Lawrence County judge rules Jordan Brown killed his father's pregnant fianc?
A Lawrence County judge today convicted a boy of juvenile charges that he fatally shot his father's pregnant fianc?.
Judge John Hodge's ruling that Jordan Brown is delinquent • the juvenile court equivalent of a guilty verdict in adult court • means authorities can keep the boy detained until his 21 st birthday.
Brown, 14, has been held in an Erie detention center since shortly after the February 2009 shotgun killing of Kenzie Marie Houk, 26, and her unborn child. Police said Brown, then 11, shot Houk in the head as she lay in bed in the family's New Galilee home, then got on a bus and went to school.
Police initially charged Brown as an adult, but his lawyers successfully argued to move the case to juvenile court. Only relatives of Brown and Houk were allowed in the New Castle courtroom during three days of testimony this week.
State prosecutors called more than a dozen witnesses, said Senior Deputy Attorney General Anthony J. Krastek. Defense attorneys called three witnesses, including the boy's father, Chris Brown and a former boyfriend of Houk who police questioned the day of the killing.
Before Hodge announced his ruling, friends and family on both sides of the case gathered outside the county courthouse, most filing in solemnly and without comment.
Some of Houk's supporters formed a circle and prayed in the courtyard in front of the building.
Defense attorney John Elisco entered shortly after 1 p.m. "I'm a little bit nervous, but, you know, just waiting to see if the judge does the right thing."
Krastek entered about 1:30 p.m., but said nothing except that he was feeling "good."
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.