|
Opening Arguments Presented in Vanbergen Murder Trial
in Lewis County Court
Published: June 11, 2025 at 08:15 p.m.
By: Julie Abbass, independent journalist, for
linkinglewiscounty.com
Intent, Motive and “Nothing Like the
Movies:” Legal Teams Give Opening Arguments in Vanbergen Murder Trial
Defendant Jacob Vanderberg (far right) listens as Lewis
County Assistant District Attorney Jospeh Hobika
III (far left) presents
opening arguments to the jury in Mr. Vanderberg’s
murder trial in Lewis County Court on June 11, 2025 (Photo by Julie Abbass)
LOWVILLE, N.Y. – In Lewis
County Court on Wednesday, opposing legal teams in the murder trial of
Jacob M. Vanbergen exposed their strategies and details of the night last
year when one man was left dead and another for eventual arrest on murder
allegations.
The 25-year-old Pennsylvanian is accused of strangling Brandon J. Shepker, 39, also from Pennsylvania, using the hooded
sweatshirt Shepker was wearing when an argument
between them turned physical on the night of Januay
6, 2024, at Ridge View Lodge on state Route 12 in the town of
Lowville.
On June 6, 2024, a grand jury indicted Vanbergen on second-degree murder.
Mr. Shepker and Mr. Vanbergen came to Lewis
County together to look at real estate opportunities and enjoy the
snowmobile trails. They both hail from Coudersport township, about halfway
between Erie and Harrisburg, PA in the north-central area of the state.
FROM THE PROSECUTION:
“Actions speak
louder than words,” said Assistant District Attorney (ADA) Joseph H. Hobika III early in his opening argument.
The ADA implored
jurors to focus on the evidence he and his team will present proving,
“beyond a reasonable doubt,” that Mr. Vanbergen knew that the “natural,
probable result of his actions” that night would be Mr. Shepker’s
death.
The prosecutor then informed the jury that the prosecution does not have to
prove motive or any advance planning by Vanbergen, only intent.
“What could be more intentional than to squeeze someone’s neck until the
life [goes] out of their body,” he said.
Throughout his opening, Mr. Hobika told of Mr.
Vanbergen’s actions that night and the ways in which the defendant’s
“stories” about what happened and why changed as the investigation
unfolded.
Mr. Hobika stated the defendant told 911 that Mr.
Shepker was fine when he left to go to a bar but
that he found his friend unconscious when he returned. About a week later , Hobika said the
defendant acknowledged to investigators confronting him with the autopsy
report that he had pushed Mr. Shepker from behind
after an argument, and then choked him “for about
a minute” until Mr. Shepker “went limp.”
Mr. Hobika said Mr. Vanbergen claimed at that
time he thought the older man was just unconscious and so went to a bar.
The prosecutor also laid out a list of people he will call to the stand
including:
*The medical examiner who
performed the autopsy on Mr. Shepker, to explain
the time it takes for someone to die
due to “consistent pressure” on the
throat and why he determined the cause of death to be homicide by
strangulation.
*Emergency Services first responders
to verify Mr. Shepker was not breathing when they
arrived, the efforts they
made to resuscitate him and they
were not able to bring him back to life.
*The investigator that performed
the initial investigation will testify that Mr. Shepker’s
sweatshirt was half off his
body and describe the bruises and
abrasions on Mr. Shepker when they arrived at the
scene, including an
“abrasion” on the elbow that was not covered by the sweatshirt. He
will also talk about items found in the room
including medications, and why Mr.
Vanbergen was not a suspect at first.
*Investigators from county and
state law enforcement will relay under oath the
information Vanbergen gave them
in various interviews, including
that he was in Mr. Shepker’s will
to inherit the business and so would be “set up for
life.”
Mr. Hobika said this information offered greed as
a possible motive despite earlier stating he did not need to prove motive,
only intent.
Throughout his opening, Mr. Hobika repeated that
he wanted jurors to listen carefully to Judge Daniel R. King’s instructions
and follow them precisely in their deliberations.
“You may think you know what constitutes a murder because of television,”
said Mr. Hobika before telling the jury to
“forget that” because it is just TV.
Wrapping up his opening, Mr. Hobika told jurors
that by the end of the trial the evidence will have shown them that Mr.
Vanbergen’s actions were “no mistake,” but rather “a choice, a deliberate
act.”
FROM THE DEFENSE:
Defense attorney Gary W. Miles reminded jurors of a key legal principal
from the perspective of the defendant: innocent until proven guilty.
“You don’t walk in there (the court room) guilty of anything,” he said,
adding that this particular case “is not a ‘who done it.’ It’s a ‘why done
it.’”
Also contrasting this case from those in entertainment media, the defense
told jurors that this case is unlike any they may have watched before
because “murderers don’t call 911,” and because his client had no motive.
He referred to the two men as “business partners” and friends.
“Why would he (Vanbergen) bite the hand that feeds him,” the defender said
rhetorically after pointing out that Vanbergen had “a good job, a good
salary and a good car,” so greed was not a factor.
Mr. Miles also claimed that Mr. Vanbergen’s last words to Mr. Shepker while he was strangling him were, “Have you had
enough?” which he said implied that Mr. Vanbergen did not want to choke his
friend to death.
According to the defense attorney, their medical expert will testify that
drugs, including the painkiller tramadol, Viagra and a high level of
alcohol, were found in Mr. Shepker’s blood and
that Mr. Shepker’s type I diabetes and insulin
pump that kept it in check
illustrated that Mr. Shepker was not in
good health which ultimately caused his death after the fight.
Mr. Miles also disputed that the fight was started by Mr. Vanbergen, saying
it was actually Mr. Shepker.
Before bringing his opening to a close, Mr. Miles reminded the jury again
that he does not need to prove Mr. Vanbergen’s innocence.
“I won’t make a lot of promises because we don’t need to make a lot of
promises,” he said.
The prosecution began calling their witnesses to the stand immediately
following Mr. Miles’ opening statement, starting with the 911 dispatcher.
The audio of Mr. Vanbergen’s 911 call was played for the jurors.
Many of them kept their eyes on the defendant as they listened to the
county dispatcher coach him through providing CPR to Mr. Shepker that night, counting compressions and breaths
for him until
paramedics arrived.
The prosecution called witnesses throughout the afternoon and will continue
their case on Thursday morning. The medical examiner is expected to be the
first on the stand for the day.
This trial iss anticipated to last up to two
weeks. Both sides will proceed to make their cases, call witnesses and
present evidence through the end of this week and into next.
It is unclear if the defendant will take the stand.
We will be here with any unexpected developments during testimony and
complete coverage of the closing arguments and verdict when all testimony
is completed.
|
