Closing Arguments Wrap Up in Shannon/Campos Double Murder, Kidnapping Trial – Jury Deliberations Begin


By Oliver Camarena

WOODLAND, CA – The closing arguments in the trial for Chandale Shannon, Jr., and Jesus Campos finished Thursday in Yolo County Superior Court with Deputy District Attorney David Wilson responding to the defense closing arguments made Wednesday. The jury is now out deliberating.

Shannon and Campos are being charged with the kidnapping and murder of Elijah Moore and Enrique Rios, who went missing in 2016.

According to the prosecution, Shannon and Campos allegedly committed the crimes with brothers Jonathan and David Froste, both of whom have already been convicted with similar counts of kidnapping and murder.

DDA Wilson began responding to the defense by telling the jury there were only two simple questions about this case. Did Shannon and Campos know what D. Froste wanted to do and did they conspire and agree to help him?

Wilson maintains the answer to both of these questions is yes and, because of that, they’re both guilty as charged.

He then criticized the defense arguments by arguing they were “vague” and “generic” and that when the jury dives into the details, the evidence doesn’t support them.

Addressing public defender David Nelson’s argument, Wilson agreed D. Froste. is a monster for the brutal killings of Moore and Rios, but claimed PD Nelson’s arguments were a sidestep in trying to frame Campos as a “robotic” pawn that was being manipulated by D. Froste.

In reference to Campos being manipulated and having no choice in the matter, Wilson said the details show that Campos agreed and was even excited about it. Wilson asserted that Campos looked up to D. Froste, and illustrated it with Campos repeatedly asking “where is the guy” and saying that Campos “chose him (D. Froste) as his idol.”

He further rebuked the defense by saying the claim that Campos and Shannon were being threatened by D. Froste and were worried for their families and their own safety was mere speculation, not backed up by any evidence.

Wilson looked back to Facebook messages from Campos when he thought no one was looking, saying those messages were evidence that Campos showed no remorse, and even felt powerful because of what they did.

A year and half after the incident occurred, Wilson says Campos and Shannon never said they were “wrapped up in a bad crowd,” and when asked “do you have any regrets?” Campos responded, “We should’ve been smarter.”

Responding to the defense strategy of trying to elicit feelings of compassion for Campos because he was only 16 years old at the time of incident, Wilson asked the jury “how old do you have to be to know that killing is wrong?”

DDA Wilson said Campos’ age is irrelevant and the question of his being old enough to be tried as an adult has already been decided by a judge and the jury must treat him as if he is an adult.

Moving on to the defense characterization of the already convicted Jonathan Froste, Wilson said the defense is trying to play the manipulation game about the credibility of J. Froste’s testimony.

DDA Wilson said the defense wants the jury to speculate about what was the blow that ultimately killed Elijah Moore and they argue that D. Froste had already killed him, relieving Shannon of guilt.

The already-convicted J. Froste testified that there was no indication that Shannon and Campos did not want to be present during the murders and made no attempt to walk away from or try to stop them.

DDA Wilson reminded the jury of this and reinforced J. Froste’s testimony by saying that he had the motivation to protect his brother, David, during testimony, but never did and that his answers had remained consistent, whereas Campos and Shannon had been caught lying multiple times to police.

Wilson concluded by reminding the jury of the charges alleged against Campos and Shannon and asked the jury to hold the two men responsible for what they willingly and voluntarily did to be a part of D. Froste’s squad.

Judge Rosenberg explained what the jury must do and released them to begin deliberations.

PD Nelson and Private Attorney Spangler then reiterated their objections to one of the jurors, the same one that spoke with Judge Rosenberg privately, but remains on the jury. The judge overruled the objection.


About The Author

Oliver is a fourth year student at the University of California, Davis pursuing a bachelors degree in political science. He is a transfer student from Porterville College and has associate degrees in both political science and social science. After graduation, Oliver plans to take a gap year before attending law school.

Related posts

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