HOULTON, Maine — Events outside the courtroom Tuesday overshadowed testimony inside that focused on forensic evidence in the triple murder trial of Thayne Ormsby.
A man related to one of the three people Ormsby is accused of stabbing to death was arrested and charged with tampering with a juror after he allegedly urged a juror to “hang the bastard.” He made the statement as the juror was entering the Aroostook County Courthouse on Tuesday morning, Maine State Police said.
The male juror reported the incident to a court official and the trial was delayed for about 45 minutes.
Albert Gaudet, 52, of Standish was arrested by state police Lt. Christopher Coleman, according to Stephen McCausland, spokesman for the Maine Department of Public Safety. Coleman interviewed Gaudet on Tuesday morning as testimony in Ormsby’s trial began.
Coleman, who supervises detectives in 11 counties, was in Houlton on Monday and Tuesday to observe the trial.
Ormsby, 21, has pleaded not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity to three counts of murder and an arson charge in connection with the stabbing deaths of Jeffrey Ryan, 55, Ryan’s son Jesse, 10, and Ryan family friend Jason Dehahn, 30, all of Amity, on June 22, 2010. They were found dead about 27 hours after the killings at the Ryans’ home on U.S. Route 1, according to police.
Gaudet is a nephew of Robert Dehahn, 55, of Amity, who is the father of Jason Dehahn, according to Coleman.
After he was arrested and taken to the Aroostook County Jail, Gaudet was released on $750 cash bail, according to the Aroostook County district attorney’s office in Houlton. His bail conditions include not returning to Houlton until the Ormsby trial concludes. He is scheduled to make his initial appearance in Aroostook County Superior Court on July 18.
Tampering with a juror is a Class B crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
It is the first time in recent memory that someone has been charged with tampering with a juror at a Maine homicide trial, McCausland said.
A similar event occurred last year in Bangor during the trial of Garrett Cheney, 23, of South Berwick in the hit-and-run death of a University of Maine student. A bystander reportedly implored jurors not to let Cheney “get away with it” and become another “Casey Anthony” as they were leaving the courthouse during a lunch break on July 26, 2011.
Two weeks before Cheney’s trial began on July 19, a Florida jury on July 5 acquitted Casey Anthony of murder in the death of her 2-year-old daughter, whose disappearance she did not report to police for a month. The verdict in Anthony’s trial, which was broadcast live around the world, sparked outrage.
Bangor police investigated the incident and interviewed the person who spoke to jurors but no one was charged, according to Cheney’s attorney, William Bly of Biddeford.
The juror who reported the incident Tuesday in Houlton will remain on the jury, Superior Court Justice E. Allen Hunter ruled after he and attorneys for both sides questioned him. The man said he could remain impartial and had not told his fellow jurors about what had happened. Neither side objected to his remaining on the jury.
After the delay Tuesday morning, the state police detectives who collected evidence at the scene of the triple homicide in Amity nearly two years ago took the stand.
Detectives Elmer Farren and Jay Pelletier both testified about finding three half-empty beer bottles and a cigarette with a long ash on it in an ashtray in Jeffrey Ryan’s trailer. The DNA from one of the bottles and the cigarette butt were matched to Ormsby, a forensic analyst from the Maine State Crime Lab testified Tuesday afternoon.
Hunter granted a defense motion that kept a forensic chemist at the crime lab from testifying about a presumptive test she did for human blood on the knife the prosecution has said is the murder weapon. The judge said that because the test could show a false positive on blood from pine martens, otters, weasels and other animals trapped in Maine, it would be excluded.
Deputy Attorney General William Stokes, who is prosecuting the case, said that the material found under the handle of the knife, recovered from a boggy area off U.S. Route 1 in Orient, was too degraded to be tested for DNA.
Ormsby grew up in Ellsworth and went to Ellsworth High School until he dropped out his senior year. At the time of the killings, he was living with Robert Strout, 65, and Joy Strout, 63, in Orient, according to previously published reports.
Robert Strout pleaded guilty in October to hindering apprehension and arson in connection with Ormsby’s case. The older man admitted helping Ormsby set fire to Jeffrey Ryan’s pickup truck the day after the slayings to cover up evidence and taking Ormsby to New Hampshire to stay with Strout’s son. He is expected to be sentenced after testifying against Ormsby.
Shortly after Ormsby was arrested, Robert Strout, who is free on bail, reportedly said Ormsby told him the killings followed a confrontation over a $10,000 drug debt owed to a third party. The defendant killed Dehahn and the boy after he killed Jeffrey Ryan because they could identify him, Stokes told the jury Monday.
Defense attorney James M. Dunleavy of Presque Isle called the deaths in Amity “tragic, horrible and horrific.”
“The defense will put into context the events of June 22 and 23 [2010],” he told jurors in his brief opening statement Monday.
Ormsby was arrested on July 2, 2010, in Dover, N.H.
He has been held without bail at the Aroostook County Jail since he was returned to Maine on July 12, 2010.
Dressed in a lightweight gray suit, Ormsby has paid close attention to testimony during the first two days of his trial. He has taken notes and consults often with his legal team.
Testimony about the search for and the discovery of Jeffrey Ryan’s burned pickup truck in Weston is scheduled to be presented Wednesday. Stokes said Tuesday that he did not know when Robert Strout, considered to be the state’s star witness, would take the stand.
The trial is scheduled to conclude on April 20.
“Gaudet is a nephew of Robert Dehahn, 55, of Amity, who is the father of Jason Dehahn, according to Coleman.”
I believe that this is the world’s most convoluted way of saying that Albert Gaudet is Jason Dehahn’s cousin.
During January of 1971, I was a jurist on the murder trial of a Waterville nurse named Bessey who had snuffed out the lifes of several of his patients. We were sequestered for a week at the Augusta House and had to walk as a group back and forth to the Courthouse several times a day. I remember hearing many people shouting at us to “Hang the Bustard.” Many people seem to have a propensity to believe that everyone who is accused of a crime is guilty – which every intelligent person knows is not true. I think we have an excellent judicial system and charging Mr. Gaudet is the proper thing to do. He should also be told by a judge that the Salem witchcraft trials are a thing of the past.
Oh come on. The guy gets a little emotional during the trial of his cousins alleged killer and shouts”hang the bastard” while a juror is walking past and gets charged with a crime? Complete overreaction on the part of the cops. How by any stretch of the imagination can this be construed as “jury tampering”? He didn’t threaten anybody or attempt to bribe anybody. B.S. charge which will be dropped as soon as the trial is over.
You are 100% correct.
this is why people like Phillip (in the crime section for the oh I don’t know 3rd time this year) keep getting out of jail….give the guy a F*&^ing fine if need be and move on. this poor man is taking the place that SHOULD be for violent repeat offenders!!
>>>>
So the juror, who I must assume is an adult person, is so fragile and feeble minded that even hearing an off-hand comment is going to exert undue influence? Mr. Gaudet expected that shouting “hang the bastard” was going to cause the juror to change his mind ?
Or, is it more likely that Mr. Gaudet was simply expressing a very human emotion over his relatives murder. A warning to Mr. Gaudet might have been sufficient without arresting him and wasting everybody’s time.
>>>>
This charge is not what I would call “within the spirit of the law” as far as jury tampering.
What is wrong with this Lt Coleman and the male juror? Of course someone who has lost a loved one in such a horrific way is going to say, Hang the Bastard and a lot more. That is in no way juror tampering and never should have been mentioned or placed in the paper. The juror should not be on the jury if a statement like that can affect him. Get real, if it were you or I and we had a loved one killed; Anyone with love and a beating heart would say something to that effect.
The article states that Lt. Coleman supervises detectives in 11 counties; evidently, he has not enough to do if he arrests a person close to the victims for stating the obvious, Hang the bastard and then some!
Say it all you want but don’t say it to a juror at the Courthouse. It is a violation of law.
>>>>
This circus is going to cost big bucks and put many people through even more pain. A tragic ending to a horrific crime is turning into a feeding frenzy and Thayne Ormsby is getting way more attention than he deserves. It would not surprise me to have his attorney again request a change of venue.
My sincere sympathies to the family and friends of the deceased. Keep your loved ones alive through your testimony and as you live your lives. I am so sorry for your loss.
Unless he admits he said it, isn’t it he said/she said? I would task the judge to prove I said it. The burden of proof is not on the defendant.
Isn’t there a back door to the court house to avoid these sorts of events?
Ridiculous.
Where is his free speech? That is a serious charge for somebody speaking his mind.
Like crying fire in a theater?
The 3 times I’ve sat on a jury (not sequestered), we were instructed to not watch the news, read the papers, or talk about it with family and friends. We weren’t even allowed to discuss it among ourselves until we started actual deliberations.
It’s hard enough to impanel 14 people that haven’t already formed an opinion before the trial; they rightly don’t want anyone influencing them during it.
>>>>
Like the “free speech” it would be if a wealthy defendant “donated” millions of dollars to his jurors?
I for one think the death penalty should re-visit maine.. I Don’t want to pay for scum like this to live out the rest of his life in prison (day camp). sadly I know this will never happen.. Maine is too liberal, and think scum like this have rights. I got news for you the second he took a life he lost ALL rights.
All he “may-have-said” is ” hang the bastard”. No need for the death penalty. Lets not be too quick to kill someone just yet…..
Were will the state get 2 million dollars for a death penalty trail ?? Yes that’s what a death penalty trail cost do a google search an you will see it dose cost that much
I don’t say this to be critical but just to inform you and others who may read this. I have a criminal justice degree from the University of Maine and have also studied crime and punishment extensively. I too was very supportive of the dealth penalty until I learned these facts in a United Nations comparison study that was conducted twice (1980 and 1990). Now get this. In every country in the world that did away with the death penalty, the murder rate plummeted immediately after it was abolished. The United States is the only Western nation that still executes people and guess what? We have the highest murder rate per capita of any civilized country in the world. So if you still wish to continue having roughly 20,000 murders per year in our country, as we have, please continue to support the death penalty. PS: Do you have any idea how many innocent people have either been executed or sentenced to life imprisonment in our country? The recent discovery of DNA has been helpful and we have released more than 100 people from their life sentence. However, you cannot resurrect those who we wrongfully executed. PS again: During the years 1972-1976, the US Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty was in violation of our 8th Amendment that forbids cruel and unusual punishment. It was durting this period that the United States expereinced it lowest per capita murder rate in its history. As well, Maine and the few other state don’t have the death penalty also have the lowest murder rate with George and Texas (who have excuted the most people) having the highest murder rate per capita. Have I convinced you yet using the facts? I doubt it. You probably are like most people I know. Executing somebody makes them feel good. And better if we had the guillotine like they had in the French Revolution days, right? Take care my friend. I wrote this quickly and off the top of my head. I hope I’ve not made any errors.
It has nothing to do with not having a rational thought. As I stated, anyone with love and a beating heart would say something to that effect. Just because you may be just out of school with a criminal justice degree from the University of Maine and studied crime and punishment extensively does not make you as knowledgeable as you are trying to make yourself sound. Yes, I think the guillotine is the perfect punishment for a person that has killed someone so horrifically; yet, it is a bit to quick to take their head off so they actually should have a slower death, like the same way their victims die.
Our system is great because is does not seek revenge, it seeks justice. You don’t need a degree to understand this, heck anyone who has ever read a Batman comic knows it.
Like the venerable judges from across America said who I sat with on a public panel with answering questions, you are part of the problem and not the solution. Perhaps you should read Robert Hughes book The Fatal Shores and see how England “reduced” their horrific crime rate. You might also learn something about Tyburn Square. You sound like a Billy the Kid person who would also enjoy supervising a chain gang. Like I say, YOU ARE THE PROBLEM in the attempt to reduce America’s horrific crime problem.
The issue is not harsh treatment, brutality and the death penalty for a trivial offense like stealing candlesticks or trying to erase the (convict) stain. It is about brutal murderers and making sure, they get their due! Sometimes justice and revenge do go together and revenge is the element of justice that has gotten a bad name. You see revenge as bloodthirsty when the reality is, that it is only justice inflicted upon a perpetrator, an eye for an eye! Billy the Kid has some shining moments and supervising a chain gang would be great as long as we were in charge of punishing the murderers of the innocent by method of our choice. You can pat the butts of the murderess bastards all the way to prison and watch as they leave and kill all over again, but the death penalty without all the repeals will end that for them, real quick like! Therefore, what should have been said was, hang the bastard and hang him high.
This is one of the many things wrong with our justice system. We are allowed free speech but in certain instances, we are NOT allowed free speech. This man was obviously emotional over the case itself and the loss of his family members. I cannot for the life of me, believe someone shouting out something random as the jurors walk in to court is going to sway that jurors decision in any way whatsoever. Legaleeze and loopholes are what is destroying the American Justice system and allowing a whole lot of guilty people to run free.
Good for Stokes. He saw that the knife, and the DNA blood testing, were both gonna go nowhere. Stick to what you can prove and have the evidence to show the jury. Expecting a jury to follow a deductive line of reasoning is taking a huge risk that’s just not necessary. Between Ormsby’s statement’s to the 2 MSP detective’s when he was locked up in NH, with his Miranda Right’s given at least twice, and Strout’s testimony, cemented in with his own statement’s and plea agreement being admissable, this trial is a done deal.
Come on guys he was a relative to the ones killed he stated his opinion on what he thinks should happen! If I were him I probably would of said something to that doesnt mean he needs to get arrested and not return to that town! Its just crazy! Another thing is that i hate these people who plead out of reason of
insanity that just means that he can get out of it do good in a mental hospital and more than likely get out in few years. trying to take easy way out!
What about “free speech?” Isn’t this precisely why jurors are sequestered during a trial? Do jurors get (before the trial) to read the Bangor Daily News comments section? Have any of these jurors heard from family members on this subject.
That a man can be arrested OUTSIDE a courthouse (in the Public’s VENUE) is outrageous.
I have seen MANY MANY prople holding signs outside the courthouses where famous trials took place.
Albert Gaudet is a political activist voicing his beliefs. That is the pitch I would use were I his lawyer.