Second Degree (Benjamin Davis Book Series 2)

by A. Turk

  “Yes, but Robyn was a drug addict long before we met. Her sister had been dealing with her drug abuse at least five years before I met her.”

  Using several still photos, Davis got Garcia to admit that Robyn and he engaged in some very different sex games. He made Garcia handle the sex toys. They were his, and Davis wanted the jury to see him with them.

  He asked Garcia about how they made the videos and then watched them while they had sex. He played the first part of the July weekend videotape. The night of July 4th, that portion of the video was more than fifty minutes long. That Viagra really worked. It was pretty rough stuff. Even if some members of the jury had used sex toys before, they’d never used them the way Robyn Eden had.

  Next, Davis played the video of Robyn’s last day alive in her apartment. First, Robyn started the camera and jumped into bed. She complained about her headache. With Garcia next to her in bed she picked up one of the bottles on the nightstand and took a pill. The two went at it for a good ten minutes. Several women on the jury gave Charlie Garcia hard stares. It was clear to Davis they didn’t like the man or care for his taste in sex.

  When both grunted in climax, Robyn jumped from the bed and disappeared, presumably into the bathroom. The camera stayed on Garcia alone in the bed, and he yelled, “What the hell are you doing?”

  She yelled back, “Masturbating. I’ll be right out!”

  She flew out of the bathroom. It was clear she’d taken something while in the bathroom by how animated she became when she returned on camera. When she got on her back and invited Garcia to get on board, viewers could actually see she was bleeding around her shaved pubic area. Clear as a bell they could hear Charlie Garcia say, “You’re bleeding like a stuck pig. Get some gauze.” Everyone in the courtroom heard the defendant’s voice: “And put pressure on it.”

  Davis stopped the video there.

  “Don’t insult this jury. You knew she was shooting up a crushed pill in her groin.”

  “I didn’t know. I suspected.”

  “That’s your answer to this jury.”

  “That’s my answer,” Charlie responded.

  “Did you think she just spontaneously started bleeding down there? You’re a medical doctor.”

  No response from Garcia. There wasn’t a good answer.

  “She’d just come from the bathroom where next to your shaving kit was the crushed oxycodone that she used, which caused her femoral bleeding?”

  “I don’t know that. I never went into the master bathroom.”

  “How did your open shaving kit get in there? Walk in by itself?”

  “She must have taken it out of my bag and put it there.”

  “She took it in the bathroom, opened it, took out the oxycodone you’d brought with you, crushed it, and used it?”

  “Absolutely not. I didn’t bring any drugs other than the Viagra.”

  That was a lie, but Davis couldn’t prove it.

  “So you say. She must have taken your shaving kit into the bathroom because she needed a shave?”

  “I don’t know.”

  “And we can’t ask her?”

  “No.”

  “You held absolute control of Robyn Eden?”

  “No. If I controlled her, I could have stopped her from doing drugs. I could have talked her into rehab.”

  “You liked her on drugs? Drugs made her weak and easier to control? You took advantage of this impressionable young woman?”

  Pierce yelled her objections.

  Judge Tanner sustained, but Davis knew more than half the jury agreed with his little speech.

  “You lied to the paramedics?”

  “I didn’t make full disclosure.”

  “They could have better helped Robyn if they knew she’d injected a narcotic?”

  “Yes.”

  “You could have walked into the bathroom and brought them the syringes and determined she’d crushed oxycodone, right?”

  “I didn’t think of that. I was panicked. I’d just performed CPR and saved her life. I wanted her to live.”

  “You had a second chance at the hospital to disclose what she’d taken when Dr. Mann questioned you?”

  “I again didn’t tell him the whole truth.”

  “Are you familiar with the Hippocratic Oath?”

  Pierce objected on the grounds of relevance.

  Judge Tanner overruled and added, “I want to hear the answer to this question.”

  Garcia stumbled over his answer. He testified that it could be traced to the Greeks, that it required that physicians provide care, and that they first do no harm.

  With the court’s permission Davis read the oath and then asked Garcia, “You were Robyn Eden’s doctor?”

  “I was one of them.”

  “Did you violate your oath as her doctor?”

  “I guess I did.”

  “When you called Valerie Daniels on the evening of July 4th, you didn’t inform her that her sister had died, did you?”

  “No.”

  “That was another example of you not telling the whole truth?”

  “Yes. I wasn’t thinking right. I was nervous and upset.”

  “You’re nervous and upset right now, aren’t you?”

  “Yes.”

  “You’re not telling this jury the whole truth, are you?”

  “I’ve tried to.”

  “Well, you’ve done a pretty miserable job.”

  Pierce objected, and before Judge Tanner could rule, Davis sat down and announced no further questions.

  CHAPTER SIXTY-THREE

  THE DEFENDANT’S

  EXPERT PROOF

  Friday, February 23, 2001

  Harrelson’s private eye earned his fee when he turned up the medical records proving Robyn Eden had two abortions. Using those documents, Pierce forced Davis into a stipulation, which Judge Tanner read to the jury. “The parties have entered into the following stipulation based upon authenticated medical records. The parties stipulate that Robyn Eden had an abortion on June 15, 1990, and December 29, 1993. The defendant was not the father in either of these pregnancies.”

  Pierce figured that Davis believed the stipulation was better than allowing Pierce to prove the abortions. In the end the abortions would be proven. Pierce actually liked how concisely these important facts entered into evidence.

  She next called the first of her experts, Dr. Lawrence Porter, a toxicologist at Vanderbilt. He gave an impressive PowerPoint. His presentation was very factual, and he spoke in a very commanding voice.

  Porter testified that oxycodone belonged to a class of drugs called narcotic analgesics; it is a painkiller. “Its active ingredient is oxycodone, and it comes in five doses: 10, 20, 40, 80, and 160 milligrams. It goes by the street names ‘term,’ ‘kicker,’ ‘oxy,’ ‘Oxycotton,’ ‘pill ladies,’ and ‘pharming.’ Robyn Eden used the two stronger doses of 80 and 160 milligrams.

  “According to a recent National Survey on Drug Use and Health, approximately 2.8 million use oxycodone at least once recreationally. In 1999, sales of oxycodone exceeded $1 billion. That dollar amount has dramatically increased over the last two years. This opiate is highly addictive. It stimulates the brain to produce an artificial feeling of pleasure.”

  Professor Porter testified that oxycodone placed a strain on the cardiovascular system and that an overdose caused slow breathing, seizures, loss of consciousness, coma, vomiting, and severe diminished mental functions. Porter explained that IV use of the drug intensified the symptoms of the drug. He also stated that oxycodone withdrawal was truly horrific.

  He testified that less than ten percent of oxycodone users achieve remission after one year on the drug. He testified that only four percent of IV users of oxycodone ever kick their habit. He testified, “Only twenty-four percent survive more than ten years of using the drug.”

  His testimony painted a dismal life expectancy for Robyn Eden. He further testified that seventy-four percent of the time the addict destroys the life of
a loved one, who is unable to deal with the addict’s use. He added, “Charles Garcia didn’t have a chance. His relationship with Robyn Eden was statistically destined to fail.”

  Pierce kept it short and sweet. Davis asked five questions on cross but couldn’t attack the statistics.

  The judge called a comfort break, and when they returned, Pierce called Dr. Robert Townsend. Harrelson brought his IOUs to the courtroom; they were safe in his inside jacket pocket.

  Dr. Townsend took the oath and, under Pierce’s direct examination, laid out his education and professional background. He admitted he was being paid his normal hourly rate of $500 an hour. He failed to mention that his $200,000 IOUs would be ripped up if Charlie were acquitted. He lied and claimed he’d been treating Charles Garcia since 1998. He’d falsified his office records to support the lie.

  When Pierce felt the jury was comfortable with Townsend, she started asking open-ended questions.

  “Explain how you diagnosed Charles Garcia.”

  “I’ve spent one hundred forty hours interviewing Charles Garcia. One day I spent ten hours in therapy with him. It’s a proven method. If I talk to patients long enough in a session, they reveal things about themselves they didn’t intend to. I learned a lot about Charles that day. I’ve also interviewed his parents and his lawyers. I’ve read pleadings from various matters, Charles’s depositions, and more than a hundred e-mails between Charles and Ms. Eden. I understand and I know Charles Garcia better than anyone, including the state’s expert Dr. Limbaugh. He spent a few hours with Mr. Garcia. I read the testimony he gave last week, and I strongly disagree with him.”

  Townsend testified that Charles Garcia was the worst case of any enabler he’d ever seen. Charles Garcia wasn’t an egotist and someone who sought to control, but a person who takes on hopeless causes, anticipating that he’d fail. “Enabling is a term often used in the context of a relationship with an addict. Usually the enabler suffers the effects of the addict’s behavior, rather than the addict doing the suffering. Enabling removes consequences from behavior of the addict. Co-dependents often feel compelled to solve other people’s problems. Enablers start off wanting to help but then get caught up in desperate situations.

  “His last desperate act was to try to save his child. The child was doomed from inception. Charles Garcia sought to save lost souls.

  “Why else would he get involved with Robyn Eden? Yes, she was beautiful, but Charles could have dated and pursued most women. Why pick an addict, and why stay with an addict? To pick the addict would be bad judgment. To stay with an addict and to keep coming back for more are the bases for his self-destructive syndrome.

  “He testified to this earlier. Coming back at Senator Daniels’s request was the biggest mistake of his life. He’s lost everything that was important to him: his medical license, his freedom, and most of all, Robyn. I’m absolutely sure he loved her, as he understood love. He engaged in some outrageous behavior, but that was for Robyn, to serve her desires. He knew she’d have gone elsewhere, which was unacceptable to him.”

  Pierce had Townsend explain how Robyn and Charles fed off one another.

  “She was an addict. It’s what drove the relationship, and it’s what drove him to try to save her. He failed, but that’s not a crime. He shouldn’t be punished any more than he has already. To do so wouldn’t bring Robyn back. To do so would be to punish someone for an illness. It wouldn’t be justice.”

  Pierce turned Dr. Townsend over to Davis for his cross-examination. Davis began slowly, but he was determined to crack the doctor’s testimony.

  “What is the term for the medical condition that Mr. Garcia is suffering from?”

  “He has enabler syndrome. He can’t help himself from trying to take on lost causes.”

  “And it’s Mr. Garcia’s behavior that supports your diagnosis?”

  “Yes.”

  Davis pointed out that under the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Evidence, he was permitted to ask expert witnesses hypothetical questions.

  “Hypothetically, if Mr. Garcia had sex with a woman going through a divorce, whose world had been turned upside down, would that be consistent with Mr. Garcia’s syndrome?”

  “That would be consistent with the syndrome.”

  “Hypothetically, if a woman had survived several failed relationships and had two abortions, would having sex with such a desperate woman be consistent with his syndrome?”

  “Yes.”

  “So Mr. Garcia’s syndrome is a license to abuse the weak and unprotected?”

  “No. You’re looking at the syndrome from the wrong side. Yes, the people he associates with have problems, but it is his behavior that is defined by the syndrome. He can’t help himself. He’s drawn to these losers.”

  Davis figured the collective jury would see Townsend’s answer for what it was. He spent the next hour sparring with Dr. Townsend without a great deal of luck.

  Davis sat down, and Pierce announced that the defendant was closing his proof.

  Davis put Dr. Limbaugh on the stand as his rebuttal proof. Dr. Limbaugh pulled no punches. He’d been sitting in the audience during Dr. Townsend’s testimony. Limbaugh called Dr. Townsend’s professional opinions rubbish, paid-for mumbo jumbo.

  Pierce objected several times. Judge Tanner ruled that each expert was entitled to his or her own professional opinions and that it was the job of the jury to sort them out.

  It was close to the end of the day, so Judge Tanner called it quits. He promised the jury that they were getting close to the end of their journey. Then he posed a question to them: Did they want to work and deliberate over the weekend? He insisted that it was their choice and that they could announce their decision after they’d had an opportunity to discuss the issue.

  The jurors adjourned to talk it over. Within a few minutes they returned, and the furniture store owner foreman reported, “The jury unanimously voted to deliberate both days and bring this process to a close, Your Honor.”

  CHAPTER SIXTY-FOUR

  THE STATE’S FIRST

  CLOSING ARGUMENT

  Saturday, February 24, 2001

  The Davis team knew this was going to be an important day. Bella sat in the front row with Liza next to her.

  Today explained why Judge Tanner had sequestered the jury. Local print, radio, and TV media were everywhere. Courtesy of Judge Tanner the Hewes City Gazette had a reserved place in the first row. The coverage had been very slanted against Charlie Garcia and his lifestyle.

  The big boys were out and about too. The New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, and AP had their knives sharpened. It was a good thing that the jury was allowed to only listen to music and watch movies on DVD. Open access to the media would have required a reversal of trial. Tanner would have no problem defending that ruling in front of the Court of Appeals.

  Sammie and Morty were giving Davis a pep talk in the hallway. It was mere formality. He didn’t need one.

  The clerk came into the hallway to retrieve them; court was about to start. Judge Tanner and the jury walked in as they got to their table.

  Judge Tanner wished everyone a good morning, then he turned to the jury foreman and stated, “A trial is supposed to be an orderly process. I want to commend the lawyers for their part of moving this case along. I’d also like to thank the jurors for their attentiveness and service.

  “We’re getting near the end of the process so I want to plan the rest of it out. Today we’ll have three closing arguments, the first by the state. See, the state goes first and last because it’s got the burden of proof. I remind you that the defendant doesn’t have to prove anything. This is a serious case, and there are three hundred forty-six trial exhibits, most of which were exhibits from the Hewes City Police Department’s investigation. I’m sure they will not review all of them with you, but they are going to cover the highlights.

  “I suspect we will be hearing from the lawyers for several hours, well into the afternoon. I propose that we break for
the day whenever the lawyers are finished. The next step in the process is the jury charge. That will take about an hour, and then we begin deliberations. I suspect that will begin about ten thirty on Sunday. I’m not here to tell you how to deliberate, but it would be reasonable to go through the exhibits and talk about each witness’s testimony. Then you’ll debate guilt or innocence on each count.”

  The judge completed his remarks, and he motioned for the state to give its closing argument.

  Davis got up slowly. He was in the zone, focused only on that jury.

  “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, before I begin my remarks, on behalf of the state of Tennessee and Hewes County, I want to thank you for your service. Did you know it’s a constitutional right to have a jury trial for any crime? You’ve been an instrument of the Constitution. You have a right to be proud.”

  Davis knew how to butter up a jury. He’d learned from the master.

  “Ladies and gentlemen, I hope I’m not distracting you, but I’ve got to move around during this closing, so I can keep the blood in my legs flowing. Judge, I hope you won’t tether me to this podium.”

  Judge Tanner respectfully responded, “I know you’ll conduct yourself appropriately, Mr. Davis.”

  Davis thought that was a little help from the judge. He was telling the jury to listen to this guy; he’s been around the block a time or two.

  His plan was to get physically close to the jury. How an attorney conducted himself in a courtroom was part of being a great lawyer. Yes, you had to ask the right questions, clearly and authoritatively, but presence in the courtroom could be the swaying factor. It was a skill that could be taught. Morty learned it on his own and taught Davis and Sammie. Pierce had the skill too.

  Davis moved closer and resumed, “I’m not going to handle many exhibits during this first closing. I certainly am never going to handle Mr. Garcia’s sex toys. You’ve seen what he did with them. All of the exhibits will be available during your deliberations.

  “Over the next hour or so, I want to prove to you that Mr. Garcia is a liar. The state has to prove the elements of each charge: second-degree murder and/or reckless homicide. I’ll focus on those issues in my second argument.