Authors: Diane Fanning
Written in Blood (25 page)
The defense opened its case on Monday, September 8. Their first witness was Dr. Jan Leestma, a forensic neuropathologist. At the request of the prosecution, he was first questioned outside the presence of the jury.
“With regard to Kathleen Peterson, do you have an opinion whether or not injuries she sustained both externally and internally are consistent with a beating?” Rudolf asked.
“Yes, I do have an opinion.”
“What is that opinion?”
“That they are not consistent with that scenario,” Dr. Leestma said.
Rudolf waved the blowpoke around in the air. Dr. Leestma examined it and declared he disagreed with Dr. Radisch's testimony that it could inflict the wounds of Kathleen Peterson.
“Dr. Radisch also testified that, in her opinion, the injuries, both internal and external, on Mrs. Peterson were not consistent with an accident in that stairwell. Do you agree or disagree with that?”
“I disagree with that interpretation.”
While the district attorney cross-examined, boisterous
laughter and loud voices emerged from the jury room. The noise had begun as a distant murmur, now it was the dominant sound in the courtroom. Judge Hudson stopped the proceedings to have the jurors moved to the jury pool room upstairs.
laughter and loud voices emerged from the jury room. The noise had begun as a distant murmur, now it was the dominant sound in the courtroom. Judge Hudson stopped the proceedings to have the jurors moved to the jury pool room upstairs.
Broadcast pundits seized on this incident. Some thought it indicative that the jury did not take the case seriously. Others expressed the opinion that if the jury was in a good mood at this point of the trial, they would never convict Michael Peterson.
After lunch, the jurors were seated again in the courtroom. Dr. Leestma reiterated his disagreement with the opinions of Dr. Radisch in both autopsies. He expressed the view that there were four lacerations on Kathleen's headâthe result of two falls causing two impacts each.
When Rudolf asked, “Could Radisch and Gleckman, with just half a brain, overrule the decision of AFIP and Dr. Barnes?” the doctor said, “No, I think she had a stroke.”
He claimed that there were abnormalities in Kathleen's heart tissue that could account for dizziness. He concluded by repeating his assertion that Kathleen Peterson's injuries were inconsistent with a beatingâthat they were not typical wounds from a round object and that they were not consistent with blows of any sort. He insisted that there was, “robust and reliable evidence that her injuries were the result of a fall.”
After the defense portion of Leestma's testimony, Rudolf and Michael Peterson looked at each other and grinned hard. Michael Peterson slapped Rudolf on the back. They were certain of victory.
Jim Hardin took the offensive when he began the cross-examination. “How much do you charge per hour for sworn testimony in the courtroom?”
Leestma testified that his in-court testimony rate was $500 per hour. He charged $350 per hour to review records and $75 per hour for travel during a normal workday. He had billed for services two or three times since inception of the caseâfor a total of about $10,000.
Next, Hardin attacked his conclusions in Kathleen Peterson's death. Leestma equivocated about the number of falls and in his certainty that all of her injuries had been caused by those falls.
When asked about the injuries to Kathleen's face, he said, “One possibility I considered, and I have no way to go with it any more than saying, âWell, maybe something like this happened,' is that she ended up somehow on her hands and knees trying to get herself up after one of these falls and somehow either she fainted or she slipped and her face went down on the stairs. I really can't do much better than that, and that borders on speculation on my part.”
“Well, how many times would she have to do that to cause these?”
“Uh, it could be one or two times. I don't know.”
“Could it be more?” Hardin pressed.
“That's possible.”
“Can you say with certainty that she wasn't struck with some instrument to cause them?”
“Those don't look like, uh, blows with some instrument. There's virtually no pattern to themâthey're just bruise-like things. Could there be some
instrument of some sort that could do that? Sure, there could. I just don't know what the impacting surface is.”
instrument of some sort that could do that? Sure, there could. I just don't know what the impacting surface is.”
Asked about what surfaces would cause the injuries to her left shoulder and down to her left hand, he replied, “These look like blunt impacts to something. The floors, the stairs, the wall, who knows?”
“[ â¦] At least it's possible that each of them is individually caused?”
“I suppose it is possible. I think that's unlikely,” Leestma said.
Dr. Leestma stated his belief that original 1985 Elizabeth Ratliff autopsy results were correct. “So, are you eliminating completely the possibility that Elizabeth Ratliff was struck by some instrument?” Hardin asked.
“I think it's unlikely,” Leestma said. Then he blathered about the wounds, trying to avoid giving a direct and definitive answer.
“Okay. SoâBut at least it's possible that Elizabeth Ratliff was struck by some instrument?” Hardin pressed.
“I'll never say never and never say always. So, it's there. It's a possibility.”
The defense next called Major Timothy Palmbach to the stand. He was an employee of the State of Connecticut Department of Public Safety. He also worked part-time for Dr. Henry Lee's Forensic Research Training Center.
The whole purpose of his arrogant testimony was to slash and burn the Durham Police Department and the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation. He criticized the collection of evidence and the length of time it took to tape off the scene and restrict movement near Kathleen's body. But he saved his most vicious attacks for
Agent Deaver. He disputed Deaver's conclusions and ridiculed his technique.
Agent Deaver. He disputed Deaver's conclusions and ridiculed his technique.
When questioned about Palmbach's testimony, some state police officers across the country expressed dismay. They insisted that there is a procedure to follow if another officer suspects wrongful conclusions by a crime scene analyst. There is an official protocol for cleaning up concerns between jurisdictions. Regardless of the merit of his opinions, they professed, revealing this information as a witness for the defense in a murder trial is not one of the methods members of the police force would ordinarily use. However, in the State of Connecticut, there is no official policy and no existing law that prohibited or discouraged Palmbach from presenting this testimony. Due to scheduling difficulties, Palmbach's cross-examination was reserved for a future date.
Following his testimony, the judge ruled that a statement from Christina Tomasetti could be read into the record. Christina was Todd's companion on the night of Kathleen's death. Now she lived on the West Coast, was pregnant and, according to the defense, her doctor did not want her to travel. Many suspicions were raised about the real reason for her absence in the courtroom.
Nonetheless, a member of David Rudolf's staff read her description of the early morning hours of December 9, 2001. Her statement concluded: “Mr. and Mrs. Peterson were in good spirits and very happy when Todd and I left the house at 10:20 P.M., Saturday night. I gave this statement of my own free will.”
In response, the prosecution read the following statement into the record: “On January 8 at 1600, I, Art Holland, interviewed Ms. Christina Tomasetti.
Ms. Tomasetti said she did not see Ms. Peterson while she was in the house.”
Ms. Tomasetti said she did not see Ms. Peterson while she was in the house.”
Then Ron Guerette, the investigator for the defense team, took the stand. He explained how he had ordered the boarding-up of the stairwell and the additional actions he had taken there. He said that he was present every time the plywood was removed for a defense expert to view the stairwell.
With the judge's permission granted, it was now time for the jury to inspect 1810 Cedar Street for themselves. A journalist from the Raleigh
News & Observer
was selected as the press representative at the scene. In his report, he said that the jury members went into the house in two groups of eight. Jury members went one by one to the staircase. Some of them walked all the way up the stairs and downâothers walked halfway up. Some walked three steps up and looked back to see what it would look like to fall from that positionâsome made swinging movements as if the blowpoke were in their hand. Many of them crouched down to look more closely at the blood spatter in the lower level.
News & Observer
was selected as the press representative at the scene. In his report, he said that the jury members went into the house in two groups of eight. Jury members went one by one to the staircase. Some of them walked all the way up the stairs and downâothers walked halfway up. Some walked three steps up and looked back to see what it would look like to fall from that positionâsome made swinging movements as if the blowpoke were in their hand. Many of them crouched down to look more closely at the blood spatter in the lower level.
The defense hoped that the jurors would perceive that the space was too tight to swing a blowpoke. And they did. But some of them came to another conclusion as wellâthat the space was too small for someone to sustain such massive injuries from such a short fall.
When the celebrated Dr. Henry Lee walked to the front of the courtroom, he nodded his head, smiled at the jury and wished them a good morning. He tried at first to project the image of a typical witness, but his Hollywood-enhanced persona overshadowed his pleasantries. The only testimony capable of creating more anticipation than his was the possibility of Michael Peterson facing cross-examination.
Lee testified that medium velocity spatter comes from many things other than impactâshaking hair, a swinging hand. He stood in front of the jury box to demonstrate, telling them he would not use real blood, just red ink.
With a full dropper, he dripped red onto a horizontal white board and then a vertical one, showing examples of low velocity spatter. Using a piece of hair dipped in the red ink, he flipped his wrist and slung medium velocity spatter on a white board held by Rudolf on the edge of the table where Lee performed his demonstration. When he swung a second time, his arm flew upward and flying red ink spattered the defense attorney. Dr. Lee laughed, but Rudolf was not amused.
He then explained that that type of spatter could also be the result of someone coughing, sneezing or wheezing. He held up a bottle and said, “I'm not going to drink ink. I'll use some ketchup. He swigged it into his mouth and coughed onto the white board. The ketchup was diluted and a fine mist flew far and wide around the board and landed on the prosecution table, staining some of the papers there.
Freda Black fumed. When the experimentation continued and she had to duck to avoid the onslaught, she was ready to throttle him.
Lee told the jury that the pattern would be radically different if the person were lying down. Laughing, he said, “I'm not going to lie down.” He turned to the defense table. “Anybody want to lie down? Nobody want to lie down? So we won't do demonstration of lie-down.”
Photographs of Kathleen in death were important evidence. When the prosecution team showed the horrific pictures from the stairwell or the autopsy suite, they held photos up to the jury, but did not display them to the whole courtroom. The defense, however, demonstrated total insensitivity to Kathleen's family members by displaying these photos on a large screen.
Guy Seaberg pressed a key on the computer and there was a close-up of Kathleen's agonized face, larger than life. Dr. Lee pointed out the evidence of blood or a darkish stain around her mouth and on her lip. That, he said, proved that much of the blood on the walls was coughed up by Kathleen.
Rudolf wound up the direct examination of Dr. Lee with a long-winded question that had one succinct
point: Was the evidence more consistent with a beating or was it more consistent with an accident?
point: Was the evidence more consistent with a beating or was it more consistent with an accident?
Lee answered, “It's more consistent with an accident.”
The defense released its witness, but one of Dr. Lee's statements hung like a cloak of deception around the witness box. “There's too much blood for a beating,” he said. This counter-intuitive statement stunned jurors and spectators alike. For some, it was a fatal blow to Dr. Lee's credibility.
On cross-examination by Jim Hardin, Lee confirmed that he did not believe Kathleen died from a beating, but did agree with Agent Deaver's finding of three points of origin in spaceâseemingly contradictory conclusions. He then tap-danced around questions posed about the cause of the lacerations on Kathleen's head.
He testified that a void spot on the wall was not the result of cleaning, but was caused by Kathleen coughing while holding a closed fist to her mouth. He could tell this, he said, because of the ghostingâthe round circles of blood with empty centers.
Hardin asked Dr. Lee if he tested those spots for the presence of saliva.
“Not my responsibility. That's something your local laboratory crime-scene people should do. If they do their job properly,” Lee banged his fingertips on the wood railing, “I don't need to come here. You cannot blame me. Say I did not do test.”
Hardin pushed the issue, causing Lee to get even touchier.
“How many time I have to repeat it?” Lee turned to the jury and smiled. “That's not my job. In Connecticut, I guarantee I would do it.”
Hardin asked him about different photos and blood spatter patterns and what they meant, getting him to admit that the prosecution scenario was possible. Hardin used a photograph to point out stains in the crime scene and to ask Lee if he tested any of them.
Lee laughed and asked, “You want me to work for you? Sure, you can offer me a job in North Carolina.” During direct examination, Lee often made eye contact with the jury, but during cross, the façade of charm slipped.
On his next day of testimony, he discredited Agent Deaver's experiment model in the stairway because Deaver used a head-shaped piece of Styrofoam with a wig in lieu of a human head. He also said that he did not use stringing via a computer model or any other method to determine point of origin. He just used his visual observation.
At first, Lee claimed that he had not used the stringing method since he was a rookie. On further prodding from Hardin, he admitted to using the method in a 1992 case as verified by the photographs in his book. Then, Hardin forced him to acknowledge that he had used the process as recently as a year ago.
After Lee agreed with Agent Deaver's analysis of bloodstains on shoes, Hardin moved on to Peterson's shorts and Lee disparaged the use of experiments at all. He said that it was impossible to reproduce real life and any effort to do so was useless.
Using Lee's book, Hardin went through the cycle process of crime reconstruction iterated there and read a quote from the book about the need for testing to corroborate the reconstructive hypothesis. “You wrote that, didn't you?”
“Yes,” Lee admitted.
When Hardin asked him about any testing he performed on clothing or on any other evidence seized, he argued again that it was not his job.
Hardin continued, “Well, Dr. Lee, you did produce an eight-page report called a âreconstruction report,' didn't you?”
“Yes, I did.”
“And you did that without going through all the phases of the fact-gathering process that you indicated in your book are very important to go through in order to produce a reconstruction?”
“No. I did gather the facts.”
Pressured by Hardin, Lee admitted that Deaver did a good job, but had not considered all the possibilities.
After a break, Hardin asked, “Based on all you saw and all you did, all you didn't do, is it your testimony before this jury that you can absolutely, conclusively exclude that Kathleen Peterson was beaten on her head?”
“My conclusion more consistent with an accidental fall.”
“But you can't exclude that she was beaten?”
“Nobody can.”
Hardin continued to pummel the witness after lunch. He questioned him about a conversation Lee had with Agent Deaver in which he said that what Deaver did was some of the best work Lee had seen.
In response, Lee dithered without giving a real answer to the question.
Hardin pushed harder. “Okay. Do you recall telling him that his work and his conclusions were very close to
yours, but that you differed on how some of the blood spatter occurred? Do you recall that?”
yours, but that you differed on how some of the blood spatter occurred? Do you recall that?”
Lee insisted he did not recall.
“Well, let me show you a copy of your book. You recall giving him a copy of your book, don't you?” Hardin asked.
“Yes, I generally give everybody a copy of my book. I want them to learn.”
[ â¦] “Do you recall signing an inscription with a note to Agent Deaver in this book?”
“Yes.”
[ â¦] “If you would please read what the note says.”
“It says, âTo Duane Deaver, one of the best,'” Lee read. “âKeep up with your good work. With warm regards, Henry Lee.'”
“Okay.”
Lee objected that his courtesy was just the result of his Chinese culture and upbringing. “I cannot say he did not try to do good work.”
A Cheshire grin crept across Hardin's face. “So you are agreeing then that he did good work?”
“I just ⦠What, you want me to say he do lousy work on the book? I cannot say that. Just like I give Mr. Rudolf a book and say he's ⦠âYou're one of the best attorneys,' but he's lousy.”
When Dr. Lee stepped down from the stand, no one at the defense table would look their celebrity witness in the eye. They offered no celebratory handshakes. No pats on anyone's back.
Other books
A Simple Case of Angels by Caroline Adderson
Finding Joy (The Joy Series) (Volume 2) by Jenni Moen
Are These My Basoomas I See Before Me? by Louise Rennison
Now You See Her by Linda Howard
Man in The Woods by Scott Spencer
Murder in Pigalle by Cara Black
A Summons to New Orleans by Hall, Barbara
Intensity by Dean Koontz
La muerte de lord Edgware by Agatha Christie
Diamond Girl by Hewtson, Kathleen
