Lynn pointed out the absurdity of Rugge stopping the van independent of Hollywood’s orders, as Hollywood tried to minimize the kidnapping. Never mind the fact that once Nick was in the van, Lynn stated that Hollywood screamed at him, “Your brother is going to pay me my money.” According to Lynn, “I don’t have any better way to explain why Nick was kidnapped than out of Hollywood’s mouth himself.”
Lynn reminded the jury how Hollywood kept saying Nick was free to go. But go where? Especially in a moving van. Once Nick stated that he didn’t know where they could find Ben, Hollywood didn’t open the door or pull off to the side of the road. No, he continued on. Lynn asserted, “This is a kidnap for ransom.”
As far as the kidnapping being a continuous transaction, Lynn repeated how Affronti told Nick “don’t do anything stupid.” For the next three days, Nick did just that. Until it ended his life. Even though Affronti had a cell phone, Nick wasn’t even allowed to call his mother, who was desperately paging him.
Evidence indicated that Hollywood did indeed intend to keep Nick until Ben could be found and he could collect his debt. On day one of the kidnapping, Hollywood told Nick, “Just tell your parents you were gone for a couple of days.” It went on three days. As Lynn pointed out, “Home isn’t where he went.”
Hollywood didn’t remember the majority of witnesses who testified, but according to Lynn, “They sure remember him.” He even brought up the irony of the Twilight Zone sign above the closet in Hoeflinger’s room, where Nick was initially almost held.
It made no sense for Hollywood to find a ride home when he had his own van right outside, according to Lynn. Lynn stressed that Hollywood was “on an island with his testimony” in comparison to every other witness, who corroborated the facts in the case—independently, without ever having spoken to one another, and speaking to the police separately.
Lynn reminded the jury that this case was about Nick. “In his fifteen-year-old mind, he believes he needs to do this for his brother.” Stay put and not cause a confrontation.
And when Hollywood left Hoeflinger’s? Lynn stated, “You don’t get to extricate yourself from the crimes you committed by simply walking out the door.”
Lynn stressed that witnesses chose not to call the police because they were more scared of what Hollywood would do to them than what would happen to Nick if they didn’t.
Hollywood had no responsibility to the kidnapped victim, “but he had a responsibility to his windows.” A responsibility to feed himself a burrito when he returned to Los Angeles, to buy a new car, to take his girlfriend to dinner on her birthday. Hollywood’s priorities were “horrifying.” And Nick was never one of them. “It’s why he’s dead.”
Hollywood was guilty of aiding and abetting, according to Lynn. He provided the car for Hoyt to get to the Lemon Tree, provided the gun, the incentive of forgiving his debt, and the order. It made no difference whether he was the shooter. “Ask yourself,” Lynn told the jury. “How did Hoyt even know Nick Markowitz was kidnapped?”
On August 8, Nick was still complying, Lynn argued. Why would he be asked if he would go to the police once released? “And this is the day that Nick is going to be murdered, he just doesn’t know it yet.”
One of the saddest facts that Lynn emphasized was that Hollywood’s own attorney never notified the police. Instead he spoke to Jack Hollywood.
As far as fleeing, Lynn reminded the jury that Hollywood’s intent was to hit the road before Nick was killed, “because he wants to make sure everybody else is on the hook for this killing instead of him.”
Incredibly, Lynn pointed out, there was no effort to return Ben Markowitz’s four attempts to call Hollywood, because Hollywood already knew Nick was dead. He didn’t even ask Hoyt, “Well, where is the TEC-9?” Hollywood believed that Nick’s kidnapping wouldn’t “up the ante” for Ben. Did Hollywood forget about the note reading, “Take this off Ben’s debt” at the restaurant, and how that sent Ben off the edge?
Lynn reminded the court that Sheehan was told by Hoyt, “Hey, the debt to Hollywood’s paid.” When Sheehan confronted Hollywood about the murder, Hollywood didn’t react with surprise or horror. No, as Lynn quoted Sheehan, Hollywood stated, “Don’t worry about it.” This countered Hollywood’s testimony about how he never could have foreseen this murder happening.
As far as Hoyt and Hollywood arguing at Hoyt’s birthday party, Lynn stressed that Hollywood wasn’t upset that Hoyt murdered Nick. No, he was pissed that Hoyt left the gun at the crime scene and involved a total stranger to him, Graham Pressley.
Lynn reminded the jury once again about Hollywood’s selective memory. “He remembers Palm Springs with his mom, and the lunch before with mom.” He also remembered he got his new car washed. But he never mentioned Nick. “He has a fantastic memory for those things that don’t get him in trouble.”
Hollywood then “visited this nightmare upon Chas Saulsbury.” According to Lynn, “He went and told people half-truths and partial stories about what was going on in his life and what happened to him so that they would help him. And he [Hollywood] was the Colorado hot potato.”
Lynn wanted the jury to ask, “What’s in it for Chas?” to lie about his testimony. He had information that could only have come from Hollywood, seeing it wasn’t printed in any papers. “How does he know [that] Hoyt says [to] the group, ‘I’ll do it’?” Chas pointed out that Hollywood told him, “Who the fuck is this kid?” regarding Graham Pressley. “If Hollywood had nothing to do with the murder . . . why does he care who Graham Pressley is or why he was there?” If Hollywood had nothing to hide, according to Lynn, why would he need to say, “I’d started a new life for myself,” when he was in Brazil? Why run if you’re innocent?
Lynn was adamant that the jury ask themselves, “What is Hoyt’s independent motive? I have no clue.” Lynn challenged the defense to answer the question, knowing they couldn’t because “their client is the motive for Hoyt murdering Nick Markowitz. Even Hollywood can’t think of a reason.” Lynn reminded the jury that Ben Markowitz had zero beef with Hoyt, so it couldn’t be him.
Lynn brought back the theme of why everyone was here and quoted Hollywood, “Our world became everybody’s world.” Lynn said he didn’t know what that meant, but it was a “very good window into this sort of egomaniacal personality that he has.” Hollywood didn’t make it Nick’s world. “This is Hollywood’s world.”
Lynn would show the jury a picture of Nick before he was kidnapped and contrast it to what he looked like after he was murdered, “bound behind the back, unburied from his grave.” He would show the picture of Jeff Markowitz’s ring that Hollywood didn’t recall taking before Rugge had him return it.
Lynn ended by using Hollywood’s own terminology against him. “I would urge you to usher Jesse Hollywood into his new status as a convicted kidnapper, a convicted child murderer . . . it’s time. Convict him.”
* * *
Hollywood’s defense attorney, Alex Kessel, spoke first, followed by Blatt. He would state that the theme of this trial was parallel to the movie Get Shorty, calling it Get Hollywood. He said that every witness had been corrupted by the movie Alpha Dog and asserted that it was impossible for them not to have seen it.
Kessel would appeal to the jury not to be swayed by the crime scene photos. “You can’t fill the voids of the People’s case with pictures of Nick Markowitz in the grave.” But what exactly were those voids? Lynn cited specific lines from testimony. Kessel, not being a gun expert, would make the confusing and unsubstantiated claim that “the TEC-9 is not the type of gun that you want to kill one person with.”
As day two of closing arguments began—and before the jury was brought in—Kessel would bring to the court’s attention how unsuitable it was for Nick’s parents to be crying at the crime scene photos, that the emotions of the mother and father of a murdered child would automatically influence the jury. Lynn would interject, “I suppose Mr. Kessel is now going to argue with the jurors that were crying and
say that they should be thrown off as well.”
Judge Hill would remind the audience to temper any emotions, but the way Kessel attributed an agenda behind the Markowitzes’ crying could be seen as a stretch. Kessel even tried to downplay how much time had passed since Nick’s death calling it a few years. Jeff Markowitz was vehement in reminding the defense attorneys that “it’s been nine years.” That prompted the judge to ask him to leave the audience.
Instead of citing testimony, which the jury would use as evidence, Kessel admonished Lynn for not bringing in particular witnesses. Kessel was suggesting that the reason Lynn chose not to was because it would hurt or contradict the State’s narrative. As far as the Ecstasy dealer in San Diego who Ben Markowitz knew, Kessel would say, “Go down and bring him up as a witness. Have him tell you.” He wanted to distance Hollywood from having someone collect a debt.
Kessel would remind the jury that Nick “is closer to sixteen than he is fifteen.” And just like Hollywood, he was speaking about Nick in the present tense, adding that small fact of his upcoming September birthday. Was this to make Nick appear a more mature murder victim?
Kessel argued that Nick was “in his element.” Smoking, drinking, again making the statement without any corroboration from a witness that “he loves smoking. That’s what he does.” Kessel would speculate that when Nick was at Rugge’s, he didn’t want to call home. He even spoke on Nick’s behalf: “Well, Mom, I was in my element. I was smoking weed and doing drugs and having fun and drinking.” He would say Nick was “enjoying himself.” How did Kessel know exactly what Nick was thinking?
Kessel tried to discredit Graham Pressley’s testimony, calling him a “convicted felon.” He would state that because he was an accomplice, the “accomplice has motives to lie.” With an accomplice, you need another witness to corroborate his testimony. If Graham Pressley testified that Hollywood offered Jesse Rugge two thousand dollars to murder Nick, why not bring in Rugge to corroborate it? “Where is Jesse Rugge?” Kessel would point out, “He was number seventy-four on their witness list.” Kessel would spend time speculating on the fictional testimony of witnesses who weren’t there rather than citing those who were. “He’s a logical and critical witness and they won’t call him. And don’t let them tell you we can call him, that’s not right. They have the burden.”
Kessel would later refer to Chas Saulsbury as “the human bong.” After lunch, when it was Blatt’s turn, he would continue lambasting Saulsbury, who “obviously appears to have some mental problems.”
Blatt wouldn’t serve only the witnesses with backhanded comments. He would do the same with Lynn and the other state prosecutor, Hans Almgren. “I’m sure they’re very good persons. They’re dedicated public servants. And the analysis that I give is not a personal attack. They cannot help if the majority of their witnesses are perjurers. They cannot help if many of these individuals seem to have some type of permanent damage to their brains due to constant marijuana use.”
Blatt continued to bleat about the witnesses who were not present. He wondered why Ben Markowitz’s fiancée at the time wasn’t brought in to talk about what Hollywood said about taking money off Ben’s debt.
He would comment on the absence of the investigating officer. “How do you have a murder case of this magnitude without even bringing an investigating officer to develop how the case began?”
Instead of reiterating evidence and testimony, Blatt informed the jury about Jesse Hollywood’s name. “Hollywood is an Irish name. Jesse and James are Biblical names.” Was his ethnicity and origin of his middle name supposed to factor into determining whether he would be convicted of first-degree murder?
Picking up where Kessel left off, Blatt would once again address Alpha Dog. “This is the first time . . . in our Anglo American history where the movie comes out before the trial.” Was Blatt presuming the nine women and three men were judging their client strictly on the movie as opposed to the last seven weeks of trial?
Blatt would take his shots at Ben Markowitz also. “You’ve got to lower yourself as a two-year-old to go out and break somebody’s windows.”
What was Blatt’s strategy in bringing up Hollywood’s perfect credit for a second time? “How many individuals do you know have a seven fifty to eight hundred FICO score . . . at twenty years old?”
Blatt would state that Hoyt killed Nick for acceptance. He lied about being a Navy SEAL. Lied about being a model. He was desperate. “I need to be somebody.” He would leave out the testimony that Hoyt also wanted to clear his debt by doing something more than just sanding down Hollywood’s hot tub.
Blatt would never state why Hollywood didn’t simply let Nick go when Nick was of no use in finding Ben. Instead Blatt would claim his client’s rationale was, “You don’t know where he is. All right, all right. I’m angry, but we’re going to still run away to Fiesta.”
If Blatt was trying to distance his client from seeing Nick as a problem, he didn’t do Hollywood a service by speculating on Hoyt’s behalf, “I’ve just taken care of your problem. I’ve done the ultimate for you.”
Blatt would also try and make the case that Hollywood would now have to kill every single witness who was involved in this matter if he truly wanted Nick murdered.
* * *
Lynn would have the last opportunity to speak per guidelines during closing arguments. It was his burden to show proof. He would point out that the defense had the exact same subpoena powers as the State. They could have called any witness also.
As far as Hoyt, he would ask the jury, “Does this guy look like an independent thinker to you?”
He would hit home the fact that Hollywood had a good reason to run. “It’s because he was guilty as sin and he knew he was going to jail for life.”
Lynn didn’t have to speculate on the evidence like the defense. He told the jury he used 178 slides and 78 citations to back up his closing argument.
He reminded the jury how Ben Markowitz had testified that he didn’t care if he lived or died now that his brother was dead, and how he felt responsible. Contrast that to Jesse Hollywood, who fled town and threw everybody else under the bus.
When it came to addressing the crime scene photos that the defense was so worried about—and the way they would evoke emotion—Lynn would state they were shown for one single reason. To show how Hollywood didn’t care enough about Nick to even remember he took his ring.
Lastly, he would reiterate, “Nick was not free to leave in his own mind.” If Hollywood didn’t tell Nick he could leave, then who else was going to? “Is it up to Miss [Natasha] Adams to set him free?”
Lynn would implore the jury to convict Hollywood. The jury was then sequestered for deliberation. How long would they take? An hour, a day, a month? No one knew.
Chapter 32
Verdict
JESSE JAMES HOLLYWOOD WAS FOUND guilty of kidnapping and first-degree murder on July 8, 2009. The jury, after four days of deliberation, did not believe the kidnapping was done for ransom or extortion. However, jurors did believe Hollywood supplied Hoyt with the TEC-9. This “special circumstance,” in the language of the law, made the mastermind behind the murder subject to the death penalty.
* * *
A poignant testament that this was always about Nick and not about Hollywood, as Lynn stated, took place on break during closing arguments. Juror number one, who was on a breathing machine, was having difficulty catching her breath. At one point a deputy informed Judge Hill that she was going to be transported to the hospital. But then the latest word came in that she insisted on remaining as a juror.
Even though Judge Hill’s preference was to dismiss her, he allowed her to have her say. He asked if it was true that she’d been having respiratory problems “in the last thirty or forty minutes.”
She was adamant about continuing on. “I think I told you I had that esophageal cancer and my lungs collapsed, and once in a while I still need my oxygen. I was a little winded this morning. I probably should
n’t have taken it out.” She stated that the room had started spinning. Judge Hill inquired whether the reinsertion of the device meant she was now feeling more comfortable.
“I’m a tough old bird,” she answered. She would state how embarrassed she was and let the court know she “was good to go.”
Judge Hill would reply, “You’re good to go. You’re a tough old bird.”
This wasn’t about her. Indeed, this was about Nick.
* * *
Six days after he was found guilty, Jesse Hollywood would receive a life sentence without the possibility of parole. Detective Valencia, the man who didn’t exist for eight months, was there at the sentencing. But Hollywood didn’t recognize the person who had tracked him down in Brazil. And for good reason. Valencia had cut off his sixteen-inch braid, once again donating it to kids suffering from cancer.
In 2010, Judge Brian Hill upheld Hollywood’s life sentence. “It has been a very long ten years,” Susan Markowitz would inform the Santa Barbara Independent. However, Judge Hill had not allowed her to read her Victim Impact Statement, describing what the loss of her son had done to her and her family. “I am still in disbelief. I wish I could have told my story.” But Judge Hill’s denial of Susan’s Impact Statement was correct in the eyes of the court. After the defense filed various motions for a retrial, Judge Hill only had the power to uphold the life sentence or grant a retrial. He denied the motions, which meant the Impact Statement would not have had any influence on the life sentence.
However, Susan did end up telling her side of the story, penning a book from her point of view about Nick, entitled My Stolen Son.
* * *
Looking back at the trial, Susan Markowitz says of Hollywood, “He hid out for five years. Why would you hide out if you were not guilty?” She believes he couldn’t live behind the excuse that he was afraid of being shot on sight. Couldn’t he simply call his lawyer and arrange to peacefully turn himself over to authorities?
59 Hours Page 13
