DA argues navajo relations, clanship
Gillson says his relationship to convicted child killer Cleo Juan unknown until after trial

Cleo Juan

By Bill Donovan
Staff writer

GALLUP — The debate continues over whether Cleo Juan deserves to have a new trial because of an alleged relationship with District Attorney Karl Gillson.

Juan’s attorney, Mark Fine, has filed a motion for a new trial in an effort to overturn a jury-rendered guilty verdict against Juan for abuse of a child — Colby Shirley — under the age of 12 resulting in death. District Court Judge Grant Foutz has not sentenced Juan yet, but state law ties his hand by requiring a sentence of 30 years before she is eligible for parole.

Fine said he was unaware of the relationship until after the conviction.

“Ms. Juan’s grandfather, Lloyd Baldwin, who passed away in November of 1997, was Mr. Gillson’s great uncle,” the motion states. This would make Gillson and Juan second cousins, according to Fine.

Gillson, in a response filed this week in district court, said neither he nor any of the prosecutors in the case knew of any allegations of a relationship until after the conviction. He also acknowledged that “a very distant blood relationship may possibly exist” in the Anglo world, but, at best, Gillson would be a third cousin to Juan.

He then went in detail about their possible relationship in Navajo society, where your relationship to another is not based on blood but on the clan system.

In traditional Navajo society, a person’s clan is derived from his mother. But his father’s clan, which is different since people within the same clan are prohibited from marrying each other, is also important. So a traditional Navajo, upon meeting someone for the first time, would recite their clans and so would the other person, thus allowing them to know if they are related to each other in Navajo society.

There are four main clans and some 70 others and in Navajo society, one’s relationship to another is taken seriously, which in the early days of the Navajo court system caused problems because of allegations that someone with a clan relationship with a tribal judge would be treated more favorably so many judges had to recuse themselves.

Nowadays, most tribal judges recuse themselves only when there is a strong clan relation as well as a strong personal relationship with one of the parties in the lawsuit.

Gillson said for that reason he doesn’t make public the names of his clans. Since his father is Anglo, he only has clans on his mother’s side. He also said in his motion that he is not aware of Juan’s clan and that she has refused to divulge it.

Bernadine Martin, one of the prosecutors in the case, said she is related to three of the four main clans, which means if she recused herself from cases where someone in any of these three clans was involved, she would be doing little work with Navajo defendants.

Gillson also pointed out that neither Juan nor her attorney brought up the question of a relationship, it was apparently of no concern to her during the trial and is now bringing it up in an effort to get another trial.

“(Karl Gillson) treated Cleo Juan no more favorably nor less favorably than he would have any other defendant in her shoes, nor any differently than others in his position would have treated the defendant,” Gillson’s motion stated. “Cleo Juan opted to roll the dice. Ms. Juan lost on her roll of the dice, and now in desperation seeks relief from this court on grounds that are supported neither in fact nor in law.”

Gillson also responded to another argument made by Fine and that was the court’s refusal to allow the jury to consider a lesser charge — regular child abuse — in the jury room.

Fine tried to get that during the trial and Foutz, said the motion, did not find his argument persuasive.

The basis of this argument was testimony during the trial that Juan had yanked Colby’s pajama bottoms, causing him to fall backwards and strike his head on the floor. Gillson’s motion pointed out that all of the state’s experts said this could not have caused the head injuries that resulted in Colby’s death. These are two separate incidents, said the motion, not related to each other.

“Perhaps this point is best made if exaggerated,” said themotion. A person slaps a child and that incident may be considered by many to be child abuse.

“Let’s assume that 30 minutes later, the same accused, still upset by the child, picks up a 12-gauge shotgun and shoots the child at close range, causing the child’s head to be completely severed from the child’s body, resulting in the immediate death to the child,” the motion stated.

It wouldn’t make sense to include the first incident, the motion states, as a lesser-included charge because “the two are separate incidents, separated by space, time and nature.”