Missouri v. Cecil Barriner
Missouri Supreme Court Case
1996, Barriner began to fear that he had failed a urinalysis test for
the presence of controlled substances. Barriner was concerned that his
probation would be revoked.
Resolving to leave his residence
in Poplar Bluff, Barriner planned to travel to the Tallapoosa, Missouri,
residence of nineteen year old Candy Sisk and Irene Sisk, Candy's
seventy-four year old grandmother, to obtain money from them.
Barriner had been in a
relationship with Candy Sisk's mother, Shirley Niswonger, from 1993
until 1996, and during that time had become acquainted with Candy.
Barriner had accompanied Niswonger on at least two occasions when she
traveled to the Sisks' house to borrow money. Barriner believed that the
Sisks were financially well-to-do.
Late in the afternoon of December
15, 1996, Barriner visited Daniel and Samantha Simmons, friends who
lived only a few miles from the Sisk residence. Barriner told Samantha
Simmons that he was going to Tallapoosa to collect some money and drove
away in the white Ford Taurus automobile he was using for transportation.
He returned shortly thereafter,
stating that no one had been home. Daniel and Samantha Simmons then
accompanied Barriner to Tallapoosa in the Ford Taurus, where Barriner
passed by the Sisk house three times.
During the drive, Barriner said
that "the girl was going to pay him some money" and pointed to a note
that he had left on the Sisks' door. Samantha Simmons noticed that
during the drive Barriner held and played with a purple Crown Royal bag
that contained something that she could not see.
On December 16, at approximately
8:45 a.m., Candy telephoned her aunt, Debbie Dubois, and reported that a
man had been to the house a short time before. Candy told Dubois that
the man had told Irene that he had "a Christmas gift for Candy from her
mother in jail."
Candy told Dubois that her
grandmother said that the man had acted strangely, and that the same man
had been in Tallapoosa the day before asking for directions to the Sisk
residence. Candy reported that she had not seen the man herself, but had
observed the man's car, which was a white Ford Taurus.
Dubois attempted to telephone a
relative to ask him to check on Irene and Candy but was unable to reach
him. Dubois then called Candy, told her she had failed to reach the
relative, and instructed Candy to call her again if the man returned.
Several minutes after 9:00 that
morning, a bank teller at a bank in nearby Risco attended to a man
driving a white Ford Taurus. The teller saw Candy riding in the
passenger seat, dressed in a nightgown and wrapped in a blanket. The
teller saw another person in the rear seat.
The driver gave the teller a
check in the amount of one thousand dollars, signed by Candy and to be
drawn on her account. After having Candy sign the required cash receipt,
the teller gave the man one thousand dollars in cash, with one hundred
dollars in twenty dollar bills, as the driver requested.
At approximately 10:45 that
morning, Dubois attempted at least twice to telephone Candy and Irene at
the Sisk residence. The telephone rang repeatedly, but no one answered.
Dubois was concerned because one telephone line had an answering machine
and because Candy, who had undergone back surgery four days before, was
not supposed to leave the house for six weeks.
Dubois drove to the Sisk house.
There she found Candy and Irene dead. She tried to call the police, but,
upon finding that the telephones in the house were missing, she drove to
see a relative, who notified the authorities.
Candy's body was on the bed in
her bedroom. Her hands were bound in front of her with rope. She was
unclothed below the waist. A pair of sweatpants and a pair of panties
were on the floor nearby. Her neck had been slashed six to eight times.
A knife protruded from her chest. An autopsy revealed that Candy bled to
death from the neck slashes, and that the knife was thrust into her
chest after she died. Several bite marks were identified on her body.
Irene's body was on the floor of
her bedroom next to the bed. She had been hog-tied, her wrists and
ankles bound together with the same length of rope. An autopsy revealed
that seventeen superficial stab wounds in a localized area on her left
chest, five of which penetrated the chest cavity and lung, were
inflicted fifteen to forty-five minutes before she died. Three deep
slashes to her throat caused her death.
On December 18, two days after
the bodies of Irene and Candy were discovered, Lieutenant Steven Hinesly
of the Missouri State Highway Patrol and Deputy Sheriff Scott Johnston
of Butler County contacted Barriner at his brother's home.
Barriner agreed to accompany the
officers to troop headquarters in Poplar Bluff to discuss the homicide.
Barriner denied knowing that the Sisks had been murdered and denied
killing them. Barriner claimed to have made trips to Cape Girardeau and
two other towns on the morning of the murders to do some Christmas
When Lieutenant Hinesly professed
skepticism that Barriner could have traveled so far so quickly, Barriner
changed his story; he then claimed that he was using methamphetamine at
the home of Kevin Dennis when the murders were committed.
Jury rejects death penalty in third
Sikeston Standard Democrat
November 15, 2004
After finding Cecil Barriner guilty of
2 counts of 1st degree murder, a jury on Friday spared his life by
handing down 2 sentences of life in prison.
Although he will spend the rest of his days behind
bars without chance for parole, the jurys sentencing decision was a
victory for Barriner, who twice before had been sent to Missouris death
row for the brutal stabbing deaths of two New Madrid County women. The
Missouri Supreme Court overturned both convictions.
In his 3rd trial, Barriner again was convicted of
murdering Irene Sisk, 74, and her granddaughter Candy Sisk, 19, in their
Tallapoosa home on Dec. 16, 1996. The proceedings were held in Boone
County before a jury of seven men and 5 women chosen in neighboring
Callaway County. Barriner, 42, is a former resident of Poplar Bluff.
The case was submitted to the jury late Thursday
afternoon following two days of testimony. After 7 hours of
deliberations that concluded Friday morning, the jury rendered the
When the trial went into the penalty phase, assistant
attorney general Kevin Zoellner urged jurors to sentence Barriner to
"Obviously he believes in the death penalty and is
willing to impose it on others," Zoellner said.
Zoellner, who assisted New Madrid County Prosecuting
Attorney Lewis Recker with the case, said the heinous nature of the
crimes merited the ultimate punishment. Both women were bound and then
stabbed repeatedly before their throats were slashed. Candy Sisk was
Pointing to Barriner, Zoellner said: "This man here
enjoyed it." Defense attorney Bradford Kessler acknowledged the jury
would likely find the aggravating factors required to impose a capital
sentence were present in this case. Nonetheless, he asked jurors to show
mercy and reject Zoellners call for vengeance.
"He is asking you to reduce yourselves to being the
same type of person you just found Cecil Barriner to be," Kessler said.
In rebuttal, Zoellner dismissed the notion that to
sentence Barriner to die is to become him.
"Mercy is for God," Zoellner said. "Unfortunately,
down here on Earth we have to deliver justice."
After deliberating about 90 minutes on sentence, the
jury handed down its recommendation of life in prison without parole,
which was the only option available other than the death sentence.
Senior Judge Frank Conley is scheduled to formally
sentence Barriner on Dec. 17. Conley has no discretion to set aside the
jurys sentence and impose the death penalty.
Juries in Dent and Warren counties separately
convicted Barriner in 1999 and 2002. He received 2 death sentences
following each trial.
The Supreme Court voted 5-2 in 2000 to reverse the
Dent County verdict.
The court ruled the trial judge erroneously allowed
the prosecution to present irrelevant and prejudicial evidence. The high
court overturned result of the 2nd trial in 2003. The court, in a close
4-3 decision, said the jury was wrongly prohibited from considering
potentially exculpatory evidence.
The case is State of Missouri v. Cecil Barriner.