Notes:

---------------------------------------------------------------------
- ----------

Judith K. Travis
December 22, 1944 - May 31, 2007

Facts
Born: December 22, 1944
Place of Birth: Peoria, IL
Death: May 31, 2007
Place of Death: Chillicothe, IL
Judith Kay Travis, 62, of 189 Pinewood Estates, Chillicothe, IL. die
d on May 31, 2007 at 12:03 P.M. at her home.

She was born on December 22, 1944 in Peoria, IL the daughter of Roy L
. and Alice I. Mitchell West. She married Donald R. Travis on June 19
, 1994 in Peoria, IL. He survives of Chillicothe, IL.

Surviving are three sons: Dean (Earlene) Barner of Lacon, IL, David (L
isa) Barner of Michigan, and Chadwick Barner of Minier, IL and one dau
ghter: Contessa L. Travis of Chillicothe, IL.

She enjoyed horseback riding, gardening and baking.

She worked with her husband at Travis Saddlery Store in Chillicothe fo
15 years.

She was a member of Rome Baptist Church in Chillicothe, IL.

A memorial service will be held on Saturday, June 16, 2007 at Rome Bap
tist Church in Chillicothe, IL. Rev. Lloyd Moss will officiate. Visita
tion will be held one half hour prior to service times at the church
. Burial will be in the LaSalle Cemetery. Memorials may be made to Mak
e-A-Wish Foundation.

Online condolences may be submitted through www.weberhurdfuneralhome.c
om

Visitation
Sat. June 16, 2007 from 12:30 at Rome Baptist Church
Click for Map and Directions

Funeral
Sat. June 16, 2007, 1:00p.m. at Weber-Hurd Funeral Home
Click for Map and Directions

Burial
Sat. June 16, 2007 at LaSalle Cemetery


Birth:



Died:

Family/Spouse: Ira Neil BARNER, Jr.. Ira (son of Ira Nelson BARNER and Ruth Elaine GRIESSER) was born on 10 May 1941 in Pekin, Tazewell Co, IL; died on 11 Dec 2017 in Canton, IL; was buried in cremated. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Judith married on 19 Jun 1994 in Peoria, Peoria Co, IL . [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Died:

Notes:

Man charged with attempted murder of Fulton County deputyAdditional de
tails have emerged from a car chase Tuesday that resulted in the arres
t of a Decatur man who now faces a charge of attempted murder.

Daily Ledger reporter
Posted May 13, 2015 at 11:47 AM

LEWISTOWN Chadwick Barner
Chadwick Barner
by Hannah Schrodt
Daily Ledger reporter

Posted May 13, 2015 at 11:47 AM

LEWISTOWN
NOTE: The Canton Park District Police Department has filed additiona
l charges against Barner. Click here for the story.
Additional details have emerged from a car chase Tuesday that resulte
d in the arrest of a Decatur man who now faces a charge of attempted m
urder.
Barner has a first appearance in front of a judge in Fulton County Cou
t on Wednesday at 1 p.m. and another court date is expected on Wednes
day, May 27 at 9 a.m.
Chadwick N. Barner, 45, of Decatur, was arrested on charges of attempt
ed murder, aggravated battery, DUI and two counts of obstructing and r
esisting police after running from police and getting into a struggl
e with a Fulton County Sheriff's Deputy in which Barner attempted to k
ill the deputy.
According to Sergeant Dan Daly of the Sheriff's Department, the Canto
Park District Police saw a black Hyundai Sonata driving at a high ra
te of speed into Canton. The park police attempted to pull over the Hy
undai but the vehicle appeared to be driving out of town and park poli
ce personnel terminated the pursuit for safety reasons.
However, Daly said Barner apparently drove back into Canton as the Ful
ton County Sheriff's Department received a call that a vehicle matchin
g the Hyundai's description was seen running a stop sign in town.
Sheriff Deputies located the Hyundai at about 2:15 p.m. on North Taylo
Road, north of Illinois Route 100 near St. David.
Daly, who was on scene of the incident, said Barner fled the scene an
d proceeded to get into a nearby pond, went out of the pond, ran int
o the woods, went back into the pond and was eventually apprehended i
a field.
The Canton Police Department K-9 units assisted in the search for Barn
er.
During the approximate one hour and 20 minute long struggle, Barner al
legedly caused himself and a Sheriff's deputy to fall into the pond an
d Barner got on top of the deputy and held the deputy's head under wat
er.
Daly said Barner was placed under arrest at 3:39 p.m.
The deputy received cuts to the face, but Daley said the deputy is OK.
"I thought it went extremely well on the quick containment of the are
a and the joint effect by the departments," Daly said.
Daly added that Barner has an extensive criminal history, but did no
t know details Wednesday morning.
Hannah Schrodt
Daily Ledger reporter Canton Daily Ledger - Canton, ILHannah Schrodt
=====================================================================
= ==================================
SAINT DAVID - A Fulton County Sheriff's Deputy nearly drowns after str
uggling with a suspect. 45 year-old Chadwick Barner of Decatur is no
w facing a slew of charges including attempted murder.

Officials say he was involved in two police pursuits, the first in Can
ton, and the other around 2:15 p.m. in Saint David. Deputies located t
he black Hyundai Sonata he was driving and began to follow. It eventua
lly turned into a foot chase. While a Sheriff's Deputy tried to take h
im into custody in a wooded area, the suspect began to struggle and bo
th fell into a lake. Authorities say Barner kept holding the Deputy'
s head under water.

With help from other officers, the Deputy was rescued and Barner was a
ested. The Deputy suffered cuts to the face but was not hospitalized
. Barner is at the Fulton County Jail without bond.
=====================================================================
= ====================================
Man charged with attempted murder of deputy
LEWISTOWN - Additional details have emerged from a car chase Tuesday t
hat resulted in the arrest of a Decatur man who now faces a charge o
f attempted murder.
Chadwick N. Barner, 45, was to have his first appearance in front o
f a judge in Fulton County Court on Wednesday, and another court dat
e is expected at 9 a.m. May 27.
Barner was arrested on charges of attempted murder, aggravated battery
, DUI and two counts of obstructing and resisting police after runnin
g from police and getting into a struggle with a Fulton County Sheriff
's Deputy in which Barner attempted to kill the deputy by dunking hi
s head underwater in a pond.
=====================================================================
= =====================================
Canton park police file additional charges against man who tried to ha
m deputyThe Canton Park District Police Department is now filing addi
tional charges against Chadwick Barner, a 45-year-old Decatur man wh
o was charged with attempted murder Tuesday following a car chase.
email print Comment 0 2Hannah Schrodt
Daily Ledger reporter Canton Daily Ledger - Canton, ILHannah Schrodt

Posted May 14, 2015 at 1:34 PM
=====================================================================
= =========================
Chadwick Barner
ZoomChadwick Barner
Hannah Schrodt
Daily Ledger reporter

Posted May 14, 2015 at 1:34 PM

The Canton Park District Police Department is now filing additional ch
arges against Chadwick Barner, a 45-year-old Decatur man who was charg
ed with attempted murder Tuesday following a car chase.
The Fulton County Sheriff's Department has charged Barner with attempt
ed murder, aggravated battery, DUI and two counts of obstructing and r
esisting police. The new charges against Barner from the park police a
e in addition to those from the sheriff's department.
Canton Park District Police Chief Terry Parks said in a press releas
e that the pursuit began when officers spotted a black 2011 Hyundai dr
iving past the Illinois River Correctional Center at 85 miles per hour
.
Barner allegedly refused to stop for park police and continued to driv
e faster. He drove off the roadway and onto property owned by Davis Sa
d and Gravel. Barner drove to the very south end of the lot behind th
e building and some large trucks.
After being discovered, Barner left that area and drove at a high rat
e of speed towards the park police unit and narrowly avoided hitting t
he vehicle. He then drove back onto the highway and went east into bot
h lanes of traffic on West Locust Street.
Parks said the pursuit was terminated at that point for safety reasons
.
The Canton Park District Police Department is now charging Barner wit
h speeding, failure to wear a seat belt, aggravated reckless driving
, fleeing or attempting to elude a police officer and illegal squealin
g/screeching of tires.
Sergeant Dan Daly of the Fulton County Sheriff's Department told the L
edger Wednesday that after the park police terminated pursuit, the dep
artment received a call that a vehicle matching the Hyundai's descript
ion ran a stop sign.
Sheriff deputies located the Hyundai at 2:15 p.m. on North Taylor Road
, just north of Illinois Route 100 near St. David.
Barner fled the scene and ran in and out of a nearby pond and into a w
ooded area. During the struggle, Barner allegedly got on top of a depu
ty and held the deputy's head under water.
After an hour and 20 minute long struggle, Barner was apprehended i
a field at 3:39 p.m., Daly said.
The deputy received cuts to the face but is otherwise OK.
The Canton Police Department K-9 units assisted in the search.
Parks said in a press release that he is "grateful to the Canton polic
e and sheriff's department and both K-9 units for the tremendous effor
t that they put forth in taking a dangerous individual off the roadway
s."
Parks added that he is thankful no one was seriously injured.
Hannah Schrodt
==================================================================
Finally, Chadwick Barner, 36, was convicted of robbing a bank in the m
id-state city of Danvers while dressed as a woman. Barner wore women'
s clothing, makeup and a wig to carry out his robbery. No word on whet
her the getup worked for or against him. When the verdict came down o
Thursday, Barner was already in jail for a drug possession charge; h
e robbed the bank while on probation for two other drug-related charge
s. Special thanks to ABC News for reminding us how to pronounce metham
phetamine.
=====================================================================
= ==========
FindLaw
Caselaw
Illinois
IL Ct. App.
PEOPLE v. BARNER

Appellate Court of Illinois,Fourth District.

The PEOPLE of the State of Illinois, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Chadwick N
. BARNER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 4-07-0545.

Decided: June 27, 2008
Arden J. Lang and Michael Delcomyn, both of State Appellate Defender'
s Office, of Springfield, for appellant. William A. Yoder, State's Att
orney, of Bloomington (Norbert J. Goetten, Robert J. Biderman, and Ana
stacia R. Brooks, all of State's Attorneys Appellate Prosecutor's Offi
ce, of counsel), for the People.
In December 2006, a jury convicted defendant, Chadwick N. Barner, of f
inancial institution robbery (720 ILCS 5/16H-40 (West 2004)), a Clas
s 1 felony. In April 2007, the trial court sentenced defendant to 1
2 1/2 years' imprisonment. On appeal, defendant contends the evidenc
e was insufficient to convict him of financial institution robbery bec
ause, although he concedes the robbery, the State failed to prove he t
ook the money by force, threat of force, or intimidation, as require
d by the statute. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

Defendant acknowledges he committed the robbery but argues no evidenc
e showed he used intimidation during the commission of the robbery o
f the financial institution as required by statute.

The bill of indictment, filed on August 30, 2006, alleged defendant co
mmitted financial institution robbery “in that he knowingly and by thr
eat of force or intimidation took money in the custody, control, care
, management[,] or possession of Illini Bank, a financial institution.
”

At defendant's December 2006 jury trial, Cynthia Scott testified she w
as employed with Illini Bank in Danvers, Illinois, as a teller on Jul
y 19, 2006. Around noon on that date, an unusual looking person ente
ed the bank. This person was wearing a black wig, sunglasses, an
d a dress. The person's face and neck were painted black, and he ha
d tissue stuffed up his nose. The person was carrying a large blac
k purse. As stated, defendant acknowledges he was this person who ro
bbed the bank.

Defendant told Scott to “[g]ive me the money.” Scott was “scared,” b
ut gave defendant the money from her drawer. Defendant, in a calm bu
t firm tone, again stated “[g]ive me the money.” Scott took this t
o be an “order.” Scott opened up somebody else's drawer, grabbed som
e money, and put it on the counter. Defendant put the money in the p
urse and ran away. The experience left Scott feeling “traumatized, s
cared.”

Photographs of the incident show that defendant had his left hand behi
d the purse while he approached the teller's counter. The purse wa
s large enough to conceal a weapon.

The jury convicted defendant, and the trial court sentenced him as sta
ted.

This appeal followed.

II. ANALYSIS

Defendant contends the facts are undisputed and thus the appropriate s
tandard of review is de novo. The State argues the parties dispute w
hat facts can be reasonably inferred from the trial evidence;  and thu
s the relevant question is whether, after viewing the evidence in th
e light most favorable to the State, any rational trier of fact coul
d have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable d
oubt. We agree with the State. However, insofar as we are a calle
d upon to interpret the financial-institution-robbery statute, which i
s a question of law, we review that issue de novo. See People v. Bro
oks, 221 Ill.2d 381, 388, 303 Ill.Dec. 161, 851 N.E.2d 59, 62 (2006).

As stated, the State charged defendant with financial institution robb
ery.

“A person commits the offense of financial institution robbery when th
e person, by force or threat of force, or by intimidation, takes, or a
ttempts to take, from the person or presence of another, or obtains o
attempts to obtain by extortion, any property or money or any othe
thing of value belonging to, or in the care, custody, control, manag
ement, or possession of, a financial institution.” 720 ILCS 5/16H-4
0 (West 2006).

It is undisputed defendant did not use force or explicitly threaten th
e use of force. The issue here is whether defendant used intimidatio
.

The financial-institution-robbery statute does not define “intimidatio
.” Neither do any Illinois decisions address this issue. As a res
ult, defendant urges this court to construe the financial-institution-
obbery statute with the intimidation statute (720 ILCS 5/12-6 (West 2
004)).

“Under the doctrine of in pari materia, two statutes dealing with th
e same subject will be considered with reference to one another to giv
e them harmonious effect. [Citation.] The doctrine is also applicabl
e to different sections of the same statute, and is consistent with th
e fundamental rule of statutory interpretation that all the provision
s of a statute must be viewed as a whole. [Citation.]” People v. McC
arty, 223 Ill.2d 109, 133-34, 306 Ill.Dec. 570, 858 N.E.2d 15, 31 (200
6).

We conclude it would not be proper to read the financial-institution-r
obbery statute in para materia with the intimidation statute as they d
o not concern the same subject. “The purpose of the intimidation stat
ute is to prohibit the making of threats intended to compel a person t
o act against his will, and the gist of the offense is the exercise o
f improper influence-the making of a threat with the intent to coerc
e another.” People v. Peterson, 306 Ill.App.3d 1091, 1099-1100, 240 I
ll.Dec. 164, 715 N.E.2d 1221, 1227 (1999);  see also People v. Verkruy
sse, 261 Ill.App.3d 972, 975, 203 Ill.Dec. 322, 639 N.E.2d 881, 883 (1
994) (“ ‘gravamen of the offense [of intimidation] is improper influen
ce on another.’ (People v. Tennin (1987), 162 Ill.App.3d 520, 525, 11
3 Ill.Dec. 897, 515 N.E.2d 1056[, 1059].)”). The legislature has dec
lared the financial-institution-robbery statute concerns the subject o
f financial crime. See 720 ILCS 5/16H-5 (West 2004).

Moreover, “[s]tatutes should be construed, if possible, so that no ter
m is rendered superfluous or meaningless.” Bonaguro v. County Officer
s Electoral Board, 158 Ill.2d 391, 397, 199 Ill.Dec. 659, 634 N.E.2d 7
12, 715 (1994). If we read the term “intimidation,” as used in the f
inancial-institution-robbery statute, to require a threat as defendan
t urges, it would be redundant, as the statute states “[a] person comm
its the offense of financial institution robbery when the person, by f
orce or threat of force, or by intimidation.” 720 ILCS 5/16H-40 (Wes
t 2004). Because the statute talks about force or the threat of forc
e in addition to intimidation, the term “intimidation” must mean somet
hing other than force or the threat of force.

Instead, we look elsewhere to help us construe the financial-instituti
on-robbery statute. The legislative history shows this statute was “
modeled very tightly after existing federal and State statutes.” 93d I
ll. Gen. Assem., Senate Proceedings, April 4, 2003, at 44-45 (statemen
ts of Senator Cullerton). The bill created financial crimes that “ha
ve been traditionally under the purview of the Federal Government.” 93
d Ill. Gen. Assem., House Proceedings, May 14, 2003, at 164-65 (statem
ents of Representative O'Brien). The federal bank-robbery statute (1
8 U.S.C. § 2113 (2000)) is substantially similar to our state's financ
ial-institution-robbery statute. The federal bank-robbery statute st
ates one commits bank robbery if:

“[B]y force and violence, or by intimidation, [one] takes, or attempt
s to take, from the person or presence of another, or obtains or attem
pts to obtain by extortion any property or money or any other thing o
f value belonging to, or in the care, custody, control, management, o
possession of, any bank, credit union, or any savings and loan assoc
iation.” 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (2000).

Because the federal bank-robbery statute is so similar to our financia
l-institution-robbery statute, it is appropriate for us to look to th
e federal bank-robbery statute and the case law interpreting it for gu
idance. See People v. Childress, 338 Ill.App.3d 540, 553, 273 Ill.De
c. 430, 789 N.E.2d 330, 341 (2003) (“Where a state statute has a feder
al counterpart, Illinois courts have looked for guidance to federal ca
ses interpreting the federal law”).

Our review of federal case law leads us to conclude defendant's action
s constituted intimidation under the financial-institution-robbery sta
tute. “Intimidation” in the context of the federal bank-robbery stat
ute has been defined as “conduct and words * * * calculated to creat
e the impression that any resistance or defiance by the teller would b
e met with force” (United States v. Jones, 932 F.2d 624, 625 (7th Cir.
1991)), or an act by defendant “reasonably calculated to put another i
fear” (United States v. Graham, 931 F.2d 1442, 1443 (11th Cir.1991))
. Federal courts determine whether intimidation has occurred in a pa
ticular case by using an objective test:  “whether an ordinary perso
in the teller's position could reasonably infer a threat of bodily h
arm from the defendant's acts.” United States v. Gilmore, 282 F.3d 39
8, 402 (6th Cir.2002).

In this case, it is undisputed defendant did not have a weapon with hi
m when he robbed the bank. “However, the display of a weapon, a threa
t to use a weapon, or even a verbal or nonverbal hint of a weapon is n
ot a necessary ingredient of intimidation.” Gilmore, 282 F.3d at 402
. “Intimidation does not require proof of express threats of bodily h
arm, threatening body motions, or the physical possibility of a concea
led weapon.” Gilmore, 282 F.3d at 403.

As stated, in this case, defendant walked into the bank in disguise, w
as carrying a black purse large enough to conceal a weapon, and twic
e told the teller to give him all of the money. The photographs of t
he incident show defendant's left hand was concealed behind the purs
e as he approached the teller. Defendant made no explicit threat o
f harm.

The case before us is similar to United States v. Robinson, 527 F.2d 1
170 (6th Cir.1975). In Robinson, the defendant approached the teller
, told her to “ ‘Give me all your money,’ ” and then slid a “ ‘black p
ouch’ ” across the counter for the teller to put the money in. Robins
on, 527 F.2d at 1171. When the teller attempted to fill the pouch wi
th bait money, the defendant said, “ ‘Don't give me that, that's not e
ough.’ ” Robinson, 527 F.2d at 1171. The defendant made no explici
t threat of harm, and both hands were visible to the teller as the def
endant put them on the counter in front of the teller's cage. Robinso
, 527 F.2d at 1171. The defendant wore a black leather coat. Robin
son, 527 F.2d at 1171.

On appeal, the defendant argued that because he did not display a weap
on, hint he had a weapon, tell the teller he had a weapon, or explicit
ly threaten the teller, the evidence of intimidation was insufficient
. Robinson, 527 F.2d at 1171-72. The court stated “[A]n ‘ordinary p
erson’ in the teller's position could reasonably, we think, infer an i
mplicit threat in the demand, ‘Give me all your money,’ accompanied b
y the presentation of a ‘black pouch.’ ” Robinson, 527 F.2d at 1172.

Moreover, the Gilmore court stated the following:

“A review of the case law reveals that making a written or verbal dema
d for money to a teller is a common means of successfully robbing ban
ks. Demands for money amount to intimidation because they carry wit
h them an implicit threat:  if the money is not produced, harm to th
e teller or other bank employee may result. Bank tellers who receiv
e demand notes are not in a position to evaluate fully the actual ris
k they face. As the Robinson court stated:  ‘An “ordinary person” i
the teller's position could reasonably, we think, infer an implici
t threat in the demand, “Give me all your money,” accompanied by the p
esentation of a “black pouch” ’. Robinson, 527 F.2d at 1172. Sever
al other circuits have also held that a demand for money in itself i
s sufficient to support a jury's finding of intimidation. See Unite
d States v. Clark, 227 F.3d 771, 774-75 (7th Cir.2000) (finding intimi
dation where note demanded ‘all of your twenties, fifties and hundre
d dollar bills' and defendant stated that ‘this is a holdup’);  [Unite
d States v.] Hill, 187 F.3d [698,] 700-01 [ (7th Cir.1999) ] (characte
izing actions as intimidating where defendant stated, ‘Give me all yo
ur money,’ and ‘don't give me any of the funny money,’ and threw a pla
stic bag on the counter window);  [United States v.] McCarty, 36 F.3
d [1349,] 1357 [ (5th Cir.1994) ] (affirming conviction of robbery b
y intimidation where typewritten note stated, ‘Be calm. This is a ro
bbery.’);   United States v. Hummasti, 986 F.2d 337, 338 (9th Cir.1993
) (concluding that threat was implicit in a note that read, ‘This i
s a robbery, give me your money,’ and in verbal demands for money);  U
ited States v. Smith, 973 F.2d 603, 603-04 (8th Cir.1992) (finding in
timidation had been established where defendant stated, ‘I want to mak
e a withdrawal. I want $2,500 in fifties and hundreds,’ and where h
e twice demanded $5,000, leaned into the window, and said, ‘come on, c
ome on, give me the money.’);  [United States v.] Lucas, 963 F.2d [243
,] 248 [ (9th Cir.1992) ] (finding intimidation where the verbal and w
itten demand was ‘put the money in the bag’ and defendant placed tw
o plastic bags on counter);  [United States v.] Henson, 945 F.2d [430,
] 439 [ (1st Cir.1991) ] (finding intimidation in written demand not
e that read, ‘put fifties and twenties into an envelope now!’);  [Unit
ed States v.] Hopkins, 703 F.2d [1102,] 1103 [ (9th Cir.1983) ] (findi
g that the threats implicit in [a] written demand of ‘Give me all you
hundreds, fifties and twenties. This is a robbery,’ and verbal dem
and of ‘give me what you got’ provide sufficient evidence of intimidat
ion to support jury's verdict).” (Emphases added.) Gilmore, 282 F.3
d at 402-03.

Again, we reiterate defendant (1) entered the bank in disguise, (2) tw
ice demanded the teller give him all the money, (3) had a purse larg
e enough to conceal a weapon, and (4) concealed his left hand behind t
he purse as he approached the teller. Under Gilmore, defendant's dem
ands for money amount to intimidation because they carried with them t
he implicit threat that if the money was not produced, harm to Scott o
another bank employee may have resulted. Gilmore, 282 F.3d at 402
. Moreover, under Robinson, an ordinary person in Scott's position c
ould reasonably have inferred an implicit threat in the demand, “ ‘Giv
e me the money,’ ” accompanied by the fact defendant had a large purs
e to put the money in. See Robinson, 527 F.2d at 1172. Accordingly
, we conclude the evidence was sufficient to support the conclusion de
fendant robbed a financial institution by “intimidation.”

III. CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated, we affirm the trial court's judgment. As par
t of our judgment, we grant the State's request that defendant be asse
ssed $50 as costs for this appeal.

Affirmed.

Justice KNECHT delivered the opinion of the court:

APPLETON, P.J., and STEIGMANN, J., concur.
====================================================================

Man sentenced to 40 years for trying to drown cop
Chadwick Barner, 45, of Decatur, was sentenced to 40 years in prison f
or the attempted murder of a Fulton County Sheriff's lieutenant on Thu
sday.

email print Comment
0
2

Chadwick Barner
Zoom
Chadwick Barner

By Hannah Schrodt
Daily Ledger reporter

Posted Dec. 3, 2015 at 2:01 PM

LEWISTOWN

Chadwick Barner, 45, of Decatur, was sentenced to 40 years in prison f
or the attempted murder of a Fulton County Sheriff's lieutenant on Thu
sday.

Judge Raymond A. Cavanaugh also sentenced Barner to 14 years for aggra
vated battery and six years for aggravated fleeing or attempting to el
ude police.

The sentences will run concurrently.

He will also be convicted of resisting or obstructing a police officer
, reckless driving and speeding.

Barner led officers from the Fulton County Sheriff's Department, Canto
Police Department and Canton Park District Police Department on an h
ours-long car and foot chase May 12. The chase ended when he attempte
d to drown Lt. Doug Lafary in a pond.

Barner was found guilty of all charges by a 12-person jury on Oct. 23.

Full coverage on Barner's sentence hearing will be featured in Friday'
s Daily Ledger.

Family/Spouse: Lisa ?. [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Died:

I.D. married E.M. THOMPSON [Group Sheet] [Family Chart]

Notes:

Birth:



Died: