After an hours long hearing last week, a Duval County judge ruled Friday that the prosecution “has met its burden in proving that (Gardner)’s guilt is evident.”
DUVAL COUNTY, Fla. — Shanna Gardner, the woman at the center of what prosecutors have called a “murder-for-hire” plot to kill her ex-husband and father of her two children, Jared Bridegan, was denied bond Friday afternoon.
Gardner, 37, is being held on first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder charges. She faces the death penalty in this case.
Her second husband, Mario Fernandez-Saldana, is also facing a first-degree murder charge related to Bridegan’s killing. He was killed in what police called an elaborate scheme, which involved a fire planted in the road, luring Bridegan to his death as he went to remove it.
In an hours-long pre-trial hearing last week, those close to Gardner testified the kids she shared with Bridegan want to see her. But Duval County Judge London Kite denied her motion to set bond Friday, ordering that Gardner stay in jail until her trial.
RELATED: Shanna Gardner asks judge for bond in alleged murder-for-hire case of ex-husband Jared Bridegan
He wrote in an order that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Gardner hired Henry Tenon, who pleaded guilty to shooting Bridegan, to kill him.
Kite clarified he is not making a judgement on Gardner’s innocence because a bond hearing, called an Arthur Hearing, is not the same as a trial. He cites Florida law: “For an Arthur hearing, while it involves a proffer of what the evidence may be at trial, is not a trial at all. It is before a judge, not a jury. Its purpose is not to determine the defendant’s guil but whether the defendant is eligible for bail and, if so, what conditions.”
He also said Gardner was a flight risk, exemplified by the fact that she moved to Washington after Bridegan’s murder and no longer has property in Jacksonville. In the order, he talked about how she moved without her children for months because of social media messages regarding her involvement in Bridegan’s death.
Kite listed several pieces of testimony presented in last week’s hearing to illustrate why he believes it is likely Gardner paid for a hit on Bridegan.
Multiple people testified Gardner was asking around about people who would be willing to kill Bridegan for money. “These were not just tongue-in-cheek comments a person makes out of frustration, as Defendant argues; they were overt actions occurring over multiple years. When Defendant was not explicitly asking if someone would kill her husband, she was lamenting to others about how terrible Mr. Bridegan made her life and how his actions frustrated her goals as a mother.”
He also says it’s likely that she orchestrated Fernandez’s involvement, because her “search for a potential hitman ended” when they began seeing each other more. She then started “bragging about Fernandez as the person to eliminate her ex-husband.”
He also explained ways Gardner could have benefited from Bridegan’s death, including the fact that she could not receive her trust fund unless she had “no further legal entanglements with her ex-husband.” His death would also end conflict’s between the two — Kite notes that they had a troubled relationship and were frequently battling over custody of their children and sharing costs of their son’s medical equipment.
Kite said he does not at all believe that Gardner was at the scene of Bridegan’s death or pulled the trigger, only that she orchestrated the murder.
Finally, Kite noted that Gardner has contacted witnesses in the past and may interfere with the judicial process if she was let out. He ended by saying due to these reasons, he cannot grant Gardner bond.
