Hernandez guilty, gets four years

CORDELL – A clash of two alpha males, neither of whom was going to back down.
That was the way opposing lawyers portrayed Dr. Jerry Hernandez and his now-deceased father-in-law during closing arguments Thursday in Hernandez’s trial on a charge of first-degree manslaughter. In the end the jurors sided with the prosecution, finding the defendant guilty and recommending that he be sentenced to four years in prison.
The Washita County jury of nine women and three men took approximately four hours to reach their decision, ending deliberations in the three-day trial just before 9:30 p.m. Thursday.
District Judge Doug Haught, who presided, scheduled formal sentencing for Aug. 30 at 1:30 p.m.
Four years was the minimum sentence the jury could have given, once it decided Hernandez was guilty. First Assistant District Attorney Ricky McPhearson, who was the lead prosecutor, asked for six years. The possible range was four to life.
Hernandez, 56, admitted during the trial that he shot Roy Lee Weeaks, 78, of Colorado, once in the chest with a handgun on Dec. 7, 2016. The shooting took place in the Cordell residence that the defendant shared with his common-law wife of nine years, Stacey Weeaks, who was the victim’s daughter. She was called as a witness by the state during the trial.
Testimony from State Medical Examiner Eric Duval indicated the bullet pierced Roy Weeaks’ heart before lodging below his left elbow.
Indications were the victim had arrived three nights earlier to visit his daughter and her spouse.
It was initially reported that the shooting took place after the two men argued about politics. But defense attorney Mark Henricksen said in his closing argument that wasn’t the case.
“If you use your common sense, whatever was going on didn’t have much to do with the 2016 elections,” he said.
On that, both sides agreed. Henricksen said in his closing argument the evidence is fairly clear Hernandez told Weeaks to “leave my house now” before the shooting occurred. “He was trying to show who was the boss in a clash of masculine egos,” added the defense attorney.
“We keep hearing how Roy was 78,” he said at another point, “but he was acting like a spoiled child the night he died. I suggest Roy taunted Jerry with super-alpha masculinity.”
“One thing the defense counsel has right,” said Mc-
Phearson in his closing. “Jerry Hernandez was going to be the big dog in his house.” And he said it cost Roy Weeaks his life.
McPhearson honed in on a couple of other issues he no doubt figured the jury might consider, that Weeaks was drunk – Hernandez had testified that he brought a bottle of Jack Daniels into the house when he arrived – and that the defendant was acting in self-defense because of prior testimony about Weeaks being the first one to display a gun.
“It’s easy to blame the drunk,” said McPhearson. “Guess what – he wasn’t drunk.” He referred to testimony from Duval that the victim’s alcohol content was .02 (drunkenness in Oklahoma is .08).”
McPhearson had asked Duval if .02 was “miniscule.” “Yes,” the M.E. answered.
Duval also said no drugs were detected in the victim’s body, either.
He said the victim’s blood and urine were tested, as well as fluid from his eyeball. The latter is where the .02 was found, he indicated.
On the issue of self-defense, McPhearson contended the defendant surrendered that when he went to the back part of the house and came back with a metal baseball bat during a verbal dispute between him and his father-in-law. It was after that that Weeaks supposedly drew a gun and pointed it at Hernandez but did not fire it.
And it was after that that Hernandez went and got his own gun and followed Weeaks to his car and shot him as he was preparing to leave.
“Why did you shoot Mr. Weeaks?” asked the defendant’s attorney.
“Because I was in fear of my life,” Hernandez answered. “Because that man had just pointed a gun at me in my own kitchen.”
Asked if it was appropriate for him to go get the baseball bat when he did, he answered, “Absolutely not. If I had it to do again, most likely I would not have.”
McPhearson wanted to know why Hernandez had not mentioned getting the baseball bat when he first talked with an investigator from the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. “It changes the whole story, doesn’t it?” asked the assistant D.A.
“It’s a more complete story,” Hernandez answered.