On two of the aggravated murder counts, the jury gave Garvin life without the possibility of parole. Those counts involved the deaths of Juanita Mollett and Christina Mollett.
In the aggravated murder conviction in the case of Edward Mollett, the jury gave Garvin life without parole for at least 25 years.
In addition, Judge Howard H. Harcha III, gave concurrent sentences pertaining to aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary, and a gun specification, totaling 7 years, to be added to the 25 years in the concurrent aggravated murder convictions, making Garvin ineligible for parole for 32 years just on the Edward Mollett charges.
“I think they (jury) were measured in their sentence. No one likes life without the possibility of parole, but it certainly is a better option than death,” defense attorney Charles “Chuck” Knight told the Portsmouth Daily Times after the jury was dismissed.
Knight then spoke about the court case.
“I still have considerable misgivings about the way a verdict was reached against Kara in that case. When you talk proof beyond a reasonable doubt it doesn’t result from a questionable identification, and no physical evidence. And that’s exactly what they had in this case,” Knight told the Times. “They had a murder weapon, that was the cause of death and no indication that Kara Garvin ever used it. They had a boy who said there was someone with black hair who committed these crimes, and yet Kara did not have black hair at the time of the crimes. That to me is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Knight said he feels there were considerable errors in the record, not just in sentencing, but in the way the discovery was handled — “the failure of the Scioto County Sheriff’s Department to fully investigate the crime. The rush to judgment. They had their defendant 20 minutes after the crime,” Knight said. “I find that incredible in today’s world of law enforcement; and certainly not one that is complimentary to the Sheriff’s Office of Scioto County. It’s a drug crime. I don’t think anybody thought it wasn’t a drug crime. And to indicate this was anything other than a power grab for the Oxycontin business in Scioto County, Ohio, is a misunderstanding of the facts in this case.”
Knight then mentioned other names that had come up during the course of the trial.
“There is no question that Paul Balmer was involved, yet he’s not charged. There’s no question (Ray) Rodriguez was involved. He is not even talked to. There’s little question that Amanda Moody was involved, and her DNA was neither examined, as to its presence on the murder weapon,” Knight said.
Garvin’s mother was surrounded by TV cameras in the hallway outside the court room, but took the time to talk to the Times about her immediate feelings after the sentencing.
“It’s hard not to feel bitter and angry with some of these people, and I’m trying not to,” Audrey Dotson said. “I don’t know how they reached the decision that they did, obviously, but I thank God that they at least gave her life and not death. And that we can appeal. And she still has the chance to have a good life with her daughter, and serving God, both in prison and out. And that’s what we’re going to cling to — that hope.”
consider this:
Kara's hair was blondish/brown at the time of the murders, but the little boy ID her from photos with blondish/brown hair--the way she looked at the time of the murders. Also, she was wearing a black skull and bones cap at the time of the murders according to Paul Balmer and she had this same cap on when she ate at Subway after the murders. On the video from her conversation at the Sheriff's Department, she said she dyed her hair the day before. But, the Sheriff's found the receipt for dye in her jacket pocket. The receipt was for hair dye from the Family Dollar store purchased after the murders and the store confirmed that she bought it there the time on the receipt. She refused to tell the Sheriff's Department where she ate. The Detective explained if she would tell him where she ate and if they found the video and it was at the time of the murderers;she'd be set free. They found the video, but it was after the murders.
The witnesses said a tan jeep, which looks just like a tan Rav. Witnesses testified that she had the 2XL clothes on and although, I guess she was skinny at the time of the murders, she still had very large breasts where a men's shirt would have fit her fine.
She said on the video from the Sheriff's Department that she had been with Paul since 4 p.m. when they left their home. She said Paul had nothing to do with it. She did NOT confess her guilt to the Detective, but she did to four inmates.
Kara called Paul from the Sheriff's Department according to the video and asked him to come in. He didn't, and I am assuming he panicked and dropped the guns outside the hotel and headed to Flordia. He probably assumed the cops could be hot on this trail and he didn't want to have the guns on him, just a guess but it seems reasonable.
The reason Paul Balmer is in jail now is for another attempted murder on a differnt Mollett family member prior to the murders of Ed and his family. Kara is charged in the case too. She was shot that night and the detective noticed the wound on her. She said that she stepped outside her home and felt something hit her arm. It was the first day of gun season, she said, and she assumed maybe that's what happened--all on the video.
It was proved without a shadow of a doubt that the murder weapon belonged to Kara, had her DNA on it and its bullets were retrieved from the victims' bodies. I have never heard that it was stolen. Why could this evidence not be brought forth? Obviously the gun was at the hotel where she and Paul were staying.
The Defense attorney only talked about this other woman and her Cuban boyfriend. There was absolutely no evidence offered to prove anything. There was no proof they were in Ohio that night. The cell phone pinged in Florida when Paul called them to say he was headed down.
The PDT did not have the staff or time to spend whole days at the trial. If they had, it would have been clearer that the verdict was correct. A jury of twelve people determined she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, enough said.
I am glad you asked. First Kara had Blonde hair at 6:30 when the murders occurred. You see the Sheriff's office had Missed this and of course was looking for a Black haired "Kara" 20 mins after arriving on the scene. The child Never saw Kara - his mother and other family members Told him her name was Kara and assisted with the identification. Did you see the line up picture? The S.O. did a wonderful job with Photo shop It wasn't her or completely her. They said it was a booking photo No it was NOT.
Glad you asked about the murder weapon see what the jury NEVER knew was that IT had been stolen and Reported to the S.O. in October. Did Balmer arrange to have all the things stolen? Maybe who knows You see I am not sure Paul Balmer even really hid that gun. It could have been hidden After he left and Before they brought him back. IT was "hidden" in plain site across from the motel room BY a mail box and garbage can. Clothes hidden weren't even clothes she had with her they were back at the house in a bag of other hunting clothes. We can't prove that yet. The "vest" they said she wore? It was a 2XL Kara weighted 100 lbs. and is 5'3" She was NOT even With Balmer at the time of the murder. He picked her up and took her to the motel. He wanted to go to Florida and she said NO I have a Dr.'s appt. tomorrow. Did he encourage her to dye her hair After someone told him they were looking for her and they thought she had black hair? The Prosecution threatening people to testify against her. The Prosecution changing witness statements to make it now seem she had a black hat on. Witnesses who first testified it was black haired woman they saw now said she had a black cap on and her hair was pulled up etc. What ever happened to the Tan Jeep he saw? A silver Rav 4 it aint!!!! Oh there is so much more but the jury did not know, but some people had their mind made up BEFORE they got in there. She should have NEVER been tried in Scioto County.
I agree about the doctors. Go after them, put their lives on the line and see if it doesn't stop some of the pill popping drug trade. I know our prisons are over crowded, but put those doctors in there and let them see just what it is all about. Take away the simple life for them.
But as for Kara and the guy, I hope they don't ever get the chance to forget that little boy's face and the face of the family. I hope they see them ever night when they close their eyes and think of them every morning when they wake! Because I am sure he will never forget it!!
My thoughts and prayers go out to the Mollett family! May God bless and keep you all safe!
First, I thought in the first article, Garvin and her boyfriend bought two boxes of black hair dye, went to a hotel in KY and dyed her hair. I can't remember if this is before or after the time of the murders, but they asked her why she dyed her hair black, if her hair was already black. They never said her hair wasn't black before she dyed it. If her hair wasn't black, what color was it? And when did she dye it back to black?
As to the murder weapon, it was hidden by Palmer allegedly, which is one of the reasons he is in jail now. It was a .38 which belonged to Garvin.
As I had read it, the little boy involved, the eye witness, was familiar with Garvin as she was frequently a visitor at the Mollet's residence, allegedly to buy drugs. However, even if the child managed to miss the face of the person, I think even a six year old can say "I have seen this person before, she had been there before."
Palmer addressed the jury, stating that Garvin had gone in for a few moments, but he doesn't remember hearing shots. Okay, I suppose that can be reasonable. But here is my question to that. If this other woman from Florida is the real culprit and they were totally wrong about Garvin, 1) when did she obtain Garvin's gun? 2)When did Palmer get it back, and hide it? 3) Was Garvin aware of the murders?
I realize that there were certain restrictions to what PDT can print, but it seems that the facts that were given lean toward her guilt. If I have misunderstood something that had previously been printed, can someone set me straight please? I would hate to go through life assuming this horrific crime was committed by Garvin if she really is innocent.
If the information I received is correct, then I do no see how the police forces at work here have failed. It is not common practice to keep seeking a criminal if they believe that criminal is in custody. I know this goes against the innocent until proven guilty theory,but that is how the justice system works. This may very well not be a situation where the police failed, but succeeded beyond our expectations. If it had been your family, how fast would you want the police to have apprehended the primary suspect?
I do not believe the Mollets should have been considered any less deserving of justice because they were criminals themselves. No one deserves to be killed like this. But Garvin does deserve a fair trial, and the public deserves the facts, as presented in the case both for and against her. If she is acquitted, this is the area she will come back to, and this is the area she will have to live with. The judgement she gets in a court of law, and the judgement she gets from the public at large can be completely opposite.