Haug is bound over to District Court

HARTINGTON — Attempted murder suspect Kevin Haug has been bound over to District Court for a Nov. 22 hearing.

The court date was set after Cedar County Court Judge Douglas Luebbe determined at a Wednesday preliminary hearing that there is enough evidence to prove there is probable cause that a crime was committed.

Haug is being charged with two counts of attempted first degree murder and six other felonies.

Judge Luebbe opened Wednesday’s hearing by outlining the charges and the potential sentences for each of the eight felonies Haug has filed against him.

Haug stands accused of attempting to kill James Olson during a July 2 altercation at Haug’s wife’s Fordyce home.

The second attempted murder charge stems from an incident later that evening, where Haug rammed into a Cedar County Sheriff’s Department vehicle, driven by deputy Sam Vacha, in an attempt to escape law enforcement.

Judge Luebbe said the attempted murder charges are both Class II Felony charges, carrying a possible maximum sentence of up to 50 years in prison and up to a $10,000 fine. If Haug is found guilty of these charges, a judge has the right to order that these penalties be carried out either consecutively or concurrently, which means the attempted murder charges alone could put Haug’s sentence at a maximum of a 100-year prison sentence, Luebbe said.

Wednesday’s hearing became a little contentious at times, as Haug’s defense lawyer, Frederick “Fritz” Bartell, of Norfolk, attempted to dispute if there were any grounds for a first-degree attempted murder charge, saying there was no proof that the incidents involved premeditation.

Judge Luebbe continually pointed out that this hearing was taking place only to establish if there was enough evidence to justify continuing the case. The hearing was not designed to determine if there was “reasonable doubt that the defendant committed a crime,” Luebbe said.

At the conclusion of the 70-minute hearing, Luebbe determined the court had seen enough evidence to warrant continuing the prosecution.

Wednesday’s hearing included testimony from Cedar County Chief Deputy Chad Claussen.

Prosecutor Ed Matney asked Claussen several questions about his background to establish that Claussen is a well-trained and an experienced law enforcement officer.

He then asked Claussen to recite what he witnessed upon arriving at the Haug home the morning of July 2. Claussen said he received the call at 6:51 a.m. When Claussen arrived at the scene, he was advised Haug had fled the residence. He immediately assumed Haug was headed toward Yankton, since he owns property in Yankton. Claussen said Haug was indeed headed to Yankton, but turned around while attempting to cross the bridge, once he saw South Dakota law enforcement.

At the residence, Claussen said he noticed blood drops outside the home. He also observed the door knob on the west door had been drilled out and a window broken. The drill was still laying outside of the house, he said.

Claussen said he drew his gun and entered the house where he met Rhea Haug.

She told him her friend, James Olsen, had been attacked with two different knives by her estranged husband. Claussen said he saw a large amount of blood between the hallway and bedroom and then found a blood-stained shirt that had holes in it. He was then told the victim was bleeding from his head, hip and abdomen. Claussen drained the swimming pool outside the home and discovered two knives in it. Claussen said he was concerned whether or not the victim would survive. Upon cross examination, Claussen said he interviwed Olson later in the day and he was told by Haug that, “he was going to kill you today.” Matney said he believes the state met its burden that a crime has been committed, but Bartels countered by asking, “what evidence do you have to show that he did this with pre-meditation,” saying that premeditation is required to determine if this is should be a First Degree attempted murder. Matney disagreed with Bartels’ statement. “It seems to me that it is being suggested that when a victim fights back — that should absolve the defendant from trying to murder him. I don’t think that’s a fare assessment at all,” Matney said. Bartels countered by saying premeditation has not been proven. “Clearly, the evidence has been established, but in terms of trying to establish that this was premeditated attempted murder — that has not been established,” Bartels said.