Mexico man sentenced in 2018 killing

A judge's gavel is seen Thursday February 21, 2019, in a courtroom at the Cole County Courthouse in Jefferson City.
A judge's gavel is seen Thursday February 21, 2019, in a courtroom at the Cole County Courthouse in Jefferson City.

In April, a Cole County jury found a Mexico man guilty of killing a woman he planned to marry in April 2018. Following three days of testimony, the jury found James Addie, 54, guilty of first-degree murder and armed criminal action.

The case was moved on a change of venue from Monroe County to Cole County on a motion by Addie's defense.

Prosecutors did not seek the death penalty against Addie, so under state law the only sentence he could have gotten was life in prison without parole for the first-degree murder conviction.

At his sentencing hearing Monday, Cole County Presiding Judge Jon Beetem ordered Addie to serve that life term.

After giving the murder verdict, the jury was involved in recommending punishment for Addie because he was also found guilty of armed criminal action.

Under state law, the jury could have recommended a term of punishment for armed criminal action of not less than three years. After deliberating, they came back with a recommendation of 20 years.

Monday, prosecutors asked for that to run consecutively to his life sentence, but defense attorney T.J. Kirsch asked Beetem to have it run concurrently.

Beetem said in reviewing the sentencing advisory report from the Office of Probation and Parole he was going to reduce the term from 20 years down to 10 years and that it would be consecutive to the life sentence.

Authorities said Addie killed Molly Watson, 35, of Huntsville, by shooting her. Her body was discovered off a Monroe County road, according to a Missouri Highway Patrol probable cause statement. Prosecutors said Watson was shot once in the head.

Investigators said Addie told them Watson and he had a relationship for seven years and were to be married in Columbia even though he was still married to his wife of more than 20 years.

At Monday's hearing, Beetem allowed Addie to make a statement. He said Kirsch was ineffective as his counsel during the trial and asked that he be given a new trial.

Beetem allowed a short recess after this then brought both sides back into the courtroom. Beetem then asked Addie if he wanted Kirsch to be in the courtroom during this part of the hearing. Addie said no, and Kirsch left.

Beetem then asked Addie a series of questions about his representation in this case, which was all done by lawyers from the Office of the Public Defender. They are lawyers who serve clients who cannot afford legal services and are appointed to do so by courts.

Beetem went back to when Addie was first charged in 2018 asking about earlier public defenders service and if that may have affected his representation. Addie said there were a few problems with earlier public defenders, but it wasn't until Kirsch took his case in February 2020 that he had concerns. Addie claimed he talked only a few times with Kirsch about what was taking place and he claimed it wasn't until the night before the trial that he and Kirsch went through what the strategy would be for his defense.

"There was no strategy that I could tell," Addie told Beetem. "He didn't cross-examine witnesses as I would have liked, and he didn't go through cellphone records that would have shown I didn't do this. He also didn't bring up the fact Molly's ex had stalked her."

Beetem noted Addie decided not to take the stand in his own defense during the trial, but Addie said Monday that Kirsch had advised him not to take the stand and, had he known Kirsch wasn't going to do more than he did, he would have done so.

"I don't fault the jury," Addie said. "The only one I fault is my attorney because he had the ability to present my case and he failed to do that."

Beetem told Addie he would note on the record all the issues he brought forth in this hearing, but he said he felt that the time and place to bring his concerns about his representation was through the normal appeals process for those who have been convicted of serious crimes such as murder.

"At this point of time, looking at what witnesses were called and what arguments were made, those are put in the bucket we call the trial strategy," Beetem told Addie. "There is a time and a place where that can fully be explored."

Upcoming Events