EPHRATA – Prosecutors urged a jury Thursday to convict a teenager of first-degree murder in the brutal slaying of a playmate three years ago, scoffing at the defendant’s claims that he left the victim injured after a fall from a tree but didn’t kill him.
Evan Savoie, now 15, is among the youngest murder defendants ever to be tried as an adult. He is accused in the Feb. 15, 2003, slaying of Craig Sorger, a 13-year-old developmentally disabled student who was found beaten and brutally stabbed in a recreational vehicle park.
Jurors began deliberating Savoie’s fate Thursday afternoon but recessed for the night without reaching a verdict. They were to resume deliberations today.
Savoie has repeatedly proclaimed his innocence, saying Sorger fell from a tree and that he left him lying on a trail, with no pulse, but did not attack him. Savoie said he left without getting aid after repeatedly trying to revive the other boy.
Common sense dictates otherwise, deputy prosecutor Ed Owens said in his closing argument. There was no evidence Sorger had ever fallen from a tree, and the defendant told another playmate that day that he wanted to go on a killing spree shortly before the slaying.
Three boys went into the park that day. Only two boys came out, Owens said. Sorger was stabbed 34 times, and Savoie had blood on his clothes, access to knives and deliberately lied to investigators both after Sorger’s disappearance and after his body was found, Owens said.
“The defendant believes he can get away with this murder. He’s betting that jurors will believe a 12-year-old cannot do this horrendous act,” he said. “Show the defendant here today that he’s wrong in believing he’s ever going to get away with it.”
The other playmate at the park that day, Jake Eakin, pleaded guilty to second-degree murder by complicity last year, two years after the murder. He is currently serving 14 years and testified against Savoie earlier in the trial.
Defense attorney Randy Smith countered that Eakin and Savoie told the same story for months after the murder. During that time, Eakin learned more about the murder and used those details to match the evidence offered by prosecutors, he said.
“Magically, two years later, the story is different, and it incorporates all of those injuries, plus some activities that don’t really add up,” he said.
Police offered no DNA evidence linking Savoie to the murder and failed to interview everyone at the park that day, Smith said. Savoie also did not possibly have enough time to kill Sorger that afternoon and walk home.
“This assault on Craig was not a stick and go. This was a frenzy, a long-lasting attack. It was brutal, and it took some time. There’s very little time here for that to happen,” he said.
Savoie may have failed to get help for Sorger after he fell from the tree, leaving him prey to an attack – a point he now feels terrible about, Smith said.
“The only thing Evan did wrong is that he didn’t go get help, for which he feels immensely sad,” he said. “He’s a kid. He was terrified. He didn’t do anything that constitutes a crime.”
Smith also pointed the finger at another boy, who later claimed to have witnessed the murder. Investigators said during the trial that they had determined the boy wasn’t credible.
Owens also scoffed at that notion in his rebuttal, calling the boy a “whacko,” and urged jurors to ignore the “smoke screen.”
“They’re grasping at straws here,” he said. “It happened.”
If convicted of first-degree murder, Savoie faces more than 20 years in prison.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
