News

Stensaker guilty on all counts

By Scott Wagar

12/23/2014

Editorial Note: The Bottineau Courant reported on the trial of the murder of Jack Sjol. The newspaper made ever attempt to receive court documents on the trial, but the Northwest District Court doesn’t give out its trial transcripts. 

However, KXNews (Channel 13) has agreed to share their documents with the Courant during its daily coverage of the trial. So, all information on the murder trial comes courtesy of KXNews to the Courant. 
This week, the Bottineau Courant starts with day three of the trial and goes to the jury’s verdict. 

Day three of the Ryan Stensaker’s murder trial focused on evidence found in the private garbage dump owned by an Isaac Steen where Jack Sjol’s body was found in comparison to evidence found at Sjol’s farm ranch where it is believed Sjol was murder.

DAY THREE

Prosecuting attorney, Nathan Madden, started day three with questions to the lead investigator of the case, Amanda McNamee, about tire tracks that were found at the garbage site and Sjol’s home which were a match to each other.

“They have the same pattern,” McNamee said. “The tire tracks at Mr. Sjol’s residence had the same pattern that we see here at the dump site location.”

Madden went on to ask Dale Maxiner of the North Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation if the matching tire tracks and their location in the dump site were consistent with dumping something in the dump site, which Maxiner stated it was. 

Defense attorney, Steven Mottinger, continued with the same type of questioning he used in the first week, did the evidence connect Stensaker to the murder of Sjol. 

Mottinger started out by asking questions to Maxiner about mail that was addressed to Stensaker found in the garbage pit next and around Sjol’s body, and if law enforcement knew how the mail ended in the private dump and how long it had been there.

Maxiner stated “no” to the questions. 

Mottinger then centered his attention on the tire tracks at the garbage site and asked Maxiner if he could prove if those tracks had anything to do with Sjol being left at that site. Again, Maxiner stated “no.”

The defense attorney then turned his attention toward an individual(s) who would place or take away evidence at a crime scene to make someone look like he or she did or didn’t do a crime.

“Somebody testified earlier that one reason we secure crime scenes is to prevent evidence from being removed or placed at the crime scene,” Mottinger said. “Say we’ve got an overnight situation like we had here? Why would somebody place evidence at a crime scene?”

Robert Fontenot of the North Dakota Bureau of Criminal Investigation stated that he didn’t know why. Mottinger then asked if it could be to “implicate somebody else” in a crime, which Fontenot commented that theoretically it could be one reason why an individual(s) would place or take away evidences from a crime scene. 

Mottinger then questioned Sgt. Doug Flatten of the Williams County Sheriff’s Department how many officers carried Sjol’s body bag from the dump and if it was possible for one person who was 5-foot, 11-inches tall at 200 pounds to lift 205 pounds.

Flatten stated he couldn’t remember the total number of people, but stated that at least two, but maybe three. 

In answering the second question, Flatten stated that he did believe it was probable for a man of that size to pick up a body. 

Madden called Dr. William Massello, North Dakota medical examiner, to the witness stand and re-asked Mottinger’s last question if it was possible for a 5-foot, 11-inches tall at 200 pound person to lift a 205 pound. Mottinger quickly objective to Madden’s question stating it called “for a conclusion.” However, Northwest District Judge David Nelson allowed Massello to answer the question.

“Yes, in my younger days I certainly could do that,” Massello said. 

In the final part of the day, Massello testified, through autopsy photos, where Sjol had been shot, which showed that he been shot once in the chest and once but perhaps twice in the head. Massello added that all the bullets were fatal shots to Sjol. 

DAY FOUR

Madden started day four of the trial telling the jury that scratch marks on the shell casings discovered at Sjol’s ranch match scratch marks of test shells that were injected out of the Remington rifle which was found under Stensaker’s bed where he slept. 

Madden called Lamont Jacobson, North Dakota State Crime Lab supervisor, to stand who testified about the findings of the casings and scratches. However, Jacobson added that even though casings had been placed in the rifle, there wasn’t enough evidence to prove those shells had been fired in the gun. 

In the cross examination of Jacobson’s comments, Mottinger hammered the point across to the jury that there was no evidence that those rifle cartridges were fired in Stensaker’s gun.

“The copper, lead core bullets you recovered, you can’t positively say they were fired from that weapon?” Mottinger asked Jacobson.

“Yes.” Jacobson said. 

“The most you can tell us is that at least one of those shell casings was in that weapon at one time?” Mottinger continued to ask Jacobson.

“All of the shell casings were in there at one time,” Jacobson responded back.

“But you don’t know when?” Mottinger continued to ask Jacobson.

“Correct.” Jacobson said.

Mottinger then reinstated a comment made by witness Candace Kolterman, who rented a room in the same house that Stensaker lived in with his mother during the murder of Sjol. 

Kolterman stated that she had seen Stensaker with a long gun where he made “clicking noises” with the gun by pressing on the trigger. 

Through Mottinger questioning of Kolterman’s statement, Jacobson stated that with a Remington rifle like Stensaker’s gun that type of noise continually would not be impossible because the rifle was a bolt action, and in order to pull the trigger the bolt would have to reset the trigger, which Kolterman never gave testimony to, that of seeing the bolt action mechanism being used.

From the case’s markings and trigger action, Madden turned the jury’s attention to cell phone records and fire which took place in Stensaker’s vehicle, a Cadillac Escalade.

Madden pointed out to the jurors that Stensaker’s phone records showed he traveled east of Williston the day of Sjol’s murder to an area which included Steen’s private dump grounds.

From Stensaker’s cell phone records, the prosecution showed that Stensaker’s SUV caught fire, which Stensaker told local firemen called to the scene that the fire came from sparks that came out of vents.

However, Deputy State Fire Marshall Ken Sisk testified that through his investigation what Stensaker told the firemen couldn’t have happened because evidence proved the fire was started in the back seat of the vehicle where Sisk also found a plastic gas tank that had melted in the fire.

“Is this consistent with fire or sparks coming from the air condition system?” Madden asked Sisk.

“To the best of my knowledge, no.” Sisk said.

Mottinger in his cross examination of Sisk asked him if he could prove through his investigation of the fire if the SUV had purposely been set on fire, which Sisk stated that he could not prove that. 

At the end of day four, Madden went back to tire tracks of Stensaker’s vehicle with Levi Kabler of the Williams County Sheriff’s Department and how the tracks tie in with the tracks left behind at Sjol’s home and at Steen’s garbage pit by asking about the similarity of the tire treads.

“This would be the tread pattern similar to what we found in the gravel at Mr. Sjol’s residence,” Kabler said. 

Mottinger, once again, attempted to point out to the jury that this type of evidence doesn’t prove Stensaker was guilty of killing Sjol. 

“There is no way anybody can tell whether or not the tires on that Escalade are responsible for those prints, scientifically impossible to do that, correct?” Mottinger asked Kabler.

“For me, yes, it is impossible to determine that.” 

DAY 5

The fifth day of the trial focused on Stensaker along with Sjol having some trepidation about his own safety.

McNamee was brought back to the witness stand where she testified that Stensaker had fired the 300 Savage sometime in August of 2012.

In Montinger’s cross-examination, McNamee stated that where Sjol’s body was discovered in Steen’s garbage pit Sjol had a pistol in his pocket of clothing. 

Mottinger continued in his cross examination asking McNamee about fears Sjol had over his own safety at the time of his murder, which McNamee stated he did. 

Mottinger then pointed out that law enforcement didn’t find any connection between Sjol and Stensaker, which McNamee agreed with. 

With the cross-examination concluded, the prosecution rested their case. Mottinger then stated that he would not be calling any witnesses for the defense and the jurors were dismissed.

At that time, Mottinger requested from Nelson what is called Rule 29, which is motion to dismiss the case because of lack of evidence, which Nelson denied the defense.

“I’m satisfied that there would be sufficient evidence here to give it to the jury,” Nelson said. “So the Rule 29 motion is noted and all three charges, the two firearms and the murder charge will be given to the jury for their deliberation.”

CLOSING ARGUMENTS 

 
With the both sides stating that they had rested their cases, the jury was called back in for the closing arguments. 

Madden was first for the prosecution and laid out a timeline of the events that occurred from two days before Sjol was murdered, to Stensaker being considered a suspect to his arrest in the case. 

Although the prosecution didn’t have evidence that knowingly placed Stensaker at the murder scene or dumpsite, Madden pointed out that evidence is there to prove Stensaker guilty of this crime. 

“Where does all the evidence point? You heard about the circumstantial and direct evidence. Where does it all point?” Madden questioned. “The weapon? The defendant. The ammunition? The defendant. The vehicle? The defendant. The mail found around the body? The defendant. Ladies and gentlemen, how many coincidences does it take?”

Mottinger continued down the same path he took through the five day trial in his closing remarks by stating the evidence didn’t prove Stensaker was there to commit the crime. 

“They specifically alleged and therefore are required to prove that Ryan Stensaker was the person who pulled the trigger on a gun, a .30 caliber gun, we don’t know which gun, but he was the one that pulled the trigger and fired the shots that caused Jack’s Sjol’s death?” Mottinger said. “You know what? They just can’t do it.”
“There is no connection,” Mottinger added. “The dots aren’t connected, they’re just a bunch of dots.”

Ending closing statements was prosecuting attorney Kristen Sjue, who continued to press the issue that the evidence does show Stensaker’s place in the murder. 

“Essentially ladies and gentlemen the defense wants you to believe that this is just a series of unfortunate events that happened to Ryan Stensaker. Wrong place at the wrong time, over, and over, and over and over again. Does this make sense to you?” Sjue said. “The state’s not asking you to find Ryan Stensaker guilty to give closure to any anybody. The state is here asking you to find Ryan Stensaker guilty of the murder of Jack Sjol because the evidence proves that Ryan Stensaker committed the murder of Jack Sjol beyond a reasonable doubt.”

The jury went to deliberations at around four in the afternoon. The jury was made up of 14 jurors who heard the case, but the two alternate jurors were dismissed from the case after closing arguments, leaving the original 12 jurors to decide Stensanker’s fate.

THE VERDICT

In less than three hours, the jury came back with a verdict on all three charges. 

“We the jury, duly empanelled and sworn in the above entitled action, do find the defendant Ryan Lee Stensaker guilty, dated at Minot, N.D., Dec. 17, 2014,” stated the clerk of court. 

The date of the sentencing has not been set.