BY MELINDA J. OVERSTREET
FOR GLASGOW NEWS 1
The seven men and five women tasked with determining whether Inell Crayton’s guilt on the fourth day of his trial chose to convict him of a lesser charge of second-degree manslaughter rather than murder in relation to the Dec. 28, 2018, death of Ke’Shawn Sarver of Cave City.
After Judge John T. Alexander went over their instructions with them and the defense and prosecuting attorneys had their turns with closing arguments, the jury deliberated roughly 90 minutes before returning the verdict in Barren Circuit Court on Friday, the fourth day of the trial. The panel also found him guilty of first-degree burglary and tampering with physical evidence, as charged.
The jury’s recommended sentences for the three counts were the maximum of 10 years, 15 of the maximum 20 years and the minimum of one year, respectively. The jurors also recommended, however, that the sentences be served concurrently, so the total would be 15 rather than 26 years. Crayton has to serve at least 85 percent – or 12 years, 9 months – of the 15-year burglary sentence before he is eligible for to be considered for parole, but he will also get credit the time he has already served. He has been lodged at the Barren County Detention Center since Jan. 1, 2019, which still leaves a minimum of more than eight additional years for him to serve before parole is possible.
Had he been convicted on the murder charge, Crayton the sentence range was 20 years to life, essentially.
Ultimately, the judge is the one who will impose a sentence, but not until after a presentence investigation is completed. The final sentencing is scheduled for 10 a.m. July 10.
Conclusion of guilt phase of trial
The panel got the case in Barren Circuit Court at 10 a.m. Friday after hearing closing arguments from the defense and prosecution sides.
As the proceedings began at 8:30 a.m., each juror was handed a set of their instructions as hammered out by the attorneys for each side and Circuit Judge John T. Alexander in the judge’s chambers the prior day, and the judge read through the instructions, which include several definitions, aloud, pointing out that it wasn’t that anyone thought the jurors couldn’t read; it was simply procedure.
Included in the instructions were that they must determine guilt based on their satisfaction that “from the evidence alone and beyond a reasonable doubt” and that all verdicts must be unanimous.
The defense has contended that Crayton was defending himself Dec. 28, 2018, when he fired the shots that killed 22-year-old Ke’Shawn Sarver inside Sarver’s Cave City apartment, to which Crayton kicked in the door because he wanted to retrieve the $1,600 Sarver had taken that was supposed to have been in exchange for a pound of marijuana. Sarver and Andrew Connors had instead, as planned in advance, taken off without providing any product for the money. When Crayton and his friend Devonja Sweat finally found Sarver’s darkened apartment, no one answered the door the first time they knocked or again later, but then after Crayton had sat down on the porch to wait for Sarver, the dog that had been coming to the window barking – a pit bull named Capone – apparently moved the blinds just enough that Crayton could see what appeared to be a night light, the dog looking upward and then a human figure, according to his testimony Thursday.
Crayton said that quickly after he knocked in the door, Sarver began swinging something at him that he thought was perhaps a machete, so as he was dodging strikes from that, he reached into his pocket holster and brought out a pistol and fired. He said he fired again after Sarver continued toward him. Sweat had also entered the apartment and the dog had jumped on him, knocking him down and causing him to drop the pistol he had and the cartridge fell out of it, Sweat testified Wednesday. Crayton testified that after the dog jumped on Sweat as he, Crayton, was about to leave, he fired at the dog.
The defense had also brought in a forensic scientist who, upon analysis of photographs, reports and such he was provided, testified that the Kentucky State Police’s investigation was lacking, because several things were not done that are considered best practices when documenting and gathering evidence, e.g. few to no measurements, no diagrams, no use of trajectory rods to show the path of the bullets, no DNA testing, etc.
“The commonwealth didn’t do anything in this case, almost literally,” defense attorney Lee Davis said Friday.
Based on the testimony of his expert witness and where the bullets came to rest, he posited an almost entirely different scenario from the prosecution as to what happened once Crayton entered Sarver’s apartment.
“When he entered that apartment, he didn’t intend to hurt anyone. He wanted to get his money back. Period,” Davis said.
Addressing discrepancies between what Crayton told police when they interviewed him and his testimony and that of others, Davis said that during the videorecorded interview that was played for the jury, “[Crayton] felt so bad, so remorseful, that they actually convinced him to say yes to this stuff.” That “stuff” included the accusation that Crayton stood over Sarver after he was already down and shot him twice more.
Commonwealth’s Attorney John Gardner, on the other hand, went with that version and said Sarver took the law into his own hands when he entered that apartment. He told the jury he didn’t believe that Crayton did not have his gun already drawn when he was already angry enough to kick down the door, knowing Sarver was significantly larger than him and knowing there was an angry, barking dog inside.
Crayton and Sweat both testified the gun was not drawn when he first entered the apartment. Crayton was not entitled to claim self-defense, Gardner said.
Gardner said both Crayton, who intended to sell at least part of the marijuana, and Sarver, who took the money and the provided nothing in exchange, were out to make a “quick buck” that night, but Sarver wasn’t the one who initiated any of that. He said there was only one actual victim in the case, and that was Sarver. He said Sarver had his whole life ahead of him but, because of Crayton’s actions, was essentially reduced to a picture of a body on a screen.
Gardner contended that Crayton’s behaviors afterward – not calling police, not turning himself in and disposing of the shoes he wore that night – also indicated guilt.
The prosecutor also defended KSP’s work on the case, stating that they processed the scene and found the person responsible.
The jury’s instructions spell out the elements that have to be met for it to be a valid claim. They have to do with, among other things, what the defendant believed and/or intended at the time of the alleged offense.
For the jury to have found Crayton was guilty of murder, they would have had to “believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt” that he killed Sarver by shooting him with a Kahr 9mm handgun AND, in so doing, he caused the death intentionally AND that, in so doing, he was not privileged to act in self-protection.
For the second-degree manslaughter charge on which he was convicted, the jury had to “believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt” that
— he killed Sarver by shooting him with a Kahr 9mm handgun AND,
— in so doing, he was acting wantonly, as defined in the instructions AND that,
— in so doing he was EITHER not “privileged to act in self-protection,” i.e. not eligible to claim it as a defense, OR,
— though otherwise privileged to act in self-protection, Crayton was mistaken in his belief that it was necessary to use physical force against Sarver in protection of himself, or in his belief in the degree of force necessary to protect himself; and that when he killed Sarver, “he was aware of and consciously disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk that was was mistaken in that belief; and that his disregard and risk constituted a gross deviation from the standard of care that a reasonable person would have observed in the same situation.”
Sentencing phase
For the sentencing phase of the trial, the jurors heard testimony from Velesa Sarver, the deceased’s mother, and then from a probation and parole officer who outlined the ranges of the penalties for the various charges on which they had found Crayton guilty.
Velesa Sarver said she wasn’t saying her son was innocent or that what he did was right, but she just wanted justice to be served, “so I guess that was justice.” She noted that she had listened to all the testimony.
“But I’d do anything if I could get my bear hugs that I used to get every day, but I can’t get none of that back. All I have is a headstone to go to,” she said. Later, looking directly toward Crayton, she said. “You gave him no mercy. Justice is served.”
To the defendant’s mother, she said, “I’m so glad that you’ll be able to hug your son and visit your son.”
On behalf of the defendant, his younger brother, Deon Thompson, took the stand first, and talked about how Crayton had always been there for him before to help him and his first job was with him. He said Crayton was always the first to make them laugh.
Hope Crayton, Inell’s mother, said she felt a lot of things could have been done better that would have enabled a more accurate decision, but she recognized that “it only takes 1 second to make the wrong decision,” and for things to take a bad direction.
Hope Crayton had lost a son to violence in 2020, and she said to Velesa Sarver “from a mother to a mother” that she was sorry, because she knows what it’s like to never be able to see a son again. She said she wanted justice, but she wanted it to be fair.
The defendant himself, Inell Crayton, then took the stand and said, “First off, I want to apologize to Ms. Sarver. I mean, I didn’t expect for none of this to happen. It broke me as well to know a life was tooken in my presence or my responsibility.”
He said he was 23 when it happened and was basically trying to figure out everything on his own, with is family at least one state away.
“As a young man, you know, like, well, trying to evolve into a better man, you know, a real man, I really don’t like asking people for help and like that …,” Inell Crayton said. “I wasn’t expecting to harm anybody or, you know, cause harm to anybody. It just happened in the blink of an eye, you know. I wasn’t expecting none of it.”
He continued to Velesa Sarver, “I’m sorry. I know I can’t bring him back.”
He added, as tears welled up and he reached for a tissue and his voice began to crack, that over the time he’s been sitting in jail he prayed to God “that he would ease your mind and bless you with comfort. … I’m sorry again. I hope that you forgive me.”
Each of the attorneys made additional comments to the jury to attempt to sway their decision on the sentence, and the jurors took roughly 80 minutes to make their decision.
Reactions
At the conclusion of all the proceedings, Davis told Glasgow News 1, “The good people of Barren County decided right.”
He said that at this time, he did not anticipate an appeal..
Gardner said that, at this time, “the commonwealth’s thoughts are with the Sarver family and how this tragedy has affected their life. The commonwealth believes that it proved beyond a reasonable doubt the defendant committed murder, but the jury decided to return the verdict of manslaughter in the second degree, and we respect that verdict, and I hope this can bring some closure to the Sarver family.”
None of the family members of Sarver and Crayton chose to comment.
Comments