Judge rules on FBI interview in Glacier Park murder case

The federal judge overseeing the murder trial of the newlywed accused of pushing her husband off a cliff in Glacier National Park recently issued several rulings about how the suspect was interviewed and what instructions will be given to the juries.

The trial date for Jordan Graham, 22, of Kalispell, is slated to start Monday, Dec. 9. She faces charges of first-degree murder, second-degree murder and making false statements for allegedly pushing her new husband, 25-year-old Cody Johnson, off a cliff near The Loop on the Going-to-the-Sun Road in Glacier Park on July 7 and then repeatedly lying to law enforcement about what happened.

U.S. District Court Judge Donald Molloy responded to defense motions claiming FBI Agent Stacy Smiedala’s July 16 interview of Graham was conducted in a way meant to shape her testimony.

Specifically, Graham’s federal public defenders allege that Smiedala intentionally guided Graham during an unrecorded portion of the interview so the subsequently recorded summary interview would create the narrative he wanted.

Molloy ruled that while Smiedala’s actions did not rise to the level of anything illegal, the FBI agent “chose not to record Graham until he had first shaped her statement by choosing descriptors and language that would allow him to guide her recorded statement, or to impeach her recorded statement if she did not follow script or his word choice.” That, Molloy wrote, pits Smiedala’s credibility against Graham’s.

As a result, Molloy ruled, the most appropriate response would be to provide a cautionary instruction to jurors, and he provided possible wording for such an instruction.

“The questions and statements made by law enforcement in any recording are not evidence,” the proposed instruction read. “If a member of law enforcement testifies in court, he or she is a witness and the statements he or she makes on the stand are evidence. However, in any recorded interview questions by an agent, like those of an attorney, are not evidence and may only be considered to understand the context of statements made by the defendant.”

Molloy denied requests by the defense to dismiss the indictment or dismiss the first-degree murder charge.

Graham’s defense attorney, Michael Donahoe, also filed a motion opposing the prosecution’s intent to present evidence that Graham previously fabricated allegations of abuse against former boyfriends, and that she made statements in the weeks leading up to her wedding to Johnson that she could murder her mother and stepfather.

While the prosecution’s document claims it is only a notice of evidence the prosecution intends to present, Donahoe argued that it should have been a motion seeking permission to introduce the evidence and is thus late because it missed the Nov. 8 deadline.

Donahoe’s filing sheds light on how the supposed statement by Graham regarding her mother and stepfather was collected. According to Donahoe, a 16-year-old girl was told to pretend to be Graham’s friend to get her talking about Johnson and to report back everything she learned.

Donahoe said an interview including the third-hand information and the fears of further murders is available on video and can be provided to the court. But he cautioned that “it would be very confusing to have to air before the jury a scenario that includes, at a minimum, a youngster who was being used as a tool by a pair of misguided adults determined to convict the defendant by rumor or innuendo.”

Donahoe also argued allegations of former abuse were irrelevant, and that the alleged threat to Graham’s mother and stepfather was not reported right away, indicating it was not a legitimate threat.