PROVO — Attorneys have finished presenting evidence in the trial for Kent Cody Barlow, who is accused of murder in the deaths of two 3-year-old boys at Cedar Valley Stables in Eagle Mountain.
The parents of both Odin Ratliff and Hunter Jackson have been attending the trial, which began on Thursday last week. Odin’s parents and Hunter’s mother and sisters testified during the week of evidence.
The last piece of evidence prosecutors shared was a statement read by 4th District Judge Derek Pullan about a 2019 conviction after Barlow admitted to going 107 mph in a populated area and had methamphetamine in his backpack. At that point, he was told by a judge that his actions were dangerous and could have resulted in the death of himself or others.
Jurors were told he remained under supervision for that conviction on May 2, 2022 — the day he again drove over the speed limit and was under the influence of methamphetamine, ultimately causing the crash that killed the boys.
Pullan ruled to allow evidence of the previous conviction because whether or not Barlow created a grave risk “is the central issue in this case,” and the prior conviction is related to that. He said the risk of unfair prejudice from the conviction is not enough to disqualify it from being used in this case.
He rejected prosecutors’ requests to include evidence of four prior convictions for possession or use of methamphetamine and seven convictions for speeding.
Defense attorneys called their witnesses on Thursday morning to return on Friday for closing arguments. Barlow’s attorney, Justin Morrison, asked jurors in his opening statements to consider finding his client guilty of manslaughter or vehicular homicide instead of murder, admitting that both sides agree he caused the boys’ deaths.
Three experts called by Barlow’s attorneys concluded the boys were killed where their bodies were found and were in the horse corrals, where they could not be seen from the road. Following a short break after their testimonies, Barlow and his attorneys said he would not be testifying in his own defense.
Todd Grey, a forensic pathology consultant who worked as the chief medical examiner in Utah for 28 years, reviewed the report of the autopsy and came to a different conclusion than Brent Davis, who testified in the case about performing the autopsies.
Davis said the injuries were consistent with a vehicle hitting the boys in their heads and then their bodies being either thrown or dragged. Grey, however, said the images and reports he considered did not show injuries consistent with being hit by a vehicle or being dragged at a high speed against any surface. He said it would be “extremely unlikely” to get the injuries he saw and find the boys’ bodies oriented as they were from a vehicle striking and then dragging the children.
He said if they had been hit by a fast-moving car, he would have expected more trauma on their faces and necks. He said they would have likely seen blood or other tissues spread throughout the scene. He also said he has never seen shoes right next to someone’s body after being hit, and the boys’ clothing did not look like it would have if the bodies had been dragged.
“My opinion is that they were in the paddock or that structure where their bodies were found,” Grey said.
Jennifer Peterson, a crime scene analyst, testified that the mother’s cellphone that she had given to the boys was also located within 5 feet of them, which she said was important evidence that they were killed where their bodies were found. She said she believes they were killed by either the roof falling or debris coming through the corral.
Michael Anderson, an accident reconstruction expert, said he had never seen all of the evidence in a central location for an auto-pedestrian collision — especially shoes, of which he said at least one always comes off and is thrown. In this case, the boys’ shoes came off but remained near their feet. He said if a fast-moving car hit the boys, it would have transferred energy to their bodies, causing additional skeletal injuries and throwing them.
“To me, it appears that the collapse of the structure onto the heads of the two victims is what caused the fatal injuries,” he said.
McBride questioned Anderson about whether the dirt would have taken off any blood on the car, but Anderson said blood could actually pick up the dirt and become more visible. He also asked if Anderson’s opinion would change if he knew one of their moms had pulled the boys’ bodies toward her and held them. Anderson said that could explain why their bodies were positioned uniquely similarly.
Anderson also answered questions from McBride about reaction time and confirmed that at the speed Barlow was traveling — less than two seconds to travel 110 yards — he would not have had time to react even if he could see the boys.
In questioning each of the witnesses, McBride pointed out to the jury that they were being paid for testifying.
The Key Takeaways for this article were generated with the assistance of large language models and reviewed by our editorial team. The article, itself, is solely human-written.
