HONOLULU -- A Honolulu jury found Kirk Lankford guilty of murdering Japanese national Masumi Watanabe a year ago in Pupukea.

The jurors deliberated since Friday after hearing weeks of testimony. They found Lankford guilty of second-degree murder.

The jury ruled that it was murder by co-mission; intentionally and knowingly caused the death of Watanabe.

Judge Karl Sakamoto granted the prosecutor's motion to hold him without bail until sentencing. He based that ruling on what he called "cold, calculating, deliberate conduct" by Lankford. Sakamoto also said Lankford was a serious flight risk.

Sakamoto scheduled a sentencing hearing during the week of May 27.

Lankford's father refused to comment after the verdict.

After hearing several theories during the trial -- that she was strangled inside his truck, that she was run over or otherwise injured and allowed to die -- the jury did not clearly state what they think. That was the question the defense wanted answered.

"Instruct the jury to go back and decide exactly what they mean by this verdict," defense attorney Don Wilkerson said.

"What they chose to analyze and find as the facts that support this verdict is confidential," Sakamoto said.

The judge ruled that the verdict was clear enough and he chose to find Lankford guilty of murder by comission. The defense would have preferred omission, meaning Watanabe died because he neglected to help her.

"You are taking that verdict away from the jury and using your own standards and the prosecution's wishes," Wilkerson said.

Carlisle said he plans to ask the judge and jury to sentence Lankford to life without parole. For that he must prove Lankford is dangerous. Carlisle wants to use evidence not allowed in the trial from a psychiatric examination.

Sakamoto kept the jury empaneled. That means the jurors will not be allowed to talk to the media about the case. They will decide on whether Lankford is eligible for an extended sentence beyond the maximum sentence for second-degree murder.

The judge would decide at a later date on the sentence.

Watanabe's parents were not in court for the verdict. They left for Japan on Monday morning. They were in court for most of the proceedings.

Prosecutors said that Lankford hit Watanabe with his pickup truck from his company Hauoli Pest Control and hid her body before disposing of it.

The defense did not show what strategy they were going to use until attorney Don Wilkerson said that his client did not kill Watanabe, but did dispose of her body.

Lankford claimed Watanabe was only slightly injured and willingly got into the truck after he accidentally struck her during her walk on Pupukea Road. After driving around Pupukea trying to find her house, Watanabe panicked, began screaming and near a vacant lot, leapt out of the pickup truck and struck her head on a boulder, according to the defense.

Lankford claimed he covered up her death to save his $75,000-a-year job.

Lankford admitted that he hid her in the truck while running scared. His attorney said Lankford tried to bury the body at Kahana Bay, but hard ground and a homeless witness scared him off. Finally he took Watanabe wrapped in garbage bags to the reef by Chinaman's Hat, Wilkerson said.

City Prosecutor Peter Carlisle said the evidence suggested Lankford lured Watanabe into his truck then strangled her when something went wrong. He said Lankford's story about Watanabe throwing herself from his speeding truck defies both science and common sense, and that his glibness on the witness stand was evidence of lying.

A traffic accident expert called Lankford's story "physically impossible."

He also said Watanabe would have been severely injured, not just grazed as Lankford claimed, with part of the injury from the truck's antenna.

Lankford's attorney said the lies came from prosecution witnesses; especially the traffic accident expert who said Lankford's account was impossible.

During the trial, the jury, prosecution and defense visited sites that were part of the case.

Defense To Fight Extended Sentence

During his murder trial, Lankford's attorney successfully fought to keep a previous case from being introduced as evidence. Lankford was accused of assaulting another Japanese woman in the same pest control truck, but he was never arrested and the woman withdrew her complaint and returned to Japan.

"Sentencing is a whole new ball game. Those rules don't apply. We are entitled to put in almost anything and everything as long as it's relevant," Carlisle said.

However, Wilkerson told the court he will once again oppose introducing those other allegations.

"This court has found that those allegations did not occur by a preponderance of the evidence so certainly the prosecution cannot come in at sentencing and reallege those matters," Wilkerson said.

Carlisle said he wants to tell the jury about more allegations against Lankford, including those from his wife Corinne, who prosecutors said told authorities he attacked her in the past, but she never filed a police complaint.

"Attacks on his wife attacks on cats and other animals. All those things would be appropriate for a decision by somebody who is in a mental health field to determine if he is someone who fits the criteria of dangerousness," Carlisle said.

Because of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the judge alone will not decide whether Lankford is eligible for a tougher sentence, life without parole instead of life with parole.

Instead, the jury will help decide whether he is dangerous enough to face that extended sentence. That is something Carlisle does not like.

"Which of course wasn't the state of the law for about 200 years. I have real questions about whether that is an invasion of the legislative process, whether that's an invasion of the executive privilege," he said.