Head Shot (28 page)
Authors: Burl Barer
“Did you have ... blood on your hands?” he asked slowly. St. Pierre answered yes. “Interesting comment,” Hultman murmured. Murdach instantly objected.
“Objection sustained,” ruled the judge. “That remark will be stricken. The jury is instructed to disregard it.”
Instructing a jury to disregard a remark is often the same as asking them to not think about green elephants. Once the remark is made, or the question asked, the impression has been made. Lawyers, of course, know this. It is precisely for this reason that they often risk a sustained objectionâthey know that it is impossible to disregard 100 percent a remark that one is told to disregard.
With tension and temperature rising in the Pierce County courtroom, the prosecution questioned Chris St. Pierre's firm assertion that he never saw Paul St. Pierre stab John Achord, nor did he notice the wounds. “When you came into the room, you walked by the body; I assume you looked at it?” asked Carl Hultman.
“I tried not to, but I looked at it. I just went into shock, like it was unbelievable. I mean, you leave the house for a half hour or something and come back and there's a guy lying on the floor here, shot in the head, blood all over the place.”
Christopher St. Pierre held steadfast in his claim that he was out of the room, speaking with Mark Perez, when Paul St. Pierre stabbed John Achord. “The first I knew of the stab wounds at all was after the autopsy was performed,” he repeatedly said. “That's when I first heard about the stab wounds; I never saw Paul stab him; I never saw the wounds.”
“That stabbing would have had to have happened in that thirty seconds when you were in Mark Perez's room, all twelve stab wounds would had to have happened in that thirty seconds that were outside your presence, wouldn't it?”
“I never saw it happen; I never heard it happen! When I came back into the room, Paul was already cutting the carpet up around the body. I had a pretty good idea what he was going to do with the body, what he wanted to do with the body.”
It was the state's contention that Chris St. Pierre encouraged the murder of John Achord to conceal the murder of Damon Wells. Hence, Carl Hultman continually linked the two events during his cross-examination. “Why didn't you call the police? Is it because you were afraid that they wouldn't believe Paul because he was high on acid?”
“I didn't care if they believed Paul or not. I wasn't the one who shot the guy,” St. Pierre replied. He acknowledged that the police were not called. This was the introduction Carl Hultman wanted to trigger his next barrage of interrelated questions. “On the night John Achord was killed, the police didn't know where Damon's body was, did they? They didn't know anything about it yet, did they? They didn't know your actual involvement or what anybody had done to Damon Wells, did they?” Each question was answered negatively. “You didn't want them to know about it, did you?”
“I came forward and told that stuff had gone too far,” said Chris St. Pierre. “It had to be stopped!”
“Nobody is disagreeing with that,” Hultman said, and delivered the remark as if it were a punch line. He cast a glance at John Ladenburg and perceived the defense counsel's preobjection body language. The unspoken was easily deciphered and just as easily ignored. Carl Hultman would abandon this line of questioning only by court ruling.
“What we are talking about is your state of mind when John Achord was murdered,” explained Hultman to St. Pierre. “You were afraid about being found out about Damon Wells; that's why he was murdered, too, isn't it?”
Ladenburg's anticipated objection found voice before his client could answer. “I think this is the fourth time this question has been asked. I don't see any point in Mr. Hultman continuing to ask the same question over and over again in this trial.”
“I'm trying to get at the truth, Your Honor,” pleaded Hultman. The judge permitted the prosecutor to continue.
“That's why he was murdered, isn't it?” reiterated Hultman. “So the police would not find out about Damon Wells, isn't that true?”
“I don't know why Paul killed him,” said St. Pierre. “You'll have to ask him. I don't know what transpired. I wasn't there. I can't tell you.”
What St. Pierre could tell and confirm under oath was that at no time after discovering the body of John Achord did he even consider calling the police. Despite numerous opportunities to distance himself from the murder and burial, he fully participated in every aspect of the transporting of the body, the burial, preparation for the decapitation, and the delivery of Achord's severed head to the Puyallup River Bridge.
“When the decision was made to decapitate John Achord's body, you went and got the cement with Youso. Who made you do that?”
“Paul told me to do it, and I was just listening to him,” answered Chris St. Pierre, admitting that while he could have gone to the police, he went instead to help his brother remove John Achord's head. “Paul dug the body up. I helped him get the body out of the grave. Then I went back and got the bucket and cement, mixed up some cement. Paul went back into the brush. I was by the road. He was about thirty feet back by the grave site and proceeded to remove John Achord's head. He chopped it off with an ax. He came out of the brush carrying John Achord's head. He came over and placed the head in the bucket of cement; we brought it back to the house, removed the lid, and saw that the cement had set up. Paul placed it in the garage. Then he asked Tony and I to get rid of it.”
Hultman provided a thoughtful pause sufficient for whatever ghoulish images occupied the jurors' minds to sink in before commenting, “You people spent a lot of time moving bodies and stuff at night, didn't you?”
“Objection,” declared Ladenburg; “Sustained,” ruled the judge. Carl Hultman was past any objection, sustained or overruled; he was already asking Chris St. Pierre for an important clarification regarding his stance of innocence in the murder of John Achord. “So your claim is that you just happened to be an unfortunate guy in the wrong place at the wrong time all the time, is that kind of what your claim is here?”
“I was caught in the middle of a lot of stuff. I was afraid for my life. I didn't know what to do. I told the police repeatedly when I gave my statement that for turning these guys in, I was most likely going to be killed.”
“You told them that you were afraid,” countered Hultman, “that you were going to be
convicted of murder!
You told the police that, didn't you?”
convicted of murder!
You told the police that, didn't you?”
“No, I said, âI'll probably be
charged
with the murder. ' ”
charged
with the murder. ' ”
“That's all,” stated Hultman. He was done with Christopher St. Pierre. John Ladenburg, however, was entitled to redirect examinationâan immediate opportunity to punch holes in Hultman's portrayal of his client's motives and involvement in the death of John Achord.
“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 Webbâthe 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 briefâMark 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-threeâan 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 âincompetent,' ” 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?”
Other books
War Without Garlands: Operation Barbarossa 1941-1942 by Kershaw, Robert
The Worry Web Site by Jacqueline Wilson
Only Mine by Elizabeth Lowell
Slammer by Allan Guthrie
How to Be Single by Liz Tuccillo
Love Rekindled (Love Surfaced) by Michelle Lynn
Touch of Darkness by C. T. Adams, Cathy Clamp
Vados (Scifi Alien Romance) (The Ujal Book 1) by Erin Tate
The Masked Monkey by Franklin W. Dixon
La felicidad de los ogros by Daniel Pennac