State and defense deliver closing arguments in Sarah Hartsfield’s insulin murder trial
After an eight-day trial, the jury in Chambers County is now deliberating the fate of Sarah Hartsfield, accused of murdering her husband, Joseph, with an insulin overdose.
After eight days of testimony, both sides delivered closing arguments on Wednesday in Sarah Hartsfield’s insulin murder trial, leaving the Chambers County jury of 12 to decide whether the 49-year-old deliberately killed her husband, Joseph Hartsfield, with an overdose of insulin.
During the state’s closing arguments, prosecutors told jurors that Sarah Hartsfield’s actions and words painted a clear picture of motive, intent, and deception. They replayed Joseph’s voicemail he left his mother just days before his death.
“I went home prepared to be shot, but it didn’t happen.”
- Blog Day 7: Lead detective details phone data, deleted messages in Sarah Hartsfield’s insulin murder trial
Prosecutors said Sarah “was tired of Joseph” and “screaming her motive to anyone who would listen,” claiming he was “bleeding her dry,” “leaving her in financial ruins,” and “refusing to get it together with his diabetes.”
Prosecutors argued that instead of leaving him, “she did the most obvious and natural thing,” she killed him. They described her as “the expletive-screaming, vindictive actress” who “waited almost an entire day while he lay dying,” calling her behavior that of “a woman that wasn’t going to take his sh*t anymore.”
Prosecutor Mallory Vargas walked jurors through a timeline that included messages, deleted texts, and videos that prosecutors said prove Sarah’s involvement. Vargas pointed out that Sarah “admitted to giving Joseph medications prescribed to her,” including Benadryl and ropinirole, “even though Joseph wouldn’t take a Tylenol.”
The prosecution reminded jurors that while Joseph’s blood sugar alerts were going off over 100 times, Sarah was “on Facebook, ordering groceries, and setting up his Apple legacy contact,” adding, “It’s almost like she knew he was going to die.”
- Blog Day 5: From house fires to murder plot: Jury hears more about Sarah Hartsfield’s ‘tumultuous’ past
Vargas told the jury that this case had “more evidence tying Sarah Hartsfield to an offense than Detective Skyler Rocz has ever had before,” calling the investigation “thorough” and “balanced.” She said Sarah “wove a web and told everyone different facts,” insisting that what Hartsfield did was “intentional, knowing, and unapologetic.”
“Joseph Hartsfield was killed by what can only be described as his worst nightmare,” Vargas said. “She is not the kind and loving person who has been wrongfully accused; she, unfortunately, is a murderer.”
- Blog Day 4: From hospital records to shooting of ex: New testimony unfolds in Sarah Hartsfield murder trial
Defense attorney Case Darwin told jurors that prosecutors had built their case on “assumptions and character attacks,” not facts. He argued that Joseph’s death was a tragic medical event, not murder, and said the state was “asking you to speculate.”
Darwin questioned the credibility of the state’s investigation and medical conclusions, pointing to inconsistencies and saying that “there is no smoking gun.” He told the jury that Sarah had been vilified because of her past relationships, not because of evidence proving guilt.
“She’s been on trial for being a bad wife, not a murderer,” Darwin said. He urged jurors to look past the emotional testimony and “stick to the science,” saying the state’s experts “couldn’t say how the insulin entered Joseph’s body” and that “reasonable doubt is all over this case.”
He reminded jurors that Sarah cooperated with law enforcement, stayed at the hospital, and “never ran or hid,” arguing that the prosecution’s narrative “doesn’t fit the facts.”
In rebuttal, Vargas countered that Sarah “was the only person in the room” and that “murderers aren’t in the business of telling us how they do it.” She said Sarah’s actions in the hours before and after Joseph’s death, from deleting messages to setting up financial changes, showed “intentional, calculated behavior.”
Vargas ended by telling jurors this case is about “what’s acceptable in Chambers County,” saying, “You may get away with it in another county… but not here.”
Now, it’s up to the jury to decide Sarah Hartsfield’s fate.
Deliberations began Wednesday afternoon.
