Closing statements were given Thursday in the main Marshall County Courtroom for the double homicide trial that has lasted eight days, including the first day for jury selection.

Ilias Lasley, 31, of Ankeny, is charged with two counts of first-degree murder of Mario Murillo, 28, and Frances Gasca, 33, both of Marshalltown. The charges stem from an April 19, 2024 shooting at a residence north of Marshalltown on 182nd Street. The arrest report states that Lasley became upset the victims were speaking to one another in Spanish. He allegedly followed them outside and began shooting. Gasca and Murillo reportedly each had seven bullet wounds.

Prosecution

During the trial, which started May 12, Marshall County Attorney Jordan Gaffney and Iowa Assistant Attorney General Ryan Baldridge made the case for Lasley’s guilt to a 12-member jury, placing emphasis on Lasley’s recorded video confession.

“At its heart, this case is about knowing when to walk away,” Gaffney said at the start of the closing statement. “. . . I think it will be helpful to recap some of the evidence you heard over the past week and a half.”

The prosecution’s closing statement, which lasted more than 90 minutes, featured already-seen clips of Lasley’s confession for the jury. In those clips, Lasley talks about shooting Gasca and Murillo.

As he took the jury through his closing statement, Gaffney also displayed a timeline of relevant events, starting with Lasley, Jacob Lillibridge, Raul Ricardo Mares Rodriguez and Gasca all moving into the house where the murders took place. Gaffney said Lasley seemed to be the odd man out and wanted to prove he was the alpha-male.

“It seemed like a good situation at first, right?” he said. “We have this group of friends living together, but there’s some conflict in there. There’s issues out there.”

The second point in the timeline is the rise in conflict in the household caused by Lasley. The third timeline point marks the beginning of relevant events on April 19, 2024, starting with a haircut Mares Rodriguez received from Murillo in the basement of the house, followed by Lasley becoming aggressive toward Mares Rodriguez and Murillo, the latter of whom Lasley did not know.

“It was supposed to be his safe place, because he’s on the run and trying to avoid detection from law enforcement because he was on the run,” Gaffney said, referring to statements Lasley made during the video confession. “He wasn’t happy with strange people . . . in the house. This is a problem for him.”

Wanting to remove himself from Mares Rodriguez and Murillo, Lasley goes into the upstairs portion of the house to spend time with Lillibridge and Alexis Matthews, but makes a few trips back downstairs.

“The state would submit to you that this was a situation where he . . . wanted to assert himself as the alpha dog,” he said. “He was tired of being the odd man out in the situation. . . . Pride and paranoia are the things driving Mr. Lasley in this situation.”

Gaffney said Lasley picked a fight with Mares Rodriguez and heard them speaking in Spanish. That was when Lasley should have walked away, but did not, he said.

“He had every opportunity to throw water on the fire, but instead he just throws gasoline on the fire,” Gaffney told the jury.

The next point in the timeline is a call between Juan Saldana and Murillo at 12:24 a.m. followed by the situation moving outside. During the escalation, Gasca jumped on Lasley’s back. He fell, got back up, started “squeezing” and shot Gasca multiple times.

“Had she not been shot, she would not have died,” Gaffney said. “She was dead by the time law enforcement got there. . . . What about Mario Murillo? Like Frances, he also suffered multiple gunshot wounds. . . . He would not have died that day if he had not been shot.”

Gaffney said luck was the reason Mares Rodriguez managed to get away. Lasley then moved the bodies so they could not be seen from the road. Gasca was placed in the breezeway between the house and the garage and Murillo was placed in the back of his truck.

The next timeline point is at 3:13 a.m. when Lasley dropped Lillibridge and Alexis Matthews off at the Meskwaki Bingo Casino. The last timeline point is Lasley getting a room at an Econo Lodge in Des Moines, where he was arrested the next day.

Gaffney told the jury Lasley acted deliberately with a specific intent to kill Gasca and Murillo. There were 14 cartridge cases found, coming from two firearms Lasley used. If there had been one shot, that could have been considered an accident. However, Gaffney said when someone intends to kill, they fire again, again, again and again.

“That tells you everything you need to know about his purpose, his intent, his goal in that moment to shoot and kill Mario Murillo and Frances Gasca,” Gaffney said.

Defense

Lasley’s defense attorneys Christine Branstad and David Newkirk told the jury that there was another shooter, and Lasley reacted to shots being fired.

Branstad gave the closing defense statement, which lasted more than 45 minutes. Two things the state is missing, she said, are forensic evidence and common sense.

“The state is making wild assumptions, a lot of assumptions to fill in the gaps,” Branstad said. “But they ignored the forensics.”

Earlier in the week, the defense had forensics expert Michael Maloney testify in the trial. Branstad said based on the forensics, they know from the trajectories of the bullets and the types found that there were two shooters. She said it is impossible for one person to fire two different firearms in that small amount of time, in that small dark space, and for the bullets to have those trajectories. There is no evidence that any of the shots from Lasley hit Murillo.

Also, some of the ammunition found at the scene were Winchester brand, which were not found with Lasley when he was arrested. Plus, some of the evidence was incomplete or mislabeled, Branstad said.

She addressed Lasley’s video confession, saying her client was exhausted, confused and high when it was given. Branstad said evidence of that is that some of the statements he gave in the confession did not make sense.

She frequently talked about Mares Rodriguez, how the stories he told about the night kept changing and asked the jury to disregard his testimony.

“For this reason, Mr. Mares [Rodriguez] was inconsistent about whether or not he had a coat . . . whether he went to one, two, three places before going to the police station, where he went afterward, if he had a backpack and if he was trying to hide it, and his relationship with Ms. Gasca,” Branstad said. “He strangled her. He left bruises. He sent text messages to her saying ‘I’m going to find you and you’re going to be sorry.’ She said, ‘If something happens to me, you know who did it.’ And she was right.”

She added that Gasca and Murillo were in a romantic relationship, evidenced by text messages, which Gasca wanted to keep secret from Mares Rodriguez.

“Take [Gasca’s] words seriously,” Branstad said. ” . . . Ms. Gasca’s words, ‘He’s always watching me.’ . . . For Frances, she couldn’t even go outside without him questioning her. What makes more sense to you? That she was getting ready to leave with the person she was in a covert romantic relationship with . . . and that her very jealous boyfriend came out and shot her and him intentionally? Or that my client . . . lost it about them speaking Spanish?”

Branstad admitted Lasley made terrible decisions, but he felt guilt, especially about not knowing who he had shot.

“There were mistakes made by my client, but I’m going to ask you to look at whether there is truly evidence beyond a reasonable doubt,” she said. “. . . Is there any verdict other than not guilty that you can reach without making assumptions? Without leaving giant holes in the puzzle? The state said they were going to put the puzzle together for you. I assert this to you, there are still very large holes in that puzzle.”

——-

Contact Lana Bradstream at 641-753-6611 ext. 210 or lbradstream@timesrepublican.com.