Steve Martini - The Jury

“How many cases of homicide by strangulation have you investigated in your career?” asks Tannery.

“A good number.”

“More than twenty?”

“Oh yes.”

“More than fifty?”

“Maybe fifty.”

“So you have some experience.”

“Yes.”

“In your professional opinion, would the tension applied by that tool, the tensioning tool in evidence, be sufficient to strangle a person to death?”

“Easily,” says de Angelo.

“Would it be enough to account for a deep ligature furrow of the kind found around the neck of Kalista Jordan?”

“I would say so. Yes.”

Tannery nods to himself as he paces a little, between his counsel table and a rostrum set up in front of the bench where his notes are.

“Your witness,” says Tannery.

Here the game is to whittle away at the edges. I start with de Angelo’s credentials as an expert.

“Lieutenant, you say you’ve investigated perhaps as many as fifty homicide cases involving strangulation. Is that right?”

“Yes.”

“Not all of those were murder, though, were they?”

“What do you mean?”

“I mean a good number of them were suicides?”

“Oh.” He thinks about this for a moment. “I suppose.”

“Have you ever investigated a case of murder in which the weapon was a nylon cable tie?”

“No. Not to my recollection.”

“So, in fact, this is the first time you’ve ever seen a case exactly like this?”

“Every case is different,” he says.

“Still you never investigated a case involving strangulation with a cable tie. Isn’t that right?”

“Yeah. Right.”

“Yet you’re willing to assume that a tensioning tool was used in this case?”

“Something was used to gain leverage,” says de Angelo. “The killer didn’t tighten that cable tie with his hands alone. Too much tension,” he says.

“Yes, but does that mean he used a tensioning tool?”

“It seems like a likely possibility to me,” he says.

“But that’s all it is, a possibility.”

He doesn’t respond.

“Let me ask you, Lieutenant, do you know for a fact that a tensioning tool was used to tighten the cable tie around the neck of Kalista Jordan?”

“Like I said, it’s likely. .”

“I didn’t ask you what was likely. I asked you if you knew for a fact whether such a tool was used.”

“No.”

“So it is only surmise, an assumption on your part, the part of your investigating team, that such a tool was even used in this case?”

“Something was used to gain leverage. It seems natural that it would have been a tool designed for that purpose.”

“Isn’t it possible that the loose end of the cable tie could have been wrapped around a stick, a piece of wood, maybe a short metal rod, and that this could have been used as a handle to gain leverage?”

“It’d be awkward,” says de Angelo.

“Still, it’s possible, isn’t it?”

“It’s possible. Anything’s possible.” It is all the concession I need.

“So as you sit here today, you don’t know with certainty whether that tool, the one in evidence, or for that matter any tensioning tool was used in this case, do you?”

“There’s not much in life that any of us know with absolute certainty,” he says.

“That’s not an answer to my question. Do you know with certainty whether that tool or any similar tool was used to kill Kalista Jordan?”

“No.”

Harry and I could have objected to this evidence, the tensioning tool, at the preliminary hearing before the trial, where Crone was bound over. We didn’t. It was a tactical decision. Now the state has relied on a piece of evidence that they cannot tie to the crime. Nor can they prove that a similar device was used. Voids like this can be filled later with reasonable doubt during our closing argument.

“You testified earlier that this particular cable tie, the one taken from around the neck of the victim, is unusual, that you wouldn’t expect to find it in your local hardware store. Is that right?”

“I think I said it was heavy-duty,” says de Angelo.

“Would you like me to have the record read back?” I ask him.

“I may have said it would be difficult to find.”

“In fact you stated that you couldn’t expect to find it in your ordinary hardware store, that you’d probably have to order it from an industrial supply house. Your words.” I’m reading from a legal notepad. “Isn’t that what you said?”

“I think so.”

“Are you telling us that cable ties of the kind used to kill Kalista Jordan are rare?”

“I don’t know how you define ‘rare,’” he says. “They’re not as common as lighter-weight cable ties,” he says.

“Would it surprise you if I told you I managed to purchase two dozen cable ties just like that one”-I point to the murder tie in the bag-“at five different stores right here in the San Diego area?” As I ask this, I am pointing to a large paper bag that Harry has picked up and placed in the center of our counsel table.

“Objection,” says Tannery. “Assumes facts not in evidence. Counsel’s trying to testify.”

“I only asked him whether he would be surprised.”

“I’ll allow the question,” says Coats.

“I don’t know.”

“Well, during the course of your investigation didn’t you check the local stores to determine whether this type of cable tie was readily available in the area?”

“We looked.”

“How many stores did you check?”

“I can’t remember.”

“Isn’t it a fact, Lieutenant, that you don’t know how many of these cable ties are sold in this area in a given week, or a month, or a year?”

De Angelo doesn’t respond.

“Objection. Compound question,” says Tannery. “Over what time frame?”

“Fine, let’s start with a week. Do you know how many cable ties like this are sold in this area in a week?”

“No.”

“Do you want to try monthly?” I ask.

I can tell by the look on his face that he doesn’t. So can the jury, several of whom are still looking at the bag on the counsel table.

“Do you know whether you might have a few cable ties like this one in your basement at home, Lieutenant?”

He doesn’t answer, but looks at me with a death wish.

“So you can’t tell us how rare they are?”

“I never said they were rare. That’s your word.”

“Fine.” I leave it alone. The cable ties aren’t rare. “Do you have any idea what these ties are used for? I mean besides strangling people.”

“Industrial uses.”

“For example?”

“Electrical wiring. To bundle up large groups of wires.”

“And?”

“I don’t know. Whatever you need ’em for.”

“Do police ever use cable ties like these?”

He makes a face, thinks about it. “Sure. They might.”

“What for?”

“Crowd control. In lieu of handcuffs. Sometimes it’s necessary to use ties like that.”

“The same kind?”

“Probably lighter weight. They wouldn’t be that strong.”

“Fine. So there’s a lot of reasons people might keep cable ties on hand that have nothing to do with murder?”

“I suppose.”

“And also the tools to tighten them?”

“Yeah.”

“I mean, isn’t it possible that a homeowner might keep ties like this, and a tensioning tool like that one in front of you, at home to tie up old newspapers, or bundle up trash, or to gather branches after pruning a tree?”

“I suppose.”

“I mean, are we all to assume that everybody who purchases cable ties intends to use them to strangle somebody?”

There is actually some giggling in the jury box with this question.