The murder trial of Charles Arnett Stevens and Richard Clark. From my journal...
2/25/93
On the morning of February 24th, we all assembled in the jury room and trooped down the stairs. I'd like to digress here momentarily to describe this up-and-down-the-stairs ritual: In the morning, one of our group (jury) is required to bring some sort of breakfast. Usually it is a type of pastry, but we've had bagels and variety breads as well. I've come to anticipate having breakfast now, and I'm sure my waistline will soon show it. After all, we don't really do much besides sit around all day listening. When we have our breaks, things get pretty noisy. There are a few men on the jury who are quite loud when they speak. When everybody gets going it can be pretty boisterous.
There is a buzzer system that serves as our communications link with the deputy sheriff down in the courtroom. His name's Peter, like my son, and we all appreciate his friendly manner. He makes coffee and transmits our requests and questions to the judge. When we are all present before session, somebody in the jury room pushes a button to indicate such. He will give us a single return buzz to acknowledge. When he buzzes twice, we all rise and assemble in numerical order at the head of the steps that lead down from the sixth floor to the fifth floor courtroom. When we have been dismissed for a recess, we all rise and file up the stairs. For some reason, due I suppose to my position on the steps, I relay the information from the head of the stairs to Peter that the door at the top is either open or closed. It has become mundane almost to the point of screaming routine. "Is the door open?" By the time this thing is over I won't want to hear that phrase ever again!
Whew...We strolled into the court and took our seats on Wednesday morning. The judge asked Mr. Selvin if he had anything further, to which he said: "Mr. Stevens' defense rests. For now."
Say what?
We all looked at each other. This wasn't really what we were expecting. Well, the prosecution once reopened its case, perhaps that would happen here, too. A strange and wonderful thing is this system. With that, Judge McGuinnis asked Mr. Zimmer if he would present his case for defendant Clark.
All along this Zimmer fellow has been somewhat facetious, asking rather pointless questions. With his opening statement, which lasts well over an hour, he discusses the circumstances of Richard Clark being charged with murder based on his confession. He said that we could go into a far-reaching discussion about whether a person who killed another under duress could be considered guilty of murder. He spoke about the techniques the police use to gather information during interrogations, never once claiming that the methods were truly improper or coercive. He claimed that Mr. Clark had been mentally and physically abused as a child, and that the mind-set Richard had had contributed to his completely fabricated confession. He said that we would hear testimony from a clinical psychologist verifying a mental condition that made the subject conducive to authority figures. He told them what he thought they wanted to hear, filling in the blanks as they were "cued" into him until he came up with a story that implicated himself as the shooter in a crime he was nowhere near.
Then Mr. Zimmer called none other than Richard James Clark, jr. to the stand in his own defense. Other than the one edited tape we had heard earlier in the people's case, no one had heard his voice. Now it was to be almost all we were to hear. The primary focus was on the chronology of the weekend Leslie Noyers died. He claims to have helped Charlie, or TC as he was known on the street, steal the tan Mazda RX7 on Friday night 3/31/89. He took the car home, the "first sports car stolen for me", that night and parked it next to his house. Saturday he drilled in Fairfield (CA) with the Army National Guard. Sunday, same thing. Sunday night he drove around with TC, drank some beer and went home in the RX7. Monday morning he got up late and drove the car to Mosswood Park in Oakland to abandon it.
What's wrong with this picture?
Leslie Noyers was killed on Monday morning at about 1:45 AM. The RX7 was in the impound lot at OPD by Monday morning. I'm writing this part two days later and I have to remember that I don't know just exactly what has really happened that night. Clark was picked up in Monterrey County jail after being held on a supposed bench warrant for car theft. Sergeant Roth and Sergeant Chenault escorted him to OPD and into an interrogation room. They started talking to him at about 1:30 in the afternoon and didn't stop until just after midnight. In the course of questioning, Richard Clark told many stories. He claimed then, and still does, that at first all he did abandon the RX7 on Monday morning. The officers challenged that, and the story began to change. Now he was with TC, Mario, a fictional character named Chuck, and they were all rifling through cars on Chetwood. The two women in the story approach TC and Chuck as Clark and Mario "hid down" behind cars. He sees TC and Leslie Noyers argue and he shoots her, standing right in front of her. Now he's challenged again, now the story has just TC and himself in it. He holds Noyers near the back of the RX7 while Charlie shoots her after an argument. Nope, the sergeants aren't buying that either. They sketch out a small diagram of the car, showing him where the casing were found in the car and where the body was found. Now he says he's in the car, he gets a little confused, he's with other people or he's not. Now he's just rambling and the investigators have to leave the room to let him calm down.
While Richard is being questioned, he starts volunteering information about another incident. This is something that takes all of us on the jury by surprise, as I expect Mr. Burr knew it would. Richard started telling them about a night when the two of them were out drinking, talking about stealing some cars. They went over to the south side of the I-580 freeway, eventually settling on an Olds 98, '79 model or so. They drove around, getting beer and later some burgers. Just goofin' around in a stolen car. After getting pretty drunk, Clark asks TC for a ride home. They get on the freeway at Park Blvd., and as they are entering the ramp TC starts rocking back and forth, saying "I got to shoot somebody". He unzips his jacket, revealing the Desert Eagle, and puts the gun in his lap. Richard says something to him about "What you talking about, man?" as they start to pull up next to a dark-colored car, a Ford Granada, driven by a black man. TC opens his window and picks up the gun. Richard says "Hey man, don't kill him. He's a brother, you don't want to do this". Stevens rolls up the window and keeps driving. He sees a white Mustang and pulls up beside it, matching its speed. As he opens the window Clark says "Hey man, you gonna shoot that white woman?" Stevens says "No, that's a man." Clark says "No, it's a..." Stevens fires one shot into the Mustang, shattering the passenger window and causing the car to "wobble" in its lane. Stevens turns to look at Clark, who is by his own testimony shocked by what's just happened. All he can think of to say is "Can I have one of those beers in the back?" Stevens says "Yeah", then they drive to TC's to drop him off, where Clark says TC threatened to harm him if he told anyone about the shooting.
Then Clark drives home, unloads the beer and goes out to Antioch to see a friend. The next day it seems the police have found the Olds 98 in Antioch and Clark has to get home somehow. When he does he makes sure to find out about the shooting on TV after telling his Mom and sisters about it. He talks to TC on the phone, asking him "Did you see on the television about last night?" TC is excited, agitated. That's pretty much the gist of this tape. Little side comment intrigue me here. I've heard a couple of the other tapes, listened to the tone of his voice while he rambled about different versions of the Noyers incident. While he related the Rochon killing he was steady, consistent, calm. While he described the chronology of Lori Rochon's murder he kept describing the feel of the draft of air when TC opened the window before shooting her. When he had finished the account, the sergeants summarized briefly and Richard seemed to get a little detached, saying the word "stupid..." in a sad, regretful way.
This would not be the last time I would hear him say this.
He also told them that he had been in the 27th and West neighborhood the afternoon before Laquann Sloan's murder. Nothing more on that now but I'm sure we'll hear more later.
Thursday ended with Mr. Burr questioning Richard Clark about various aspects of his taped statements. The defense wants us to believe that Clark was badgered and bullied into admitting his role in the killing of Leslie Noyers. We are expected to see that Richard did this in order to "give them what they wanted to hear" , to tell them stories so absurd, (his contention) that they will know something is wrong and stop questioning him. He thinks that TC will state that Clark wasn't even there, even though Clark has just implicated him in two murders.
(An aside here: I'm watching Judgment at Nuremberg. An interesting note while jotting down thoughts about a murder trial of lesser scale)
And the beat goes on.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
The Trial: The Other Side of the Story
I wasn't spending much time at work. The trial was really stressful on all of us, and even though we regularly had Fridays off, not many of the jurors went to work, preferring a three day weekend. Our kindly bailiff, Peter, told us that if our bosses called, all he would say was: "I'm sorry, I cannot disturb jurors during the trial." This was, of course, before the advent of the ubiquitous cell phone.
The journal continues:
Mr. Selvin's opening remarks...
...were something less than spectacular. His client faces the possibility of a death sentence, and the remarks were nothing more than a mild reminder to remain objective, to "trust me", and that "you will see that things are not what they appear to be", referring to Mr. Burr's presentation. He has a strange manner, and it was affecting Juror #9, a woman named Leigh. She was on the verge of losing it with laughter. She thinks he's really buffoonish, a view shared to greater and lesser degrees by everybody, and she's finding it hard to contain herself. I told her that all she needed to do to calm down was to look into the gallery at the relations of Raymond August who have been there every day since the start. Maybe she won't find this so funny anymore after seeing the lines of pain on those people's faces. I'm not an altogether serious person by nature, but this is probably one of the most important things I'll ever do as a human being, and that helps keep my mind on the right track.
The first defense witness was a gentleman who had stopped at a traffic light at the corner of West and 27th St. on the night of Loquann Sloan's murder. He saw a "black male" come around the corner from West to 27th and proceed eastbound. He saw two more "black males" follow about 50 yards behind, coming from the same direction. A white "Chevette-type" vehicle came from the same direction on West, turning quickly onto 27th and through the red light. The next sequence of events is quick: The car stops as three shots are heard, the two "black males" run across the street behind the witness's car yelling "somebody's been shot!". The witness looks in his side view mirror, through glass that is "limo-smoked" tint, and sees the white car drive off. He takes off, returning later to give a statement. All this information is distilled from a fairly combative between him and Mr. Burr. The fellow seemed to be trying to keep from being "railroaded" by the prosecution. He was really defensive, unnecessarily so, and it was a little painful for us to listen to him when there really was no problem. I think he felt that Mr. Burr represented The System, the same one that held him for several hours the night of Loquann Sloan's murder. He was cooped up in an interrogation room at OPD, and he probably didn't enjoy it.
Next on the All-Star Chuck Stevens defense parade was Mrs. Ziegler. She was a real hoot! What is it with the old black ladies living on the 700 block of 27th Street? This lady got up there, she must have been seventy years old, and she was wearing a very shiny silver blouse with gold ornaments on it, along with several necklaces and intricately designed earrings. To be blunt, she looked like an aged madam. I don't know if these were her best clothes, or whether she always dresses this way. Anyway, she began her recounting of the events of the night Sloan was killed. She lives, still, in the house right above the murder scene. She was somewhat confused about the facts, but eventually Mr. Selvin was able to glean a certain chronology from her. She was in her bedroom that night, just about to get into bed. She heard three sharp sounds and assumed that her daughter was banging on the door, trying to get in. When she didn't hear any other sounds she looked out the window of her bedroom. She saw a male black man run from the area just behind her car into the street and jump into the passenger side of a vehicle which had pulled up there. (The earlier witness claimed that nobody had entered or left the vehicle he saw) She crossed from the bedroom to the living room. By the time she looked out of that window she saw the car pull away and a body was lying on the sidewalk. She then dialed 911. It was really funny watching Mr. Selvin struggle through this lady's testimony. He asked her specific questions about her position in the house, her angle on the scene, the position of her car in the driveway, the autos in the street, the number of steps the suspect took between one position and the next, what time it was, time intervals, so many things... She tried to answer as best she could, but it was apparent that Mr. Selvin had little experience with older people. He tried leading her through several sequences. only to have Mr. Burr object to the questions being leading. When he re-phrased the questions to suit the objection, Mrs. Ziegler couldn't answer the question properly. We got a fair picture of what she saw, and it wasn't much. Mr. Burr was able to exercise patience and tact with her, and his questions simply clarified in a matter of minutes what it had taken Selvin an eternity to accomplish. No doubt about it, if nothing else this guy is a master showman, using the defense's own witness against him.
We spent a lot of time in the jury room today, just waiting around. This doesn't even require speculation. It's obvious that certain items of evidence or questioning or procedure are being discussed out of our presence in order to present a proper case to us. It may be proper in the strictest legal sense, but it makes for some extremely tedious work. The other folks I share the jury room with are nice enough, but I have to admit that none of them would be particularly interesting to me as acquaintances save one: A fellow named Skip, a Vietnam War veteran helicopter pilot. He seems the closest to a kindred spirit, but there is a feeling there that I cannot explain. I don't think we would be friends on the "outside". Something stands in the way...Is he gay? He sends out cloaked signals. He is definitely a complex person. The dynamics of this jury are most definitely potentially explosive. We have both strong and weak personalities, and I see the possibility of sharp discord when the time comes (to deliberate). Meanwhile I survive, small talk, reading whatever book I check out of the library. So far I have checked out The End of Eternity by Isaac Asimov, The History of Western Civilization, or My Story by Joe Bob Briggs, and Rabbit is Rich by John Updike. Nothing inspirational yet, but we'll see...
I seem to say that a lot. Hmmm.
Next: Day to Day, or Now for Defendant #2.
The journal continues:
Mr. Selvin's opening remarks...
...were something less than spectacular. His client faces the possibility of a death sentence, and the remarks were nothing more than a mild reminder to remain objective, to "trust me", and that "you will see that things are not what they appear to be", referring to Mr. Burr's presentation. He has a strange manner, and it was affecting Juror #9, a woman named Leigh. She was on the verge of losing it with laughter. She thinks he's really buffoonish, a view shared to greater and lesser degrees by everybody, and she's finding it hard to contain herself. I told her that all she needed to do to calm down was to look into the gallery at the relations of Raymond August who have been there every day since the start. Maybe she won't find this so funny anymore after seeing the lines of pain on those people's faces. I'm not an altogether serious person by nature, but this is probably one of the most important things I'll ever do as a human being, and that helps keep my mind on the right track.
The first defense witness was a gentleman who had stopped at a traffic light at the corner of West and 27th St. on the night of Loquann Sloan's murder. He saw a "black male" come around the corner from West to 27th and proceed eastbound. He saw two more "black males" follow about 50 yards behind, coming from the same direction. A white "Chevette-type" vehicle came from the same direction on West, turning quickly onto 27th and through the red light. The next sequence of events is quick: The car stops as three shots are heard, the two "black males" run across the street behind the witness's car yelling "somebody's been shot!". The witness looks in his side view mirror, through glass that is "limo-smoked" tint, and sees the white car drive off. He takes off, returning later to give a statement. All this information is distilled from a fairly combative between him and Mr. Burr. The fellow seemed to be trying to keep from being "railroaded" by the prosecution. He was really defensive, unnecessarily so, and it was a little painful for us to listen to him when there really was no problem. I think he felt that Mr. Burr represented The System, the same one that held him for several hours the night of Loquann Sloan's murder. He was cooped up in an interrogation room at OPD, and he probably didn't enjoy it.
Next on the All-Star Chuck Stevens defense parade was Mrs. Ziegler. She was a real hoot! What is it with the old black ladies living on the 700 block of 27th Street? This lady got up there, she must have been seventy years old, and she was wearing a very shiny silver blouse with gold ornaments on it, along with several necklaces and intricately designed earrings. To be blunt, she looked like an aged madam. I don't know if these were her best clothes, or whether she always dresses this way. Anyway, she began her recounting of the events of the night Sloan was killed. She lives, still, in the house right above the murder scene. She was somewhat confused about the facts, but eventually Mr. Selvin was able to glean a certain chronology from her. She was in her bedroom that night, just about to get into bed. She heard three sharp sounds and assumed that her daughter was banging on the door, trying to get in. When she didn't hear any other sounds she looked out the window of her bedroom. She saw a male black man run from the area just behind her car into the street and jump into the passenger side of a vehicle which had pulled up there. (The earlier witness claimed that nobody had entered or left the vehicle he saw) She crossed from the bedroom to the living room. By the time she looked out of that window she saw the car pull away and a body was lying on the sidewalk. She then dialed 911. It was really funny watching Mr. Selvin struggle through this lady's testimony. He asked her specific questions about her position in the house, her angle on the scene, the position of her car in the driveway, the autos in the street, the number of steps the suspect took between one position and the next, what time it was, time intervals, so many things... She tried to answer as best she could, but it was apparent that Mr. Selvin had little experience with older people. He tried leading her through several sequences. only to have Mr. Burr object to the questions being leading. When he re-phrased the questions to suit the objection, Mrs. Ziegler couldn't answer the question properly. We got a fair picture of what she saw, and it wasn't much. Mr. Burr was able to exercise patience and tact with her, and his questions simply clarified in a matter of minutes what it had taken Selvin an eternity to accomplish. No doubt about it, if nothing else this guy is a master showman, using the defense's own witness against him.
We spent a lot of time in the jury room today, just waiting around. This doesn't even require speculation. It's obvious that certain items of evidence or questioning or procedure are being discussed out of our presence in order to present a proper case to us. It may be proper in the strictest legal sense, but it makes for some extremely tedious work. The other folks I share the jury room with are nice enough, but I have to admit that none of them would be particularly interesting to me as acquaintances save one: A fellow named Skip, a Vietnam War veteran helicopter pilot. He seems the closest to a kindred spirit, but there is a feeling there that I cannot explain. I don't think we would be friends on the "outside". Something stands in the way...Is he gay? He sends out cloaked signals. He is definitely a complex person. The dynamics of this jury are most definitely potentially explosive. We have both strong and weak personalities, and I see the possibility of sharp discord when the time comes (to deliberate). Meanwhile I survive, small talk, reading whatever book I check out of the library. So far I have checked out The End of Eternity by Isaac Asimov, The History of Western Civilization, or My Story by Joe Bob Briggs, and Rabbit is Rich by John Updike. Nothing inspirational yet, but we'll see...
I seem to say that a lot. Hmmm.
Next: Day to Day, or Now for Defendant #2.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
The Trial: Deja Vu
It's yesterday once more...
2/23/93
This morning Mr. Burr reopened the case for the prosecution long enough to introduce some new evidence. I had been prepared to hear Mr. Selvin's opening remarks, but what we ended up seeing this morning hardened my view considerably toward Charles Stevens. Paul Fenn was brough to the stand again, and he identified lead fragments and two copper jackets that he had found around the inside of his van for a few days after being shot at on the Harrison Street/Oakland Avenue off ramp. Next, Lansing Lee, the OPD's criminologist, stated that the jacketing had been fired from a weapon with 6-right. polygonal rifling. Mr. Selvin got Lee to admit that a person could take the .357 mag bullet out of the casing, or buy it separately, and then reload it into a 9mm casing, firing it through another polygonal barrel. Sorry, doughboy. (I refer to Mr. Selvin in this way because of his pasty skin and The Ladyfingers Incident) I don't buy it. When a person could buy ammo of that type that was suited to that gun, he wouldn't go to the trouble to reload it just to save a few pennies per round. Besides, the 9mm is a .355 bullet; the .357 bullet reloaded into the 9mm casing would fit, but dangerously close, with a possibility for blowback in the breech. Not worth the trouble.
The last witness for The People was Sgt. McKenna. He explained that the jackets and lead fragments had been given to the OPD Property Section, only to be forgotten. He was pretty straightforward about it, as might be expected. He's a very sober fellow, never once cracking a rather grim facade. I can imagine that it must be tough being a homicide inspector for a happenin' town like Oakland.
The real bombshell came just before lunch. Sgt. McKenna identified an envelope that was found on Chuck's dresser the day of the search (and the death of Raymond August). On the back side of the envelope we saw a list of numbers and letters, followed by a dash at each number, and another number, like this:
Sgt. McKenna identified the first number as the designation under the California Penal Code for assault with a deadly weapon. The next dealt with auto theft Section 187 designates the crime of murder. The last is a violation of the forearms code. (There is also a mysterious gap in the list, and we don't find out until after the trial what was not shown to us that day) With no real fanfare, Mr. Burr has presented us with Charles Stevens' scorecard, listing in detail the crimes he has committed. This really dealt a hell of a blow to his case, even before we've heard it. I will be very interested in seeing how the defense explains what it means to them. We looked at pictures of the DaSilva shooting scene, Paul Fenn's van, and the neighborhood around Santa Clara Ave/Chetwood Ave/Jean Street. The prosecution makes a good case for itself, with all these assaults occurring in the same area at the same time with a unique weapon, no further assaults or physical evidence connected with the gun type since then. Tough stuff to overcome. We'll see...
Next Chapter: Doughboy makes the Case
2/23/93
This morning Mr. Burr reopened the case for the prosecution long enough to introduce some new evidence. I had been prepared to hear Mr. Selvin's opening remarks, but what we ended up seeing this morning hardened my view considerably toward Charles Stevens. Paul Fenn was brough to the stand again, and he identified lead fragments and two copper jackets that he had found around the inside of his van for a few days after being shot at on the Harrison Street/Oakland Avenue off ramp. Next, Lansing Lee, the OPD's criminologist, stated that the jacketing had been fired from a weapon with 6-right. polygonal rifling. Mr. Selvin got Lee to admit that a person could take the .357 mag bullet out of the casing, or buy it separately, and then reload it into a 9mm casing, firing it through another polygonal barrel. Sorry, doughboy. (I refer to Mr. Selvin in this way because of his pasty skin and The Ladyfingers Incident) I don't buy it. When a person could buy ammo of that type that was suited to that gun, he wouldn't go to the trouble to reload it just to save a few pennies per round. Besides, the 9mm is a .355 bullet; the .357 bullet reloaded into the 9mm casing would fit, but dangerously close, with a possibility for blowback in the breech. Not worth the trouble.
The last witness for The People was Sgt. McKenna. He explained that the jackets and lead fragments had been given to the OPD Property Section, only to be forgotten. He was pretty straightforward about it, as might be expected. He's a very sober fellow, never once cracking a rather grim facade. I can imagine that it must be tough being a homicide inspector for a happenin' town like Oakland.
The real bombshell came just before lunch. Sgt. McKenna identified an envelope that was found on Chuck's dresser the day of the search (and the death of Raymond August). On the back side of the envelope we saw a list of numbers and letters, followed by a dash at each number, and another number, like this:
Sgt. McKenna identified the first number as the designation under the California Penal Code for assault with a deadly weapon. The next dealt with auto theft Section 187 designates the crime of murder. The last is a violation of the forearms code. (There is also a mysterious gap in the list, and we don't find out until after the trial what was not shown to us that day) With no real fanfare, Mr. Burr has presented us with Charles Stevens' scorecard, listing in detail the crimes he has committed. This really dealt a hell of a blow to his case, even before we've heard it. I will be very interested in seeing how the defense explains what it means to them. We looked at pictures of the DaSilva shooting scene, Paul Fenn's van, and the neighborhood around Santa Clara Ave/Chetwood Ave/Jean Street. The prosecution makes a good case for itself, with all these assaults occurring in the same area at the same time with a unique weapon, no further assaults or physical evidence connected with the gun type since then. Tough stuff to overcome. We'll see...
Next Chapter: Doughboy makes the Case
Monday, March 1, 2010
The Trial: Second Wind
Real Life was weird around this time. Every day I walked out of the madness and mayhem and into school conferences, paying the rent, doing my job. It was like leaving a movie. It stuck with me, coloring my view on the day to day shit coming at me. My company had a bowling party one Saturday and I enjoyed the chance to get away from it all, drink some beers and knock over a few pins. One of my buddies had a friend with him. The dude heard that I was on the Freeway Shooter jury and came over to me. "Hey that's cool, man. Guy had a Desert Eagle, right? I heard that he..." "Hey!", I said, "I'm not supposed to talk about the trial. I'd be in deep shit if I did." He tried to just wave it off, like hey, nobody will know, but that just wasn't my style.
My journal from 1993 continues...
2/17/93 (One day after my birthday)
Today Mr. Burr concluded the case for the prosecution. We have heard from many witnesses concerning each individual scene, and here are my opinions so far:
-Leslie Noyer
From the taped statement it is obvious to me that Richard Clark murdered the woman. He admits to it directly, with no more emotion than he might display describing throwing out the garbage. I am appalled and angry at him for this act, though I will listen with whatever objectivity I can muster to his attorney, the ever-smiling Mr. Zimmer. Charles Stevens left a palm print on the RX7 found at the scene, and of course the Desert Eagle is his. No witnesses have been called to place him there, though Mr. Burr continues to imply his presence through photographs and testimony showing the proximity of Stevens' apartment house to the scene of the shooting.
The taped statement from Clark mentions a black prostitute (who) performed oral sex on him, but I suppose she hasn't been found or whatever. There is also the question of who Mario is, the mystery man in or not in the car around the night of the Stokes and August incident. But I get ahead of myself...
-Anderson/Lee
Eight casings found at the scene are positively matched to the Desert Eagle Exhibit #40 by ballistics criminologist Lansing Lee. The scene is just a couple of hundred yards from Stevens' apartment. Jenelle Lee gives a partial identification of Stevens himself, though she only sees him for a second or two before he starts firing. These were two lucky ladies.
-Loquan Sloan
As I have said, the boy was quite simply executed. The casings (3) at the scene are positively identified as coming from the Desert Eagle. This scene is the farthest West from Stevens' home, though it has been stated that the trip between them is only five minutes or so...I believe firmly at this point that this murder qualifies as one involving special circumstances, unless the defense admits to the responsibility and builds a case around the actual nature of the shooting. It won't be easy to change my mind right now.
-Fenn/Peters
This shooting scene bears all of the same method that is described by Stokes. There really isn't enough physical evidence to say with absolute certainty that Stevens did the shooting. Thing is, though, that just minutes later, after the "white sedan" in the Fenn/Peters (shooting) turns left on Pearl from Harrison...
-Upendra DaSilva
...is assaulted on Oakland Avenue, not far from the intersection with Santa Clara. That's a straight shot down to Jean Street. The casing found at the scene came from the infamous Desert Eagle. There are also the slugs and copper jackets which have become so familiar to me now.
-Lori Rochon
No casings found, but the slug that tore through that poor woman's body was quite well intact enough to be linked to a .357, polygonal, right-wound weapon; only the Desert Eagle fits that set of characteristics.The scene of the killing is within easy reach of Stevens' home, and no other murder or shooting has occurred using that type of weaponry or ammunition since. (Stevens was apprehended) The DA made a point, initially contested by Selvin, of telling us that nobody had offered any evidence since then leading to any other suspect, even though a reward had been offered.
-Rodney Stokes (and Raymond August)
No doubt about it, this is the most damning evidence against Stevens. We listened to his testimony for over two hours today, and his memory is impeccable. He remembers every detail with clarity, and identified Stevens positively in court and at the scene. He was a man involved in extraordinary and terrible circumstances, and he came through it with guts and courage.
(We discovered later that he had also been threatened with death if he testified by some of Stevens' lowlife friends)
He saw Raymond August murdered by Stevens; the physical evidence is clear in implicating the man. I have no doubt that Stevens should be severely punished for this crime. I will ponder just how far this severity needs to be carried.
The search of Stevens' home shows all the classic symptoms of the serial killer as seen on TV. Newspapers recounting each of the shootings, the cardboard wrapping for a dent-puller used to strip RX7 ignitions, all of the paraphernalia for the Desert Eagle, identical ammunition to that found at most of the crime scenes, some unidentified (though obviously important) 3x5 photos. The defense has so far laid down a patchwork plan, though I'm sure that will flesh out. Mr. Selvin has tried to cloud some inconsequential issues, though one stands out slightly. Technically speaking, the bolt from the Stevens Desert Eagle could be removed and used in another identical weapon, leaving the same identifying marks on the casings.
The probability or possibility that this happened is slim enough in my mind as to be out of the question. The gun is rare enough, much less would somebody ask to use the firing bolt alone, in exchange for what(?).
A brief word about Selvin and Zimmer. I am frankly not impressed. From the beginning they have seemed ineffectual, capricious, only semi-serious. Their questions have been without much point, except to interrupt. They asked me stupid questions while the jury interviews were going on, and they have asked frivolous questions about whether people have been to bakeries or whatever. I get the feeling that most, if not all of the jury had no respect for these two fellows. They'll have a lot of ground to make up with us before they're back even with Mr. Burr. He is self-assured and confident, with a businesslike manner. I have been impressed with his presentation.
On Monday, Part II of this act begins. Hold on tight...
My journal from 1993 continues...
2/17/93 (One day after my birthday)
Today Mr. Burr concluded the case for the prosecution. We have heard from many witnesses concerning each individual scene, and here are my opinions so far:
-Leslie Noyer
From the taped statement it is obvious to me that Richard Clark murdered the woman. He admits to it directly, with no more emotion than he might display describing throwing out the garbage. I am appalled and angry at him for this act, though I will listen with whatever objectivity I can muster to his attorney, the ever-smiling Mr. Zimmer. Charles Stevens left a palm print on the RX7 found at the scene, and of course the Desert Eagle is his. No witnesses have been called to place him there, though Mr. Burr continues to imply his presence through photographs and testimony showing the proximity of Stevens' apartment house to the scene of the shooting.
The taped statement from Clark mentions a black prostitute (who) performed oral sex on him, but I suppose she hasn't been found or whatever. There is also the question of who Mario is, the mystery man in or not in the car around the night of the Stokes and August incident. But I get ahead of myself...
-Anderson/Lee
Eight casings found at the scene are positively matched to the Desert Eagle Exhibit #40 by ballistics criminologist Lansing Lee. The scene is just a couple of hundred yards from Stevens' apartment. Jenelle Lee gives a partial identification of Stevens himself, though she only sees him for a second or two before he starts firing. These were two lucky ladies.
-Loquan Sloan
As I have said, the boy was quite simply executed. The casings (3) at the scene are positively identified as coming from the Desert Eagle. This scene is the farthest West from Stevens' home, though it has been stated that the trip between them is only five minutes or so...I believe firmly at this point that this murder qualifies as one involving special circumstances, unless the defense admits to the responsibility and builds a case around the actual nature of the shooting. It won't be easy to change my mind right now.
-Fenn/Peters
This shooting scene bears all of the same method that is described by Stokes. There really isn't enough physical evidence to say with absolute certainty that Stevens did the shooting. Thing is, though, that just minutes later, after the "white sedan" in the Fenn/Peters (shooting) turns left on Pearl from Harrison...
-Upendra DaSilva
...is assaulted on Oakland Avenue, not far from the intersection with Santa Clara. That's a straight shot down to Jean Street. The casing found at the scene came from the infamous Desert Eagle. There are also the slugs and copper jackets which have become so familiar to me now.
-Lori Rochon
No casings found, but the slug that tore through that poor woman's body was quite well intact enough to be linked to a .357, polygonal, right-wound weapon; only the Desert Eagle fits that set of characteristics.The scene of the killing is within easy reach of Stevens' home, and no other murder or shooting has occurred using that type of weaponry or ammunition since. (Stevens was apprehended) The DA made a point, initially contested by Selvin, of telling us that nobody had offered any evidence since then leading to any other suspect, even though a reward had been offered.
-Rodney Stokes (and Raymond August)
No doubt about it, this is the most damning evidence against Stevens. We listened to his testimony for over two hours today, and his memory is impeccable. He remembers every detail with clarity, and identified Stevens positively in court and at the scene. He was a man involved in extraordinary and terrible circumstances, and he came through it with guts and courage.
(We discovered later that he had also been threatened with death if he testified by some of Stevens' lowlife friends)
He saw Raymond August murdered by Stevens; the physical evidence is clear in implicating the man. I have no doubt that Stevens should be severely punished for this crime. I will ponder just how far this severity needs to be carried.
The search of Stevens' home shows all the classic symptoms of the serial killer as seen on TV. Newspapers recounting each of the shootings, the cardboard wrapping for a dent-puller used to strip RX7 ignitions, all of the paraphernalia for the Desert Eagle, identical ammunition to that found at most of the crime scenes, some unidentified (though obviously important) 3x5 photos. The defense has so far laid down a patchwork plan, though I'm sure that will flesh out. Mr. Selvin has tried to cloud some inconsequential issues, though one stands out slightly. Technically speaking, the bolt from the Stevens Desert Eagle could be removed and used in another identical weapon, leaving the same identifying marks on the casings.
The probability or possibility that this happened is slim enough in my mind as to be out of the question. The gun is rare enough, much less would somebody ask to use the firing bolt alone, in exchange for what(?).
A brief word about Selvin and Zimmer. I am frankly not impressed. From the beginning they have seemed ineffectual, capricious, only semi-serious. Their questions have been without much point, except to interrupt. They asked me stupid questions while the jury interviews were going on, and they have asked frivolous questions about whether people have been to bakeries or whatever. I get the feeling that most, if not all of the jury had no respect for these two fellows. They'll have a lot of ground to make up with us before they're back even with Mr. Burr. He is self-assured and confident, with a businesslike manner. I have been impressed with his presentation.
On Monday, Part II of this act begins. Hold on tight...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)