Special Circumstances (30 page)

—news center 4 LEGAL ANALYST morgan henderson. monday, march 23.
At three o’clock the same afternoon, Skipper stands and says in a clearvoice, “The people call Dr. Roderick Beckert.”
Beckert nods to the judge as he walks confidently to the front of thecourtroom. The college-professor tweed jacket that was hanging on thecoatrack in his office has been replaced with a charcoal-gray businesssuit and a burgundy tie. He’s the living embodiment of the voice ofauthority.
Skipper stands at the lectern. He doesn’t want to crowd Beckert.
“Would you please state your name and occupation for the record?”
“Dr. Roderick Beckert.” The hint of a smile. He closes his eyes andslowly reopens them.
“I am the chief medical examiner for the city and county of SanFrancisco.” He nods, as if to reassure himself that he is, in fact,who he says he is.
“I’ve held the position for twenty-seven years.”
Skipper begins to run Beckert through his credentials. I stop himalmost immediately and stipulate to his expertise. There’s no point ingiving Skipper twenty minutes of free time to wave Beckert’s diplomasin front of the jury.
“Dr. Beckert,” Skipper says, “did you perform autopsies on the bodiesof Robert Holmes and Diana Kennedy on January first of this year?”
“Yes.”
“And would you be kind enough to describe the results of thoseautopsies?”
He smiles politely and turns slightly toward the jury.
“Of course, Mr. Gates.”
He says Bob and Diana died of gunshot wounds, his to the head, hers tothe chest. Time of death between one and four a.m. He explains thatDiana was two months pregnant and that the unborn fetus also died. Histone is conversational, yet forceful. I let him drone on for a fewminutes about body temperature, lividity and discoloration before Iinterrupt him and stipulate that we’ll agree to his determination onthe range he has established for the time of death. The jury alreadybelieves him. It’s not to our advantage to let him build empathy.
On cue, McNulty trots out a poster-size version of one of the photosBeckert showed me in his office. We tried to keep it out.
“Doctor,” Skipper says, “what is this a picture of?”
“It’s the left side of the head of the victim, Robert Holmes.”
“Doctor, would you please describe the gunshot wound that killed Mr.Holmes?”
“Of course. Entry through the right parietal, just above the righttemple. It severed the cerebral cortex and pierced the mesencephalon,or midbrain, before exiting through the left parietal lobe and the leftparietal bone of the skull, just above the left ear.” In other words,Beckert explains that the gun was placed against Bob’s right temple andshot laterally through his head, causing instantaneous death as thebullet passed through the midbrain structure.
The courtroom is completely silent.
“Doctor, would you mind pointing out to the jury the exit wound thatyou just described?”
“Of course.” Beckert climbs down off the witness stand and walks tothe easel holding the picture. He takes out his pen and points at thearea just behind Bob’s left ear.
“Dr. Beckert,” Skipper continues, “was there another wound to thehead?”
“Yes, Mr. Gates.” Beckert points toward the area above Bob’s leftear, just above the edge of the exit wound.
“Right here, on the parietal bone, there’s a small hematoma, orconcussive injury.”
“Objection,” I say.
“I’m afraid we can’t tell what Dr. Beckert is pointing at.”
Judge Chen says, “I’m afraid that I can’t either. Doctor, I’m going tohave to ask you to mark the wound more precisely.”
“Of course, Your Honor.” He pulls a felt-tip marker from his pocketand he draws a circle on the picture.
“Right here, Your Honor.”
Judge Chen nods.
“Thank you, Dr. Beckert.”
Skipper studies the picture.
“Doctor,” he says, “would you mind describing the concussive wound ingreater detail?”
“Yes. Mr. Holmes suffered a blow to the head, which caused ahematoma, or bump, to the parietal bone of his skull. Based upon theswelling and the freshness of the wound, I believe he was knockedunconscious shortly before he died. It’s similar to a blow suffered bya football player in a helmet-to-helmet collision.”
“Is it possible he was killed by the concussive blow?”
“It’s unlikely. There was trauma to the skull, but not enough to killa healthy male.”
“Why would somebody go to all the trouble of knocking him out beforethey shot him?”
“Objection. Speculative. Dr. Beckert is a pathologist, not aclairvoyant.”
“Sustained.”
“I’ll rephrase. Doctor, do you have a theory as to why someone wouldhave knocked Mr. Holmes unconscious and then shot him momentslater?”
“Objection. Still speculative.”
“Sustained.”
“Doctor, does it appear to you that the killer was attempting to makethis look like a suicide?”
“Objection.”
“Sustained.” Judge Chen glares as Skipper.
“That’s enough, Mr. Gates.”
“No further questions, Your Honor.”
I don’t wait.
“Dr. Beckert, can you show me this alleged concussive wound one moretime?”
He walks to the easel and points toward the circle he drew a momentago.
“Right here.”
“And you’re one hundred percent sure that mark you just showed me wascaused by someone taking a heavy object and hitting Mr. Holmes?”
“Yes. One hundred percent sure.”
“And it is not possible the wound was caused by the bullet thatobliterated much of his head?”
“In my best medical judgment, no.”
“Doctor, did you find any evidence of the object that you claim wasused to strike Mr. Holmes?”
“I’m not sure I understand.”
“Well, Doctor, if Mr. Holmes was hit with a piece of wood or a pieceof metal, you may have found fragments of wood or metal or perhapspaint in the wound.
Did you find any such evidence?”
“No,” he says.
“Why not?”
“Excuse me?”
“How is it possible that somebody hit Mr. Holmes hard enough to knockhim unconscious, yet you found no evidence of the object?”
“Objection. Speculative.”
“Overruled.”
Beckert shakes his head.
“He must have been hit with an object that didn’t leave any traces.”
“I see.” I pause.
“Doctor, you will recall that the body was found on the floor.”
“That’s correct.”
“Is it possible the concussive wound was caused by Mr. Holmes hittinghis head on his desk as he slumped to the floor?”
He furrows his brow.
“No, Mr. Daley.”
“Why not?” I’m taking a bit of a chance here.
“Mr. Holmes died instantly. The hematoma was fairly well developed.If he’d hit his head on his desk after he’d been shot, there would havebeen no bump on his head.” He explains that bumps are formed by bloodrushing to the injured area.
When you die, your heart stops beating and your body is thereforeincapable of pumping enough blood to create a bump.
“Mr. Daley,” he says, “you can hit a cadaver as many times as you’dlike, but you can’t generate a bump on its head.
As a result, I concluded that Mr. Holmes was very much alive when hewas struck on the head.”
I’m sorry I asked. I pick up a copy of his autopsy report from theevidence cart.
“Doctor, do you recognize this report?”
“Yes. It’s my autopsy report on Mr. Holmes.”
“Right.” I hand it to him.
“You dictate these reports as you conduct your autopsy, right?”
“Yes.”
“Doctor, could you please turn to page fourteen.”
He puts on his glasses. He flips through the report.
“I’ve found it, Mr.
Daley.”
“Doctor, would you please confirm that page fourteen describes theconcussive wound.”
He studies it quickly.
“Yes, it does, Mr. Daley.”
“And would you be kind enough to read the portion of the report that Ihighlighted?”
“Of course.
“Approximately three centimeters from the top of the exit wound, thereappears to be a small concussive wound on the parietal bone of theskull.
The wound appears relatively fresh.”
” “And those were your exact words, Doctor?”
He looks serious.
“Yes, Mr. Daley. Those were my exact words as I dictated them.”
“At the time you dictated your notes, were you looking at Mr. Holmes’shead?”
Skipper stands, then sits down. He probably could object, but he can’tfigure out a reason.
“Of course I was looking at his head,” Beckert replies with a hint ofirritation in his voice.
“Well, Doctor, when you were looking at Mr. Holmes’s head, youdescribed what ‘appears’ to be a ‘small concussive wound’ that is‘relatively’ fresh. Yet, a moment ago, you testified that you were onehundred percent sure that it was, in fact, a concussive wound and itwas most certainly fresh. How did your tentative observation turn intosuch an absolute conclusion?”
He pouts.
“Mr. Daley,” he says, “I’ve been a medical examiner for thirty-threeyears. You read my preliminary observations. I examined the woundmore closely during my more detailed autopsy procedures. The size anddepth of the concussive wound led me to conclude, unequivocally, thatMr. Holmes was struck on the head.”
I glance at the jury.
“How much time elapsed between the day you performed the autopsy andthe day you issued your final report?”
“About a week.”
“And how many times did you look at the body again during thatweek?”
“I didn’t.”
“You didn’t? Yet, during the course of a week, your view on theconcussive wound seems to have changed.”
“After reviewing the evidence, I became certain that there was, infact, a concussive wound.”
“And it certainly helps the prosecution’s case if there’s such a wound,right?”
Skipper and McNulty both stand.
“Objection,” Skipper shouts.
“Move to strike.”
“Sustained.”
I turn back to Beckert.
“Could you please read the portion of your report that I’ve highlightedon page nineteen?”
“
“Chemical residue was found on victim’s right hand.”
” “What sort of chemical residue?”
He stops.
“Gunpowder,” he says slowly.
Judge Chen’s eyes open wide.
I try to look perplexed.
“Gunpowder? There was gunpowder residue on his right hand?”
“Yes.”
“How did it get there?”
Skipper pops up.
“Objection, Your Honor. Speculative.”
“Sustained.”
“I’ll rephrase.” I turn back to Beckert.
“Isn’t it true that when a gun is fired, it emits chemicals, includinggunpowder, traces of which can be found on the hands of the party whofired the gun?”
“Objection. Dr. Beckert isn’t an expert on firearms or chemicalsubstances.”
“Your Honor,” I implore, “Dr. Beckert wrote the seminal textbook onforensic science. Surely he’s capable of answering such a basicquestion.”
“Overruled.”
Beckert pushes his glasses to the top of his head.
“Yes, Mr. Daley. When someone fires a gun, it is possible to findtraces of gunpowder and other chemicals on his hand.”
“Gunpowder traces are one of the first things the police test for onthe hands of a person charged with a shooting, right?”
“Yes.”
“So, Doctor,” I say, “the gunpowder traces on the right hand of Mr.Holmes suggest that it is possible that Mr. Holmes fired the gun thatkilled him.”
“Objection. Speculative.”
“Overruled.”
“Yes,” he says grudgingly.
“It’s possible. However…”
“In fact, Doctor, the gunpowder traces on the right hand of Mr. Holmesalmost certainly indicate he did, in fact, fire the gun.”
“Objection, Your Honor. Speculative.”
“Sustained.”
“No further questions, Your Honor.”
Skipper leaps up for redirect.
“Doctor, in your best medical judgment, was Mr.
Holmes unconscious when he was killed?”
Yes.
“And how do you account for the gunpowder traces on his right hand?”
“Objection. Speculative.”
“Overruled.”
He nods as if he expected the question.
“I believe Mr. Holmes was knocked unconscious by a blow to the side ofhis head. I believe someone placed the gun in his right hand andcaused Mr. Holmes to pull the trigger. It was a clumsy attempt tofake a suicide.”
“Thank you, Doctor. No further questions.”
I jump up for one more crack at him. I search for my best tone ofincredulity.
“So, Doctor, it’s your testimony that you think somebody sneaked upbehind Bob Holmes, whacked him on the head, and while he wasunconscious, put a revolver in his hand and caused him to use the samehand to shoot himself. Is that about it?”
He nods.
“Yes, Mr. Daley,” he says in an even tone.
“That’s about it.”
“You realize that nobody in their right mind would believe such apreposterous scenario.”
Skipper’s up.
“Objection,” he screams.
“Sustained,” Judge Chen snaps.
“Mr. Daley, I don’t want to see any more grandstanding in mycourtroom. Do you understand?”
I try to sound contrite.
“Yes, Your Honor. No further questions.”
CHAPTER 35
BUILDING BLOCKS
“Prosecutors build their cases one block at a time.”
—CNN’s burden of proof. tuesday, march 24.
It’s the next morning.
“Please state your name and occupation for the record,” Skipper says.
“Edward O’Malley. Ballistics technician, SFPD.”
Ed O’Malley is a forty-seven-year-old civilian scientist who is thedepartment’s ballistics guru. He works in a hermetically sealed areain the basement of the Hall. The police refer to guys like Ed as whitecoats. He can determine with statistical precision whether a bulletwas discharged from a particular weapon.
His demeanor is studious. His tiny, rimless glasses perch on a largenose above a tidy gray mustache. His role in this play will berelatively short.
Skipper runs him through his resume, then picks up the plastic-wrappedrevolver from the evidence cart and holds it up as if it’s the SuperBowl trophy.
“Mr.
O’Malley,” he says, “do you recognize this revolver?”
“Yes.” He pauses.
“That’s the murder weapon.”
I’m up right away.
“Objection. There’s no foundation for Mr. O’Malley’s characterizationof this revolver as the ‘murder’ weapon.”
“Sustained.” Judge Chen sighs. We’re starting early today.
“The jury will disregard the characterization of the weapon.” Sheturns to Skipper.
“Try it again, Mr. Gates.”
Skipper leads O’Malley through a detailed description of the revolver.He concludes that it was the weapon that fired the fatal shots. Skippersits down.
There isn’t an iota of doubt in my mind that the bullets were firedfrom this gun. Of course, this doesn’t stop me from trying to plant afew seeds of doubt in the mind of the phone company supervisor.
“Mr. O’Malley,” I say as I stand up, “how long have you been aballistics expert with the department?”
“Fourteen years.”
“Ever been suspended?”
Skipper leaps up.
“Objection, Your Honor. Relevance.”
“Your Honor,” I say, “Mr. Gates called this witness as an expert. Hisrecord is highly relevant.”
“Overruled.”
O’Malley glances at the clock.
“I was suspended for a week eleven years ago.”
“No further questions.” The jury doesn’t have to know he was suspendedwhen he pled no contest to a DUI charge. One could make a credibleargument that it was wholly unrelated to his credentials as aballistics expert. Skipper doesn’t seem to know about it. If he did,he might try to rehabilitate O’Malley on redirect. On the other hand,he might not. The jury may not like the idea that his ballisticsexpert was picked up for drunk driving. O’Malley glares at Mort, whohas brought his integrity into question for the second time. Mortfound out about O’Malley’s suspension when he was defending a caseabout five years ago.