Death Penalty Still on the Table For Alleged McStay Family Killer

The trial could start in August.

Prosecutors today said they will decide by July 10th whether or not to seek the death penalty against the man accused of killing the McStay family in Fallbrook.

Charles “Chase” Merritt is charged with four counts of murder, with a special circumstances enhancement for multiple murders, that makes him eligible for the death penalty or life in prison without parole, if convicted.

At a hearing today in San Bernardino, where the case is being heard, Judge Michael Smith also set an August 10th trial date for the man accused of brutally murdering his former business partner, Joseph McStay, McStay’s wife Summer, and the couple’s two young sons. Evidence at Merritt’s June 15th preliminary indicates that Merritt beat the victims to death with a small sledge hammer.

Merritt’s attorney, Jimmy Mettias, insists that the evidence his client is weak and circumstantial, and expressed confidence that a jury will find not convict his client.

Talking with reporters after today’s hearing, Mettias said he will probably ask Judge Smith to delay the trial for at least several months, because there’s so much evidence in the case, and because investigators for the defense are still gathering information.

Also at today’s hearing, Judge Smith indicated he will release information from search warrants lodged with the court by law enforcement during its lengthy investigation of the McStay murders.

Those warrants are expected to contain details about the investigation that were not revealed during the preliminary hearing.

They are expected to be made public on July 1st.

But Judge Smith said he will not release two of the approximately 35 search warrants, because those two warrants contain information prosecutors say should remain secret. The judge also agreed to redact three sentences from the warrants at the request of the defense, which argued that those unknown details are “inaccurate and highly prejudicial… and would interfere with (Merritt’s) ability to get a fair trial.”

The judge agreed with the defense argument, and said the redactions are necessary for “the protection of the defendant’s rights.”

Media attorney Kelly Aviles, who represents NBC 7 and other media outlets, disagreed with that ruling.

Aviles argued that all substantial information in those warrants should be public. Media outlets are considering a legal challenge to Judge Smith’s ruling. 

Contact Us