“Look at all the different faces of the defendant we’ve seen. You heard his former fiancée testify that she knows ‘Family Bart.’ The Bart that loved his mom, the Bart that loved his dad, the Bart that was very, very protective of his brother, Kevin, because that’s the face he wanted her to see.
“Adam Hipp got to know ‘Financial Adviser Bart’ as they used to sit around in the upstairs lifting weights together, talking about their trust funds. He knew that was compelling to Adam Hipp.
“The people in Waco got to meet ‘Nerdy Bart,’ that spent all of his time playing video games and basically almost flunked out of school. That’s the face he showed Justin Peters and Will Anthony.
“The people in Willis and the Bentwater Country Club, they got to know ‘Party Animal Bart.’ The party was always at his place every night.
“And what you got to see yesterday was ‘On Trial for Capital Murder Bart.’ The defendant looks for people with low self-esteem and he exploits it. The reason why this makes him a future danger is because these are exactly the type of people that he’s going to be in prison with—people with low self-esteem, people who are less intelligent than him, people who are less sophisticated than him, people that he is going to be able to influence.”
Strange went on to point out three instances of evidence that Bart Whitaker considered to be a joke: first, a picture, taken on the night of the murder, with Bart and Kevin, smiling together, and Bart flipping him off in secret; second, the Keyser Soze–addressed mailer envelope sent to Adam Hipp, with bribery money inside; third, the Christmas card to Fred Felcman. Of the latter, he stated, “Fred Felcman obviously knows what Bart Whitaker is capable of, so if I send you a card with an ominous notation to your family, it’s going to ruin your holiday.”
Strange turned back toward Bart and said, “There is a time in your life to lay low. When you have been caught committing capital murder, and you are going on trial for your life, there is a time to just shut up.” A few snickers could be heard in the gallery. “He can’t do it”—Strange turned to face the jury box—“because it’s a compulsion. It’s just who he is.”
Strange was quick to dispel the idea that Bart suffered from the hard bigotry of high expectations. “He told you with his own mouth he planned on killing his family. Unless he kills his family, there is no inheritance. And we know that money was the motivation, not the Peter Pan fantasy he tried to sell you yesterday. You saw no evidence that was truly mitigating. He tried to tell you this irrational story that somehow his family’s expectations of him—the fact that they treated him too well, the fact that they bought him too much stuff—made him hate his family and caused him to kill them.” Strange practically spat the words out. “Folks, it was over the money. He wanted to inherit the money. The thing is, he understands that people who kill their mommas don’t fare particularly well in front of Texas juries when they do it for money, so he had to come up with Plan B. That’s why he made up the Peter Pan–like fantasy yesterday. He doesn’t want you to think he killed his family over money, because you’ll hold it against him. And you should. And he did.”
Strange told the jury that he felt bad for the Bartlett and Whitaker families. However, “the fact that the families have forgiven him, the fact that the families don’t want it (a death sentence) to happen, it doesn’t fit in this equation.” He added, “A legitimate purpose of the criminal justice system is to deter crime. Hopefully, by making an example out of a person, other people will know not to follow that conduct. And if we know anything else from the facts of this case, Bart Whitaker deserves to be made an example of. He should be the poster child for this.”
Strange lamented Bart’s choices in life: “He had the chance for a perfectly easy life. He came up here yesterday and tried to tell you that he has been spoiled rotten, that his parents have done so much for him that he resented it. That because they were successful, it raised expectations for him. That’s offensive! That’s basically blaming Tricia and Kevin for their own deaths!”
Strange was furious, as were many onlookers in the gallery. He continued, “The bottom line is he has absolutely no moral compass. He has remarkable ability to be all things to all people, and he has no moral compass.”
The prosecutor was ready to finish his portion of the argument. “Just like every one of you people, I hope the world, this community, is a better place because I tread on this earth. I think any moral person would want the same thing. We want to make a better life for our children, and we want the world to be a better place. There are some people, however, like Bart Whitaker, that just take. And they take and they take, and they suck the life out of everything they come in contact with. You’ve had a chance to see that.”
Strange paused, collected himself, and turned toward Bart. He then looked back at the jurors. “He killed his mother. He killed his brother. They both loved him. Without condition. And he killed them.” Strange let that sink in. “When you look at the life of Bart Whitaker, the only thing he’s ever earned himself is this trip to death row.”
The gallery fell silent.
Randy McDonald was up next to speak on behalf of Bart.
“There is no question, no question at all, that this is a horrible, tragic, unacceptable crime.” McDonald somehow wanted the jurors to stifle their emotions and, instead, focus on the task at hand, which was to assess if Bart Whitaker should be considered a continuing threat if he was to remain alive—one of the three criteria to determine whether or not he should be executed.
The defense attorney disagreed with Prosecutor Strange’s conclusion that Bart killed his family for money. “The state has made a big deal about the money. The money was his tool,” McDonald surmised, “the manipulation. Money was a tool for him. The bottom line is there was something wrong with Bart. No one does this without something being wrong with them. No rational person would do this.”
McDonald tried to blame Bart’s conspiratorial plans on his alleged lack of acceptance. “What you really see is an individual withdrawing from society. That’s exactly what he did. His feelings were that he was off on this island and he doesn’t have anybody that loves him. He somehow developed that into a hatred for his parents. There could be no other reasoning.”
McDonald then resorted to the death penalty defense attorney backup plan: guilt. “I’m up here telling you that you will never make a more important decision in your life about whether to take another human being’s life.”
McDonald’s next tactic was to comparison shop Bart alongside his co-conspirators. He seemed amazed that the prosecution plea-bargained with Steven Champagne. “Fifteen years on a lesser included of murder, all because they are so driven to seek justice with the death penalty in this case. No remorse from him whatsoever, and he gets fifteen years.”
The prosecution’s potential dealings with Chris Brashear were even more appalling to Bart’s defense attorney. “Is there something maybe less blameworthy about Bart’s conduct than Chris Brashear’s?” McDonald asked. He then listed Brashear’s actions the night of the murders. “Just another walk in the park. What does that tell you about that person? What does that tell you about his moral culpability? Is that actually greater than Bart’s? They didn’t make a decision to seek the death penalty for him, and it’s the same conduct. He was, in fact, the shooter! Had Chris Brashear not pulled the trigger, we wouldn’t be here today.”
McDonald then acknowledged the uniqueness of the case. “I’ve never been involved in a case where the defense called the victims in the case to put their feelings before you. The reason I did it is that they tell you they don’t want the death penalty [for Bart]. More importantly, the devastation continues for these victims. They want closure.”
The defense attorney made his final plea to spare Bart’s life. “For someone like Bart, who had every opportunity in the world, who had loving parents, he’s thrown it away. For someone like him being in prison every single day for the rest of his life, and thinking about what he did, that is pre
tty serious punishment.”
McDonald then attempted to convince the jury that Bart had changed. “The Bart Whitaker that committed this crime could no more have gotten up here and faced you and told you the truth and accepted responsibility for this than the Man in the Moon. There’s no way he could have done that. Only by being in jail, only by being faced with this, is he able to actually come clean with you about it. He tells you the truth. He actually is remorseful.”
McDonald trumpeted the Christian theme of forgiveness laid out by Kent Whitaker. “We all know from our religious beliefs that confession is the start. It is the start of forgiveness and redemption. That’s what you’re hearing his dad talk about. That’s what he’s interested in. That’s what he’s telling you about.”
McDonald closed with a return to guilt. “Do yourself a favor,” he said directly to everyone in the jury box, “depending on your decision, one day you’re going to wake up, and you’re going to read the paper that Bart Whitaker was executed. You’ve got to know that it was proven to you beyond a reasonable doubt, and that you didn’t just do it because it is such a notorious, high-profile, ugly, nasty crime.” Some of the jurors noticeably shifted in their seats. “Treat him the way the state of Texas wants you to treat him, following your oath to do justice. I think if you really, really look at it, there is absolutely no evidence that he is a continuing threat to society, once he’s given a life sentence.”
McDonald signed off with the following bit of advice for the jury: “Render a just verdict. If you can do that, you’ll be all right with yourself in the morning. If you can’t, you’re going to have problems with it. Thank you.”
McDonald finished his closing argument and ADA Fred Felcman immediately popped up from his chair. He did not look happy.
“I always listen very intently to what the defense attorney has to say, and I listened for an hour, and I have never heard such rambling and doublespeak in all my life. Never does he talk about the defendant. He never talks about the evidence.” Felcman shook his head at the thought.
“I don’t quite understand this moral thing with Chris Brashear, that because he pulled the trigger, he is more evil or more heinous than the defendant. The defendant took his family out and ate bread with them, knowing full well they were going to be dead in a few minutes, and brought them back to be assassinated. Chris Brashear was the weapon that the defendant used to kill his family. He could have substituted another person in, but it’s always the defendant bringing back his family to be assassinated.”
Felcman spoke about the Christmas card Bart sent him before the trial and how it was indicative of his future potential as a threat. “I said to him, ‘When you sent me that card, what was that all about?’ He said, ‘Well, I don’t dislike you, Mr. Felcman.’ Ladies and gentlemen, he has no reason to dislike his family,” the prosecutor stated, and turned to look at the defendant. “He had absolutely no reason whatsoever to hate his mother or brother or father, but in his mind”—he poked his temple to hammer the point home—“he perceived in his mind that they had offended him in some manner, even though it had nothing to do with reality whatsoever.”
Felcman turned away from the jury to glance back at Bart. In a booming voice, he declared, “It doesn’t matter if you treat this defendant with kindness, as Mr. Kent Whitaker does. It doesn’t matter if you’re the ideal father. In his mind, somewhere along the line, he perceives it differently. You are now in danger. And not only that, there’s nothing you can do to stop it. There’s nothing you can do to stop it, until he’s in the grave.”
Felcman took issue with Randy McDonald’s guilt tactic. “I’m sorry Mr. McDonald said something about you killing him. Ladies and gentlemen, you’re going to answer these questions, but the state of Texas will execute him, all right? It was shameful for him to put you in that position, absolutely shameful.”
Felcman moved on to whether or not Bart Whitaker would prove to be a future threat. “He talked seven people, five on the murders and two on the burglaries, to do things with him. He manipulated a trained psychologist to write a letter that said, Don’t worry, he won’t do anything like this again. He even convinced Lynne Sorsby to marry him after he was a suspect in a capital murder case and had lived a double life in college. This is a good salesman. This guy could sell ice to an Eskimo. Even Lynne Ayres, the educational diagnostician, said, ‘He looks at people as tools.’ Now he’s looking at you as a tool to try to get out of the death penalty.”
Felcman continued to paint the picture of the real Bart Whitaker. “It doesn’t take him long to develop the perception that he hates you, or somehow you have offended him, and you deserve to die. He only does things when it comes to his advantage.”
The prosecutor had had just about enough of the defendant. “He’s the most heinous, evil thing you can think of. Without him,” he declared to the jurors, “you’re not here, and Mr. Whitaker still has his wife and son. The only person who is morally blameworthy is the defendant.”
Felcman had a final bit of advice for the jury panel. “Hug each other, make your verdict, and go home.”
At 11:55 A.M., Judge Vacek instructed the jury members to head back to the jurors’ quarters to begin deliberating the fate of Bart Whitaker, and whether he should live or die.
Five hours later, the jury had not reached a conclusion. As a result, Judge Vacek ordered they be sequestered for the night, and to resume deliberations the following day.
55
March 8, 2007
Fort Bend County Courthouse
Richmond, Texas
Judge Vacek took his seat at the head of the courtroom. The members of the jury were quietly led to the jury box.
The judge wasted no time in getting down to business.
“Let the record reflect that we’re here in Cause Number 42,969, the State of Texas versus Thomas Bartlett Whitaker. The jury is present. The state is present. The defendant is present in person and with counsel. I’ve received the court’s charge on punishment from the jury. I will read the jury’s answers.
“Issue number one. Do you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that there is a probability that the Defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society?
“Answer: Yes.
“Issue number two. Do you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant actually caused the death of the deceased, or did not actually cause the death of the deceased, but intended to kill the deceased or another, or anticipated that a human life would be taken? You are instructed that in answering this issue, only the conduct of the defendant can be considered, and that the instructions pertaining to the law of parties heretofore given you cannot now be considered in answering this issue.
“Answer: Yes.
“Issue number three. Do you find from the evidence, taking into consideration all of the evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the defendant’s character and background, and the personal moral culpability of the defendant, that there is sufficient mitigating circumstances or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life imprisonment, rather than a death sentence be imposed? You are instructed that in answering this issue, you shall answer the issue yes or no. You may not answer the issue no unless the jury unanimously agrees, and you may not answer yes unless ten or more jurors agree. The jury need not agree on what particular evidence supports an affirmative finding on this issue. The jury shall consider mitigating evidence to be evidence that a juror might regard as reducing the defendant’s moral blameworthiness.
“Answer: No.
“We, the jury, having answered the foregoing issues, return the same into the court as our verdict.
“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is this a unanimous verdict?”
“Yes,” the jury members declared in unison.
“Thomas Bartlett Whitaker,” Judge Vacek addressed the defendant directly, “is there anything you wish to say to this court before I pronounce senten
ce?”
“No, sir,” Bart answered. He never showed any emotion upon hearing his fate.
“Then, in Cause Number 42,969, the State of Texas versus Thomas Bartlett Whitaker, upon the verdicts received by the court from the jury, rendered unanimously by the jury in this cause, that is the verdict of the jury unanimously finding that you are guilty of the offense of capital murder, as charged by the state in the indictment in this case, and their verdicts answering Special Issue number one unanimously yes, answering Special Issue number two unanimously yes, and answering Special Issue number three unanimously no. You are guilty of the offense of capital murder, as charged by the state of Texas, and that you be punished in accordance with the rules of Texas law. That is, that you be sentenced to death by means of lethal injection. Sheriff, you may take him away.”
The courtroom remained silent as Bart Whitaker was escorted away to meet his final destiny.
56
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Fort Bend County Courthouse
Richmond, Texas
Several months after Bart Whitaker was found guilty and sentenced to death, and after Steven Champagne was given a fifteen-year prison term, Chris Brashear finally entered a plea of guilty, as per his deal with the district attorney’s office. In exchange, he was spared a death sentence and, instead, received life in prison.
During Brashear’s hearing, Kent Whitaker was allowed to address the young man as part of the courtroom proceedings and offer up his victim impact statement. Many times, the statement can become a fiery scene between a murderer and the victim’s family. Kent Whitaker was there, instead, to let Chris Brashear know he was forgiven.
Savage Son Page 30