Shoe Prints Make Good Impressions

by Andrea 
Campbell

Criminals think they’re clever by not leaving fingerprints, but they may neglect another area: shoe prints. Shoe prints—or footprints, as they’re usually called—are the most common impression left at or near a crime scene.

Stepping Up

Prints are found outside in dirt, mud, clay, and snow. In urban areas they’re left on the rooftops of apartment buildings. Sometimes they are found inside when the perpetrator tracks dirt into the house—or when they have walked through something like paint, dirt, or blood. If investigators can use footwear or tire tread evidence to show that a person was at the crime scene, the suspect will have to have a good explanation for being there. If the impression found is created from blood, the suspect will need a really good explanation!

Comparisons: Start with Characterizing

Since shoe types and styles number in the thousands, comparisons are first narrowed down by size, type, brand, design, and shape. Then individual characteristics are studied such as nicks, cuts, or wear patterns. Perhaps a stone wedged into the tread. Even with flat-bottomed deck shoes, the stitching in soles is unique, and no two will look alike in a print.

When footwear impressions or tire tracks are found at a crime scene, they’re photographed. If a depression is left in mud, for example, a cast or moulage (French for casting/moulding) is made.

How to Make a Plaster Cast
Some special equipment is needed to make a perfect plaster cast. Here’s how the pros do it:

•  Clean out any loose material without disturbing the impression. 
•  Spray a fixative onto the surface.
•  Build a portable frame or wood ledge and place it around the track mark.
•  Mix plaster of Paris or dental stone casting material and pour it over the marks.  Another product, Snow Print Wax, can be used for impressions found in packed snow.
•  Place reinforcement sticks or cheesecloth into the mixture.
•  When casting is hard, carefully lift it out and put it in a cardboard box upside down to dry.

Gait Patterns, Too

Casts are used for identification, and they also provide clues to the movement, direction, and speed of the person who made them. For instance, the cast of a runner’s footprint will differ from that of a walker—a running foot will sink deeper in front, with less weight distributed to the heel upon landing. Analysts can also answer such questions as: Was he was carrying something heavy? Was he wounded? Did he carry soil away on his shoes as he left? (Soil samples are usually taken in case they are needed later, to match such soil.)
 
Latents (Not Readily Visible)
Latent shoe prints are found on counter tops, staircases, and walls, and footwear impressions can be lifted just like fingerprints using chemicals and powder. One bank robber climbed over the counter during a holdup—and his shoes matched the print made on the surface perfectly.

But for the flimsiest of all evidence, shoe prints found in dust, another system is needed. The best way is to turn out the lights and shine a light—a flashlight will do—against the hard, dusty surface and document that with a photograph. In order to preserve these footprints, analysts use an electrostatic dust lifter. A sheet of black lifting material, like foil, is laid over the surface. A high-voltage charge is run through the material. The electricity makes the dust stick to the sheer, and voilà—an image! The process is nondestructive and works on just about any surface.

Unusual Prints: A Case Story
A state trooper in Alaska was called in to investigate several cases of moose poaching. (Bet you didn’t know that moose poaching is a crime.) Some earlier cases had been solved due to the carelessness of the criminals, who had left behind incriminating evidence such as a boot print and, in one memorable case, a wallet complete with the poacher’s driver’s license! One culprit, though, seemed to have left no clues at all—until police discovered a clear print of his license-plate number where he had backed his vehicle up against a snow bank. 

Photo courtesy of ©Ron Roberts 

 Excerpt from Andrea's Detective Notebook: Crime Scene Science (available on CD)

Giving Thanks in an Imperfect World

by Pat Brown

I am alone tonight (with my four cats) in the suburbs of Washington DC. I have a chance to reflect about my life, about all of our lives on this planet, to think back on a year of communal struggle with recession, fear, crime, and war. I think of what I have to give thanks for. I wonder what victims of crime and families who have suffered loss of loved ones can give thanks for. And I find there is always something if we break down our lives into moments instead of results.

I met a woman the other day at the movie theatre and we chatted for a while as we walked toward our cars in the parking lot. She told me how she felt life and the people she loved had let her down; that her life seemed a failure. I asked her how she would describe a vacation where she saw the most beautiful sunset on the beach, had a delightful picnic in a butterfly reserve, attended a fabulous musical show during the first half of the trip but during the second half it rained every day, the people at the hotel were rude, the dinner at the restaurant was horrible and then she fell down the steps while sightseeing and broke her foot.

When she told me she would view the vacation as a terrible one. I asked why she discounted the worth of the wonderful experiences she had during the first half? She smiled and said, "Well, I guess because the trip wasn't perfect and it didn't end well." Welcome to life.

We can all makes lists of bad things and good things that happen to us on our journey through the years. Some of us will have longer good lists, and some longer bad lists, but most of us will have a fair amount on both sides. And in those lists, we will have different qualities of experience, some mildly pleasant and some magnificant, some slighty disappointing and some devastating. Sometimes a bad experience will lead to a good one and vice versa. Isn't life fascinating?

I had a tubal pregnancy and infertility that led to the adoption of my third child. I had a difficult divorce that led me to a wonderfully close relationship with my sister and her husband and a whole new set of friends. Each door that closed was painful, but each door that opened was an adventure.

If we view life as a series of short stories instead of a novel, we can expect to have some chapters that are humorous, some romantic, some challenging, some exciting, some tragic, some spiritual, and some bittersweet. And we never know when one chapter will end and another will begin.

Today, as we spend time with friends and family or find ourselves alone with God, please let us remember to be thankful for each chapter of our lives and grateful for the people who have shared our stories with us for whatever time we had together.

Crime will return to Women in Crime Ink tomorrow, but for now, I wish you all a great Thanksgiving with your loved ones, and for those who are suffering the absence of a loved one, may your memories be comforting.

Happy Thanksgiving from Women in Crime Ink

From all of us at Women in Crime Ink to all of you and your families: Happy Thanksgiving.

Our Hysterical Media

By Laura James

I have three theories on why the mass media hypes certain types of true crime stories. First, certain kinds of cases hit our buttons and drive up viewership. Second, exaggerating a case to "historic" proportions makes the journalist feel more important, since it strokes the ego to think one is reporting on a history-shattering event. Third, whatever drives up ratings is likely to have a divisive political angle worth exploring for ratings the next day.

Every media outlet in the country is guilty of these sins. I can prove that. Outrageous sensationalism is most often associated with mass murders, especially those committed with a "semi-automatic weapon" (news flash: most guns are "semi-automatic"). Another kind of case that attracts a lot of hype, over-analysis and speculation is the family annihilator.

There are dozens of workplace shootings every year. We'll hear about one and only one, I'd guess, this year. Sadly, that recent massacre took place in a city that had experienced just such a madman's rampage decades ago. Very few news outlets bothered to mention that earlier incident. Why? They prefer to think of every story they cover as unprecedented and unique. Precedents spoil hype.

Here is more proof. The most respected media outlets in the United States sensationalize true crime stories to the point of making blatantly false statements for the sake of a great opening sentence.

The mass shooting at Virginia Tech was not even close to being the worst massacre in US history, or even the worst school massacre in US history. But it was hyped exactly as such by none other than these outlets. (I noted the exact quote in case the links expired, and many did.)

On the Virginia Tech massacre, every single statement a false one:

MSNBC - "the worst school massacre in US history"
ABC - George Stephanopoulos: "The worst campus massacre before Virginia Tech was back in the University of Texas in 1966."
Newsweek - "worst massacre in U.S. history"
Time - "the worst massacre in US history"
Baltimore Sun - "the worst school massacre in US history"
Los Angeles Times - "the worst school massacre in history"
Court TV Crime Library "the worst mass murder in American history," indeed! This is a particularly egregious and unforgivable error on a website that purports to offer encyclopedic treatment of historic crimes, including articles on the Bath massacre and Mountain Meadows.
New Jersey Star-Ledger - "America's worst campus massacre"
Atlanta Journal-Constitution - "worst campus massacre in US history"
New York Daily News - "the worst campus massacre in American history"
Troy Record - "the nation's worst massacre"
WorldNetDaily - "America's worst school massacre"
Campus Times - "worst school massacre in United States history"
Shreveport Times - "worst massacre in American history"
Asheville Citizen-Times "The worst massacre in U.S. history"
Janesville Gazette - "the worst massacre in US history"
Roanoke Times - "worst school massacre in US history"
Daily Titan - "worst massacre in US history"
Bakersfield Californian - "the worst massacre in the country's history."

You'd think the press would've remembered having to correct their reporting when they erroneously fluffed the Columbine massacre as the "worst ever." Oops - I assume too much - did they correct themselves?

For the record, the worst school massacre in U.S. history took place in Michigan. The worst massacre ever is more difficult to discern because of all of the horrific examples. There was never a need to exaggerate any of them.

* * *

Once a newspaper touches a story, the facts are lost forever, even to the protagonists.

--Norman Mailer

'A Death in the Desert'

by Cathy Scott

The Las Vegas homicide investigation into casino heir Ted Binion's death culminated in not just one trial, but two. The case, which attracted a media herd, became known as Las Vegas's biggest trial, surpassing even the storied mob trials from the 1980s.

The case has also been called a "murder mystery." But Binion's death was hardly a mystery -- a point hammered home in a documentary recently aired on Investigation Discovery Channel's "On the case with Paula Zahn." In "A Death in the Desert," Zahn carefully laid out the discrepancies in the case.

Binion died sometime in the late morning hours of Sept.17, 1998. It was no secret he'd struggled with drugs for years. The day before his death, Binion bought tar heroin from his drug dealer. His next-door neighbor, a physician, filled a Xanax prescription for him. So Binion's stately home wasn't treated as a crime scene after his body was discovered. The casual police behavior, compounded by people walking in and out removing valuables such as expensive fine art and silver coins, would come back to haunt the prosecution team: There was no smoking gun, and police gathered no hard evidence from the scene.

But in the days following Binion's death, Sandy Murphy, his live-in girlfriend of three years, became a suspect, as did Rick Tabish. Tabish, Binion's friend, would eventually be linked romantically with Sandy.

Spurred largely by Binion's baby sister, Becky Behnen, the district attorney indicted Murphy and Tabish in Binion's death. Becky had a bitter falling out with her brother before his death. The two hadn't spoken in months, and they were rumored to have taken out contracts on each other's lives. The rumors never substantiated, but to put it mildly, Ted and Becky didn't like each other.

Many things struck me as odd while I covered the case as a journalist. For one, Las Vegas police allowed private detective Tom Dillard to take over and lead the police investigation. Granted, he was a retired homicide detective from the Las Vegas police department. Still, it was unprecedented.

Add to that the fact that Dillard was paid a whopping $400,000 by Binion's estate to investigate the case, a point confirmed by Murphy's defense attorney Michael Cristalli in the documentary. Despite the odd involvement of the highly paid outside investigator, the case moved forward through the judicial system. I was fascinated by red flags in the case; I started writing a book about it while covering it for Reuters news service and the now-defunct APBNews.com. It had the makings of a made-for-TV movie (which, ultimately, it became).

The Binion family had a Wild West reputation, starting with Ted's father, Benny, (left) who once served prison time for killing a man in Texas. The younger Binion was also known for wild behavior. He also was accused of killing a man, but, unlike his father, he was never charged. So it came as no surprise when the media covered Ted Binion's death intensely. Court TV aired the first trial gavel-to-gavel. National and international TV and print reporters, along with a courtroom artist, filled the courtroom each day.

At the end of that trial, in 2000, Murphy and Tabish were each convicted of murder and of burglarizing Binion's underground vault to unearth his buried silver, which was worth millions (the Binions were known for burying their fortunes on family owned property).

Murphy and Tabish appealed their convictions and, on a technicality, were granted a new trial by the Nevada Supreme Court. Once again, they were tried together. It was during the second trial, with Tabish represented by radical civil rights attorney J. Tony Serra, that the prosecution's case against the pair unraveled.

During the first trial, circumstantial evidence presented by star expert witness Michael Baden all but sealed Murphy and Tabish's fate -- that is, until Serra came along for the second trial. Serra questioned Baden at length about a so-called button mark left on Binion's chest. Baden testified during the first trial that the mark was made by someone sitting on Binion, compressing his chest, while simultaneously holding a hand over Binion's nose and mouth to suffocate him. In May 2000, Murphy and Tabish were each convicted of murder and of burglary of Binion's buried silver cache. Jurors interviewed afterward said Baden's testimony swayed them toward guilty verdicts.

During the second trial, however, attorneys Serra and Cristalli used enlarged photos to prove that the button mark on Binion's chest was actually a blister. In November 2004, the jury returned not-guilty verdicts on the murder charges but let stand the burglary convictions.

Today, Sandy Murphy lives in Southern California. After the second trial, she was granted time served for the burglary charge and released. Rick Tabish remains in a Nevada prison and is expected to be released sometime in 2010. Sandy continues, through the court system, to clear her name in the burglary case.

As I said during my interview with the Investigation Discovery Channel, I'm certain there was no murder, that Ted Binion instead died from a self-induced drug overdose. It was, as Tony Serra observed, "casino royalty" and the "Binion money machine" who convicted the pair.

The second edition of my book, Death in the Desert: The Ted Binion Homicide Case, will be released in the spring of 2010.

Photos courtesy of Court TV and the Las Vegas Sun.

Texas and Rick Perry - Another Execution

by Katherine Scardino

I am so angry over the execution of Robert Lee Thompson. At 6:00 p.m. on Thursday, Nov. 19, 2009, Rick Perry presided over his 207th execution in the nine years since he became governor of Texas. That's more executions during his tenure than the 152 the illustrious George W. Bush managed. It's a record Perry will have the honor of living with for the rest of his life.

Robert Lee Thompson was executed by lethal injection despite the extremely rare recommendation by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles that his sentence be commuted to life. Mr. Thompson was executed even though he didn't kill anyone. In this case, the shooter was his co-defendant, Sammy Butler, who is now serving a life sentence. But the kicker is even worse: The jury sentenced the co-defendant to life in prison after the prosecutors failed to prove he intended to kill the victim. So, let’s see -- the actual shooter got life because the prosecutor couldn't prove intent, so the guy standing next to him, who wasn't the killer, got a death sentence.

Mr. Thompson died because Rick Perry decided the State of Texas should continue killing people despite the objection of a growing number of local voters and world governments. Texas is the laughing stock of most other countries. I've heard Canada calls us the hind end of the United States.

Mr. Thompson was convicted and sentenced to death legally. It's legal in Texas to charge an individual with capital murder if he's a “party” to the offense. He was present, and he knew the murder would or could happen. In law school, we were given the example of the guy waiting in the car outside the bank while his armed buddy goes inside to rob the teller. In the process of the robbery, a shooting occurs, and the teller is dead. The guy in the car knew his cohort had a gun. So the driver is just as guilty as the person who actually went inside the bank and pulled the trigger.

Over the years, there have been many debates over the death penalty for a “non-shooter.” Some jurisdictions have refused to execute a person if they are a party, as opposed to being the person who fired the fatal shot. Texas has no such compunction. We kill everyone.

In this case, Robert Lee Thompson, 34, was a party to a murder. The Board of Pardons and Paroles sent a letter to Gov. Perry requesting he commute the death sentence to life without parole. Mr. Perry refused to commute the sentence. Mr. Thompson was injected with a three-drug combination that even veterinarians won’t use on animals, and he is no longer breathing our air. Aren’t we lucky, and don’t we feel so much better? This man wasn't a threat to anyone anymore. He was behind bars in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. He wasn't going to ever, I repeat, ever see the light of a free day for the rest of his natural life. He was living in a little box with no human contact; food was served to him through a hole in his cell door. What did we gain by executing him? Oh, I know. We maintained our reputation as the biggest bunch of idiots this side of Pluto.

Another death penalty case our governor controlled was Napoleon Beazley. Mr. Beazley was 17 years old at the time he killed a man during a robbery. He had a perfect disciplinary record while he was in jail and subsequently in prison. He was remorseful and stated so at every opportunity. He was a young man who had not yet grown to adulthood. Gov. Perry refused to commute his sentence to life, despite the many letters in support of a life sentence. Mr. Beazley was executed in May 2002. Three years later, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case of Roper v. Simmons, ruling that the great United States could not execute convicts who were younger than 18 when they committed a capital crime. Too bad it wasn't any help to the late Mr. Beazley.

I've heard all the arguments in favor of the death penalty. I understand that grieving families want to see the sentence carried out. But adding another killing is not justice; it's vengeance. As a Texan, I feel that my state killing a man who didn't fire a fatal shot is unjust and wrong. The recommendation that Mr. Thompson’s death sentence be commuted to life in prison was one of only two written by the Board of Pardons and Paroles in the past two years -- during which Texas executed 41 people. I would hope that when such a recommendation is made, our governor would, at the minimum, pay some respect to the judgment of people he appointed to that board and consider what they have to say.

Come on, Texas. Make the rest of us proud. Let’s not be the “hind end” of the United States anymore.

Murder of 'Mob Princess' Susan Berman Remains A Mystery

The following is an excerpt from Cathy Scott's latest book, The Rough Guide to True Crime, released by Penguin Books in August. Susan Berman is the subject of an earlier book by Scott titled Murder of a Mafia Daughter: The Life and Tragic Death of Susan Berman (Barricade Books), due out in a second edition early next year.

by Cathy Scott

The life of a journalist and author who spent her adult years writing about her mob roots ended dramatically, like a character in one of her books. Susan Berman, 55, was murdered in her Beverly Hills, California, home. She was shot execution-style by an unknown assailant just as New York state police were scheduling an interview about a decades-old unsolved missing-person's case.

Berman’s body was found on December 24, 2000, inside her rundown rented house in the woodsy Benedict Canyon neighborhood, where she lived with her three dogs. The front door had been left wide open – there were no signs of a forced entry or struggle, no signs of a sexual assault, and no items had been stolen from the house.

Susan had lived what she once described as a perfect childhood, despite being the daughter of a Jewish mobster. In the 1930s and '40s, her father, Davie Berman, was part of the same crime syndicate as Benjamin “Bugsy” Siegel and mob kingpin Meyer Lansky. Working with Lansky, considered one of the shrewdest gangsters to ever walk the streets of 20th-century New York, gave Davie the opportunity to learn from the mob's top echelon. After all, Lansky was known as Lucky Luciano’s right-hand man and the mob’s financial mastermind.

As a trio, Berman, Siegel and Lansky pioneered the development of Las Vegas from a sleepy desert cow town to a thriving gambling Mecca. Nevertheless, the gangsters soon found themselves in an uneasy alliance with the Italian Mafia, who moved in on the Jewish mob’s territory. Davie, who co-owned the famous Flamingo Hotel and Casino with Siegel and Lansky, ran the place after Siegel was murdered in 1947 (in the Beverly Hills home of his mistress, Virginia Hill). Only in 1951, after the highly publicized and televised Kefauver Committee hearings of the US Senate’s investigation into organized crime, did the public become aware of the extent of Jewish involvement in the underworld.

Susan was unaware of her father’s underworld dealings until she became an adult, but her Las Vegas childhood was not exactly normal. Her father had slot machines installed in Flamingo Hotel rooms so his daughter could pass the time gambling and ordering room service. Susan enjoyed the life of a spoiled, indulged child. She wanted for nothing. Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra and Liberace performed at her birthday parties. Davie drove fancy new Cadillacs. To his Susie, he was the world. What Susan did not know then was that when mob families were feuding, her family was in danger. During times of mob unrest, Davie piloted Susan away to Los Angeles, flying out of McCarran Field to the Los Angeles airport, and then to the Beverly Wilshire Hotel for two or three days. He told Susan they were short vacations. Bodyguard Lou Raskin, a mountain of a man, lived with the Bermans so he could watch over Davie’s precious daughter. Susie remembered the trips as wonderful outings. She fell in love with Los Angeles.

The high-society lifestyle of the “Mafia Princess”, as the media called her, came to an abrupt end in 1957, when she was twelve. That year her father died during intestinal surgery. Only a few months later her mother Gladys committed suicide by taking a barbiturate overdose. Her Nevada childhood would haunt Susan for the rest of her life. In the ensuing years, what Berman wanted most was for her father to be remembered for his contributions to the development of Las Vegas. She wrote about Davie in two memoirs, 1981’s critically acclaimed Easy Street and 1996’s Lady Las Vegas. There was speculation after Susan's death that perhaps digging into Davie’s mob past was what got Susan killed. When police, responding to reports of dogs running loose, found Susan’s lifeless body on the floor of her rented house, they also noticed a 1920s Chicago Police “WANTED” poster for her father. Combined with the cause of death – a single gunshot wound to the back of the head – it was not surprising that detectives wondered if Susan had been whacked by the Mafia. That notion was soon debunked when they realized the mobsters of her father’s era would be between 90 and 100 years old. Moreover, nothing Susan was working on was anything she would be killed over.

One person of interest to the police was Berman’s University of California classmate Bobby Durst. She regularly referred to him as her brother and her best friend. They had much in common. Durst was a multimillionaire and the eldest son of a rich New York real-estate tycoon family. Like Berman, Durst’s mother committed suicide when he was a child, falling from the roof of the family mansion while her son watched.

Durst’s wife, Kathleen McCormack, went missing in 1982; he was questioned about the disappearance but never charged with any crime. In 1999, Kathleen’s parents went to court and had their daughter declared dead, even though no body was ever found. It cleared the way for them to settle her estate. But it also cleared the path for Durst to remarry, which he did.

Questioned about Susan’s killing, Durst told investigators he’d spent the holidays in the Hamptons with his second wife at the time Berman was gunned down. But Durst’s wife, Debra Lee Charatan, did not corroborate her husband’s claim. Durst’s celebrity lawyer, Dick DeGuerin, offered up a different alibi: Durst, he said, was on a plane Christmas Eve day – headed from San Francisco, where Durst owned a home, to New York - when Berman’s body was discovered. About the same time police were arriving at Berman’s home, DeGuerin said, Durst was on a plane. The problem with that alibi was that police said Berman had been dead for two days when her body was discovered, which meant Durst was not off the hook. Instead of providing an alibi for his client, DeGuerin unwittingly placed Durst in California at the time of Berman’s murder, just up the coast from the crime scene. Durst, 57 at the time of Susan’s death, was not charged in connection with her murder.

Three years later he was, however, tried for killing Morris Black, an elderly neighbor of his in Galveston, Texas. Durst had moved to that state for fear of being indicted in New York by the Westchester County district attorney, who had reopened the investigation into Durst's first wife’s disappearance. He lived in disguise, masquerading as a mute woman and renting a $300-a-month apartment. Morris Black, 71, a bad-tempered former seaman, lived across the hall.

Black’s body was butchered and stuffed into garbage bags that were found floating in Galveston Bay. Durst was arrested and charged with murder. He posted a $300,000 bond and then jumped bail, leaving the state and thus becoming a fugitive. He was found six weeks later in Pennsylvania, when – despite having $500 in his pocket – he was caught shoplifting a chicken sandwich, a Band-Aid and a newspaper. At trial, Durst admitted the killing, but claimed self defense.

In a shock verdict, the jury acquitted him.

If Durst had admitted to killing Morris Black, then what about Susan Berman, her friends asked. Could he have killed Susan … and his first wife, Kathleen, too? Medical student Kathleen, 29, was last seen on Jan. 31, 1982. Durst told police he’d put her on a Manhattan-bound train at a Katonah, N.Y., station so she could return to classes in the city the next day. He remained at their cottage near South Salem, Westchester County. Five days later, he reported his wife missing.

At the time, Susan Berman acted as Durst’s unofficial spokeswoman, fielding telephone calls from the media so Bobby did not have to deal with them. The dean of Kathleen Durst’s college told investigators that a woman identifying herself as Kathleen called in sick to school around the time of her disappearance. Friends and family believe Susan in fact made that call; they believe Susan knew too much about Kathleen Durst’s disappearance – and that’s what got her killed. Susan, so her confidants said, could be pushy. Perhaps, they surmised, Susan had pushed too far. After all, she’d contacted Bobby and asked for a loan so she could buy a used SUV. Instead, Bobby Durst sent her two separate checks for $25,000, telling her in a note that they were gifts, not loans. Still, the investigation of Durst by Los Angeles police detectives went cold. Authorities named a second man, Nyle Brenner, Susan’s manager, as a person of interest in the case. That probe too went nowhere.

No eyewitnesses to Susan’s murder ever came forward. Susan’s killer simply escaped into the night. At the scene, investigators found the casing of a spent bullet used in a 9mm handgun. It was the best evidence they had. After Durst was arrested in the Black case and police found a 9mm handgun in the trunk of his car, LAPD investigators traveled to Texas and did ballistics tests on the gun to see if it matched the casing found at Berman’s house. The tests were inconclusive.

According to the lead detective, Paul Coulter, he would have done things differently had homicide investigators been called in to handle the case from the start. His office, however, was not given the case until a few days after a news release was issued – eleven long days after the murder. As a result, reporters across the globe began calling the LAPD for information. That was when higher-ups handed off the case to the Robbery-Homicide unit.

“It’s very difficult, because we weren’t there from the get-go,” Detective Coulter said in a telephone interview. Jerry Stephens, Coulter’s partner on the case, retired in mid-2003. Another detective, Jesse Linn, replaced Stephens and paired up with Coulter in the investigation. Later, however, no one seemed to be investigating the murder. There were no new clues or leads.

The Berman investigation, Case No. 000825485, is now a cold one at Parker Center on North Los Angeles Street, where the LAPD's Robbery–Homicide Division is housed. Berman’s murder was one of 548 committed within LAPD’s jurisdiction in 2000.

When she came of age, Susan was given a trust of $5.25 million – which, over the years, she squandered on overspending and bad investments. She purchased three homes and lost them all to foreclosure. Still, for years she kept up a facade and wanted to be treated as if she had money. She was a wealthy Mafia daughter and a respected writer – but she ended up struggling and penniless, living in squalor while she waited for a big movie deal, until she was shot to death in the back of the head, her murderer never apprehended.

Photos courtesy of CourtTV.

The Thin Line Between Life and Death

by Donna Pendergast

It's been more than 20 years since Joseph Passeno (left) and Bruce (Christopher) Michaels (below right) stunned the suburban Detroit community of Rochester Hills with a gruesome crime that defied comprehension and shocked the public.

After finishing dinner at home on Nov. 9, 1989, Wanda Tarr, 58, was headed out in her Chevrolet Cavalier to meet an insurance client when she was forced out of the car at gunpoint by Passeno, then 17, and Michaels, then 16. They took her to Hawthorne Park in nearby Pontiac, where they robbed her and shot her to death. Passeno and Michaels then used her personal identification to find her home, where they told her husband, Glenn Tarr, that they had abducted his wife. The pair then abducted Tarr and forced him to withdraw money from an ATM. Then they took him to Hawthorne park and murdered him next to his wife's body by shooting Tarr six times.

Passeno and Michaels were arrested shortly after their crimes, when they bragged about their thrill kill to schoolmates. They were found guilty of first-degree murder and multiple other charges in a March 1990 jury trial. They were sentenced as adults to life in prison without parole.

After nearly two decades in separate Michigan prisons, Passeno and Michaels bear little resemblance to the fresh-faced teens they were when they went in. His entire face covered in tattoos, Passeno now looks like a mutant from a carnival midway. Michaels lost the baby face once so at odds with his horrific crimes.

Last week, two companion cases argued before the U.S. Supreme Court could have implications for the mandatory life sentences imposed on Passeno and Michaels. The court was asked to consider whether life sentences for juvenile defendants constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, prohibited by the Eight Amendment.

The cases before the court involve two Florida residents, Terrance Graham and Joseph Sullivan. Graham, now 22, was 16 when he robbed a restaurant at gunpoint. After serving a year behind bars, he violated the terms of his probation by committing another armed burglary, breaking into a man's house and robbing him at gunpoint. Sullivan was 13 in 1989 when he sexually assaulted a 72-year-old woman in her home during a burglary. It was the eighteenth crime committed by Sullivan, who is mentally disabled, during just two years. Both defendants were sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Arguing before the court, petitioners in the current case cited the 2005 Supreme Court ruling in Roper v. Simmons, which banned executing people who commit capital murder before they reach the age of 18, on Eighth Amendment grounds. Lawyers argued that the logic of that ruling should be extended to life sentences, the equivalent of a slow death in prison for an adolescent. As in the Roper case, lawyers highlighted adolescents' limited cognitive capacities to assess and manage impulses because their pre-frontal cortex, which controls them and recognizes consequences, isn't fully developed.

The court could rule in a number of ways. One key point in the pending cases: neither defendant had committed a homicide. The court's opinion could differentiate between juvenile offenders who kill and those who commit lesser crimes. It also could uphold the two defendants' current sentences or set an age limit for when such punishment is inhumane. It could ban life without parole for all juvenile offenders, affecting thousands of cases like those of Michaels and Passeno.

Robust policy discussions have sprung up debating the potential for rehabilitation and reform of juvenile offenders after maturation of the brain. But what about the cold-blooded sociopath who kills with extraordinary brutality and without remorse? What about when the crime is so serious and vile that denying the offender freedom for the rest of his life is the most appropriate response? An antisocial predator who has spent years or decades in prison is extremely unlikely to be able to reintegrate into society. There is no proven treatment for antisocial personality disorders that will drive an inmate to rape or kill if released. Prisons serve not only to rehabilitate and punish but also to prevent those who are a threat to society from harming others.

As a prosecutor, I have seen the bad and the worst for well over two decades. Yet I'm reluctant to dismiss the possibility of reform. I'm more reluctant, though, to release someone who will create more victims if returned to society. Out of 100 murder trials I have prosecuted, only three involved 16-year old-defendants sentenced to life without parole. All three cases involved chronically violent youthful offenders who committed heinous acts beyond comprehension.

Charging a juvenile with an offense carrying the possibility of life without parole is a decision that should not be made lightly. But as a prosecutor, I want that tool in my arsenal.

Statements made in this post are my own and are not intended to reflect the views opinion or position of the Michigan Attorney General or the Michigan Department of Attorney General.

A Predator's Playland

by Susan Murphy-Milano

In 1984, Adrian Freeman solicited, kidnapped, and raped a prostitute, for which he was charged, and indicted, in Cleveland. Before that case could be adjudicated and closed, in 1987, he kidnapped, raped, and committed gross personal imposition (forcible rape of children under 13 years old), again in the Cleveland area. Freeman was granted bail in both cases.

In October 1988, he jumped bail and fled to Washington, D.C. For 12 years, he was a fixture on the campus of George Washington University. The students and faculty thought of him as a harmless, homeless man. When someone committed similar crimes, no one looked at Freeman as a suspect.

One day, while Freeman stood in front of an on-campus record store, a GWU police officer recognized him from an FBI most-wanted poster. The FBI picked up Freeman on a fugitive warrant in November 2001; U.S. Marshals returned him to Cleveland, where he plead guilty to the rape and kidnapping of the prostitute and the little girls.

Cuyahoga County, Ohio, prosecutors were happy to get this case resolved. A judge gave Freeman five years, to be served at Ohio State Penitentiary in Youngstown. While serving his time at this supermax facility, he was kept in isolation, away from his fellow inmates, because prison officials feared other inmates would kill him.

After Freeman was released, he moved to Eufaula, Ala. He is a registered sex offender. Every day, Freeman roams the streets -- and visits the only McDonalds in town. Stop in for a hamburger, and you'll find Adrian Freeman sitting at a table near the alcove of the McDondalds Playland, enthusiastically watching the children.

According to authorities, there is nothing anyone can do -- until he strikes again.

What About the Victim?

by Diane Fanning


Just after 3 AM, on February 6, 2007, United States Air Force Captain Colleen Shipman (right) rolled her luggage behind her as she walked in a light drizzle across the C section of the Blue Satellite parking area at Orlando International Airport. It was the last leg of her journey. All she wanted was to go home. As she reached row 33, the sense of relief she expected to feel at this point in her travels shattered when she realized that the strange woman from the shuttle was following her.

Colleen picked up her pace. The footsteps behind her slapped the wet pavement at an increased speed. She cut across to row 31, moving even faster toward her car. Now the sound of the pursuer's running footsteps echoed in her ears. Don't be paranoid, she thought as she tried to calm herself. The woman is probably just going to her own car and is in a hurry.

Despite the self-assurances, anxiety clutched Colleen's body in its tight grip. Relieved to reach her car, she jerked open the rear door and tossed her bag onto the back seat. She slammed it shut and opened the one in front. Sliding behind the steering wheel, Collen pulled the door shut and locked the doors in one swift move.

Two hands slapped on the window beside her. She flinched. Hearing a jerk on the door handle, she jabbed her key into the ignition.

The sight of the woman outside of her car did nothing to still Colleen's fears. Beneath the raised hood of a khaki trench coat, bushy black hair framed a pinched face. The dark glasses the woman wore in the dead of night obscured her eyes. She looked so much like an inept spy from a low-budget film that it would have been laughable if it wasn't so frightening. Colleen's fear for her personal safety ratcheted up yet another notch.
--excerpt from Out There: The In-depth story of the astronaut love-triangle case that shocked America

When her pursuer (right) was arrested, Colleen's fear was justified. In addition to her disguise, the stalker carried pepper spray, a two-pound drilling hammer, a black buck knife, and several feet of rubber tubing. Initially, police charged her with attempted murder and abduction.

The woman who chased Colleen through the airport parking lot wasn't a crazed nobody but Lisa Nowak, an astronaut who'd flown on a mission into space and was obsessed with Colleen's boyfriend, astronaut Billy Oefelein.

Nearly three years after Nowak -- wearing an astronaut diaper to keep stops to a minimum -- drove from Texas to Florida to stalk and terrorize her love rival, a court has finally decided her fate. Instead of the original felonies, Lisa Nowak plead guilty to third-degree burglary of a conveyance and misdemeanor battery.

Colleen Shipman suffered that night -- and continues to suffer -- from extreme trauma brought on by the attack. She pleaded to the judge: "Please don't be fooled. Lisa Nowak is a very good actress. She turned on her charm and spun a pitiful story. Almost three years later, I'm still reeling from her vicious attack. I know in my heart when Lisa Nowak attacked me, she was going to kill me. I believe I escaped a horrible death that night. The world as I knew it before Lisa Nowak attacked me is gone. I constantly look over my shoulder when I go outside so I can't be a victim to a surprise attack again."

She also told the judge that she suffers from migraines and high blood pressure and can no longer sleep without a light on. She's purchased a shotgun and obtained a concealed-weapons permit. "I have horrible anxiety --especially at night. I have terrifying nightmares of being cut into little pieces. I have barricaded my doors."

The judge seemed unmoved. Although he spoke harshly to Nowak -- "You are to stay totally away from her and have absolutely no contact of any sort. You brought this on yourself. I don't have any sympathy for you in that respect" -- he gave her a light sentence: one year probation, two days already served in jail, a mandated eight-hour anger management class, and fifty hours of community service.

On the one hand, Nowak (right) had no criminal record, led an exemplary life before and after the attempted attack, and lost her hard-earned position as a shuttle astronaut at NASA. She was certainly an unusual and unlikely perpetrator.

On the other hand, did that light sentence devalue Colleen by minimizing the trauma she experienced? The woman who stole her peace of mind and sense of security is free to continue her life without any incarceration. Yes, Lisa Nowak had been an outstanding role model most of her life. She lost the career of her dreams. And she still faces possible military charges by the Navy, her home base since she entered the United States Naval Academy in July 1981.

But Nowak isn't haunted by the image of an attacker coming out of the night to end her life. She is not living in fear of a repeat performance.

I can see both viewpoints on this outcome, but one thing still bothers me. If Colleen Shipman had stalked and launched the same attack on famous and lauded astronaut Lisa Nowak, would she have been sentenced so lightly? Shipman also led a model life and also had no prior criminal record. But she wasn't a celebrity. If, under those circumstances, Colleen would have gotten a more severe sentence -- which I think likely -- then justice has not been served.

What do you think?

Here a Gotti, There a Gotti, Everywhere a Gotti: Fourth Time a Charm for Prosecutors?

by Stacy Dittrich

We’ll see if the fourth time is a charm for second-generation mobster John Gotti Jr., 45. As the jury began its deliberation Thursday on racketeering charges against the Gambino Family crime boss, the same circus-like atmosphere and fears of mob retaliation hung like a thick fog in the courtroom, as it had during the three previous trials involving the high-profile gangster -- trials that all resulted in a hung jury. Like his famed father before him, Gotti Jr. has managed to skirt a judicial system that has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to lock him up for the rest of his life. Facing the same fate as his father, John “Dapper Don” Gotti Sr., who died in prison in 2002, Gotti Jr. now waits quietly to see if this particular jury will convict him of racketeering or on two murder charges.

The trial to date has already shown signs of an outcome in Gotti Jr.’s favor, the same problems that plagued the previous trials. Some jurors, fearful of mob retaliation and claims of anonymous threats, have requested to be dismissed, while others are clearly staging their support for the defendant — an act that caused presiding judge Kevin Castel to send two of them packing. His decision caused Gotti Jr.’s mother, Victoria, to have a complete meltdown inside the courtroom, one of many bizarre outbursts and displays by the Gotti family.

“F****** animals!” she screamed at the judge after the jurors were dismissed.

“They’re railroading you! They’re doing to you what you did to your father!”

Even though her embarrassed son tried to calm her down, she continued.

“They’re the gangsters! Right there!” she yelled, pointing at the judge and prosecutors. “The ****** gangsters! You sons of bitches! Put your own sons in there! You ********!”

She was quickly removed from the courtroom but could still be heard yelling in the hallway. Earlier in the trial, Gotti Jr. referred loudly to a prosecution witness as a “dog” and a “punk.” Prosecutors also alleged Gotti Jr. mouthed the words “I’ll kill you” to another witness. However, prosecutors are confident that their star witness, former Gotti Jr. best friend, mobster, and recent rat, John Alite, 47, will be their smoking gun. Unfortunately, Alite’s testimony sounded like it came directly from the "Goodfellas" screenplay.

“When I went to restaurants, I didn’t wait. When I went to shows, I got the best seats,” he testified. “When we went to stores, we got suits custom-made. We got treated like celebrities.

“People looked at me differently and they knew I was somebody. I didn’t have to wait in line at the bakery.”

Alite said he bought “the best of everything,” including $500 Bruno Magli shoes, Rolex watches, gold bars, diamonds, and 24 cars.

Quite frankly, his testimony may be just slightly unbelievable, as the non-Italian son of a taxi cab driver testified in a dirty, gray, sweatshirt and looked like a two-bit street thug. Not to mention, he never testified in the prior trials because he was on the run from his own charges. He only agreed to testify against Gotti Jr. (pictured left) under promises of a lesser sentence from the prosecution.

It will be interesting to see if Gotti Jr. inherits his father’s Teflon. If so, it will even be more interesting to see just how federal prosecutors get a conviction. No matter the outcome, it’s pretty obvious that the theories of mob extinction are debunked. They’re clearly as strong and powerful as ever.

How Crime Victims Become Crime Survivors

by Diane Dimond

It was an overcast October Saturday at the Joint Forces Training Base at Los Alamitos, California. The 7 am start time was daunting, but I’d promised to go. I’m glad I did. It was the annual “Survive and Thrive” 5K run/walk event put on by a group called Crime Survivors. Note that it’s not crime victims – it’s crime survivors. And before you ask, no, I didn’t run, but I did walk.

The woman who started Crime Survivors is Patricia Wenskunas, my hero.

She is a blond dynamo, a catering event planner by trade and a survivor of childhood sexual abuse and attempted murder. She speaks gently, but her message packs a wallop: Crime victims deserve consideration, at least as much consideration as the criminal gets. It was a point I heard repeatedly from the crowds who attended this annual event, all touched in life-changing ways. Several participants wore T-shirts with the image of their dead loved one, taken away in a sudden spurt of violence.

Many told me what they’d endured: childhood rapes, adult sexual assaults, domestic violence deaths, or family who were killed by repeat drunk drivers. Several spoke of senseless murder. Every single person said after police arrived to tell them the awful news they were left in a foggy swirl of loneliness. They spoke of how hard it was to heal and discover the pathway to their own recoveries.

“Hi, I’m Diane Dimond. May I ask what brought you here today?”

Juenenne, a woman about my age, silently pointed to the picture of her handsome son, Jake Eric Jackson, on her shirt. Her chin quavered, her eyes brimmed and suddenly there we were – two total strangers standing on a parade field on a distant military base full of victims' rights advocates – hugging each other.

“He was at a club one night. There were a couple of guys disrespecting a young lady, and Jake stepped in to help. One hit him in the face and wrestled with him. One took out a gun and shot Jake in the chest. As he lay dying, the other man kicked him and stomped on him.”

Juenenne had driven nearly two hours that morning from her home in Phelan, California, as a step along her path to recovery. She hoped mixing with others who shared similar pain might ease her sorrow.

Doves Mean Hope

After the speeches, Patricia invited a few family members up to the front to hold and then release beautiful white doves into the overcast sky. As touching music played, Patricia gave a lingering hug to each survivor, and then the doves flew off, one by one, instinctively circling overhead, waiting for the others so they could fly off in unison. Their unity in the dreary sky was inspiring. That’s when I first noticed Mary Ann, who was certainly thinking of her dead son, Jonathan Muse, as she released her dove.

On the walking path lined with three-foot-tall pictures of lost loved ones, Mary Ann and I talked. She’d been angry at her 17-year-old son for getting his 16-year-old girlfriend pregnant. In a huff, he’d jumped on a bike at midnight and ridden off down the street. A carload of gang members happened by and inexplicably shot Jonathan dead. Mary Ann, a nurse who is married to a police officer, was pushing a baby carriage as we talked. Inside was little Shayla (photo below right), the new grandbaby who will never know her father.

“I don’t know what I’d do without this child,” Mary Anne said as she clenched her teeth against the tears.

Juenenne got justice. The two men who killed her son are in prison. Mary Ann has not, and that's part of the problem so many victims of crime face. Their terrible loss is made more burdensome as they try to navigate the justice system. Police are too busy to deliver updates on their cases, court proceedings are confusing, and the parole system is frightening. On this staggeringly long journey to justice, these folks feel victimized again and again.

I wish we could clone Patricia’s Crime Survivors group nationwide. They help educate the public and police about victim’s rights. They push to change laws and attitudes. Crime Survivors donates thousands of adult and child emergency victim bags to law enforcement every year so officers can offer a victim something. The bag contains a list of vital phone numbers, toiletries including a toothbrush, first aid kit and a journal with a pen so victims can write down their thoughts on the road to survival.

Our system simply doesn’t help crime victims. I hope you never have to experience what they’ve gone through, but odds are you might.

For more information on Crime Survivors visit www.CrimeSurvivors.com

A Jew in St. Lou

by Lisa R. Cohen

I write this on a flight to St. Louis, where I'll be speaking today at their annual Jewish Book Festival. OK, my last name is Cohen, and that automatically confers Jewish bona fides - unless you're a British child these days trying to get into an elite private school and your mother is a convert! But other than my roots, what does AFTER ETAN, the 30-year-long (and counting) story of the most famous missing child since the Lindbergh baby, have to do with Judaism?

Turns out, a lot. Etan Patz was Jewish. His parents, Stan and convert Julie (Etan and his siblings wouldn't have been accepted to that British school), liked Israeli names. Etan's sister is Shira; his brother is Ari. Etan's uncle was a renowned rabbi who headed up a large suburban N.J. congregation. Early in the case, authorities learned Rabbi Patz took dozens of children on an annual summer trip to an Israeli kibbutz. The rumors ran wild - a family rift over religious differences? Maybe Uncle Norman had spirited Etan to Israel to bring him up more devoutly?

It was a ridiculous notion, not the least because Uncle Norman was a reform rabbi. But the Israel angle resurfaced repeatedly, after a mysterious photograph of Etan, taken by Stan Patz himself, surfaced in an Israeli magazine a few years after the boy disappeared. An even more bizarre twist? The picture's caption read "Etan Ben Haim" (Etan, Son of Life). No one could ever figure out how or why that photo appeared.

Ten years in, Federal Prosecutor Stuart GraBois, who at the time was just taking over this now-cold case, traveled to Israel with an FBI agent (photo at left) in an attempt to resolve the connection. The two men crisscrossed the country to visit Ben Haim families, knocking on doors and demanding birth certificates for any boy named Etan. All to no avail, and the mystery endures.

Then there was GraBois himself, a man who has relentlessly pursued the Patz case to this day. Despite the French-sounding name, Stuart GraBois was a Bensonhurst boy who celebrated his Bar Mitzvah in Brooklyn, where he'd grown up in a tight-knit Jewish home. There were French roots, to be sure. Before leaving Paris for New York in 1906, GraBois's grandfather had seen first-hand the damage of France's infamous "Affaire Dreyfus," and would often talk to his grandson with deep anger and sadness about the decade-long travesty. The elder GraBois vividly recalled the injustice done to Jewish artillery captain Alfred Dreyfus (photo at right). Dreyfus was falsely convicted of treason and imprisoned for four years on the notorious Devil's Island, a French prison off the coast of South America, before his name was finally cleared. His case was immortalized by author Emile Zola's "J'Accuse!"

"That's why we came to America," Benjamin GraBois would tell his grandson. "Because justice is possible. Here you have a chance to go to school to make sure people get treated fairly." As an Assistant U.S. Attorney, GraBois took his grandfather's words seriously.

Over the last several years of this case, Stan Patz and now-former prosecutor Stuart GraBois joined forces against one man, serial pedophile Jose Antonio Ramos (photo below right). And here's where the Jewish ties start to strain credulity. But then, the best non-fiction stories are the ones that read like fiction. Two other unlikely allies also lent their time and effort to make the case against Ramos. These two informants separately approached GraBois, each unaware the other was doing so, because they both knew Ramos from behind bars. Both offered to help extract his confession.

In a clandestine undercover operation, GraBois inserted first one of the men, and then the other, into Ramos’s cell. One played an elaborate con. He passed himself off as both a lawyer and an amateur shrink. He escaped with incriminating evidence against Ramos but almost got himself killed in his high-stakes game. The other was more straightforward, but he, too, feared for his life. By the time he left the shared cell, he was convinced Ramos was a madman.

Their original link to Ramos? Both of them were Jewish, and both had met Ramos at prison religious services or as part of Jewish study behind bars! In fact, one of them later revealed to me that he’d risked his safety to go after Ramos because it made him crazy watching Ramos pretend to be a Jew.

Yes, that’s right, Jose Antonio Ramos underwent a jailhouse conversion. Even though he had Christian pen pals to whom he was still quoting New Testament scripture, Ramos also began wearing a yarmulke and dropping Yiddish phrases. He refused to cut his hair for religious reasons, and demanded the same kosher dietary considerations etc., as the few other Jewish inmates at the prison. He claimed to have discovered – late in life - his own grandfather’s roots as a Spanish Jew.

All of these connections, some more absurd than others, led me to the Jewish Book Festival, here in St. Louis, where I've now landed. But perhaps most resonant for me are the themes, prominent in Jewish history and culture, that this book echoes so fervently: survival under the worst of conditions; a search for justice no matter how long it takes; and the edict former Federal Prosecutor Stuart GraBois continues to live by – Never, ever, ever, ever give up.

Finger Pointing 101

by Kathryn Casey

Some cases linger. Even after trials are long over, they make headlines. It seems that victims and their families will never gain closure.

At times, the twists and turns can be shocking. Even those things we thought were agreed upon are challenged. Consider this situation: A defendant testifies at his trial that he's sure he pulled the trigger. Yup, no one else was in the apartment at the time. Nope, his kind-of-a-girlfriend hadn't been with him and the victim at all that night. She couldn't have done it. Well, my thought is that it's pretty hard to later claim that the girlfriend was in fact the murderer, don't you think?

Yet, that's apparently what's happening in Austin's Colton Pitonyak case, the subject of my true crime book, A Descent Into Hell.

In a nutshell, here's the case: Pitonyak (photo below right) was a privileged kid out of Little Rock who grew up in big houses and went to private schools. He was also brilliant, a national merit scholar finalist with a $150,000 scholarship to the University of Texas's esteemed McComb's School of Business. When he graduated from high school, his teachers predicted Pitonyak would return to Arkansas as a young Donald Trump. Instead, just two short years later, the honor student was flunking and modeling himself more after Tony Soprano.

Enter his would-be girlfriend: While at UT, Pitonyak hooked up with Laura Hall, (photo below left), a bright but troubled young woman who idolized his bad-boy image. She would become Pitonyak's partner in the grisly crime that lay ahead.

The victim in this case was Jennifer Cave (photo above). Like Pitonyak and Hall, Cave was highly intelligent. With long red hair and freckles, she had a keen sense of humor and, friends and family say, a good heart. Yet she, too, lived on the edge, struggling with a drug addiction that she complained felt as if it stalked her. Ironically, the night she died, Jennifer had just worked her first day at an exciting new job and appeared serious about shaking her demons and starting over.

This is, without a doubt, the most disturbing case I've ever covered, forcing me to confront the frightening world of kids, drugs, guns, and violence. Three bright, college-age kids with everything ahead delved into Austin's drug culture and ended up throwing their lives away. In the end, Pitonyak was convicted of murder, and Hall was sentenced to five years for helping him dismember Cave's body, like the gangsters they emulated. After they cut up Jennifer's body in Pitonyak's apartment bathtub, Hall took him on a joyride to Mexico in her green Caddy, cavalierly telling a friend, "That's just how I roll."

So, here's the current situation: As I mentioned above, at the trial, Pitonyak testified that he felt sure he fired the fatal shot. He said that although he remembered little of that night, high on drugs and booze, he had to have, since no one but he and Jennifer Cave were in his apartment that night. His explanation: He hadn't meant to kill Jennifer; it had to have been an accident, but he accepted responsibility.

Now, however, it appears that Pitonyak has changed his mind. Last week, with his chances for a new trial drying up, Pitonyak's attorney filed a new appeal, arguing that Laura Hall is the killer.

That's a switch, isn't it?

What do they have to backup their claims? Pitonyak's attorneys are arguing that two friends who testified Hall was miles away the night the murder took place are mistaken. If so, Hall doesn't have a solid alibi for that night. And they have something else: the accounts of two inmates of the Travis County jail, who reportedly say Laura Hall confessed to Cave's murder during a jailhouse therapy group.

How's this going to end? The unexpected does happen, but I think it's a hard sell. After all, in the courtroom Pitonyak looked the jurors in the eyes and testified that Hall wasn't in his apartment on the night Jennifer died. While I don't fault Pitonyak's attorneys for filing the appeal -- their job after all is to do all they can to get him a new trial -- this is yet another example of how victims and their families suffer not just through the horrific initial loss and the subsequent painful trial, but often for years after, while cases are being appealed. As for Jennifer's family, they insist that they have no doubt that Pitonyak is the murderer.

Photos from the Austin American Statesman

Handwriting Analysis: An Interview with Sheila Lowe

by Andrea Campbell

I studied handwriting analysis extensively and wrote a novel about a handwriting analyst character over 14 years ago, but could never get it published. Today I’d like you to meet our guest, Sheila Lowe, who has managed to do what I could not. (Sheila Lowe, pictured at left)

Q.: Sheila, for readers who don’t know you, could you talk a little about your background as a forensic handwriting specialist?

A.: I started studying handwriting more than 40 years ago while I was in high school, and subsequently spent 10 years reading every book I could find on the subject. Finally, I discovered Charlie Cole, an expert who taught correspondence courses in graphology, which I greedily devoured. I became certified by the American Handwriting Analysis Foundation in 1981 and four years later became qualified in the court system to testify as an expert in the field of handwriting. Dare I use a cliché and say, “the rest is history”?

Q.: What is the difference between graphology and handwriting analysis?

A.: Graphology is the generic term for handwriting analysis; however, the study of handwriting is generally broken into two different areas: personality assessment and handwriting authentication.

Q.: How are these disciplines used?

A.: Graphology is the study of handwriting to learn about behavior and personality—which includes the effects of life experiences on handwriting, as well as of illness, medications, aging, drugs, etc. Another aspect of handwriting analysis is forensic handwriting authentication, which is used in cases involving forgery. So, if you want to get better insight into your own or someone else’s motivations and needs, graphology can help. If someone has stolen your identity and forged your name, you need a handwriting analyst trained in the authentication side. Some analysts do one or the other, some (like me) do both.

Q.: Graphology gets a bad rap; can you explain?

A.: Because there is no licensing and no controls over the practice, anyone can set up shop and start analyzing handwriting after reading a book or two. There are thousands of web sites hawking graphology, many of them by people who would not be able to get a license, if only there were a requirement to get one! They have done a great deal of harm to the field and their clients. Also, there’s long been a misconception that graphology has something to do with fortune telling or occult arts. It doesn’t.

Q.: Will you talk about some of the characteristics an expert can discern using handwriting analysis?

A.: The general categories I cover in a personality profile include ego needs and ego strength, social attitudes, thinking style, fears and defenses—things like that. A lot depends on the purpose of the analysis. If I’m doing a report for an employer who has sent me handwritings of applicants, I would examine the areas specific to the job description. If the report were for a couple getting married, or for a mid-life career change, or for a child custody issue, the focus would be different.

Q.: Let’s get to your writing. What are your books? May we have a mini-synopsis?

A.: I write both non-fiction and fiction books. My non-fiction works are The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Handwriting Analysis (Alpha), which teaches the gestalt method of graphology and is like a mini course, and Handwriting of the Famous & Infamous (Thunder Bay), which has my thumbnail sketches of the handwritings of 75 well-known people from Galileo to the Son of Sam, from John Lennon to Hillary Clinton, and a whole lot of others. I also write mystery fiction — The Forensic Handwriting Mystery series (Penguin’s Obsidian) featuring forensic handwriting expert Claudia Rose. Dead Write, the third book in the series, was recently released, and I’ve just finished the next book, Unholy Writ, for release next year.

Q.: Who is your protagonist and what type of character is she?

A.: Claudia Rose is a modern single woman entering her forties, who, in the first book, Poison Pen, becomes involved with LAPD detective Joel Jovanic. Her handwriting analysis practice brings her in touch with crimes such as forgery, and using what she knows, she’s better able to understand the people, both good and bad, who are involved. Claudia has a hard time staying detached in cases where kids are in jeopardy, which is the case in Written in Blood and Unholy Writ. She’s warm and compassionate, but she’s learning to be tough when she needs to be. And she’s learning to allow herself to open up in a love relationship — one of her big challenges at the beginning of the series.

Q.: Do you use the misconceptions about handwriting analysis in your books?

A.: Yes. Claudia regularly has to answer the same questions and misconceptions that I do. I hope the series will help clear things up.

Q.: Does your character go into the courts?

A.: In Written in Blood there is a major courtroom scene that is very similar to testimonies I’ve given in my own practice. Claudia has to face the same challenges and stress of testifying that I do.

Q.: On the business side, how did you find a publisher? Did you start with an agent?

A.: I’ve had seven agents, and now I have a good one. I sold my fiction books and the first two mysteries on my own. It’s a lot easier to sell non-fiction without an agent, but I did a lot of studying on how to go about it before setting out. In fact, I read The Complete Idiot’s Guide to Getting Published, and following its guidelines may have made the difference. I tried for a long time and, as I said, a number of agents, to sell my first mystery, Poison Pen, to a major publishing house. Finally, I had an offer from a small startup publisher, Capital Crime. They got the book reviewed in Publisher’s Weekly. I was lucky enough to get a starred review, which attracted the attention of my then-editor at Penguin, who made an offer for the first two books, and later, two more.

Q.: What can you tell us about your publisher and your experience (e.g., contract, editing, promotion, anything such as that) with them?

A.: Considering my good experience with a small press (for fiction), I encourage anyone having difficulty getting picked up by a large publishing house to try them. You’ll have control over cover art and work closely with your editor. At large houses, you’re likely to get your book cover with a note that says, “Here’s your cover. We hope you love it as much as we do.” Luckily, so far, I have! Regardless of the size of your publisher you will be expected to promote the book yourself (and pay for the promotion yourself). If you’re not willing and able to do that, don’t even bother looking for a publisher. They need to know that you’re willing to invest your (probably small) advance in promotion. That means creating a web site and/or blog, printing bookmarks, attending conventions and speaking on panels, visiting bookstores, etc. One note about bookstores: unless you have a very well-known name, book signings tend to be a waste of time and the big box stores discourage them. It’s often more effective just to do a “drop-in” signing. Call in advance to make sure they have your books in stock.

Q.: Do you have any advice for writers who want to break into the field?

A.: Learn your craft. If you’re writing genre fiction, find out what the rules are so that you can break them. Get into a critique group in your genre, hire a private editor to read your material, and listen to what that editor has to say about your work. Oh, and leave out most of the adverbs (those pesky “ly” words that make the writing weak).

Q.: Is there anything you would like to tell WCI Readers?

A.: Buy books! Whether they’re traditional books that you can cuddle up in bed with, or a Kindle that you can take on a plane (where I’m writing this, on my way to Bouchercon, a mystery convention), support your favorite authors. When someone tells me, “I love your books. I pass them around to all my friends,” I remind them that authors don’t get royalties on borrowed books, and it’s those royalties that allow authors to keep on writing the stories they love to read.

Thank you, Sheila.

http://www.sheilalowe.com/ for handwriting analysis;

http://www.claudiaroseseries.com/ for mystery

Eleven Bodies and Counting

by Pat Brown

The people living in Anthony Sowell's Cleveland neighborhood are appalled and stunned to find a serial killer in their midst. Sowell, a convicted rapist, is now an alleged serial killer (alleged, since we have yet to prove he killed the 11 women found dead in his house and any others who turn up as police tear apart his house; he could have just been maintaining a graveyard for a buddy). They ask how so many citizens could disappear without law enforcement warning that a serial killer was at large in their area.

Even worse: How could so many women go missing right around a violent sex-offender's home -- especially a house that reeked of death so badly that neighbors complained to the city? No parole officer went in to see if there was something amiss. No police detective brought a cadaver dog by to check out the stench.

Is this an anomaly? Is this a particularly bad police department? Is the city totally uncaring about these women because they were black, in a rundown area? No. This scenario occurs over and over across the country, which is why the handling of serial-homicide investigation needs to change.

First, let's look at the police department. Can you say "not enough manpower and funding to handle all their cases"? You bet. Any big city police department is drowning under its caseload. Shrinking tax dollars mean slashed city budgets, including public safety funding. Cities are furloughing officers and hiring no new ones. Detectives don't have the time or manpower to clear backlogs of rape and murder cases, let alone reports of missing people.

Complicate this with the victims themselves. It's unlikely that all of Sowell's victims were drug addicts, alcoholics, or prostitutes (he could have grabbed a church lady coming by with tracts on how to bring Jesus into his life). But the more times the possible victim has disappeared before (off on a drunk, out of town with a boyfriend, off to score drugs), and the longer her rap sheet before she went missing, the more likely it is that an overworked detective won't take time away from rape and murder investigations to spend hours tracking down some woman who is off bingeing in Atlantic City.

Anthony Sowell knows all this very well. He knows which victims to grab: those who are easy to con, and those police are unlikely to look for. Some victims won't go to the police because they have criminal records, or they don't believe the authorities will believe them. Tanja Doss was attacked by Sowell four years ago, but never reported the assault for just that reason. Sowell also knows police don't like to admit there are serial rapists and serial killers in their jurisdictions, because that means community pressure. Serial murder cases are extremely difficult to solve and terribly time consuming. The police are just too tired to deal with more demands.

There are, however, methods which could improve this situation. One is to establish a Suspected Serial-Homicide unit. All missing persons, unsolved rapes and sexual murders go into the unit's database and are monitored. This way someone is paying attention to a map that would, for example, eventually have shown a lot of dots around Anthony Sowell's house. There would also be a dedicated detective or two to link crimes together and pay extra attention to violent sex offenders who have been released back into the community.

We could also use more training in psychopathy for detectives, parole officers, and parole boards. Many are unable to recognize psychopathic manipulation and ploys. Some will think Sowell is rehabilitated (which can never happen with sex offenders) and no longer dangerous if he periodically offers barbeque to neighbors (which Sowell apparently did). Essentially, for many dealing with sexual psychopaths, if they see no evil and hear no evil, the sex offender is behaving himself.

Some people ask if Sowell is one of those brilliant serial killers who are always portrayed like Hannibal Lecter in movies. The answer is no. Most serial sex offenders are of average intelligence, but they get lucky because they grab their victims when no one sees them do it, often pick victims who aren't missed, and their crimes get lost in the excess of criminal activity in the jurisdiction. Investigative methods and training often fail to identify these predators.

Anthony Sowell was one of those who got lucky. His house smelled like dead bodies for years, but many thought the smell came from the sausage factory next door. The owner of the factory went nuts trying to eliminate the smell, spending thousands of dollars replacing equipment, because even he thought the horrific odor might be the factory's doing. What a break for Sowell!

Sowell, a 50-year-old ex-Marine, was previously convicted when he was 30. He received just 15 years for kidnapping, choking, and raping a woman, because a plea agreement reduced the charge to attempted rape. So, actually, Sowell isn't even a convicted rapist, though he is a registered sex offender. Considering the violence the woman faced before she escaped, I bet she would have ended up dead if she hadn't jumped out of a window. I also bet Sowell committed many more crimes before he got caught for this one. Unfortunately, he did his time, and in June 2005 he was released and given another chance at life; another chance to rape and kill.

Sadly, 11 or more women will never get their second chances.

When Loved Ones Do The Unthinkable

by Diane Dimond

There’s a drama playing out in West Babylon, New York that makes you want to go home and tell your family how much you love them. It also makes you wonder how much bad news about your loved one you could accept if he or she did something so horrible it caused seven innocents to lose their lives.

On Sunday, July 26th, at about 10 o’clock in the morning, Diane Schuler got behind the wheel of her red mini-van with five children, all under the age of nine -- including her brother's three little girls -- to return home from an upstate New York camping trip. At some point during the drive, Schuler’s young niece, Emma, picked up a cell phone and called her father. “There’s something wrong with Aunt Diane!” she is reported to have cried.

Diane Schuler had inexplicably gotten on a suburban highway going the wrong way. The horrific head-on crash that followed -- after she drove the wrong way for almost two miles -- killed everyone in her vehicle except her five-year-old son, Bryan. Three unsuspecting men in the other vehicle, a Chevy TrailBlazer SUV, all died. In a split second, eight people were dead in a pile of twisted and burning wreckage barely recognizable as automobile parts.

Flash forward to the toxicology report on this seemingly happily married mother of two. The coroner’s office concluded that Diane Schuler had a blood-alcohol level of .19 – more than twice the legal limit – plus six grams of unabsorbed alcohol in her stomach. In addition, her blood carried 113 nanograms per milliliter of THC, the active ingredient in marijuana. The medical examiner said the level indicated Diane had smoked weed as recently as 15 minutes before the fiery crash. Translated: Schuler was very drunk and very high at the time of the accident.

Oh, and police report they found a 1.75-liter bottle of vodka in the minivan after the deadly accident.

Police waited until after the dead were buried to release Diane Schuler's toxicology report. After the information came to light, the grieving husband, Daniel, went before the press to categorically deny his 36-year-old wife had an alcohol or drug problem. He revealed he works nights, and their two children were frequently left with a babysitter, but he insisted some sort of unidentified medical problem must have caused her to lose control of the car. “She was a perfect wife, upstanding mother, a hard worker, a reliable person, trustworthy,” he said through his tears, remembering both his wife and his dead two-year-old daughter.

Denial in the face of reality. And a mourning man is left to nurse his critically wounded young son back to health. Your heart goes out to Daniel Schuler, as delusional as he is in the face of overwhelming forensics.

But that’s not all this new widower must face. A flamboyant New York attorney named Irving Anolik has entered the picture to claim “there’s a strong fragrance of criminality” to the crash deaths. He plans to file a civil suit against the Schulers. Anolik represents the family of Guy and Michael Bastardi, a father and son who died in the SUV. Anolik says it is “inconceivable” that the Schulers were unaware Diane had a drinking and drug problem.

“Any person who was aware that she was drinking is an accomplice … whoever sold her the marijuana committed a crime,” said Anolik. “She didn’t just wake up one morning with a drug problem and capable of drinking that much alcohol.”

Anolik has a point, but the whole idea of blaming the family and making them pay for their dead loved one’s actions doesn’t sit well with me. I completely understand the urge for revenge, the need to make someone pay you back for the awful thing that’s happened. But ultimately, it's empty satisfaction.

We’ve become a society of blame seekers. Someone must take the blame for all the bad things that happen to us in life. One person’s bad judgment can't be merely accepted. For some reason, we need to point the finger of responsibility at others and demand money to ease our hurt and our loss. Of course, money doesn’t do either. The dead are still dead, and we still feel the tremendous loss deep in our souls.

But there’s always a lawyer willing to take the case for the promise of 30% of the settlement amount. Almost all the plaintiffs I’ve spoken to at the end of long, grueling, wrongful-death lawsuits say the same thing. In retrospect, they realize the years-long legal process they endured only served to keep their grief fresh. It prolonged the pain and the time it took to heal. The family of the Bastardi father and son were in court recently asking a judge to name an executor of Diane's estate so they'll have something to sue.

Do I think the survivors of the dead in this case deserve something? Yes. They deserve some peace for the awful event that has shattered their lives.

It's not CSI Folks!

by Kathryn Casey

Over the decades, I've spent a considerable amount of time in courtrooms. It’s part of the job. Awhile back, I sat in on a long trial, seven weeks. (There I am below right.) On the first day, I heard a phrase I hear in nearly every trial I attend these days. The prosecutor had the crime scene specialist on the stand, and the D.A. said something on the order of, “It’s not exactly CSI, is it, Sir?”

The investigator said, “No, it’s not.”

It may seem odd that a television program was a topic of testimony in a murder trial, but the CSI-type shows come up more often than not in courtrooms. Prosecutors increasingly feel compelled to defuse the myth, to explain to jurors who watch the sophisticated CBS series and others like it that not all the gadgets and techniques they see in television are gospel, and that even the ones that do exist often aren’t available in run-of-the-mill, budget-strapped cop shops.

What types of crime solving methods? You know, like the holographic facial reconstruction on Fox’s Bones. At times, it can actually be pretty comical. I once had lunch with a homicide cop and a crime scene officer, while they laughed about a CSI Miami episode in which a murder was solved based on an ant bite. Bite evidence is, of course, not unusual. But in this case, the TV sleuths measured and mapped an ant bite on a corpse, reconstructing the little critter’s minuscule mandible, then linked the resulting information not only to a certain species but – forgive me if this is wrong I am getting it second hand – to a specific ant colony. Wham! Crime solved. Wow. I was impressed. But everyone else at the table found the plot less than plausible.

Why is the CSI effect a bad thing in a courtroom? Prosecutors fear jurors who watch such unrealistic, forensic heavy programs may expect too much. They may expect absolute physical evidence to convict.

Of course, there’s another side to the coin. Many defense attorneys object to the CSI comment. Why? For the defense, it’s not usually a bad thing for juries to assume all the stuff on CSI is real world. If they believe the TV show is gospel, jurors figure their local P.D. hasn’t met the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt” in a case without iron-clad forensic evidence. After all if CSI is viewed by many as a real-world guideline for how a crime scene is investigated, what’s to be made of a police department without equipment to measure an ant bite and conclusively tie it to the correct ant hill? Of course that assumes a police department has an unlimited budget, a state-of-the-art lab, and the likes of David Caruso on staff.

Maybe it’s not surprising or new that we’re getting drawn in by dramatic presentations on television and confusing them with real life. I remember the first murder trial I sat through as a fledgling reporter, more than two decades ago. I’d grown up watching Perry Mason on my family’s black-and-white television, and I was shocked that witnesses weren’t allowed to ramble on without waiting for lawyers’ questions and, even more so, that neither the prosecutor nor the defense attorney cornered a single witness on the stand and spurred a confession.

Actually, to this day, I’m still waiting to be in a courtroom where a suspect yells out: “All right, I did it!”

Mommy's Little Girl

by Diane Fanning

More than a year ago, I agreed to write a book about a story that dominated the national media. I finished my manuscript in mid-May this year, and it seems like that day was long, long ago. Today, at last, St, Martin's Press releases MOMMY'S LITTLE GIRL: Casey Anthony and Her Daughter Caylee's Tragic Fate.

I kept photos of Caylee in front of me as I wrote. As a mother, I could not comprehend how any woman could carry a baby in her body for nine long months and then, two to three years later, look at the innocent, trusting face and even think of harming her toddler. I thought of my own daughter often as I researched and dug into the facts of this incomprehensible crime.

I really did not want to believe that Casey Anthony -- or any mother -- could murder her own daughter. But after months of immersion in the available evidence and in interviews with people close to the case, I could reach no other conclusion.

So I was gratified by the reviews the book already received, making months of slogging through the muck worthwhile.

Hal Boedeker of the Orlando Sentinel wrote of MOMMY'S LITTLE GIRL: "Author Diane Fanning tirelessly recounts the young woman's lying ways, theorizes how Anthony might have disposed of her daughter and concludes that Anthony is 'an individual whose self-absorption and insensitivity to others is a destructive force.'"

Mike DeForest of WKMG-Channel 6 News said in a television book review: "At least for a little while, for people following the Casey Anthony saga, this is basically going to be like a bible for them."

Want additional reading material before picking up the book? See my post, Is Malignant Narcissism the Answer? here at Women in Crime Ink -- or read the first chapter of the book on my website. You can also view video clips of my interview with 48 Hours.

You'll find MOMMY'S LITTLE GIRL in bookstores everywhere today. If you pick up a copy, I'd love to hear your feedback (write diane@dianefanning.com) after you read the book. But whether you read it or not, I am sure you will join me in demanding nothing less than justice for little Caylee.

Money and Murder

by Katherine Scardino

Did you know it costs more than $2 million, give or take a few hundred thousand, to prosecute a capital-murder defendant from the moment of arrest until the jury returns a verdict? That's without the continuing costs of a decade or so of appeals of every death sentence.

Killing a citizen for killing another citizen to prevent the killer from killing again is costly -- and frankly, embarrassing. Many studies find there is absolutely no evidence that executing the “worst of the worst” deters anyone from committing any kind of crime, especially murder. In 1995, a poll by Hart Research Associates found that the majority of police chiefs did not believe the death penalty significantly reduces the number of homicides. In fact, these police chiefs ranked it as the least effective way to reduce crime. The only thing Texas has gotten from all its many executions is a bad reputation and the distinction of killing more people than any other state in the United States, as well as some entire countries.

After 33 years of executions (since the U.S. Supreme Court allowed restoration of the death penalty in 1976), some states are looking at the bottom line: What are we getting in return for executing violent criminals? New Mexico recently backed away from capital punishment. The cost is too great for the return; worse, several prisoners have been exonerated, which can scare even the most steadfast death-penalty supporter. No one can stomach the execution of an innocent person.

Texas is currently in turmoil over the 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was convicted of setting a fire that killed his three young daughters in 1991. The evidence used to declare the fire arson in 1991 has been found flawed and unreliable by Texas' arson commission in 2009.

It appears that Texas did, in fact, execute a man for a crime he did not commit. Oops! My bad! What else can we say? Well, according to Gov. Rick Perry, right after he replaced three members of the arson commission, Cameron Todd Willingham (photo below) was a “bad man” who deserved to die, right? No, Gov. Perry, you are wrong. Whether Mr. Willingham was a “bad man” wasn't the point. The point is that Texas spent the money to have a jury trial, and presented bad, incompetent, allegedly “expert” evidence about arson -- and that this evidence led a jury to find Willingham guilty of capital murder and sentence him to death.

There are so many flaws in the U.S. capital-punishment system that it's hard to pick just one. It would be nice if capital punishment were eliminated in the United States so we could join the company of the rest of the world's civilized nations. But more likely, it will be because of money, money, money.

Let’s look briefly at the money issue. In Texas, a death penalty case costs an average of $2.3 million, about three times the cost of imprisoning someone in a single cell at the highest security level for 40 years -- and that's from a Dallas Morning News report back in 1992! Obviously, as of 2009, the cost is even higher. In California, the death-penalty system costs taxpayers $114 million each year, above and beyond the costs of keeping convicts locked up for life. (L.A. Times, March 6, 2005).

The cost of a capital crime -- a crime for which a person may be sentenced to death -- can be too much for some jurisdictions, such as Austin County, Texas. In August in a small, bucolic community halfway between Austin and Houston, four men, all relatives, were arrested, jailed and charged with capital murder in the death of a Houston doctor visiting his summer home there. Austin County hasn't had a capital-murder prosecution in 15 years. The cost of prosecuting these four men for capital murder will be prohibitive. Each of the four defendants is entitled to two defense lawyers, defense experts, and a multitude of other defense expenses.

So: What if smaller counties “Just Say No”? Their resources could be channeled into better schools, more police officers, solving old crimes, building new libraries, etc.

That would leave only the larger jurisdictions prosecuting capital cases. And how could that be acceptable? That would mean if someone committed a capital murder in Harris County, for example, they could be sentenced to death. If the same person committed the same crime in a small county, he wouldn't be charged with capital murder -- so punishment would be determined by where a crime was committed.

That is exactly what is happening in various counties across Texas, making the death penalty even more flawed and inequitable.

The cost of prosecuting a capital case is enormous. The return is small -- so small that all you get back is one executed person unable to commit any more crimes -- and a lot of invoices. Let’s ALL just say no.

Funny, Freaky, Freeing, or Just Plain Irresponsible?

by Robin Sax

Marge Simpson’s "Playboy" pictures are out now in the November issue. It's the first time a cartoon character has been featured on the risqué magazine's cover, and I’ve got to admit -- at first I chuckled. Then I started thinking ... Why? Why Marge? Why "Playboy"?

Marge Simpson is a wife and mother of three kids on Fox's long-running series, “The Simpsons.” The "Playboy" pictures feature Marge (remember, she’s an animated character) sitting naked on a bunny chair, wearing nothing but her signature blue hairdo. The spread also features a story inside called, “The Devil in Marge Simpson.”

There has been much banter about this on the blogs, and I really liked what Hollywood Gossip had to say on the matter:

As a housewife and mother of three, we fear that Marge’s pictorial - which includes a three-page spread and interview -- sets a bad example. What will Maggie [her daughter] think when she gets old enough to use Google? How will Bart’s classmates react to these images? It’s really all the fault of Kate Gosselin. Clearly jealous of the attention that famous mom has received -- Marge set out to reclaim the spotlight. Mission (grossly) accomplished.

Of course this is a tongue-in-cheek post, but it raises an important question: How does this affect the children? As a woman, there’s a part of me that thinks it’s refreshing to see a “regular” (if imaginary) mom on the coveted cover of a major magazine. It’s a nice change of pace from the usual image of impossible perfection we see on every other magazine cover. But how about putting Marge on "In Style", "Harpers Bazaar", "The New Yorker," or even "Parents"?

Why did "Playboy" choose Marge Simpson? What about Jessica Rabbit or Lara Croft or even Betty Boop? If we’re talking about sexualizing an animated character, why not choose one that was created to be a sex symbol? In an age when we worry about kids growing up too fast, we want our public figures to be good role models. So why did "Playboy" need to turn Marge into a sexy hottie when there are certainly enough others to go around?

Some argue "The Simpsons" isn’t really for kids. But I don’t care. Every kid knows who "The Simpsons" are, and most watch it. It appears on regular TV channels, and Marge is a cartoon character with special kid appeal.

The bottom line: I agree with the folks at MTV who said that "Playboy" is probably trying to attract younger readers. I guess that’s where my problem is. You put Marge on the cover, and all of sudden kids are going to pick up the magazine thinking it’s for kids, unaware of what's inside the covers.

Perhaps what makes this even more troublesome is that the cover appears right before Halloween, when we’re smack in the middle of the new trend of overly sexualized Halloween costumes. Remember the good old days of princesses, bulky coats over costumes, and bunny faces? Gone!

Now we see lacy garters, bustiers, and devils in mini-skirts. Susan Linn, director of the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood in Boston, says that corporate marketers are increasingly aiming at girls as young as preschool age as if they were teenagers! Linn, who also wrote "The Case for Make Believe" and "Consuming Kids," said much of it is based on a marketing strategy known as CAGOY, or "Children are Getting Older Younger."

"It's a marketing phenomenon, created by marketers, based on an assumption that children are acquiring the trappings of maturity earlier. There is no evidence of that," she says. Linn said there is evidence, however, that the commercialization of childhood intensifies serious issues like childhood obesity, eating disorders, low self-esteem and precocious sexual activity. It also interferes with imagination and creative play.

So if costumes are sending bad messages, and if over-sexualizing leads to a host of sociological and psychological problems, why open that Pandora’s Box? When will the media and marketers err on the side of caution and start thinking about what’s in the best interest of our children? Yes, this is the same media that criticizes parents for not doing their job protecting their kids. So here’s my question: When will society and the media start doing theirs?

The Monster's Wife, Culpable?

by Contributors to Women in Crime Ink

Police have charged Nancy Garrido along with her husband, Phillip, for abducting and imprisoning Jaycee Dugard for the past 18 years. Both are charged with 29 counts each, ranging from kidnapping to rape. Dugard's stepfather has identified Nancy, a nursing assistant believed to have assisted in the delivery of Dugard's two children, as the woman who snatched his stepdaughter off the street, and police say Nancy (left) was home with the then 11-year-old for five months while her husband cooled his heels in jail on a parole violation. Meanwhile, her attorney maintains Nancy's innocence, saying she too was her husband's victim, kept under Garrido's control.

The question for WCI bloggers: If it turns out that Nancy Garrido is involved in this heinous crime, and if it turns out that she's been a victim of prolonged domestic violence, how much weight should this be given, and should it impact guilt/innocence or sentencing?

Pat Brown: Nancy Garrido deserves to accept full responsibility for her actions. Why? Because she wasn't an innocent girl like Jaycee who might have been snared by an older Phillip Garrido and brainwashed. She was a full grown adult who met Garrido when he was already in prison and she knew he was in prison for kidnapping and rape. She chose to partner with him, and she chose to participate in his criminal activities. She is as guilty as he is for what happened to Jaycee Dugard (left) and her children. I say a life sentence without parole is fully appropriate for Nancy Garrido.

Andrea Campbell: In my opinion, if Nancy Garrido was free to come and go, yet still aided in perpetuating the kidnapping and crime against Jaycee Dugard, and then allowed it to continue with the imprisonment of the children, she should be charged as a co-conspirator. At the very least, it is criminal aiding and abetting.

Kathryn Casey: It appears that Nancy Garrido had every opportunity to turn her husband in and end the nightmare for Jaycee and her family. If that’s true, it’s fitting that she’s held responsible right along with the monster she chose as her husband. What woman marries a man in prison for kidnap and rape, allegedly assists in a kidnapping once he's released, and then sits back and does nothing while he imprisons and violates a child? Should abuse by Garrido against Nancy come in at all? Sure, in sentencing. If Nancy has been victimized by her husband, the jury or judge who hands down the sentence should be able to fully assess the entire picture.

Diane Fanning: Nancy Garrido should be judged solely by her actions in the guilt/innocence phase of the trial. If the state proves--as I believe they will--that she aided and abetted in the crimes committed against Jaycee Dugard and in keeping her captivity a secret for all these years. Then, she should be found guilty of all of that. If there was on-going long-term, verifiable domestic violence perpetrated on Nancy, that should be considered as a mitigating circumstance only during the sentencing phase and weighed against the actions she took or did not take regarding Jaycee.

Susan Murphy-Milano: Nancy Garrido is a full-fledged accomplice and co-conspirator, who in my opinion willingly participated in the crimes against a helpless child. Garrido should receive no mercy and have her lawyer strike from the court record the untruths told about her being a battered woman.

Jaycee Dugard was locked away like a caged animal from the outside world behind a series of fences, sheds and tents in the back of a suburban home. She was brainwashed and raped for years and gave birth to two children, the first when Jaycee was about 14. Those children, both girls now 11 and 15, also were kept hidden away in the caged compound.

I am reminded of Michelle Lyn Michaud, also of Sacramento, sentenced to death for her role in the 1997 kidnap, rape and murder of a 22-year-old student. During the trial, defense attorneys also tried to portray Michaud as a battered woman who would do anything to please her boyfriend, James Daveggio, who also was sentenced to death.

Nancy Garrido is a predator, and the battered-women’s theory is a way to mask and not take responsibility for her heinous crimes.

Katherine Scardino: Nancy Garrido should be judged solely on her own actions - if it is proven that she herself committed a direct criminal act - such as kidnapping, assault or some other direct act against another individual, or an act that is a crime by omission - meaning that she should have taken some reasonable action to prevent a criminal act - such as injury to a child by omission - she will be tried for her own crimes.

If her crime is an act by omission, then it is possible that she'd been so brainwashed or assaulted by this man that she could not take any preventative measures to protect or save Ms. Dugard. That may come in during the guilt phase of the trial - but generally, as Diane said, that information would only be admissible during the sentencing phase of a trial as possible mitigating evidence, just like information about a person's background - i.e., child abuse, sexual assault, beatings, etc. The jury can hear and consider this evidence when deliberating her punishment. The jury can give whatever weight they feel is appropriate to this type of information.

Cathy Scott: If Nancy Garrido was involved in the kidnapping and imprisonment of Jaycee Dugard, then, yes, she should pay. But I do believe some consideration -- even compassion -- should be afforded her if it turns out that she too was a victim of Philip Garrido (above right). The control from such a twisted and sociopathic mind reaches beyond prison bars, which may partly explain Garrido's failure to report her husband once he was jailed.

Silenced

by Susan Murphy-Milano

Two years ago today, 23-year-old Stacy Ann Peterson vanished from the house in the Illinois suburb of Bolingbrook that she shared with her police-officer husband Drew Peterson, her two children and his two sons, whom she'd adopted.

After several months of being stalked and living under her husband's tight, controlling reins, Stacy Peterson told her husband the marriage was over. In October 2007, Stacy met and consulted with divorce attorney Harry Smith -- ironically, the same lawyer Kathleen Savio hired to represent her when she decided to divorce Peterson.

When Stacy failed to show up at her brother's house that late-October day, family members were concerned, especially her sister Cassandra Cales. Just two days earlier, after a cozy family night of movie and pizza, Stacy warned Cassandra that she planned to leave Peterson and said: "If something happens to me, I just want you to know it was Drew." When Cassandra couldn't reach her missing sister, she went to Stacy's house and found the four children home alone, with no sign of Peterson's car. At the Bolingbrook Police Department, Cassandra filed a missing-person report.

Within 48 hours, camera crews and journalists besieged the once quiet suburban cul-de-sac. Peterson, then a police sergeant, gave them a show -- a bizarre public display including personal attacks on his wife and her family in the wake of her disappearance. The national media covered Peterson's act like a low-life reality TV show. Each day as Peterson left his house, journalists shoved microphones in his face, hungry for a sound bite for evening crime or news broadcasts. If you were a resident of Illinois during the first three weeks after Stacy vanished, you saw Peterson served up on local, cable and radio programs like a charred chicken flapping its wings almost around the clock.

To me, it seemed Peterson treated Stacy's life like a dirty rag. In his attempts to discredit her, Peterson made comments such as "You know she came from a broken home," or, "Her mother went missing too, so this is not a surprise." Then I heard Peterson say, "Stacy is where she wants to be." My heart sank as I thought of the boys who'd now lost a mother twice.

Seventeen days after Cassandra reported Stacy's disappearance, the Will County State Attorney's Office obtained a court order and exhumed the body of Kathleen Savio. Savio, Peterson's previous wife, was discovered dead in a bathtub in the marital house in 2004. Suddenly, the media and police focus swung from Stacy's disappearance to a new autopsy into the cause of Kathleen's death. The effort to find Stacy lost its momentum. The ground began to freeze, making the search more difficult for family and teams of volunteers. And the media remained hooked on Drew's public displays and his love life, leaving no time to find answers or enlist the public's help in finding Stacy.

In the months that followed, I met with people who knew Stacy personally. From the moment she married Drew, Stacy worked to knit a loving family environment, integrating Drew's then-estranged family into the couple's new life. From all accounts, she had a kind, warm and giving heart. People's eyes sparkled when they spoke of her. She made friends and family feel welcome. When a guest didn't show up for a gathering, Stacy called urged, "Come on," one relative recalled. "We're holding dinner, where are you? We're not starting until you get here."

Another told me: "Stacy was the glue, and that's why her disappearance is so painful to those of us who knew her."

Stacy Peterson's dream was to be a loving wife and mother, an all-around nurturer. She enrolled in nursing classes at a local college. When Stacy could no longer live under Peterson's heavy-handed control and constant watch, she made plans to leave. But like many women in her position, she made a mistake. She told her husband what she planned before she moved to a place where she'd be safe from him.

Stacy was silenced in the prime of her life. But there can be no silencing of family and friends who will continue to search for her until she is found. A grand jury met for 18 months before handing down an indictment against Drew Peterson for the death of Kathleen Savio.

I believe when that trial begins, the long silence about how Kathleen Savio lost her life will be lifted and the truth about how Stacy died will also be revealed. During the trial, thanks to Illinois' new hearsay law, Stacy Peterson's words will finally be heard.