MOUNT VERNON – Knox County Prosecutor Chip McConville and Public Defender John Pyle gave closing arguments Friday morning in the Kevin Remillard murder trial at Knox County Common Pleas Court.
McConville started by asking the jury to return a verdict of guilty to murder charges, frequently referencing an eight-page letter found on a nightstand in Kevin’s room at the Gambier address where the alleged crime occurred in June 2017. The letter, signed “Kevin,” referenced killing “Nick” multiple times.
Remillard is charged with murdering his cousin, Nick, via a fatal gunshot wound to the head.
The prosecution had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kevin purposefully killed his cousin in order to have the jury convict him of murder.
“No matter which set of facts you heard or believe, there is no doubt Nick’s death was caused by Kevin Remillard,” McConville told the jury.
McConville made clear to the jury that the state didn’t need to prove that Kevin premeditatively killed his cousin, it just needed to prove that at the time the shot was fired, Kevin’s intent was to kill him.
McConville pointed to testimony that proved Nick had been shot in the head at close-range, which he claimed showed intent. He said that Kevin’s testimony was “filled with all kinds of gaps in memory,” although there was no doubt about the identity of the person who wrote the eight-page letter.
In examining the letter, McConville told the jury to pay attention to the active verb choice used by the author, which he said was proven to be Kevin.
The letter began with the author saying they had woken up that day with the intent of killing people. The author used active voice in admitting to firing the first round into the wall, as opposed to saying “the gun went off,” McConville noted.
He went on to highlight several other references to actively killing Nick in the letter, choosing to use active voice instead of passive voice.
“Ladies and gentlemen, this note is a confession to Nick Remillard’s murder,” McConville told the jury.
McConville proceeded to tell the jury that the note was more accurate than Kevin’s testimony because it was proven to be written shortly after Nick had died. Kevin’s testimony was over a year after the fact.
He reminded the jury that Kevin never called 911 after he found Nick had been shot and that his testimony did not make sense. He said that the only person who could have put Nick’s body in the pool would have been Kevin, as the two were the only ones who lived in the house.
And to prove intent, McConville said that a “reasonable person” would not have done that to a dead body. He pointed to the sump pump attached to Nick’s body, weighing him down in the murky, brown pool water, and thus concealing it in the backyard.
McConville said that if Kevin had accidentally shot his cousin, he would not have run off to hide afterwards. He said he would also have likely turned in the malfunctioning gun.
“Kevin’s account from the witness stand yesterday, folks, was simply not credible,” McConville concluded.
In Pyle’s closing argument, he detailed two different sides of what happened on June 10, 2017: the letter, which tells one story, and Kevin’s court testimony, which tells another.
He said that while certain factors in the case were undisputed, such as the fact that Kevin took the gun with him when he ran away and that he appeared on Village Market surveillance footage that Saturday afternoon, so was the fact that the gunshots fired in two separate directions.
He pointed to the holes in the prosecution’s case, saying there was little evidence that could prove Kevin’s intent that night.
“That hole, in reality, is small,” said Pyle, referring to the hole in the wall of the 405 Gaskin Avenue living room. “But it’s as big as the Grand Canyon in the government’s case.”
Pyle told the jury that the government’s case was “a mile wide and an inch deep.” He said that physical evidence does not prove intent.
He suggested that Kevin might have recklessly or negligently handled the weapon while being intoxicated. He also said that tampering with evidence does not prove the intent to kill, telling the jury once more that Kevin testified to taking the gun to go shoot himself.
McConville responded by saying that Kevin’s behavior before and after the shooting, along with the forensic and scientific evidence of the alleged crime, are enough to prove his intent. He concluded with one final message for the jury, reading aloud from the eight-page letter.
“Now I am a murderer of a child,” the note read. “Nick had his whole life to live and I stole that from him.”
After closing arguments were made, the jury received instructions from Judge Richard Wetzel and began deliberations at approximately 1 p.m.
The jury was presented with three options to consider in convicting Kevin in the death of Nick: murder, reckless homicide and negligent homicide. The firearm specification applies to all charges except the negligent homicide charge, as it is a misdemeanor.
The jury will also be asked to decide whether or not to convict Kevin of tampering with evidence.
According to the Ohio Revised Code, to convict the defendant of murder, the prosecution would have had to prove Kevin killed Nick with purposeful intent. To convict the defendant of reckless homicide, a lesser charge, the prosecution would have had to prove Kevin recklessly caused the death of Nick. To convict the defendant of negligent homicide, the prosecution would have had to prove Kevin negligently caused the death of Nick.
To convict the defendant of tampering with evidence, the prosecution would have had to prove Kevin altered, destroyed, concealed, or removed any record, document, or thing, with purpose to impair its value or availability as evidence in a proceeding or investigation which he knew was in progress or was likely to be instituted.
