And the Sea Will Tell

by Vincent Bugliosi

  “Jennifer, reading from her diary, recounted many instances for you of friendly interaction. For instance, the Grahams’ going to Jennifer’s birthday party on July 16th; their exchanging food with each other; Buck and Jennifer giving Mac messages to relay to Hawaii by way of his radio; and so forth.

  “You heard all the examples, and I’m not going to go over all of them with you now. You’ll have the diary back in the jury room.

  “Suffice it to say there was a continuing, ongoing social intercourse between the Grahams and Buck and Jennifer during the summer of 1974 on the island of Palmyra. And we don’t just have to rely on Jennifer’s testimony and diary to prove this. It was corroborated and confirmed by the testimony of other witnesses.” In addition to citing Tom Wolfe’s testimony that Mac and Muff would go fishing and give part of their catch to Buck and Jennifer, I read excerpts from the important testimony of Bill Larson that the relationship he had observed between the two couples at the July 25 potluck dinner was very friendly. “You’ll note the prosecution didn’t call Larson to the stand. They stayed away from him the way the devil stays away from holy water.

  “While it is also true that Muff told Larson she did not want Buck and Jennifer on the Sea Wind, how much does that mean? I’m sure each of you folks know people you’re friendly with whom you might not want to have in your home.”

  I pointed out that even Bernard Leonard, the quintessential prosecution witness, told the FBI that the Grahams were friendly with Buck and Jennifer, although, because of their different lifestyles, “not extremely” so.

  “In fact, even if we accept the prosecution’s position that the cake-truce incident did take place—and I think they are light-years away from proving that point—what did Shoemaker say? He testified he heard two women in the background having a conversation, ‘and there was laughter.’”

  I went on to tell the jury that since the prosecution had not presented evidence that the Grahams had ever communicated any unfriendly feeling they may have had toward Buck and Jennifer, and in fact were outwardly friendly toward them, “when Buck told Jennifer that Mac had invited them to the Sea Wind for a bon voyage dinner, there certainly would be no reason for her to believe that no such invitation was made.”

  I added that Jennifer knew that the Grahams had given bon voyage dinners for others, and that furthermore, she and Buck had been on the Sea Wind before. “There are references in Jennifer’s diary on July 9th, July 28th, August 6th, and August 11th, where either she or Buck, or the two of them, were on the Sea Wind.”

  I concluded by emphasizing that Jennifer had never vouched for the veracity of the dinner invitation. She simply testified that this was what Buck had told her. “There’s an old line in Elizabethan literature: ‘I cannot tell how the truth may be. I say the tale as ’twas said to me.’”

  Of course, everything I had said thus far presupposed that Buck had told Jennifer, as she claimed, that there was a dinner invitation. But had she concocted the whole dinner-invitation story with Buck? I argued that there was evidence, in Buck’s own testimony at his theft trial, to support the position that he alone had fabricated the dinner-invitation story. (“We don’t have his testimony at his murder trial because he did not testify,” I added, wanting the jury to know a negative circumstance that contrasted with Jennifer.)

  I began reading Buck Walker’s version of what had happened on August 30. “‘I saw Mac early in the morning’—notice he said I, not we—‘I guess eight or nine o’clock, and we passed the time of day. We smoked a cigarette or something like that. I went aboard his boat and we played a game of chess, a couple games of chess, and he said he was going to help tow us out of the lagoon with his dinghy. So, he invited us over for dinner that night. It was sort of a bon voyage thing. Then I went back over to our boat, and Jennifer and I continued getting our boat ready for the next day.’”

  Walker’s attorney asked Walker if he had seen Mac later that day.

  “‘I saw him about one or two o’clock in the afternoon. He said that he was going fishing that afternoon, and if he wasn’t back at the appointed hour of six-thirty, to go ahead and board the boat and help ourselves to a drink…and that’s the last time I talked to him.’

  “Note in Buck Walker’s testimony there’s no reference to Jennifer being present when he had these contacts with Mac Graham on the key date of August 30th. And Jennifer has also testified that on that date she had no contact with the Grahams. Now, I ask you this: if Jennifer had been involved with Buck in the murder of the Grahams, and if they had concocted this dinner-invitation story together, wouldn’t it have been natural for them to have said that they both saw the Grahams on the 30th?

  “Since they would know that if they were ever investigated, the finger of suspicion would naturally point more strongly to the one who did have contact with the Grahams that day, why would Buck take on this additional suspicion all by himself and completely relieve Jennifer of it? Was Buck trying to prove to Jennifer that chivalry was not dead in America?

  “That’s just pure moonshine,” I boomed. “If Jennifer had trumped up this phony story with Buck—more importantly, if Jennifer had been involved with Buck in the murders of the Grahams—wouldn’t Buck have said that Jennifer was with him on at least one of the occasions he claims to have seen Mac Graham that day? Wouldn’t he have insisted on having her available to furnish some support for his story about the dinner invitation?

  “Instead, he testified that all of his contacts with Mac took place when Jennifer wasn’t present. Why did he say this? Because since Jennifer wasn’t involved in this sordid and monstrous deed with him, of necessity, he had to say she wasn’t present. If he had said she was, when she knew that she wasn’t, he would be revealing his guilt to her, something he obviously never wanted to do.”

  I charged that it couldn’t be more obvious that Buck alone fabricated the entire story about the dinner invitation.

  “As we go along, we will see example after example of Buck Walker’s tapestry of lies about the dinner invitation unraveling. Another point in his story that reveals the lie of it all is this: Mac and Muff apparently had ample supplies of frozen meat on the Sea Wind, and when they had people for dinner, oftentimes they would serve meat. The Leonards said that. Tom Wolfe said their bon voyage dinner was meat and fish.

  “But for Buck and Jennifer, of all people, who had fish literally swimming out of their ears, they were going to serve them more fish? Why doesn’t it make sense? Because the story was an obvious fabrication. To convince Jennifer of the Grahams’ dying accidentally in the lagoon, Buck Walker had to come up with this story about their going fishing, in the lagoon, for the alleged bon voyage dinner that night.”

  I continued my attempted reconstruction of the events (after Buck came by the Iola around 9:00 A.M.) of August 30, 1974: per Jennifer’s testimony, their making trips from Buck’s tent to the Iola to bring personal belongings aboard for the trip to Fanning; around 10:30 or 11 A.M., their plan for Jennifer to remain aboard the Iola to bake, clean, and stow gear for their trip to Fanning and for Buck to take the furniture from his tent to the Refrigerator House and bring the tent back to the Iola; Buck’s doing neither (Jennifer’s testimony, plus Wheeler’s testimony that the 1974 search party found the furniture still inside Buck’s tent); et cetera.

  “We can infer the real reason why Buck Walker never brought the tent back to the Iola that day, or the furniture to the Refrigerator House, can’t we, ladies and gentlemen? He was much too busy on shore and in the lagoon. A grisly, macabre story of terror and cold-blooded murder was taking place on Palmyra that day that would compare favorably with anything seen in a low-budget Hollywood horror film. And Buck Walker had a starring role in it all. He played the part of the human monster.”

  I stressed it was worth remembering that Buck had been living ashore in his tent since July 15. “The relevance of this, of course, is obvious. Since Buck was by himself on shore, he had much, much more freedom and latitude to do wh
at he did on August 30 than he would have had if Jennifer had been living on shore with him.”

  I was in a weak position on the next issue: Enoki’s argument that if Jennifer weren’t involved in the murders, Buck would never have left the dinghy with her, since she might come ashore at any time. In attempting a convincing rebuttal, I once again pointed to Jennifer’s testimony that after 10:30 or 11:00 A.M., it had been both Buck’s and her plan that she stay aboard the Iola to swab, store, and bake. “Furthermore, Buck obviously would know Jennifer’s habits,” I said. “He probably had no reason to believe that Jennifer would take the dinghy to shore.” I added that it only takes a matter of seconds, or a minute, to kill a fellow human being, so even if Jennifer did come ashore, Buck knew it would be highly unlikely she’d catch him in the act. (I didn’t add, of course, that if Jennifer had seen anything else—the corpses, or Buck in the process of doing anything with them—it would have been just as bad for Buck.)

  I returned to the chronology of that day—from Buck’s coming by the Iola in the early afternoon and again around 4 P.M., and Jennifer’s hearing the Zodiac in the lagoon around 4:30 P.M. (“We can reasonably infer that the operator of that dinghy was Buck Walker, and the cargo was death—the bodies of Mac and Muff Graham”), to Buck’s and Jennifer’s arriving at the Sea Wind around 6:30 P.M.

  “There are two things at this point that continue to give the lie to Buck’s story,” I argued. “Number one, I asked Jennifer if the masthead light of the Sea Wind was on when she and Buck arrived for dinner, and she said no.

  “Tom Wolfe testified it got dark on Palmyra between 6:00 and 7:00 P.M., and Jennifer also said this. Since we know that Palmyra, at night, was very dark, and since, according to Buck’s story, Mac realized he and Muff might get back after 6:30 P.M., and therefore perhaps after dark, not only would common sense dictate he would have left the masthead light on as a beacon for him and Muff, but Wolfe testified that on the one occasion he was with Mac in which Mac thought he might return to the Sea Wind after dark, he did leave the masthead light on. So this is further circumstantial evidence that Buck’s story was a total fabrication.”

  The second point I made concerned the apricot brandy. I told the jury it was obvious that Buck Walker had put Jennifer’s drink of choice out on the table. To believe otherwise would be to accept the extreme coincidence that the Grahams, who had no way of knowing the unpopular liqueur was one of Jennifer’s favorite drinks, just happened to set out apricot brandy. Unless, of course, the jury entertained the third possibility—that Jennifer fabricated this story about the apricot brandy to subtly place suspicion on Buck. But if that were so, I reasoned with the jury, “wouldn’t she have made sure I knew that apricot brandy was one of her favorite drinks and that the Grahams had no way of knowing this? Wouldn’t she have told me this? But she didn’t. And she couldn’t have assumed I was going to ask her.

  “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, Buck Walker’s tale about being invited to the Sea Wind for a bon voyage dinner is riddled with holes and implausibilities because it’s obvious there never was any such invitation.

  “In my attempt to delineate for you, by way of commonsense inferences, the events that took place on the island of Palmyra on August 30, 1974, one reality emerges, and it’s compatible with all the other evidence in this case. Namely, that Buck Walker murdered the Grahams all by himself, and Jennifer Jenkins had absolutely nothing to do with the murders.

  “I believe that only one person alive today knows all of the facts concerning what happened to the Grahams. His name is Buck Walker, and he’s been as quiet as a statue. I guess if I were he, my lips would be permanently zippered, too.

  “I spoke earlier of the horror and terror that took place on Palmyra on the day of August 30, 1974. Before I continue on with the chronology of events, the question that presents itself at this point is this: If Jennifer is telling a truthful story, why didn’t she hear any of this? For instance, if a gun was used, the sound of the gun being fired?*

  “Well, to begin with, before we even get into the issue of sounds, although it appears that Buck disposed of the bodies in the lagoon after 4:30 P.M. on August 30th, we don’t know what time of day the actual murders took place. We also don’t even know where on Palmyra these murders took place.

  “I’ve thought of several scenarios, but I won’t even bother relating them to you since they’re just bald, naked speculation on my part. I might add that the prosecution doesn’t know any more than we do as to when and where on Palmyra the murders took place.

  “However, I think it’s reasonable to assume that Walker would have murdered Mac Graham while Mac was separated from Muff. It’s clearly more risky to confront two people when they’re together than one at a time. And we know it would not have been difficult for Buck Walker to confront Mac and Muff separately, since there was testimony at this trial that Mac would be by himself often, such as at his workshop, or exploring the island. In other words, Buck would not have needed Jennifer to distract Muff while he murdered Mac.

  “More importantly, on the issue of hearing sounds, we don’t know for sure how Walker murdered the Grahams. However, I believe the circumstantial evidence is that Buck Walker did not use his gun. And that’s very, very important.”

  I summarized that evidence. “Dr. Uberlaker testified that the hole above the left ear in the skull of Muff Graham ‘appears to have been made by erosion, not by trauma or projectile.’” Although Dr. Stephens, the medical examiner, testified he could not rule out the possibility the hole was caused by a bullet, I pointed out that he had not reached any conclusion on this issue. “One fact that indicated it was not caused by a gunshot, however, is that Dr. Stephens was unable to find any trace of lead around the hole. So there’s no substantive evidence of a gun being used.”

  I went on to tell the jury that we did, however, have positive medical evidence of multiple fractures, resulting from multiple blows to the region of Muff’s head—the fracturing out of the lower jawbone from the skull, as well as fractures to the upper and lower molars, the crown of tooth number 13, and the roots of tooth number 30.

  “Dr. Harris testified the fractures were caused by blunt force, a force much greater than that from a human fist. He said something like a sledgehammer would have had to have been used. Muff also had fractures to the radius and ulna bones of the left forearm, and fractures to her left and right tibia, all caused by extreme force. The image that is irresistibly conjured up is that of Walker repeatedly striking Muff Graham, over and over again, with a sledgehammer type of instrument.”

  I certainly didn’t get the image, I told the jury, of Walker shooting Muff to death with his gun, then, as she lay dead on the ground, proceeding to strike her over and over again with a sledgehammer. “That type of overkill would only be the conduct of one who had a prodigious hatred for the victim. There’s no evidence that such a situation existed between Buck Walker and Muff Graham.”

  Perhaps the key piece of circumstantial evidence that Walker did not use his gun, I added, was that when the contents of the Sea Wind were inventoried by the FBI at the time of Jennifer’s arrest, they found his gun.

  “It’s number 5 on the inventory list,” I said. “Obviously, if Buck’s gun was the murder weapon, he would not have kept that gun on the Sea Wind. He would have disposed of it. If the authorities had his gun, an experienced ex-con like Buck would know—even lay people from watching crime shows on television would know—that if the bodies of the Grahams were discovered, and the bullet or bullets were removed from their bodies, or were found loose in the container after only the skeleton remained, the markings on the bullet or bullets could be matched up with the markings on bullets test-fired from his gun. And that would be the end of the ball game for him. He would have to know this. The fact that he kept that gun strongly indicates he knew he had nothing like this to fear, since he didn’t use the gun.

  “In the absence of any other available evidence, it would appear, not just from the m
edical and scientific testimony of the prosecution’s own experts, but from the circumstantial evidence I’ve just discussed, that Mrs. Graham was murdered by sledgehammer-type blows to the head, and that no gun was used.”

  Throughout my argument, the jury was taking notes, an excellent sign. But not my presumed nemesis, the Kansas Rock. He simply sat with arms tightly folded, shooting me a chilly glare that said, “Proceed, Mr. Bugliosi, you have my biased attention.”

  “The fact that it appears Buck Walker did not use his gun,” I went on, “is additional circumstantial evidence that he committed these murders alone. Since a gun is not only much easier to use than an instrument like a sledgehammer, but much more effective, why would he use a sledgehammer?

  “Because a weapon like a sledgehammer,” I said, continuing in my effort to give the jury missing pieces of the mystery, “would have had one big advantage for Buck Walker over a gun. It wouldn’t make any noise. Noise that a gun being fired would make. Noise that Jennifer might hear.”

  I argued that even if the hole in the skull was caused by a bullet—“as it appears it was not”—Dr. Stephens testified that the reverse-coning effect he found around the hole would have meant that it was from a contact gunshot wound.

  I referred to Dr. Stephens’s testimony that with such a contact-type firing, the gunshot would have sounded like only a “loud pop.” And at two hundred yards—the approximate distance between the Iola and the Sea Wind—he felt the shot might not have been heard at all, “particularly if there were any other sounds on the island. And we’ll get into that in a moment,” I said.

  Reducing the level of my voice, I gripped the rail of the jury box and spoke intimately to the jury. “All of these arguments that I have been making to you folks, all of these inferences I am drawing, where do they all come from? Are they just fanciful ruminations on my part? Did they come from some wishful reverie of mine? Are they the product of tricky and insincere reasoning on my part?