‘You’re speculating’: Judge fires back at claim he influenced Caneiro jury

FREEHOLD, N.J. (Court TV) — A New Jersey judge will have to examine his own behavior as he weighs whether to grant a new trial to a man convicted of murdering his brother and his brother’s family.

Paul Caneiro, 59, was convicted of four counts of first-degree murder and aggravated arson for the deaths of his brother, Keith Caneiro, 50, and Keith Caneiro’s wife and two children. Jennifer Caneiro, 45, Jesse Caneiro, 11, and Sophia, 8, were killed in their home; investigators said both Keith Caneiro and Jennifer Caneiro were shot to death and the children were stabbed. After they were attacked, their home was set on fire. Prosecutors said Paul Caneiro then returned to his own home and set it on fire in an attempt to conceal his involvement.

On Monday, Paul Caneiro returned to court as his attorneys fight for a new trial. In a brief filed in advance of Monday’s hearing, the defendant claimed, in part, that Judge Marc Lemieux’s visible frustration with the defense during the trial led to the guilty verdict. But Lemieux challenged the allegations, saying there’s no way his actions could have affected the jury’s decision. “All of those instances [cited in the defense’s brief] did not occur either in the jury’s presence, meaning they were not even physically in the courtroom, or happened at sidebar,” Lemieux said. “Can you walk me through your theory on how these incidents that the jury did not observe, how they actually could have impacted their ability to decide this case fairly?”

Andy Murray, representing Paul Caneiro, responded that the issue was not just how the judge treated the defense team, but how kind and light-hearted the rest of the courtroom environment was. “The juxtaposition of that lightheartedness, with what I think was visible frustration on the Court’s part, and just reacting to the parties specifically,” Murray said. “It appeared to me that it would have been obvious to anybody looking that Your Honor was frustrated, Your Honor was annoyed.”

But Lemieux argued there was no way to know what the jury saw or interpreted. “You’re speculating,” he said. “The only thing you’ve said so far, out of fairness to you, is that ‘It appeared to me that they would see this.’ But it’s not like you were standing there, staring at the jurors and they communicated with you in some way. It’s not like you have any documented proof that actually there was some impact on them.”

Lemieux also noted that his jury instructions explicitly told the jury not to speculate about sidebars, to consider any interactions between the Court and counsel and not to treat the judge’s rulings as favoring either side.

“We would have had to have been in two different courtrooms to be able to say that there was somehow a manifest injustice in this trial,” Prosecutor Christopher Decker said in his argument on Monday.

Lemieux took the matter under consideration and said he would issue a written ruling in the future, though no timeframe was offered.

Paul Caneiro faces life in prison when he is sentenced. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for May 12.