Head Shot (27 page)

Read Head Shot Online

Authors: Burl Barer

BOOK: Head Shot
8.81Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
Having made that fact perfectly clear, Ladenburg had no further questions; Hultman had only one in cross-examination; then Judge Steiner asked, “Mr. Murdach, because you're a witness, do you wish Mr. Ladenburg to ask you your questions, or do you wish to ask yourself any questions?”
“I would like to ask myself a couple more questions that are pertinent to Paul St. Pierre,” said Murdach. Hultman objected, was overruled, and Murdach read aloud from his notes. “ ‘Mr. Webb said that Paul and Cory were high on acid, that there was an eight-foot circle of blood on the floor, that Paul showed him a piece of metal, and it looked like self-defense. He said that you don't see things right when you are high on acid. Paul sees the metal and it scared him. Paul misunderstood and shot him.' That's all I have,” said Murdach. Ladenburg said that he didn't have any other questions, and Carl Hultman had no further questions, either. Murdach left the witness stand and returned to the defense table. Carl Hultman sighed with resignation. He knew what was coming.
“I call Mr. Carl Hultman to the stand,” said Ladenburg. He retained his serious decorum despite deriving a measure of professional pleasure in the irony of the prosecuting attorney testifying for the defense. Hultman didn't bother objecting. He walked over, sat down, was duly sworn, and prepared to answer honestly the questions posed by John Ladenburg on behalf of Christopher St. Pierre.
 
 
Ladenburg asked, “Is it correct that Mr. Webb told you that there were inaccuracies in his statement given to the police in July of 1984?” Hultman agreed, and when asked for a sample inaccuracy, he acknowledged that Andrew Webb said that Chris and Paul St. Pierre really didn't stab Damon Wells. Webb took full responsibility for the knife wounds. That was all Ladenburg wanted from Hultman, and the prosecutor had no questions for himself.
Christopher St. Pierre was not obligated to say a word. To differentiate his client from the uncooperative Mr. Webb, and to demonstrate Chris St. Pierre's attitude of full disclosure, John Ladenburg called him to the witness stand. Glancing nervously at the twelve people who could send him to the gallows, Christopher St. Pierre swore to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
“I was really drunk,” admitted Chris St. Pierre about the night Damon Wells was murdered. “Me and Andrew had been drinking at the tavern even before we got to the house. We had four cases of beer and we had been drinking for a period of maybe a half hour. I found Paul and Damon in the bathroom, arguing. Paul started hitting Damon. I was drunk and being rowdy; I started hitting him, too. Then Andrew came in and started hitting Damon, really beating him up bad. He was hitting and kicking him.”
Ladenburg's questions led Christopher St. Pierre through the evening's events in chronological order, faithfully following the precise structure and content of his sworn statement to the Tacoma Police. He told the jury how Andrew Webb chased Wells at Salmon Beach, tackled him, and slit his throat. When Damon Wells stopped breathing, Webb threw the knife into Damon Wells's back, removed it, and threw it again.
Questioned about discovering John Achord on the dining room floor, Paul St. Pierre standing over the bloody body, brandishing his .45, Christopher answered in clear detail. “I went into shock. I started saying to Paul, ‘What the hell are you doing? What the hell is going on?' I just asked him that over and over again. I was shouting it at him,” added Chris, explaining that the
Rambo
movie
First Blood
was blaring loudly from the television. Andrew Webb was shouting as well, said Chris St. Pierre. “ ‘Goddamn it, Paul. I can't believe this,' ” yelled Andrew Webb. “ ‘I'm already facing twenty years. I killed one guy, and now you kill this guy. I can't believe this.' ”
“When you saw Mr. Achord,” asked Ladenburg, “did it appear to you that he was alive?” The witness answered in the negative. “Did he make any breathing sounds or did he make any movements?” Again, St. Pierre said he heard and saw no signs of life from John Achord. “When you asked Paul what he was doing, what did he say?” Chris testified that Paul said that Achord had come at him with a knife, or threatened him in some manner. “Paul pulled out his gun and told him to cool out, but the guy wouldn't. The guy just came at him or something and then Paul shot him.”
Ladenburg asked if Chris St. Pierre saw any knife in the room, or anything that Achord could have had as a weapon. “Yes, on the floor was a single-bladed folding pocketknife, brown handle, about eight inches long, opened.”
“Bullshit! Bullshit! Bullshit!” The jury's attention quickly shifted from the witness stand to the spectator gallery. Larry Achord, the victim's brother, stood spewing a torrent of outrage and insults toward Chris St. Pierre. Achord's outburst was accompanied by additional derisive remarks and insults spontaneously offered by Achord's friends and relatives.
“Officer Dillon,” said the judge sternly, “take the gentleman out, please.” The upset sibling of the deceased was immediately escorted from the Pierce County courtroom by uniformed security.
Aggravated, Judge Gary Steiner requested the jury to step out for a minute. This incident resonated with import and implications far beyond merely altering the courtroom's staid and officious atmosphere. There are laws, precedents, and policies regarding outburst in the courtroom. Steiner knew those laws, precedents, and policies. So did John Ladenburg. “We move for a mistrial on the basis of misconduct of a spectator in the courtroom,” said Ladenburg. Judge Steiner wasn't surprised.
“The jury heard all of this,” said Ladenburg. “All of the jurors looked in the direction of the spectators. It was a direct comment on Mr. St. Pierre's testimony by people whom we are not allowed to cross-examine, and who are not participants in the case, and who are not witnesses to the crime scene or anything else.”
“I think it obviously directly influences the jury's opinion of Mr. St. Pierre's testimony. It's a very unfortunate incident, but one we can do nothing about at this point, and it's certainly going to influence the jury's opinion.”
Steiner's exemplary courtroom courtesy and decorum now began to show aggravation and displeasure leading to dramatically expressed anger from the bench. “I'm going to have to invoke powers of contempt to put people in jail if this conduct continues! Aside from the jury question,” snapped Steiner, aiming his justifiable ire at spectators who augmented Larry Achord's outburst with impolite remarks of their own. “You're destroying the efficacy of this trial, and all the money associated with it! The gallery is instructed not to make any kind of commotion, not to demonstrate emotion, not to say anything during the progress of the trial!”
Ladenburg demanding a mistrial because one spectator yelled “Bullshit” was not an extreme response. In truth, he was no more eager to start the trial all over again than Hultman or Steiner. Had he not moved for a mistrial, however, he could have been open to charges of ineffective counsel. “I don't want to try this case over again, but I don't want my client convicted on the basis of statements made by spectators. This isn't a three-ring circus. I think the court has no choice now but to grant a mistrial.”
David Murdach spoke up, saying, “We would join in the motion and simply repeat that at the beginning of this case there were obviously problems with the spectator gallery with respect to certain comments being made.”
Carl Hultman acknowledged the sensitivity of the situation, and asked the court to not declare a mistrial. “The court can cure this problem, and it is a problem. I think the individual that was escorted out of the courtroom is one of the deceased's brothers. It's understandable, it's human, and it's regrettable, but I think the court can cure it by an instruction.” Hultman proposed that the judge simply tell the jurors to disregard the outburst.
“The motion for a mistrial is denied,” said Judge Steiner. A new instruction for the present jury, he decided, was preferable to a future trial with a new jury.
John Ladenburg discerned something peculiar about Achord's sudden outpouring of disruptive anger. Upon reflection, he realized that there was nothing new, unexpected, or surprising about Chris St. Pierre's testimony that could spark spontaneous, unrehearsed outrage.
“I think the comments just made in the courtroom were intentional,” admitted Ladenburg, the idea becoming more solidified as he spoke. “In fact, I can see no other way around. The evidence that Mr. St. Pierre said he ‘saw a knife' has been in his statement, in the police report, and has been referred to in this courtroom in numerous hearings a number of times over this last year. This isn't anything that just suddenly surprised everyone. The Achords and all of their family have been involved in every hearing that I can remember since the start of this case. What happened was an intentional attempt to influence the jury and to make comment on Mr. St. Pierre's testimony.”
David Murdach silently considered whether or not he should make the court aware of another troublesome attempt to influence proceedings—threats against his own life.
Eighteen
“They have been mumbling in the background that they are going to get me,” David Murdach revealed to Judge Gary Steiner the following morning. “I would like some testimony taken from these people as to what has been going on... .”
Judge Steiner had no intention of taking testimony from the spectators, but every intention of taking the spectators to task. “If there is any outbursts, whether it be vocal or it be visual, [it] will result in personal penalty from the court to the person who is doing so,” he dramatically announced. “There should be no discussion in the audience, no veiled threats, no gestures, no facial expressions. The conduct of this trial is one the administration of which is justice, and I won't permit it. If anybody violates the order, they will first be excused from the court for the balance of the trial. The other option is to clear the courtroom entirely. The third thing is personal penalty, including contempt and jail.
“If there is a mistrial resulting, the cost of the mistrial will be directed to the person causing the mistrial,” he said, echoing the words of Judge Thomas Sauriol. “The cost of this trial is well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Bring on the jury so I can instruct them.
“Good morning, ladies and gentlemen,” Steiner said. “The outburst by the spectator had nothing to do with the trial. You should not allow any outside influence to interfere with your decision. It is your duty to try the case solely upon the evidence heard from the witness stand and the exhibits admitted into evidence and under the law as given to you by the court.”
John Ladenburg resumed his direct examination of Christopher St. Pierre exactly where he had left off. “When you entered the house, what did you see?” The witness recounted the same essential testimony as he did prior to the previous day's outburst. Ladenburg then asked for details about his interaction with Mark Perez.
“I went into Mark Perez's room. He was just waking up. He sat up in bed and was squinting his eyes, clearing his eyes. I started to ask him if he heard anything and started just telling him to stay in his room and not come out because I didn't want him to get involved in this or see what was going on. I was in there for a short thirty seconds. Andrew Webb came in and he started saying the same type of things to Mark, ‘Just stay in your room; don't come out; you don't want to see what's going on.' Then Paul came up to Mark Perez's door and said something, but I don't remember what he said. Andrew told him to leave.
“We went back into the living room, into the dining room area,” testified Chris St. Pierre. “Paul was there. He was starting to cut the carpet up around the body and folding it up over the body. We helped him roll the body up and finish cutting up the other side of the carpet.”
“At that time,” asked Ladenburg, “did you see any knife wounds in Mr. Achord, and if you had seen knife wounds, would you have told the police about it on the nineteenth of June when you made your statement to them?”
Chris St. Pierre assured him that he most certainly would have told the police about knife wounds had he known about them. After all, he led the police to the body. If he knew there were knife wounds, he would also know those wounds would be revealed once the body was recovered.
“After we rolled up the body in the carpet, Paul, Andrew, and I carried it out to Andrew's car,” he said, continuing his testimony. “We placed it in the backseat. We were going to go bury the body, you know.”
Ladenburg knew the story all too well, and all the different versions. The defense strategy was direct and clearly supported. Chris was the “cooperative defendant”—he helped the police, directed them to evidence and the bodies, and told them everything he knew. Andrew Webb, whose plea-bargain statement was the only “evidence” loosely linking Chris St. Pierre to the killing of John Achord, was the “unco-operative defendant.” He was the unreliable opposite of Chris St. Pierre. He refused to testify, admitted his statement was false, and took full responsibility for the murder of Damon Wells. Paul St. Pierre was the “insane defendant”—the one for whom murder was an accomplishment worth bragging about, and everyone else was perceived as a possible enemy, potential victim, or both.
Chris St. Pierre's testimony, Ladenburg reasoned, would demonstrate his willingness and honesty, differentiate him from the unwilling and dishonest Andrew Webb, and definitely raise reasonable doubt about the prosecution's charge of aggravated first-degree murder. The entire “aggravated” aspect of the charge revolved around Andrew Webb's assertion that Chris St. Pierre encouraged his brother to kill Achord to cover up the Wells homicide. Chris testified that he thought John Achord was dead from the .45 head shot, he never heard Achord breathing, never saw him move, was convinced that Paul had killed him with the .45, and that Andrew Webb never once suggested calling the police or ambulance.
“Andrew said that you told him that the police should not be called because Paul was high on acid and the police would not believe him,” said Murdach, “and that you said that if the police came snooping around they might find out about Damon Wells. Did you ever say that?”
“No, I never heard anything like that,” responded Chris St. Pierre. When Webb's latest revised version was recounted, the narrative in which Chris's comments about covering up the Wells murder took place the next day, St. Pierre said even that was untrue. “As a matter of fact, if Andrew said it was the next day, that's impossible because I didn't see Andrew for three days afterward. Paul and Andrew were working together at the bakery, they might have had some discussion like that, but nothing like that was ever said in my presence.”
David Murdach began his cross-examination asking for clarification about the genesis of the decapitation concept, an idea originated by Tony Youso. “The next day, Paul was discussing what had happened with Tony Youso. Paul was still concerned about the bullet being in the man's head. Tony Youso suggested that he remove the head. Once Paul got the idea into his head himself, he said, ‘Yeah, I better do it, I guess.' At that time, Paul gave Tony and I some money and told him to go get some cement and stuff.”
Murdach wanted one more point made clear to the jury, and he asked the question with practiced precision. “From your testimony, I understand you to say that you do not recall any conversation whatsoever about any discussion about calling the police?”
St. Pierre answered, “No.”
“Is that because,” asked Murdach, “you didn't hear it? Were you present during the entire time that Andrew and Paul were together by the body of John Achord?” Chris St. Pierre had already testified that he went into Mark Perez's room, but Murdach wanted to make sure the jury had it drilled into their heads so they would never forget it.
“So I understand what you said,” restated Murdach, “you left the room for a period of time and if there was a conversation between Paul and Andrew, you were not in their presence?”
“I was not in their presence,” confirmed Chris St. Pierre. Murdach had no further questions, but prosecutor Carl Hultman had plenty of questions designed to elicit testimony that would hopefully reveal Christopher St. Pierre as a disgusting, repellent, heartless murderer. He wanted to paint him as a man devoid of compassion, who willingly participated in the kidnapping and killing of Damon Wells, concealed the crime, encouraged the murder of John Achord, participated in the gruesome decapitation of Achord's corpse, concealed those crimes as well, and only revealed information after he was in police custody.
“Chris, I believe you said that there wasn't any conversation that you ever heard about being concerned about the police finding out about Damon Wells's murder,” said Hultman. Again, St. Pierre stated that he never heard such a conversation. “But you were afraid of being found out, weren't you?”
“If I was so afraid of being found out, I wouldn't have gone and told the police everything like I did,” replied St. Pierre strongly. It was then that Hultman moved in. “In your statement, you say that Detective Price came by your house three weeks after Damon's death. You knew the police understood and realized that your house was the last place Damon was seen alive. You knew that, didn't you?” The witness agreed.
“So you knew sometime in March of 1984, two months before John Achord was killed, that the police knew Damon Wells had not been seen alive since he came to your house. Therefore, you people would be logical suspects. You knew that, didn't you? Detective Price came to your house and asked about Damon Wells. You lied to him about that, didn't you? That's because you were afraid of being found out, isn't it?”
“I was afraid,” admitted St. Pierre. “I was afraid that if I told what Andrew had done and stuff, if he could get at me, he would kill me.” Hultman questioned if that was the only source of St. Pierre's fear, asking if he felt guilty about what he had done. “I didn't feel guilty of murder; I didn't kill anybody,” responded St. Pierre.
Carl Hultman elicited testimony concerning the witness's previous murder conviction in the Wells trial, his life sentence plus an additional thirty years for the kidnapping and assault. “That's the kidnapping you say was a voluntary trip by Damon Wells, is that correct? Do you want to think about it for a minute? Are you sure that's what it was? A voluntary trip? Damon went voluntarily with you and your brother and Andrew Webb?”
“Yes,” said Christopher St. Pierre.
“The jury didn't believe you last time,” said Hultman with a hint of sarcasm, “did they?” Both defense counsels voiced objections sustained by Judge Steiner. David Murdach then asked that the jury be excused. Once the jurors went out, Murdach went ballistic. “This is prosecutorial misconduct,” he said vehemently. “The jury should be admonished to disregard that last question and admonished to disregard any comments further along this line.”
The reason for Murdach's outrage was that Carl Hultman was trying to get Chris St. Pierre to mention that he didn't take the stand in his own behalf during the Wells trial. “The prosecutor knows that neither Paul nor Chris testified in the previous trial. This is nothing more than an attempt to get into evidence that Christopher St. Pierre didn't take the stand.”
“He exercised his Fifth Amendment privilege,” added John Ladenburg. “The case is presently on appeal. If it is retried, he may exercise that privilege again. I don't think the prosecutor should be allowed to do this.”
The judge agreed; the jury would be instructed to disregard the question. Hultman then told the court that he intended to ask the same question again, except change the wording slightly.
“I move for a mistrial,” said Murdach.
“Your motion is denied,” said Steiner. “Bring in the jury.”
Carl Hultman asked for a brief delay. He wanted another intended line of questioning approved. “I intend to ask him to describe Damon Wells's physical size inasmuch as he's asserted that Damon went voluntarily. I think his size, relative to Andrew Webb and the St. Pierre brothers, is a matter which relates to a question of how anybody would believe his claim that Damon went voluntarily. I think that's an absurd statement! I think the jury is entitled to know that Damon Wells was very, very small—five feet tall and [about] one hundred five pounds. We are looking at the witness's credibility, and I think the jury is entitled to examine his credibility on this matter.”
Judge Steiner ruled otherwise. “The fact of the conviction of kidnapping speaks for itself. You are retrying the first case.” The prosecutor argued that the witness was not testifying honestly or accurately. “I don't think it is relevant at all,” said Steiner. The jurors returned, and he advised them to disregard the previous question and the answer.
Hultman, however, refused to abandon the Wells incident. He continued questioning Chris St. Pierre about his violent contributions to Damon Wells's final hours. “Yes” was the reply, again and again, as the prosecutor asked, “Did you beat Damon Wells in the bathroom? Did you beat him again in the car? Did you beat him still more at the beach?”
And finally: “Did you think there was anything wrong with what happened to Damon Wells?” The only answer was affirmative, giving Hultman the opening he was waiting for. “Then why did you stand there for five to ten minutes waiting for him to bleed to death?”
“What was I supposed to do? Was I supposed to run off yelling for help? What was I supposed to do? I stood there in shock,” said St. Pierre. “There was nothing I could do.”
“Except hide the evidence of the crime?”
“That's true,” admitted St. Pierre. “I did participate in covering up the evidence.” Hultman asked about building a fire and burning their clothes. “I didn't do that. I didn't burn my clothes. I did burn my boots.” The prosecutor selected a particularly disturbing portion of Christopher St. Pierre's original sworn statement, and read it aloud: “ ‘We took showers to wash away the blood.' ”
“Is that right?” asked Hultman. “Did you shower to wash away the blood?”
“I didn't have to take a shower,” St. Pierre said. “I could have just washed my hands. I had some blood on my hands.” The witness's remark, a simple statement of physical fact, was too similar to an expression indicating undeniable guilt for Hultman to resist.

Other books

Beyond Jealousy by Kit Rocha
Shifting by Rachel D'Aigle
Axis of Aaron by Johnny B. Truant and Sean Platt
A Spring Betrayal by Tom Callaghan
The Copper Frame by Ellery Queen
Cat to the Dogs by Shirley Rousseau Murphy
Little Tease by Amy Valenti
Chasing Orion by Kathryn Lasky