I have a bruise. Look. I have a bruise on my hand from where I caught myself. Ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you, detectives didn't lead her there. Detectives are asking what happened. Don't tell us it was an accident. We're talking to doctors. This is not an accident. They didn't actually say that. We're talking to doctors. This happened. This happened recently and we didn't even know what happened. You know, for someone who's just going along with what the detectives wanted to hear, this defendant, I submit to you, was awfully committed to that narrative, coming up with the narrative. She, Lindsay Parton, not the detectives, provided detail-rich explanations for Hannah's injuries. Ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you, this isn't a situation where the detectives said, did you hit her? And she's like, yeah, and just went along with it. That's not what we have here. We have a defendant who presents descriptions of why Hannah was in trouble, where she was, where Hannah was when she got in trouble, and then exactly what the defendant did as a result. She tells, specifically in her interview, that Hannah was in trouble for dumping ketchup in the toilet, and that she was sitting in the bathroom and that's when she slapped her upside the head for dumping the ketchup and that's where she hit her on the chin multiple times with a closed fist. And why did she say she did this? Because she was mad. She was mad. She just bought that ketchup. Hannah knows better. What are you doing, Hannah? She was mad. And that's why she did it. Defendant also tells you she wanted to protect everyone around her. Well, everyone's a lot of people, but she specifically mentioned two people, TJ and Jason. Okay, so TJ, her husband, or husband type, the man, and you've seen it, you've heard testimony about this, and you've seen, you'll have the text messages, you can kind of look through them. But Ms. Parton admitted on the stand, this is her husband, the man that's hardly around, that drinks too much, that fights with her constantly over text message, that's fighting with her over text message on March 6th, on March 7th, right up until the moment that she goes to bed on March 7th, they're fighting. And who realistically wasn't even a suspect in this. He was interviewed for a very short amount of time. She said, yeah, his interview was short. And he said, I wasn't there. I don't know, I wasn't there. That was the end of that. So she's also protecting Jason. Jason, the man that we have text messages showing, I hope he doesn't move in. I really don't want to watch his kids. Jason, the man that doesn't pay him much, $30, $35 a day, it's not a lot for child care. who's behind in paying her. She had all those notations. He owes me money. He's behind. I don't get paid a lot to begin with and he's behind on those payments. A man that drops off his kid really early in the morning and she has to now wake up an hour earlier than she used to to get KK. She's wake up an hour early, sometimes more than that. It's not uncommon for a 610, 615, 630 drop off. You saw those notes, ladies and gentlemen. Look through those notes that she took of the drop off in the last month of preceding this incident. And I submit to you a majority of them are before seven. A man that picks her up late in the day. A man that sends her, his daughter, to the house that now has to be fed. Breakfast, lunch, sometimes dinner, depending on how late it's getting. That she sometimes has to give a bath, too, because she's dirty. That she has to schlep up to dance on Mondays. That she has to sometimes wash her clothes because they're dirty. So she also admitted that prior to this incident on March 8th, they didn't even talk on the phone. She had a point to say that. Before this incident, we don't have any phone calls. So she's protecting that man. She also told you that she believes she was well within her rights to physically discipline Hannah. Yet, ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you, you've heard no testimony from Jason about this. That question wasn't asked by defense. What was the understanding? What was she allowed to do? We have no testimony from Jason about that. Object. [00:44:09] Speaker 2: Approach. Approach. Thank you. [00:44:24] Speaker 1: You've heard no testimony from Jason as to what Lindsay Parton, Hannah Weshey's babysitter, was allowed to do when it came to discipline. But what you did hear was testimony from the defendant about what she believed that she could do if she were to physically discipline Hannah. And ladies and gentlemen, she sat here right on the stand and she told you that she thought it was well within her rights to poke Hannah in the chest, to squeeze Hannah around the middle, to slap her with an open hand across the face, to hit her under the chin with a closed fist. And she even said she thought it was well within her rights to shake that child. And ladies and gentlemen, she also told you that I didn't think that admitting that I poked that child in the chest, that I squeezed that child around the middle, that I slapped that child across the face with an open hand, that I hit her with a closed fist under the chin, and that I shook her. I didn't think I would get in trouble for that. Ladies and gentlemen, you have heard a lot, a lot of testimony regarding time frame. And the state does not deny that there is a short time frame here. There just is. What we have here and what we know for certain are timestamps located in phone records, States Exhibit 125. No worries, you don't have to go through those boxes and boxes of paper. You'll have that disc and you can use that. You'll have those records and you can look at those timestamps and you saw those presented up on the screen as well. And what we know for certain is that at 6.52 a.m. on March 8th, 2018 that Jason texted this defendant and said, I'm getting ready to head over. And we have a response text from this defendant also at 6.52 a few seconds later. And then the defendant is calling Jason at 7 a.m. and 9-1-1 at 7-0-1. That's our time frame. 6.52 to 7 o'clock. That's what we know from the phone records. Defense is trying to artificially create a shorter time frame by having Jason sit up here and account for every second. How long did it take you to do this? How long did... Ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you that there's really no way to know. You don't know how long it takes you. He tried his best to estimate, but who knows? What we know is the times that we see in the timestamps and the phone records. That's what we know. The defendant tried to testify that Jason arrived at 6.59. She was very specific about that. 6.59. And then what did she tell you? Jason kneeled down. We chit-chatted a little bit. We talked about the weather. We talked, you know, oh, her face looks a little better. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I submit to you that's not a feasible explanation. That he got there at 6.59. they chit-chatted for a while some amount of time and then he left and she's calling him at 7. Ladies and gentlemen, he'd still be there. If that were the case, he'd still be there at 7 when she's calling. That doesn't make any sense. what we know from the phone records is clearly at 7 o'clock. That's when she phoned Jason. And the state submits to you that a short time frame here is absolutely in keeping with the state's evidence. Absolutely in keeping of how those events would have played out on March 8, 2018. You heard testimony at drop-off that morning that Hannah was asking for extra hugs and she wanted extra kisses from Dad. You heard that. The defendant told you that Hannah was acting completely normally when she walked in the house. Dad sat her down, she had her coat on, she had her blanket, and she walked into that house completely normal. At some point she asked for, can I have a donut, buddy, and couch? But the defendant stated in her interview that in her first interview she asked Hannah, hey, do you want to go back to bed? It's kind of early. Do you want to go back to bed? And Hannah says, no, I want to stay up. The defendant told you in her second interview that Hannah was whining. She was clinging after Dad, I want extra hugs, I want extra kisses, I don't want to go back to bed. She's whining. The state submits to you that it was early. They had a long day ahead of them. 12-hour day ahead of them, it's early. And Hannah's already starting, she's already whining. So the defendant tells you that she was frustrated. She was frustrated, she was in a rush, she wanted to get back. Her other kid's in the kitchen. I'm frustrated. She's already whining, she's already starting. And the defendant tells you that she grabbed Hannah by the shoulders and she shook her. She tells you that in her interview just to get her to stop whining because she says, after I shook her, yeah, she stopped whining. and that 115-pound woman, which I'll point out to you is more than three times the weight of Hannah, she shook that 32-pound child hard enough, and I submit to you as any adult could, she shook her heart enough that shortly after, Hannah lost consciousness. And the doctors from Cincinnati Children's Hospital have been extremely clear on this point, extremely clear that Hannah's injuries were consistent with shaking or shaking with impact, and she would have been, become symptomatic and unconscious within seconds. That's the timeline we have here, and the state's evidence is absolutely in keeping with that timeline. Ladies and gentlemen, you heard a deposition, you got to watch a deposition, of the defense expert in this case, who I'll point out was paid $7,000 for that testimony. And you heard that Detective Spitz said that he reviewed all the documents that were submitted to him, not all the documents in the case, but all the documents that were submitted to him. But yet you heard him admit, yeah, I didn't read the surgeon report, I didn't read that. I did not review that. That surgeon report from Hannah's only surgery at Cincinnati Children's Hospital, he didn't read it. And he seemed genuinely surprised when he heard just how much blood was evacuated from that subdural hemorrhage from that surgery. He didn't even know that there was an evacuation of that subdural bleed. He's testifying to, well, at autopsy, this is how much blood was there. At autopsy, she had already gone through a craniectomy and an evacuation of that blood. And when he was told that it was 250 mLs, his response, well, that is a lot of blood. He didn't even know. And he's offering an opinion. This makes the state question, and I submit to you, if he didn't review that, if he didn't know that, what else doesn't he know about the case? What else didn't he review? And reason and common sense tell you, ladies and gentlemen, it's unlikely he reviewed that, I think Mr. Pagan said it was 5,000 pages of medical records. I submit to you that reason and common sense tell you he did not review 5,000 pages of medical records with that little magnifying glass he was using. And what opinion did Dr. Spitz offer? What did he say? He said the injury to Hannah's brain was from swelling. It's brain swelling. He kept saying that over and over again, brain swelling. And he said specifically that the injury in the back of her head, the one that we noticed once we shaved the hair, that injury to the back of the head, that's not the cause of her death. Brain swelling was the cause of her death. Okay? I would submit to you that's kind of like saying, it's not the stab wound that killed him and he bled to death. Cool. Yes. But the swelling, the brain swelling is a reaction to an injury. The brain swells because there's been some sort of injury. But the defense never explains what injury happened here that caused the brain swelling. Well, he doesn't explain that. Ladies and gentlemen, brains just don't swell on their own. There needs to be some sort of injury. He doesn't discuss that. This man's a pathologist. not a pediatrician. He's not treating live children and seeing which children survive their injuries and which ones don't. The state would submit to you that physicians at Cincinnati Children's Hospital who see simple falls, the whole range, simple falls to the most traumatic injuries. They have a greater understanding of not only of the injuries Hannah had but also from their experience what that presentation of symptoms would have looked like and when those would have occurred. And those experts seem to reach the same conclusion that this child suffered abuse of head trauma, that her injuries were excessive and extensive, and she would not have been acting normally when she received these devastating injuries. And ladies and gentlemen, there are six charges before you. Six charges. Four counts of endangering children, one count of involuntary manslaughter, and one count of murder. And the state of Ohio is tasked with proving each and every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. That is our burden and we accept that burden. Included, ladies and gentlemen, in each count that is before you is what we call venue, where the offense occurred. And venue, you've heard ample testimony about that. We have to prove it occurred in Butler County, Ohio. And you've heard repeated testimony that on March 6th, 7th, and 8th that this defendant lived at 4050 Shank Road, Hanover Township, which is located in Butler County, Ohio. And this is where she would have not only babysat Hannah, but where she did in fact babysat Hannah on March 6th, 7th, and 8th. Venue is not really an issue in this case, but it is still one of the elements that we have to prove to you. You'll also have to show in these elements date. Date is an element of the offense. And you've heard testimony that March 6th and 7th and March 8th are the dates in question here. The first two counts apply to March 6th and 7th and I'll go over that with you ladies and gentlemen, so we'll judge. And the last remaining counts are March 8th. We also have to prove that the victim here is a child. A child is somebody under the age of 18 and I think we have sufficiently proven and given you enough evidence to that matter. Hannah was 3 years old. Her date of birth was January 11, 2015. So I want to walk through what you're going to see and Judge will do it again with you but I want you to understand when you are looking at these different counts the elements that the state of Ohio is charged with proving. And Judge will go over these elements and he'll walk you through these and instruct you on what certain terms and definitions are as well. Count one, endangering children. The state of Ohio has to prove to you that honor about March 6th through March 7th of 2018 so those first two days in the week Tuesday and Wednesday in Butler County, Ohio that this defendant Lindsay Parton recklessly tortured or cruelly abused a child. And ladies and gentlemen you will get definitions as to what those words mean. What does torture mean? What does cruelly abuse mean? What does abuse mean? We all have ideas of what they mean but they do have a legal definition. And count one refers to the events earlier in the week Tuesday and Wednesday where the defendant would have cruelly abused Hannah causing significant and severe bruising to her face to her ear to her neck and chin all because defendants defendants said that Hannah had dumped some ketchup in the toilet. Count two endangering children same date range on or about March 6th 2018 through March 7th 2017 again in Butler County, Ohio that the defendant Lindsay Parton recklessly administered corporal punishment or other physical disciplinary measure and the punishment or discipline was excessive under the circumstances and that corporal punishment created a substantial risk of serious physical harm to the child. Again, judge will instruct you regarding certain terms corporal punishment what it means to substantially create a risk of serious physical harm and what serious physical harm is. He will instruct you on all that. But I submit to you that count two refers to the events earlier in the week Wednesday and Tuesday where the defendant administered corporal punishment or other disciplinary measures on Hannah and caused significant and severe bruising to her face her ear her chest her neck her chin all because again defendant said Hannah dumped ketchup in the toilet and I will submit to you ladies and gentlemen that count one and count two are not although based on maybe the same acts or actions it involves a different element corporate punishment versus torture or cruelly abuse and you'll get those definitions but I submit to you that the way they are presented she can be found you can issue a verdict on both. Count three endangering children on or about March 8th we're now into March 8th Thursday in Butler County Ohio defendant Lindsay Parton was the person having care and control of or was it loco parentis of a child Hannah Weshey and recklessly created a substantial risk to the health and safety of that child by violating a duty of care or protection a lot of words ladies and gentlemen the state submits to you that as a babysitter this defendant had care and control of Hannah Weshey four days a week up to 12 hours a day she fed her she bathed her she did her laundry and she had a she had a duty to that child to care and protect and on March 8th 2018 she violated that duty to Hannah and as a result of that violation there was serious physical harm to Hannah and specifically the traumatic brain injury that we've talked about and all those accompanying hemorrhages that we talked about you'll notice you'll notice that there's a special verdict on this one special verdict and the judge will again explain this to you you can find and count three independent of that special verdict that that babysitter that defendant violated her duty of care and that duty to protect that child and if she did that these elements are met if that created a substantial risk of harm to that child and then ladies and gentlemen there is a special verdict you can additionally find if that child suffered serious physical harm as a result of that violation of that duty to Hannah count four involuntary manslaughter on or about March 8th 2018 in Butler County Ohio defendant Lindsay Parton recklessly caused the death of Hannah Weshey as approximate result of committing a felony offense to it felony child endangering in count three so let me break this down for you that the defendant recklessly caused the death of Hannah recklessly engaged in an act that caused the death of Hannah as approximate result of committing count three so if you find that she committed count three and you'll have this ladies and gentlemen in writing so don't worry about memorizing if you find that she committed count three with that special verdict that there was serious physical harm and then count four as a result of committing that violation that resulted in serious physical harm the child died we've met all the elements of count four and this ladies and gentlemen specifically refers we're in March 8th again we're now always looking at March 8th this refers to the events of March 8th wherein the defendant abused Hannah however the defendant abused Hannah however it is [01:03:24] Speaker ?: that she violated [01:03:24] Speaker 1: that duty to Hannah and as a result there was serious physical harm to that child count five endangering children on or about March 8th again Thursday in Butler County Ohio defendant Lindsay Parton recklessly abused a child this refers to the actions of the defendant on March 8th wherein the defendant abused Hannah however it happened the state is not required to prove how it happened that's not our burden however she abused her whether that be shaking whether that be shaking with impact impact striking the child what have you that she recklessly abused that child and ladies and gentlemen this is another special verdict finding so if you find without the special verdict you can find her guilty of recklessly abusing that child on March 8th if you go as far as the evidence has shown you that you can that the child suffered serious physical harm as a result of whatever Lindsay did to her on March 8th that caused serious physical harm you can have that special verdict finding as well and lastly ladies and gentlemen count 6 murder on or about March 8th 2018 in Butler County Ohio defendant Lindsay Parton recklessly caused the death of Hannah Weshey as approximate result of committing a felony offense of violence of the first or second degree to it child endangering count 5 so again break it down going back a slide count 5 if you find with the special verdict that on March 8th that the defendant committed this count 5 child endangering and you found serious physical harm and you finding count 6 that as a result of abusing that child as a result of causing serious physical harm to that child and then as a result Hannah died count 6 the elements are met and ladies and gentlemen in opening statement you heard defense attorney Ms. Cook Howard say that because only one child died in this case defendant cannot be convicted of both involuntary manslaughter and murder ladies and gentlemen that's absolutely incorrect she absolutely can the state submits to you that defendant albeit through the same actions or action on March 8th she committed separate offenses on the morning of March 8th the first offense is that she violated a duty to protect that child and as a result of that violation the child suffered serious physical harm and she died that's one she also committed another offense where she recklessly abused that child and as a result of recklessly abusing that child she caused serious physical harm to that child and that child died offense number two two different acts although maybe the same actions two different charges and she can be found guilty of both absolutely she can and ladies and gentlemen you heard testimony regarding mechanism in this case what happened what happened how did this happen and you'll notice that as we went through all those slides all six counts neither mechanism nor motive or elements of the offense like we talked about in jury selection you have to hold the state to its burden of proving its elements and nothing more ladies and gentlemen you've heard a lot of discussion too especially in opening and I suspect you'll hear it in close as well after I sit down about reasonable doubt the state is tasked with proving each and every element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt so what's reasonable doubt what is that what does that mean it's doubt that is reasonable in light of the evidence before you and the state submits to you that we've proven every element I'm going to put this down just a second so I can see you all we have proven every element of every offense in this case and we've proven that the defendant this defendant right here Lindsay Parton committed each and every one of those six offenses the defense attorney has attempted to insert doubt in this case that's what they've done in addition to the defendant they've tried to offer some additional explanations to pepper reasonable doubt into this case defendant what else have we heard about the gravel driveway this isn't very straight I apologize what else have we heard about that might have provided some doubt in this case it's toy choo-choo train what else Jason and it's up to you ladies and gentlemen this is your job to determine what's reasonable using your collective memory of the testimony and drawing common sense conclusions common sense conclusions from the evidence that's before you so looking first at the train we've heard a lot of testimony about the train and a fall from the train on Wednesday March 7th and you've heard plenty of testimony on this issue as well doctors Karee, Makaroff and Dean all say a simple childhood fall could not cause this devastating injury and defense wants to argue but defendant was so forthcoming about this fall from the train she was forthcoming that she googled you know what do you put on bruises after Hannah fell off this train how do you she told in her interview how do you make them feel better how do you make them look better ladies and gentlemen you saw that document she didn't google how to make a bruise look better she didn't google how to make a bruise feel better she googled how do you get rid of a bruise and then she deleted that search the only search she deleted during that week and the state would submit to you that this wasn't something even essential oils was going to fix and the defendant in both her interview and during her testimony on the stand she stated she googled bruising only after Hannah had fallen off this train right after and that happened around 4pm she admitted yeah it happened that's what the testimony has been it's around 4 ladies and gentlemen you saw that document you'll have that before you her phone shows this search history at 8am not 4pm not after she would have fallen off this train 8am she's googling how do you get rid of a bruise and you heard testimony from Paula Smith the defendant's own stepmother-in-law I guess you would call her she testified that defendant came back from the hospital Paula Smith came over the defendant's house I'm going to watch your kids so you can go to Fort Hamilton Hospital the defendant said I was gone about 30 minutes and she testified when Lindsay came back that she was panicky she was panicking and she said where's the toy train and Paula told you I moved it we put it away and she said you need to put that train right back where it was she was like why why why she said she the defendant said you need to put it back I'm in big trouble the state would submit to you that the train isn't reasonable in light of the ovens before you so you've heard a lot of testimony regarding a fall in the driveway the gravel driveway not pebbles rocks on Tuesday March 6 but you also heard Dr. Makaroff testify that the bruises to the chest the bruises to the under the chin the neck those are protected areas of the body and when someone falls that's not the area the area of the body that would be injured from an accidental fall and defendants now back as of yesterday we're now back to she fell in the gravel driveway and she hit her she bruised her chin and she bruised her chest in the gravel driveway defendant testified yesterday that the morning Hannah fell in the gravel driveway she's not only wearing a shirt but she's wearing a jacket so we're somehow made to believe that she has a simple fall to a protected area of her body and that these gravel rocks somehow puncture her jacket and her shirt and then puncture her skin and you know we've heard a lot of testimony that you know Hannah fell that week she fell that Hannah even told you heard on cross-examination you know Hannah even told dad you know yeah I fell in the driveway and here's the thing maybe she did kids fall all the time but it's not what caused this injury to her chest it's not what caused that injury to her neck and her chin bruising the protected areas of the body the state would submit to you that maybe her knees her hands they would be scraped up from that kind of fall but she wouldn't have bruises to her chest that's covered by clothing she would not have deep lasting bruises that were visible at autopsy 11 days later from a simple fall in the gravel driveway and the state would submit to you that the gravel driveway is not a reasonable explanation in light of the evidence before you Jason Jason testified Hannah was acting normally both the night before March 7 and the morning of March 8 he testified he dropped his daughter off at the babysitter's house that morning March 8, 2018 and shortly after leaving he got a phone call from the defendant saying that Hannah had collapsed you heard the cross-examination of Jason there is absolutely no evidence before you that Jason did anything to harm Hannah no car accidents no falls in the car when he put it into drive nothing we have no evidence of that we do have some testimony that Jason recently remembered that where he went on Wednesday all right he didn't get milk and he actually told the detectives that way back when shortly after this incident happened no I didn't go get milk he told you he dropped off a friend in Fairfield and then came back to his house at 400 4004 shank and he came back with his daughter but ladies and gentlemen you heard Paula Smith testify hey I came home from Dollar General at 830 845 his car was there he was there on March 7th and during defendant's testimony for the first time ever defendant claims I'm just telling detectives what Jason told me to say yet at no point in any of those interviews did she say hey you know what I'm just repeating what Jason told me he just said four hours of face to face with detectives she's not telling them that we don't hear that until yesterday and we're made to believe that she just took one for the team I'm going to put my liberty my life at risk I'm not going to see my kids because I'm just going to take one for the team because for Jason a man that owed her money made her watch his kids 12 hours a day and that she didn't communicate regularly really the state would submit to you that Jason or anyone else for that matter is not reasonable in light of the evidence before you you heard some testimony that the defense suggests that Jason was under an incredible amount of stress that week he got in a fight with another employee he had some truck accident rolling away but let's take a look at the stress that the defendant was under she's watching four kids from sun up till sundown she often had Hannah up to 12 hours a day she had to feed her sometimes bathe her sometimes wash her clothes take her to dance she had four kids I think all under the age of four up to 12 hours a day and ladies and gentlemen she was also dealing with some really personal issues as well and I want to make clear that the state does not make light of the fact that the defendant suffered a miscarriage we do not make light of that fact and we don't make light of the fact that she was potentially having some troubles with her husband we don't make light of those issues and we're not offering that information of the defendant to harass or embarrass her we're offering it for the limited purpose of understanding the defendant's state of mind at the time of these injuries these incidents on March 6th 7th and 8th defendant admitted in her second interview with police that she had a recent miscarriage and that was very traumatic for her she did not feel she said in her interview she did not feel normal at that moment that she was trying to work on herself and not get so frustrated and she admitted to feeling in over her head and ladies and gentlemen although that in no way excuses the behavior that we have here and I ask you to not insert sympathy into your considerations it does provide you with a potential motive for why the defendant would have snapped and hurt Hannah and the state asks you to consider these things and the impact it would have had on the defendant on her state of mind during the time period before you March 6th 7th and 8th and ladies and gentlemen you got to hear first first hand from Lindsay Parham herself you got to hear her testify and you heard the stories you heard the changing evolving inconsistent stories she told you'll have those recorded statements to listen to you can go back and listen to the inconsistencies the denials and the admissions and in those statements you heard her admitting to causing multiple injuries to Hannah on the days leading up to the day that she went unconscious you heard her admit to poking her chest squeezing her chest slapping her upside the head hitting her with a closed fist and then finally on March 8th shaking her and the state would submit to you ladies and gentlemen that none of these other explanations are reasonable in light of the evidence before you so you're left with one reasonable explanation for Hannah's injuries on March 6th 7th and 8th including that fatal injury to three year old 32 pound three foot tall Hannah Weshey and that explanation ladies and gentlemen is Lindsay Parton sitting right there and you heard denial after denial but that truth finally came out with what my hand open closed yes open with what my hand open [01:21:05] Speaker ?: open [01:21:05] Speaker 1: close get open here you know better I remember grabbing a squeeze down Hannah you've got to stop got it [01:21:24] Speaker 2: I smacked her on the chin for giving it it was the same thing I got bad and I just slapped her on the side of the head and he went like that closed yeah like that how many times don't say once well so she didn't want him to go to work [01:22:02] Speaker 1: and he's like I gotta go I gotta go so he rushed out and I was like Hannah you can't do that daddy's better go to work he shook her yeah I kind of I shook her and I remember picking her up and squeezing her and we didn't fall I need just enough to where Hannah you never had been to do that why would you do that your dad's late we can't do that you know better than that what are we going to do tomorrow morning ladies and gentlemen the defendant testified she was with Hannah on the morning of March 8, 2018 for no more than 30 seconds and in that last clip that you just viewed the defendant demonstrates I'll submit to you shaking Hannah for 8 seconds well within the 30 second time frame that the defendant provided us with defense counsel an opening statement told you that we have a dead child here so we need someone to blame and that's not true we don't know exactly what happened here there's only two people that can tell us what happened here Hannah and this defendant and Hannah's not here to tell us what happened to her we can't tell you what happened and the law does not require us to do so we only need to prove that Hannah was abused and or that the defendant violated her duty to that child do not hold the state to a higher burden hold us only to the burden of proving the elements and what we can tell you ladies and gentlemen of the jury is what the defendant admitted to and that the injuries on Hannah are consistent are consistent with what the defendant told you and I submit to you that had detectives known to ask about that bruise on the back of the head those bruises had they known they were there and they asked that defendant about it she would have had an explanation for that as well ladies and gentlemen of the jury I would respectfully ask you after looking at all the testimony and the evidence and drawing your reasonable conclusions therefrom that you find the defendant guilty of endangering children for torturing or cruelly abusing Hannah Weshy on March 6th 6th or 7th and I'd ask that you find her guilty of endangering children for excessively disciplining Hannah and creating a substantial risk of harm to her on March 6th or March 7th and guilty of endangering children for violating a duty to care for and protect that 3 year old child on March 8th and that resulted in serious physical harm to Hannah and I ask that you find the defendant guilty of involuntary manslaughter for causing Hannah's death after violating that duty to her and that violation resulted in serious physical harm to that child on March 8th and I ask you to find this defendant guilty of endangering children for abusing Hannah on March 8th in a way that caused serious physical harm to her and lastly ladies and gentlemen of the jury I ask that you find this defendant guilty of murder for abusing that child for causing physical, serious physical harm to that child and as a result Hannah Weshy 3 year old, 32 pound, 3 foot tall Hannah Weshy died as a result Thank you [01:25:53] Speaker ?: Thank you [01:25:53] Speaker 2: Thank you very much Ladies and gentlemen of the jury do you want to press on or does somebody need a break? Anybody need a break? Raise your hand We got a couple of them who would like a break? Oh Alright, it's approximately 10-0-11 try to be done break and re-congregate about 11 o'clock on the dot and we'll get through this the best we can It's been a little way to go but we're getting closer please leave your notepad please remember your admission Okay? So that will go off the record