Emotions Run High As Jury Renders Guilty Verdict in Marsh Trial

by Antoinnette Borbon

A jury of his peers would deliver a guilty verdict today in the state’s case against the young man responsible for the deaths of Oliver Northup and Claudia Maupin.

The panel, which consisted of eight women and four men, delivered a verdict of guilty in the first degree of two counts of murder with case enhancements for the use of a deadly weapon, also finding to be true the special circumstances of multiple victims, torture and lying in wait.

But it didn’t appear to come easy for one of the jurors, who sobbed during the reading of the verdict, and wiped the tears from her face as she watched Daniel’s reaction to their decision.

A red-faced Daniel Marsh, who was often seen covering his eyes and hanging his head, sat with hands clasped together, teary-eyed, as he listened to the verdict being read.

Daniel Marsh would confess to a gruesome act in which he took the lives of the elderly couple while they slept in their Cowell Blvd. home.

It was on a night in April of 2013, Daniel told FBI Agent Campion, that he roamed around looking for an open window. Adorned in black, wearing a ski mask and boots covered with duct tape, Daniel made his way through the open window of the Northups’ home.

Daniel told Agent Campion that he stood in the bedroom of the elderly couple as they slept and that “I knew it was too late to stop, I had to do something.”

He described in his confession, “It felt surreal, like I was out of body, euphoria….a better high than opium.”

It wasn’t until June of 2013, two months later, that authorities would learn, from Daniel’s best friend and (Daniel’s) girlfriend, the gruesome details of what Daniel had done in the early morning hours of April 14, 2013.

Daniel had confided in the two, as they all shared a liking for the same films, music, and recreational use of marijuana and alcohol…as they escaped from a shared sense of worsening depression.

In his closing, Assistant Chief Deputy District Attorney Mike Cabral told jurors, “Daniel was driven by his own desire, a blood lust.”

But the defense would argue that side effects from the prescribed anti-depressants caused the young boy to have intrusive, morbid thoughts of homicide. Deputy Public Defender Ron Johnson stated to the jurors, “To expect a 14-year-old child to know why he is having those feelings, thoughts, borders on absurd.”

But in less than two hours, the jury would decide on first degree murder with enhancements and find all special circumstances to be true.

After reading the verdict of guilty, Judge Stephen Mock polled the jury members. One by one, they answered yes to the decision of guilt.

Today brought the first phase of the trial to an end. Next, jurors will have to listen to testimony to decide if Marsh is not guilty by reason of insanity.

On Monday morning the second phase is set to begin. If found insane, Daniel would spend his sentence in a mental health facility. If jurors deem him sane, Daniel faces life in state prison.

It was an emotional day for family members and friends, who have endured the trial through often grueling testimony from witnesses.

But there was a sigh of relief from the family of the victims as they thanked DDA Cabral, who also appeared to be overcome with emotion.

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts


  1. davisite4

    Argh, another writer for the Vanguard who overuses/misuses the subjunctive! Please stop (both you and David!)! It distracts from the story.

    “A jury of his peers would deliver a guilty verdict today…”
    “Daniel Marsh would confess to a gruesome act…”
    “But the defense would argue that side effects….”
    “But in less than two hours, the jury would decide on first degree murder”

    None of those “woulds” are necessary or appropriate. Instead, those sentences should read:

    “A jury of his peers delivered a guilty verdict today…”
    “Daniel Marsh confessed to a gruesome act…”
    “But the defense argued that side effects….”
    “But in less than two hours, the jury decided on first degree murder”

    1. Highbeam

      davisite4, I agree with you, and that is not the way I “would” prefer to word things (here, forgive my using the word to denote repetition in the past, or habitual past behavior), but when I am doing some editing for David I actually try not to modify the author’s style too much, so I allowed the auxiliary modal usage (if I correctly remember what it is called) to talk about the past or the future-in-the-past … which admittedly almost created a sense of habitual past behavior or a conditional. My apologies in my failures to create a perfect article, but, again, I do not believe that David wants my assistance to rewrite the articles completely – nor is there time, as they are posted.

      The authors are, as I have said before, sitting in court through long hours of testimony, recording as much of the detail as they can without trying to make it a verbatim transcript, and recording their impressions and observations, as well. They seldom have more than a couple hours at night to pull their notes into a coherent article, and I have less time than that to fact-check and copy edit. I appreciate and applaud their work.

      1. davisite4

        I appreciate and applaud their work, too. Sorry I didn’t make that clear initially. However, all I have done here is to point out a small grammatical tick that the author could be more aware of when writing. As the goal is clear communication, anything that clouds or distracts from that goal ought to be considered welcome feedback. I wrote my comments to try to improve things, not to condemn you or the author.

        1. Highbeam

          That was the intent of my post, davisite4, to appreciate your feedback. I am sorry that it came across defensively. But I did want to explain the pressure that the authors, diligently watching the entire trial, may be under.

      2. Antoinnette

        Thank you, Cathy…..very kind…and I appreciate your efforts to figure things out quickly….often I am trying to get finished by 4 am…lol…and trust me, sometimes falling asleep during…lol.

        I know some of the work is poor, but appreciate the forbearance.

    2. PhilColeman

      Probably it’s not possible with the software limitations in this blog. It sure would be nice to privately dialog with a post or article writer on some error in grammar or spelling without the public crucifixion. At a minimum, it must discourage folks from making possible meaningful posts for fear of being slammed for an error in style and not substance.

      That said, I learned a new word today. “subjunctive.” I think I’m guilt free from the unnecessary use of “would” but will be extra vigilant now. My Midwest upbringing had me dangling prepositions in both speech and writing for decades, until somebody cruelly called me out in a very public setting. Humiliating, but effective. But the guy COULD have corrected me later, privately, but he didn’t. My respect for his grammatical skills increased, but for people-skills, it dropped a lot.

      1. davisite4

        Agreed that it would be good to have a way to contact authors (or anyone else on the blog) privately. But “public crucifixion”? “Slammed”? Don’t you think you’re exaggerating just a little bit?

        The Vanguard had already announced the verdict, so people who wanted to comment on that already had a place to do so. The purpose of this piece was to convey the emotional reactions to the verdict, i.e., to tell a story. And my point was that the author’s grammar detracted from that story. Surely I don’t need to have a “public crucifixion” or be “slammed” for pointing that out and hoping to see it better in the future.

        1. PhilColeman

          When you are the recipient, instead of the deliverer, of such mass publicized criticism you will develop a better understanding of whether or not it is hyperbole.

      2. Antoinnette

        Thank you so much for that one, Phil….Yes, often times it is the manner in which people bring something to you…been guilty of failing on that at times too.

        Although I appreciate any criticism and/or corrections and the readers posts…I believe it would be best to take it to a private setting. I apologize if ever I came off defensive or crouse…not at all my intent.

        It is always a lesson for me to think before I speak..but we are all human and fall short of that one…lol

        I know my work needs constant correction with editing and I praise our editor for her time to read over all of our articles, it takes a lot of time I am sure.

        But I have cautioned myself now on the word, “would,” it does make sense to omit it.

        Thanks again, Phil…:)

  2. Biddlin

    For journalistic excellence, I read The New York Times, but it wouldn’t hurt you guys to read “The Elements of Style,” Strunk & White.
    (Sorry, davisite4, I knew it was wrong, but could not control the urge. I plead “Diminished Capacity.”)

  3. Antoinnette

    Thanks for the grammatical advice….perhaps you should ask David if we could use an extra editor….

    Or stick with the Enterprise, Democrat or Sac Bee….they are seasoned journalists…we are law interns with a different purpose.

    Thanks for reading! I’ll take it in stride….

      1. Antoinnette

        Actually completed three years of court reporting school, then decided it wasn’t what I really wanted to do.

        My grades in English, grammar, etc….were all A’s. But definitely need to brush up again. I would hope to be able to do my own editing…oops, there I go again with the proverbial, “woulds,” lol….

        I am a creature of habit…lol. But will work on it..:)

  4. davisite4

    You are trying to communicate, yes? That is your purpose. In order to communicate well, you need reasonably good grammar. This isn’t the worst grammar mistake ever — there are many worse ones — but it is a very distracting one that gives a meaning to your sentences that you didn’t intend (and David makes the exact same mistake, frequently). So, you might consider taking this small comment as a helpful suggestion instead of getting defensive and brushing it off as not your problem, or sending me to other places to read news (??)

  5. tj

    “Law interns”: This term is a little confusing. Vanguard interns aren’t attending or planning to attend law school, they’re reporting on legal activity in the courthouse.

    1. Highbeam

      Actually, tj, some of the interns have been in law school (UCD/King Hall, not sure about any from McGeorge), undergrads in pre-law, graduates with a JD, or paralegals…and some have been journalism majors, I believe. But of course the internship differs from a legal internship that requires the boss to be an attorney…

    2. Antoinnette

      Actually most of every intern has either been prelaw, beginning law and/or journalism, paralegals, and recently, a law graduate. Several of the kids went on to start law school this fall.

      I, myself will begin an apprenticeship under an attorney as opposed to school, hopefully be able to pass the Bar in the next three to four years…Lord willing..lol

      But I will say this, no matter what they come aboard to learn, or get experience with, there is a great deal more you walk away with than simply telling a story…even if you are terrible at it….lol..

      Thanks for reading…

  6. DavisBurns

    Wow. All about grammar and not a word about the verdict. I’ll go first. It was no surprise. I think his defense did the best they could with what they were given. I wonder what diagnosis he has. I would rather see him in a mental hospital but I believe that won’t happen.

  7. dlemongello

    The whole thing hinges on the LEGAL DEFINITION of insane and if he meets it. Would anyone in their “right mind” do what he did? NO WAY! He was driven to do it by something or a lack of something, probably both, the latter being the mental/emotional ability to resist such and urge. I have no creds but I believe he is very ill.

    1. Tia Will


      I can guarantee you that the Vanguard participant with the most expertise in this area is in complete agreement with you and with experience with both the prison and state mental hospital systems believes that the latter is the best placement for Mr. Marsh,

    2. Antoinnette

      I agree, it’s a tough one, did he know what he was doing? yes, probably, but in what state of mind does an individual carry out something such as this? and clean up the mess so well, then tell friends?

      Then you have the confession, his demeanor changed during it and his behavior towards what he did and how he felt about it and how he expressed it to authorities It didn’t seem like a normal minded kid at all?

      During the part where he was left alone, it appeared he was even talking to himself? as if someone else was present? But it was hard to make out what he was saying…and, it could have been an act if he thought he was being watched, too? A whole lot to speculate I guess…

      I imagine unless we are the doctors treating him now, we can only make assumptions?

      A truly tough case….

  8. KonaOhana

    delemongello, I agree. There were causal effects that were obviously going on in his teenage mind. The history of the negative effects of the BIGPHARMA drugs SSRI’S is now over 50+ yrs. The group of manufactures called BIGPharma behave like a mafia. A drug cartel. This judgement is not mine. It’s from several doctors worldwide who have worked for years to expose this behavior of lies, bribery, murder & distortion of the evidence to confuse society. This confusion creates a distortion of the evidence. This distortion of truth begins with articles claiming independent research which in fact are not. They are written in-house by BIGPharma then signed by doctors which are “kept” & paid as consultants. In fact they’re prostituting themselves. They’re thousands of these doctors nationally that are paid to agree with the propaganda written& published in medical journals to establish a wall of lies to convince those that don’t have time of desire to do their own research to confirm these fake reports. It’s truly HEINOUS that the medical profession has been hijacked by a cartel interested only in profit with no consideration for the health of anyone. If they were, this overwhelming mountain of evidence of suicides and murder being presented to the FDA since the 1980’s would have caused a ban of these drugs like in many European countries. The ban of use on anyone under 25 yrs started in the EU. The corporate ownership of the FDA has prevented the medical researchers inside the FDA from enforcing the ban set up in 1980. During the Reagan administration we now know the vice president George Bush was heavily invested in the Eli Lilly group. He used his influence to reopen/end the ban. This the assault on our mental stability nationally started again.

    This information is published in “Prozac Panacea or Pandora” by Dr Ann Blake Tracy assisted by Dr Peter Breggin. This book was written as a reference book for doctors and researchers to get the truth behind the wall of orphans and lies built and maintained by Eli Lilly& others. The prosecution’s witness Dr Jacob is one of these “consultants” that are on staff liers. They travel the country perverting the law by lying to the court. He has been repeatedly admonished by the Psychiatric professionals organization in the state where he lives. They stopped short of pulling his license. But they were very clear they started publicly that his thoughts & practices were not valid. They belittled him publicly. His income is over 75% from Eli Lilly at up to $30,000 each time he testifies. This proves he’s owned by Eli Lilly as are his opinions. These paid propagandists should not be allowed to testify on any case. Especially cases that have the effect to ruin lives by continuing the wall of lies and B.S. that perpetuate the same effort to poison even more people causing suicide and death for profit.

    By no means are these profits small. It’s reported these companies make over a billion dollars EACH MONTH on EACH PILL. SSRI’S are distributed under several names by ALL are effectively the same medication. Prozac, Celexa, Lexapro, Zoloft, Paxil, Luvox, Pexeva, Vilazodone, Serafim (the new name for Prozac). That’s a huge Sun of money they can use to change reality via every means at their disposal.
    They finance medical schools that primary focus in treating anyone is VIA drugs. The original talk therapy in psychoanalysis has been largely replaced by drugs as in the case of Dan Marsh per the data released Dutton his trial. The Kaiser group of doctors treating the young man didn’t talk to each other or read each other’s reports. They they were prescribing drugs without any concern for his work being. Indiscriminate drugging of a 13 yrs old through his 15th year. That’s malpractice at any level. Indiscriminate drugging of tuts young man was inexcusable by the evidence. Proof being each doctor brought their own MALPRACTICE attorney with them to court to assure they didn’t admit to incompetence while on the stand. Although the defense Mr Johnson made that point to the court & jury that these doctors were so obviously incompetent they had to bring their own protection to trial.

    This community, ALL communities must read the volumes of data proving the duplicity of the manufactures & doctors in these murders and suicides at the following links. http://www.drugawareness.org. http://www.ssristories.net. http://www.ssristories.drugawareness.org http://www.Breggin.com. One can search on YouTube the term SSRI’S and you will find so many films& testimonials by doctors, patients, ex drug pushers from BIGPHARMA ALL trying to earn the world.

    I question why haven’t the “new media” blown the lid off this hideously heinous behavior of the medical system. The answer must be the hundreds of billions of dollars the CARTEL has to spread over and cover up the truth.

    The CFC, Center for Disease Control reported there were 100,000 suicide in the USA in 2012. They estimate the majority were caused by ssri’s. Further it’s estimated and equal number of murders. The research supports that the total of all mass murders at schools & public places were perpetrated by people taking these drugs.

    Additional data available from Dr Peter Gotzshe author of ” Deadly Medicines & Organized Crime” in which he exposes the methods c buffoons uses worldwide to promote this heinous, hideous attack on our society

    1. KonaOhana

      Correction re CDC report is est of 100,000 suicides since Medical researchers est the majority are caused by the effects of SSRI’S. They also estimate there’s an equal number of murders and that the majority are by patients taking these drugs. Therefore we as a nation owe it to our families especially our children to stop, halt any further manufacture or distribution of these drugs other than for the purpose of withdrawals at a safe slow titration so as to not trigger any further harm to anyone. To stop the further spread of these drugs. The only proven benefit had been the placebo effect. Thus give patients chalk tablets their safe and cause no psychosis. The polite term for insanity.

      Please take the time to educate yourselves visa the sites and books I’ve listed. It’s horrific. It’s also imperative we all take responsibility and take action. Protect our families our communities.

      The approach taken by the Deputy DA of revenge and assault will only serve to harm or children. To help facilitate the continuation of the poisoning of our nation. These levers of suicide, murder etc were never prevalent before SSRI’S began distribution. Let’s return to a sane and safe WORLD by removing these drugs from the marketplace

      1. KonaOhana

        Again typo. The number of suicides is a total since 2012. Please insert 2012 between. …. since …… and Medical researchers.
        My program deleted the “2012” sorry

  9. Tia Will


    I completely share your concerns about overuse and misuse of the SSRIs. I agree that there has been overreach in the expansion of the diagnosis for which their use is authorized and in their “off label” usage. Having said that I feel that when one uses the same tactics that the drug companies have used, namely exaggerated claims of either harm or benefit to support your case does more harm than good. It is in this spirit that I would take exception to some of your comments.

    1. “lies, bribery, murder & distortion of the evidence to confuse society”
    The lies and distortions I can corroborate. The bribery and murder……unless you have proof that this has occurred in specific instances, I think this
    serves to detract from your case.
    2. “In fact they’re prostituting themselves”
    The history of the SSRIs is very long and complicated. There have been very well done studies as well as poorly executed studies on both sides of
    this issue. I feel that some of the doctors that testify on either side of this issue are probably thoroughly convinced of the veracity of the testimony that
    they are providing, while some others…..probably not so much so. But to use a highly inflammatory word such as “prostitute” to characterize all who
    do not share your opinion of this highly controversial area of medicine again does not help support your case.
    3. ALL are effectively the same medication. Prozac, Celexa, Lexapro, Zoloft, Paxil, Luvox, Pexeva, Vilazodone
    This is not accurate. All of these drugs are distinct biochemically and some have quite different efficacy and safety profiles.
    4. The links that you provided are almost all testimonials about how the involved drugs might have affected the actions of individuals. They are individual
    accounts rather than demonstrated fact. While there is nothing wrong with this, I do not feel that searching You Tube can be considered research
    and would certainly not rise to the level of evidence either in favor of or against any particular treatment plan.
    5. “They estimate the majority were caused by ssri’s.”
    “The research supports that the total of all mass murders at schools & public places were perpetrated by people taking these drugs.”
    Causation is a very tricky determination to make. The fact that an individual was taking, or had been taking these drugs does not mean that the
    drug caused the action. A simple example from another area of medicine to make the point. A woman on birth control pills has a 3-5% chance of
    conception. If she conceives while taking the pill, it does not mean that the pill caused the pregnancy. The fact that she was sexually active caused
    the pregnancy. This is certainly not a reason to pull birth control pills off the market because “they do not work”.
    6. “That’s malpractice at any level. Indiscriminate drugging of tuts young man was inexcusable by the evidence. Proof being each doctor brought their
    own MALPRACTICE attorney with them to court to assure they didn’t admit to incompetence while on the stand.
    The presence or absence of a malpractice attorney says absolutely nothing about the competence of the physician. The only thing that this means
    in my mind is that the physicians involved were availing themselves of counsel which would not be needed if our system were more focused on
    determination of fact and probability of causality and less focused on whom to “pin the blame”. If you do not believe that this is true, just read back
    through the comments on these threads covering the Marsh trial from beginning to end with the endless pursuit of “whom to blame”.

  10. Antoinnette

    Wow! interesting posts…I agree for the more part about the drugs…totally against prescription drugs like these for children and some adults unless properly diagnosed to need them.

    However, that being said, I still believe it was a combination of things that caused him to feel this way, not just drugs.

    I do agree too, that his mind couldn’t have been sound at the time of the commission but the jurors will have to decide on that, although tough and as you can read by this article, somewhat emotionally painful decision to make for this young kid.

    I pray he is able to be helped wherever he ends up….

  11. Tia Will


    “unless properly diagnosed to need them.”

    And here is lies the rub. None of these physicians are bribed to prescribe these medications. I have no doubt that at the time of the prescription, each thought they were doing the right thing for Mr. Marsh. Unfortunately, we have witnessed a terrible, terrible outcome. However, that does not mean that anyone was uncaring, or incompetent, or malicious.

    If Mr. Marsh had had the same outcome as my son, hospitalized for severe depression with suicidal ideation and successfully treated at age 16 with Prozac as well as intensive counseling and extremely close observation including the use of timed “no self harm” contracts and check ins by phone when he was home before me, then we would all have been congratulating the doctors and therapists on the excellent outcome. Ironic isn’t it. I credit Prozac as part of the successful treatment plan that saved my son’s life while Mr. Marsh had quite a different course.

    I just don’t think that it is ever wise to jump to conclusions based on anecdotes. If we were to use my anecdote, we would be lead to believe that Prozac is a wonderful choice for teens. Not a good policy whether for, or against.

    1. Antoinnette

      True….Tia….but I wasn’t implying the doctors were uncaring, incompetent or malicious?

      I only felt some of them failed him by repeatedly prescribing medicine without checking on him and feel it important to make darn sure there is a need for any medicine.

      However, that being said, it falls on the parents responsibility too.

      The difference here is parenting…I am not the greatest mother, but I was not going to stop until we found the right medication for my sons seizures just as you did for your son. That is what it takes. Daniel may or may not have had this?

      Recall, he was in charge of taking his own meds? The therapist told mom, “don’t hover over Daniel,” so she put them into a bowl..

      Contradictions from witnesses, one doctor said mom was involved, dad was not, and another stated opposite…a lot to speculate on, right?

  12. Tia Will


    Agreed. I should have been more clear. You were not making that statement. But many other posters have attributed at best lack of attention and at worst “prostitution” to doctors involved in prescribing and or defending the SSRIs. One of the expert witnesses made implications about the competency of the prescribing physicians as did another poster who claimed that the presence of an attorney proved incompetency.
    My comment was actually directed towards those who would make these kinds of claims with little to no evidence.

    What I think this comes down to in the end is fragmentation of care and need to assess blame rather than a collaborative approach in which the providers reinforce the need for input from all involved ( patient, parents, sibs, school personnel and other providers ) and that each involved individual be open and willing to contribute. It seems like everyone who knew Daniel had a little piece of the very complicated individual that is Daniel…..but no one had enough to put the pieces together to discern the developing crisis.

    1. Antoinnette

      Thank you, Tia…agree, I understand you. I respect your wisdom and I gain so much insight into the medical field from all of the doctors on here whom have taken the time to educate some of us…lol

      Thank you for keeping up with all these articles…:)

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for