KANSAS CITY, Mo., Oct. 26, 2007

Jury: Death For Expectant Mom Killer

Lisa Montgomery Guilty Of Murdering A Pregnant Woman And Attempting To Steal The Fetus

  • Lisa Montgomery (left) and Bobbie Jo Stinnett (right). Montgomery was convicted Monday for killing the expectant mother and cutting the baby from her womb in 2004.

    Lisa Montgomery (left) and Bobbie Jo Stinnett (right). Montgomery was convicted Monday for killing the expectant mother and cutting the baby from her womb in 2004.  (AP/Nodaway-Holt High School)

  • Interactive Out Of Sight: Missing Kids

    Get the facts on kidnappings, learn predator profiles and check out resources for locating missing children.

  • Interactive FBI Crime Statistics

    Explore the latest information on U.S. crime, from acts of violence to property damage.

(CBS/AP)  A federal jury decided Friday that a woman convicted of killing an expectant mother and cutting her baby from her womb should receive the death penalty.

Jurors deliberated more than five hours before recommending the sentence for Lisa Montgomery. Judge Gary Fenner will sentence Montgomery, but he had told jurors he was obligated to abide by their recommendation. A sentencing date has not been set.

Montgomery, 39, was convicted Monday of kidnapping and killing Bobbie Jo Stinnett on Dec. 16, 2004, in the victim's home in the northwest Missouri town of Skidmore. She was arrested the next day in Melvern, Kan., where she was showing off the newborn as her own.

Montgomery wiped her eyes with a tissue as the jury announced its sentencing decision. Her attorney, Fred Duchardt, had his hand on her shoulder.

When the jurors were asked if they agreed with the decision, each responded: "Yes, your honor." Afterward, the jury asked to speak to prosecutors and defense attorneys but did not say why.

Lisa Montgomery's husband, Kevin, and his parents were not in the courtroom when the verdict was read but came in as the jurors left. The family then went into another room without speaking to reporters.

Prosecutors argued that Stinnett's killing and mutilation is the kind of crime for which capital punishment is intended.

Showing jurors photos of the bloody crime scene, the prosecution told jurors Thursday that Montgomery deserves to die because of the heinousness of her crime, and because computer evidence — including Internet searches on performing Caesareans — shows the crime was premeditated.

Federal prosecutor Roseann Ketchmark said Montgomery had violated Stinnett in the "most wicked way possible," then failed to seek medical attention for the infant, who was four weeks shy of her due date.

Defense attorney Fred Duchardt, who claims sexual abuse during Montgomery's childhood led to mental illness, asked the jury to spare his client's life. He said emotional abuse from her mother and sexual abuse from her stepfather "killed Lisa's soul."

"I'm not ashamed to ask you all for mercy," Duchardt told the jury. "I ask for it on behalf of Lisa and all the people who love her."

Prosecutors claimed Montgomery was faking mental illness to aid her defense. They also noted that few of the many people who have been sexually abused go on to kill.

Ketchmark showed jurors crime scene photos highlighting the blows to Stinnett's head, injuries to her elbows, defensive cuts to her hands and strangulation marks.

"Look at the ragged abdominal cuts," she said. "This is vicious. This defendant mutilated her."

Ketchmark also described how the gruesome death had hurt Stinnett's family, particularly her husband, Zeb, who was forced to raise their daughter alone, and her mother, Becky Harper, who found her daughter's body.

© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Add a Comment See all 80 Comments
by rshoff2 October 29, 2007 4:21 PM EDT
I think we should worry more about our next door neighbors welfare than concern ourselves with any human rights of a sociapathic murderer. All normal people feel the need for revenge and enjoy watching it. For those concerned that we are ''blood thirsty'', think again. This woman was given full process of our court system with defense. The woman she killed did not. We are not picking a person out of the crowd to take our hostilities out on. In fact, regardless of our opinion, it is up to the court and they have decided. Correctly as they may add. And regarding Hermitt''s wish to abandon the separation of Church and State, I have one question. Exactly which Church do you want to govern? Your? Mine? Christian? Muslim? Please be realistic and support the separation of Church and State.
Reply to this comment
by usaprophet October 29, 2007 4:15 AM EDT
Unlike Hitlery and the so-called GOP frontrunner, Giuliani, Dr. Paul fights for the right of an innocent, unborn child. He believes the right to life is at the heart of the American ideals of liberty. His professional and legislative record demonstrates his strong commitment to this pro-life principle. In 40 years of medical practice, he never once considered performing an abortion, nor did he ever find abortion necessary to save the life of a pregnant woman. In Congress, he authored legislation that seeks to define life as beginning at conception (HR 1094). He is also the prime sponsor of HR 300, which would negate the effect of Roe v Wade by removing the ability of federal courts to interfere with state legislation to protect life. This is a practical, direct approach to ending federal court tyranny which threatens our constitutional republic and has caused the deaths of 45 million of the unborn. He also authored HR 1095, which prevents federal funds to be used for population control. Many other GOP candidates, except Giuliani, talk about being pro-life. Ron Paul took direct action to restore protection for the unborn. As an OB/GYN doctor, he delivered over 4,000 babies. That experience made him an unshakable foe of abortion. Many of you may have his book, Challenge To Liberty, which champions the idea that there cannot be liberty in a society unless the rights of all innocents are protected. Ron Paul respects the dignity of human life.
Reply to this comment
by usaprophet October 28, 2007 9:14 PM EDT
I want to report a major fire, my friends. Our Constitution is on fire. And it''s currently being burned in Congress. See H.R. 1955, a.k.a., Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007. I couldn''t believe it. Apparently, activists with Web sites are really begining to anger the elite insofar as they are publically holding them accountable for their evil. Here''s a part of the bill, which passed the house on Oct 23, in spite of Congressman, Ron Paul''s opposition thereto. The right to free speech on the Internet is gone, my friends. Look it up for yourself, and weep for your country that our rights have eroded this far. Here''s a short excerpt from the bill''s DEFINITIONS statement: "The development and implementation of methods and processes that can be utilized to prevent violent radicalization, homegrown terrorism, and ideologically based violence in the United States is critical to combating domestic terrorism." Here''s another excerpt from the bill''s FINDINGS statement: "The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens." And guess who get''s to decide what is "terrorist-related propaganda?" You got it! The Department of Homeland Insecurity, an agency that''s answerable ONLY to The President. If Ron Paul isn''t elected, our country is doomed!
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 October 28, 2007 3:21 AM EDT
It may shock ye...US of A was and have never been a Christian nation. Religion is said..Constution does not have God in it. We were barred in the foster homes and schools therefore we we did not attend church. There is such a thing as sep of church and state in the US of A. Yes there is that.
Reply to this comment
by hermit22 October 28, 2007 2:23 AM EDT
how many crimes would be avoided if childabusers were DEALT with when the kid was still a kid and not ignored and not mentioned until the kid is a grown person going berserk at age 39? all this misguided nonsence about the mythical "separation of church and state" has done horrendous damage on the culture. the government and schools quit teaching "thou shalt not kill" like they used to teach, but perversly the government still can kill someone who kills. don''t give them the warning NOT to kill but yet....dish out the capital punishment. what is crazy about that picture? many schools were BEGUN to teach the Bible and the commandments, like harvard and yale & a few others of those big wig schools. they lost their compass and got off tract sadly. check out their history. they taught "thou shalt not kill"....etc. also "Sunday opening" that robs children of their Sunday School lessons is also part of the problem. Hollyweird TEACHS murders on a regular basis. what is those old fat cats responsibilities in these matters?
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 October 28, 2007 12:23 AM EDT
Ma''am from the UK..What do they do with your Nation''s killers and you have them.I read the bbc and hear your news on the teley here in America..
In America the prisoms are full..They learn one thing in them how to be worse at their craft that being crime..I wish they would not kill but have you heard of copy cats..The cameras don''t cut down crime as we thot it would..There are gang killings..What should we do..We can''t pander to them.As a people what are we to do..Is is right she live yes and no..Will she learn from being locked up..I don''t know..Will she think of the lady she killed. I don''t know..I could not put her to sleep..Her peers have..
Reply to this comment
by alanrobisch October 27, 2007 11:52 PM EDT
Thank God we don''''t have the death penalty here in UK


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Suzannesugar at 04:24 PM : Oct 27, 2007

You do you allow abotion
Reply to this comment
by alanrobisch October 27, 2007 11:48 PM EDT
We ought to stop killing and even more we ought to stop taking satisfaction in killing. It is vile.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by CBS_Oliver at 12:42 PM : Oct 27, 2007

do you as they like to say support a women''s right to choose. If you do, you are being a hypocrit since one life is as valueable as another
Reply to this comment
by rickstas October 27, 2007 7:37 PM EDT
Speaking of IQ, libsluvsuvs, your manner of speaking I think may be indicative of yours.
Reply to this comment
by suzannesugar October 27, 2007 7:24 PM EDT
Thank God we don''t have the death penalty here in UK
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 October 27, 2007 7:10 PM EDT
scully152,,Women have been put to death and they did die..The man in the white house when he was gov of TX saw to it that a woman put to death...She did..Why should they live when they kill. I feel it goes against my faith but I did not kill..They did therefore they wrote that ticket..How do we as a people and women stop the killings...Do we pander to them knowing they killed and they showed no mercy when they killed.. They prey on others..
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 October 27, 2007 6:53 PM EDT
No she can''t be safely locked up..Dear yer must learn yer lessons that of life..Have yer ever been the same room as some who as killed..Yer meet them and they are so stweet yer think no they didn''t but DNA don''t ly..Some are azzes bent on that very thing.. Their hatred is so strong..I had to learn to read the tones of the voices as I can''t read faces..That woman killed and as she lie dying her child ripped from her body..She will do it again if not stopped.. THE GOLDEN RULE..Yer want to take her home...Yer not to kill as yer bible say but that don''t work as We have sep of church and state...
Reply to this comment
by fibonacci_ October 27, 2007 6:01 PM EDT
You don''t want to hear me elaborate on my point.
Reply to this comment
by michellem99-2009 October 27, 2007 5:30 PM EDT
I am suppose to pity her,feel sorry for her..Sorry I don''t..Why should I..They kill...No by pulling them to sleep won''t bring the ones they killed.I am merciful person..A Mainer. When I left and lived in the big cities I could not believe the shiit they do just to be the centre of attn...Where I am from we care for others..I could walk down the street..Shop..Sure there was crime growing up. We knew our place..We knew about Desset Islandand what was there..That woman would be dealt with right fast..Yes they most likely do to her as she did to that lady...Huh yer say.
Reply to this comment
by libsluvsuvs October 27, 2007 4:38 PM EDT
Posted by fibonacci_ at 01:12 PM : Oct 27, 2007
+ report abuse

*************

can you please elaborate your point instead of going around like a fu cking drama queen..(something that a person with an IQ of 78 can understand).

I have this feeling that right after your comment, you see yourself as one of the elite liberal inteligentsa that sits at "starbuck sipping a $5.00 cup of coffee" and you think you are better than the man ''at the doughnut shop sipping a .50 cent cup of coffee''.

Reply to this comment
by libsluvsuvs October 27, 2007 4:34 PM EDT
So you wish to kill her to say yourself the money it would cost to imprison her?

You do not have the power to free her to another''''s care - nor the inclination, it would seem. So your suggestion that someone take her in is just malicious taunting.

Too bad.

Posted by CBS_Oliver at 12:57 PM : Oct 27, 2007
+ report abuse

*****

as malicious as the idea from which i was retorting. to suggest that this person wants to save her from the gas chamber because ''she actually cares about this woman'' in oppose to the '' i just want to feel beneviolent so i can sleep good at night''.

the jury and our system decided DEATH..and to suggest NOT is malicious.
Reply to this comment
by fibonacci_ October 27, 2007 4:12 PM EDT
Yea, what a moron. Obviously doesn''t read my posts carefully enough either. Probably a bush fan who wears shorts and a baseball cap and has an IQ of about 78.
Reply to this comment
by cbs_oliver October 27, 2007 3:57 PM EDT
Posted by libsluvsuvs at 12:44 PM : Oct 27, 2007 (responding to fibonacci_): "*rolls eyes*..if you are so inclined in dealing with criminals in a civilized way..HOW ABOUT YOU KEEP THEM IN YOUR HOUSE AND YOU PAY FOR THE UPKEEP AND BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF THESE ''''POOR SOULS''''.."

So you wish to kill her to say yourself the money it would cost to imprison her?

You do not have the power to free her to another''s care - nor the inclination, it would seem. So your suggestion that someone take her in is just malicious taunting.

Too bad.
Reply to this comment
by libsluvsuvs October 27, 2007 3:44 PM EDT
That isn''''t a substitute for the death penalty, that is the death penalty. Blood! Blood! Oh god mother, blood!

Posted by fibonacci_ at 08:52 AM : Oct 27, 2007
+ report abuse

*****

*rolls eyes*..if you are so inclined in dealing with criminals in a civilized way..HOW ABOUT YOU KEEP THEM IN YOUR HOUSE AND YOU PAY FOR THE UPKEEP AND BE ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE ACTIONS OF THESE ''POOR SOULS''..


you talk a lot of sh*t let me see if you can walk the walk
Reply to this comment
by cbs_oliver October 27, 2007 3:42 PM EDT
Lisa Montgomery can be safely incarcerated.

Although she is depraved and/or profoundly deranged there is no good reason to kill her.

We ought to stop killing and even more we ought to stop taking satisfaction in killing. It is vile.
Reply to this comment
See all 80 Comments

Exclusive Webshow

Best-selling author Mitch Albom on his first nonfiction work since "Tuesdays with Morrie." Watch Now

  • MOST POPULAR
Discussed
  1. House Passes Landmark Health Care Bill

    (478 recent comments)

Latest News
News in Pictures
Scroll Left Scroll Right
Connect with CBS News

Stay connected with the CBS News using your favorite social networks and online news applications: