Violence (13 page)

There was a short recess, after which the defendants sent Derek’s public defender to deliver their Opening Statement. He was also the one who made the objections at the outset of Henklin’s Opening Statement. His name was Bryce Calcote, a 28-year-old bright-eyed gangly go-getter, fresh out of a good law school, who was champing at the bit to get his first real trial court experience.

Calcote was actually pretty good, and after a nervous start, showed some stage presence. He used his hands with a flourish to make points, demonstrating a flair for the dramatic. He slowly strode before the jury box, not afraid to get close to them. He also wasn’t fearful of making eye contact, and had good personal grooming which is something that shouldn’t be discounted. He also had a slight limp, not from some temporary injury, that he carried with dignity and which gave him a sympathetic feature.

Calcote started with a nod to the prosecutor and how “Ms. Henklin” did a wonderful job outlining the State’s case where the “burden of proof” is on her to demonstrate, through the evidence, that these men committed these “alleged” despicable acts.

However, Calcote quickly negated that acknowledgment when he raised his voice perceptibly and said, “But that burden is uniquely formidable because the truth of the matter is that these three men are innocent! They did not get up that fateful day and say we want these two people dead! They merely went to work, and on that day their duties happened to be at the Anderson home, whereupon Mrs. Anderson’s husband came home for lunch and jealously called their boss to have them fired. Mrs. Anderson hated that that was her husband’s first response when he saw them together. She was upset at their treatment and told them so and invited them to return later that evening when she knew she would be alone.”

Mr. Calcote only mentioned the “invitation to return” directly just once in his opening. He didn’t want to overplay it, because this was the weakest, albeit at the same time the most vital, part of their case. At this point, accepting that premise at all was going to require the jury to do some throwing of logic out the window. Quite a few in depth studies have been done that show the vast majority of jurors make up their minds based on an opening statement and do not change their decision so it is critically important to start on the right foot. This would have to be one of those other third of cases that the jurors’ minds are won over later, through working the evidence and testimony.

“That is when the horrendous sequence of events occurred, on that fateful night.” Calcote continued. “The deaths that took place that evening were heartbreaking, but they were not caused by these men, but rather by a mother’s anguish at seeing what tragically happened to her daughter as a result of her, the mother’s choices. Fact is, it was a fateful decision, because when her daughter came home, she did not ring the doorbell, or use a key, but went around to the back of the residence where undoubtedly it was shocking for a daughter to see her mother engaged in adult activities.”

Ward shifted uneasily about in his place on the pew-styled bench. It was hard to hear everything that was going on because the gallery was separated by bullet-proof glass from the rest of the courtroom which itself was small and claustrophobic, as many were in the criminal courts building. The bullet-proof glass was also soundproof so spectators had to rely on an inadequate microphone placed at the judge’s bench to follow the proceedings. If you weren’t getting every other sentence because of the throat-clearing coughs of the courtroom participants you were lucky to get every other word in between the heavy nasal breathing of Judge Marr which was a result of the strain on his respiratory and cardiovascular system from carrying his corpulent frame. It didn’t matter because even hearing just a portion was enough to get one sick to their stomach if you knew the truth of the matter. Ward could only think of how glad he was that Anderson wasn’t here right now listening to this bilge from the defense counsel.

Calcote kept his tone measured, matter-of-fact at this point, and made himself face the jury. “And when Mr. Derek Lysander stepped out into the night air and saw Mrs. Anderson’s daughter floating in the pool he immediately ran back inside to get the others to help pull her body out of the water. This is when Mrs. Anderson realized what had happened and went into a whirl of guilt. She ran from the living room into the master bedroom and quickly returned with a gun. The defendants were stunned. They thought she was running to call 911. They didn’t know what she intended to do. It wasn’t their gun. They didn’t know if she was going to use it on them, blame them for what happened. They didn’t know how proficient she was in its use. Again, it wasn’t their gun. It was Mr. Anderson’s gun. Obviously Mrs. Anderson knew where the gun was, so she must have had some familiarity with it. But when they realized she was going to use the gun on herself, Derek Lysander even had tears in his eyes as he empathetically tried to reason with her not to do it.”

The veteran members of the court really had to bite their lips at most of this grandstanding lest they make the trial seem like an “ex parte” proceeding, which is a judicial process primarily conducted for the benefit of one party only. While they had heard it all in their time this “tears of Derek” line was particularly testing.

The jurors, if they were skeptical at all at this point, were not revealing.

When Calcote delivered the next line, he made sure to act it out. “As Mr. Lysander approached Mrs. Anderson he was able to grab her by the wrists and take hold of her gun hand, but sadly she was determined to pay for or make amends for her daughter’s death in some way, and she pulled the trigger in spite of Mr. Lysander’s efforts to stop her.” Calcote sagged his shoulders demonstrably, ruefully.

Derek even lowered his head somberly at the defense table as though he were reliving a painful memory.

The young public defender went on from that point also detailing some of the evidence that would be presented (except for the DNA evidence which they weren’t going to argue against). Calcote conceded that there were gunshot deposits on both “Mrs. Anderson’s hands as well as Mr. Derek Lysander’s hands but that Mrs. Anderson’s hands showed the greater density of residue.” He left out that by the time Derek was picked up and the test was administered it was hours later therefore much of the residue wore off or was washed off.

Calcote said that “there will be no evidence of a break-in because there was no break-in” and admitted “yes, they ran, and yes, they were frightened” but asked rhetorically “who wouldn’t be?” He followed that statement with, “It’s a horrible thing in life to be blamed for something you didn’t do.”

Ward snorted derisively at this reprehensible declaration. The other attendees in the gallery looked at Ward but luckily no one was the wiser about his outburst on the other side of the soundproof-glass.

Calcote wrapped up by again stressing the point favorable to the defense, “But it wasn’t their gun and they knew it wasn’t their gun so they decided to face the fact they would be forced to defend themselves. And they were completely compliant once they were confronted with this reality, as police witnesses will testify to, because the sad fact of the matter is owning a gun and having it in the home makes the likelihood of death by suicide greater by many times over…”

“Objection, your Honor, this is argument!” Prosecutor Henklin interrupted.

“Sustained.” Judge Marr ruled.

“But, your Honor, we will be presenting an expert witness who will testify to this very point.” Calcote countered.

“Then let it come out when you present your witness.” Judge Marr instructed him.

Calcote nodded, shaken out of his rhythm. He stepped to the defense table where he scanned some notes on a yellow pad.

Ms. Henklin was careful not to show the slightest emotion during all this, even when he mentioned the link between gun ownership and increased rates of suicide. She knew it would be a major element of their defense. Actually, she was completely expressionless throughout his opening, thinking she might stop him several times with objections but in the end, except for this one time, decided to let him run. She felt it might have made her look devious otherwise.

Calcote concluded his refresher and moved back in front of the jury box, bearing down for his finish. “Now you’re going to see photographs of all kinds of things, but seeing a photograph doesn’t prove anything. You’re going to see photographs that will be gruesome, but that does not prove anything. They are only going to show the deaths of Mrs. Anderson by a gunshot and her daughter by blunt head trauma which led to her subsequent drowning, but they don’t prove anything else.”

Derek, Gabriel and Ruben all set their jaws self-righteously.

Calcote extended his arm in a sweeping gesture towards the bench. “Just as Judge Marr stated during jury selection and reminded us earlier this morning, you need to put aside all preconceived notions and just look at the facts. And if you just look at the facts, I am supremely confident, after everything has been presented, that you will find that these three men are not guilty. Thank you.”

The first witness called that opening day by the prosecution was Police Officer Neal Davis, the officer who made the arrest of the suspects on the night of the “alleged” murder.

“I made contact with the suspects shortly before 11 p.m. during what was being treated as a high-risk traffic stop.” Davis recalled when asked by the prosecutor. “I had placed their vehicle under surveillance due to a call coming in several minutes earlier to be on the lookout for possibly three suspects in a tan LTD that may have been involved in a shooting death. I observed the vehicle swerving through traffic erratically, placed a call for back-up, and put my emergency lights on. The vehicle immediately turned eastbound on Cemetery Road and came to a stop as other officers responding to my call arrived on scene. The suspects were ordered out of their vehicle and promptly complied with commands.”

On a screen in the courtroom a video of the police cruiser’s on-board dashboard cam was played. It mirrored exactly what Officer Davis had testified to on the stand. The video showed Officer Davis standing in the open door of his idling cruiser, service weapon drawn, spotlights illuminating the LTD as other police cruisers skidded to a stop on the gravelly access road.

“Everybody out of the car! Hands where I can see them!”
Officer Davis yelled as Derek, Gabriel and Ruben stepped dazedly out of the LTD, hands held high on the videotape.

“On the ground! Face down! Hands out to your side!”
Davis continued as he advanced carefully on Derek, who had been driving, blood clearly smeared on one side of Derek’s face, neck and shirt.

Derek assumed the position, laid flat on the ground as the other arriving officers, with their guns drawn, helped secure Derek, Gabriel and Ruben, handcuffing them all.

Eerily, grave markers could be also seen through a chain-link fence in the background on the dashcam video since the stop took place on “Cemetery Road” which abutted a memorial park. It was just a coincidence. Still, the irony was not lost on many of those in the courtroom.

“I observed what appeared to be blood on one of the suspects, the driver of the vehicle.” Officer Davis continued to testify. “And all three suspects’ persons were thoroughly searched but no weapons were found. Since the suspects were compliant and under control we did not engage in a further search of the vehicle at the time of the arrest but a casual observation of the interior of their vehicle showed what appeared to be a small plastic bag containing pills in plain view on the front seat.”

Officer Davis also went on to testify that at the traffic stop the driver, Derek Lysander, appeared to be intoxicated from the effects of some narcotic and/or possibly alcoholic beverage and indeed, the two other occupants of the vehicle appeared to be in a similar impaired state.

The officer further stated for the record that Derek Lysander, in addition to possibly driving under the influence, was also committing numerous lane violations when he was pulled over, and was driving without a license, as well as driving without insurance and was operating an unregistered vehicle.

None of the officer’s testimony was challenged by the defense. There was “probable cause” that the suspects had committed a felony and while warrants were later issued to search the vehicle, the initial, immediate search for any weapons and/or the gun used in the alleged shooting (the arresting officer couldn’t know at the time that the weapon was in Karen’s hand) was legal and reasonable. Seeing the “plastic bag” clearly fell under the “plain view doctrine” which allows an officer to search a place and seize evidence or other unlawful objects, without a warrant, if such objects are discovered and easily perceptible during a lawful observation.

Davis concluded his testimony by saying all three suspects, “were taken without incident.”

Gabriel Lysander’s public defender, Ms. Rafaela Alcantara, a 30-year-old woman with too gentle looks for this line of work, was sent to cross-examine Davis. She basically had only one line of questioning, the three defendant’s compliance or lack thereof, from the time of their arrest to the hours immediately afterward. She kept it brief so as not to look as if she were unduly pestering the witness.

Officer Davis acknowledged the “suspects submitted” to “all searches, required tests and standard requests for information throughout the booking procedure.”

And when Ms. Alcantara then surmised for Officer Davis, “It seems to be fair to say all of the defendants were model prisoners for the time they were in your custody?”

He answered. “They weren’t uncooperative.”

The prosecution put two more State witnesses on the stand that opening day.

First up after the lunch break was scientist Wojtek Sliczynski from the Illinois State Police Forensic Science Center who testified as to the results from the gunshot residue, or GSR tests. Mr. Sliczynski stated that while Gabriel and Ruben tested “negative,” that is they showed no signs of having recently fired a gun, “Mr. Derek Lysander’s left and right hands did both carry unique particles that indicated the defendant either recently discharged a firearm, came in contact with a recently discharged firearm or was in extremely close proximity to a weapon when it was discharged.”