Dear Mr. Andrus:
I am extremely disappointed in your decision to dismiss charges against Greg Nelson and Suzanne Little. Usually, a DA will go for a retrial when he gets a majority vote for conviction the first time around. Murder is absolutely the highest priority crime to prosecute. How can you possibly say that the rest of your workload is more important?
Christine Chenevert and yourself did your best on the first trial and managed to convince seven jurors that Greg was guilty, guilty, guilty! But I think there are a number of ways you could improve on a retrial.
In jury selection, it appears from what other jurors have said that you were stuck with a couple of jurors that were hopelessly biased against conviction. I hope your intuition on this is better next time. When a defense lawyer questions a potential juror very aggressively, then reluctantly decides not to challenge, he/she may be playing a game to sneak a juror he/she really likes onto the jury. Don't get any non-practicing lawyers on the jury. Do look for people who have seen what meth does and does not do to people. Being Native American is probably a plus, except for Hoopa residents.
A couple of jurors thought that Greg was the salt of the earth. This should not have happened. He is almost certainly a pusher as well as a meth user. Find some people in rehab who will testify that Greg sold them meth. Sylvia Jenkins was not very credible, but if you use her, ask her if Greg supplied her with meth when she was a minor. Find some gyppo loggers who fired Greg because he showed up loaded and couldn't do the job. Did he pay income taxes? Probably not. Get his IRS records. Did he make enough to live without dealing meth? Probably not. Make sure the jury knows he is a scumbag.
Don't leave Steve Marshall for the defense to take apart. Prep him as well as you can and put him on. Make sure that you discuss any inconsistencies in his testimony during direct, and give him a chance to reconcile differences between his recollections and the confession. In "Outrage," Bugliosi said that if only the DA had gotten Fuhrman to say that yes, to his great regret he had used the term nigger on a few occasions, OJ would have been convicted.
Research any precedents saying that minor participants in a kidnapping are equally guilty. Make sure the judge and jury hear that and try to get it in the instructions. Work harder on the ransom note issue. Things unfortunately do get lost in 33 years.
Maybe you need an expert on what meth does and does not do to a person. Meth addicts I have known were clever liars, skilled at manipulating people. It would be totally out of character for a meth addict to give a false confession. Bugliosi handled this issue pretty well when the defense objected to Linda Kasabian's testimony on the grounds that she was an acid head with a blown mind.
Keep digging for witnesses to the disposal of the body.
Could the red honda still be in a junkyard somewhere? Are there records that Albert Carpenter or someone else did own this car? Really work on anything that might result in physical evidence.
If Greg can be convicted on a drug charge and in jail during a retrial for murder, so much the better.
Work harder on motive. Did Bill Cook have anything to do with the accusation that Antone murdered Herb Cook? Did he testify in Antone's trial? Did Antone and Suzanne get a huge bill they couldn't pay after the trial? If so, make sure the jury knows this.
Showing posts with label Suzanne Aubrey Little. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Suzanne Aubrey Little. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Confession + seven guilty votes = Murder Case Dismissed!
Faced with a budget crisis and a powerful bay area defense attorney, DA Kirk Andrus moved to dismiss kidnapping charges against Suzanne Little, and Murder/kidnap charges against Greg Nelson of Hoopa, for the death 33 years ago of six-year old Willie Cook of Happy Camp. Nelson's first trial ended with the jury deadlocked 7 to 5 for conviction on murder, and 6 to 6 on the kidnapping charge. Redding Searchlight
Nelson's retrial and Little's trial had been scheduled to begin Jan 11. Family and friends of the victim felt betrayed and appalled by the decision. Andrus will undoubtedly be second-guessed for spending a reported $60,000 in drug forfeiture money for a special prosecutor in Nelson's first trial instead of prosecuting it himself. Many courtroom observers thought that Nelson's first trial should have been a slam dunk, since the prosecution had a confession and an eyewitness. But public defender Lael Kayfetz managed to sow enough doubt to get a mistrial.
The state can still refile charges against both defendants if they get more evidence and/or more money.
As the days have gone on since the mistrial was announced on November 12, I have become more convinced of Nelson and Little's guilt. Several former jurors have commented extensively on the case in the Eureka Times-Standard forum. Topix forum The bottom line is that Nelson did confess. The confession was wrung out of him over a two day period, but it was ruled admissible. Nelson clearly and consistently denied molesting Cook, whose body was found nude. But his statements on whether he suffocated or strangled Willie were equivocal in the beginning, until he finally did confess, although he claimed he hadn't really meant to kill him. And he admitted early on that he was the driver when Willie was kidnapped in Happy Camp and brought to Hoopa. Nelson later claimed that he made the confession because he was really messed up on meth, and had consumed 1/8 ounce of it that the arresting officers missed, when they stopped for a bathroom break. Nelson may not be too bright, but he already knew about Miranda rights, having two previous convictions. And the meth addicts that I have known would definitely lie, but they all seemed to be clever liars skilled at manipulating people to get money or whatever they needed to get more speed. The idea that this powerful mental stimulant would make someone confess to something they didn't do is fundamentally at odds with the reality I have seen over the last 40 years. I would say that any juror relying on his own common sense would have to put the idea of false confessions in the same loopy category as the idea of "recovered memories," a concept advocated by a few psychologists years ago.
Where did the prosecution go wrong on this case? See above post.
Nelson's retrial and Little's trial had been scheduled to begin Jan 11. Family and friends of the victim felt betrayed and appalled by the decision. Andrus will undoubtedly be second-guessed for spending a reported $60,000 in drug forfeiture money for a special prosecutor in Nelson's first trial instead of prosecuting it himself. Many courtroom observers thought that Nelson's first trial should have been a slam dunk, since the prosecution had a confession and an eyewitness. But public defender Lael Kayfetz managed to sow enough doubt to get a mistrial.
The state can still refile charges against both defendants if they get more evidence and/or more money.
As the days have gone on since the mistrial was announced on November 12, I have become more convinced of Nelson and Little's guilt. Several former jurors have commented extensively on the case in the Eureka Times-Standard forum. Topix forum The bottom line is that Nelson did confess. The confession was wrung out of him over a two day period, but it was ruled admissible. Nelson clearly and consistently denied molesting Cook, whose body was found nude. But his statements on whether he suffocated or strangled Willie were equivocal in the beginning, until he finally did confess, although he claimed he hadn't really meant to kill him. And he admitted early on that he was the driver when Willie was kidnapped in Happy Camp and brought to Hoopa. Nelson later claimed that he made the confession because he was really messed up on meth, and had consumed 1/8 ounce of it that the arresting officers missed, when they stopped for a bathroom break. Nelson may not be too bright, but he already knew about Miranda rights, having two previous convictions. And the meth addicts that I have known would definitely lie, but they all seemed to be clever liars skilled at manipulating people to get money or whatever they needed to get more speed. The idea that this powerful mental stimulant would make someone confess to something they didn't do is fundamentally at odds with the reality I have seen over the last 40 years. I would say that any juror relying on his own common sense would have to put the idea of false confessions in the same loopy category as the idea of "recovered memories," a concept advocated by a few psychologists years ago.
Where did the prosecution go wrong on this case? See above post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)