Colorful little polka dots pepper the pillow Lu Thi Harris used on her bed each night. But four years ago, a stranger invaded her Dallas home and used that pillow as a weapon.

On March 20, 2018, Billy Chemirmir — who spotted Harris at a Walmart not far away — smothered the life out of the 81-year-old woman, Dallas County prosecutors argued in his capital murder trial this week.

“That man, right there, is capable of taking the most innocent of objects — the things we put our children’s heads down on at night so they can have dreams ... and he turned them into instruments of nightmares,” prosecutor Glen Fitzmartin said to jurors Thursday. He stood just feet away from where Chemirmir sat, peering down at him and pointing his finger.

The Dallas County jury took just 45 minutes to convict Chemirmir of capital murder. Chemirmir could be one of the state’s most prolific serial killers. Police say he preyed on elderly women in senior living communities and private homes in Dallas and Collin counties, stealing their valuable jewelry and other precious items.

State District Judge Raquel “Rocky” Jones sentenced Chemirmir to life in prison without the possibility of parole because prosecutors chose not to pursue the death penalty.

Chemirmir showed no visible reaction to the verdict. He stood before the judge with his arms crossed while she sentenced him.

This was Chemirmir’s second trial for Harris’ death. Chemirmir escaped a conviction in November after jurors deadlocked following 11 hours of deliberations over two days. One juror refused to budge, according to notes sent to the judge from that jury.

This week, jurors also heard about attacks on Mary Brooks on Jan. 30, 2018, in her Dallas condominium and Mary Bartel on March 19, 2018, in her retirement community apartment. Bartel survived and helped police on an investigation that led them to Chemirmir. Brooks’ death initially was thought to have been of natural causes, but the medical examiner changed his ruling after Chemirmir’s arrest and the discovery of Brooks’ missing jewelry.

Dallas County District Attorney John Creuzot renewed his vow Thursday to take Chemirmir to trial on one more capital murder charge for Brooks’ death.

“That’s what we said we’d do, and I think that’s appropriate,” Creuzot said.

After that, the other 11 counts of capital murder against him in Dallas County will likely be dismissed.

Chemirmir, a Kenyan immigrant with permanent resident status in the U.S., did not testify. He has maintained he is innocent and told The Dallas Morning News earlier this year that he was convinced he’d never see the inside of a Texas prison. He patted one of his attorneys, Mark Watson, on the arm Thursday before being taken back to jail.

About 25 relatives representing about 12 families attended the trial and rejoiced at the verdict, erupting in cheers after Chemirmir was led out of the courtroom. Creuzot, who helped prosecute the case, sniffled and blinked back tears while the families huddled together and prayed.

Jurors declined to comment as they left the courtroom.

“They heard the evidence that all of us had been living with for years,” said Mary Jo Jennings, whose mother, Leah Corken, was killed at The Tradition-Prestonwood in August 2016. “I hope this is the first step of healing for all of the families.”

Chemirmir’s attorneys said they have already filed a notice of appeal.

“We didn’t think the state had enough evidence to get beyond a reasonable doubt. Obviously the jury disagreed,” one of Chemirmir’s attorneys, Kobby Warren, said after court ended. “We respect the verdict of the jury. I just don’t agree with it.”

Circumstantial case

The new jury heard much of the same evidence that jurors heard in November.

The case against Chemirmir is circumstantial, prosecutors have said. But they believe the totality of the evidence shows Chemirmir had a pattern of smothering elderly women and stealing their jewelry to sell for profit.

“This idea that circumstantial evidence equals weak evidence is stuff of movies and books ... but it’s not real,” Creuzot said to jurors in closing arguments.

Jurors saw video surveillance footage from a Walmart on Coit and Arapaho roads on three separate days, including the day of Harris’ death.

On that day, March 20, 2018, video shows Chemirmir and Harris in the store at the same time.

Defense lawyers challenged the video evidence by pointing out that Harris arrived at Walmart nearly 40 minutes before Chemirmir and that footage does not appear to show the two speaking to each other. Chemirmir drove out of the parking lot about two minutes before Harris, Warren pointed out.

Prosecutors sought to prove Chemirmir had a pattern of choosing victims at Walmart.

Surveillance footage from another day in March showed Chemirmir standing outside the same Walmart in dark slacks, a white shirt and a blue tie with a phone to his ear, watching the parking lot intently. But a cellphone analyst testified that Chemirmir’s phone showed no record of incoming or outgoing calls during the time he loitered in the Walmart, suggesting that he pretended to be on the phone.

Prosecutors also showed Walmart footage from Jan. 30 — the day Mary Brooks was killed. A silver Nissan Altima parked next to Brooks’ car, but the driver never got out. The car, which resembled the one Chemirmir drove, left when Brooks did. The footage never showed a license plate number or the driver.

Under prosecutors’ questioning, the cellphone analyst testified that Chemirmir’s records placed him in the area of the Walmart at the same time. But defense lawyers tried to cast doubt on the reliability of cellphone towers and the large swath of area they cover.

The defense’s strategy was also similar to the last trial. Warren and and fellow defense lawyer Phillip Hayes cross-examined the state’s witnesses more often, but like in the first trial, they made no opening statement and called no witnesses.

“In a criminal case, the most important thing that the state has to do is prove to you all that the person they’re accusing was at the scene ... They can’t place him there,” Warren said in closing arguments, referring to Harris’ house.

Differences in strategy

Much about the two trials was the same. But prosecutors changed the order of witnesses and did not show some evidence that was a major part of the last trial.

The case they presented this week was largely chronological, placing witnesses in an order that showed how the investigation developed from the attack on Bartel, to Chemirmir’s arrest, to the discovery of Harris’ body, to the reinvestigation of Brooks’ death.

There were also subtle differences in how evidence was presented to jurors, like when lead prosecutor Fitzmartin showed a photograph of Harris on a projector. The prosecutor then laid jewelry on top of the photo that Chemirmir had when he was arrested to show how it matched the items Harris wore in the photo.

“All of this stuff is actually not stuff. It’s evidence. It’s evidence of the guilt of Billy Chemirmir in the death of Lu Thi Harris,” Fitzmartin said forcefully in his closing argument.

Prosecutors did not show jurors video of Chemirmir’s interview with police officers from Dallas and Plano the night he was arrested.

In that hourslong video watched by the first jury, Chemirmir denied involvement in either women’s deaths. He remained polite throughout the interview, and appeared surprised to be accused of murder. He told police he thought he was being questioned for an outstanding warrant for public intoxication.

“I just can’t believe this,” Chemirmir said. “Where I come from, our culture, we don’t even think about that. ... I didn’t murder anybody.”

Prosecutors might not have chosen to play the video in the retrial because it created doubt in jurors’ minds that Chemirmir was guilty, said Robbie McClung, a defense lawyer and former prosecutor not involved in the case.

Defense lawyers tried to get the video admitted, but to no avail. Rules that lawyers must abide by prevent the defense from entering what is considered a self-serving statement because it takes away the prosecution’s ability to cross-examine the person.

“I think that was probably the downfall for them the last time. I think that’s what hung the jury,” McClung said. “It left some of the jurors wondering ‘Could it possibly be that he didn’t do it and we’ve got the wrong person?’”

“That was a strategic move,” she said. “The only way he would get his story out is if he took the stand.”

Looking ahead

Chemirmir will remain in the Dallas County jail until after the trial for Brooks’ death, which has not been scheduled. He will then likely be transferred to Collin County, where prosecutors also have five indictments against Chemirmir for deaths there.

Creuzot said he and Collin County District Attorney Greg Willis agreed that Dallas County would try its cases first.

After Creuzot said last year that he wouldn’t seek the death penalty, lawmakers and families of Chemirmir’s alleged victims called on Willis to do so. The Collin County DA’s office has declined to comment on the cases.