Shortly thereafter, the trial concluded for the day and Detective Latour stepped back into the witness box in a light gray pinstripe suit to continue his testimony on September 4, 2013. He introduced photographs from the Sheetz location, where Grant went to supposedly hand over the boys to Laura on Friday for the weekend of July 15, 2011.
Additionally, he offered the evidence of a receipt from U-Haul for the rental of the trailer and the purchase of some moving supplies, a mount and ball for the trailer hitch and a lock. He showed the jury a video of Grant Hayes making that transaction.
Then his testimony moved to Texas, where Latour presented photographs of Karen Berry’s street, house, the johnboat on Oyster Creek, and the path leading to it. Latour explained that his main responsibilities at that scene were interviews and the retrieval of videos and other relevant materials not at the house while Detective Gill assisted the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office in the processing of evidence.
On July 26, 2011, Latour said, he drove to the medical examiner’s office in Galveston to observe the autopsy performed by Assistant Medical Examiner Dr. Nobby Mambo on the upper and lower torso found the day before in Oyster Creek, then briefed Dr. Deborah Radisch, the medical examiner in North Carolina, on his observations. Latour also attended the second autopsy after the discovery of the skull before returning to North Carolina.
On cross, defense attorney Jeff Cutler drew the jury’s attention to the fact that it was Amanda Hayes—not Grant—who drove her nephew Shelton Berry’s pickup to the end of Skinner Lane and offloaded the boxes of muriatic acid. He also questioned Latour about the drive from North Carolina to Texas, eliciting testimony that there were many swamps and bodies of water along the way where a body could have been dumped.
On re-direct, Latour established that there had been no calls to 911 from any of the Hayeses’ phones on the day Laura went missing, diminishing the believability that a confrontation on July 13, 2011, had accidentally turned deadly.
Shelton Berry, Amanda’s nephew, replaced the detective on the stand. Shelton had a sharp nose, long neck, and short brown hair that was slightly spiky on top. He was tanned and muscular from his long hours of work outside in the Texas sun. He told the jury that he did groundskeeping and maintenance work and operated a side business, Critter Catchers.
His testimony was littered with “yes, ma’am”s as he answered prosecutors’ questions. He said he’d been asleep when Amanda arrived with her family. It had been more than a year since he’d seen his aunt Amanda, and he’d never met Grant or the children before. Although he knew about Lily’s birth, he’d never heard about the two boys.
He related the conversations he’d had with Grant about alligators, fishing, sharks and operating the johnboat, but said that Grant seemed to be on the phone most of the time he was at their house. He also appeared to be nervous throughout the visit. Shelton said that he had removed the trotline for catching catfish and a knife from the boat after Amanda and Grant left but before the detectives arrived. He did not, however, use the boat or move it from where Grant and Amanda left it.
On cross-examination, Shelton admitted that both Grant and Amanda talked about alligator hunting, and on re-direct said that although Amanda asked him to take Grant hunting with them, she never indicated any desire to go along.
Shelton’s brother, Dalton, testified next. He had the same nose as Shelton, but was heavier and paler than his brother, with dark brown hair, a round face with dark circles under his eyes, and a sideways slant to his mouth. He told the jury that he hadn’t been at home when Amanda and her family arrived. When he got there, around five thirty in the morning, they were all asleep.
He said that Grant and Amanda were both upset and worried that they might be in trouble because they were not supposed to take the boys over state lines but said they’d had no choice because the boys’ mother hadn’t picked them up on Friday.
Dalton also testified that Grant talked to him, too, about alligator hunting and shark fishing.
He said that when Grant and Amanda were packing up to leave, he helped Grant clean the coolers. He said that the trailer remained hitched to their vehicle the whole time they were at his house and it was returned to the U-Haul in Katy on their return trip to North Carolina.
CHAPTER THIRTY-ONE
THE next witness was Fort Bend Sheriff’s Office Crime Scene Investigator Kim Oreskovich. She wore a brown uniform and tie and wire-rim glasses with brown stems and pulled her long curly light brown hair back in a ponytail.
She presented a series of graphic photographs of the body parts’ recovery. Out of respect for the victim and her family and friends, these were not displayed on the large screen but on a smaller one that was pointed directly at the jury. Oreskovich stood next to it and described the pictures to the jury as she recounted the story of recovering the first body parts from Oyster Creek. At the end of that grisly recital, court was adjourned for the day.
Oreskovich returned to the stand to resume her testimony on the fifth day of the trial, Thursday, September 5, 2013, wearing her hair pulled back from her face but hanging loose and free below her shoulders. In this session, she introduced a massive amount of evidence that she had gathered at the crime scene in Texas, including the DNA swabs and the two coolers that likely once carried the remains of Laura Ackerson. The larger cooler looked grimy because of the layer of fingerprint powder spread on the exterior in a vain attempt to locate fingerprints.
She was followed on the witness stand by Detective Brad Wichard from the robbery/homicide unit of the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office. He had a big, bushy mustache with lots of grayish hair receding at his temples and put on reading glasses whenever he needed to look at writing on the exhibits.
Wichard presented diagrams of the property and a layout of where the evidence had been recovered. He described his role in the search of the Berry home and the surrounding area, and the materials he discovered there including the Motel 6 receipt in the name of Amanda Smith of New York City, a shotgun from the spare room, a jar and a green towel found in the barn, a suitcase belonging to Amanda pulled out of a trash pile, and the video of Amanda driving Shelton’s truck and dumping the muriatic acid boxes at the end of the cul-de-sac on Skinner Lane.
He also submitted samples of dirt taken from the hog pen, some from the dark spot and others from other locations around the pen that he had collected and turned in for analysis. On cross-examination, he told the jury that he had noticed the dark spot in the animal containment area on July 26.
Next in the box was Houston Police Department dive team member Brian Davis, looking very pale and quite nervous during his testimony. He explained to the jury the obstacles he faced during the dive in Oyster Creek: poor visibility, rampant lily pads, overhanging weeds and the hot Texas sun. He entered photographs of the water search into evidence.
Dr. Ricky Carlyle, a Kinston dentist that Laura Ackerson visited, provided patient notes including all missing, canceled and attended appointments. He also provided a full mouth series, a panoramic x-ray that went from ear to ear showing all the teeth, jaw and sinuses along with a computer graph of the existing work in the victim’s mouth. His testimony and exhibits backed the state’s contention as to the identity of the skull found in Oyster Creek.
Raymond Boyd, an employee at the Home Depot in Katy, Texas, next took the jury step-by-step through Grant Hayes’s visit to the store on the day the accused purchased gloves, a trash can and the muriatic acid. He detailed his conversations with Grant and the reasons he’d discouraged him from purchasing the acid for odor removal. He then identified a photo of the packaging recovered on the Berry property as being for the long-cuff neoprene gloves that Grant had bought that day.
When Raymond Boyd finished his testimony, Brian Davis returned to the stand, where he identified photographs of the head wrapped in a sheet laying on a body bag, and the head itself. On cross, the defense asked questi
ons that seemed to bolster the state’s case, asking about the gruesome condition of that body part. Davis reiterated the slipping and sliding of the skin on the skull.
Voir dire testimony outside of the presence of the jury was required of the next witness, Dr. Paul Stimson. An elderly man with bags under his eyes and sagging jowls, he’d served as the forensic odontologist for Harris County, Texas, from 1968 until his recent retirement in February 2013.
Stimson testified that all of the teeth were in the mouth when he x-rayed the skull. When he returned at the request of the medical examiner, Dr. Stephen Pustilnik brought him just one tooth, the maxillary left central incisor, for examination. Using a 100X magnifying glass, he observed what appeared to be acid etching on the front surface. He told the judge that the other teeth that were missing had detached from the jaw somewhere between Texas and North Carolina.
The judge was concerned about the tooth being removed and asked, “Is it normal to remove teeth in making this kind of analysis?”
“It is not unusual,” Stimson said. He stated that “it’s not unusual for teeth to slip out in the body bag while the body is in the morgue waiting for the family and funeral directors to pick them up.”
“I see.”
“Especially anterior teeth. Back teeth, because they are multi-rooted, usually stay in place.”
“I see.”
Answering a question from the defense, Stimson explained that teeth were put back in with soft wax—not glue—to ensure a tooth is placed in the right socket and can be moved if it’s placed in error. He said that in the past, “I’ve seen acid-etched teeth clinically, not forensically.”
The judge asked if there was any way the acid etching could have occurred naturally, and Stimson replied, “Yes. If individuals have lemon-sucking habits or individuals who eat a lot of sweet candy or individuals who have bulimia and regurgitate, you get acid etching of the inside of the teeth and so it’s a natural phenomenon that can occur.”
He also explained the use of acid etching in some dental procedures, like veneers, where “the tooth, which is kind of roughened and the inside of the porcelain is roughened. This gives the glue something to bond with.” Likewise, “you acid etch it to do a filling, helping the glue hold them in place.”
“How long would the acid etching last?”
“It’s permanently there. Once you take the enamel away, it’s gone.”
The defense continued the cross, asking, “Is it possible that the etching could be anything else but acid?”
“This is not toothbrush abrasion—no,” Stimson answered.
The defense then reviewed the chain of custody for the tooth in question. When they finished that line of questioning, the judge announced that Dr. Stimson could testify to, and Grant’s attorneys could elicit information about, other ways that the etching could occur.
The defense objected, saying, “The teeth never came to North Carolina from Texas for examination by a North Carolina doctor.”
The judge said, “A North Carolina doctor is not a requirement. Objection overruled.”
CHAPTER THIRTY-TWO
DR. Paul Stimson resumed the stand on Friday, September 6, 2013, the sixth day of the trial—this time to testify before the jury. The prosecution took him through his extensive experience in his field from dental school to his professorship to his appointment as a forensic odontologist for the medical examiner’s office. Since 1968, there had rarely been a year in which he hadn’t appeared before the bench as an expert witness in courtrooms all over the world.
He explained to the jury that, although acid etching could happen naturally, it would take years of lemon sucking to strip through enamel or demineralize teeth, because enamel is the hardest structure in the human body. He detailed his examination of a tooth from the skull of Laura Ackerson and then read the addendum to his identification report into the record.
“Forensic examination of acid etching on the left central incisor (number nine) in case RA-2011-280. In a previous conversation, you had advised me that muriatic acid had been used in some of the dentition in this case. On August 9, 2011, I had occasion to be in the area and traveled to the morgue and examined the upper left central incisor in your presence, tooth number nine. For viewing magnification was one hundred times using a magnifying glass provided by you. There was visible acid etching in the facial surface of this tooth. When you felt the facial surface of this tooth with your fingernail, there was a depression caused by the acid action with a small ridge on one edge.
“The dental tubules could be visualized with the aid of the magnifying glass in this area. I agree with your opinion that there was acid etching of the facial surface of the maxillary central incisors in this case.”
Through this witness, the state submitted photographs of the remains with some of the teeth missing from sockets but showing the tooth Dr. Stimson had examined in place. Stimson told the jury, “I can’t specify the acid—only that etching is present.” Knowing the actual substance would be “dependent on the length of exposure time combined with the strength of the acid.”
On cross-examination, the defense asked if anyone else had been called in to examine the tooth. Stimson said he didn’t know whether or not that had happened.
—
THE next witness, Detective David Moore of the Raleigh Police Department, was a veteran of twenty-six years with very short hair and a round face plagued by a perpetual look of worry. He explained to the jury that on August 19, 2011, he’d used a Cellebrite unit with special software to transfer data from Grant’s and Amanda’s phones and put it into a readable report. He read a number of text messages—some with dates, some not—to the jury. He started with the very last text message Laura Ackerson ever sent, on July 13 at 4:12 P.M. “Okay,” he read from Laura’s cell, “I’m leaving Wilson now. I’ll call when I get past the traffic. Where will you be in an hour or so?”
Other texts included messages from Laura about a “peepee accident” that had delayed her departure with the kids to meet Grant at Sheetz, requests for respect for her phone time with the boys, accusations of Grant lying about her and others, as well as apologies and requests for photographs.
He also read texts from Grant to Laura that had an edge of hostility, including one message where he seemed to be calling Laura a “brat,” and another where he ordered: “Get them dressed now!” In another he got in a dig: “I’m used to being around them a lot more than you are, Laura. My whole life is them. Day in and out. The park, the mall, Monkey Joe’s, meals, messes and bath, that’s the kind of parent I am. ‘Thank you.’”
On cross-examination, the defense established that what Detective Moore read was from an edited version of his original report. Grant’s attorney also asked if the word “brat” was name-calling or an acronym for the Bananas-Rice-Applesauce-Toast diet. Moore did not know.
—
RALEIGH/WAKE City-County Bureau of Identification Agent Mike Galloway was the next to testify. He explained that he responded to any crime in Wake County when requested by any law enforcement agency. He took photos and looked for fingerprints as well as blood and other body fluids.
He detailed his role in the search of Grant’s Dodge Durango and spoke about the difficulty of obtaining fingerprints from the cloth center console. He talked about the search of the Hayeses’ self-storage unit and apartment, where he witnessed the bleached-out section of carpet by their front door. He explained his examination of the sofa that had been sold on Craigslist, and the wild-goose chase after a blood droplet trail at a nearby apartment complex. Finally, he related his smelly encounter with Dumpster trash as he documented the contents with photographs and processed the items found at the lab. When he finished his work, he repackaged all the potential evidence and turned it over to lead CCBI Agent Shannon Quick.
—
THE final witness of the day was Dr. Nobby Mambo, the assistant m
edical examiner from Texas who had performed the autopsy on the remains of Laura Ackerson. Dr. Mambo was a native of Africa with short hair and deep-set eyes, who spoke in softly accented English with a slight stutter. He detailed his education and experience starting with his attendance at medical school in Zimbabwe and covering his further studies in the United States and work in Canada and New Jersey before he settled in the Houston area in 2007.
He presented his autopsy report to the jury detailing the cuts on all of the body parts, the location of internal organs and the moderate state of decomposition of the torso and leg. He used actual photographs—not projections on the screen—to show the jury the other injuries made by marine life while the remains were in the waters of Oyster Creek.
He explained to the jury that he’d examined the cartilage around the neck looking for any signs of choking, particularly in the larynx. Unfortunately, he said, the muscles were gone and, because of that, it was impossible to find evidence of internal bleeding in any of the locations that it would normally be found. His conclusion was that Laura Ackerson died from an act of homicide by undetermined means.
On cross, defense attorney Jeff Cutler questioned the inclined cut on the clavicle bone, and Dr. Mambo told him that there was no way to determine if that injury had been made by an up or down motion. When he asked about the blood pooling inside the back of the skull, Mambo admitted that it could have been caused by premortem or postmortem trauma or by positioning of the body that caused the fluid to seep back there through lividity.
CHAPTER THIRTY-THREE
THE seventh day of trial began on Monday, September 9, 2013, with Officer Kevin Crocker from the Raleigh Police Department Fugitive Task Force. He detailed his surveillance of the elder Hayeses’ home, including the signs of increased nervousness by Grant Hayes III.
Bitter Remains Page 16