DAY 10: Judge declares mistrial in David Prevatte murder trial over jury misconduct

PENDER COUNTY, N.C. (WECT) –  The judge has declared a mistrial in the David Prevatte murder trial based on jury misconduct, ending proceedings in the case stemming from the 2017 strangling and sexual assault death of 5-year-old Paitin Fields.

Prevatte is charged in the death of his niece.

Juror removed, second juror questioned

Controversy marked Thursday’s court proceedings as the judge removed Juror No. 3, though declining to hold her in contempt, and began weighing the dismissal of at least one other juror. These new misconduct claims surfaced on the 10th day of the trial, which got off to a late start at 9:51 a.m.

Juror No. 2 reported that Juror No. 3 made several defensive comments about Prevatte to the panel, claiming he was marginalized, “blackballed by the whole town,” and not a member of the Ku Klux Klan. Juror No. 3 also alleged he “can’t be racist because his girlfriend is Black,” adding that she “knows things but can’t say it” regarding undisclosed details about what she called the “biggest case that hit Pender in a long time.”

Juror No. 3 denied making the comments or doing outside research. The judge questioned each remaining juror individually, and most said they heard at least one comment but could disregard it. The prosecution and defense agreed to her removal, and the judge ordered an alternate to be seated.

Second misconduct claims surface

After a meeting in chambers, the bailiff raised a second issue involving Juror No. 7, who said Juror No. 3 had stopped other jurors from talking during deliberations.

Juror No. 7 then said Juror No. 2 told jurors “the defendant had a rap sheet longer than the table.” Juror No. 5 confirmed hearing Juror No. 2 mention a “rap sheet.” Juror No. 9 said Juror No. 4 said “the authorities know him, he’s been around.” Juror No. 11 vaguely recalled hearing that authorities knew the defendant.

Jurors No. 1, No. 4, No. 6, No. 8, No. 10 and No. 12 initially denied hearing talk about law enforcement history, though Juror No. 4 was recalled after Juror No. 9 attributed the “authorities know him” comment to her. Juror No. 4 denied making it. The judge said he did not believe Juror No. 4 was telling the truth.

Prosecutors and the defense agreed Juror No. 2 should be removed at minimum. The defense warned continued removals could leave too few jurors to continue.

The judge called a mistrial a drastic remedy but said case law, citing the Galbreath case, leaves it to his discretion. He said the trial could have continued after Juror No. 3’s removal, but the additional claims made it impossible to remedy.

Following the mistrial, the case is set to return to court on November 13 for an administrative hearing.

This is a developing story.