By DAMIEN FISHER, InDepthNH.org
Convicted of murdering Keene man Jonathan Amerault and then forcing his wife to decapitate the corpse, Armando Barron wants a new trial because one of the trial jurors did not understand the term “reasonable doubt.”
The New Hampshire Supreme Court heard arguments Thursday in the appeal that focuses on the trial juror’s understanding of reasonable doubt. When questioned during the jury selection phase of the trial, the juror would not say she would vote to acquit Barron if there was reasonable doubt about the evidence.
“There are some absolutes in criminal trials,” said Appellate Defender Thomas Barnard. “This is one of those absolutes, perhaps the most important absolute is if there is a reasonable doubt, the jury must acquit.”
Instead, the juror repeatedly gave non-committal answers when questioned, Barnard said, like “It depends.”
Armando Barron is serving a life sentence for Amerault’s 2020 murder, which took place in Rindge. Britany Barron was paroled in 2022 after she pleaded guilty to destroying evidence. She then served as the key state witness in her ex-husband’s trial.
While Barnard said the juror in question should not have been put on the jury, Elizabeth Woodcock, representing the state, said she was someone without a legal background who got tangled up in a complicated concept.
“I actually think (reasonable doubt) is very complicated,” Woodcock said.
The juror’s full answers demonstrate she did not need to be excluded from serving, Woodcock said. The juror repeatedly said under questioning she would make her decision based on the evidence and did not display a bias against Armando Barron, Woodcock said.
Jury selection in the high-profile murder case had numerous people called for duty who acknowledged they already believed Barron was guilty, according to Woodcock.
Armando Barron’s appeal also challenges the way jurors were instructed before they began deliberations. While they were given instructions on considering Armando Barron’s truthfulness, they were never given a similar instruction about Britany Barron.
Britany Barron initially lied to police when she was discovered at a remote campsite with Amerault’s head and body, but soon told the truth when questioned by detectives in a New Hampshire State Police barracks.
Armando Barron’s defense during the trial was that Britany Barron killed Amerault, and Barnard said Thursday the jury should have been instructed to consider whether her first lies to police betrayed a consciousness of guilt. Woodcock said the defense team at trial cross-examined Britany Barron in front of the jury, allowing plenty of opportunity for that theory to develop. Armando Barron did not testify during the trial.
“She never denied making the false statements, she admitted they were false,” Woodcock said. “She admitted to what she did [in front of] the jury.”
Amerault was 25 when Armando Barron beat, tortured, and then shot him to death at Annett Wayside Park in Rindge after he discovered Britany Barron had a relationship with Amerault, according to court records.
Amerault was an engineer at Teleflex in Jaffrey, a biomedical company, where he worked with Britany Barron.
When he discovered the relationship, and learned his wife wanted a divorce, Armando Barron beat Britany Barron, breaking her nose, breaking teeth, and sticking a loaded gun in her mouth. He then used her cell phone to lure Amerault to the park in Rindge.
After the murder, Armando Barron brought his wife, and Amerault’s car and corpse, to a remote campsite in Atkinson and Gilmanton Academy Grant. There, he ordered his wife to cut off Amerault’s head with a saw, and then he left her to hide the body, according to court records.
When discovered at the campsite, Britany Barron first told New Hampshire Fish and Game Officers she was camping with friends. She only disclosed the torture and murder once she was in custody.
