Reasonable Doubt by Steve Vogel

Author:Steve Vogel [Vogel, Steve]
Language: eng
Format: epub, mobi
Publisher: BookBaby
Published: 2018-03-20T15:13:10+00:00

Sixteen

The defense of David Hendricks began on Election Day, November 6, 1984.

But first, John Long sought a directed verdict of not guilty. With the jury out of the courtroom, Long tried to convince Judge Baner that the directed verdict was in order. He stood at a podium before the judge.

“When the evidence that has been elicited at this trial is viewed even in a most favorable light to the state,” Long told the judge, “a conviction could not stand. And this court, with all due respect, has an obligation to enter a directed verdict of acquittal—notwithstanding the sensational nature of this case.”

Long said the state’s case was entirely circumstantial and no motive had been established.

“The state has not offered evidence—not one iota of evidence—that there is such a thing as progressive sexual aggression. There has not been a single witness testify with respect to the behavioral sciences or anything else that there is in fact such a thing as a progressive sexual aggression. Yet this is the basis that the state would urge upon us as their motive for the defendant to take an ax and/or knife and slay his wife and his three children as they lay sleeping.

“Even if we admitted that there was such a thing as progressive sexual aggression, what evidence has been shown that progressive sexual aggression will lead one to commit the act of murder? Not murder, Your Honor, of a lover. Not murder of somebody in a heat of passion but, by implication, a cold deliberate act of ax murder of one’s wife and children.”

Long moved on to the related issue of Hendricks’s religion. There was no evidence, Long said, that Hendricks had done anything that would cause the Brethren to set him aside, or silence him, or even take the least severe step, a reprimand. Even so, Long asked, would the mere possibility of a reprimand cause a man to take the action Hendricks was accused of taking?

“The possibility of a reprimand would be sufficient for a man to take an ax, a long-handled ax and hit his wife in the head at least three times with it? To take the same ax and hit his children in the face with it? To take a butcher knife and to slit their throats with it because he might be reprimanded?

“Motive means motivation. Is there a scintilla of evidence in the trial to this point which would show by word, by deed, by demonstrative evidence that the defendant feared a possibility of rebuke to such an extent that his only recourse was to kill his wife and children?

“Can the court see or find anything that’s been presented to show the relationship or the actions of this defendant any different from the actions of many individuals who may be indiscreet or may stray or may do a wrong thing? Instead, what the evidence here has shown is that the defendant is not perfect. The bottom line of this, Your Honor, is that there’s no showing—no

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.