Parties deliver closing arguments in Adam Fravel trial
Go Deeper.
Create an account or log in to save stories.
Like this?
Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.
By Olivia Estright, Rochester Post Bulletin
Closing arguments concluded the trial of Adam Fravel on Wednesday, Nov. 6. Jurors began deliberating around 2:30 p.m.
Fravel, who appeared in court wearing a black suit with a dark-colored shirt and tie, was on trial for the murder of Madeline Kingsbury. He’s facing charges of first-degree murder while committing domestic abuse with a past pattern of domestic abuse, first-degree premeditated murder and two counts of second-degree murder.
Fravel’s and Kingsbury’s families made their first appearance in the courtroom gallery on Wednesday after witnesses were sequestered throughout the trial.
Phillip Prokopowicz, a special prosecutor with Minnesota’s Bureau of Criminal Apprehension who is handling the case, argued that Fravel was the sole person with motive, opportunity and the means to kill Kingsbury. Defense attorney Zachary Bauer argued the statement made in his opening statement: “This case is about tunnel vision, revisionist history and secret truths.”
Turn Up Your Support
MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all.
Each side argued their case for more than an hour before the case was handed over to the jury.
As of 3 p.m. Wednesday, the jury has not reached a verdict. They will be deliberating until 9:30 p.m., if needed.
State claims Fravel had motive, opportunity and means to murder Kingsbury
In a nearly two-hour long closing argument, Prokopowicz began by explaining the differences between direct and circumstantial evidence and what proof beyond a reasonable doubt means.
“Direct evidence is just as good as circumstantial evidence,” Prokopowicz told the jurors.
He said the jurors need to rely on “good judgment and common sense” when deciding if Fravel is guilty.
Prokopowicz posed a series of questions to the jury, including whether Fravel had the motive, opportunity and means to kill Kingsbury. He began explaining Fravel’s motive.
“The relationship was never about them,” Prokopowicz argued. “It was always about him.”
The state recounted testimony from Kingsbury’s friends and family regarding the relationship between Fravel and Kingsbury. When their first child was born, Prokopowicz said, “there was a pivot in the relationship.” Kingsbury later became frustrated with their relationship, Prokopowicz said.
Prokopowicz referenced testimony from Kingsbury’s friends about instances of alleged domestic abuse, including times they claimed they saw bruises on Kingsbury's neck and one instance where a friend said she was on FaceTime with Kingsbury when Fravel allegedly hit her. Another friend testified that Kingsbury told her that Fravel put his hands around her neck and told her she could end up like Gabby Petito, a woman who was killed in 2021 by her fiance.
Fravel admitted to law enforcement that he had an infatuation with Petito’s case and said his interaction with Kingsbury was “just a joke,” Prokopowicz said.
Kingsbury’s parents testified that she decided to leave Fravel months before she was reported missing.
Text messages between Fravel and Kingsbury in December 2022 revealed that Kingsbury told him she wanted to end the relationship, Prokopowicz said. Fravel proceeded to send her over 60 photographs of the two of them and their children.
“I’m already aware that I’m ruining everything for everybody,” Kingsbury texted Fravel.
Prokopowicz then asked who had the opportunity to kill Kingsbury.
On March 31, 2023, Kingsbury and Fravel dropped their children off at daycare then drove back to their Winona residence. Kingsbury was scheduled to work, Prokopowicz said. She logged onto Mayo Clinic’s VPN but never completed any work that day.
“Madeline Kingsbury never left that residence alive,” he said.
There were no signs of disturbances or physical fight, according to investigators. The person who killed Kingsbury was already in the home, Prokopowicz said.
The state then argued that Fravel was the only one with the means to kill Kingsbury, who died by homicidal asphyxiation, according to the medical examiner.
According to Prokopowicz, the towel that Kingsbury was strangled with matched towels in their Winona residence. The gray bedsheet Kingsbury’s body was wrapped in matched those of a gray pillowcase from their home. Black duct tape found with her remains matched the width and color of tape found in their home.
“The time has come to remove that cloak of innocence – that presumption of innocence,” Prokopowicz concluded. “The time has come for the defendant to be found guilty of first-degree murder with a past pattern of domestic abuse. The time has come for the defendant to be found guilty of first-degree murder with premeditation. The time has come for the defendant to be found guilty of second-degree intentional murder. The time has come for the defendant to be found guilty murder in the second degree while committing a felony.”
Defense revisits claims of ‘tunnel vision, revisionist history and secret truths’
“Not all circumstantial evidence is created equally,” Bauer told the jurors at the beginning of his closing argument.
For an hour and 20 minutes, the defense argued that jurors can “connect the dots,” not fill in the blanks.
Bauer argued once again that law enforcement acted with tunnel vision when investigating the case. Witnesses throughout the trial discussed the 24/7 surveillance on Fravel and that a tracker was put on his vehicle.
Bauer claimed that when officers came across facts that didn’t make sense, they would dismiss the details.
The state claimed that Kingsbury fought for her life inside of the Winona residence, Bauer said.
“There are no broken dishes. There are no holes in the wall,” Kingsbury said. “There is nothing … that supports the idea that there was any type of struggle inside that residence.”
The defense also relied on a statement made by Robert Albrecht, a neighbor of Fravel's and Kingsbury’s Winona residence. Albrecht was the final witness for the defense who claimed that he saw an “unidentified person” that wasn’t Fravel waving at him from Fravel and Kingsbury’s residence on the morning that Kingsbury was reported to have disappeared.
Bauer then argued that there was “revisionist history” in testimonies from Kingsbury’s friends, who spoke about potential instances of abuse Kingsbury faced from Fravel.
Two witnesses, who claimed to see Fravel hit Kingsbury during a FaceTime call, shared similar details about their stories – including that Kingsbury was in the kitchen holding her son and that the couple was arguing over how messy the house was, Bauer said.
Bauer also said the state painted a picture that Kingsbury and Fravel’s relationship was over after their December 2022 messages.
“That’s not true,” Bauer said. “It’s simply just not true.”
In February 2023, Kingsbury sent Fravel a message insinuating she wanted to have a sexual interaction, and in March 2023, she messaged him that she wanted to cuddle with Fravel and their son, Bauer said.
Bauer also referenced the 60 photographs sent by Fravel to Kingsbury, noting that those messages are “a two-hour snapshot” of their entire relationship.
Though the state argued that Kingsbury was being “controlled” by Fravel, Bauer said, Kingsbury did what she wanted to do. He also argued she had her own “secret truths” that she didn’t share with her friends regarding her relationship with Fravel.
Bauer discussed again how law enforcement dismissed details of the investigation, including DNA evidence. He concluded by talking about the instructions they would receive before beginning their deliberation.
Bauer said for there to be a pattern of domestic abuse, the incidents need to be approximate in time to each other.
Bauer then referenced one neighbor’s testimony who said they never heard “an argument, a fight, a yelling match.”
For the first-degree premeditated charge, Bauer told the jurors to ask themselves whether they can “conclude that this wasn’t a rash impulse.”
Though the defense only represented one-tenth of the exhibits, the quality of their evidence outmatches that of the state’s, Bauer argued.
“At some point, enough’s enough,” he said. “The state has not met its burden.”