Athy man reveals what it's like to serve on US murder jury
Karl Prendergast outside Nesbett Courthouse in Anchorage, Alaska
In May, I received a letter in the mail from the Alaska Court system informing me I was summoned to appear for jury duty at the Boney Courthouse in Anchorage in early June.
I was previously summoned as a juror in June of 2022 for a trial that was rescheduled, so all the prospective jurors were dismissed.
This time it felt a bit different; I showed up in early June for a survey to fill out. The message I was given was if you don’t hear from the court system over the weekend, I would have to show up on the following week.
I found myself in the jury selection process, in which I had to field a few questions from the prosecution and defense.
I remember being asked by one of the prosecuting attorneys about my survey response on the subject of guns.
I had commented that responsible ownership went hand in hand with all gun owners, that I didn’t have objections to the second amendment which enshrines the right to bear arms, which I explained historically as more closely related to the right to bear muskets.
She then asked me if I owned guns, I replied that my right to privacy was more important than revealing the answer.
The questions and replies from other prospective jurors were just as strange.
One perspective juror was asked what houses he would burgle in a neighborhood. He replied he would target homes where Democrats lived because they would not be gun owners. The response drew a hearty laugh from most present. He was not chosen.
Another lady was asked about her karaoke experiences, which she nervously replied she tried it once, and that was the last time. She was chosen.
The defense attorney then gave me a hypnotical scenario of her going on vacation with her husband and leaving their favorite dog in care with her mother-in-law. When she gets back from vacation, she discovers the dog is gone.
The mother-in-law claims she knows nothing about the dog’s disappearance. However, the attorney now finds the dog buried under the rhubarb patch a few days after returning, and suspects the mother-in-law had something to do with it.
The mother-in-law claims they know nothing about the scene. She then asked me what I would do?
I mentioned something about looking for DNA at the site. And when I was pressed about the mother-in-law, I thought it fair to reply that you are her mother-in-law, and that you would know her better than me.
I was beginning to sense that this might not be a run-of-the mill trial.
So, I was chosen to be juror number 10. The full jury requirement was twelve, plus four alternates.
The alternates would not be known until just before the deliberation process. All 16 jurors were sworn in, told by Judge Peter Ramgren that we were sworn to be silent about the case with family, friends, and co-workers.
Also, we were forbidden to talk with any of the other jurors about our opinions, or comments about the case until the trial went to the jury for the deliberation phase.
We were allowed to chat amongst ourselves about anything except the ongoing trial.
It felt like the elephant in the jury break room was getting bigger as each day passed (we had two or three breaks per day), I kept up the conversation being the de facto sports reporter on the 2026 World Cup which was just getting underway.
As the case unfolded there was a lot of evidence to see and listen to. The events took place in early August of 2023.
A group of young friends out for a 21st birthday celebration of the defendant Zarrius Hildebrand. His newlywed wife Saria, just a year older, was a central part of the celebrations.
In the early hours of the next day, there is a single shot heard by a man who lived more than 50 feet away and called in to 911 as a concerned person.
The Anchorage police department (APD) responded by driving by the apartment complex shortly thereafter and reported that they did not see anything suspicious at the time.
The single shot heard was linked to the death of Saria with a single shot to her head that killed her instantly.
The trial continued for many days in which we saw the evidence of a cleanup from the defendant, who claimed out of fear of being blamed was one of the reasons that he did not call in the incident.
He admitted he lied to everyone who was looking for Saria, after he had secretly dumped her body in an underground storm drain near the apartment complex.
I listened to the heartbreaking testimony of Saria’s mother, and her loving relationship with her daughter.
The short video of Saria’s body found at the bottom of the drain fifteen feet down was part of a story of ultimate abandonment by the defendant.
There was another item that the prosecuting attorney called the pseudo-suicide note that the defendant wrote and was examined work for word for all present at the trial.
The defendant, who took the stand at the end of the trial, claimed that he did not know who shot his wife.
There was a strong emphasis from the defense that the volume of alcohol that was consumed by the defendant caused him to throw up at the end of the night, that led to a blackout situation when they got home.
The evidence showed that he was able to walk from the Uber to the apartment complex entrance, with his wife holding him up.
He admitted to almost everything else, including pouring gasoline on her deceased body.
The defendant also claimed that he was not woken up by the sound of the gunfire.
I listened and watched the procession of evidence for nine days after which both sides rested.
The 14 jurors were marched into the courtroom, on Wednesday 24 June. Judge Ramgren read out most of the juror instructions regarding charges, and counts. First degree murder, second degree murder, and two counts of tampering with physical evidence.
The last order of business was to dismiss the two alternate jurors.
We were informed that the alternates would noy be announced until just before the case went to the jury for deliberation.
I listened to the first number, I don’t remember what number it was, but the second number that was called was number 10. I was dismissed.
I had a strong sense that I would be one of the two chosen by a lottery to be an alternate.
I over prepared for the final day with a flash of tea, and a special cup, explaining to the rest of the team before we were called in that I was somehow invoking Murphy's Law, along the lines of the more prepared you are for an event the more likely you won't happen. Almost prophetic in hindsight.
The jury deliberated for over 10 hours during the next two and a half days. All decisions had to be unanimous.
The jury found the defendant guilty of all charges except murder in the first degree.
After the jury’s decision was public, I was free to discuss it with family and friends.
Personally, I was glad that the deliberations did not result in a hung jury, which I believe would have resulted in a future retrial.
The part I found hard to believe was the amnesia that the defendant claimed he had the next morning when he woke up beside his deceased wife. How the defendant went into cover up mode immediately.
If he was innocent, why did he not call 9-1-1. The defence team had a long emotional litany of excuses because the defendant was scared. Too many unanswered questions.
Even though I was not present for the final deliberation, I agreed with the final verdict of a conviction of murder. Every state can differ slightly on what constitutes murder in the first degree.
The plaintiff team presented a clearly defined process, which included audio evidence of the defendant on a recorded phone call saying that he would work his "magic on the jury" when the trial happens.
When he was challenged for an explanation of what the statement meant, after a lengthy pause he flatly said that it meant that he would testify, what was missing was the bragging attitude that was there in his tone in the phone call It was all over for now.
The defendant will find out what kind of sentence will be imposed on 23 October. The range of prison time could be anywhere from a 15 to 99-year sentence.
I received a personal letter of thanks signed by Judge Ramgen. Also, another letter offering free counseling for up to ten hours for free if needed. It was an experience that I will remember for a long time.
