Marcher trial ends

EPHRATA — Jurors in Robbie Joe Marcher’s trial continue deliberating after hearing closing arguments Friday.

Marcher, 40, Moses Lake, is accused of shooting Earl Romig, an off-duty Grant County Sheriff’s deputy, in a field near Soap Lake on Jan. 10, 2008. He is on trial for assault in the first degree, unlawful hunting of big game in the second degree and failing to summon assistance.

While the jury has the option of convicting Marcher of the two lesser charges of assault in the second degree or assault in the third degree, Chief Deputy Prosecutor Ed Owens said Marcher is guilty of assault in the first degree.

“This was no hunting accident,” he said. “He wasn’t hunting at that time. He went to go shoot Earl Romig. Did he know it was Earl Romig? The state does not contend that. There’s no evidence in there that shows that Deputy Romig and the defendant ever knew each other.”

Owens continued, saying what Marcher and Romig were both hunting in the same area, accusing Marcher of being angry at the deputy for ruining his attempt to shoot a deer.

“(Marcher) was ticked and how do we know that? Because we have testimony from Earl Romig, who says when he was walking up the orchard line road that he sees this guy and this guy throws his rifle up and points it at him and cocks his arm,” Owens said. “The state argues that is a threat right there from the defendant to Earl Romig to get out of here.”

Pointing out a video showing two Grant County Sheriff’s detectives and Marcher walking to the site the shot allegedly came from, Owens said the jury can see the defendant leading them there.

“You’ll see other areas that he might be looking around at stuff,” Owens said. “What he’s doing is looking around to get (reference) points.”

Owens pointed out the reenactment shows Marcher could clearly see what he was shooting at was a person.

“It was almost pitch black and they could still see him through that scope,” he said.

The prosecutor continued, pointing to Marcher’s testimony about knowing what he’s shooting at.

“When he shoots, he does what? He shoots to kill,” Owens said. “He said he hits what he aims (at,) knows what he aims at, knows what his background is. That was his own testimony.”

While Owens expected Marcher’s defense attorney to argue there was no motive, the prosecutor said there doesn’t need to be a motive for intent. He continued by pointing out there are a lot of motiveless crimes committed by people.

Owens pointed out the victim saw the shooter, describing him as wearing a camouflage jacket, with a hat and a beard, saying nobody told Romig the description.

There’s no evidence showing anyone else was in the orchard, the prosecutor said, pointing out even the defendant didn’t see any other hunters in the orchard. There were also boot prints matching Marcher’s boots at the spot where the shot came from.

After shooting Romig, Owens accused Marcher of leaving him there to die, saying he knew the .30-06 rifle would kill him, and the defendant testified he never shoots at something he doesn’t intend to kill.

After saying what happened to Romig was horrible, defense attorney Brett Billingsley pointed out inconsistencies in his statements to the police, saying he told police he turned left before he was shot.

“When he testified in court, he said he went backwards due to some geographical reason he went back where he came from,” Billingsley said. “He’s facing away from the tree line, saying that, ‘I didn’t go that way because I was scared. I was feeling uneasy. I got scoped before. I was scanning around. I was looking around for coyotes. I was looking for people. I was looking for anything.’ But he misses that?”

Billingsley pointed out the only way the shot makes sense is if Romig turned his back to where the footprint was found on the edge of the orchard, adding he was evacuated towards a possible alternative route to Romig’s car. Then mentioning deputies saw him point right, drawing on a map the defense attorney noted this would put the shot west of where police think it came from.

He also pointed out Romig told police he saw the shooter driving a Ford F-150 when he was shot. 

The scene of the crime was initially tainted, because preservation of life is more important than the preservation of evidence, Billingsley said, agreeing with the idea. After the police only preserved the scene in a limited way, adding they only preserved the spot where Romig was found.

“Absent an obstruction, the shot could come from 360 different degrees, this is a very limited crime scene,” he said. “They could have expanded this crime scene hundreds of yards in all directions, but all they concerned themselves with was this tree line.”

Billingsley pointed out Owens’ theory paints Marcher as a cold-blooded killer, saying intent and motive are the same thing.

“Everything we do intentionally in this life has a motive,” he said. “If I’m hungry that’s my motive to intentionally eat … The prosecution in this case spent almost two weeks establishing opportunity and is hanging their hat on the motive that Robbie Marcher doesn’t like coyote hunters.”

After pointing out Marcher hunts every year, Billingsley asked if losing one deer is going to cause the defendant to try to murder somebody.

“A cold-blooded killer in this case, if you want to believe the state’s theory, walks back, ho-hum, moseys back actually, takes a few minutes to drive out of the orchard. On the way out of the orchard, after just having attempted to kill somebody, there is witnesses. He doesn’t do anything about it, this cold-blooded killer.”

Billingsley pointed out Marcher stopped, took the chain off of the tire, put it in the back of the truck and drives off, adding they didn’t race away from the scene.

“This cold-blooded killer gets to his house 45 minutes, half hour away, gets out and feeds the ducks and the chickens, leaves the truck in plain sight, goes back in and talks to his wife,” Billingsley said.

The defense attorney also said police limited their search for a suspect to someone with a valid hunter’s permit for the special season in the area, adding the person they arrested didn’t have a valid permit.

Marcher is waiting for the jury to make its decision.