When she finally raised her wet eyes from the table, she looked across to the jury. They were all staring at her, making their judgments, and that pressure only served to make her more nervous.
The twelve men and women that would judge Anna’s fate had a collective sadness around them. None of them looked happy to be in attendance. Valentine made true on her promise to dismiss all the red-blooded males, and Harvey did his best to dismiss the older women who would sympathize with Jessica’s life. The twelve that remained appeared to be reasonable, intelligent middle class people. They all looked like they have been cut from the same middle-class mold; with steady jobs, normal haircuts, and plain clothes.
Harvey was glad that his profession meant that he wasn’t called upon for jury duty. Knowing what he knew of the legal system, he wouldn’t trust the evidence presented to him by either side.
But someone had to make the decisions about the evidence.
Joanne Valentine appeared confident as she sat at the prosecution table with the support of three fellow lawyers. She should be confident; she had evidence on her side.
But Bill Harvey had a hunch.
And that was all he needed.
After Judge Wilmot had delivered his instructions, Valentine stood in front of the jury box and opened the case.
“Your Honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for your time. As you have heard my name is Joanne Valentine, and with my team, we will present the case of first-degree murder against Miss. Anna Jane Lempare. In this opening statement, I will state what I expect the evidence to prove.
The people are charging Anna Lempare with violations of the California Penal Code 187. We are charging Anna Lempare with the willful, deliberate, first-degree murder of her aunt, Jessica Harriet Lempare. Over the coming days, the people will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Anna Lempare killed Jessica Lempare with malice by calling to the stand numerous witnesses.
On May 1st of this year, Jessica Lempare had finished lunch in her home when there was a knock at the door. Jessica loved her apartment—it was where she was most comfortable. Unfortunately, it’s also where she was murdered.
Our first witness, LAPD Detective Timothy Miller, is an unbiased government official who examined the defendant’s house after the horrible murder. He will detail that there was no sign of forced entry and no sign of a struggle. This is unusual because all of Jessica’s friends refer to her as ‘feisty’. For her not to fight back while being strangled… well, it indeed needed to be someone that Jessica knew well. The detective will detail the DNA evidence found at Jessica’s house. That DNA evidence belongs to Anna Lempare. There is no doubt about that unbiased analysis.
Our second witness, Dr. Daniel Reed, will detail that Jessica was murdered by strangulation. Dr. Reed is a Medical Examiner with the Los Angeles County Department of Medical Examiner-Coroner. He will provide unbiased information about how Jessica was murdered.
Our third witness, a next-door neighbor, Thomas Feeble, will testify that he heard two women arguing in Jessica’s apartment on the afternoon of May 1st. He will testify that he recognized those voices as Jessica Lempare and Anna Lempare. When the arguing finished, Thomas stepped into the hallway, and he saw Anna leaving Jessica’s apartment. It was at this point that Anna confronted Thomas, threatened him, and then she punched a hole in the wall before leaving. He will testify that Anna Lempare was very angry.
Our fourth witness, respected veteran Mr. John ‘Bud’ Morgan, will state that Anna and Jessica had an ongoing dispute over the outcome of a will. You’ll hear about evidence that shows that this dispute reached a point where Anna was compelled to strangle Jessica.
Jessica was the trustee of Norman Chester’s Will, who was Anna’s grandfather, and this estate was worth just over twenty million dollars. Anna’s grandfather was clever enough to encourage his granddaughter, the last surviving member of his direct bloodline, to attend and complete Army Basic Training by the age of twenty-five.
If she didn’t do this, then the full amount of inheritance would be donated to a very worthy cause—a charity named Recovering Veterans. As you can tell by the name of the charity, they help veterans who have struggled with life since returning to serve their country. A very commendable cause indeed. John Morgan is the head CEO of this charity.
But Anna did not wish for any of the funds to go to the people that needed it. Selfishly, she wanted her hands on all that money. You see, Jessica Lempare was the only trustee of the will, and if anything happened to Jessica before Anna turned twenty-five, then the will would be split equally between Anna and the charity, just over ten million dollars each.
That meant Anna would receive ten million dollars’ inheritance if Jessica passed away before Anna turned twenty-five, without having to complete the conditions assigned to the will.
Throughout the course of this trial, you will hear witnesses state that Anna had no intention of attending Army Basic Training. She had no intention of completing the conditions of her grandfather’s will. She also had no intention of giving up her inheritance.
Heartlessly, she strangled her aunt for the sake of ten million dollars.
Heartlessly.
I ask you, what sort of woman kills their own family member for the sake of money?
We will present evidence as part of this case that will prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Anna strangled her aunt, Jessica Lempare.
As a member of this jury, you have a very important job. Your job will be to listen to the evidence that is presented to you. You must listen to the facts of this case.
Once you have heard all the evidence, you will be asked to make a determination based on that evidence.
But don’t worry, your decision will be easy.
At the end of this case, I will not stand before you and give you an answer to this case. I already know what your decision will be once you have heard the evidence.
The justice system has chosen you to make a decision based on all the evidence presented to you. That is all you have to do.
Your decision will be Guilty.
By the end of this trial, that will become obvious to you.
Thank you very much for serving your duty.”
Valentine ended her opening statement with a quick glance at Harvey.
As she walked back to her table, she gave him a wink, letting him know that she thought she had already landed a Guilty verdict.
Her voice was so soft and sensual during the opening that it could melt even the harshest soul. Harvey was sure that was how she won most of her cases.
In contrast, Harvey’s opening statement went easy on the personality and focused more on the technicalities of the law.
“May it please the court, Miss Valentine, members of the jury, on May 1st at 6 p.m., or perhaps a few minutes before, Jessica Lempare was strangled in her apartment. The prosecution would have you believe that Anna Lempare is guilty of a crime as heinous as murder. But over the coming days, we shall prove otherwise.
Anna Lempare was not there. Anna Lempare did not know about the incident until she was arrested the day after.
I repeat, Anna Lempare was not there.
Anna Lempare was at her home watching television when the incident occurred. Yes, she had argued with her aunt that night, but this wasn’t unusual behavior for these two feisty women. They had many arguments. That is how they communicated.
She had left her aunt’s apartment one hour before the incident and didn’t return.
Anna Lempare was not there when the death occurred.
I am Criminal Defense Attorney Bill Harvey and, along with my team, I represent Anna Lempare.
We are here to explain to you the undeniable fact that right now Anna Lempare is presumed innocent.
We are here to help you understand that many reasonable doubts lurk in the evidence.
We will present evidence to you showing the doubts about Anna’s guilt, beginning with our cross-examination of the prosecution’s evidence.
/>
During this case, you are going to hear about the presumption of innocence. That means that currently there is no guilt.
Anna Lempare starts with a blank page.
The presumption of innocence means that suspicion, bias, prejudgment, and assumptions have no place in your thoughts. You must make a decision based on the facts.
That is your responsibility to control. And it is a big responsibility.
Together, we are going on a ride. On that ride, I will show you where the police and their apparent laboratory ‘experts’ have ignored obvious evidence, used false science, and done untidy fieldwork, which has all led to a very wrong and early judgment.
I will show you that the witness statements are not enough to convict Anna Lempare.
And I will show you that the evidence in regards to the DNA is a mere assumption, and nothing more.
This trial will be an interesting ride, and it is a ride that we will take together.
Judge Wilmot will remind you that you are not to make up your minds until the journey is done, because it may be at the very last moment of the trial that you discover the reasonable doubt in the final piece of evidence.
And when our journey comes to a close, I will stand before you and ask you for a verdict of Not Guilty.
Because Anna Lempare did not murder her aunt. She was trying to live her life, not take one.
I repeat, Anna Lempare was not there.
Thank you for your time, and thank you for listening. I wish you well.”
When a number of heads nodded in the jury, Harvey returned the wink to Valentine.
CHAPTER 17
As the prosecution called their first witness, Bill Harvey felt quite calm.
His shoulders were relaxed, there was no tension on his face, and his breathing was slow. After he saw the heads nodding in the jury box at the end of his opening statement, he felt like he had the jury on his side, and the prosecution was going to have to fight hard to pull them back.
Detective Timothy Miller walked to the stand looking irritated. His fists were clenched, his shoulders were tight, his eyes were narrow. He didn’t want to be in this courtroom.
This was the worst part of the job he loved—he had done the hard yards, poured his heart and soul into catching criminals, and now he had to deal with overly-educated lawyers who administered the letter of the law.
This was the part where one wrong statement could throw away months of hard work.
And it was Harvey’s job to ensure he said at least one wrong word, and then exploit that word for all it was worth.
“Please state your name and occupation for the court,” Valentine began.
“Detective Timothy Miller and I’m a proud detective with the Los Angeles Police Department,” he stated slowly as he leaned forward toward the microphone. He was as uncomfortable with public speaking as he was with courtrooms.
“Are you the detective that analyzed the crime scene at the apartment that belonged to Jessica Lempare?”
“Yes. I am.”
“Detective Miller, I would like you to take us through the events on that day. In your own words, can you please describe what happened?”
Miller was an old-fashioned man. His values would have suited the 1970s; however, his hardline approach on life seemed misplaced in the current era. He had the look of a man who demanded his wife served him dinner and a beer as soon as he stepped in the door.
He was a man that was willing to risk his life to make a difference in the world, and he didn’t care if he had to bend a few rules to get it done.
“At 6.19 p.m., on Friday the 1st of May, a 911 call was made to notify us of a deceased person in the Los Feliz Palace apartments. At 6.36 p.m., we arrived at the property and entered the apartment. It’s here that we found Jessica Lempare on the floor.”
One of Valentine’s assistants typed into their laptop, and the photographs of the crime scene appeared on the court monitor. “The prosecution would like to introduce these photos of the crime scene as evidence.”
“Proceed,” Judge Wilmot said with approval.
“And this is how you found the apartment, Detective Miller?” Valentine asked, referring to the photos.
“We found Jessica lying on the floor of her living room. I checked her pulse, and there was no sign of life. Her body was very cold. The paramedics arrived at 6.42pm, and that was when it was confirmed that Jessica was deceased.”
“What was your expert impressions of the scene?”
“As soon as we saw the body, it became clear that the woman was strangled. There was bruising around her neck, and her body was in a lifeless position.”
“Have you seen someone strangled before?”
“Yes.”
“And how did this scene differ from that?”
“There was no sign of a struggle, which I found unusual. I would have expected a broken vase, or skin under her fingernails, or more bruises on the body of the deceased. For there to be no sign of a struggle, the argument must have escalated quickly.”
“Objection,” Harvey called out. “There is no established evidence to suggest there was an argument immediately prior to the strangulation.”
“Sustained,” Judge Wilmot agreed. “Please stick to the facts as you know them, Detective Miller.”
“Yes, sir.” Miller nodded like a schoolboy after being told off by the principal.
“Was there any sign of forced entry into the apartment of Jessica Lempare?” Valentine moved on quickly.
“No.” Miller coughed loudly. He knew that he should give up smoking, but he struggled with the reality of his job. Nicotine was an easy release from the stress of his world.
“Was there anything to suggest that there was an unexpected intruder in the room? Either an open window or another entrance left open?”
“No.” Miller shook his head, coughing slightly again. “There was no evidence of that.”
“Was there anything unusual about this crime scene?”
“No.” Miller shook his head for the second time. “It was very clear that the woman was deceased, there was no sign of a struggle, and there was nothing else unusual about the scene.”
“When you conducted your investigation into this horrific murder, did you find any fingerprints at the scene of the crime?”
“We did.”
“And who did those fingerprints belong to?”
“We found numerous fingerprints in the apartment. However, we were only able to match fingerprints to Anna Lempare.”
“And did you find DNA evidence at the scene?”
“We found DNA evidence on a glass of water in the living room, next to where the deceased was lying. This DNA evidence was in the form of saliva and was a proven match to Anna Lempare.”
“What was lying on the ground next to the deceased’s body when you entered the apartment?”
“It was a copy of the Norman Chester Will. Jessica Lempare is the trustee of that estate.”
“Was there anything else lying on the ground?”
“No.”
“Was it a very tidy apartment?”
“It was.”
“So, it would appear that the deceased was discussing the will before she died?”
“I can’t comment on what she was discussing before she died. However, a copy of the will was lying next to her body when we found her. It was the only thing that appeared out of place in the apartment.”
“And can you tell the court, were you the officer that arrested Anna Lempare?”
“Yes.”
“And did Anna Lempare seem upset when you were questioning her about the death of her aunt?”
“Anna didn’t seem visibly upset by the death of her aunt.”
“Did Anna Lempare provide an alibi for the time of death?”
“During questioning, Anna advised that she was at home watching television by herself when the death occurred.”
“Is there any evidence that proves Anna Lempare was at her apartment at t
he time that her aunt was murdered, such as security footage of her apartment?”
“No.”
“Detective Miller, you arrested Anna Lempare, and escorted her to the police station, and then questioned her about the death of her aunt. Did you, at any time, see Anna Lempare cry over the death of her aunt?”
“No, I didn’t.”
“Thank you for your time, Detective Miller.” Valentine smiled. “No further questions.”
A nice, simple, clean start to the prosecution’s case. A textbook approach to her first witness. Valentine had painted a very clear picture of the crime scene, and she already had convinced some of the jury members. Harvey liked to refer to the jurors convinced by early statements as “believers.” They would believe anything that authority told them—if a police officer told them to take off their clothes, they would do it without question. They had total belief in authority because they didn’t believe in themselves.
Harvey didn’t like those jurors. He would work hard to change their minds by showing that the people in authority were just that—people. They may have been convinced by Detective Miller’s words, but now it was Harvey’s turn to play the game.
“Hello, Detective Timothy Miller,” Harvey began, seated behind his desk. “Thank you for taking the time to talk with us today. I assume you’re very familiar with the details surrounding this case?”
“Yes.” Miller replied flippantly. His hatred for Bill Harvey’s profession was clear.
“The fingerprints that you have stated you found at the crime scene, where were they?”
“The fingerprints were found to be on the surrounding areas near the deceased’s body.”
“Can you please provide more detail?”
Detective Miller glared at Harvey.
“We conducted detail analysis of the scene, and we found fingerprints on the hallway cabinet and the coffee table. Those fingerprints were proven to belong to Anna Lempare.”
Bill Harvey Collection Page 40