photo by: Kim Callahan/Journal-World

Rodney E. Marshall, left, appears Thursday, Nov. 7, 2024, in Douglas County District Court, with his attorneys Matthew Cohen, center, and Cline Boone.

A defendant in a double homicide case clearly waived his Miranda rights, and his incriminating statements to police will be admissible at trial, a Douglas County judge ruled Thursday. Additionally, the trial of Rodney E. Marshall, scheduled to begin in two months, will remain in Lawrence, and jurors will not be allowed to visit the crime scenes.

Marshall, 53, is alleged to have fatally shot Shelby McCoy, 52, at 1115 Tennessee St., on July 31, 2022, before driving across town on a moped to fatally shoot William D. O’Brien, 43, of Lawrence, at 325 Northwood Lane. After the shootings, police staked out Marshall’s residence in central Lawrence, and when he left the home, he led police on a chase while allegedly firing a pistol out of his window, resulting in several charges of attempted murder. The chase ended on Kansas Highway 10 near Eudora, as the Journal-World has reported.

Judge Amy Hanley had previously determined that Marshall’s statements to police were voluntary, but on Thursday, pursuant to a defense motion, she listened to testimony from a Lawrence police detective specifically concerning whether Marshall had clearly waived his Miranda rights. She ruled that he had — by not unambiguously invoking his right to an attorney and by repeatedly initiating conversations with police when he wasn’t under interrogation. At the outset of his arrest Marshall had said “No, no, I will talk to my attorneys” and then get back to police, but he kept talking to police of his own accord without any prompting, Hanley found. As a result, Marshall’s incriminating statements will be admitted into evidence.

In February, when Hanley determined Marshall’s statements were voluntarily given and would be admitted on that basis, his attorneys, Cline Boone and Matthew Cohen, signaled interest in pursuing a plea deal, but that avenue wasn’t spoken of Thursday.

Defense attorneys had also moved for a change of venue, arguing that extensive media coverage of the homicides and police chase would prejudice the jury pool, denying their client a fair trial. However, Hanley made short work of that argument, noting that the defense had not presented evidence of actual prejudice as required by law, such as a jury study, but only speculation. She also noted that the jury selection process itself is meant to ensure impartiality and that this case, due to its severity, would involve a large jury pool. Hanley said she intended to have 16 people on the jury, four of them alternates.

The defense also asked Hanley to allow jurors to visit the two homicide scenes, arguing that the distance between the two residences and their interior layouts would aid jurors’ understanding of the case. But Hanley determined that existing video footage of the scenes would be sufficient for that purpose. She said it had been more than two years since the killings and that the residences could have changed significantly in that time. Moreover, she noted that taking dozens of people, including jurors, the defendants and officers of the court, to the scenes would be a “logistical nightmare,” considering the security that would be required. The visit might also tempt jurors to speak to one another and to take their own measurements, she said, which could be prejudicial.

Defense attorneys had also filed a motion for immunity from prosecution based on self-defense, but on Thursday they said that they had withdrawn that motion, although they still might argue self-defense at trial, which is scheduled to start on Jan. 6, with Deputy District Attorney David Greenwald and Senior Assistant DA Ricardo Leal prosecuting.