by Robert Scott
So Gorham showed Chilcote a police document that stated: Bateman asked the driver if he was looking for something. Gorham then said, “It seems that she made contact with him first, and not the other way around.”
Chilcote replied, “No. There were many people on this case and sharing information. What is correct is that she indicated that he spoke to her first.”
Gorham came back with, “This report is from a person named Stauder?”
“Yes, she is a detective with the Corvallis PD.”
“Do you know if anything was done with this tip (by Bateman) until December 2004?”
Chilcote replied, “No, I don’t know the specifics of how they responded to that tip.”
“You were on the major task force on this case. Do you remember anything about this tip or any other tip concerning a green van from May to December 2004?”
Chilcote said, “I remember a lot of information coming after May about two OSU students who had been contacted by a person in a van.”
Kemper, on cross, asked Chilcote, “Roughly, when did the green van become a point of interest to law enforcement?”
Chilcote responded, “A van was of interest to us relatively soon in the investigation, because we were receiving information about these reports about a van not far from the scene of the abduction of Brooke Wilberger. It was a van of a certain color and certain size. The tips came from Diane Mason and Jade Bateman.”
DDA Kemper wanted to know, “Was Bob Clifford someone who came to your attention?”
“Yes,” Chilcote said. “He came to my attention about the same time through investigators.”
“Was Mr. Clifford able to give more information about the van?”
“Yes. He was able to give more details about the driver of that van, and he also was able to identify the license plate on that van as being from Minnesota.”
Kemper asked, “Was Mr. Clifford able to pick an individual out of a photo lineup?”
“Yes,” Chilcote responded. “He picked out Mr. Courtney.”
On redirect Gorham asked, “Would it be fair to say that [the] focus of the investigation was not on Ms. Mason’s tip, or Ms. Bateman’s tip, or Mr. Clifford’s tip, or the green van, until you already were looking at Mr. Courtney as a suspect?”
Chilcote replied, “It really refocused us. And the task force was about fifty people at that point.”
Because John Chilcote had mentioned Detective Karen Stauder as the one who had written a report that it was Jade Bateman who first spoke with Joel Courtney, and not the other way around, Steven Gorham had Stauder testify.
Karen Stauder said that she was a detective with the Corvallis PD in 2004 and had been a part of the Brooke Wilberger Task Force.
Gorham had Stauder look at a report she had made and asked, “That report, did you submit it to anyone?”
“Yes, to my police department,” she said.
Gorham had Stauder read the report and then had her read something written by some other officer, which was termed a “tip slip.”
What Gorham was getting at was that Detective Stauder’s report was somewhat different from the wording of the tip slip. The tip slip may have come from Detective Sarah Fontaine, because Gorham asked Detective Stauder who Fontaine was. Stauder said that Fontaine was a member of the Oregon State Police.
Gorham asked, “Did you see Ms. Bateman in person?”
“No,” Stauder replied, “I spoke to her on the phone.”
“Did Ms. Bateman say she approached the person in the van?”
Stauder said, “Yes and no. If I may elaborate on that.”
“Sure,” Gorham responded.
So Stauder explained, “She told me that a person in a van was driving by very slowly and staring at her. It was at that point that she initiated contact with that person.”
“So she initiated that contact,” Gorham said.
Stauder gave the same reply she had just mentioned.
Not letting her off the hook on this, Gorham added, “What did she tell you she asked him?”
Stauder said, “She asked if he was looking for something.”
Apparently, Gorham was reasoning that if Jade Bateman first made verbal contact with Joel Courtney, then he couldn’t have been too threatening to her. Otherwise, she would have simply run away rather than sticking around and talking to him.
Karen Kemper, on cross, wanted to get to the bottom of why Detective Stauder would make a comment as to whether Jade Bateman first made contact with the suspect, as being “Yes and no.” To get to this point, Kemper first asked Detective Stauder how long she had been in law enforcement. Stauder replied that she had been a police officer for sixteen years and a detective for the last five years. She said she had trained in defensive tactics, body language, and many other things of that nature.
Kemper asked Stauder what she meant about “body language.”
Stauder replied that if someone was staring at her, that was a form of unspoken contact.
Kemper asked, “From your experience, how might you counter that nonverbal contact?”
Stauder began to answer, “For me as a woman, I—”
This brought an immediate objection from Gorham. “What her thoughts are on something like this is irrelevant.”
Judge Williams sustained the objection.
So Karen Kemper tried again. “Ms. Stauder, you’re a female, and you weren’t always an officer. Correct?”
“Yes.”
“You live in the city.”
“Yes.”
“You walk around.”
“Yes.
“Did you ever have anyone stare at you?”
“Yes, I have.”
Gorham objected once again to this line of questioning. He said, “Maybe these questions aren’t objectionable, but they are leading to something that is.”
Kemper, on the other hand, claimed, “This officer has testified that she’s taken specialized training in behavior and mannerisms. Therefore, she is qualified as an expert to talk about nonverbal situations, both as an officer and a female.”
Gorham disagreed and said, “Then the argument is that every female is an expert in being female. I guess that would make me an expert in not being female. She’s not an expert in anything except in being who she is. It’s not relevant. What is relevant is what occurred between Ms. Bateman and somebody in a green van. If you listened to Ms. Bateman on the stand, it would seem that the person in the van initiated contact. Now we learn that is not accurate.”
Judge Williams sustained the objection once again.
Kemper kept trying, however. She had Detective Stauder tell about her training and experience. While doing this, Karen Stauder said, “Actions of people who are nonverbal are very important. A person who is driving slowly by you and staring, that is a prime example. In law enforcement we are trained that nonverbal contact can be very important. We are trained to watch people’s movements. Even if someone is just staring at you—we are trained to notice that they are staring at us. A nonverbal thing like that cannot be ignored.”
In the end all that Detective Stauder was able to get in was that she was a trained officer who thought nonverbal communication was important. It was her belief that when Jade Bateman was walking alone through a large parking lot, and a man drove slowly by her, staring at her, it was appropriate for Jade to make the first spoken contact. It was not because she was happy to see the man there—rather, it was because she was worried for her own safety and wanted to know what was going on.
These witnesses had been bad enough for Joel Courtney’s case. However, there were four others who were absolutely devastating, and they would box him into a very tight corner.
CHAPTER 23
“I STARTED SCREAMING AND CRYING.”
One of these witnesses was Jesus Ordaz, Joel’s brother-in-law. Since Spanish was Ordaz’s first language, an interpreter was called in just in case that route would be easier to follow. Ordaz said that he had been married for eightee
n years. His wife’s sister, Rosy, was Joel Courtney’s wife. Ordaz said that he had known Joel for seventeen years.
In April and May 2004, Joel, Rosy, and their kids were living at the Ordaz residence in the southeast section of Portland. Jesus was working for CBM, which did janitorial work in many Western states. A calendar of May 2004 was produced in court, and it proved that no one except Joel Courtney had driven that green van for the company in that month. During the early part of May, Joel drove the van, with Minnesota plates, to Montana and Idaho on a job. On a return trip to Oregon, Joel got a ticket for speeding.
Later that same month, on May 23, 2004, a friend invited Jesus and his family to a First Communion party. Jesus and his wife invited Rosy and her kids to come as well, and they did so. It was a Sunday, so they all went to church before the Communion. It was a full mass, and they were there from noon until one-thirty. The party started around two, and Joel didn’t arrive until some time later, since he’d been working on a janitorial job. Jesus seemed to think that Joel didn’t get there until 6:00 P.M.
As Jesus recalled, he and Joel stayed late at the party, after their wives left. In fact, both Jesus and Joel stayed there all through the night, drinking beers and tequila. Jesus also recounted that Joel went a few times into a room, where Jesus suspected illegal drugs were being used.
When Jesus and Joel got home, it was around six-thirty in the morning on Monday, May 24. Joel said he had to use the phone to make a long-distance call, and Jesus let him do so. The prosecution brought out a document concerning Jesus Ordaz’s phone number and phone calls to the court in Lincoln County, Oregon. Ordaz said that the document was correct about his phone number. It was noted that phone calls to the court in Lincoln County were made at 7:21, 7:22, and 7:27 A.M.
Ordaz continued, “Joel left my house right after his last phone call. He was driving the green van. The van was clean on the outside at the time he left. Joel would usually take some clothes with him when he went on a trip. On that day he was wearing the same clothes he had worn at the party. And he wore a baseball cap and some dark sunglasses.
“Joel did not come back to our house for some time. I’m not sure, but I think it was either late on May twenty-fifth or early on May twenty-sixth. I wasn’t home at the time. I was working, because I normally work from five-thirty P.M. until two A.M. the next morning. When I got home on May twenty-sixth, the green van was outside and all dirty on the outside. Like when you drive a van up in the mountains. It was muddy. I knew when I saw the van, my supervisor wouldn’t like seeing it like that. So I took it to work, where there was good water pressure, and I washed it there.”
Jesus added about going on vacation to Southern California in early June 2004. When he got home, Joel was gone, and so was the green van. Jesus discovered that Joel had driven the green Dodge van to New Mexico, without permission. A short time later, Jesus Ordaz’s superior at CBM phoned and had Jesus go to New Mexico and retrieve the green van, which he did.
Even more damaging to Courtney than Jesus Ordaz was the testimony of several women who had been sexually molested by Joel Courtney. One of these was Sue McDonald, who had been eighteen years old in 1984. She spoke of hanging out with teenage friends, “watching television and doing regular teenage stuff.” One of the teenagers there was Joel Courtney. Once again, McDonald told her story of being in a car with Joel after getting together with the others, and being out on an isolated road alone with him.
“There were no streetlights and very few houses on the road. I was driving and Joel started putting his hand on my leg. Making advances. I asked him, ‘What are you doing?’ He kept at it and I had to stop driving. When I stopped, he climbed on top of me. He hit me in the face with his fist.
“He got out of the car and dragged me out. He pulled my pants down. I was sitting in the gravel by the side of the road. I asked him to stop. I asked if we could go back to Vickie’s house if he wanted to do it. I thought maybe I could convince him to go back where people were. I was scared.”
At this point in her testimony, Sue broke down crying. She asked for a moment to collect herself and have a drink of water. After she had done that, Sue continued. “At some point he stopped and kind of agreed with me. We got back in the car. And then he changed his mind and said for me to just take him home.”
It was this incident that eventually led to a conviction of Joel Courtney for sexual molestation.
Karen Kemper asked if Sue saw Joel Courtney in the courtroom. She pointed to Joel, who was sitting at the defense table.
DDA Kemper said, “Understanding that many years have intervened, do you recall his height back then?”
Sue answered, “He was about six feet tall.”
“And what was your height then?”
“I was about five foot three.”
Gorham, on cross, asked, “After that night, did you ever see Mr. Courtney again?”
Sue replied, “I think I saw him again a year or two later. I don’t remember where.”
Gorham then queried, “Could it have been hanging out with other friends?”
Sue responded, “It probably was with mutual friends.”
Possibly even more damaging to Joel Courtney than Sue McDonald was the testimony of his own sister, Dina McBride. Dina was not able to take the actual witness stand because of recent leg surgery, so she was sworn in lower down in the courtroom. Once she began to testify, Dina said that she was two and a half years older than Joel.
Karen Kemper asked her, “Is coming here today difficult for you?”
Dina replied, “I guess I’m glad to have the opportunity to see him. But it’s a sad occasion.”
“How do you feel about the defendant?”
Dina responded, “I love my brother. I love his family. But I’m sad because of what we’re here for.”
DDA Kemper wanted to know where she and Joel were raised. Dina said they were raised in Beaverton, Oregon.
“In the spring of 1993, where was your brother living?” (This mention of the year 1993 didn’t mean much in the way of previous testimony. But it soon would have a very important connotation.)
Dina said, “I think in North Portland or over by Multnomah. There was an apartment up in the hills. I think he and Rosy were living there at the time.”
“Was he working then?”
Dina responded, “I think he was a mechanic then.”
“Do you know what kind of mechanic?”
“I remember someone saying a Honda-certified mechanic.”
Kemper asked, “Do you remember what your brother looked like in the spring of 1993?”
Dina said, “He was tall. He had kind of long hair in the back. It was kind of gelled on top. Maybe kind of spiky. When he was fairly young, he was given a very light prescription of reading glasses. He didn’t wear them often. But he would wear sunglasses when it was sunny outside.”
DDA Kemper produced a photo of Dina at her wedding in November 1993. In the photo was Joel, his wife, Rosy, and their first son. Dina said, yes, that was the way Joel looked in 1993.
Switching to a different year, Kemper asked about June 2004. Kemper asked if there was a time during that June 2004, when Joel showed up at their grandmother’s house. Dina replied, “Yes, there were actually four generations living in that house. My husband and I, my mom, my children and grandmother. It was a little before noon when Joel arrived. It was around the same time I was coordinating a large children’s event at church. I actually sent an e-mail right around that time to my husband, because I was so concerned about Joel. I asked my husband to pray for Joel.
“I was at home with my grandma. My mom was at work. The house was pretty quiet, and I had just finished getting Grandma lunch. Grandma wasn’t feeling good, so she went to lay down. It was around eleven forty-five A.M. when Joel came in. I hadn’t seen him in a while and he seemed—not exactly agitated, but like he was on edge. A little, not quite hyper but—well, he walked through the door and he said, ‘You won’t believe where I’ve b
een for the last three days.’ His conversation was very animated.
“I said, ‘Well, what went on?’ And he said, ‘I was kidnapped for three days, and there were guys there with guns and knives. There was a kind of a party at first, and people were there, but later they were gone. I was hiding in the bushes, and it rained part of the time, and I was naked part of the time. I was freezing and hungry, and I haven’t had anything to eat.’
“It was a lot of information coming from him in[a] very disjointed manner. And he mentioned there was a girl there, but there wasn’t a lot of description about her. There was even some information about the proximity of where this had all occurred.”
Dina started to say, “The implication was—”
Gorham objected and was sustained. There wasn’t going to be any testimony about “implications.”
So Karen Kemper asked, “What did the girl look like?”
Dina said, “He didn’t give any specifics about short, tall, thin, fat, whatever. There was a mention that there was a blond girl in the group.”
“Did he tell you about blood?”
“He did mention blood and guns and knives. Someone had an automatic firearm and it was frightening.”
“Did he tell you where the blood was?”
“No, he did not.”
“Did he tell you what happened to the girl?”
“No, he didn’t.”
Kemper then wanted Dina to look at a document that concerned her interview by Detective Houck in September 2008. Dina looked at the document of what she had said to Houck, and now added, “Joel said that he had been sleeping outdoors. Somehow I thought he meant in the woods somewhere. Joel talked about it starting at a party and there was a progression of movement. I don’t know where the girl came into the story line. She was a blond girl, and he said there was blood on her. And then she died.”
Gorham had no cross-examination of Dina McBride, but he said that he might when it came to trial.
Many of the witnesses who had just testified had done so before, and their stories were known to one degree or another by the media. That was not the case with the next witness. She was new to the stories about Joel Courtney, and what she had to say added one more huge nail to his coffin. The woman was Sandy Vargas.
