As Time Goes By (7 page)

T
he next witness for the state was Paul Hecker, the funeral home director. He testified that he had been called to the Grant residence by Mrs. Betsy Grant, who had informed him that her husband, who had been very ill with Alzheimer's disease, had passed away in his sleep. He said that he had immediately contacted his technical assistant, who picked up the hearse and joined him at the Grant home a short time later.

Hecker testified that Betsy Grant met him at the door and escorted him into Dr. Grant's bedroom. A young Alpine police officer stood just outside the room and nodded to him as he entered.

“Is the person you met and who identified herself as Betsy Grant in the courtroom today?”

“Yes, she is.”

“Would you please point her out.”

“She is seated at the table to my right.”

“Would you describe the demeanor of Betsy Grant at that time?”

“She was courteous, very low-key.”

“Describe what you observed in the bedroom.”

“I observed the deceased lying in the bed. He was wearing pajamas.”

“Did you initially note any indication or sign of injury?”

“No, I did not.”

“What did you do next?”

“I explained to Mrs. Grant that it would be better if she and the caregiver, whose name was Angela Watts, left the bedroom so that my assistant and I could remove the body to the hearse that was parked outside.”

“Did they do so?”

“Yes.”

“Can you describe the demeanor of both women as they left the bedroom?”

“Mrs. Grant quietly walked out. The caregiver was sobbing quite loudly.”

“Did you transport the body to the funeral home?”

“Yes, we did.”

“As of that time did you have any suspicion that there had been any trauma inflicted on Dr. Grant?” the prosecutor asked.

“No, I did not. It appeared that Dr. Grant had died in his sleep.”

“When you had been in his room, had you noticed anything at all that was unusual?”

“I wouldn't use the word ‘unusual.' But I had noticed something out of place, for lack of a better term.”

“And what do you mean by that?”

“Well, I knew of course that Edward Grant was a doctor. On the night table next to his bed, mounted on a granite base, there was an old-fashioned mortar bowl that appeared to be from a mortar-and-pestle set. There was a plate with an inscription on the base. It was inscribed, “Hackensack Hospital, Dr. Edward Grant, Honoree.”

“What did you notice about it?”

“The pestle was missing.”

“Sir, I'm not sure that everyone here knows what a pestle is or what it looks like. Can you please tell us?”

“Apothecaries, who were the early pharmacists, would use a mortar and pestle to grind the drugs they were using. In layman's terms the pestle would be similar in shape to a baseball bat, but only a few inches long. It is a somewhat heavy object, rounded at the top and bottom, but heavier and thicker at the lower end.”

“What kind of material were the mortar and the base that you saw made of?”

“Black marble.”

With both hands the prosecutor then picked up an object that had been on a table behind where he had been sitting. He brought it up to the witness and said, “Sir, I'm showing you what's been marked ‘State's Exhibit 25' for identification. Have you seen this object before?”

“Yes, sir. I have.”

And what is it, sir?

“This appears to be the mortar-and-pestle set, minus the pestle. I note that the inscribed plate refers to Dr. Grant.”

“Is this in the same condition as when you saw it that morning?”

“Exactly the same, sir. The pestle that I noted was missing is still not there.”

“Is it reasonable to assume that the missing pestle was made of the same material?”

“Yes, it normally would be.”

“And heavy enough to be used as a weapon?”

Robert Maynard was on his feet once again. “Objection. Objection.”

“Sustained,” the judge said quickly.

“How much would a pestle from this type of mortar-and-pestle set generally weigh?”

“It is a hard marble object, likely weighing about a pound.”

“So the pestle would ordinarily be lying with the thick end down in the bowl-shaped mortar?”

“That's right. Again, the fact that it wasn't there is what drew my attention.”

“Mr. Hecker,” the prosecutor continued, “did you remove the body of Dr. Edward Grant from his bedroom to your funeral parlor?”

“Yes, I did.”

“When did that take place?”

“Shortly after my arrival.”

“You stated that there was a caregiver on the scene?”

“Yes, I was informed that the caregiver, upon arriving at the house and going into Mr. Grant's bedroom and going over to him, realized he was not breathing. She called 9-1-1.”

“Were you informed that the Alpine police officer on the scene had contacted Dr. Grant's personal physician, who agreed to sign the death certificate?”

“Yes, I was.”

“In your mind, as of that time, was there any suggestion or any indication whatsoever of foul play?”

“No, there was not.”

“What happened after Dr. Grant's body arrived at your funeral parlor?”

“We began our usual procedures to prepare the body for viewing and burial.”

“Did you perform these procedures yourself?”

“Yes, with the assistance of one of my technicians.”

“During this process did you observe anything unusual?”

“Yes.”

“What was it that you observed?”

“The back of Dr. Grant's head was very soft to the touch. It was obvious that he had sustained some type of traumatic injury to that area.”

“At that time did you have any idea about how that type of injury could have occurred?

“I immediately thought of the missing pestle.”

“Given the location and the nature, would it have been possible for Dr. Grant to self-inflict the injury?”

“Absolutely not.”

“What did you do then?”

“I ceased working on Dr. Grant's body and called the medical examiner. He immediately responded that he would call the police and send an ambulance to bring Dr. Grant's body to his facility, the county morgue.”

“What happened next?”

“I understand that an autopsy was performed and two days later the body was returned to my establishment for burial.”

“Thank you, Mr. Hecker. I have no further questions.”

Delaney listened as Robert Maynard asked only one question of this witness.

“Are you in the habit of observing the artifacts in a room when your services are engaged?”

“It is something that I have always done automatically. It is in the nature of my work. When I am removing the deceased, I always closely observe the surrounding physical scene.”

Knowing that he could do absolutely nothing with this witness, Maynard said, “I have no further questions, Your Honor.”

From her seat Delaney looked at Betsy Grant, who appeared surprised that her lawyer had not asked any more questions.

The prosecutor then called Dr. Martin Caruso, the county medical examiner. After summarizing his extensive medical training and explaining that in twenty years as the medical examiner he had conducted thousands of autopsies, he related what he had observed during the autopsy of Dr. Edward Grant. He testified that the deceased's skull had been fractured in four places causing the brain to swell and internal brain bleeding to begin.

“Is there any way Dr. Grant could have fallen and caused that injury to his head?”

“I would say it is almost impossible to have sustained that kind of injury as the result of a fall.”

“Why is that the case?” the prosecutor asked.

“Because if he had fallen and hit his head, the impact of that trauma would have been so severe that he almost certainly would have lost consciousness. And he would not have been able to get back into bed on his own.”

“Dr. Caruso, I represent to you that the evidence in this trial has indicated that a marble pestle, weighing approximately one pound, was missing from the bedroom where Dr. Grant had been sleeping. In your expert medical opinion, was the injury you observed consistent with the victim being struck in the back of the head with this type of object?”

“Yes. The injury I observed could have been caused by a pestle of this size or other similar object. Let me explain. If the victim had been struck by a larger, heavier object, such as a hammer or a baseball bat, there would have been much more severe external injury and substantial bleeding. An injury from a much smaller object, such as a pestle, will cause internal injury to the brain, but often there is no external bleeding.”

“Was there any external bleeding here?”

“No, there was not.”

As the questioning went on, Delaney tried to analyze the reaction of the jury to the testimony they were hearing. She noticed that the eyes of several of them shifted to look at Betsy Grant. Tears were slipping quietly down her cheeks as she absorbed the reality of the blow to her husband's head.

Delaney listened as Robert Maynard asked just a few questions of the medical examiner. It was clear to her that the witness had undoubtedly established that Edward Grant had died from a blow to his head, not the result under any circumstances of an accident.

When questioning of the witness ended, it was nearly one o'clock. Judge Roth turned to the jury and told them that it was time for the lunch recess. “Ladies and gentlemen, we will resume at two fifteen. During this break do not discuss the testimony among yourselves or with anyone else. Have a very pleasant lunch.”

•  •  •

When the proceedings resumed, the prosecutor called Frank Bruno, the lawyer handling Dr. Grant's estate. Approximately sixty years old, with a reserved and serious demeanor, he explained that after the death of Dr. Grant's first wife, their son Alan Grant had been the sole heir to his father's estate. Dr. Grant had revised his will after he married Betsy Ryan, then designating both as equal co-heirs except that the home and its contents would solely remain with Betsy. He had also provided that if he ever became incapacitated, Betsy Grant would have power of attorney to make legal, financial and medical decisions for him.

Under further questioning by the prosecutor, he testified that the current value of the estate, apart from the home and contents, was about fifteen million dollars. He further stated that two non-family members, Angela Watts and Carmen Sanchez, had received bequests in the will. Each was left twenty-five thousand dollars. Bruno did not know if either was aware of her bequest before Dr. Grant died.

Robert Maynard then began cross-examination.

“Mr. Bruno, how old is Alan Grant now?”

“He is thirty-five years old.”

“And would it be fair to say that for various reasons he has had over the last many years severe financial pressures?”

“I would say that that is accurate.”

“And is it fair to say that his father gave him a great deal of financial assistance?”

“Yes, he did.”

“Is it also fair to say that a little over a decade ago his father had become very impatient with his lifestyle?”

“Yes, he had. His only employment was as a commercial photographer, and it was not very steady.”

“Do you know if Betsy Grant expressed an opinion on this scenario?”

“Yes, she did. She felt strongly that his annual gift or allowance should be limited to one hundred thousand dollars a year, which was less than half of what he was used to receiving.”

“Did the doctor make that change?”

“Yes, he did.”

“If you know, what was Alan Grant's reaction?”

“He was furious and barely spoke to his father for months after that.”

“What were his feelings toward Betsy?”

“He blamed her for his father's decision and immensely resented her.”

“Mr. Bruno, you are an expert in estate law. Is that correct?”

“I would certainly hope so after thirty-five years in this practice.”

“If a person is convicted of the intentional killing of another person, can that person inherit from the victim?”

“No, that person may not profit from homicide.”

“So, Mr. Bruno, if Betsy Grant is convicted of murder, Alan Grant becomes the sole heir, is that correct?”

“That is correct.”

Robert Maynard then looked at the jury and half-smiled. “Mr. Bruno, would you just remind us again what Alan Grant would get if Betsy is convicted.”

“He would receive the entire estate, which apart from the home is valued at fifteen million dollars. He would also receive his father's half share in the Alpine home, which is now worth approximately three million dollars. Finally, he would receive all of his father's personal possessions, such as jewelry and clothing.”

“Thank you very much, sir,” Maynard said.

Prosecutor Elliot Holmes stood up. “You Honor, it is now after three o'clock. I know there will be a mid-afternoon break. I request that the state be permitted to call our next witness tomorrow morning.”

“That's fine,” Judge Roth replied. After again cautioning the jurors not to discuss the case and not to read or listen to any newspaper or media coverage, the proceedings ended for the day.