Early on, Susan questioned Gabe about the alleged ritualistic sexual abuse of Adam at the day care center in an attempt to demonstrate that the accusations came from Felix, not from her. Over Sequeira’s objections, Susan played a tape of Felix’s speech at the Berkeley Conference of the California Consortium of Child Abuse in 1988. It was at this event that he was introduced as a “parent of a ritualistically abused child.”
Gabe sat impassively as his dead father’s voice filled the courtroom. “The children were raped on stage, raped in every form imaginable,” Felix told conference participants. Meanwhile jurors were transfixed by the audio-taped lecture in which Felix claimed that his eldest son, Adam, had witnessed a baby being stuffed into a plastic bag and “hammered to death,” and that cult members ate flesh, vomit, and blood in front of his son and other children.
“My rage is omnipresent… my fantasy, of course, is to kill them,” Felix’s recorded voice resounded over speakers in the courtroom. “And I’m a rather moral person. I want to kill them.”
“Did you recognize your father’s voice?” Susan asked Gabe when the tape ended.
Gabriel responded affirmatively.
Afterward, Susan asked about allegations that he, too, had been sexually abused while in day care and that both his parents had gone to police to file a complaint. Still, he insisted that he and Adam had no recollection of being molested while in day care. He maintained that Susan was the one who had created the whole scenario and ultimately convinced Felix that it was real.
“Did it ever occur to you that he might be making it all up?” Susan asked.
“I don’t know,” Gabe replied.
While the questions were exhaustive, Susan never really probed Gabe’s recollection of the night he found his father’s body in the guesthouse. After three days of cross-examination, she asked the teen, “On the night you found your father’s body, were you scared?”
“I wasn’t scared, I was completely devastated,” Gabe replied. “But I wasn’t scared.”
Questions like this made it clear that Susan’s examination was going nowhere. She asked her son if he was “completely truthful” with police during his interrogation, and if he recalled how many times he told officers that his mother “had never been violent” with his dad. But she failed to delve further into the events of that day.
Instead, she pushed Gabe to portray his father in a negative light.
“You don’t recall your father poisoning Tuffy, the family dog?” she asked.
“No, I don’t.”
“Are you aware that your father woke up every day thinking about killing people?”
At times, Susan seemed determined to engage her son in a dialogue, invoking Judge Brady to issue a warning that cross-examination “is not a conversation.”
Even the prosecutor expressed frustration after it became clear that Susan intended to question his star witness until she was content with his responses—no matter the relevance to the case.
There was a break in the case during the second day of testimony when Susan arrived for court and told the judge that she had a bad sore throat, vowed that she “wasn’t making it up” and asked for a postponement. The judge acquiesced and instructed everyone to return to court the following Monday, March 13.
Still, Susan felt well enough to object to Marjorie Briner’s presence in the courtroom before the adjournment. She argued that Briner, her son’s guardian, was influencing Gabe’s testimony. She also insisted that Briner stood to profit from the outcome of the trial because she was entitled to Social Security benefits as his guardian.
In a telephone conversation early in the trial, Marjorie Briner expressed Gabriel’s concern over how he was being portrayed in the media. Some members of the press had been speculating over statements the teen had made during a telephone conversation with his brother Adam while at police headquarters that were being aired on Court TV. Briner explained that Gabe was anxious to clarify one remark in which he appeared to say “Dad left us a pile of ‘money,’ when in fact, Gabe claims that he told Adam, ‘Dad left us a pile of debt.’
“This young man is under a great deal of stress, and it’s not unreasonable to have a support person in the court,” Sequeria argued with regard to Briner’s presence in the courtroom, telling Susan that just because she thinks something is happening doesn’t make it so.
Judge Brady ruled that Briner could remain in the courtroom, except when Gabriel was responding to specific questions about financial matters.
“I am going to need a therapist when this is all over,” Sequeira told reporters outside court that Wednesday afternoon.
That following Monday, Susan confronted the judge over the recent arrest of her middle son, Eli, on charges he beat up his girlfriend. On March 9, police arrested Eli and charged him with misdemeanor battery based on claims that his then-girlfriend made to authorities at the Polks’ Miner Road home.
Eli had been released on bail and was standing in the doorway of the courtroom when his mother asked the judge to issue a restraining order against his girlfriend.
Brady refused and instructed Susan to get on with her cross-examination. “Mrs. Polk, your son is an adult, and if he feels a restraining order is necessary, there is an appropriate process for him to go through.”
“His life has been threatened,” Susan went on. “There are physical marks on his face. He called police for help.”
Susan claimed that it was Eli who had summoned police that past Thursday after his girlfriend entered the house without permission and assaulted him for not returning her phone calls. She then argued that Eli was entitled to an emergency restraining order from Brady because he was a witness in her case.
“I’m not going to issue a restraining order unless I hear from both parties,” the judge declared.
It was then that Susan spotted her son in the vestibule outside the courtroom. “This is my son,” she shouted, pointing to the courtroom door. “Look at his face!”
Susan directed her case manager, Valerie Harris, to retrieve Eli and bring him inside. But her son declined to enter, prompting Judge Brady to set a hearing date for March 16 to address the matter. She also ordered that Eli’s girlfriend be notified of the court date.
A second interruption occurred when Judge Brady advised Susan that she was not permitted to have witnesses in the courtroom after spotting her mother, Helen Bolling, in the third row of the gallery. Susan appeared surprised at the judge’s comment. Turning to look in the gallery, Susan smiled. “Oh, there she is! Hi Mom!” she shouted, waving at the gray-haired woman in the ankle-high cowboy boots. “I didn’t know she was here.”
Judge Brady instructed Susan’s mother to step out of the courtroom, explaining that she was a witness in the case and could not stay for testimony.
By the end of the day, Sequeira was throwing his hands up in exasperation. “I give up,” he said, after Susan repeatedly questioned Gabriel about a pair of brass knuckles that he supposedly kept in his car, despite the D.A.’s objections.
“She’s been cross-examining her son for three days and she’s been talking about Tuffy and Ruffy and whatever else she’s got going,” Sequeria complained. “She’s absolutely torturing that kid. And she’s abusing her cross-examination privileges. She’s abusing the process.”
Finding it pointless to continue objecting, the prosecutor stood silent as Gabe again explained that he carried the brass knuckles because he was scared of his mother and brother Eli. He said that Eli told him he would do “whatever” it took to prevent him from testifying against their mother. Gabe took his brother’s remark as a threat and obtained a restraining order against Eli. According to Gabe, Eli held “a lot of resentment” toward both his parents and acted out a lot, both at home and in school.
Susan then turned to the family’s time in Piedmont and Gabriel’s difficulties while in middle school, where he admitted to being involved in fights and being suspended for “drugs.” Responding to Susan’s insinuations, Gabe blamed the const
ant arguing at home for his behavior, for his acting up in school, and for the hard time he had making friends during childhood.
“Parents in the neighborhood were scared of you,” he said. “Scared of our family, generally.” Gabe went on to name one parent who refused to let her child play with him and his brothers because of concerns about Susan’s mental state—or as Gabe put it “you and your delusions.”
His sharp remarks did not appear to faze Susan, who plowed ahead, at one point displaying photographs of family trips to Disneyland and Gabe as a child playing with a friend and the family dogs, Max and Mitsie, in an attempt to elicit fond memories of their times together.
“Didn’t you say ‘even if she is delusional, we love her because she’s fun?’” Susan asked, holding up the “Best Mom” plaque that her three sons awarded her in 1997.
“Yeah, we loved you. This [the plaque] was Dad’s idea by the way,” he shot back. Susan wept when Gabe said he couldn’t confirm her claims that his dad punched her in the face, dragged her up the stairs by her hair, and told her that he would never give her a divorce.
“He threw water in your face one time,” the teen acknowledged.
“One time?” Susan fired back.
Gabe admitted that his father may have picked up and thrown small items around the house during arguments with Susan but said that he never threw anything directly at her.
Continuing, Susan asked Gabe about his strained relationship with Eli, tearing up as the questions came out of her mouth.
“Do you recall telling your brother Eli that he was your best friend?”
“Yes,” Gabe replied in a monotone.
“Do you remember when you went to school wearing his oversized clothes and shoes?” Susan asked, referring to Gabe’s time in elementary school. “Do you miss your brother?”
There was silence in the courtroom as Gabriel contemplated his answer. “Yes, I do miss him,” the teen replied, straightening himself in the chair. “I still have affection for Eli, Dad, and you…. I do have good memories. I do love you. But there’s terrible memories with the good memories.”
“You still have affection for your brother?” Susan posed. “Then why did you sue him?”
“I didn’t sue Eli, I sued you.”
“Didn’t you and your brother settle a wrongful death suit with me for $300,000?” Susan said, referring to the civil action that Gabe and Adam filed after her arrest.
Gabe was visibly upset when his mother brought up the suit in court, insisting that he wasn’t allowed to talk about it because of a confidentiality agreement that both parties had signed. “You know that,” he snapped at his mother.
“Couldn’t you have just left him off?” Susan asked, referring to Eli.
Gabe told his mother that he was not a lawyer, but it was his understanding that he and Adam had sued her, and that since Eli took her side, he had to be named in the suit.
“These things are obviously very important to you but they don’t seem to add or subtract from your case,” Judge Brady told Susan.
“I hope you don’t think I’m picking on you,” Susan told Gabriel before court adjourned that night. “You are aware that I loved all three of my sons the same?”
“Yes, I know,” he acknowledged. “You appreciate Eli a lot more now because he buys into your delusions and we don’t.”
On Tuesday, jurors arrived for a third day of cross-examination. Instead, they learned that Susan had asked for another delay.
“I’m sick and I think I’m getting bronchitis,” she sniffled.
The judge arranged to have her seen by a doctor; Brady also let Susan know that she was anxious to keep the proceedings moving along and hoped to resume court after lunch.
When Susan returned that afternoon, she reported that she had been prescribed antibiotics for her condition. She then requested an adjournment until the following Monday to get some “much needed rest.” “I was up half the night coughing,” she told the judge. “This is a murder trial and I want to be at my best.”
Judge Brady was sympathetic to Susan’s infirmity—she, too, was nursing a sore throat, but denied her request for what she deemed an “unreasonable” delay and ordered all parties back to court on Thursday, March 16. This adjournment was further evidence of the judge’s extraordinary patience. Brady rarely lost her cool even as Susan accused her of conspiring with the prosecutor or showing bias against the defense in front of jurors.
At times, Brady’s interchanges with Susan were akin to a kindergarten teacher scolding a young student, soothing the child until she calmed down. When it became clear that Susan could not be reigned in, Brady would order a “time out,” punishing Susan with fifteen minutes in a holding cell to regain her composure. Remarkably, Susan continued to push even as the judge reprimanded her. “Well, then I’m taking papers with me to read!” she told Brady after being ordered to the holding cell one afternoon.
“No,” the judge shot back. There was no reading during a time out.
It seemed that Susan had mastered the art of knowing just how far to push before landing in serious trouble, and she continued to press throughout the trial. Sometimes the judge’s latitude went too far as Brady allowed Susan to disrupt the flow of testimony and antagonize the prosecution. The end result was a highly irregular relationship between the bench and the attorneys, but in this case of many bizarre relationships, no one seemed particularly surprised.
On Thursday, jurors learned of yet another delay. An alternate juror had called in sick and, of course, there were more objections from the defendant. This time, Susan was upset that the leg shackles she was being forced to wear were causing runs in her pantyhose. Next, Susan objected to the prosecutor’s request to interrupt her cross-examination of Gabe so that he could put Adam on the stand. Adam had been waiting in the wings to testify for the prosecution since the trial had begun and was on the State’s list to take the stand after Gabe. But Adam was growing increasingly concerned that all the delays would prevent him from returning to UCLA in time for final exams and a scheduled trip to South Africa with his girlfriend.
Susan argued that it was unfair to disrupt her case merely to accommodate her son’s vacation plans. Besides, she felt that Gabriel’s testimony was too important to interrupt.
“You would think that the defendant might have some consideration for her child,” the prosecutor said.
“I object,” Susan shot back. “That’s an outrageous comment.”
“We will start fresh on Monday and hopefully move along,” the judge ruled, choosing to postpone the trial another day rather than replace the sick juror with an alternate. Already, one juror had been excused from the case and with the trial expected to last another two months, she did not want to risk losing another. This postponement would be the fourth delay since the trial began one week earlier.
Susan took two final shots at the prosecutor before the court adjourned Thursday. Out of earshot of jurors, she accused the D.A.’s office of “coaching” her two sons to slander both her and Eli on the stand. She also accused Sequeira of prosecutorial misconduct, charging that he deliberately tried to provoke a mistrial with his supposed underhanded strategies.
“I’d rather have needles shoved in my eye than have a mistrial,” Sequeira shot back.
“I would be very careful about making such accusations without any proof,” Judge Brady admonished Susan.
Court reconvened on Monday, March 20, with Susan continuing to question Gabriel about his childhood. “I don’t remember, I was five,” the teen responded to one question. “I was just a little kid,” he replied to another.
“I think we’re having a forest-for-the-trees problem,” Judge Brady told Susan at one point during her examination. “A lot of time is being spent on minutiae about events that are extremely important to you—again, I’m not telling you how to try your case, but my concern is that [the jury’s] attention will be lost for the important things.”
At the end of Monday’s p
roceedings, the judge informed Susan that she would allow her just one more day to question her son. She refused to bend even as Susan demanded to continue for “as much time as it takes to get to the truth.” Susan would have to finish her cross-examination by 5 PM Tuesday.
The following day, Susan escalated her attack, engaging the prosecutor in a number of heated exchanges.
Before Gabriel even took the stand that morning, Susan accused Sequeira of “making faces” in the courtroom. She claimed the prosecutor was rolling his eyes at jurors to imply that her cross-examination of her son was tedious.
“I can’t freeze my face,” Sequeira replied dryly, remarking that he had an expressive face.
Judge Brady intervened, telling Susan that she had not seen any “eye-rolling” on the part of the prosecutor, only a look of fatigue when Sequeira briefly shut his eyes in court.
“He is goading me,” Susan complained, talking over the prosecutor as he tried to defend against her latest accusation.
When he finally got the floor, Sequeira charged that Susan was making a “farce” of the trial with her unending objections, demands for a mistrial and accusations of prosecutorial misconduct “every fifteen minutes,” and he implored the judge to revoke Susan’s right to represent herself in court.
“We have gone far beyond the pale of what is reasonable,” he said, after jurors were cleared from the courtroom. “This jury, God knows what they’re thinking now.”
Even the court reporter voiced complaints about Susan’s behavior in court that day, at one point rising from her chair and telling the judge that it was impossible to record the proceedings with Susan repeatedly talking over the witness. When she complained a second time, Susan instructed the judge to “admonish the court reporter!”
Sequeira froze in disbelief. He had never seen anyone instruct a judge to reprimand a member of the court staff. But Brady remained calm, giving Susan more latitude until she, too, reached her limit and threatened to revoke Susan’s pro per status if she continued to ignore the court’s rules.
Final Analysis Page 26