Unholy Sacrifice

by Robert Scott

  Mabel Carberry said of Deputy DA Jewett, “He was dynamic. He kept the jurors and gallery captivated with clear and positive evidence. He was honest with the victims’ family members and let them know what was coming. When you consider the crimes happened four years in the past, he made everything seem like yesterday.”

  Other witnesses were helpful for the defense, even though they had been called by the prosecution. Kelly Lord told Cook, “I always thought Taylor did the killing. I believe he did all of the killing. I find it very hard to believe that Justin murdered any of them. I look back on all of this and think, ‘There but for the grace of God, I could have been Dawn Godman.’ As for Godman, Lord said, “Dawn was Selina. Either one of them could have been killed.”

  Some of the court observers admitted that Cook had a very hard task to perform. Ray Carberry said, “Cook worked very hard on a difficult case.” And Juley Salkeld agreed, by saying, “He paid attention to what was happening. He showed passion when he needed to. At one point, he said, ‘Your Honor, I’m fighting for my client’s life.’”

  Other witnesses were very reluctant on the stand, such as Jessyka Chompff during portions of her testimony. She was embarrassed that her affair with Taylor was coming to light in a most public way. Discussed in front of the jury and the gallery, was the fact that she had sex with Taylor and her husband. She admitted that Taylor was a gift from her husband on their wedding night. All three of them were in bed together, and then Alex left and it was only her and Taylor there. Compff said, “Taylor couldn’t get an erection, so we did other things.”

  Christina Kelly was also a reluctant witness at times, especially talking about her involvement with Taylor and Keri about the Feline Club. She was being very careful in her testimony, trying to imply that the Feline Club was an escort service, not a prostitution service. Finally in frustration, Jewett said, “Tell the whole truth!”

  If Kelly was being very guarded in her testimony to Jewett, it was nothing compared to the intransigence of Keri Furman. There were problems with her right from the beginning, starting with her no-show at 9:00 A.M. on May 12, 2004, as she was supposed to do.

  Keri had been subpoenaed to show up at that hour in court, but she informed Jewett she had written down the wrong flight times from southern California to the Oakland airport. She claimed to have written down 7:51 A.M., rather than 7:15 A.M. There was no way she could be in Martinez for the morning session.

  Jewett was not pleased. He asked for a bench warrant and said that if Keri did not arrive in court by 1:30 P.M., she should be arrested and brought into court in handcuffs.

  When Keri (now Keri Mendoza) finally did take the stand, she and Jewett were both in a contentious mood. She often answered his question with “I don’t remember,” or “I don’t recall.”

  At one point Chronicle reporter Demian Bulwa counted Mendoza saying, “I don’t remember—I don’t recall” sixteen times in five minutes.

  A constant refrain from Jewett was “Didn’t you say . . . ,” referring to her comments to detectives in Las Vegas, and her different answers now.

  At another point, he was frustrated by how she was now portraying the interview with detectives in Las Vegas. He had proof via audiotapes that her demeanor there had been cooperative, friendly and forthcoming. Now she was saying the detectives had badgered her and intimidated her.

  Jewett said, “I’m asking about your conduct in Las Vegas.”

  Keri answered, “Your messengers (the detectives) were very unprofessional.” She accused them of slamming a pile of documents down in front of her, being threatening and even trying to have her sign autographed copies of her nude Playboy photos.

  Keri’s refrain of “I don’t recall” became even more pronounced when Jewett asked her about placing $4,000 in Justin’s Cal Fed account in June 2000. Jewett asked her, “Do you recall talking to Taylor about depositing money into Justin’s Cal Fed account?”

  “I don’t remember,” Keri responded.

  “Did you call Taylor on August second?” he asked.

  At that point, she said, “I called and he was angry. I just wanted to know how he was doing. I didn’t talk about a payment of money.”

  She did admit a short time later that she supposedly owed Taylor for a loan he had given her to buy her sports car. Then she added one more thing. Keri said that Taylor told her over the phone, “The deal is working out.”

  Asked by Jewett what the “deal” was, she responded testily, “I didn’t want to know, Hal! I didn’t want to associate with it.”

  Jewett said, “Remember, you are under oath.”

  He asked later, “Did you give any thought [in Las Vegas] of what they were arrested for?”

  Keri responded, “You had detectives come see me the same day this happened.” (Actually, the detectives met her five days after the arrest.) “You sent your dogs down there!”

  “I sent my dogs down there?” Jewett asked incredulously.

  “Yes. I didn’t want to think about it. I had my career to think about. I don’t like you, Hal. You’re not my friend. Taylor lied to me, Hal!”

  Then she complained that when she received a subpoena recently to appear in court, the deputy serving it in her southern California county had supposedly blocked her in her driveway and threw the subpoena in her face. “You threatened me with arrest!” she cried.

  The “dogs” remark particularly piqued Jewett’s interest. He asked her, “Ever see any dogs at Saddlewood?”

  “No,” she said.

  Jewett asked Keri about In To Me See and her role in it, especially about helping on the questionnaire.

  With barely concealed scorn, she answered, “I don’t remember any questionnaire, Hal.”

  And concerning the Feline Club fronting for a prostitution ring, she said, “I was not a part of that!”

  “Weren’t you supposed to train the girls?” Jewett asked.

  “No!” Keri replied.

  Asked if she had told Detective Marziano the truth during his visit in Las Vegas, she was evasive at best. “I was under a lot of stress then,” she answered. “I’m not having a very good day now. I don’t deserve to be treated like this. I did my part, Hal! I think this is unfair.”

  Perhaps frustrated by Keri’s lack of cooperation, Judge O’Malley told her that no one was having a good day, and that it would all be over quicker, and less of a torture for her, if she just answered the questions.

  Keri was crying almost nonstop by the time Jewett asked her about the Twelve Principles of Magic. She said that Taylor had placed the poster on a refrigeratorso that she would have to look at it every time she passed by. Jewett asked about Taylor’s contention that there was no right or wrong, and what did she think about that. Keri answered, “I’m not like him. But he didn’t like the terms ‘right’ and ‘wrong.’ It was the best thing of my life to leave him.”

  Jewett asked, “It was the best thing of your life to leave him?”

  She practically spat back in his face, “What do you think, Hal!”

  Asked about a safe, she denied any knowledge of one. Asked about the manufacturing of drugs at Oak Grove, Keri said that she never wanted any manufacturing to take place there and was incensed when she found out about Taylor trying to do that in the garage.

  Keri’s testimony would have been through in one day, but because of her late arrival and constant verbal battles with Jewett, she was held over for another day to testify. Arriving in court the next morning, she wore the same outfit as the previous day, not realizing earlier that she needed to pack a bag for a two-day endurance test.

  At least in the questioning by Daniel Cook, Keri began to feel that she was on safer terrain and regained much of her composure. She talked about a rough childhood and lack of confidence while growing up. She spoke of how Taylor had overwhelmed her when she was still young and naive. She said he had taken advantage of her vulnerability.

  Asked if Taylor had ever threatened her, she said, “Not physically, but near
the end, I was scared. I really didn’t know this person. I didn’t want to know some things about him. Justin never talked to me about what he was up to. They both shut me out.”

  Keri was finally through on the stand, but her previous statements were not. Jewett wanted to impeach a total of thirteen of her statements that she had made under oath, with variant answers she had given to the investigators over the phone and in her Las Vegas interview. He also wanted to show that the Las Vegas questioning had not been done in an intimidating manner, as she now suggested. In fact, it had not been confrontational at all, and on the audiotapes her willing cooperation and often friendly manner could be heard.

  Cook, on the other hand, had a problem with only portions of the transcripts being admitted now. He said that to let the prosecution pick and choose sections from the entire transcript could be unfair to his client, Justin. Cook added, “There are errors in those transcripts. The heart of the matter is, my client has the right to a fair trial. To allow parts of a transcript to be read is not consistent with due process.”

  Then Cook said that Keri’s statements mainly dealt with her days when she shared a house with Taylor and Justin on Oak Grove Road. “Those [thoughts] were focused on certain subject matters there. Ms. Furman’s knowledge of Taylor and Justin came from that shared residence.” Cook pointed out that Keri had never been in Saddlewood or known anything about the development of Children of Thunder.

  Cook wanted the whole transcript brought in if any portion of it was read. He said, “Keri even told officers that Taylor was a parasite to both her and Justin. In those transcripts, it details [Taylor’s] blackmails, crazy ideas, raves, Harmony and questionnaires. Taylor talked about all this stuff as if God were talking to him. I consider Taylor a brainwasher. He could brainwash someone to do anything he wanted.”

  Cook pointed to a statement Keri made: “Justin would follow anything Taylor asked him to do. So would Dawn.”

  Cook stated, “All of this is relevant. The rule of law and spirit of the law is such that we must approach this broadly.”

  The crux of the matter for Judge O’Malley was that if the entire transcript was presented, it would take at least an hour and a half to go through it. She was mindful that the jurors might be lulled into complacency by the droning speech of something being read for that long a time. Cook, however, cited the California Constitution, Article 1—Section 28. It referred to the fact that the time element should not be a factor in deciding how much material was presented before a jury. He said, “We’ve been here a couple of months, and will be here for a month more. Mr. Jewett has presented exhaustive details and I should have the same right. In the big picture, it won’t take that much time.”

  To Judge O’Malley, it seemed that the rules of law applied to Section 356 of the California evidence code. She said, “My understanding of three fifty-six is that by its nature it doesn’t allow the entirety (of a document). The whole is only allowed if it makes understandable the main area of evidence. I didn’t find that the entire transcript needed to be played to make it understandable. As for certain statements you (Cook) feel are not impeachable, in number thirteen, she says, ‘You (the detectives) can call me anytime. I want to be helpful. You can even call me at three A.M.’ This impeaches her statement about Mr. Jewett sending his dogs (the investigators) to Las Vegas.

  “Number ten deals with the signature on a centerfold. This is not impeachable.”

  When the jury was brought back in, Judge O’Malley explained to them why there had been a lengthy delay. Then, polite and conscientious as always, she said, “You have witnessed in this trial three of the best attorneys you will ever see.”

  Dawn Godman took the jurors through every aspect of her life before and after her conversion to Mormonism. She told of first meeting Taylor at the murder mystery night at the Third Ward. Like many other young women close to him, she said, “He was charismatic and powerful.”

  Even with a sentence of thirty-seven years to life, she still admitted, when asked by Jewett, that she still wasn’t sure if Taylor was a prophet of God or not. Dawn said, “Breaking away from Taylor has been a back-and-forth struggle. It’s been a continuous process over the last four years.”

  She even admitted that after her incarceration, “I believed no matter what happened, Taylor would work with the angels to set us free.”

  Then she said something that startled the victims’ families. Dawn declared, “I’ve always tried to live life without regrets. If I had to go back and do my life over again, I wouldn’t change a thing.”

  She quickly added that she did regret having ever met Taylor Helzer.

  Dawn covered everything about the Children of Thunder without flinching. Her plea bargain depended on it, and unlike Keri Furman, she rarely said, “I don’t recall.” She spoke of every aspect in the scheme from July 30 through the killing of Jenny Villarin and James Gamble in the early-morning hours of August 3. She told of cutting up and packaging the body of Selina, and depositing all the body bags in the Delta. She even said that later she couldn’t get the smell of the residence at Saddlewood out of her nose for two weeks afterward. Jewett would later refer to this as the “smell of death.”

  Dr. Reiber’s testimony was extensive and graphic in the extreme. Every word he said about the autopsied body parts was backed up by extremely graphic photos on an overhead screen. Jewett had warned the victims’ family members they could leave if they did not want to sit through the showing. They all stayed. Carma Helzer and Justin’s sister, Heather, however, left the court. Only Justin was left from the Helzer side, with his lawyers sitting next to him. During the showing of the photographs, he would not look at them. He stared down at the desk in front of him with determined concentration as Jewett referred to the photos as “Justin’s handiwork.”

  Court observer Juley Salkeld said, “Dr. Reiber’s statements were very damaging to Justin. Especially when he talked about putting the body parts back together. In some ways, that was the worst part.”

  Chris Darden added, “It was Dr. Reiber and Detective Nash who blew this case wide open. Their testimony really hurt Justin.”

  Various bumps along the road in the trial came as one side or the other objected to certain evidence being introduced. Cook objected that Jewett was trying to introduce the safe at Debra McClanahan’s residence, and this had to do with Taylor and Dawn, not his client, Justin. Judge O’Malley ruled that the safe and its contents would be allowed. One of the pieces of evidence in the safe was the pistol that Justin had purchased.

  Then Cook objected to Jewett actually turning on the reciprocal saw so that the jury could hear the sound it made. He said, “There is no evidentiary value in the operation of the saw. It would influence the passions of the jury.”

  Jewett argued that Dawn Godman knew the sound of the saw because she had used it to construct the dog run. She could listen to the saw in court and say that it sounded the same as the one she had used. Jewett said, “It goes to state of mind and their deliberate commitment to kill.”

  “It’s nothing more than a grandstanding move to influence their (the jury’s) passions,” Cook countered.

  Jewett: The saw brings home loud and clear the nature of this crime.

  Cook: The shock and theatrical effect does not assist the jury in the facts. It’s merely for dramatic effect.

  O’Malley: In considering to allow the saw to be turned on—I look back to other homicide cases that have been before this court. In other homicides, I allowed how weapons were used. For instance, in the case of a shooting, it showed how you load a gun and how it would become fully operable and the sound of the process. It goes to intent and state of mind. I think it is relevant if it was to show how you get this instrument (the saw) to work. If it is an item that makes a loud sound, so be it. This just happens to be a saw rather than a gun.

  Cook was luckier with his contention that no mention should be made of Taylor’s flight to evade officers on the morning of August 7, 2000, at t
he time of his arrest on Saddlewood. Cook said that Justin had been no part of that process and had willingly allowed himself to be arrested by officers. Jewett wanted the evidence in, saying that Justin was a co-conspirator and there were notes about what he and Taylor would do if ever arrested.

  Judge O’Malley allowed the nature of Taylor’s detention by Detective Inskip to be mentioned, but not the matter of his flight or terrorist threats to William Sharp and Mary Mozzochi.

  If Cook was worried about the impact the sound of the reciprocal saw made in front of the jury, it was nothing compared to one of Jewett’s most dramatic moments in court. Jewett was talking about the hammer blow from Justin on the back of Selina Bishop’s head as she lay on the floor receiving a back rub from Taylor. Suddenly, without warning, Jewett brought a hammer down on a stack of papers in the courtroom. Almost everyone jumped by the loud impact, even Judge Mary Ann O’Malley.

  Closing arguments can be very dramatic by their very nature. They are a summation of testimony and a counselor’s right to delve into oratory beyond the scope of mere evidence. Harold Jewett began for the prosecution in the guilt phase by saying, “This is one hell of a case. We had five people brutally killed. Each person was a unique and special person.”

  He spoke of Annette Stineman enjoying mystery novels, gardening and her spinning wheel. Ivan enjoyed romance novels, working in the yard and his friends. Jewett pointed to Justin and said, “This defendant took the lives from the Stinemans. The brutality of the crime reflects about his heart and soul.”