{"id":403718,"date":"2026-09-18T16:50:11","date_gmt":"2026-09-18T16:50:11","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/403718\/"},"modified":"2026-09-18T16:50:11","modified_gmt":"2026-09-18T16:50:11","slug":"state-combines-shanna-gardner-henry-tenon-trials-drops-some-charges-against-pair-in-jared-bridegan-murder","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/403718\/","title":{"rendered":"State combines Shanna Gardner, Henry Tenon trials, drops some charges against pair in Jared Bridegan murder"},"content":{"rendered":"

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. \u2013 After one of three people accused in the deadly ambush shooting of Jared Bridegan<\/a> was convicted last month, the other two defendants will now be tried together and face fewer charges, according to court records.<\/p>\n

Shanna Gardner<\/a>, Bridegan\u2019s ex-wife, and Henry Tenon<\/a>, the accused gunman, will face trial together in May 2027, after prosecutors took their cases back to the grand jury.<\/p>\n

Gardner, 39, was re-indicted on charges of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder, and Tenon, 65, was re-indicted on first-degree murder and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. <\/p>\n

The cases were also combined.<\/p>\n

Three of Tenon\u2019s charges — child abuse, conspiracy to commit murder and accessory after the fact — were dropped; and Gardner had two charges dropped: child abuse and solicitation to commit a capital felony.<\/p>\n

After a week-long trial in August, Mario Fernandez<\/a>, Gardner\u2019s estranged husband, was found guilty of first-degree murder and solicitation to commit a capital felony in Bridegan\u2019s killing.<\/p>\n

Tenon<\/a> is a former tenant at a property owned by Fernandez, and prosecutors have said that Gardner and Fernandez conspired together to hire him to kill Bridegan, after years of contentious custody disputes over the twins Gardner and Bridegan shared.<\/p>\n

The twins were 9 years old when Bridegan was murdered on Feb. 16, 2022.<\/p>\n

The father of four had stopped to move a tire that was blocking his way home after dropping off the twins with Gardner. Prosecutors say it was a ruse to get him out of the vehicle and that Tenon\u2019s DNA was found on that tire.<\/p>\n

The child abuse charge all three defendants once faced had stemmed from the fact that Bridegan\u2019s toddler daughter was with him when he was gunned down and was narrowly missed by a bullet while she was strapped in her car seat.<\/p>\n

Prosecutors had initially planned to try Gardner immediately after Fernandez, but new child sex charges filed against Fernandez the day after his conviction forced a delay.<\/p>\n

Because the charges have the potential to alter Gardner\u2019s defense strategy, both the state and defense agreed the trial should be postponed.<\/p>\n

Judge London Kite set the new trial date for next year, with jury selection to begin on May 3, 2027, and three weeks of trial scheduled to start May 10, 2027.<\/p>\n

RELATED: Jury convicts Mario Fernandez of murder in February 2022 ambush shooting of Jared Bridegan, his wife\u2019s ex-husband<\/a> | \u2018Truth won today,\u2019 says Jared Bridegan\u2019s widow after Mario Fernandez convicted of murder in 2022 shooting<\/a><\/p>\n

Gardner defense motions<\/p>\n

During his trial, Fernandez\u2019s defense opted to concede that Tenon is the man captured on video in Jacksonville Beach leaving the scene of the ambush shooting on foot.<\/p>\n

It seems Gardner\u2019s defense will take a different approach.<\/p>\n

Among about a dozen defense motions that Kite must rule on before trial, Gardner\u2019s attorneys are requesting that the state not be allowed to call a truck in surveillance footage \u201cTenon\u2019s truck\u201d or identify people in the footage as Henry Tenon. <\/p>\n

The defense argues the images are unclear and those disputed identifications should be decided by the jury, not assumed by witnesses or prosecutors.<\/p>\n

Defense attorneys also want Kite to block a detective from testifying that Tenon\u2019s walk matched the shooter\u2019s. It argues the detective lacks proper expertise, the method is unreliable and the side-by-side video is misleading.<\/p>\n

Other defense motions that must still be decided are:<\/p>\n

Autopsy\/scene photos:\u00a0A request to exclude graphic photographs of Jared Bridegan, arguing they are unnecessary because Gardner does not dispute that he was killed and was not allegedly present or the shooter.<\/p>\n

Burden shifting:\u00a0A motion to bar the prosecution from arguing, \u201cIf Gardner didn\u2019t do it, who did?\u201d or that no one else had a motive. The defense says the state must prove Gardner\u2019s guilt and she need not identify another suspect.<\/p>\n

Discovery:\u00a0A request to force prosecutors to turn over statements and communications involving Kirsten Bridegan, Detective Christopher Johns, and prosecutors\u2014including relevant texts, emails, social-media directions and call records.<\/p>\n

Second phone:\u00a0A motion to exclude evidence that Gardner obtained another phone on her lawyer\u2019s advice, arguing it could reflect privacy concerns\u2014not guilt. Alternatively, prohibit calling it a \u201cburner phone\u201d and require a limiting instruction.<\/p>\n

\u201cBurner phone\u201d and \u201cdry run\u201d language:\u00a0A request to stop prosecutors from using those terms, arguing they imply criminal intent and unfairly prejudice the jury. It asks the state to use neutral descriptions instead.<\/p>\n

Marital communications:\u00a0A motion to exclude private conversations between Gardner and Fernandez, who is still her husband, legally. It argues the conversations are protected by marital privilege and that presenting only Gardner\u2019s side would mislead the jury.<\/p>\n

Missing Ring-camera footage:\u00a0A request to prevent the state from suggesting Gardner deleted or hid Ring footage. It argues there is no evidence that footage existed or that Gardner caused it to disappear, and that technical problems could explain its absence.<\/p>\n

Co-conspirator statements:\u00a0A motion to require prosecutors to identify, before trial, every out-of-court statement they plan to use under the co-conspirator hearsay exception. It also wants the state to explain the independent evidence supporting each statement so the defense can challenge them.<\/p>\n

Susan Lee\u2019s testimony:\u00a0A request for witness Susan Lee to testify by Zoom using typed answers because a speech impediment makes oral communication difficult, especially under stress. She would remain under oath and subject to cross-examination.<\/p>\n

Subpoena for widow\u2019s phone<\/p>\n

Gardner\u2019s defense team has been seeking private messages and other information from Kirsten Bridegan\u2019s phone and social media accounts that attorneys said could be relevant to Gardner\u2019s defense.<\/p>\n

Bridegan, a potential prosecution witness, has opposed the request.<\/p>\n

In a statement to News4JAX, Gardner\u2019s defense team said it is not seeking direct access to Kirsten Bridegan\u2019s phone.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe defense is not asking for Kirsten Bridegan\u2019s phone,\u201d the statement said. \u201cThe judge ordered her to turn over specific communications with A.B., L.B., lead Detective Christopher Johns and the prosecutors assigned to the case, including the State Attorney. Those communications go to the judge, not the defense.\u201d<\/p>\n

The statement questioned why Bridegan and prosecutors are opposing a judicial review of the communications.<\/p>\n

\u201cWhy are Kirsten Bridegan and the State fighting to keep these communications secret?\u201d the defense said. \u201cWhat are they afraid these communications will show?\u201d<\/p>\n

Those statements reflect the defense\u2019s position. <\/p>\n

Kirsten Bridegan\u2019s attorney, Douglas Clifton, on the other hand, has argued that the subpoena from the defense seeks highly private information and violates protections under Florida\u2019s victims\u2019 rights law, commonly known as Marsy\u2019s Law.<\/p>\n

Clifton has said a forensic examination of the phone could expose unrelated personal information and potentially reveal confidential details about Bridegan and her family. He has characterized the defense request as an overly broad fishing expedition.<\/p>\n

Heated back-and-forth<\/p>\n

Kite previously ordered Bridegan to turn over her cellphone<\/a> by 9 a.m. Aug. 21. and denied Bridegan\u2019s request to stay the cellphone order shortly before the deadline.<\/p>\n

Kite said she had reviewed a sealed submission from Gardner\u2019s attorneys and found that some requested information had potential evidentiary value. <\/p>\n

She said her order limited the scope of any disclosure and required the court to review the communications before anything could be provided to the defense.<\/p>\n

But when Bridegan did not turn over the phone by the deadline, Kite interrupted the Fernandez trial<\/a> and held an emergency hearing. Gardner\u2019s attorneys then asked the judge to begin contempt proceedings against Bridegan.<\/p>\n

Kite scheduled a contempt hearing for later that day. Before it could take place, the Fifth District Court of Appeal imposed a stay<\/a>, which prevents enforcement of the phone order while it considers Bridegan\u2019s petition. <\/p>\n

The appellate court confirmed Sept. 2 that the stay will remain in place through the final disposition of the petition.<\/p>\n

Prosecutor communications<\/p>\n

Gardner\u2019s defense team has also asked Kite to enforce another order requiring the state to search for communications involving Kirsten Bridegan; Detective Christopher Johns, the lead investigator in Jared Bridegan\u2019s death; and prosecutors.<\/p>\n

In a motion filed Sept. 10, Gardner\u2019s attorneys argue that prosecutors still have not complied with an Aug. 11 order from Kite requiring them to determine whether communications involving Kirsten Bridegan and Johns \u2014 along with Assistant State Attorneys Christina Stifler and Alan Mizrahi, and State Attorney Melissa Nelson \u2014 exist in the state\u2019s \u201cpossession, custody or control.\u201d<\/p>\n

The defense argues the state improperly answered only whether it had Johns\u2019 messages \u2014 not whether it had access to them through him \u2014 and gave no details about its search of the prosecutors\u2019 communications.<\/p>\n

The defense says the state acknowledged that communications involving the prosecutors exist but provided only a general statement that they had been searched for exculpatory or impeachment information.<\/p>\n

The defense says prosecutors have produced no messages, documents or other communications to Gardner\u2019s attorneys.<\/p>\n

The motion asks Kite to order the state to collect and search Johns\u2019 communications with Kirsten Bridegan and submit all responsive communications \u2014 along with the results of the state\u2019s searches \u2014 to the court for private, or in-camera, review.<\/p>\n

The judge would decide whether any material is relevant and should be disclosed to the defense.<\/p>\n

The defense argues the communications could contain evidence about witness bias, credibility or the shaping of testimony. <\/p>\n

Kirsten Bridegan is expected to be a key prosecution witness. Evidence that could be used to challenge a witness\u2019 credibility generally falls under prosecutors\u2019 obligations to disclose favorable evidence under Brady v. Maryland and Giglio v. United States, the motion says.<\/p>\n

The motion does not establish that prosecutors violated their disclosure obligations. It asks Kite to require further searches and independently review the communications before deciding whether any must be disclosed.<\/p>\n

Judge declines to step aside<\/p>\n

The dispute over Kirsten\u2019s phone led prosecutors and Kirsten Bridegan to separately ask Kite to step aside from Gardner\u2019s case. They argued the judge\u2019s handling of the phone subpoena and the proposed contempt hearing created a reasonable fear that future proceedings involving Kirsten Bridegan would not be fair.<\/p>\n

Bridegan\u2019s motion argued that Kite had appeared to prejudge whether Kirsten Bridegan should be held in criminal contempt. She cited the short deadline to surrender the phone, the judge\u2019s refusal to wait for an appellate ruling and the decision to schedule a same-day contempt hearing.<\/p>\n

The State\u2019s motion said Kite\u2019s words and conduct created the appearance that matters involving Kirsten Bridegan had been prejudged. <\/p>\n

Prosecutors pointed to the rapid sequence of events, the interruption of Fernandez\u2019s trial and the limited time Bridegan was given to prepare for the proposed contempt hearing.<\/p>\n

The State said it was not seeking Kite\u2019s removal simply because she had ruled against Bridegan. Instead, prosecutors argued that the combined circumstances created a reasonable fear that future proceedings involving Kirsten Bridegan would not be fair and impartial.<\/p>\n

Kite denied both recusal motions, saying they were legally insufficient. Her ruling did not resolve whether Bridegan ultimately must surrender her phone or whether she could face contempt proceedings.<\/p>\n

Copyright 2026 by WJXT News4JAX – All rights reserved.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"JACKSONVILLE, Fla. \u2013 After one of three people accused in the deadly ambush shooting of Jared Bridegan was…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":403719,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[8],"tags":[30375,116,118,117,30372,30373,30374],"class_list":["post-403718","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-jacksonville","tag-henry-tenon","tag-jacksonville","tag-jacksonville-headlines","tag-jacksonville-news","tag-jared-bridegan","tag-mario-fernandez","tag-shanna-gardner"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/403718","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=403718"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/403718\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/403719"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=403718"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=403718"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-fl\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=403718"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}