by Kenneth Eade
Dr. Dutoit’s electric personality put the jurors at ease immediately and he talked to them as if they were guests in his own home, in front of the fireplace drinking hot cocoa. In fact, when he testified, he didn’t address Brent with the answer to his questions. He trained his cloud gray eyes straight at the jurors, as if he were sharing with them a well-kept secret. Then Brent touched on the juiciest part; the one that Stein was sure to capitalize on.
“Dr. Dutoit, you were paid to appear here today, isn’t that correct?”
“Yes, I was.”
“What is your hourly rate?”
“I charge $450 per hour for studies and reports and $600 per hour for court time.”
“And have you worked for both plaintiffs and defendants?”
“I have. I’ve also worked for the prosecution and defense side in numerous criminal cases.”
Not missing a beat, Brent moved to the meat of Dr. Dutoit’s testimony.
“Dr. Dutoit, when I hired you for this case, I asked you to examine documents that Ms. Solomon had notarized for Prudent Bank, is that correct?”
“Yes.”
“What did I ask you to look for?”
“You asked me to look for discrepancies in her signature.”
“What documents did you examine?”
“I reviewed and analyzed over 500 documents that were allegedly notarized by Ms. Solomon. There are many elements that go into signature analysis, and I examined and considered them all.”
“Can you explain the process of signature analysis and what elements you examined in each signature sample?”
“Certainly. The process of signing one’s name is unique to every individual, like a fingerprint. A signature consists of a series of rapid movements, made by the human neuromuscular system. It is essentially a task of pattern recognition.
There are two types of signature analysis; offline, which is the study of the patterns of the genuine signature in comparison to the suspect signature, and online, which involves the use of special software that has been developed to evaluate not only the contours but the movements made to create a signature.”
“Doctor, can you explain this in layman’s terms?”
“Of course. It would be easier to demonstrate. May I?”
“Yes.”
Dutoit put the demonstration samples of Solomon’s signature on the overhead and went through them with his pointer.
“Here are the signature samples taken this morning from the witness, Judy Solomon. Every genuine signature will vary from one to another, but a trained eye looks for patterns in the genuine signature that are always the same; such as the height and width of the signature, here,” said Dutoit, pointing at the examples. “You can see that these signatures are all about the same height and width even though they may vary in size.
“We also look at the slant and angle of the signature, and you can see that there is the same basic slant and angle pattern with each one of these examples, even though they vary in total size. We also look for horizontal and vertical peaks, like these here, and differences in baseline shift between the vertical centers of gravity as I am pointing out on these examples, between the left and the right part of the signature image, the number of cross points, which are these, and the number of closed loops, which you can see here.”
“Then, after looking at the images, we grid them, as you can see that I have done in this slide,” he said, putting a grid overlay slide over the signature samples.
“In the grid, each image is divided into 96 rectangular regions, and we look for the patterns and compare them with each image example. As you can see, with these images signed by Ms. Solomon today, they essentially match each other.”
“Finally, we use an online analysis with special software, which measures speed, acceleration, curvature, and signature pressure.” Dutoit put up another slide, showing Solomon’s signature as analyzed online. “These are a series of signatures that Ms. Solomon performed in her deposition. We scanned in her alleged signatures from the public records as well as the signature on the assignment for comparison.”
“As a result of your analysis of Ms. Solomon’s signature, and comparison with the 500 signatures you examined from the public record, as well as the signature on the assignment, what conclusions did you come to?”
“I compared the signatures on the public records with signatures that Ms. Solomon provided to you in deposition, and analyzed them in comparison to each other. Out of the 500 documents I examined, only one hundred three of them contained…”
“Objection!” said Stein. “Irrelevant.”
“Counsel, please approach the bench,” said Judge Masters.
“Your Honor, it is highly prejudicial to compare signatures on other documents when we should be focusing on the one that is relevant to this case,” argued Stein.
“Your Honor, this shows a pattern of forgery and fraud that is consistent in this case, and is relevant to the RICO count to show a criminal enterprise,” Brent argued.
“That is a good point, Mr. Marks, but I agree with Mr. Stein that its prejudicial impact far outweighs any probative value. I am not going to allow any further discussion of anything other than a signature comparison of the Exhibits.”
After Brent, Stein and Black took their positions at counsel table, Judge Masters instructed, “Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, you are instructed to disregard any testimony regarding signatures of Ms. Solomon on any other documents. The only document that contains her signature that is relevant in this case is Exhibit 5 and the signature samples that she signed in court. You may proceed, Mr. Marks.”
“Dr. Dutoit, did you examine and compare the signature on Exhibit 5 with Ms. Solomon’s signature samples?”
“Yes, I did.”
“And what conclusions, if any, did you come to?”
“The signature on Exhibit 5, the assignment, is a forgery.”
“How so?”
“It is what is known as a random forgery. With a simulated skilled forgery, the forger attempts to imitate the genuine signature by looking at it, tracing it, or duplicating it as closely as possible. This is a random forgery, because it fits none of the patterns of the genuine signature. A random forgery is a forgery made by a person who has absolutely no information about the genuine signer’s signature. This forgery was made by someone who was not even attempting to imitate the genuine signature.”
“And how do you know that?”
“If the forger had referred to a copy of the original signature, he or she would have tried to simulate the genuine signature in some way; we call this a simple simulated signature. May I show you?”
“Yes.” Dutoit put up a slide of the original signature and Exhibit 5.
“This is the original signature. First of all, the overall size of the image is smaller. Secondly, the loops are completely different in each of the o’s, and l’s” he said, pointing to them with his pointer. “Now, when I overlay the grid, you can see what I mean in measured space. As you can see here, the “S” in “Solomon” in the original is looped– always– and the “S” in Exhibit 5 bears no loop. The curvature, here, and the slant, here, are completely different.”
“So, in terms of percentage, what is your belief that Exhibit 5 is a forgery?”
“I am 100% sure that the signature on Exhibit 5 is made by a different person than Ms. Solomon and that it is a forgery.”
“Thank you, Your Honor, no further questions.”
“Mr. Stein, your witness.”
“Thank you, Your Honor. Dr. Dutoit, isn’t it true that, when one signs one’s signature, it does not appear exactly the same every time?”
“Yes, that’s true. It will always be a little different, but…”
“Move to strike after ‘yes’ Your Honor.”
“Granted.”
“And isn’t it also true that the signature samples you analyzed from Ms. Solomon’s deposition were made on a special pad that performs more functions that a mere sca
n of a two dimensional signature?”
“Yes, but…”
“Move to strike after ‘yes’ Your Honor.”
“Granted.”
Stein continued on with his cross examination of Dutoit on obvious points, but failed to make a dent in his armor. Brent had a few follow up questions on redirect, but the damage to Prudent Bank had already been done. It was clear that the assignment was not only done late, it was also a forgery. Prudent Bank was clearly in Brent’s cross-hairs at the end of this first day of trial.
42
Brent dragged his body home after the long drive on the saturated freeways from Los Angeles at travel time, exhausted, and poured himself through the front door, spilling the pile of unopened mail he had from the mailbox onto the floor of the entry. Calico swarmed around his legs and mewed for her dinner.
“Okay baby, I know you’re hungry. Let’s go.”
The kitty dutifully followed Brent into the kitchen, then ran ahead of him to her empty bowl, which Brent filled with a generous packet of saucy cat food. Then he went to the bedroom, peeled off and hung his suit and basked in the warmth of a rejuvenating and relaxing shower.
Brent’s mind was going 600 miles an hour as he tried to force himself to think about something other than the trial. It was practically impossible to do, so he put on some jazz music to try to calm himself down.
He fixed himself a Baileys on the rocks, and sat at the kitchen table, looking out over the Santa Barbara harbor and going over his trial notes for the next day, when, suddenly, the doorbell rang.
Brent did not desire any unwanted visitors, such as the “Mike” character from Carl’s Junior, or any visitors at all for that matter. However, he quickly changed his mind when he looked through the peep-hole. Brent opened the door to the smiling face of Angela, who was holding a bottle of champagne in one hand and a bottle of massage oil in the other.
“I thought you could use some relaxation therapy,” she said, as Brent ushered her in.
“I couldn’t think of anything better.”
“Just go into the bedroom, relax, and let me do everything,” she said, as Brent happily complied.
Moments later, Angela entered the room with champagne on ice, stripped down to her black, lacy underwear, and began a delightful, relaxing massage that Brent never could have dreamed of.
“Have you forgotten about work yet?”
“Almost.”
“Well then, I have a sure fire remedy to make you forget right away.”
Angela’s palms massaged Brent from his chest, and she moved painfully slowly down his torso, tickling every nerve of his skin until it was obvious what her secret remedy was.
43
Brent had prepared April well for her testimony. Since her father would not be present at trial, it would provide the emotional background needed to evoke sympathy from the jury.
April went on the stand, dressed well but conservatively, as usual, in her best blue silk blouson. She painfully and tearfully described the night she found her mother murdered, and her father gasping within the last inches of his life. It was a harrowing and gruesome description that Brent listened to with sympathetic eyes, diverting his glance from April to share his emotions with the jury from time to time. Twenty four other sad and shocked eyes fixated on April as she testified. After the sad stage had been set, Brent continued to question her to lay the foundation for bringing Jack Ruder to the stand.
“Ms. Marsh, did you perform a full inventory of all the valuable items in your parents’ home after the attack?”
“Yes, I did.”
“And what was the result of your inventory?”
“Nothing was missing.”
“Were you aware of the financial difficulties your father had been experiencing around the time of the attack?”
“Objection, calls for speculation,” said Stein.
“Join,” said Black.
“Your Honor, I’m just asking if she was aware.”
“Overruled. You may answer the question, Ms. Marsh.”
“Yes, I was aware that Dad had lost a great deal of his portfolio in the stock crash, and was without cash flow to manage his business.”
“How were you aware of this?”
“Because he asked me for a loan to help him get through until the financing closed.”
“Were you surprised by this request?”
“Yes.”
“Why?”
“Because Dad’s business had always been successful. He'd even gone into semi-retirement and had been living off his investments.”
“You mentioned a financing. What financing?”
“He had taken a loan out on the house with Tentane Mutual.”
“Objection, hearsay,” said Stein.
“Counsel, please approach the bench.”
Once at the bench, the judge queried Brent, “Why is this not hearsay, Mr. Marks?”
“Your Honor, the fact of the loan is already in evidence. I am laying a foundation for the next witness, not trying to use her testimony as proof that Mr. Marsh took out the loan.”
“Objection overruled.”
“So, your father asked you for a loan. Then what did you do?”
“I told him I could help, of course, but I asked if I could take a look at his books and records to see if what he was asking me for would tide him over until the loan closed.”
“Did he show you his books?”
“Yes.”
“Did looking at the books affect your decision in any way?”
“Yes.”
“How?”
“Dad had been scaling down on his business, and using some retirement income to supplement their living expenses.”
“How did this affect your decision?”
“He hadn’t asked me for enough money, and the amount that he needed was more than I could give.”
“How was that?”
“Well, it seemed to me that what he was asking me for was not enough, as there was not enough income to sustain payments on the loan after it did close.”
“Then what happened?”
“I gave him a loan of $20,000.”
“Did he ever pay you back?”
“No.”
“Ms. Marsh, you are executor of your father’s estate, is that correct?”
“Yes.”
“Can you please identify what has been marked as Exhibit 14?”
“This is the accounting of the estate, filed with the probate court.”
“What assets, if any, did your father have in his estate?”
“Just the house. That was his only remaining asset.”
“Thank you, Ms. Marsh.”
Neither Stein nor Black opted to cross examine April. Repetition of the Marshes’ poor financial situation was bad for their case, and they wanted the murder scene to fade as much as possible from the jury’s memory.
44
The next important witness would be George Marsh, speaking from the grave, but on trial would be augmentative and alternative communication, and Dr. Beverly Senlon would set the stage for playing George Marsh’s video-taped testimony. Dr. Senlon was dressed demurely but attractively and spoke well to the jury, as if they were attending a consultation in her office.
“Dr. Senlon, can you please give the Court a brief summary of your professional background?” asked Brent.
“I completed my undergraduate studies in psychology at UCLA and went on to their graduate studies program, eventually receiving a PhD in clinical and forensic psychology.”
“Have you testified as an expert in court before?”
“Yes, I have.”
“About how many times?”
“I’d say more than ten times.”
“And can you describe your current professional occupation, please?”
“I have a practice which specializes in speech pathology, providing solutions for people in need of augmentative and alternative communication.”
“Have you published any paper
s on the subject of your specialty?”
“Yes, I have written several research papers that were published in the American Medical Journal, as well as many articles in Psychology Today.
“I am showing you a document marked as Exhibit 15. Can you identify this document?”
“It’s my curriculum vitae, which lists all of my education, experience, publications, and professional associations I belong to.”
Brent moved Exhibit 15 into evidence and tendered Dr. Senlon as an expert witness, and both Stein and Black waived voir dire to test her qualifications.
“Can you describe what augmentative and alternative communication is, please?”
“Yes. Augmentative and alternative communication, or AAC, is a description for methods used to supplement or replace speech or writing for those with impairments in the production or comprehension of spoken or written language. It’s used by people who have a wide range of speech and language impairments, caused by any number of impairments, such as cerebral palsy, autism, ALS and Parkinson’s disease.”
“And how exactly is AAC used?”
“It can vary, depending on the severity of the speech impediment. If a patient has the ability to make some sounds to communicate, they are encouraged to do so, even with the use of a speech generating device. We can incorporate sign language and body language, facial expressions, or even picture boards or spelling boards, depending on the patient’smotor, visual, cognitive, language and communication strengths and weaknesses. We essentially design a customized communication system for each particular patient. It’s kind of like learning a new language.”
