The Son Who Murdered His Parents Pt. 2

After Larry's arrest he was transferred out of Pickens County to the Forsyth County Jail for his own safety. It was common in Pickens County History to do this when people were upset enough to go after the suspect. After his sentencing he was transferred to a state prison on March 30, 1983. That state prison was Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Center (GDCC) in Jackson, Georgia.

In 1983, the Georgia Supreme Court reviewed the original case. But before they reached their decision, it was agreed upon that Larry murdered both his parents. Specifically evidence was released that proved the shotgun used from Ginger's house was the one that fired the shells. Evidence also demonstrated that the stolen items from Larry's mom were among items Larry tried destroying by burning them. Larry also asked his wife to retrieve the other stolen items that he had given to his wife. She in turn, handed them over.

Larry admitted that he murdered his parents. But that wasn't what the case was about. He argued that the judge should be removed because he was a former District Attorney and questioned many of the witnesses extensively, the court disagreed. He argued that he should have had a change of venue because he couldn't get a fair trial, the court disagreed.

He argued that the long days in court got in the way of his counsel's effectiveness, the court disagreed. He argued the the sentencing instructions were handled incorrectly, the court disagreed. The Georgia Supreme Court did agree the court in Pickens should have handled the juror questionnaire differently, but didn't believe that constituted grounds for reversal of the earlier decision. The one argument made that changed the court's mind was the fact that Larry's grandfather wasn't allowed to testify.

Larry's grandfather Ralph had been subpoenaed and attended the trial, but left Friday evening because he felt ill. He did not return for Saturday’s sentencing hearing. Larry's counsel requested time to determine his grandfather's condition to make sure he could testify.

Larry's attorney explained that Ralph wanted to tell the jury he did not want his grandson executed and that another death would not bring back his son. The trial judge considered that proposed testimony inadmissible and denied the requests for a continuance.

The Supreme Court ruled that this was wrong. Ralph’s plea was admissible evidence supporting mercy, and potentially carried particular weight because he was closely related to both the defendant and the victims. The Georgia Supreme Court found defense should have received a reasonable opportunity to investigate his absence and determine whether he could attend.

As a result, the two death sentences were overturned, but the convictions of murder and armed robbery stood. He remained in prison and awaited a new trial - not to determine his guilt, that was admitted and established. The new trial was only to determine the appropriate sentencing for the crimes since the earlier court erred in excluding Larry's grandfather's (Roy's dad) testimony.

The retrial happened in 1985. The purpose was only to redetermine whether or not Larry would get life in prison, or the death penalty. During the trial Larry made several claims to the court that were not agreed upon by the court.

Larry now claimed that his girlfriend drugged him, changing his earlier admission of taking LSD on his own volition before the murders.

Then he claimed his girlfriend Ginger killed his parents. This was refuted by his earlier confessions to the police, by the physical evidence, and by his admissions in his earlier trials.

Larry also asserted that his original confession to the police happened when he was in a drug induced state and that he was trying to protect his girlfriend. None of this explains why he testified that he himself murdered his parents in trial when he wasn't drugged.

The court found no evidence that any of these new claims held water. Anyone can claim anything they want in a court or law, or on an affidavit. A complete stranger could make a legal sworn statement that he was the Messiah, and legitimately believe he was. That document doesn't establish proof, it establishes only that the person who made the claim....made the claim.

Larry's defense team argued that in the first trial the jury was essentially deadlocked and that should have resulted in his getting a life sentence instead of the death penalty. The court disagreed on the grounds the first judge would have been able to make the determination about a deadlocked jury and found the judge had not abused his discretion.

The defense made an argument about the original judge's supplemental instructions were find since they applied to all the jurors and didn't single out the dissenting juror from the original trial.

Larry's team then argued the original trial didn't properly consider the mitigating evidence of Larry's memory lapses, family conflicts, etc. However, the court found the original instructions clearly allowed those circumstances to be considered.

Finally, during this trial, the court found that because the first murder was connected to a robbery and the second murder was connected to the first murder, the death sentences were affirmed on Dec 2, 1986. There was a subsequent attempt for reconsideration for the court's decision that was denied on December 17, 1986.

Two other trials follow in Part 3.