“A Defense That Fell Apart”: Josh Kolsrud On The Fire Chief Kevin West Murder Trial

A Startling Defense Strategy

In his recent appearance on Court TV, Phoenix Defense attorney Josh Kolsrud said he was “flabbergasted” by the defense strategy used in the trial of fire chief Kevin West, who is accused of strangling his wife, Marcelle “Marcy” West. According to Kolsrud, the claim that Marcy West died from a seizure caused by a massage was not just unusual, but fundamentally flawed. As a trial lawyer who regularly handles homicide cases, he described the theory as a risky all-or-nothing approach that placed the entire defense on a medical explanation that was highly vulnerable to expert testimony.

Why the Forensic Evidence Was Devastating

Kolsrud explained that the prosecution’s case was strengthened significantly by the testimony of two forensic pathologists who directly dismantled the massage theory. He noted that these experts testified it was medically impossible for a massage to cause the type of asphyxiation and injuries observed. In Kolsrud’s view, this was devastating because the defense was not arguing misidentification or an alibi—it was relying entirely on a medical cause of death that the state’s experts convincingly rejected.

The Missing Expert That Changed Everything

One of the most damaging aspects of the defense, according to Kolsrud, was its failure to present its own forensic pathologist. He questioned how a defense team could advance a medical-based theory without an expert willing to support it under oath. Kolsrud suggested the reason was simple: no qualified expert would testify that a massage could produce those injuries. Without expert backing, he said, the defense lacked credibility and left the jury with little reason to doubt the prosecution’s version of events.

Key Takeaways from Josh Kolsrud

• The “massage gone wrong” theory was an extremely risky and unusual defense.

• Prosecutors dismantled the defense with testimony from two forensic pathologists.

• The defense relied entirely on a medical explanation rather than an alibi or alternative suspect.

• Failing to call a defense forensic pathologist severely weakened credibility.

• Without expert support, the defense theory was unlikely to create reasonable doubt.