Dark Moon, page 30
“She said she had a Glock .9 millimeter that she kept in the trunk of her car. She checked on the gun that afternoon, and it was missing.”
“And did she have any idea how it came to be missing?”
“She guessed it had been stolen, but there was no sign of forced entry.”
“Officer Stratton, are you experienced with car theft and break ins?”
“I am. I’ve worked over a hundred cases.”
“And in your experience, are there always signs of forced entry when a car has been broken into.”
“No.”
“Now, Officer Stratton, did you prepare a police report based upon Mrs. Reed’s information?”
“I did.”
“When?”
“I wrote it that afternoon, and I filed it the next day in the department.”
“So it was filed on May 20?”
“That is correct.”
“And you are certain you filed that report?”
“Very certain.”
Sarah noticed the jurors were hanging on Tim Sratton’s every word and smiled inside. “So if Officer Brent McColly said he never found a report, would he be accurate?”
“No, he would not. He was aware Mrs. Reed had reported the gun stolen and that I had written and filed a report based upon her complaint.”
“Officer Stratton, did there come a day when Officer McColly spoke to you about the report you had prepared?”
“Yes.”
“And how did he contact you?”
“By telephone at my home. I was off-duty at the time.”
“And was anyone else on the call?”
“Yes. Mr. Barton.” Timothy Stratton looked over at the prosecutor, and all sixteen pairs of juror eyes followed his.
“Do you recall what day this happened?”
“June 3. It was the day Alexa Reed was arrested.”
“Do you recall what Officer McColly told you?”
“Yes. He said Mrs. Reed had claimed she made a police report about her stolen gun, and I verified she had. Then Mr. Barton asked me to destroy it and to lay low so the defense team wouldn’t find me.”
“Did he tell you why he wanted you to destroy the report and lay low?”
“Yes. Mr. Barton said it would be easier to convict Mrs. Reed of the murders if the report didn’t exist.”
“And what would happen if you didn’t destroy the report?”
“I would lose my job.”
“And are you afraid of losing your job for testifying here today?
“Objection. Relevance.”
“Overruled. You may answer.”
“Yes, I am.”
“And did you do as you were asked and destroy the report?”
“I did at the office. But I kept a copy at home on my computer.”
“And why did you keep a copy?”
“I knew destroying the report was wrong. I wanted to be an honest cop.”
“And on the day you interviewed Mrs. Reed, did she tell you why she had the Glock .9?”
“Yes. She said she purchased the weapon and learned to use it because she was fearful for her safety and that of her children because of threats from Mr. Reed.”
“Objection. Hearsay.”
“I’ll allow it. Continue, Ms. Knight.”
“So she told you she had the gun because of threats from her ex-husband?”
“Correct.”
“Did she say whether the gun was properly licensed, and if she’d taken firearms training?”
“Yes. It was licensed, and she had completed a course in firearms use and safety.”
“Thank you, Officer Stratton.”
With an inward sigh of relief, Sarah gathered her notes from the podium and resumed her seat at counsel table.
Judge Tomlinson looked over at Preston Barton. “Any questions for the officer, Mr. Barton?”
“Yes, Your Honor. A few.”
Sarah watched Preston’s stout little figure position itself behind the podium so the jurors could get a good view of his face.
“Officer Stratton, you testified you examined the trunk of Mrs. Reed’s car and there were no signs it had been broken into?”
“That is correct.”
“So other than Mrs. Reed’s word that the gun had been stolen, did you find any additional evidence to back up her story?”
“No.”
“Now you said I asked you to destroy this report?”
“Correct.”
“And you said the reason given was it would be easier to prosecute her without it?’
“Correct.”
“Are you an attorney, Officer Stratton?”
“No.”
“So you aren’t in a position to judge an attorney’s tactical decisions, are you?”
“I am not.”
“So if I had a tactical reason to want the report destroyed because it was based upon the unreliable statement of Alexa Reed, whom Dr. Ronald Brigman through psychological testing had found to be a liar, you would not be in a position to judge my reasons for the request, would you?”
Sarah leapt to her feet. “Objection, Your Honor.”
“Counsel, approach the bench,” Judge Tomlinson intoned. “Let me hear from you first, Ms. Knight.”
Being careful to keep her voice low, so the jurors would not hear, Sarah said, “Dr. Brigman could not determine the truth of my client’s statements through psychological testing.”
“We’ve been through this,” Preston Barton huffed. “Dr. Brigman’s finding that she is a liar is conclusive.”
“And that’s legal error. This case is going to be reversed on appeal.”
“Wishful thinking,” Preston Barton shot back.
“That’s enough,” Judge Tomlinson said. “Rephrase your question, Mr. Barton, leaving Dr. Brigman out of it.”
Sarah smiled inside, happy with her victory.
Preston Barton went back to the podium. “So, Officer Stratton, you would not be in a position to judge my legal reasons for directing you to destroy the report?”
“No, other than I was taught in the Academy not to destroy evidence.”
“But did the Academy mention worthless and false evidence?”
“The Academy did not divide evidence up that way. Evidence is evidence.”
“But you have, have you not, been instructed by my office and by your superiors in the department to destroy evidence that is old or stale or worthless from time to time in other cases?”
“That is correct.”
“The Department has storage limitations, does it not, Officer?”
“Yes.”
“So we can’t keep everything, can we?”
“No.”
“Thank you, Officer Stratton. No further questions.”
“Do you have any re-direct, Ms. Knight?” Judge Tomlinson smiled politely.
“I do.”
Sarah resumed her place at the podium and looked directly into Tim Stratton’s earnest eyes. “Officer, when you interviewed Mrs. Reed that day, did you have any reason to believe she was not telling the truth about her gun being stolen?”
“No, not all. She was very open and direct. And she seemed upset that it had gone missing.”
“And when you were asked to destroy your report, was it because it was old and valueless?”
“No.”
“In fact, weren’t you told, it had great value as evidence, and that is why the district attorney’s office wanted it destroyed?
“Correct.”
“And were you concerned about your professional reputation if you complied with the request to destroy it?”
“Very.”
“And so that is why you kept the copy at home?”
“Correct.”
Sarah looked up at Judge Tomlinson and said, “That’s all I have.”
“Thank you, Officer Stratton. You may be excused.”
“Your Honor, wait! I have one more question.” Preston Barton huffed to his feet, afraid he’d lose the opportunity.
“Very well, Mr. Barton. Sorry, Officer Stratton. If you would remain a little longer.”
“Officer, did you ask Mrs. Reed who had a key to the trunk besides herself?”
“Yes. She said she had the only key.”
“And you didn’t take any steps to corroborate her story that the gun had been stolen, did you?”
“No. I wrote down what she told me, and I filed the report.”
“Thank you, Officer Stratton. No more questions.”
Anger welled in the pit of Sarah’s stomach, but she tried not to show it as she looked over at the juror’s faces. From their expressions, Preston had won that round. They didn’t believe Alexa’s gun had been stolen.
“Ms. Knight, you may call your next witness.”
“The defense calls James Mitchell.”
Sarah watched Jim approach the stand and be sworn by the clerk. He was so handsome in his dark power suit and red tie. The tailoring fit him perfectly and accented his broad, muscular shoulders. Unbidden, Sarah’s memories of being in his strong safe arms broke through her professional concentration, and her heart began to beat hard and fast.
I can’t feel this, she reminded herself. He belongs to Alexa.
Jim sat down on the witness chair and adjusted the microphone with an expert touch. The Bureau had trained him to testify, Sarah remembered. His gentle eyes focused on hers, encouraging her to begin.
“Would you state your name for the record?”
“James Chapman Mitchell.”
“And how are you employed, Mr. Mitchell?”
“I’m am self-employed as a private investigator.”
“And what is your relationship to this case?”
“I was hired to be the defense investigator in August of last year.”
“And what is your training and experience to do investigations, Mr. Mitchell?”
“I was a Special Agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation for more than twenty years.”
“And do you have a law degree in addition to your experience with the Bureau?”
“I do. I graduated from Georgetown.”
“Now, Mr. Mitchell, turning to your investigative work in this case, did I ask you to review financial records of Ronald Brigman that I obtained by subpoena?”
“Yes.”
“And do you have experience reviewing financial records?”
“I do. I worked over a hundred cases in the Bureau dealing with money laundering and organized crime.”
“Will you describe the records I asked you to review?”
“Dr. Brigman had four bank accounts at Wells Fargo Bank, a personal checking account, a savings account, a business checking account, and a business savings account.”
“And did you find any financial data relevant to the facts of this case when you reviewed Dr. Brigman’s financial information?”
“Yes.”
“Will you explain those for the jury?”
“I found a payment to Dr. Brigman each month from Michael Reed of four thousand dollars. It was transferred on the first of each month to Dr. Brigman’s personal checking account.”
“And how did you determine the payment came from Michael Reed?”
“Mrs. Reed provided the number of the account her ex-husband used to pay child support, and it matched the account he used to pay Dr. Brigman each month.”
“Did you happen to notice when the payments to Dr. Brigman began?”
“Yes, in January of 2009.”
“And did I ask you to obtain certified court records of the date Michael Reed filed for divorce from his wife?”
“You did.”
“I’d like this marked as Defense Exhibit B. It’s a date-stamped copy of Michael Reed’s petition for divorce.”
“And what is the date on this document, Mr. Mitchell?”
“January 15, 2009.”
“And did I also ask you to obtain a certified copy of the minute order appointing Ronald Brigman as the child custody evaluator in the Reed divorce?”
“Yes.”
“This will be Defense Exhibit C, Your Honor.”
“What is the date that Dr. Brigman was appointed?”
“March 3, 2009.”
Sarah saw the discrepancy register with some of the jurors, but she continued to nail down the point for all of them. “So the records show Michael Reed was paying Dr. Brigman four thousand a month from the time he filed for divorce in January and before Dr. Brigman became a part of the family law case in February?”
“That is correct.”
“Did you reach a conclusion about the nature of this four thousand a month payment?”
“Objection!” Preston Barton was quivering with rage.
“Your Honor, Mr. Mitchell has established his reputation as an expert in investigating financial crimes.”
“Very well. Overruled.”
“I concluded that Michael Reed wanted to control the custody of his children by bribing Ronald Brigman, and he made that arrangement with him before he took action to divorce his wife.”
“Now, Mr. Mitchell, I have one final area to cover with you. Did you become aware of surveillance cameras that covered the back of Dr. Brigman’s house?”
“Yes, one of his neighbors provided me with footage from his cameras on the night of June 2, 2013.”
“Thank you, Mr. Mitchell. No further questions.”
Preston Barton leapt to the podium as Sarah sat down, but he managed to get a grip on his emotions. He began in a cool, confident professional tone. “So tell me, Mr. Mitchell, did you review all of the family court file?”
“Yes, I did.”
“And did you read all of Dr. Brigman’s psychological evaluations of Michael and Alexa and their children?”
“I did.”
“And did you read Dr. Brigman’s finding that the defendant had deliberately harmed the children’s relationship with their father?”
“I read that. It didn’t ring true to me.”
“Your Honor, I ask that the portion of Mr. Mitchell’s answer after ‘I read that’ be stricken as not responsive.”
“It will be stricken. Just answer the question asked, Mr. Mitchell.”
“And did you find a minute order that showed Dr. Brigman was appointed to do psychotherapy with the children?”
“Yes.”
“And who paid for that therapy?”
“Michael Reed.”
“And that would have been expensive therapy, would it not?”
“I am not versed in the costs of psychotherapy in San Diego, and that theory does not explain the payments in January before the divorce began.”
“But what if Michael Reed was concerned about his relationship with his children and took them to Dr Brigman for an expert opinion in January 2009 leading him to decide to file for divorce to save his relationship with them?”
“Objection.” Sarah stood up quickly. “These facts are not in evidence. Mr. Barton is asking the witness to speculate.”
“That’s true,” Judge Tomlinson nodded. “Objection sustained.”
“No further questions.”
And to Sarah’ great relief, the judge said to Jim, “You may step down.”
“Ms. Knight, it’s nearly four o’clock. Do you have another witness for today?”
“Yes, Your Honor. Ted Frederickson. He won’t take long. I’ll easily finish by four thirty.”
“Very well. You may call your next witness.”
Ted Frederickson presented well, Sarah thought as she watched the clerk swear in the tall, lanky, good-looking man in the obviously expensive Big Firm navy power suit and tasteful maroon tie.
“Good afternoon, Mr. Frederickson, please state your name and occupation for the record.”
“Theodore Christian Frederickson. I am a partner with the firm of King and White.”
“And do you practice criminal law, Mr. Frederickson?”
“No. I specialize in corporate buyouts and mergers.”
“And did you have a connection to Dr. Ronald Brigman?”
“Yes. He was my next door neighbor for fifteen years.”
“Did there come a time when my investigator, James Mitchell contacted you?”
“Yes. He spoke with my wife first, and then with me.”
“And why did Mr. Mitchell contact you?”
“I have a surveillance system that covers the front and back of my house. And the camera in my back yard also picks up Dr. Brigman’s back door.”
“Can you describe the back door of Dr. Brigman’s residence?”
“He had the same setup all of us on that side of the street have. Oversized sliding glass doors open onto a patio that gives us the best view from the edge of Mt. Soledad of the village of La Jolla and the Pacific Ocean.”
“And I take it that is a pretty spectacular view?”
“Yes.”
“And do you know if Dr. Brigman was in the habit of leaving his back doors open?”
“Yes. All of us along that side of the street liked to enjoy the view at night.”
“Now, when Mr. Mitchell contacted you, was he seeking something in particular?”
“Yes. He had learned from my wife that I had saved the surveillance tape that showed the back door of Dr. Brigman’s house on the night he was killed.”
Sarah held up a CD. “I’d like this marked as Defense Exhibit D. It is a copy of the surveillance tape that Mr. Frederickson provided.”
“No objection,” Preston Barton mumbled.
“And have you viewed this surveillance footage, Mr. Frederickson?”
“I have.”
“And does it accurately depict the area in question?”
“Yes.”
“And is the time stamp on the footage accurate?”
“It is.”
“No further questions.”
“Mr. Barton?”
“Just briefly, Your Honor”
Sarah watched the prosecutor heft himself out of his chair and up to the podium.
“Mr. Frederickson, why did you provide this material to the defense and not to the police?”
“Because the police never asked for it. They took statements from my wife and me, and we told them about the tape, but they never came back for it.”
“Why did you save it then?”
“I knew it was important evidence.”
“Now you said that you have seen this footage?”
“Yes.”
