"Pillowcase Rapist" Christopher Hubbart Being Released?

Thanks to Nancy B for bringing this unbelievable story to light in one of her recent comments. The women of California need to know this man's face - and be aware that he may soon be wandering the streets of their neighborhood. I'm still at a loss for words that Santa Clara Judge Gilbert Brown granted the " conditional release" of Christopher Hubbart - a man who admitted to violently raping nearly 40 women throughout the state of California.  Those are the rapes he admitted to, who knows the real number?  Why in God's name would any Judge, any court in the United States of America release an inmate with this type of predatory background?

Christopher Hubbart

Here's some background on Hubbart. Beginning in 1968, he began raping women in San Bernardino and Los Angeles Counties.  In the year 1972 alone, he reportedly raped 25 or 26 women.  Yet in 1983, he was paroled - and on the same day of his release, he raped another woman.  The SAME DAY of his release he found his next victim. He went on to rape 9 more woman in San Jose before being caught and returned to custody.  Do you think at that point he ever should have been released? Is there any question this man should have been locked up for life? He was released AGAIN in 1990, and shortly thereafter he attacked a woman who was jogging and was returned to custody. Hubbart spent time at Atascadero State Hospital as a "mentally disordered offender". That's a polite way to put it. He's in another state hospital now, Coalinga State Hospital.

Dubbed "The Pillowcase Rapist", Hubbart terrorized women in their own homes by covering their heads with pillowcases in an attempt to drown out their screams for help.  A true predator, he would stalk neighborhoods, looking for telltale clues that the man of the house was gone - like looking into open garages for cars, and looking for signs of children. He believed women with children would be less likely to fight him in order to keep their children safe. What a monster. He would bind them, cover their faces and assault them. 

Los Angeles District Attorney Jacky Lacey says her office is doing everything they can to challenge the release of Hubbart. State law requires that inmates conditionally released must be placed back in the community they lived in prior to their incarceration, unless circumstances require placement elsewhere. His last known residence was in Claremont, CA. How can this happen? This man has offended, re offended and re offended again - yet the state thinks it's time to release him into a community?  Lacey petitioned the state Supreme Court in July to block the release, but was unsuccessful. The Huffington Post reported that Lacey said "we have aggressively pursued and exhausted all legal avenues to stop the release of sexually violent predator Christopher Hubbart to Los Angeles County". 

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said "releasing this individual into the county where many of the victims and their families live is unreasonable and unfair". I say releasing him ANYWHERE is unreasonable and unfair. He should be locked up for life. Efforts are reportedly under way to notify his victims. Hubbarts case prompted the passage of the Sexually Violent Predators Act, which allows authorities to keep offenders like Hubbart in custody until officials deem them safe. 

After hearing from mental health professionals in April, a Santa Clara County judge ruled 62 year old Hubbart eligible for release, and ordered him to be relocated back to Los Angeles County. A San Jose appeals court and state Supreme Court upheld the ruling, over the protests of DA Lacey. Is there anything that we, as concerned citizens do to block the release? If this man committed these sex crimes today, he would undoubtedly face life in prison. This is completely unacceptable, and seems to put an entire community in harms way.  If history tells us anything about Hubbart, he'll be stalking another neighborhood looking for another victim - ankle bracelet, GPS or whatever they will be using to monitor him will not be enough.

I'm outraged.  Nancy B, you were SO right about this story - truly outrageous and outright frightening. Thank you so much for bringing this to light.  I'm looking for some type of petition that we can all sign. If you know of one, please post the location. It's frightening to think of what this man is capable of and how many times he's been released only to commit more rapes. What makes these mental health officials believe he's reformed? Would they be comfortable with Hubbart being released into their neighborhoods?  How about Judge Gilbert Brown? How would he like to be Hubbarts' neighbor? 

"Cold Justice" Heats Up Unsolved Murder Cases

This is my third blog post on TNT's new reality show, "Cold Justice".  Cold Justice pairs former Texas prosecutor Kelly Siegler with former Las Vegas CSI Yolanda McClary, who travel to small rural towns across America to look at unsolved murder cases.  Their first episode which aired Tuesday has already delivered results - the arrest of Ronnie Hendricks (see yesterdays post for details) for the murder of Pam Shelley. TNT lists an episode guide online, and 
I couldn't resist taking a peek and looking for details on those cases.  I was astonished at what they have accomplished in their first season.  This is more than just another crime drama, these ladies are committed and determined to bringing justice to those who may have escaped it previously in small towns that may lack the resources to bring a suspect to trial.

You can see the episode guide on their website. They give a brief description of the victims and circumstances of their deaths. Here is a list of this seasons cases:

Episode 2) Victim:  67 year old Mattie Williams was found stabbed and bludgeoned to death in the woods outside of an abandoned house approximately 4 miles from her home on 8/28/06.  Williams lived in Morehouse Parish, LA and was said to be an active member of her church and a loving mother. Her daughter, LaShonda Williams told reporters how difficult life was without her mother during a 2008 interview with a local reporter. She also stressed how the family leaned on each other for strength after the killing. Williams was initially believed to be missing, after a friend went to her home and saw blood outside of her house and called the police.  Her body was found just 6 hours later.  This episode runs next Tuesday, and it appears Siegler and McClary may have breathed new life into this cold case.

On 7/2/13, know.com reported there were 3 people indicted for second degree murder in relation to this case.  All three face mandatory life sentences if convicted.  Sadly, one of the three is Mattie Williams' own son, John Williams. This episode airs next Tuesday on TNT.


Episode 3) Victim:  32 year old Eric Baxter, who was found shot to death in his home in Dickson, Tennessee on 8/20/98.  This is said to be the only unsolved homicide in the small community where it occurred. I haven't been able to find any additional information on the circumstances around his death, possible suspects or the outcome of Siegler and McClary's investigation.

Episode 4)  Victim: 17 year old Rachelle Escalante was believed to have been killed by a hit and run driver on 7/6/88 in Globe, Arizona.  Escalante was said to have been walking home from a party when she was struck.  Escalante had just completed her junior year in high school when she attended a party with friends where a fight broke out.  Escalante left the party on foot, and patrol officers came across her crawling across the middle of the road - they initially believed it was an injured animal but as the got closer they realized it was a young girl. They stopped their patrol car and attempted to help her, but it was too late. I was unable to find any additional information on this investigation online. Guess I'll have to wait until the episode airs!

Episode 5)  Victim: 48 year old Charlene Corporon was found shot to death in her home in Palacios, Texas on 6/6/82. Corporon owned the most successful agricultural business in town and worked with her son Gary. It was widely known that Gary had been physically and verbally abusive towards his mother in recent years, and when a friend of Charlene's knocked on the door looking for her, Gary answered reportedly said "Charlene doesn't look too good". She had been shot in the head with a .22 caliber gun.  This is by far the most perplexing of the cases/episodes so far. The episode guide gives little information on this case, but what I found online makes this a mystery. In a May 4, 2012 article in the houstonchronicle.com it says that Charlene's son Gary was charged with murder but may never be tried. The issue at hand seems to be this:  was he ever indicted for this murder, and if he was indicted and charged, why hasn't there been a trial? Gary Corporon is said to be working offshore near LA and remains free on $100,000 bail.  OK, if he's free after posting bail, that would indicate that he WAS arrested wouldn't it? It's confusing. Some law enforcement officials say he had been arrested, some aren't so sure. District Clerk Becky Denn said there was no record of Corporon's indictment. What gives here? District Attorney Steven Reiss told the Houston Chronicle reporter that he planned to ask a new grand jury to "re-indict" Corporon, he further stated that "the delay does not appear to have been created by any law enforcement agency". He has requested additional investigation into the improprieties which appear to have caused a 31 year delay in prosecuting this case. South Texas College of Law professor Geoffrey Corn believes Corporon has a great case for a "speedy trial dismissal".  There is no statute of limitation on murder, but what happens if Corporon was arrested 30 years ago, and never brought to trial - and the charges were never dropped? What if the ball was dropped entirely? If there is no record of the indictment, what could the bail bondsman tell us about this issue? 

The circumstances around Gary Corporon's freedom were brought to light after Kelly Siegler began investigating the case for a Cold Justice episode. Nubbin Chambbe, a former Sheriff's Detective who worked this case back in 1982 said he was told that Corporon was not indicted, and that the grand jury "passed" on the case, wanting additional information. So is that where the ball was dropped?  Matagorda County Sheriff Douglas "Skipper" Osborne declined to answer questions on the case because it is a pending case. Sam Hurta, who was Sheriff in the early 80's and former DA Jack Sayler were unavailable for comment on the case. This will be another episode I'll have to watch to see what they uncover. Was Gary Corporon ever arrested back in 1982? Has he been living free of consequences for 31 years, after being a strong suspect in his mother's murder? 

Episode 6) Victim: 29 year old Mary Ann Holmes was a single mother living in the small mostly Mormon community of Thatcher, Arizona when she was found handcuffed, tortured, raped and sexually mutilated in her own home. Her two small girls witnessed the murder, and the 3 and 5 year old girls were also tied up and naked. The oldest girl managed to free herself and ran across the street to a neighbor/friend's house for help. It was too late, Mary Ann Holmes was dead, and it appeared her 3 year old was covered in her mother's blood. It was reported that one of the girls said "mommy was hurt by a lion-man". Holmes had a yard sale in the morning, and the money she made from the yard sale was missing. Police believe someone at the yard sale may have come back later that evening. Police initially interviewed more than 75 people about this case, but no suspect emerged. Holmes' ex boyfriend was an early suspect after police noticed Holmes had filed a report, believing he was en route to Arizona from Florida. Although Holmes feared him, the ex-boyfriend's alibi checked out according to investigators. Little evidence has been disclosed, but there was a bloody shoe print, said to be size 11 1/2 found at the scene. There may have also been a single finger print on the handcuffs used on Holmes. What an awful murder, and for some animal to do that in front of two innocent children is just unfathomable. I really hope they find this guy.

Episode 7)  Victim:  49 year old Isabel Corale was found dead on the couch in her Fremont, Ohio home on 1/24/88.  It appeared that the mother of six fell asleep on the couch and in the early morning hours, somebody hit her in the head with an object. She never woke up.  She was discovered the following morning by her husband, who called police. When police arrived, Corale's husband and three of her children were upstairs, frightened and covered in blood. A hatchet was found propped against a wall in the home - was it the murder weapon? I was unable to find any additional information on this case, or the outcome of Siegler and McClary's investigation.

Episode 8)  Victim: 54 year old Robert Bryant was found beaten to death on the floor of the Agriliance Fertilizer Warehouse in Seagrave, Texas where he worked for 26 years. His body was discovered by a fellow employee. Bryant was known as a reliable employee who always arrived early and started the coffee. He was well liked and the community was shocked at this crime. Bryant's wallet was found with money inside, still in his pocket.  Little else is known about this case. Was he killed by another employee, or did he interrupt a robbery?  I can't find anything else on this case online.  I'll have to watch the episode!

Those are the episodes listed thus far.  Very interesting to see what can happen when new eyes look over these cold cases. Even though there has only been one episode so far, I really like this show.  This seems much different from "The First 48", "Dateline" and "48 Hours".  I think the chemistry between Siegler and McClary is great - they are both well respected in their fields - and I like the detective they are using, named Johnny Bonds. He's known to be a master interrogator. Looks like at least 3 of the 8 cases now have arrests to go with them.  Not bad!

"Cold Justice" Delivers In First Episode - Ronnie Hendricks Murder Trial Begins Sept. 9th

I've been waiting for months for this show to begin, and last night's premiere did not disappoint.  Pairing former Texas prosecutor Kelly Siegler with former Vegas CSI Yolanda McClary was brilliant.  They are both credible, no-nonsense professionals who seem to compliment each other's strengths well.  In their first televised case, they traveled to a small town called Cuero - where a detective there long suspected a shooting death that was ruled a suicide was likely a murder.  Siegler and McClary hit the road and toured the small rural community, met with the Sgt. who held on to this case since January of 2001 in the hopes of getting justice for victim Pam Shelley, her children and her family.

Ronnie Hendricks (Cuerorecord.com)

The small town police force had long believed that Shelley's live-in boyfriend, Ronnie Hendricks was responsible for shooting Pam and staging the scene to make it appear to have been a suicide.  Shelley was shot in the head, the case was quickly ruled to be a suicide after Hendricks' family members told police Shelley had a prior suicide attempt when she lived in Arkansas. Hendricks family members statements to police were conflicting, to say the least. Hendricks told police he had been on the porch with Pam's two children when he heard a gunshot from inside the house. He claims he ran in and found her in the bathroom, bleeding from a gunshot wound. He insists that he began CPR in an attempt to save her life, but "blood was coming out from everywhere".  Hendricks isn't the only family member to claim they performed CPR before the paramedics arrived.  Yet none of them had blood anywhere on their clothing?

Siegler and McClary's first stop in town was to meet with police Sgt. Carl Bowen.  Bowen remembers the scene well.  He pulled out the case file and walked them through the case.  There was little in the way of evidence, because the scene wasn't initially treated as a crime scene - instead, it was quickly ruled a suicide.  No gunshot residue tests were performed on Shelley or Hendricks.  They did have the gun used in the shooting. Ronnie Hendricks gun. Siegler made a list with two sides, one listing the things pointing towards suicide and the other with things that pointed to murder.  They began to methodically go down the list on each side.  They talked to Pam's family and friends about the alleged suicide attempt in Arkansas.  They quickly ruled this out.  Pam and Ronnie were known to fight constantly, and Ronnie had a record of abuse.  It was also known that Ronnie didn't particularly like Pam's two children from a previous relationship.  He did not get along with 11 year old Kayla, who is now 23 years old and appeared on the program last night.

Kayla told Siegler and McClary what she remembers from that day 11 years ago.  Hendricks came home in a foul mood.  He had words with both Pam and Kayla, and he slapped Kayla which was the last straw for Pam.  Pam asked Ronnie's stepfather if he would help load their belongings on his trailer and drive them back to Arkansas. He agreed to help.  Pam Shelley was leaving Ronnie Hendricks. Her things were packed, on the trailer - why in the world would she shoot herself in the head 15 minutes before she was planning to leave this situation?  Ronnie's account of the situation changed greatly from his first police interview after the shooting, where he said he wasn't in the house when the shot was fired.  Now, he claims he was in the house.

His family's accounts just don't add up.  First responders clearly recall that nobody was performing CPR on Shelley, and nobody had blood on them - and they most certainly would have if they had done CPR.  McClary and Siegler were joined by a seasoned detective to help with the case.  He's known to be a master at interviewing suspects.  They sent the one piece of evidence they had to the lab - the gun.  They wanted to see if any touch DNA existed on the handle or the trigger.  The results confirmed their belief - Pam Shelley's DNA was not on the gun, not on the trigger.  No fingerprints, no DNA - and she supposedly shot herself with this gun?  Even more telling, Ronnie Hendricks DNA was not on the gun. No fingerprints either.  This was HIS gun!  One would expect his prints and/or DNA to be present.  This gun was wiped down, that seems clear.

The saddest part of the show was now 23 year old Kayla going back to the house where the killing occurred 11 years ago.  This was her first time back, and she barely held herself together.  But she did, and she walked the team through what she remembers from that awful day.  They re interviewed all family members and noted the inconsistencies in their statements.  After the gun testing results came back, Siegler wrote up her report on their findings and presented it to the county district attorney's office.  Sgt.Bowen had reopened this case back in 2008, but at that time they did not feel they had enough evidence to successfully prosecute Hendricks.  This time, the outcome would be different.

Siegler, McClary and the production crew arrived in the summer of 2012 and began investigating this case.  By the end of 2012, Ronnie Hendricks was arrested and charged with the murder of Pam Shelley. His trial is slated to begin on September 9th of this year. Now that's pretty impressive!  It would be selfish to expect such positive outcomes each time these two set out to catch a killer - but one can dream.  I think TNT has hit the crime/reality TV jackpot in pairing these two.  Kudos!

Juan Martinez Prosecuting Former Cop Richard Chrisman

Maricopa County prosecutor Juan Martinez is a busy man.  One would imagine that the time he has spent preparing for and prosecuting Jodi Arias has taken years of his life, and it’s not over.  He still has a retrial of the penalty phase off somewhere in the future – but the fact of the matter is he has other cases on his desk.  He is currently prosecuting former Phoenix Police Officer Richard Chrisman for second degree murder, aggravated assault and animal cruelty stemming from a domestic violence call the officer responded to in October of 2010 in which Chrisman fatally shot 29 year old Daniel Rodriquez and his dog “Junior”.

On October 5, 2010 Rodriquez’s mother called police from a neighbors trailer after her son began destroying her property inside of the trailer and became angry and aggressive towards her.  Officer Chrisman and partner Officer Sergio Virgillo responded to the trailer and began knocking on the door.  When Daniel Rodriquez would not open the door, his mother reportedly gave officers permission to enter.  Within minutes, Daniel Rodriquez and his dog were both shot and killed by Chrisman.  This much is known, but the accounts of what happened in between differ.  The prosecution claims Chrismas abused his powers as an officer, manipulated the crime scene and lied about what happened prior to the shooting.  Chrisman claims he only shot after he was unable to diffuse a confrontational Rodriquez who tried to grab his gun and he feared for his life.

Who is telling the truth?  Richard Chrisman took the witness stand yesterday and tearfully recounted the events on October 5, 2010. He told the jury that after getting permission to enter the trailer from Rodriquez’s mother, he was confronted by an angry and aggressive Daniel Rodriquez, who was yelling profanities at the officers – and his pit bull “Junior” was acting aggressively.  When Rodriquez refused to come outside with Chrisman, the two “tussled”.  Chrisman and his partner tried to gain control over the situation by using pepper spray and then deploying a Taser, hitting Rodriquez in the chest. 

Rodriquez removed the Taser probes from his chest.  His dog was continuing to bark, as dogs tend to do when they witness confrontations and yelling – Chrisman shot the dog twice. Rodriquez appeared to try to deflect the bullets from hitting his dog, and he became even more enraged. “His anger elevates, he reaches out and tries to grab my gun”.  Chrisman claims Rodriquez then picked up a bicycle from the living room floor, “he was going to smash my brains in” – the former officer claimed.  “I fired two rounds, center mass”.  Prosecutors believe Rodriquez did not intend to use the bicycle as a weapon, he was simply trying to get away.

Defense attorney Patrick Gunn asked Chrisman if the actions he took to diffuse the situation before shooting Rodriquez complied with the training he received as an officer.  “Yes”, Chrisman said.  During cross examination, prosecutor Juan Martinez accused Chrisman of not following police protocol, manipulating the scene and lying about the events of October 5, 2010.  The state alleges that Chrisman put the muzzle of his gun to Rodriquez’s temple, telling him that he didn’t need a warrant to be inside of the trailer, a claim that Chrisman flatly disputes.  Officer Virgillo told officials that he never saw any weapon(s) in the hands of Daniel Rodriquez, and there was no threat requiring deadly force during that call.   Virgillo has also testified that the victim’s dog was not attacking either officer.  Chrisman has argued that the dog was aggressive and he considered him a threat to his safety. 

Richard Chrisman was fired from the Phoenix police department five months after the shooting.  He was a 9 year veteran of the police force.  The trial continues Wednesday when Chrismas is expected to return to the witness stand to square off against prosecutor Juan Martinez.  I’m not sure if this trial is being covered online – I haven’t checked “Wild About Trials” site yet, but if anybody knows where it can be viewed, could you please leave a comment?  I’d love to see Juan Martinez back in action. 

Isn’t it amazing how Juan Martinez is able to multi-task, handling numerous complex cases that have overlapped.  Interestingly enough, in reading about the Chrisman case and the numerous delays and continuances granted in getting this case to trial – I noticed the trial judge is none other than Judge Sherry Stephens.  She granted a total of 6 continuances since Chrisman was arraigned on October 21, 2010.  Apparently this is just part of the process?  It seems reasonable that from time to time, continuances will need to be granted in circumstances where witnesses are  not available or one side has a legitimate need for more time – but SIX continuances seems excessive.  I’d be interested to know what the average number of continuances for a murder trial is, and how Judge Stephens ranks in those statistics. 

The people of Maricopa County seemed disgruntled over the time it took to bring this former officer to trial – and the fact that he remained free after posting $150,000 bond.  He even reportedly got married while free and awaiting trial.  I know, he’s innocent until proven guilty. He was a police officer.  In their line of work, shootings happen.  Thank God there are people out there who are brave enough to be police officers who knowingly put themselves in dangerous situations to ensure the safety of others.  I have the utmost respect for police officers.  But not all officers are heroes, there will always be a few bad apples who abuse their power and use their knowledge of law enforcement to get away with criminal activity, including murder.  I can think of 4 police officers who were convicted of murdering their wives off the top of my head.  Is Chrisman a good cop who made a bad decision, or over reacted to what he perceived to be grave danger?  Or is he a cop who abused his authority and shot and killed an unarmed man and his dog?  He’d better have a damned good attorney because he’s going up against a very thorough and relentless prosecutor!  

Barbara Sheehan Acquitted in Shooting Death of Husband - Battered Woman's Syndrome Tested

Over the Labor Day weekend, I was catching up on my reading online and came across a story that caught my interest.  The news wasn’t new, the story was about 52 year old Barbara Sheehan who in June of this year began serving a five year prison sentence for a gun possession charge.  Sheehan was a mother of two, a secretary and was married to retired NYPD Sgt. Raymond Sheehan.  After seeing a photo of this woman, who looks like the average American mother – I was curious about the gun possession charge so I read on.  What I found surprised me.  Sheehan had been acquitted of second degree murder after shooting her husband 11 times and killing him on February 8, 2008.  Acquitted of murder, but convicted on gun possession?  My curiosity drove me to look up this case, the trial and find out what happened with Barbara & Raymond Sheehan.

Turns out that Barbara Sheehan admitted to killing her husband, shooting him more than 11 times with two of his guns while he was shaving in the bathroom of their home – but she successfully argued that she shot him in self defense, and utilized the battered wife’s syndrome to demonstrate her fear that had she not killed him, he would have killed her.  The case was interesting in that her attorneys were able to demonstrate that over the course of their marriage Raymond Sheehan had been increasingly physically abusive towards her – allegations that were confirmed and corroborated by Sheehan’s two adult children who testified at trial for the defense.  It can’t be easy for spouses of law enforcement to report incidents of domestic violence.  Think Drew Peterson….Kathleen Savio’s many calls to police about threats from Drew brought little action from responding officers. 

The prosecution painted Barbara Sheehan as a liar who killed her husband in cold blood.  The original judge in Sheenans trial would not allow expert witness testimony on battered woman’s syndrome, however a new judge was assigned to the trial and he did allow in limited testimony from Jacquelyn Campbell, a professor and researcher from John Hopkins University.  Campbell’s studies about domestic violence homicides led her to create the pre-eminent danger-lethality assessment for women in battering situations.  Campbell was not allowed to assess Sheehan, instead, she was only allowed to present generic testimony on the cycle of violence and the “learned helplessness” that leads women to believe that escaping their situation is not possible.  It was mostly a discussion on why women often times do not report abuse to law enforcement, medical professionals, and hide it from family and friends. 

Campbell was not allowed to tell the jury that of the 20 or so indicators on the danger-lethality assessment, nearly all were present in the Sheehans’ relationship in the year prior to the killing.  The escalating violence and threats to kill, the presence of guns in their home and his talk of suicide combined with his need to completely control every aspect of her life were all signs that her time may be running out.  Other testimony that was excluded from her trial was the effects of Raymond Sheehan’s employment in law enforcement – something that surely would have been a factor on her willingness or ability to feel safe in reporting domestic violence.  This could understandably be an issue for women who depend on their husband’s income for support of the family, fearing the loss of employment would lead to loss in sole support of an entire family.  This wasn’t the case here, but it’s another aspect that effects reporting of domestic violence.

The jury also did not hear the statistics that in many cases when an officer’s spouse makes an allegation of domestic violence, “almost without exception” the officer and not the complainant is protected.  According to statistics provided by the National Center for Women in Policing, police agencies usually handle officer involved complaints of domestic violence internally and informally.  They further stated that when a report is made, criminal investigations are rarely conducted and punishment is “exceedingly light”, with counseling the most frequent recommended course of action.  Even more frightening, reports of domestic violence rarely end up in an officer’s employment file – and they are often times promoted, many only a short time after the allegations are made.  Sounds to me like these reports are buried, not taken seriously or simply vanish. 

After reading about all of the information and testimony the Sheehan jury WAS NOT allowed to hear, they did hear from the couple’s 21 year old son, Raymond.  On the witness stand, Raymond broke down in tears when he read something he wrote when he was 14 years old and found out his father had a girlfriend. The Assistant District Attorney had to finish reading the entry for Raymond, in which he professed his anger towards his father and the mistress he discovered by accident when he intercepted an e-mail between the two.  He wrote “my whole life has changed…I’m never going to trust him again”.  The prosecutor was quick to ask why the young man failed to document the beatings his mother took at the hands of his father in his writings.  Raymond replied “that doesn’t mean it never happened”.  Raymond Sheehan left for college in Connecticut because he could no longer stand to be around his father.  He went on to be the second string quarterback of the Sacred Heart University football team in Fairfield.  He admitted that during his senior year in high school, his family life was so bad he considered taking his own life.

The Sheehan’s daughter, 25 year old Jennifer Sheehan also testified on behalf of her mother.  When the prosecutor asked how many times she witnessed her father abusing her mother, she said “millions of times, it happened every day”.  She recalled her father throwing food on the ceiling and floor when her mother cooked something he didn’t like.  She also told jurors about an incident that occurred during her 21^st birthday party – when her father told her she had to move out of their house.  He then stood outside and threw rocks at their home.  Barbara Sheehan’s hands shook visibly at times during her testimony, as she recounted painful memories of her husband calling her “stupid, fat, a horrible mother” and knocking her down, kicking her, choking her and spitting in her face. 

The trial was held in September of 2011, more than 3 years after the killing.  Assistant DA Deborah Pomodore prosecuted the case and told the jury that Sheehan killed her husband out of pure hatred.  They described her as a “deeply unhappy wife who resented her sexless marriage and was now grossly exaggerating what she calls decades of physical abuse.  The trial called national attention to the issue of self defense in domestic violence cases, as the defense argued Barbara Sheehan killed her husband after years of abuse and after he pointed a loaded pistol at her.  Sheehan chronicled the events which included her husband throwing scalding hot pasta sauce in her face, banging her head against the wall and smashing her in the head with a phone receiver when she tried to call 911 for help.  Pomodore tried to shed an entirely different light on the marriage, calling her accounts of events into question and was highly skeptical of the abuse claims.  The prosecutor called Sheehan a “feisty and assertive woman” who was clumsy and accident prone, and even suggested some of her injuries were self inflicted.   Pomodore tried to point out inconsistencies in Sheehans’ statements, pointing to a December 2007 call to a domestic violence hot line in which Sheehan said there had been no physical abuse.  She also suggested Sheehan played up being the victim during media interviews. In the state of New York, self defense laws justify the use of lethal force in response to an immediate threat to life.  Pomodore claims this simply was not the case.  Many legal experts considered this to be a prime case to test the battered woman syndrome defense.

Sheehan testified about an incident that occurred while the family was on vacation in Jamaica when her husband banged her head against a cinder block wall in August of 2007.  After killing her husband in 2008, Sheehan told Good Morning America that he cracked her head open during the Jamaica trip.  During another interview on the Oprah Winfrey Show, she said the injury required stitches from her forehead to the back of the head.  Pomodore tried to capitalize on what she called inconsistencies and exaggerations of the Jamaica event.  Sheehan’s children backed up her story about the injuries and fighting that occurred during that trip.  Sheehan claimed the pair got into a heated argument before she killed him because she refused to go on a trip to Florida with him.  He was shaving when she shot him, although he had a loaded gun on the counter nearby and within reach. 

The defense brought an arsenal of potentially embarrassing accusations of their own to trial.  The most shocking revelation was that Mr. Sheehan was a sexual deviant who forced his wife to watch as he put on adult diapers, women’s dresses or ladies tights and masturbated in front of her.  Pomodore attempted to diffuse the allegations by stating that Sheehan was a willing participant in the role-playing games and suggested she enjoyed being a “dominatrix” while her husband took on the role of a baby.  Yeah, you heard this correctly – I had to read it several times to make sure I got it all right!  Pomodore cited an advertisement in which the Sheehan’s were seeking another couple to engage in other role-playing games with.  Barbara Sheehan called the ad “disgusting”, and said that she was repulsed by her husbands behavior and claims they hadn’t had sexual relations in 10 years.

The jury certainly had much to consider when they retired to begin deliberations.  Sheehan had many supporters in the community and in the courtroom, and many people felt the case should not have even been prosecuted.  I tend to think that anytime someone is shot 11 times, there has to be a thorough investigation and a trial.  Sheehan may have been the victim of abuse, she may have felt she had no way out of the marriage with the exception of being killed or killing her husband – but it should be for a jury to decide.  11 gunshots seems to be more than one would need to stop any perceived danger.  These cases are tough, and I don’t know what I would have decided if I were a juror on this case.  This particular jury had a hard time reaching a consensus – they deadlocked at first, unable to reach an unanimous decision. They ultimately acquitted her of murder.  Despite not hearing much of the expert witness testimony and a lot of other evidence the judge wouldn’t allow in, they took the testimony of the couple’s two adult children seriously.  They were the witnesses to the horrors their mother endured at the hands of their father – a member of law enforcement, who was supposed to protect and serve the community and protect his family, not terrorize them.

The jury acquitted her of murder, but they found her guilty of a gun violation?  She was sentenced to 5 years in prison for gun possession.  I don’t get it.  The jury decided the shooting was justified, so why the gun conviction?  Yes, she shot him with his own weapons – registered to her husband.  I don’t think she had time to get a gun permit while he was threatening to kill her and her children that February morning in 2008.  Was this a compromise verdict of some kind?  Who knows.  Sometimes verdicts don’t make sense.  The public seems to believe Sheehan was justified in shooting her husband to death.  While I don’t feel killing somebody is the appropriate way out of a marriage, I guess there are those situations that are so dangerous, so volatile – where the person feels it’s the ONLY way out. It’s sad, any way you look at it.

Jodi Arias Sentencing Re-Trial - Common Sense Compromises

As we await the mid-September court date in the never ending Jodi Arias penalty phase retrial, I have a few common sense suggestions to get this train wreck of a trial back on the rails.  There are several outstanding motions put forth by Arias’ defense duo – these motions are not new to the public, and therefore they certainly have been on the table for Judge Sherry Stephens to ponder since the August 5^th deadline she gave both sides to file such motions.  What I don’t understand is why these motions were not being considered between the deadline filing date of August 5^th and the status hearing on August 26^th.  I know judges are busy people, juggling multiple trial dates along with their many other responsibilities but come on…..I started this blog because I was shocked and outraged about this case and what happened to Travis Alexander – the photos, the lies, the stolen gun, the ex boyfriends, the stalking, the sex tape and the Cancun trip made this a story that caught the attention of the media and the public.  My family and friends were not as interested in discussing the trial as I was, and I needed an outlet to seek other like minded people.  I was surprised at how many people felt the same way and returned to this blog and let their thoughts and insights.

After viewing the trial and the revolting trial strategy of Jodi Arias and her defense duo, and the subsequent non-verdict at sentencing, coupled with the newest series of delays has turned this blog into my own personal venting page.  I apologize for that!  Like most people out there, I just want to see resolution to this trial in my lifetime!  I have some simple common sense suggestions to Judge Stephens in regards to these outstanding motions – compromises, if you will.  These solutions would seem to be neutral to both sides and not greatly affect the outcome of the retrial.  Arias has already been convicted of first degree murder, half the battle has been fought and won.  All that’s left to decide is whether a jury believes Arias’ life should be spared or if she deserves the ultimate punishment.  A new jury will write the last chapter of this sad story.

On the motions:  Change of Venue – Nurmi and Willmott have argued that due to the media saturation in the Maricopa County area, finding an impartial jury that hasn’t been exposed to extensive news coverage and/or already formed an opinion is unlikely.  Let’s face it, although the media may have been present at the trial venue, the trial was covered on a national level – people all across the good old U S of A know who Jodi Arias is.  She’s made sure of that, calling her own press conferences immediately following her conviction and after her arrest – her constant “tweets” and online art auctions all have aided Arias in keeping the spotlight directly on her.  She shares the blame for the media coverage, as she seems to be thriving in her new found convict status.  My compromise idea is to hold the retrial in Maricopa County, but choose the new jury from another jurisdiction and bus those jurors in to the Superior Court Building for the trial.  They successfully did this in the Casey Anthony case.  I believe the citizens of Maricopa County deserve to see this trial finished in their county.  So choose the jury from another county, transport them to and from the trial.

Sequester The Jury:  The defense wanted jury #1 to be sequestered, but that motion was denied by Judge Stephens, who felt it was an unnecessary cost and burden to the jurors during what was sure to be a lengthy trial.  Potential jurors may be less inclined to want to serve on a jury if it meant being away from their families for 5 months straight.  You can’t blame them.  I think sequestering jury #2 would be a good idea, erring on the side of caution and in the interest of getting this trial moving along.  Sequestering a jury is a burden to the jurors, but it is a good way to put to rest the defense’s concerns about jurors seeing outside news about the trial.  At this point, cost shouldn’t be an issue for the state.  I say sequester them, provide them with movies and other activities to make their time less mundane since they will not have access to regular television or newspapers and limited access to their family and friends.  It’s a small price to pay to fulfill such a vital civic duty.  Sequestering the jury does not help or hinder the prosecution or the defense. It levels the playing field, just do it!

Defense Wants Jurors To Disclose Twitter Account Information/Social Media – The motion specifically mentions Twitter (alone) to the best of my knowledge.  The judge’s admonishment covers ALL media, however it appears one of the alternate jurors may have been busted for an exchange with media during the trial.  But the judge and the defense needs to acknowledge that Jodi Arias herself attempted to influence the public by her tweets, facilitated by friends on the outside during her own trial.  She’s guilty of discussing the trial more than any juror or alternate.  What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

The defense wants individualized voir dire of jurors – I don’t see a problem with this motion either.  It actually helps the prosecutor as well as the defense.  We want to ensure this jury is REALLY DEATH QUALIFIED and we want to know they would be willing and able to hand down a death sentence regardless of their personal belief system relating to capital punishment.  This is perhaps the most difficult part of the process.  During group voir dire, potential jurors may be afraid or unwilling to be 100% honest on their personal beliefs, wherein if they were questioned in the judges chambers outside of the earshot of other potential jurors they may be more willing to be completely honest in vocalizing their beliefs either way.  We’ve heard so much about how difficult some jurors found it to give Arias the death penalty, as if they would somehow be responsible for her death.  This simply isn’t the case.  If sentenced to death, the blame falls squarely on Jodi Arias herself.  Not her attorneys, not the media, not the “haters”, not the Alexander family, not Travis Alexander – and not even her wooden-spoon yielding mother!!  This jury needs to understand the law and how to apply it by weighing the aggravating factors against any mitigating factors. It can be as simple as that.  The jury needs to not feel responsibility for “killing” anybody. They are applying the law.

Those are my suggestions of the motions I’m aware of, in a nutshell.  These are all common sense compromise-based solutions to the issues Judge Stephens is facing going into the retrial.  My hope is that in that next mid-September status hearing, she will have decided to rule on these motions and is ready to set a date for the jury selection process.  No more extensions, this should be it.  A jury found Jodi Arias guilty on May 8, 2013, nearly 4 months ago!  Initially, she wanted to start jury selection in July, and the defense team had scheduling conflicts and have been seeking to delay it into 2014 ever since.  Please, please, please Judge Stephens – don’t let this happen.  This isn’t a new case, these aren’t new issues and the state has been ready since May 9^th.  Let’s get this train back on the track and go full steam ahead to Justicetown (did I really say that??).  I’m getting a little corny, a sign that I should end this entry.  I hope you have all had a great Labor Day weekend, and I hope to see your comments and thoughts on these suggestions.    Until next time……

Will Drew Peterson Ever Stand Trial For Stacy Peterson's Murder?

In my last blog post, I wrote about the new TNT show “Cold Justice” that debuts next Tuesday night.  The show features former Texas prosecutor Kelly Siegler and Las Vegas CSI Yolanda McClary who travel across America’s small towns taking a second look at some unsolved cold homicide cases.  I’m excited about the show, mostly because I’m a fan of Siegler’s work as a prosecutor but also the premise of the show seems different than many of the present formatted crime shows.  I believe they will be looking for unsolved murders that happened in rural areas where law enforcement resources were sparse.  But wouldn’t it be cool if they could get to the bottom of some of the more well known unsolved homicide/missing person cases?  At the top of my personal wish list:  the disappearance of Stacy Peterson. 

Most people believe Stacy Peterson is not simply missing, she was killed.  The prime suspect in the case has always been her husband Drew Peterson.  Stacy Peterson met and married the much older Drew Peterson after meeting him while he was on duty as a Bolingbrook police officer.  He was married to Kathleen Savio at the time, but the two quickly began a romantic relationship and when she became pregnant with his child Peterson and Savio began bitter divorce proceedings.  Savio was Peterson’s third wife, Stacy would be wife #4.  After the divorce was final, Drew married Stacy – the only thing remaining aside from the custodial arrangements of Peterson and Savio’s children was the division of property and assets.  Savio didn’t live to make it to court for the decision on division of assets, she was found dead in her bathtub.  Originally ruled an accident by the coroner, many of Kathleen’s family and friends were convinced her abusive ex husband killed her.

A little more than 4 years after Stacy married Drew Peterson, she simply disappeared.  On October 29, 2007 she was reported missing but not by her husband, she was reported missing by her sister Cassandra Cales after Stacy failed to show up for plans they had and nobody could reach her.  The last time family or friends heard from Stacy was on October 17, 2007 when she left a voicemail message on her father’s answering machine – in the message, Stacy left a new cellphone number for her family.   Stacy’s family knew there had been trouble in the marriage for some time, with Drew becoming more and more controlling over Stacy – insisting on knowing where she was at all times and who she was with.  Stacy wanted out of the marriage, but she feared Drew – and for good reason.  Stacy had been holding on to a secret that more than likely got her killed.  She knew that her husband had left their home on the night of Kathleen Savio’s death (murder).  She woke up in the middle of the night and he was not in bed.  She later found him in the laundry room, dressed in dark colored clothing and putting women’s clothing as well as his own clothes in the washing machine.  This was of particular interest because Drew never did his own laundry.  Where did the women’s clothing come from, and why did Drew have it? What was he doing out in the middle of the night and why did he coach her on what to tell police about that night during routine questioning after Kathleen’s death?  We know the answer to those questions now.  It took Stacy’s disappearance for law enforcement to take a second look at the suspicious death of Kathleen Savio.

Drew Peterson was eventually arrested for the murder of Kathleen Savio.  After her body was exhumed, a second autopsy proved crucial in showing her death was not an accidental drowning.  Drew Peterson was tried and convicted of killing Kathleen Savio in 2012 after a trial that was as much of a media circus as the Jodi Arias and Casey Anthony trials – although Peterson’s trial did not have cameras in the courtroom, it was still widely covered and discussed nightly on a national level.  Peterson was convicted in part due to a controversial new law enacted for this case.  Dubbed “Drew’s Law”, state prosecutors were able to use statements Stacy Peterson made to her pastor Neil Schori and divorce attorney Harry Smith at trial.  Stacy went to the pastor and told him she believed she helped her husband Drew get away with murdering his ex wife Kathleen Savio. She feared the knowledge put her in danger, and she was right.  Peterson’s defense team made what turned out to be a crucial mistake at trial by calling attorney Harry Smith to the stand as a witness.  The prosecution pounced on the opportunity and elicited some very damaging testimony from Smith regarding conversations he had with Stacy Peterson before her disappearance.  Smith told jurors that Stacy Peterson asked him if she could use her knowledge of Drew’s involvement in Kathleen’s death/murder as leverage against him in divorce proceedings.  Can you say M-O-T-I-V-E???

There are a few things Drew Peterson would not stand for from the women in his life.  He WAS married four times, almost five times.  Drew sought to control his women.  Whether it be what they wore, how much makeup they applied, who they talked to on the phone, who they e-mailed and who they saw.  He had to know everything at all times.  Was the much older Drew not the confident, self assured police officer he portrayed himself to be?  Was he really an insecure, middle aged man who feared the much younger and attractive Stacy would leave him and take half of his assets?  Drew Peterson’s ego could not stand for any woman leaving him – and he made it known to more than one person that he wouldn’t give half of his assets to any woman.  That was HIS money.  He didn’t believe in community property, and there’s no way he was going to share his hard earned pension and other assets with a young attractive woman who could have easily started a new life with someone more age-appropriate and less controlling.  I think that thought just ate at him.  He avoided the division of property with wife #3 by killing her and making it appear to be an accident. He bragged to Kathleen AND Stacy that he had the knowledge to kill them and make it look like an accident, and he nearly got away with it with Kathleen.  His ego unchecked, he has attempted to dispose of Stacy without having to part with his assets and keeping his ego in tact.

Drew Peterson is currently serving his 38 year sentence at the Menard Correctional Center in Illinois.  He will be 93 years old at the earliest possible release date, barring any successful appeals he will more than likely never see the light of day again.  Does that mean this man should go unpunished or untried for the murder of Stacy Peterson?  Will States Attorney James Glasgow pursue new charges against Drew Peterson in connection with his missing and presumed dead 4^th wife Stacy?  I think if there is any chance to nail him, they will.  Peterson isn’t going anywhere anytime in the near future.  The problem is, much of what they know or suspect Peterson did is circumstantial and with Stacy’s body never having been recovered, it’s notoriously difficult to prosecute a no-body homicide.  Thankfully there is no statute of limitations on murder, however as time ticks away, witnesses forget details or move away and in some cases they die.  Time is of essence if they hope to try Peterson for the murder of Stacy.  What do police know, and how much of what they know have they shared with the public?  I don’t know very much in the way of details, but it seems likely that the best evidence against Drew comes in the form of statements made by his stepbrother Thomas Morphey.  Morphey told police he helped Drew carry a large and heavy 55 gallon blue drum/container from his bedroom to Peterson’s SVU right after Stacy’s disappearance.  He allegedly has said the container was warm, and it was large enough to hold Stacy’s body.  Distraught after the revelation that Stacy was missing, Morphey attempted to kill himself when he realized that he may have inadvertently helped dispose of Stacy’s body.  Morphey’s statements were downplayed by Peterson’s defense attorneys, claiming his drug and alcohol problems make him an unreliable witness who should not be believed.  Peterson’s longtime friend Rick Mims corroborated the blue container story in that he told police he was with Drew when he purchased 3 such drums from a cable company the two had worked for part time back in 2003. 

That blue container has never been recovered.  I remember years ago, a news story came on where the police were called to a nearby lake or river after people fishing reported a large blue container floating in the water.  They retrieved the container, but it did not contain Stacy’s body.  The million dollar question is what did Drew do with the container that may have concealed Stacy’s body?  Did he bury it? Did he throw it in some body of water?  Seems to me that he must have buried it or disposed of it in a body of water large enough to where it would never be found.  Drew had a small airplane.  Could he have loaded the barrel in the plane and flown over water and tossed it over?  Can Drew be prosecuted without Stacy’s body being found?  I certainly hope so.  I hate to think that people are rewarded for their skill at concealing a body.  But with a purely circumstantial case such as this, and double jeopardy in play, the police are likely taking their time with this case.  I don’t believe Stacy’s case has been forgotten.  I hope to someday see Stacy’s killer standing trial for her murder.

Drew Peterson is another high profile defendant who courted the media, and then turned around and complained about the pre-trial publicity harming his case.  Drew is probably the only person I can think of who could be compared to Jodi Arias in their hunger for media attention before, during and after their trial.  While Stacy was missing, Drew Peterson appeared on Larry King Live and publicly proclaimed his innocence and told viewers Stacy had up and left him for another man, taking only her bikini with her. How ridiculous of a notion is that?  Stacy would never have left her children behind, and especially not with Drew. Drew often toyed with the numerous reporters who camped out in his front yard.  He even pitched the idea of a contest “Win a Date With Drew” to the media.  While he was being held in jail awaiting trial, he called radio personality Mancow Muller from jail and suggested a new contest – “Win a Conjugal Visit With Drew”.  How disgusting is this man?  Peterson ALMOST snared another wife after Stacy’s disappearance.  In December of 2008, he announced his engagement to 23 year old Christina Raines in a television interview.  Raines at the time believed in Drew’s innocence, but that would change months later when she called off the engagement and moved out of the home he used to share with Stacy in January 2009.  Thankfully, Raines family and friends convinced her that she was making a MONUMENTAL and dangerous mistake in trusting Drew Peterson – a man who was married four times, of which one wife died under suspicious circumstances and the other was “missing”.  Game over Drew.  I have the feeling we have not heard or seen the last of Drew Peterson.  He may have disappeared from the spotlight at the insistence of his new attorney(s), but I don’t think his personality will ever let him completely fade into the background.  I truly hope to see justice for Stacy Peterson during my lifetime. Her family deserves to know where she is and what happened to her. That’s the only card Drew has left to play.