Jury zeros in on cellphone as deliberations in Ed Holley murder trial extend into next week
The jury of six men and six women sent six notes to the court Friday requesting to review specific evidence and testimony. They asked to see two short clips of a 2019 police interview with Holley, during which Megan McDonald's cellphone was mentioned.
More Stories
The jury in the second murder trial of Edward Holley is focusing certain people and evidence as they finish their fifth full day of deliberations at the Orange County Courthouse.
The jury of six men and six women sent six notes to the court Friday requesting to review specific evidence and testimony.
They asked to see two short clips of a 2019 police interview with Holley, during which Megan McDonald's cellphone was mentioned.
Holley is accused of killing Megan in March 2003 in the Town of Wallkill.
Prosecutors have argued Holley was in the back seat of Megan's 1991 Mercury Sable sedan when he attacked Megan who was in the driver's seat, hitting her in the head and face with a hammer as the fight spilled outside.
Megan's body was found the next day by a dumpster on Bowser Road.
Her car was found three days later oddly parked at an apartment complex.
Her cellphone was left in the car.
An employee of a company hired by the prosecution to do low-match DNA analysis testified that Megan's cellphone had DNA on it that was 53 times more likely to match Holley's DNA than that of a random person, and that it was not a definitive full match.
The prosecution has said the finding is significant.
The defense disagreed, urging the jury during its closing argument not to put weight on the prosecution's evidence, adding that the prosecution's case is built on lies.
In the 2019 police interview, Holley said he was not sure if Megan had a cellphone in 2003 and would usually page her if she was not at home.
The jury requested late Friday to review more evidence, including another portion of the 2019 police interview.
The jury will return Monday morning to review the evidence and have some testimony read back to them before they continue with deliberations.
