Deadly Seduction (30 page)

Even Wil Siders admitted after the hearing, “If there was any mistake and if anyone made one it should be looked at very carefully.” But he, along with all the other law officers involved in the case, had no intention of raking over old ground. Privately, Siders was a very relieved man. He knew that Susan probably would have got away with murdering her husband if she had not told anyone about what she had done. The moment she confided in her sister Darlene, her fate was sealed.

Jimmy Grund’s father, James A. Grund, was quietly happy about the verdict, although nothing was going to bring back his son. However, the wily old lawyer did make one very significant comment: “We did the best job we could for him to avenge his murder.” For revenge was a very clear motive in the two trials of Susan Grund.

James Grund decided there and then that whatever happened, the eternal flame burning over his son’s grave would remain burning forever as a lasting tribute to one of the county’s finest citizens—Jimmy Grund.

Nineteen

Following the trial, local journalists were promised that Susan would hold a press conference. The Grund family were horrified by any such plan as they did not want Susan to get any more coverage for her crime. Then the press conference got mysteriously cancelled. Some reporters believed the Grund family managed to put a halt to the plan, while others reckoned that Susan was advised by her attorney not to speak publicly for fear it might not help her when it came to her sentencing hearing the following month.

Many local people and journalists remain convinced that the key to the case lay with Susan’s claims of an affair with her stepson, David Grund. Many insisted there was a relationship and numerous Peru citizens had been hoping that a press conference by Susan might help clear the air.

“Some of what she said was pretty convincing. David was a shaky sort,” commented the
Peru Daily Tribune
’s young star reporter, Andy Pierce. “The way Susan described them being in bed together, hearing Jimmy in the garage coming in, the bed being messed up. It was believable. He was a good looking kid.”

Naturally, journalists were also keen to interview David Grund. But he remained as tight-lipped as ever, under strict family instructions not to talk to anyone publicly about the case.

Some locals pointed out that the
Peru Daily Tribune
had definite ties to the Grund family. The President of the corporation which owned the newspaper lived near Jimmy and Susan, on Summit Drive.

Reporter Andy Pierce also noted that he was instructed not to lean on the Grund family. “I was always told to give the family as much room as possible and we were not to approach them except at the end of the trial for a brief comment.”

The following day, the local radio station was swamped with requests for songs with titles that bore some relation to the conviction. The tracks chosen included, “Devil Woman,” “Run Around Sue,” “Poison Ivy,” “Working on the Chain Gang,” “Evil Woman,” “Indiana Wants Me,” “Take these Chains from my Heart,” “Rescue Me,” “Money Can’t Buy Me Love,” and so on. Every time one came on a cheer could be heard in some corner or other of Peru.

*   *   *

Susan’s attorney Charlie Scruggs faced a barrage of criticism from his client following his decision not to allow her to talk about her alleged affair with David at the second trial.

But Scruggs genuinely believed the prosecution would have so many other lovers of Susan’s on standby that reference to her alleged affair with her stepson would weaken his defense, rather than strengthen it. He has never been able to fathom whether the relationship occurred or not, “only David and Susan know the truth.”

After the case, David Grund was rarely seen in Peru. He and girlfriend Suzanne moved up to Michigan where David was attending a local law school.

*   *   *

Susan’s friend Mary Heltzel got a letter from Susan on March 24, 1994. She was still in the Miami County Jail awaiting sentencing at the time.

Susan wrote, “The shock is wearing off and the realization of the verdict is sinking in. I will never understand how Mother and Darlene can live with themselves. But knowing Darlene she will.”

Susan clearly intended to appeal the verdict and fight on. She went on, “Jim is my husband and he would never approve of what his family did or what has happened to me or our children. The Grunds know this too. He is not resting in peace and I will fight because he would have.”

Susan seemed angry about Charlie Scruggs’s representation of her.

Her seething anger about Darlene and her mother had grown even stronger over the months. “I don’t know how they can live with themselves.”

Susan then revealed that she planned on going to school once she got to the state prison because school helps to reduce your sentence. “But we are still praying for a miracle,” she wrote.

Less than two weeks later, another letter showed up at Mary’s home. This time, Susan mentioned school again, obviously it was becoming a real obsession for her. She was also looking forward to being allowed to wear her own clothes in state prison.

In reference to a male relative of Mary’s who had just been imprisoned, Susan wrote, “Men’s prison is nothing like women’s. But women’s is bad enough.”

*   *   *

On April 15, 1994, Susan appeared in court once again to hear her sentence passed for murdering her husband, Jimmy Grund. As she sat in the Miami County Courthouse where pictures of her husband’s grandfather, Circuit Judge Hurd J. Hurst, and his uncle, fellow Circuit Judge Frank Dice, hung from the walls, she knew that her battle was over.

This time Susan did not testify on her own behalf. Charlie Scruggs advised her not to say anything because it might make the judge even harsher on her when it came to sentencing.

Special Judge Surbeck of nearby Allen County did not pull any punches when he described Susan as cold and calculating. He also made a point of mentioning that during her second trial the jury convicted her quickly, implying that was significant evidence in regard to her guilt.

“You have to have calmly, coldly and calculatedly carried it out and then returned to your children,” Surbeck told Susan in front of a hushed courtroom. “There is also premeditation there because you either stole the gun or had it stolen from, of all people, the victim’s son.”

Judge Surbeck insisted there were no mitigating circumstances, and that a number of aggravating circumstances had led him to decide on the harshest sentence possible. The most relevant event of all was the no-contest plea Susan made in 1983 in Oklahoma, following those awful child battery accusations.

Then photographs of her bruised, bloodied and severely sunburned stepson, Tommy Whited, appeared on a slide projector screen in the Miami County Court. The packed room gasped in horror.

Oklahoma City Police Det. J. M. Einhorn took the stand and glanced coldly across at the woman he last met as she tried to defend her actions in beating a child close to death more than ten years earlier. He then explained to the court quietly, “The only way Tommy can eat now is through a hole in his stomach.”

Susan’s attorney Charlie Scruggs valiantly attempted to water down the impact of Susan’s child battery case by having ten witnesses appear on her behalf before sentencing. Most of them were only on the stand for about a minute each and many of them spoke of her good work for the Miami County 4-H Fair.

But those words were soon forgotten when the Grund family got their say. All six family members told the court they wanted Susan to get the maximum sentence. Emotion-filled testimony about Jimmy Grund’s links with the law and the town of Peru made it sound more like a public obituary than a sentencing in a court of law.

There was much talk about Susan possibly selling her story to the media and the Grunds had something to say about that subject as well. They insisted she should not profit from the murder of Jimmy Grund.

Prosecutor Wil Siders—friend and colleague of the Grunds for more than twenty years—made a point of commenting, “The value of her story went down immensely after she was found guilty. One would presume that she told the truth on the stand so if she tried to sell a different story, who would believe it?” There was an understandable amount of glee in his voice.

Members of the Grund family also related conflicts and lies attributed to Susan Grund and requested the maximum sentence. Their feelings were expressed in person and by handwritten notes addressed to “Dear Judge Surbeck.”

David Grund—the young man whom some in Peru still believe to this day had a sexual liaison with his stepmother—tearfully stated that Susan “does not deserve to live. But since the law does not allow the death penalty, we cannot afford to not give her the maximum penalty.”

The Judge responded by telling the court that Susan’s criminal history showed a refusal to conform to society’s rules and a propensity for violence. He even predicted rather gloomily that “the likelihood of rehabilitation is slim.”

He awarded the standard sentence of forty years with an additional twenty years for aggravating circumstances. Susan was also fined $10,000, the maximum allowed by law. It seemed strange to those present that she should face a cash penalty. It was almost as straightforward as a parking violation ticket.

Immediately after the sentencing, Susan was transported to the women’s prison in Indianapolis by the Miami County Sheriff’s Department. She had served 529 days since her arrest on November 3, 1992, and would not be eligible for parole until the year 2024, by which time she will be in her midsixties.

Peru’s upper-class citizens were delighted by the sentence and decided to celebrate Susan’s imprisonment in style. Dozens of local dignitaries attended a celebration party at Shanty Malone’s that same evening.

Jimmy Grund’s rich and influential friends even had a T-shirt specially printed up to commemorate Susan the murderer. Oklahoma City Det. J. M. Einhorn—who had brought Susan to trial on those child battery charges—had never seen anything like it before in his life. The whole town seemed to be partying.

The T-shirts were strictly limited edition. Wil Siders kept one. Gary Nichols gave his to Einhorn. They were grey in color and they featured a cartoon about the sentencing. None of the investigators would produce one for anyone to see, so the contents remain a secret to this day.

The party at Shanty Malone’s was quite a wild affair by all accounts. Jimmy Grund’s elderly mother Connie got so merry she ended up dancing on the bar. Jim Grund’s great friend Sgt. Gary Nichols even managed to pat her rear end in the process. Judge Surbeck and his attractive wife joined in the spirit of the occasion and everyone held nonstop toasts to various investigators involved in the case.

Wil Siders held one very private toast in the corner of Shanty Malone’s that night. For he believed there was one unsung hero in this entire saga—Susan’s sister, Darlene. It would have been easy for her to sit back and say nothing about what her sister had told her. But she came forward and contributed more than any other individual to her sister’s arrest. Siders held a silent tribute to Darlene. Without her, he would never have got that conviction.

*   *   *

Shortly after the end of the second trial, Susan’s defense attorney Charlie Scruggs announced he would not be representing her in any appeal she planned to make against her conviction.

Scruggs insisted that his client had, in his opinion, received a fair trial, and he did not feel he could go any further with her case. Scruggs also pointed out that virtually every murder conviction gets appealed by the defendant.

An appeal by Susan would not automatically guarantee her a new trial, but it would allow the Indiana Supreme Court to examine court records to see if any legal errors were made that pointed toward an unfair trial.

But Charlie Scruggs made a damning indictment of her case by saying, “I think she got a fair trial. I don’t think any mistakes were made and I don’t think an appeal would be successful. I felt Susan received the due process of law and a fair trial. She will have to live with the verdict and suffer the consequences of that.”

What Charlie Scruggs did not make a point of mentioning was that although he received payment for his services during the first trial, he did not receive a penny for his work on the second hearing.

Susan eventually hired a deputy state public defender called David Freund to handle her appeal. At the time of writing, Freund had just received an extension for the appellate brief.

After sentencing, Susan was given a thirty-day period of no contact while adjusting to her new home at the Indiana Women’s Prison, near Indianapolis. She was all alone and away from Peru for the first time since her arrest.

*   *   *

Mary Heltzel received a letter from Susan after her sentencing. This time the envelope had Susan’s impressive personalized name and address on a gold sticker. It was only possible to tell it was from a prison by the initials “I.W.P.” on the address tag.

Susan had sent an expensive Christmas card with a carefully typed note to Mary and her family. The card was signed, “Sending you my very best for the holiday season, Much Love, Susan.”

Intriguingly, the enclosed note was clearly a copy of something Susan had sent to all her friends and family with a seasonal greeting card.

Susan’s studies in criminal justice in prison were going well. Her health had improved with the exception of a few minor setbacks. She continued enjoying singing in the jail choir and regularly appeared in Christmas concerts. Susan’s weekly Bible study classes were also going very well. She also completed all three parts of a correspondence Bible study course.

Susan was in many ways thriving on prison life. She taught other inmates makeup and beauty tips and she commanded a certain level of respect through her alleged crimes, which had elevated her to the status of a star prisoner. Her obsession with religion continued and she wrote to her friend Mary, “I may not be able to move the mountains but my faith in GOD and HIS ability to move the mountains will reach HIM through prayers. I hope that you pray for the grave concerns and needs as we can all use all the prayers to see us through.”