Here are the defense closing arguments:
Defense Presents Closing Arguments: 10:20 a.m.
Lead defense attorney Charlie Rittgers tells a 12 member jury that Ryan Widmer is not guilty in the murder of his wife, Sarah, during his closing arguments Wednesday.
Rittgers says that the victim was described by EMS responders as not overly wet, not dry, not overly wet.
Rittgers starts off his closing arguments with negating everything that Vieux brought up in his closing arguments. He starts with the carpet found in the Widmer’s home.
He says one of the prosecution’s witnesses testified that the items that were found in the home were indeed wet when they were packaged.
“So much for the dry carpet.” Rittgers says.
Next he talks about Ryan’s response to the 9-1-1 call. The defense says the first responder made it upstairs; six and a half minutes after Ryan made the call.
Rittgers then show the jury a transcript of the 9-1-1 call with certain questions highlighted.
911 Dispatcher: Have you taken her out of the water yet?
“Yes, she’s lying here unconscious,” Ryan says.
911 Dispatcher: How long was she in there?
Ryan says Sarah was in the tub for about 45 minutes. He then asks the dispatcher if someone was coming.
911 Dispatcher: “Yeah, there already on there way, is there anyway you can get her out of the bathtub?”
Ryan says he can try and he puts the phone down.
Rittgers tells the jury that Ryan did what anyone else would do in this situation, he pulls the drain as he lifts her out.
Rittgers then continues to talk about the magazines.
“The magazines, look at the magazines, they are wrinkled. They weren’t picked up until two and a half hours later,” Rittgers say.
Rittgers closing arguments continue with an observation of the bathtub. He asks the jury to look at the tub and notice the marks on it. He says one of the prosecution’s witnesses said he can’t age those marks, he can’t even determine when the marks were made.
“They think he was lying, that she fell asleep and drowned. Well maybe she had a seizure that night, is he suppose to say I heard of this sudden death syndrome, was he suppose to say that?” Rittgers asks.
“Pruning, pruning , pruning. I don’t know how many times we heard of that. No one knows how long she was in that tub. We don’t know if she was doing her nails, we don’t know if she was on the computer,” Rittgers tells the jury. There’s no evidence that shows how long she was in the tub.
Rittgers continues to negate the prosecutions comments made during their closing arguments. He talks about the fact that the Bengals game was on in the upstairs bedroom.
He asks the jury what’s so strange about Ryan walking in the bedroom, turning on the TV and then heading to the bathroom.
“What theory do they (the prosecution) have as to how this happened? We haven’t heard it,” Rittgers says. “If there was a violent struggle, we don’t have any theory to how this happened.”
Rittgers begins to act out what he’s saying to the jury.
“Well he could have put her head in the toilet, well, where is the water around the toilet, where is the bruising on her knees, where is the bruising on her nose, her cheek?” Rittgers asks the jury.
Rittgers negates the prosecution’s theory that Ryan placed her head in the sink.
“Where’s the water on the sink? Where’s the evidence of struggle around the sink? Where’s the damage to the cabinets?” Rittgers asks.
Rittgers say if there was a violent struggle then wouldn’t Sarah had fought for her life?
He continues to tell the jury if there was a violent struggle there would’ve been marks on Ryan and Sarah. There would’ve been defensive wounds.
“What about those finely manicured nails; there wasn’t one scratch on them,” Rittgers says.
Rittgers tells the jury if Sarah was strangled she would be fighting for her life, she would’ve been grabbing him, she would’ve been breaking fingernails.
Rittgers brings up the bruise found on the back of Sarah’s neck and tells the jury all the other pathologists who testified agreed and said it was minor.
“No marks on the shoulders, no marks on the buttocks. Lacerations on her lip, result from intubation efforts,” Rittgers says.
Next, Rittgers discuss the contusions on her head.
Rittgers tells the jury that Dr. Uptegrove said they are minor and they would not render unconsciousness and Rogers, another witness agreed.
“There’s no evidence at all, it makes no sense, their theory, none,” Rittgers says.
Rittgers tells the jury there were no signs of struggle anywhere in the house and no marks on Ryan or Sarah.
Rittgers tells the jury the prosecution did everything they did to try to convict Ryan.
“They interviewed all his friends, co-workers. They went through business records, personal records, everything, because they were looking for what…motive (he says with conviction)…they don’t have a motive. Where’s the range, where are all the marks and stuff, where’s the hair missing?” Rittgers asks.
Rittgers then says let’s talk about the evidence.
A power point slide is shown to the jury with the following listed:
- No defensive wounds on Sarah
- No scratches, cracks, or chips on nails
- No DNA under Sarah’s nails
- Body “not overly wet”
- No wet towels, clothes, etc.
- According to the EMS workers, her body was /warm/hot
- No injuries to the knees, toes
Finally, Rittgers discusses the CPR efforts. He says that EMS crews continued to do resuscitation efforts when they got to the hospital.
Rittgers says the prosecution wants us to believe (Rittgers grab the tools used to try to save Sarah) that these tools (as he clamps them) wouldn’t cause much damage.
He tells the jury to use their common sense because the prosecution team has no motive. There wasn’t one negative thing said about Ryan based on testimonies Rittgers says.
“They have to put on their case, beyond unreasonable doubt,” Rittgers says. I didn’t have to have evidence, I didn’t have to have witnesses, and they (the prosecution) do.”
Rittgers reminds the jury the experts all agreed that you can’t rule out seizure or sudden death.
I know one thing; Ryan Widmer had nothing to do with his wife’s death.
Rittgers discusses unreasonable doubt to the jury.
“If you think that the state proved their case by clear and convincing evidence, you still have to rule not-guilty. It has to be met by clear and unreasonable doubt,” Rittgers says.
Rittgers places instructions of determining beyond unreasonable doubt on the projector.
“Prosecution talks a lot about our case, they didn’t talk about their case,” Rittgers says.
“They have no motive, they have 45 minutes of resuscitation, they have no marks on Ryan, they have no defensive motives, they have no scrapes, marks, cracks on fingernails,” Rittgers says. I hope you would agree that Ryan Widmer is not guilty in any wrong doing, thank you very much.”
~
