by Burl Barer
“Didn’t you also tell Detective Yerbury and Price that the reason you came forward was to prove you weren’t involved in these two murders?” St. Pierre confirmed Ladenburg’s assertion. “Mr. Hultman numerous times asked you whether or not you wanted to have John Achord killed in order to cover up Damon Wells’s murder. Who was it that murdered Damon Wells? Who was it who slit Damon Wells’s throat and stabbed him in the back? Who was it who handed Paul a knife and told him to kill John Achord that night?” Each question elicited the same two-word answer: “Andrew Webb.”
Ladenburg, asking the last question of Christopher St. Pierre, made sure the jury’s final thought was the unmistakable guilt and complicity of Andrew Webb—the man who refused to cooperate, and the only man implicating his client in the murder of John Achord.
The case on behalf of Chris St. Pierre had one more witness whose testimony was anticipated as exceptionally brief—Mark Perez would simply confirm three things. First, Andrew Webb had a knife-throwing set. Second, Chris St. Pierre was not the kind of person who would stand up to his brother Paul or Andrew Webb. Third, the night Damon Wells was beaten in the bathroom, Chris was in the living room talking with Perez most of the time. Whatever transpired in the bathroom with Damon Wells happened primarily with Andrew and Paul, not Chris St. Pierre.
“At this time, Your Honor,” said John Ladenburg, “I would like to have the admission of Exhibit D two-twenty-three—an excerpt of testimony given by Andrew Webb on April 17, 1984.”
Judge Steiner allowed Ladenburg to read aloud the entire transcript of Andrew Webb’s testimony as to why he refused to testify against the St. Pierres. The jury listened carefully, and heard with perfect clarity, Webb’s admission that he originally intended to testify “out of vengeance” and “to look good in the public eye.”
The defense of Christopher St. Pierre rested. David Murdach, attorney for the one defendant pleading not guilty by reason of insanity, assured the jury that they wouldn’t have to go through all those witnesses again. “I am not going to duplicate what has already been presented. I will simply call new and fresh material for you to consider,” he said in his opening statement. “You’ve already heard Dr. Tappin’s testimony, and we’ll offer the testimony of Dr. Lloyd, staff psychiatrist with Western State Hospital. You might wonder what Western State Hospital has to do with this entire matter.
“During the course of these proceedings,” explained Murdach, “my client, Paul St. Pierre, was diagnosed with a paranoid disorder and an almost borderline personality with respect to having psychotic interludes. Because of those impressions, he was found to be incompetent to proceed. When a person is classified ‘incompetent,’ ” Murdach explained, “they send them to a mental hospital, where they are again tested to determine if they are competent, or not competent, to stand trial.” Murdach told the jury that the combined testimonies of the doctors Tappin, Muscatel, and Lloyd would explain the fact of mental illness.
“There will be no question after the testimony is unfolded that my client has a mental illness, a mental defect, paranoid personality, borderline psychotic, and that illness hindered his ability to form the requisite intent on the night of this particular killing.”
Following the medical experts who evaluated Paul St. Pierre, Murdach would call Michael Comte, the man who supervised the psychological evaluation on Andrew Webb. “You’ll be able to find out what kind of person Andrew Webb is through the eyes of Dr. Comte,” he advised the jury. “Then we will call Ms. Gerri Woolf, a probation officer from Pierce County, who will also talk about Andrew Webb and the difficulties he was experiencing from a legal standpoint when this incident occurred. Realizing that we are unable to cross-examine Andrew Webb because his statement was merely read to you, far different than what Christopher St. Pierre underwent, the rigorous cross-examination by the prosecutor. We can’t cross-examine Mr. Andrew Webb, we can only ...”
Carl Hultman, aggravated, objected. “I think counsel has made his point. I think he’s arguing.” The judge permitted it, and Murdach continued exactly where he left off. “... put in these things to show what kind of person Andrew Webb was, and what was going on in his life at the time these incidents occurred.”
The jury would hear testimony from pathologist Dr. Cordova establishing that even if Achord was stabbed twelve times, he was already dead from the gunshot. Mr. Donaldson would testify that he saw a man whom he believed to be John Achord acting bizarre and drug-crazed the night of the Rush concert.
“I believe from the evidence you will receive here, you’ll far better understand what was going on in everybody’s mind,” said Murdach. “The mind,” and the condition of Paul St. Pierre’s on the night Achord was killed, was the essence of Murdach’s defense. He immediately called Dr. Lloyd to the witness stand. Lloyd, staff psychiatrist at the mentally ill offender unit of Western State Hospital, confirmed that he examined and diagnosed Paul St. Pierre, and that his findings were the same as Dr. Tappin and Dr. Muscatel. “He is so tenuously controlled,” said Lloyd, “that psychosis is highly possible at any time.” The basic unchanged diagnosis, said Lloyd, was a “paranoid personality.”
Ladenburg had no questions, but Carl Hultman made sure the jury knew that only three days after Dr. Lloyd admitted Paul St. Pierre for an intended ninety-day stay, the patient was discharged.
“He was discharged in three days by other doctors,” said Dr. Lloyd, making his disapproval clear. “He wasn’t discharged by me.”
“And was he found competent by these other doctors?”
“I believe that’s what they said,” Lloyd answered, and that was all Hultman wanted the jury to know. David Murdach, entitled to redirect examination, said, “Just one final question. You didn’t render an opinion that he should be released?”
“No, I was taken off the case,” said Dr. Lloyd. When asked why he was suddenly removed, he replied, “You’ll have to ask Mr. Griffies, the prosecuting attorney, about that.”
Carl Hultman and Judge Steiner were momentarily taken aback, and in their moment of inaction, Murdach launched a series of questions, which, if answered as he expected, would be damning to the prosecution’s case.
“Why would you be taken off the case if you saw him when he’s admitted to Western State Hospital? What was going on as to why you should be suddenly taken off the case?”
The answer Murdach sought, and the one Dr. Lloyd would potentially provide, was that the chief prosecutor of Pierce County, William Griffies, manipulated the entire process, including the removal of Lloyd, an immediate reversal in diagnosis, and a three-day discharge making sure the brothers would be tried “as one.”
“I’m going to object,” said Hultman. “I don’t think that’s a germane issue in this case.” The trial, should Judge Steiner overrule the objection, could take a sudden digression, diverting the jury from first-degree aggravated murder to suspicious and/or spurious allegations of prosecutorial misconduct.
Judge Steiner thought it over, then turned to Dr. Lloyd. “Can you answer the question ‘Why were you taken off the case?’ from personal knowledge?” As all Lloyd had was conjecture and opinion, his testimony came to an abrupt conclusion. Dr. Proctor was waiting in the wings, as was Mr. Alfred Donaldson. Donaldson’s testimony would be brief compared to Proctor’s; Murdach called him to the stand first.
“I was on my way to purchase a ticket for the Rush concert,” testified Donaldson. “This person walked up toward me, muttering total nothingness, very confused as to who he was and where he was. Fifteen minutes later, I ran into him again. He was asking how to find a ticket or something. The ticket office was right in front of him. About forty-five minutes later, he was out leaning against the fence, screaming at the top of his lungs. He was very incoherent. He was talking to himself, spouting off things, screaming, yelling about things that were not in existence around him.”
Murdach showed Donaldson a Missing Persons poster featuring John Achord. According to Donaldson, when he saw the poster two d
ays after the concert, he called the Tacoma Police Department. If Donaldson’s portrayal of Achord was believable, then Paul St. Pierre’s feeling threatened, and acting in what he saw as self-defense, was certainly favorable toward his client.
Dr. Charles Proctor, the clinical psychologist employed at Western State Hospital who participated in the short examination and evaluation of Paul St. Pierre, was quickly sworn in.
“Had you met with him prior to that evaluation when you saw him at Western State Hospital?” Murdach asked.
Proctor replied that he had never seen Paul St. Pierre except one time before writing the report. He further confirmed that the removal of Dr. Lloyd was “unusual”; the evaluation session lasted only forty-five minutes; no tests were conducted; St. Pierre was diagnosed as having mental illness and was deemed competent to stand trial.
John Ladenburg had a few questions for Dr. Proctor, and posed them politely. First, he established that when Dr. Lloyd examined Paul St. Pierre, the patient was not on any antipsychotic medication. When Dr. Proctor and Dr. Allison saw him for those forty-five minutes, St. Pierre was medicated. “You see him when he’s on the medication that is supposed to reduce that psychosis. Is it surprising then that you don’t see the psychosis?”
Proctor acknowledged that the effect of the medication was a reasonable explanation for Paul St. Pierre not manifesting the same behavioral symptoms as he did when examined by Dr. Lloyd. Ladenburg then made sure that the jury knew that the medical definition of competency is different from the legal definition of the same word. “Did you ever do any testing whatsoever to determine whether or not he met the legal definition of diminished capacity or of complete capacity? Did you do any questioning or testing as to that idea at all?”
“I wasn’t asked for that,” said Dr. Proctor. “I would have to have been given the legal mental-capacity requirement, the specific intent requirement in order to answer that question. I wasn’t asked to do any tests, so I didn’t do any.” Proctor made it clear that his evaluation was not conducted with the question of legal competency in mind.
Hultman’s cross-examination was surprisingly brief, during which he asked the doctor to explain the term “defense mechanism of projection,” a phrase first brought to the jury’s attention by the earlier testimony of Dr. Tappin.
“The term projection refers to the person saying to himself, ‘Other people must be like me, I am a tough character, and so other people are tough characters, and I’ve got to protect myself from them.’ Most paranoid personalities exhibit the tendency to ‘hit them back’ first in a defensive sense. They are ready to protect themselves before a real threat even exists.”
“As we have said,” summarized Carl Hultman, “they project that kind of aggressive, hostile attitude into the other person, and believe it’s coming from the other person, when it’s really their feelings toward that person?” Dr. Proctor agreed with Hultman’s analysis, and validated that definition of “the defense mechanism of projection.”
Proctor stepped down, and David Murdach asked that the jury step out. The next witness, Gerri Woolf, was also important to Ladenburg and disturbing to Hultman. Woolf was from the Adult Probation and Parole Office. A previous “client” of hers, following his arrests for assault, was Andrew Webb.
“What we want to get to,” explained Ladenburg, “is Officer Woolf’s almost prophetic prediction about the future behavior of Andrew Webb.” This prediction arose from the four-page presentence report prepared by Woolf, following Webb’s conviction in the three assault cases.
“Another issue, too,” Ladenburg added, “is that Andrew Webb obviously lied to his probation officer during the course of that report. He held back all information about his involvement in other criminal activity. These murders occurred during a time when he was in contact with Ms. Woolf, and misleading the court.”
Officer Woolf’s testimony would establish Andrew Webb as a violent, dangerous liar. Judge Steiner wanted to know how Murdach and Ladenburg planned to get this information before the jury. “Because Andrew Webb is not on the stand,” he inquired, “are you going to ask her about his believability or credibility based on the statements he made to her, whether or not those were lies?”
“Right,” replied Ladenburg.
“Wrong,” objected Hultman. “That’s not the way opinion evidence is admitted in this state. Specific instances of fabrication are specifically not admissible in this state. There’s no rule of evidence that would permit that admission.”
Judge Steiner, however, saw the dog-door-sized loophole through which Murdach and Ladenburg were pushing their argument. If this evidence concerned Andrew Webb’s motive or intent in hiding the material facts, then it was admissible. “Is that where we are going here?”
That was exactly where the defense was going. Ladenburg explained, “Mr. Webb admitted having assaulted the victim, and admitted that he slapped the victim, but denied sticking the rifle barrel into Shane’s mouth. That incident was witnessed by a police officer. Webb later denied that to the police, and lied to the police. I think that’s important to show he was not truthful in his first case and that he lied.” Ladenburg offered Officer Bahr’s police report to Steiner as validation of Webb’s dishonesty.
“In addition,” continued Ladenburg, “Mr. Webb denied all use of drugs and narcotics to Officer Woolf. On the date of Achord’s murder, prior to his interview with Officer Woolf, Andrew Webb states that he was using LSD. If Mr. Webb would take the stand, I would ask him, ‘Did you tell your probation officer that you didn’t use drugs during this period?’ He would say yes or no. Then I would be able to show Gerri Woolf and say that he lied about that. He did tell his probation officer he was using drugs, and in fact, he told the police during the statement that he was using LSD.”
The judge could see the relationship to the present incident, and the loophole became larger. “In addition to that,” Ladenburg said, “the history of Andrew Webb is extremely violent. I think we have the right to portray him as he actually is, and to show how spontaneous his violence is and how heinous the acts are.”
Steiner thought it over, and despite the possibility of some “shaky ground,” he decided to permit Officer Woolf to testify about Andrew Webb’s truthfulness or lying, based upon her investigation, “particularly those that are related to this crime,” he said. “I think the question is whether she can, on the basis of her investigation, render an opinion about whether or not he was truthful with her. I think that’s a valid question. Bring in the jury.”
“ ‘You motherfucker,’ ” said Officer Woolf, reading aloud from the police report, “ ‘tell me where the guns are or I’ll blow your fucking head off.’ ” She confirmed that Andrew Webb denied, despite the eyewitness account of Officer Bahr, that this incident ever took place. She also told jurors that the court sentenced Webb on the assault charges after Damon Wells was killed, but before Andrew Webb was arrested for murder.
“You may step down,” said Steiner to Woolf, then turned toward the waiting witness, Dr. Juan Cordova, a physician and surgeon specializing in pathology. In the previous twenty-five years, Cordova had performed up to 800 autopsies on behalf of the Pierce County coroner. He had also conducted autopsies for hospitals when a patient died while a resident.
David Murdach asked Dr. Cordova if he performed an autopsy on the recovered head of John Achord. “I examined the head,” Cordova explained, “but there was not an autopsy conducted on the head itself.”
After a few preliminary foundation questions, Murdach told Dr. Cordova that there was a debate as to whether John Achord’s death resulted from the gunshot wound or the stab wounds. “Based on your examination of the head, and Mr. Achord’s shirt, do you have any opinion as to what caused death, or are you able to tell?”
“Well, the examination of the head didn’t help me. There is a large pool of blood. There’s a head wound with a bullet. There is no blood on the shirt even after the stabbing, so my assumption is—my conclusion is, that
the wound to the head was fatal, as far as bleeding out.”
On cross-examination, Carl Hultman asked why there was a difference between the witness’s conclusion and that of Dr. Lacsina’s, also a respected and qualified pathologist. “I have the right to disagree with his statement,” commented Dr. Cordova politely, “because it depends on the amount of blood in the person.” A discussion of wounds, hemorrhaging, and the influence of the body’s position on blood seepage, whether the body was faceup or facedown, occupied many more minutes of testimony. Hultman kept trying to maneuver Cordova into revising his conclusion; all such efforts proved ineffectual and were punctuated by numerous objections from almost everyone except the jurors and spectators. Dr. Cordova was finally allowed to step down, and Judge Steiner informed the jury that they would get a four-day break.
“What we have decided to do,” said the judge, “is not have you come in tomorrow or Friday.” The witnesses originally scheduled for Thursday and Friday would be moved to Monday, and the entire trial would wrap up with less strain upon the already weary jurors.
“I wish I had been in the courtroom that next Monday,” Andrew Webb’s ex-wife lamented several years later. “I never knew about the mental tests, diagnoses, explanations, or anything about why my husband was the way he was. Of course, I had been so brainwashed that I thought I was nuts and he was fine. He’s a violent murderer, a wife strangler, and ... Oh, yeah: there’s a rumor that he and Paul St. Pierre might have been one of the Green River Killers.”
This allegation, buttressed by nothing more substantial than speculation and coincidence, offended even Marty Webb. “I thought it was a horrible thing to say about a member of the family,” she said. “This was no secret, whispered rumor. It was blabbed all over to family and friends. Personally, I think it’s a bunch of crap. But as for Paul St. Pierre being a likely suspect, I wouldn’t be surprised.”