Convicting Preppers? – Murry Murder Trial
by Shari Dovale
In May 2015, the bodies of Terry Canfield, his wife Lisa Canfield, and Lisa’s son John Constable were found inside a raging house fire. The three people had been shot and the house set ablaze to eliminate the evidence of the murders.
Lisa’s daughter, Amanda Murry, was working an unexpected overtime shift and was late coming home. When she arrived and saw the fire, she collapsed into a puddle of water.
She later told detectives that the only person that did not like her family was her estranged husband, Roy Murry.
Roy Murry is a veteran of the Iraq War, a gun enthusiast, and a survivalist. He stockpiles ammunition, medical supplies and toilet paper.
Now, he is on trial for shooting his wife’s mother, step-father and brother. He is also charged with attempting to kill his wife at the same time.
The prosecution is being lead by the elected District Attorney for Spokane County, Larry Haskell. It is no small case to bring out the top attorney in the county.
Murry is being defended by Public Defenders Tom Krzyminski and Jill Gannon-Nagle. These two attorneys are putting an extraordinary amount of effort into this case.
The case is not a simple and easy case, as there is very little evidence placing the defendant at the scene of the crime. The prosecution is relying mostly on emotion. They have dragged in witness after witness to tell the jury that this guy was really eccentric.
- He was a gun enthusiast. He wore a side arm 99% of the time. He owned multiple weapons. He stockpiled ammunition.
- He was a prepper. He stored medical supplies, food and toilet paper.
- He was a survivalist. He believed in being prepared if the government should collapse, or if some other disaster should happen. He trained and insisted that his loved ones learn self-defense.
- And he was a right-wing political conservative. He was once on a short-list for an appointment to fill a Senate seat. He was active for a time in local politics. And he did not trust the government.
- He is a veteran. He deployed to Iraq, via Kuwait, and was injured while he was there. He received a Purple Heart and a Bronze Star for Valor.
The witnesses have all had the same basic theme: Murry was socially awkward. He scared everyone by carrying a weapon all the time. He kept strange stuff in his car, like extra gasoline and road flares.
Murry suffers from PTSD, due to his time in Iraq. He keeps it under control through medication. The prosecution has painted him as a bit of a nut job, when the incidents referred to seemed to have been easily rectified through the adjustment of his medication.
It has yet to be shown whether or not this man can be tied to these crimes, as the prosecution has presented a case of pure fear and emotion.
The fact that he carried a weapon everywhere he went, and was very proficient in the use of these weapons is brought up with every witness. The stockpiling of medical supplies is mentioned, as well as his supply of food and gasoline.
The fact that he does this in preparation for possible government collapse is testified to as a symptom of his mental state. Distrust of the government seems to be a point to convict, not to debate.
His conservative roots are on trial. His ‘prepper’ lifestyle and survivalist leanings are thought to be abnormal. His training in the military are symptoms versus standards. These beliefs are to be feared and used against him as he fights for his very life and freedom.
I do not know if this man is guilty of these crimes. I may never know, as the prosecution has yet to present solid evidence connecting him to the scene.
He was married to the victim’s daughter. He did not get along with her family. These are not easy things for people to deal with, but they are not crimes.
He did not trust his government, a common sentiment in this country.
He prepared for natural and/or man-made disasters. Not unusual in the inland northwest, as the self-sufficient lifestyle is more the ‘norm’ than not.
He served his country honorably. Why has this become something for the liberal progressives to fear?
I understand that the family of the victims need closure and justice, as they deserve. However, if the prosecution does not present hard and solid evidence of this man committing these crimes, they may not see the justice they need.
The ‘lay’ or emotional witnesses have finished and the prosecution will begin several days of ‘expert’ testimony. They anticipate finishing their case late next week. The defense expects three days required for their response.
Let’s hope that there will be something more substantial for the jury to discuss. As yet, the fear presented may be strong in the liberal mind, but it should not be enough to take a man’s freedom from him.