By DEAN OLSEN
Illinois Times
dolsen@illinoistimes.com
Former Sangamon County sheriff’s deputy Sean Grayson’s lawyers say he deserves a new trial for the 2024 murder of Sonya Massey because the presiding judge erred when allowing the jury to hear Grayson’s disparaging remarks about Massey after the fatal shooting.
“As a result, the events following the shooting had no relevance to the issues in the case,” attorneys Daniel Fultz and Mark Wykoff wrote in their Nov. 26 motion for a new trial. “The only purpose served by the introduction of that evidence was to improperly inflame the passions of the jury – which was substantially prejudicial to the defendant.”
Sangamon County Circuit Judge Ryan Cadagin is expected to rule on that argument, and others in the motion, at the scheduled Jan. 29 sentencing of Grayson.
Second-degree murder conviction
The 31-year-old Riverton resident, currently incarcerated at the Sangamon County Jail, was convicted Oct. 29 of second-degree murder after a trial that was moved to Peoria County because of concerns that extensive pretrial publicity would make it too hard to select an unbiased jury in Sangamon County.
The jury of nine women and three men – all Peoria County residents – found that Grayson’s fatal shooting of Massey, 36, in her unincorporated Woodside Township home on July 6, 2024, met all of the criteria for a first-degree murder conviction.
But the jury opted for the less-serious second-degree murder conviction because of a mitigating factor. The jury found that Grayson believed he was acting in self-defense but still deserved to be convicted of murder because that belief was unreasonable.
Requests for a new trial and for a conviction to be thrown out, which also is part of Grayson’s motion, are almost never granted at the trial court level. However, the arguments presented in the motion, as well as whatever sentence Grayson receives, could be cited in any appeal Grayson’s lawyers will be allowed to file in the next few months.
Sangamon County State’s Attorney John Milhiser, who prosecuted the murder case with First Assistant State’s Attorney Mary Beth Rodgers, said the defense’s motion “is standard practice after a trial. We do not believe there is any merit to the defendant’s assertions in his motion and are preparing and will file our written response.”
A second-degree murder conviction carries a potential penalty of four to 20 years in prison, with the potential for any time served to be cut in half for good behavior. With credit for time served and good behavior, Grayson could end up serving, at most, fewer than 10 years in prison.
A second-degree murder conviction also would allow Cadagin to sentence Grayson to probation and no prison time.
A first-degree murder conviction in this case would have carried a mandatory 45 years to life in prison without the possibility of probation.
Motion focuses on post-shooting footage
The motion for a new trial said Cadagin unfairly allowed the jury to see police-worn camera video of the fatal confrontation inside Massey’s home that included Grayson’s statements and actions after the shooting even though Grayson’s lawyers asked before the trial that the jury not be shown the post-shooting footage.
“The video featured the defendant’s coarse language and graphic depictions of Ms. Massey’s injuries,” the motion said. “The defendant argued that the strong, negative emotional associations could improperly influence the jury’s impartiality.”
Experts who testified at the trial at Milhiser’s request said Grayson, who responded to Massey’s 911 call about her suspicion of a prowler in the neighborhood, failed to realize that she was dealing with mental illness and modify his behavior.
The experts said Grayson let his temper get the best of him and provoked a confrontation rather than taking steps to de-escalate the situation. Experts called by the defense contradicted conclusions reached by the prosecution’s experts.
With another deputy at his side, Grayson shot Massey in the face after a tense few seconds in which he yelled that she wasn’t complying with his orders to put down a pot of hot water from her stove.
A few frames of bodycam video – shown in freeze frames to the jury but undetectable to the regular viewer – showed her lifting the pot over her head and starting to throw the water in Grayson’s direction when Grayson fired three shots at Massey, with one of the bullets striking her.
‘This f—ing b—h is crazy’
When Grayson was outside Massey’s house, his own body-worn camera recorded him telling other police officers, “This f—ing b—h is crazy” and “it f—ing happened so god—n quick. … She set it up on purpose. … I didn’t have a f—ing choice. … We barely got missed.”
Elsewhere in Grayson’s motion for a new trial, his lawyers said Cadagin erred when he ordered Grayson detained before his trial. The Fourth District Appellate Court agreed with Grayson’s lawyers, but prosecutors appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court, which ordered Grayson detained until the high court made a final ruling.
The Supreme Court ultimately didn’t rule before the trial in Peoria County. The court then dismissed the appeal as moot.
The motion also faulted Cadagin for barring the use of certain phrases and opinions by the defense’s experts during the trial, and for rejecting a jury instruction proposed by the defense on the justification for police use of force.
In addition, the motion said Cadagin shouldn’t have prevented the defense from introducing evidence about Massey’s “propensity for violence” based on her behavior the day before the early morning shooting.
Capitol News can be reached at News@WJBC.com.
