.jpg)
DAKOTA CITY — Jason Jones’ fate is now in the hands of a three-judge panel.
A Dakota County jury of seven men and five women on Thursday determined there to be aggravating circumstances in the murders of four Laurel residents by Jones on Aug. 4, 2022, making Jones eligible for the death penalty. The jury deliberated for less than an hour Thursday afternoon before determining the murders were aggravated.
The jury’s finding followed an aggravation hearing that took place after jurors earlier Thursday convicted Jones, 44, of four counts each of first-degree murder and use of a firearm to commit a felony and two counts of second-degree arson.
Aggravating circumstances are those which increase the guilt or enormity of the crime or add to the punishment that can be imposed. Aggravating circumstances, according to Nebraska statute, are reasons why the defendant should be sentenced to death.
As a result of the jury’s verdicts, District Judge Bryan Meismer will contact the Nebraska Supreme Court, which will appoint additional judges to accompany Meismer in presiding over future proceedings. The panel will determine whether Jones will be sentenced to death or life in prison following a hearing during which the defense will present mitigating evidence.
Jones’ trial was moved from Cedar County after Meismer determined earlier this year that Jones could not receive a fair trial there.
Jones broke into 503 Elm St. on the morning of Aug. 4, 2022, and shot Gene Twiford, 86, and his wife, Janet Twiford, 85; and their daughter, Dana Twiford, 55, before setting the Twiford home on fire. He also broke into the 209 Elm St. home of Michele Ebeling, 53, shot Ebeling and set her home ablaze.
Prosecutors called one witness — Nebraska State Patrol investigator Pedram Nabegh — during the aggravation hearing.
Nebraska statute allows prosecutors to choose from a list of nine aggravating circumstances. The state alleged two aggravators in the killings of Janet and Dana Twiford and one aggravator in the Gene Twiford and Michele Ebeling homicides.
Prosecutors alleged the following: — At the time the murder of Ebeling was committed by Jones, Jones committed the murder of one or all of the Twifords.
— At the time the murder of Gene Twiford was committed by Jones, Jones committed the murder of one or all three of the other victims.
— At the time the murder of Janet Twiford was committed by Jones, Jones committed the murder of one or all three of the other victims.
— The murder of Janet Twiford by Jones was committed in an effort to conceal the commission of burglary and/or murder or to conceal Jones’ identity as the perpetrator of said crimes.
— At the time the murder of Dana Twiford was committed by Jones, Jones committed the murder of one or all three of the other victims.
— The murder of Dana Twiford was committed in an effort to conceal the commission of burglary and/or murder or to conceal Jones’ identity as the perpetrator of said crimes.
In support of these allegations, prosecutors called Nabegh to testify. He had also testified during the guilt/ innocence phase of the trial.
Nabegh has training in the reconstruction of shooting scenes and mapped the trajectories of bullets at the Twiford home.
Assistant Nebraska Attorney General Corey O’Brien contended that Jones broke into the Twiford home with the intent to kill Gene Twiford but didn’t know Janet or Dana Twiford existed and shot them to conceal the murder of Gene Twiford and the break-in.
Nabegh concluded that Jones walked into the master bedroom and shot Gene Twiford twice while he was lying in bed, shot Janet Twiford three times as she was getting out of bed, then shot Dana Twiford six times as she exited her room down the hallway. Nabegh based his findings on each of the victims having entry wounds on the front of their bodies, the large presence of shell casings in the master bedroom and the specific locations of the shell casings on the floor, he said.
O’Brien argued that Jones went to the Twiford house intending to kill Gene Twiford but also killed Janet and Dana Twiford to cover up Gene Twifords homicide. O’Brien played audio of a phone call between Jones and his mother. In the call, Jones talked about how he didn’t even know Janet and Dana Twiford existed.
“It’s clear from his words that his mission that day with respect t© 5Q3 (Elm St.) was Gene Twiford,” O’Brien said. “He had a specific purpose, he had a specific design, he had a specific premeditation, he had a specific motive to go down and kill Gene Twiford. And he did not expect Dana and Janet to be there. He had no reason to kill them, but it doesn’t stop him; they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Dead witnesses can’t talk.”
The theory that Jones didn’t want to be identified was supported by evidence that Jones went to the Twiford home around 3 a.m., O’Brien said, and brought with him gas cans and a lighter to set the house on fire.
Jones also walked to the Twiford residence rather than drove, possibly indicating he didn’t want his vehicle to be detected by somebody’s home surveillance.
Had Jones not intended to conceal Gene Twiford’s murder, the prosecutor said, he would’ve knocked on the front door, “blown out” Gene Twiford and left, as opposed to breaking into the Twiford residence in the middle of the night and killing everyone who lived there.
Jurors also were left to decide whether each of the murders happened at the same time as the others.
The state contended that Jones gunned down the Twifords at 503 Elm St. before walking over to 209 Elm St. and killing Ebeling within minutes.
To find that Ebeling’s murder was aggravated, jurors had to find that all fpur killings were committed during the same criminal transaction, which means a continuous and uninterrupted chain of conduct.
O’Brien argued that Ebeling’s murder was committed in the same course of conduct as the Twiford murders. The only thing that disrupted Jones, the prosecutor said, was his stupidity in that he started himself on fire at the Twiford home.
“It’s hard to imagine how (Ebeling’s murder) isn’t part of the same criminal transaction,” O’Brien said, “particularly when the defendant, in a premeditated fashion, wrote a letter saying it was his intent to take out the douche bags, take them with me, that he went and got multiple gas cans, that he took multiple guns. He did all this for the same purpose — to commit the same criminal transaction.”
Defense attorney Todd Lancaster told jurors to pay attention to the words “broken” and “uninterrupted” contained within the definition of “same criminal transaction.” The criminal transaction by Jones at the Twiford house was interrupted by the period of time in which he poured gas around the Twiford home and walked three blocks to Ebeling’s house, Lancaster said.
“There was a short period of time, but it was a sequence of events that was broken,” Lancaster said.
As for the killings of Janet and Dana Twiford, the defense attorney said evidence showed that the killings of each of the Twifords occurred in rapid succession, showing that Jones could not have developed the thought to kill the two women in order to conceal Gene Twiford’s murder.
Lancaster did not dispute the state’s allegation that the Twiford murders occurred at the same time.
O’Brien rebutted that Jones brought 58 rounds of ammunition and two guns with him to the Twiford house, saying Jones “brought a nuclear weapon with him to kill a fly-* “Why did he bring all that ammunition with him? To kill one little, 85-year-old man?” O’Brien said. “No, it’s because he knew that he had to conceal himself from being identified. He needed to be prepared for that, and he was.”
Twiford family ‘relieved’
The family of Gene, Janet and Dana Twiford offered the following statement after the guilty verdict was announced: “We are relieved by today’s conviction and appreciate the hard work of the legal team and law enforcement throughout tMs process. We would also like to convey our gratitude to the jury for their time and attention in this long process. While tMs is one step toward justice for our loved ones, we must respect the ongoing investigation and the legal proceedings in the second case (Carrie Jones).
“Our focus remains on healing and honoring our Mother/Grandma, Father/Grandpa and Sister/ Aunt, while carrying their love and memories in our hearts every day.”
Jones’ wife, Carrie Jones, 45, is charged with first-degree murder, tampering with evidence and being an accessory to murder. She is accused ©f pushing her husband to kill Gene Twiford because of sexually charged statements Twiford would direct toward Carrie JoneS over a multiple-year period.
Attorneys react
Per agency policy, the prosecutors in Jones’ case are not permitted to speak to the media about the case. The Nebraska Attorney General’s Office, though, stated in a press release it “is pleased with the outcome and thanks the jury for their hard work in tMs case.”
Lancaster said the defense hoped for different verdicts in both phases of the trial, but he was grateful for the time and effort the jury put in.
“They worked hard and they took their job seriously, and I appreciate that,” Lancaster said. “But again, not the outcome we were hoping for. But we’re not done with Mr. Jones’ case.”
He conceded that the Twiford killings were committed at the same time, according to state statute, adding that the facts surrounding that aggravating circumstance “were clear.”
If Jones is sentenced to death, state law calls for an automatic appeal process. When asked if Jones would appeal his convictions in the event he is not sentenced to death, Lancaster said that circumstance is too early to think about. His focus moving forward is gathering information that mitigates against the death penalty, he said.
As of 4:30 p.m., Lancaster hadn’t had the chance to notify Jones of the jury’s verdicts, but he said Ms client likely was aware of the outcome because he has access to the media.
What’s next
Jones’ next court date Won’t be scheduled until after the three-judge panel is assembled and has the chance to review evidence from the jury trial.
It likely will be several months before Jones learns Ms sentence.
Carrie Jones’ next hearing is scheduled for Monday, Nov. 25. A trial date has not yet been set in her case.
The defense attorneys in Carrie Jones’ case are also seeking t> 1 have her trial moved out of Cedar County.
