“No, I didn’t, sir.”
“You didn’t get that from the news?”
“No. Not at all.”
“Is that a part you just made up?”
“No. I done gave my testimony way before I ever heard anything of that nature in the news.”
“And you said you were interviewed by the police—that was a year after you were here in Wake County jail, wasn’t it?”
“Probably so.”
“Press also reported there was a custody dispute, didn’t they?”
“Um, when I was in Albemarle Jail in Elizabeth City, they don’t cover North Carolina news, so once I left Wake County, I never heard anything about Grant Hayes case on the news.”
Jeff Cutler insisted that Pablo Trinidad had been facing a twenty-one-year sentence before he spoke about Grant Hayes, and Pablo contradicted him saying that it was only 360 months. Cutler then alleged that was proof that he’d already been given an advantage for just saying he would appear today and testify for the prosecution. “If you’ve already been paid for making those statements, you’ve already benefited from those things you told the feds, isn’t that right? So this is your only real chance to get it reduced again, isn’t it?”
“Hoping—I’m hoping that I’ll get some relief, but once again I was never promised—I haven’t spoken to anybody saying to me I am going to get some relief from this testimony I’m giving today.”
On re-direct, prosecutor Becky Holt asked a series of questions about what Pablo had seen on the news. Pablo responded negatively on each point she raised. Then she said, “Was there anything—anything in the news about the victim being an unfit mother?”
Pablo said no.
“Was there anything in the news about the victim?”
“No, ma’am.”
After a few questions about specific information about Laura Ackerson, Holt asked, “Was all that information provided to you by the defendant?”
“Yes, ma’am.”
To his great relief, Pablo Trinidad was finally released from the witness box.
CHAPTER THIRTY-FIVE
DR. Deborah Radisch, chief medical examiner for North Carolina, had been with the department nearly continuously since 1983 and had served as chief since July 2010. Her record of effective performance on the witness stand was legendary.
Dr. Radisch had chin-length white-blonde hair and wore glasses, and she told the jury that she first became involved in the case when Detective Robert Latour of the Raleigh Police Department called her from Galveston, Texas, to inquire about preserving material to make tool-mark comparisons. She explained her examination of the remains prior to sending them to Dr. Ann Ross for analysis on the dismemberment cuts.
When asked about the stab wound, Radisch told the jury that if the puncture in C4, the fourth cervical vertebrae, came from the back, it could have struck important arteries or veins. From the front, it would probably cause a leak in the airway or a cut on the esophagus. For most of the possible angles for this wound, the damage would not be immediately fatal, although if the weapon hit the carotid artery, it would have been a very quick death.
The prosecution asked about her conclusions in the death of Laura Ackerson. Dr. Radisch said that there was a “possibility that injuries represent an asphyxial cause of death or means of death. . . . There was not enough information with the parts we received to determine the exact cause of death.” She could not determine if Laura was stabbed to death or strangled to death because of the decomposition to the head. However, she said, it was clear that Laura died by “undetermined homicidal violence.”
On cross-examination, the defense alleged that, according to Dr. Nobby Mambo’s testimony, the doctor had crushed the thyroid cartilage during examination. Dr. Radisch admitted she had no knowledge of that since it was not in his report, but said, “There’s no evidence of healing, so it’s an acute injury, but there’s no evidence if it happened before she died or just after she died at the time of death, you just can’t tell. It’s kind of a fresh injury.”
The defense pressed her about the broken and glued tooth in the skull. She said with a shrug, “When you work with them, they kind of fall out and you put them back in.”
—
DETECTIVE Jerry Faulk, with the homicide unit of the Raleigh Police Department and lead investigator in the case, enumerated and presented into evidence the exhibits he collected from Grant and Amanda’s home. Among them were receipts for many different purchases around the time of Laura’s death, including Grant’s shopping trip to Wal-Mart.
It had to be a challenge for the jury to absorb all these details, but nothing compared to getting their minds around the idea of someone going into a store and picking out a power tool and blades knowing he was going to use to cut up another human being’s body.
Over strong objections from the defense, Faulk read into the public record the lyrics to “Man Killer,” one of Grant’s compositions. “Give into me, I want it all, I want your scream, I want your crawl. I’ll make you bleed, fall to the floor. Don’t try to plead, that turns me on. I’ll take the keys to your car and some more. . . . I’m not the one to make you scream. I’m just the one to make you bleed. Don’t raise your arms, you can’t stop me. I’ll put my hands on your throat and squeeze.”
—
THE jurors then heard from one of the last people to see Laura Ackerson alive, Randy Jenkins, the owner and operator of Bill’s Grill, a small restaurant in the farming community of Black Creek, North Carolina. Randy described it as a “quaint little, sort of like Mayberry, type of place.”
Randy said he’d found Laura to be “very poised and very excited about her new business venture” and he’d signed a contract with her for menus. He noted that he’d urged her to change her appointment in Raleigh because of the heavy traffic at that time of day but she’d insisted that she had to go there anyway.
The defense had no questions for this witness.
Susan Dufur, the assistant manager at the Brier Creek Wal-Mart in July 2011, stepped into the stand next. The state played the video of Grant shopping in her store just after two A.M. on July 14. She took the jury through the details of her interaction with the defendant regarding his purchase of a reciprocating saw, goggles, plastic trash bags and tarps. “He was very inquisitive and laid-back—not excited or rattled or panicky,” she said. “He was calm the whole time he interacted with me.”
—
THE state then played a recording of “Broomstick Rider,” another one of Grant Hayes’s songs. The defense objected, but the judge overruled.
As the music played in the courtroom, Grant bopped and bobbed his head along as if he were so totally caught up in his creation that he was unaware of his surroundings.
The prosecutors provided the jury with a transcript of the lyrics. “Baby Mama. I got two kids by you. I can’t take any more from you. The way we slept was so cold, I’d wake up every morning wondering which of us would go. I’m paying her bills. Find another sugar daddy. You tryin’ to take my kids. That’s the way you live. I warned you—don’t say I didn’t warn you. I don’t want your drama. I have two kids by you. I can’t take anything more from you. Price tag on your head. You must’ve told your attorney, I have intentions of killing you.”
With that, the state rested its case.
CHAPTER THIRTY-SIX
THE same day that the state ended its presentation, the defense called its first witness, Amanda Hayes’s sister Karen Berry.
Karen took the stand, appearing beaten down by the direction life had taken in the last couple of years. Her long platinum blonde hair was pushed back from her face with a headband.
She explained to the jury that she was much older than Amanda and had always been more like a mother to her than a sister. When asked about the last time she’d seen her sister prior to July 2011, Karen said, “I saw her two years earli
er, in June 2009, but I don’t think I saw her in between. We stayed in contact by telephone but not regularly.”
Karen didn’t remember exactly when Amanda called, but she knew it was after their mother had died in June 2011. “Amanda said she wanted to see me, she missed me and her husband sold his computer equipment so she could come to see me because she’s [been] missing me really bad.”
Karen told the jury that Amanda and her family arrived early Monday morning, July 18, 2011. The next day, she said, “Amanda wanted to speak to me alone. She said, ‘I hurt Laura and I hurt her bad.’ She needed to talk to me.” Karen said, after that, she had a conversation with Grant and Amanda about the creek across the street.
“What about the creek across the street?” the defense attorney asked.
“I don’t know. They knew about the boat because there had been a discussion about taking the boys fishing before they came.”
“Did you at some point put two and two together that Laura was with them?”
“I can’t say I put two and two together but I had suspicions that something was wrong.”
“Did you come to the conclusion at some point that Laura was dead?”
“I think so. I did come to realize that Laura was dead.”
After going over the arrival and departure times, the defense asked, “Did there come a time when Grant and Amanda used the boat?”
“Yes sir,” Karen said. “They had asked to use the boat or they asked when they first got there or maybe even before because they asked—they were planning to take the boys fishing in it. . . . I told them they could use the boat but it wasn’t safe for the little ones.”
When asked about the arrival of the detectives the next Sunday, Karen said, “I told the detectives that I didn’t want to go to court and testify against my sister but I was afraid I was going to have to one day. . . . I had chest pains when I was talking to them because of the difficulty of saying what I had to say and the stress of the situation. . . . I told the police that Amanda came to me because she always came to me—to my house.”
On cross-examination the prosecution focused on what Amanda had told her sister about hurting Laura. “At one point, you told detectives that you weren’t sure if she told you she hurt Laura real bad or that Laura was dead. This morning, are you sure she said Laura was hurt bad or did she say Laura was dead?”
“I’m just . . .”
“Back when you told detectives you didn’t know if she told you she hurt Laura real bad if she told you she was dead, correct?”
“If I said it back then, it’s correct. ’Cause I don’t remember right now what exactly.”
The pain and distaste battling for control of Karen’s face were washed away by relief with the realization that court was adjourned for the day. The questions, however, continued the next morning, September 13, 2013.
While they were at her house, Karen said, Grant spent almost all of his time outside while Amanda was in the house with the babies.
Regarding Amanda’s newborn daughter, the prosecution clarified, “And Lily was a little bit over . . . a month old?”
Karen’s mouth twisted, her face contorted, and she choked out a response laden with emotion, “Yes, sir.” She sniffed, sobbed and grabbed a tissue. With deliberation, she inhaled deeply and exhaled a jagged breath through pursed lips. She wiped away tears and said, “I’m okay.”
“We’re not in any hurry, Ms. Berry. Just take your time,” the judge told her.
Karen held a tissue to her eyes with one hand, clutched her elbow with the other and pulled both arms protectively into her chest. After a few sniffles, she said, “Go ahead.”
Assistant District Attorney Boz Zellinger asked, “Grant wasn’t with Lily much at all, was he?”
“No, sir. . . . He only wanted her to take pictures or something.”
She responded to Zellinger’s questions by saying that she hadn’t noticed the coolers until an hour before they left her house. She saw Grant wash out the U-Haul and told herself that it must have rained in North Carolina and it was all muddy in the back. She didn’t want to think, she said, she’d just wanted them to leave. Karen’s lower lip and chin started to quiver again and she grabbed another tissue to wipe her nose.
She said that Wednesday morning, she and Amanda sat down with a cup of coffee “and we were fixin’ to talk about my mother, ’cause she just passed away. We just got started—really didn’t get started good” when Grant interrupted and told Amanda she needed to get ready to go right away. Later they did talk briefly, and Karen asked if she was covering for Grant, and Amanda nodded.
On re-direct, the defense put Karen on the spot about Amanda’s comment saying she hurt Laura. They pushed her so hard that the prosecution objected and the judge reminded the defense attorneys that Karen Berry was their witness.
Defense attorney Jeff Cutler pulled out transcripts of Karen’s interviews with law enforcement and entered them into evidence. “Did you tell detectives that Amanda wanted to tell you about something serious?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Did you tell detectives in that first interview that she hurt Laura?”
“Yes, sir.”
“She told you she hurt Laura and hurt her bad?”
“Yes, sir.”
“Do you remember Detective Gill asking you specifically, ‘Karen, what did she say?’ He asked you that question?”
“Yes, sir.”
“You remember saying, ‘She said she hurt her.’”
“I remember because I looked over the statements, yes, sir.”
“Did you say you asked her, ‘How did you hurt Laura?’ Do you remember that?”
“Did he ask me if she told me how she hurt Laura? Yes, he asked me that.”
“And you said it was bad?”
Karen paused and turned her head, thinking, “Yes, I probably said that, yes.”
“Amanda never told you exactly how she hurt Laura?”
“No, sir.”
After hammering away at that point for a few more questions, Cutler asked, “Do you remember telling Detective Latour that Grant came over, Grant said he loved her, he’d taken vows and he was going to take care of Amanda?”
“I don’t remember saying it.”
The attorney handed her a page of the transcript. She reviewed it, but although she still did not remember saying it, she believed she must have because it was in the document.
“Do you remember if Amanda ever said anything to you about Grant hurting Laura?”
“No, sir,” Karen replied. “She never told me anything about Grant hurting Laura except the time she shook her head and told me she was covering for him. That’s the only time.”
“You wanted to believe your sister didn’t you?”
“I can’t say that I wanted, because I don’t know what I wanted. I just know I looked her straight in her face as I’ve always done to get her to tell me the truth. And at that moment, I believed without a doubt in my mind that she was covering for him. And she looked me straight in the face and shook her head yes.”
The defense returned to the statement Karen had made about not wanting to testify against her sister in court and asked her if she’d said that. Karen broke down again and choked through the tears coursing down her cheeks, “Yes, sir. Yes, sir, I did.”
—
JEFF Cutler called Detective Faulk back to the witness stand. They used him to introduce a number of newspaper articles designed to undermine the credibility of Pablo Trinidad’s testimony. The defense attorney then had Faulk read a number of pleasant e-mail exchanges between Grant and Laura.
On cross, Assistant District Attorney Becky Holt established that Pablo Trinidad had given his information to the federal prosecutors before many of the articles just read into the record had been posted online. Then she elicited from Detective Faulk the
information that they had never found Laura’s phone, her recorder, the two bags she had with her when she left the apartment that morning, or the black blouse or brown pants she was wearing that day.
On re-direct, the defense confirmed that Grant had texted Lauren Harris about a visit with Laura and the boys to Monkey Joe’s on July 13, 2011. Detective Faulk was excused from the stand and the defense rested their case.
CHAPTER THIRTY-SEVEN
WILL Durham delivered the first part of the defense’s closing arguments in a mocking, flippant tone of voice, as if the prosecution’s case was one big joke. “I told you on the first day that this case is about a man trying to cover up his wife’s actions. And the state has not proven anything different now. Your Honor will tell you that proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that fully satisfies you—entirely convinces you of the defendant’s guilt.”
He reminded the jurors that they promised not to convict unless guilt was fully proven and now they needed to decide between first or second degree murder and not guilty. He, of course, urged the latter.
He explained that first degree murder required malice, premeditation, deliberation and planning. “The evidence in this case—all the evidence you’ve heard—doesn’t make any sense with a planned-out killing. If it was, it would be the most incomprehensible plan in the world. The saw was purchased after. The cleaning supplies were purchased after. The U-Haul trailer was rented after. They didn’t even have a hitch on the car.”
Durham went on, “And you heard about this note—and you saw it, it was one of the last things you saw—where Laura Ackerson gave up custody for twenty-five thousand dollars. We know it’s Laura’s writing on that. The FBI examiner examined her handwriting and said, ‘She wrote that.’ You’ve seen the signature. The FBI examiner couldn’t come to a conclusion on that because she couldn’t get copies of Laura Ackerson’s signature.
“If you’re going to kill someone to get custody, you don’t need an agreement that says you get custody. Doesn’t make any sense with a plan. And that would be the dumbest plan in history to have someone come to your house so that you could kill them in your home, with your children present?”
Bitter Remains Page 18
