Judgement Calls

Home > Mystery > Judgement Calls > Page 20
Judgement Calls Page 20

by Alafair Burke


  the house picking up the various items of clothing strewn on the path

  between the front door and my bed, Chuck grabbed the Oregonian from the

  porch.

  The story about the anonymous letter was a long one and had made the

  front page of the Metro section. Putting aside my outrage that the

  press had gone forward on the basis on a single anonymous unconfirmed

  letter, I could acknowledge that the story was actually fair. It

  raised the possibility that

  Taylor and Landry were innocent, but it also quoted experienced

  criminal investigators who were familiar with the common phenomenon of

  false confessions in high-profile cases. Some even suggested it might

  be a publicity stunt by a death-penalty opponent.

  Although the paper did not reprint the letter itself, I was surprised

  by the amount of detail revealed about the letter's contents. The

  typewritten letter was mailed from Roseburg, a logging town a couple of

  hours south of Portland. According to the report, the letter described

  with dispassion the grizzly details of the final hours of Jamie

  Zimmerman's life and her horrible death. Its anonymous author claimed

  to have been playing pool at Tommy Z's when he saw Jamie Zimmerman

  running her tongue across her parted lips, watching him while she did a

  nasty dance in front of the jukebox. She made it clear what she wanted

  when she graphically simulated fellatio on the last of many bottles of

  Rolling Rock he bought her.

  I looked up from the paper. "Tommy Z's? Did that come up in the

  investigation?"

  Chuck nodded. "Truck stop slash biker bar in southeast Portland. It

  was reported during the trial, though, so anyone could know about it.

  Margaret Landry said Taylor picked up Jamie there. We found witnesses

  who placed Taylor at the bar around the time Jamie disappeared, and

  Jamie was known to hang out there sometimes."

  I went back to the article. The author claimed that Jamie danced for a

  couple of songs and then walked over to him and said she noticed him

  because he looked dangerous. After some token small talk, he drove her

  back to his apartment. In the privacy of the apartment, the dance she

  began at

  Tommy Z's evolved into a strip tease and a lap dance. After the two

  began to engage in what the article paraphrased as "consensual

  intercourse," what might have been merely a desperate exchange of

  bodily fluids between two pathetic lives took a violent turn. According

  to the author, a drunk Jamie started laughing during the act itself,

  mocking her anonymous lover about the size of his manhood. The man hit

  her repeatedly, telling her to shut up. The author wrote that he

  initially wrapped his hands around Jamie Zimmerman's throat to silence

  her taunts. But when her eyes started to bulge and she began tensing

  her entire body in an effort to free her throat from his grasp, he

  realized he wouldn't stop; that he had never felt such power and

  gratification as through her suffering.

  When I'd finished reading, I looked up at Chuck. He read my thoughts.

  "You're going to tell me it could be worse, right?"

  I nodded.

  "I know this kind of stuff happens in death cases and it's something

  I've got to deal with, but I'm telling you, Sam, I just don't have it

  in me. At Landry's trial, the entire defense was based on an attack

  against me as a cop and a person. That guilty verdict, and the verdict

  against Taylor: I saw those as vindication. I haven't even been able

  to deal with my feelings about Taylor's execution, because I can't

  separate my feelings about the execution itself from the stress I was

  feeling about the publicity that would go along with it. I knew that

  somehow this would come back around to me."

  I stood up and took him in my arms. He held me tightly, and I could

  feel his body begin to shake. "Dammit, Sam, I didn't do anything

  wrong." I stroked his hair and ran my hand along his back, whispering

  shushing sounds in his ear.

  Then I led him back to bed to comfort him the only way I could think

  to.

  Chuck was scheduled to testify at the trial that morning, but we went

  to the courthouse separately to make sure we weren't seen arriving

  together. I hoped that concentrating on his testimony would take his

  mind off the letter.

  Chuck was a great witness. The description of the search of the car

  could have been one of the moments when I lost the jurors, but Chuck's

  personable style helped keep their attention. He explained that he had

  not located any blood or other physical evidence of an assault in the

  car, but that the car looked like it had new paint, carpet, and

  upholstery. Transitioning into the work order from the auto detail

  shop, I asked, "Were you able to determine, Detective Forbes, whether

  your initial impression was correct?"

  "Yes, I was."

  "And how were able to verify that, Detective?" It felt good when we

  made eye contact, but I looked away so as not to get distracted.

  "During the search of the car, I located an invoice from the Collision

  Clinic, an automobile detailing shop at Southeast Eighty-second and

  Division."

  I showed him the invoice and he verified that it was the paper he had

  found during the search. I said to Judge Lesh, "Your honor, the

  parties have stipulated that the contents of the invoice are in fact

  accurate."

  Judge Lesh turned to the jury and delivered the standard instruction

  for stipulations like these. "Members of the jury, the parties have

  agreed that it's unnecessary to call someone with firsthand knowledge

  about the contents of this exhibit to testify. Essentially, they have

  agreed that the document is exactly what it appears to be and that

  what's written on it is true."

  When the judge was finished, I turned back to Chuck. "What does the

  invoice indicate?"

  "It shows that Frank Derringer paid eight hundred dollars for new

  paint, upholstery, and carpet for the vehicle."

  "And does it indicate when the work was completed?"

  "Yes, it does. The work was done the day after Kendra Martin was

  abducted."

  I paused to make sure that the jury understood the implication. Then,

  for the truly dense, I followed up. "So, one day after the assault on

  Kendra Martin, and before you were able to search it, Frank Derringer

  paid someone to replace the carpet and upholstery on the interior of

  his car?" Chuck agreed. "And one day after the assault on Kendra

  Martin, Frank Derringer paid someone to change the appearance of his

  vehicle by painting its exterior?" Yes, again. "And he paid eight

  hundred dollars for this work?" Yes.

  "Detective, are you familiar with the Blue Book for automobile prices?"

  Yes. I pulled out the photocopy of the relevant page from the Blue

  Book and asked Chuck to refer to it. "Based on that, Detective, what

  is your estimate of the maximum fair market value of Frank Derringer's

  vehicle, prior to the work he had completed at the Collision Clinic?"

  "Twelve hundred dollars."

  "And what is your estimate
of the fair market value after he paid eight

  hundred dollars for the work at the Collision Clinic?"

  "Fourteen hundred dollars."

  Lisa was predictably gentle on cross. Yes, Chuck admitted, some people

  spend money to improve houses and cars, even if they might not get the

  money returned. And, yes, he conceded, it may have been worth eight

  hundred dollars to Mr. Derringer to have a new feel to his car. When

  Lisa finished her questioning, reserving the right to recall the

  witness later, I didn't see any need to redirect. Instead, I caught

  Chuck's eye as he left the witness stand. I was right. Testifying in

  a solid case with an easy cross had taken his mind off the Zimmerman

  debacle.

  The trial was trucking along smoothly. I began to suspect that my

  paranoia about Lisa's strategy was exactly that paranoia. Perhaps she

  had simply concluded there was no reason to knock herself out trying to

  save Derringer. She didn't even try to attack the accuracy of the

  fingerprint evidence when the criminologist, Heidi Chung, called a

  match based only on six points. Her only questions concerned the

  timing of the latent print found on Kendra's purse. Chung conceded the

  point that must always be given up on fingerprint evidence: Although

  she could state with confidence that the defendant had left his

  fingerprint on the victim's purse, there was no way to determine when

  the print had been left behind.

  On redirect, Chung explained to the jury that it was never possible to

  determine from physical evidence alone when a fingerprint was left

  behind. All the physical evidence could do was confirm that the

  suspect had touched that item at some point prior to the print's

  discovery.

  Through the end of my case-in-chief, the only witness Lisa

  cross-examined in any detail was Dave Renshaw, Derringer's probation

  officer. She didn't get far.

  The sole purpose of Renshaw's testimony was to show that when Renshaw

  saw Derringer's private parts a few weeks before Kendra was assaulted,

  they were still covered with hair like most other people's privates.

  Lisa tried to rattle Renshaw's testimony by pointing out that he didn't

  actually examine Derringer physically and was not looking specifically

  at that physical feature. In the end, though, there was no way to get

  around the obvious: A shorn scrotum stands out.

  The only other line of questioning she had for Renshaw concerned

  Derringer's probation record. Renshaw admitted on cross that Derringer

  had kept all their appointments, stayed in regular contact with him,

  and maintained regular employment. Lopez even went through a list of

  the various temp jobs Derringer had worked since he got parole: day

  labor, grill cooking, stockrooms, inventories.

  I could've objected on the basis that Lisa's questions called for

  inadmissible character evidence. She was, after all, trying to

  establish that Derringer had been keeping his nose clean, which had

  nothing to do with the issues in the trial. But any objection would

  invite a bullshit attempt to justify the evidence in front of the jury.

  Lisa would probably argue something to the effect that the evidence

  contradicted the State's theory that Derringer planned the abduction

  ahead of time or was associating with a possible accomplice. I figured

  any minimal benefit she got out of the questioning was a reasonable

  price to pay to avoid giving her an opportunity to make a speech for

  the jury.

  As it turned out, Renshaw was a pro who could diffuse Lisa's points on

  cross without my assistance on redirect. After Lisa had established

  that Derringer had reported all address changes, met all appointments,

  spoken regularly with Renshaw, and worked full-time on parole, she

  asked one question too many: "Isn't it true, Mr. Renshaw, that Mr.

  Derringer complied fully with the conditions of his parole?" "Sure,

  counselor. I guess you could say he was a model parolee except for the

  fact that he kidnapped, raped,

  sodomized, and tried to murder a thirteen-year-old girl." I think I

  saw Lesh smile as Lisa leapt to her feet to object.

  Her objection was sustained, but the exchange kept Lisa quiet for the

  rest of my case-in-chief.

  Ten.

  I had spent the week presenting my case to the jury, witness by

  witness. Building a prison for Frank Derringer with evidence, each

  piece stacking upon the last like bricks. Now I was ready to sit back

  and watch Lisa Lopez struggle to save face. I wanted it. I wanted it

  bad. I tried not to look smug and amused, which I was, when she stood

  on Thursday afternoon for her mid-trial opening.

  "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my point is a simple one." She put

  her hands on Derringer's shoulders. "This man, Frank Derringer, is

  innocent." A simple statement, but it caught the jury's attention.

  Lopez walked to the front of the jury box and continued. "Ms. Kincaid

  has done a fine job of presenting evidence the way she wants you to

  hear it. But what I want you to hear, and what you will conclude to be

  true, is that Frank Derringer finds himself on trial for a crime he

  didn't commit because a troubled and confused young girl who has led a

  very sad life mistakenly identified him as she was coming out of a

  heroin-induced haze."

  Although Lopez conceded that Kendra "may have been subjected to

  horrendous acts," she went on to remind the jurors of the presumption

  of Derringer's innocence and the oath they had taken to evaluate the

  evidence dispassionately. But she wasn't just arguing that there would

  be a reasonable doubt about Derringer's guilt. She was using the word

  innocent repeatedly. The defense's position wasn't just that Derringer

  was not guilty in the legal sense because the State couldn't make its

  case, but that he was factually innocent. Jurors feel better about

  acquitting someone they believe is innocent, but Lisa's strategy was

  risky. It's harder to prove innocence than to establish reasonable

  doubt.

  Lisa's quiet, contemplative tone became more urgent as she talked to

  the jurors about Derringer's alibi. Then she shifted her theme. "By

  the end of this trial, you will realize that Kendra Martin is a victim,

  but my client is as well. In fact, I believe that we will prove to you

  that both Mr. Derringer and Miss Martin are victims of the same

  wrongdoing."

  I tried to maintain my typical trial composure, looking as bored as

  possible while the defense presents its case. But for the life of me,

  I couldn't figure out where Lisa was going with her statement.

  "The wrongdoing that has brought Kendra Martin, Frank Derringer, and

  all of us together began about four years ago. Four years ago,

  Portland police officers found the body of another troubled young girl

  named Jamie Zimmerman in the Columbia Gorge. Jamie wasn't as lucky as

  Kendra. She was murdered strangled after being raped and beaten. Like

  Miss Martin, Jamie was a drug addict who supported her habit through

  occasional prostitution. Like Ms. Martin, she was raped and

  sodomized. Pol
ice found Jamie's badly decomposed body less than a mile

  from where Kendra Martin was located. Ms. Kincaid mentioned that

  whoever committed this crime took Kendra's purse. Well, guess what,

  ladies and gentlemen? Whoever killed Jamie Zimmerman took her purse

  too, and it was never recovered.

  "Those are enough similarities that you're probably thinking to

  yourself right now that the two crimes might be connected. You'd

  certainly think our police would at least look into it, especially when

  you learn that the same detectives who testified in this case

  investigated Jamie Zimmerman's murder."

  I was seething. How the hell did Lopez think she was going to get away

  with blind siding me this way? I didn't know every detail of the Jamie

  Zimmerman investigation, but I knew enough to recognize that Lopez was

  trying to take advantage of that case's recent revival in the media to

  confuse the jury. I also knew that she had never bothered to mention

  to me that her defense had anything to do with the Zimmerman case.

  There was nothing I could do, though, without playing into Lisa's hand.

  Any outburst from me would only add dramatic emphasis to her opening

  statement. So I sat there quietly while Lisa told the jurors about

  Margaret Landry and Jesse Taylor and their protestations of innocence,

  the recent letter to the Oregonian confessing to Jamie Zimmerman's

  murder, and a supposed conspiracy among Portland police to conceal the

  truth.

  "Because a jury didn't hear the truth about that case three years ago,

  innocent people were convicted. I don't want you to make the same

  mistake. I don't want you to convict an innocent person. So I'm going

  to make sure you get all the evidence. You're going to hear not only

 

‹ Prev