He reminded the jury that Nancy had killed Rob by “smashing his skull with five separate blows to the upper right side of his head, each one of the blows fatal. Fractured skull bone was driven into his brain, causing massive spillage of brain substance. Did the defendant believe it was necessary to use force to defend herself? If yes, was the amount of force she used reasonable?”
He reminded jurors that each of the five blows “required a great amount of force” and that there were no defensive injuries on Rob’s upper limbs, indicating that Rob might have been “sufficiently impaired by a cocktail of drugs” so as to be capable of “little or no motion at the time the blows were dealt to his head.”
He also reminded jurors to bear in mind Nancy’s “amorous relationship with U.S. resident Michael Del Priore” as well as Rob’s estimated US$18 million estate.
But he told them to also bear in mind the defense contention that Nancy had “killed in lawful self-defense when her husband, following taunting and provocative statements, attempted to force anal sex upon her while threatening her with a baseball bat” and that “fearing for her life, she killed him with the metal ornament, originally used to fend off blows from the bat.”
“Another element to note in the defense case,” he said, “is the allegation that Robert Kissel had a controlling nature that developed into paranoia.” The jury could also consider whether “homosexual pornographic Web sites found on the family computer supported the defendant’s testimony that Robert Kissel routinely forced anal sex upon her.”
Mr. Justice Lunn said he would conclude his summation in the morning and that the jury would be able to start deliberating after lunch.
The judge began summarizing the case. I knew it was going to be biased but had no idea just how far he’d go until today. He’s basically presenting the entire prosecution case all over again…piece by piece…speculation by speculation with his opinions…every time he says the word murderer…he looks right at me…it’s bullshit…but the jury sits there and listens…
I know what’s ahead…I think it just hit me today in a way that’s never been clearer…I think things are gonna get a whole lot worse from this point…
Before leaving for court the next morning, Nancy wrote:
I play this image in my mind all the time…your coming home from work and you pull in the driveway…its pouring…I run out to you as your getting out of your truck…you say, “Baby it’s pouring, what are you doing”…I don’t say anything…I just press up against you…my mouth on yours…kissing you hard…needing to feel you…all of you…as the rain falls down on both of us…we’re soaking wet—but all I feel is you and how warm your lips are…we both run into the house peeling off our wet clothes as we make our way to our bedroom leaving a trail of bunched up wet clothes along the way…
The judge concluded his summary of the evidence by focusing on the claim that Nancy had experienced a “meltdown” in the aftermath of having killed her husband in self-defense.
“These claims must be considered in light of the manner in which she carried out what the prosecution has called her ‘cover-up’ activities.” He drew the jury’s attention to still pictures taken from closed-circuit television footage that showed Nancy dragging a large suitcase, carrying a rug, and carrying shopping bags on different occasions. He reminded the jury that the salesperson at Tequila Kola had described Nancy as “normal, but a little bit loud.”
He said, “The accused bought a chaise lounge, two cushions, and a small carpet before returning the next day to buy two more large carpets at a total price of twenty-seven thousand dollars. The defendant also on the morning of November third ordered twenty cartons from Links Relocations. The police later found bloody items, including the three-point-seven-kilogram lead ornament in the boxes.”
He reminded the jury of Bryna O’Shea’s testimony that on the day after the killing Nancy was not crying on the phone and was “forcing herself to sound upset.”
Concluding at midday, Mr. Justice Lunn said, “I would invite you to consider these facts, in respect of whether or not the defendant had gone into a meltdown.” He reminded the jury that a unanimous verdict was not required: five to two would suffice, either way.
The jury deliberated for eight hours, returning a verdict at 8:30 p.m. They did not look at Nancy as they entered the courtroom. Although it did not need to be, their verdict was unanimous: guilty of murder. Not manslaughter due to provocation: murder.
Nancy stood, silent, head bowed, not crying. Mr. Justice Lunn said, “As I am required to do by law, I impose a sentence of life imprisonment upon you.” Still dressed in black, she was led away by four officers of Hong Kong’s Correctional Services Department. She was not given a chance to embrace her mother.
Outside the courtroom, seventy-eight-year-old Bill Kissel said to the assembled reporters, “Justice has been served. My son is resting in peace now. All the allegations against him have been proven false. Rob was a wonderful father. He tried his best to be a wonderful husband. His children can go on with their lives now, knowing how much he loved them.”
Nancy’s mother, Jean McGlothlin, said, “Right now, I’m just going to try and get by.”
Simon Clarke and Alexander King said they would appeal.
September 1, 2005 11 PM or so…
hi my love…I don’t have a clock…so I’m guessing what time it is…I’m back at Tai Lam…and by now you know why…I’m pretty speechless really…especially with you…I don’t quite know what to say…sorry doesn’t really work…does it…Forgive me my love…I’m in shock…I certainly didn’t see this coming…
I can’t write anything that can explain what’s happened…How can you ever forgive me…your precious heart has been shattered into a million tiny pieces…and every night I pray that one day I can put them back together to make you whole again…
Tonight like every night I’ll whisper your name…it still belongs to me…I’ll cherish saying it and hope that you can hear me…I love you Michael Scott Del Priore…
PART FIVE
THE IMMUTABILITY OF HATE
Hatred is in my brain, not in my stomach or my skin. It can’t be removed like a rash or an ache.
—GRAHAM GREENE, The End of the Affair
33. NANCY
This is, indeed, a story of domestic violence, power and greed. Nan was “over her head” in many respects. She also made unwise choices along the way…as we all do…She, however, fell through that thin gauze that supports most of us above the pit of irretrievable consequences.
—Nancy Kissel’s mother, Jean McGlothlin, in an e-mail to the author
SIMON CLARKE MADE THE FORTY-FIVE-MINUTE DRIVE FROM Central to the Tai Lam Centre for Women in the western New Territories the next day. He’d already been assured that Nancy’s guardian angel from Goldman Sachs would pay the full cost of all appeals, and he’d decided to hire Hong Kong’s preeminent appellate barrister, Gerard McCoy. He knew Nancy would be heartened by knowing that she’d continue to be represented by the best.
But he also knew Nancy wouldn’t want to talk about appeals, or even about the verdict, which had come as a shock. Both Clarke and Alexander King had been prepared for manslaughter due to provocation. Nancy had resisted having that option presented to the jury because she’d felt it would give them an easy way out. She’d been able to prevent King from arguing it, but she’d had no such control over Mr. Justice Lunn. In any event, it had been an obvious option, and no one would have been surprised if the jury took it.
But a unanimous verdict of murder, after less than eight hours of deliberation, following a trial that had lasted almost three months and in which the evidence had been entirely circumstantial? A unanimous verdict of guilty against a multimillionaire expat investment banker’s wife?
It was sobering, to say the least. Although Nancy had consistently refused to take advice from him, and King had insisted that everything be done her way throughout the trial, Clarke would not have blamed her for ranting
that it was all his fault that she might spend the rest of her life in a Chinese prison. But he didn’t expect that to happen. He knew that, odd as it seemed, she was going to rant at him not because of the verdict, but because in the sixteen hours since then, he’d not been able to reach Michael Del Priore with the news.
The mystery of Nancy’s enthrallment with Del Priore had only deepened for Clarke after he’d met him the previous winter. The man had not struck him as either a romantic charmer or evil schemer. It could well have been his very blandness that lay at the root of his appeal to Nancy. He’d been a blank canvas on which she’d been able to paint her own portrait, born from a lifetime of neediness, neurosis, and insecurity. His chief attribute may have been his willingness to let Nancy direct every aspect of their time together. With him, she’d never have to fight for control. He certainly had been her husband’s opposite in that respect.
“Had been” were the operative words, and not only because her husband was dead. “Had been” because of a short item and photo in the new edition of the South China Morning Post.
During the trial, Hong Kong newspapers and magazines were prohibited from publishing anything about the case except courtroom testimony. Now the gag was off. The caption under a picture of Del Priore opening his car door read:
This is Michael Del Priore, the muscular TV repairman and notorious ladies’ man…The 41-year-old with piercing eyes is known as a man with a colorful past…
The trauma of Kissel’s arrest no longer seems to bother him, as he now lives with a blonde woman called Tracey who drives a red Ford GT sports car. She moved into Mr. Del Priore’s tiny home in Hinsdale, Vermont, in January…
Nancy was not going to be pleased about Tracey. Clarke hoped to get in and out of Tai Lam before she had a chance to see the story. He’d be subjected to tirade enough for having failed to reach Del Priore. He didn’t want to be anywhere near her when she learned the reason for her ex-lover’s elusiveness. He mentioned the story but emphasized how handsome Michael had looked in the picture.
Nancy wrote to him that night, before she’d seen the newspaper:
Simon and I spent some time alone…started to cry uncontrollably…my first words were “Where is he…find him for me…” He said the arrangement was that you were to call him…you still haven’t called him…call…please call…I need to know that you’re alright…
Don’t go anywhere…I won’t let you…I’m begging you to stay…can I do that…to give up years of your life really…that’s what I’m asking…begging really…praying…can I ask you to do this…stay exactly where you are in your mind, in your heart, do not falter from that…don’t give in to anything…I won’t let you…
…I ask God to let you feel the love I have for you…I ask God to outstretch His arms that possess so much power, and take you in, and rescue you…outstretch your hand to His…let Him take you to me…let Him guide you inside my soul and I’ll do the same, until we meet…let Him join our spirits together…
The next day, the Chinese-language magazine Eastweek published its story:
EVIL FOREIGN WOMAN MURDERS HUSBAND—LOVER SCOTFREE IN AMERICA
The chief case investigator Ng Yeung-yuen, chief criminal inspector of the Hong Kong Western district, said that although the main culprit in the case has been convicted and sentenced to life in prison, the investigation has not ended. The possibility that more arrests will be made cannot be excluded.
The additional person indicated by the police is believed to refer to Nancy Kissel’s lover, 41-year-old Michael Del Priore. If sufficient evidence is gathered, the Hong Kong police will go through the Interpol to arrest Michael Del Priore, who is presently in the United States.
Michael’s younger brother Lance Del Priore said that Michael was tall and handsome with attractive blue eyes. The ladies like him and he has lots of romances…he locked onto the married Nancy Kissel. In January 2003, he divorced his wife in order to win this rich woman who can “lay golden eggs.”
After the Nancy Kissel murder case broke, Michael did not concern himself about that and found a new lover. He is presently living with a blonde woman who drives a sports car.
Then the Chinese-language magazine Next published the story it had been sitting on:
Our reporter met the lover Michael in the United States. He was an ordinary middle-aged man. When our reporter asked if he had contacted Nancy or if he still thinks about her, Michael shook his head and said that he did not want to talk about it.
Michael lives in a mobile home…there is a woman who stays overnight at this house. On a weekend night, the reporter observed him and his blond girlfriend. Outside his house is the silver sports car of his girlfriend.
At around midnight, the girlfriend changed into a singlet and shorts and stepped outside to smoke a cigarette. According to his brother Lance, the blond woman moved in with Michael a month ago. Michael is a lady’s man and had many partners before. During short conversation with the reporter, he was somewhat blunt but at least he was quite gentle in tone. With his attractive smile, it is easy to see why he is a lady’s man.
One afternoon, the reporter observed Michael in sunshades coming back from shopping at a supermarket, bringing bags of grocery back into the house. After about half an hour, he came back out of the house and then he used the lawn mower to mow the lawn. At the time, the sun was high in the sky and the temperature was about 30 degrees Centigrade. The sweating Michael took off his shirt and walked around with his fat belly bouncing around.
The stories and pictures would have disabled many denial mechanisms, but Nancy’s was sturdier than most. She wrote to Del Priore:
My entire body…it’s completely wasted…drained of all energy…I can’t eat…this pain in my heart is destroying me physically…every day…my mind…starting to convince me of something I may not be able to recover from…my constant battle of facing the reality of letting you go…I’ve refused to accept this…I just can’t face ever letting you go…
Maybe I’m living in a fantasy world…I know the reality…you’re human…and you have needs…but my selfish side wants to keep you all to myself…not ever wanting you to share yourself with another…never wanting your heart belonging to another…never wanting your hands to explore another…I want to keep you all to myself…forever…my heart refuses to give up on this extraordinary once in a lifetime love…I refuse to give up on my dream…
Nancy still did not write to her children. Two weeks after her conviction, Jane filed suit in New York State Surrogate’s Court, seeking custody of them. New York courts had jurisdiction because Rob’s last legal address in the United States had been in New York. In an affidavit accompanying the suit, Jane said, “Hayley has represented to me that her and Andrew’s legal problems have left her in a desperate financial situation and that she intends to fight for custody of Robbie’s children—even though she admits that it is not in their best interests to remain with her—in order to benefit from their considerable assets. Hayley told me that Andrew had leveraged everything, including their house in Vermont, and that he had left her with nothing,”
A week after the suit was filed and three days before a hearing in Surrogate’s Court, The New York Times published a lengthy story about the suit and all that had precipitated it. Bill was quoted as saying, “Andrew is in deep trouble and it wouldn’t be appropriate to have the children in a house without a mother and a father, where the wife needs the children to support her lifestyle.”
The story also said, “Back in June, Ms. [Chandler], a co-executor of her brother’s estate, testified during the murder trial that the estate was worth $18 million. That estimate has now been lowered to $15.5 million. Some of that gap can be attributed to investments that Robert Kissel had made in apartment buildings in New Jersey, which Andrew Kissel is now accused of having secretly sold out from under his own partners.”
The day after the story ran, Andrew called Jane and left a blistering message on her voice mail: “Jane, it’s your e
x-brother. You’re famous, you’re on the front page of The New York Times. You should get it. You’re quoted. You’ve managed to do what Dad has tried to do for seventy-five years: tear this family apart. You’ve done that. And we’re going to bury you, Jane.”
Hayley called the same day. Her tone was more restrained, but she left no doubt that in the matter of custody—if in nothing else—she and Andrew would present a united front: “The betrayal I have gotten from you is of a magnitude that I never thought possible. But obviously I underestimated you.”
Convinced that Bill lurked behind Jane’s bid for custody, Hayley left him a somewhat less restrained message: “You’re an evil man, and I would say that you’ll get what you deserve except that you already got what you deserve.”
The Kissels were at it again. New York Surrogate’s Court judge Eve Preminger expressed her disgust from the bench at an October 2 hearing: “This isn’t a game here. These children aren’t property,” she said. In a new filing, Jane’s lawyer said, “Hayley Kissel has demonstrated blatant financial self-interest in seeking to maintain custody of the Kissel children and a disregard for their best interest.” Judge Preminger seemed to agree. “If one has to speculate” about Hayley’s motive in seeking to retain custody, “the speculations aren’t pretty,” she said.
Hayley hired Nathan Dershowitz, the brother of Harvard law professor and author Alan Dershowitz, to represent her, which suggested she had not yet reached the point of applying for food stamps. The phase of dueling press conferences began. “It’s not right for the court to suddenly swoop in and take these children off,” Nathan Dershowitz said. “I just don’t understand the rush to get in there and pull them out. There is a very strong bond between Hayley and the children.”
Never Enough Page 26