Date With the Devil (23 page)

Read Date With the Devil Online

Authors: Don Lasseter

BOOK: Date With the Devil
3.29Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
“I know,” said Brougham, “the defense is going to say that conditions have changed since we found the body, so the concern that there is going to be destruction of the evidence is gone. The people would respond to that by saying the gun is still outstanding, and we have concerns about the safety of witnesses. We also have concerns that the defendant will flee.” She added that Mahler had bragged that he could easily post the amount of money required. “The defendant knows a lot about these witnesses, where they can be located, and they are very vulnerable to him.” She requested that the order for no bail remain intact.
Flier stood and argued that the assertions by the prosecution were not entirely true. In the police interview, he said, “The awareness of where the body is, and the gun, is through hearsay. He never tells anyone that he killed anybody. It's in their own report—that his statements were all from hearsay.” Furthermore, said Flier, this is not a capital case and there are no special circumstances so he is entitled to bail.
The possibility that his client, if freed, might have destroyed the body, said Flier, was preposterous. But even if it had been true, the issue had changed since discovery of the body. Therefore, the people's main argument no longer applied. In regard to the gun, he said, “I don't even understand that argument. [They] don't need the gun to prove a murder case. Only the body is needed. The gun issue is a red herring.”
Flier also expressed doubts about the alleged threats to the lives of witnesses. Certainly, the lawyer said, his client could be monitored with a tracking device to prevent him from doing harm to anyone. “So we are doing everything to protect society and to protect his rights.”
Judge Feldstern noted aloud that Karl Norvik had been asked if the defendant had ever directly threatened him. The answer had been “No, but ...” This observation alarmed the prosecutor.
She replied, “Our concern is for public safety. We have a defendant who can easily flee—one who has resources to get whatever he wants done. And he has indicated that he would want to kill witnesses in this case. Mr. Van Develde and Mr. Norvik didn't come forward for five days because they were concerned for their safety. They believed he has the financial ability to harm them, either through someone else or doing it himself. To us, it is a major concern that the gun is still out there and accessible to the defendant.”
Flier replied by pointing out that his client had not fled. “He went to hotels, but came back to his residence, where he was arrested—”
The judge interrupted. “He was hiding in a closet, covering himself up, secreting himself.”
“He wasn't hiding in Guatemala,” Flier riposted.
“Fair enough,” said Feldstern, trying not to smile.
Forging ahead, Flier said, “My point is he was hiding in his own residence. He was concerned and didn't know who was trying to get into his home. You and I might not have hidden in a closet. The bottom line is he was there in his own home. I don't see flight risk.” Flier again downplayed the alleged threats to witnesses. “The key issue is his right to bail, and that is all we are asking.”
Both attorneys rested their cases.
 
 
Judge Daniel B. Feldstern spoke. “First of all, let me just comment on the issue of sufficiency of evidence. The court believes it is overwhelming. In my view, this defendant committed this murder and disposed of the body using his vehicle. There can't be anything clearer than that. He was in possession of a firearm. The body and the gun were [missing] at the time of his arrest.”
Regarding the question of bail, the judge acknowledged that circumstances had been changed by discovery of a body. He also noted that bail is normally denied in cases of capital murder, but often allowed in lesser charges. “This is not a capital case. But there are exceptions where there is a substantial likelihood that defendant's release would result in great bodily harm to others. There is evidence here that he has demonstrated an intent and propensity to hide and destroy evidence exemplified by the movement of the body, to put it in some remote area. The gun has never been recovered. He has made statements about knowing the whereabouts. He is the only person to know about it.”
After a brief pause, while referring to his notes, Feldstern continued. “He was found hiding in his house. There was some sort of detergent found near one of the bloodstains, which was about the size of a basketball. This tells me the defendant went back to the house for the purpose of trying to further destroy evidence in this case.
“Also, there have been some representations here about his desire to eliminate witnesses, should he be released on bail. And the fact that he was [near] LAX right after this event occurred is another demonstration possibly inferring that he had the intent to flee, even though he felt compelled, at some point, to hide the evidence further.
“So, in the totality of circumstances, it appears to me that the issue of public safety is valid.”
With mention of erratic behavior, the use of a firearm, involvement of controlled substances, and the crime's seriousness, he said, “It is not unreasonable, under these circumstances, for the defendant to be held without bail. And that will be the court's order.”
David Mahler grimaced and visibly slumped in his chair.
Judge Feldstern had not finished. “It appears to me from the evidence presented that the following offenses have been committed and there is sufficient cause to believe the defendant is guilty thereof.” He cited them like a bell tolling doom: murder, felonious use of a firearm, and assault with a firearm.
Finally he set a date for the formal arraignment of July 16.
 
 
Certainly, none of this meant that Mahler was guilty of any charges. The preliminary hearing had only accomplished its purpose, to legally subject him to arraignment and a trial.
Reporters and lawyers, both defense and prosecution, almost unanimously agreed that a jury would have great difficulty finding him guilty of second-degree murder. The best that could be expected, considering his drug usage, volatile personality, and the circumstances of the shooting, would be a verdict of manslaughter—either voluntary or involuntary. If so, Mahler would probably serve a prison sentence amounting to no more than a slap on the wrist.
C
HAPTER
27
A L
OOK
B
EHIND
THE
S
CENES
B
Y
R
ONALD
B
OWERS
I first came to grips with the David Mahler case a short time after the criminal complaints had been filed. Fellow prosecutor Cathryn Brougham stopped by my office on the seventeenth floor of the Criminal Courts Building and asked me if I had heard about the homicide in the Hollywood Hills. I thought, at first, she might be referring to Victor Paleologus, who had been tried for killing Kristi Johnson.
“No,” my visitor said. “It's the one that took place above the Sunset Strip, and the police couldn't find the body.” That rang a bell. I had recently heard a television reporter asking for the public's help in finding the body of a female murder victim, but I could summon up only a hazy recollection of the facts.
The Deputy DA tried to enlighten me. I listened intently as she spewed out a lot of names: Donnie, Karl, Jeremy, Atticus, Cheryl, Kitty, Stacy, Damien—all surrounding a lawyer, David Mahler. He had been arrested and charged with murdering Kristin Baldwin. To be honest, I struggled to keep the names straight.As Cathryn spoke, I pulled out a legal tablet and plunked it down on my desk. My ears perked up when she told me that Mahler was an East Coast lawyer who had been a criminal defense attorney. This could turn out to be intriguing.
For more years than I care to remember, I have been assisting prosecutors in the Los Angeles District Attorney's Office with visual aids to use in criminal trials. I believe our techniques for augmenting introduction of evidence has been one of the best in the nation. Our uses of Microsoft PowerPoint presentations have proven exceptionally helpful to prosecutors in aiding jurors to understand evidence and complex issues in a murder case. Colorful, well-designed images projected on a large screen replace the tedious drone of a speech and keep jurors' attention focused. Still referred to as “slides” from the old-fashioned 35-millimeter slide projectors, this modern technology allows text, graphics, movies, and gradual addition to the pictures arranged according to the user's wishes.
It has been my experience that careful organization of the facts and pictorial presentation of them is essential to success in any business, and particularly in this one. So, I penciled in the names of the characters as my colleague delivered information about them.
I never interrupt other attorneys when they describe their views of a case because I am particularly interested in how they tell the story. This is a precursor of how best to convey those same facts during the trial. I want to listen as though I were a juror to see if the message penetrates the target or if it misses the mark. After fifteen minutes of details flying at me, I agreed with Cathryn that she had a riveting case and said I would be glad to help structure the presentation. As she exited, I requested a copy of the police reports. They were delivered to me about an hour later by a law clerk.
After a meticulous review of the documents, I realized we had some serious obstacles to overcome in laying this out to a jury. It could be difficult to make a convincing argument that Mahler had murdered Kristin as opposed to overreacting to an argument. I anticipated that his defense would portray him as under the influence of drugs, drunk, and emotionally unstable at the time, making him incapable of forming the intent to kill. My experience had taught me that jurors' ultimate decisions in these types of cases often hinge on the shooter's state of mind when the trigger was pulled.
My first objective would be to help the jury keep the cast of characters straight. Experimenting with it, I created a visual chart, including photos displaying all of the parties present in the room at or near the time of the shooting.This included pictures of Mahler and Kristin, as well as Donnie and Karl, all superimposed over a photo of Mahler's master bedroom. To drive home the point, I inserted a graphic clip art of a revolver next to Mahler with an arrow extending from the gun barrel to Kristin's chest. Even though transcripts of interviews said that Donnie and Karl thought she had been shot in the face, I decided to go along with the coroner's report of possible bullet damage to the chest.
Next I needed a way to explain the configuration of David Mahler's house without baffling the jurors. Every time the investigators discussed the case with me, they would describe a labyrinth of rooms that defied comprehension. The structure stretched seven stories down a slope, and the upper stories were divided into split levels. Each descending level jutted out below the one above it.An interior staircase made it even more confusing.Anyone describing it would usually wind up by saying, “There is no way to explain the layout of rooms in there.”
To clarify it in my own mind, I wrote:
 
Above garage—kitchen and dining room
Street level—garage and living room
Level 1—office (below living room)
Level 2—David's bedroom and master bath
Level 3—Moudy's studio apartment
Level 4—Norvik's studio apartment
Level 5—Van Develde's studio apartmen
t
 
At last, using police photos, I diagrammed it and instead of referring to “floors” or “stories,” they became “levels.” To further clarify it, I attached photos of the rooms at each level.
Grappling with another problem, I tried to develop a time line of events. So many things happened between May 24, when Kristin went to Newport Beach with Mahler, and June 16, when her body was found. I couldn't keep it all sorted out. So how could I expect jurors to grasp it? I couldn't keep it straight as to when Mahler went to the Marriott or the Standard Hotel, let alone the comings and goings of his Jaguars. Even the date of the shooting kept slipping out of my mind.And how long was it before Karl called the police? Several attempts at making flowcharts failed before I found a solution.
A giant calendar page solved my problem. I combined May and June onto a single sheet, beginning with May 20 and ending with June 16, the day Kristin's body was discovered. In the block for each day, I entered the important events. So simple, yet effective. For example, jurors could easily see that five days elapsed between the time of the shooting and Karl's call to the police. They could also easily see Mahler's activities after he shot Kristin, until his arrest and the police interview.This would certainly reduce the amount of explanation by the prosecutor. (Note: It also provided an indispensable aid to Don Lasseter and Ron Bowers in writing this book.)
Perhaps this task might sound relatively simple, but it must be kept in mind that I was working on several other cases at the same time. The Phil Spector murder case gobbled up huge segments of my workdays and nights. In his two spectacular trials, covered by international news media, musical magnate Phil Spector had been accused of murdering Lana Clarkson in his mansion. It took awhile for me to connect the dots of similarity.
The parallels between Spector and Mahler were amazing. They both involved an arrogant, testosterone-driven—possibly drunk or drugged—male who snared a younger woman and steered her to his isolated house, where he could dominate her at his will. When confronted with some resistance or rejection, both men automatically resorted to pointing a gun, allegedly without intent to shoot to force compliance with their wishes. Mahler told two tenants of the shooting and Spector blurted it out to a chauffeur.
I later learned of another link between the two cases. Karl Norvik, whose call to the police ultimately resulted in the Mahler mystery being solved, had been a good friend of Lana Clarkson! He had attended the funeral services after her death.
For months I had been working on ways to disprove Spector's defense that Lana had grabbed the pistol and stuck it in her mouth to commit suicide. I wondered if Mahler would try to craft such an absurd excuse. Or, as an experienced defense attorney, would he manufacture a more plausible story to explain the slaying?
While uncanny similarities were mirrored in these two cases, a major difference perplexed me. The news and entertainment media demonstrated an insatiable appetite for any tidbit of information related to Phil Spector. To me, he was an obscure, over-the-hill record producer. They virtually ignored the David Mahler case, despite one of the most colorful cast of characters I had ever encountered.
Whatever excuse Mahler would come up with, he would still need to reason away the trail of blood leading from his bedroom to the garage and into the trunk of his older Jaguar. A criminalist planned to testify that the pattern of droplets on the stairs indicated that the victim's body had been dragged by her feet, causing blood to spatter on the carpet and the stairs as her head bounced from step to step. Initially I thought I could use one diagram to illustrate this. But photos of the crime scene revealed the incredible length of the trail. I settled on using four photo boards with superimposed dotted lines to designate the long path of blood drops.
Jurors have inquiring minds, and I knew they would want some evidence to show whose blood made up the trail. Could Mahler have sustained an injury and bled as he walked from his bedroom to the garage? Or perhaps it had been left by one of the other residents, clients, or hookers who frequented Cole Crest. I needed a way to show the blood belonged to Kristin Baldwin. Usually, that is an easy task, since you need only to compare a DNA sample, from the victim or the suspect. When I asked the detectives for a comparison of Kristin's DNA sample, the case suddenly got complicated. They responded that no DNA sample had been taken from her dehydrated remains.
I never quite understood why. Yes, her flesh had turned almost to leather, but I had read of DNA samples being taken from King Tut's mummy. I don't know if a mistake in the coroner's procedures or the advanced decomposition had made it impossible. The pitiful remains had been cremated. But another option existed. A swab could be taken from the mouth of Kristin's mother for comparison. Since she lived in Vermont, it took some time to obtain and analyze. At last, upon completions of that task, we had proof that the blood in the house, by a high mathematical probability, had been left by Kristin. My challenge was to make it easy for jurors to interpret the numbers. I think my displays succeeded fairly well, even though the subject of DNA can be overwhelmingly complex for any jury.
One of the key pieces of evidence came from the security video camera of David Mahler's neighbor. We were able to capture images of Mahler's Jaguar backing into the garage late at night. It later left and was gone for nearly five hours. I saw the need for a visual display showing that Mahler had the opportunity to transport and dump Kristin's body in the desert near Daggett. By tracing the route on a map, from Cole Crest to the site where she was found, I saw it was 124 miles.An easy calculation proved that Mahler could have made the round-trip, even with the constraints of speed limits. He even would have a little time left over. To make it easy for jurors to visualize, I enlarged a map and inserted a photo of the Cole Crest house at the starting point and a picture of Kristin's body under the edge of a low bridge in the desert. I posted the mileage, the starting time of 2:17
A.M.
, and the return time of 7:15
A.M.
Later, just to hedge all bets, we asked DA investigator Ronald “Ron” Valdiva to drive the route and determine if it could be done within those time frames. He videotaped it and we planned for him to testify at the trial.
During all of this preparation, I had heard a lot about the house on Cole Crest Drive, the environment up there and the tortuous driving conditions in the neighborhood. A report from the detectives even noted that David Mahler's longtime girlfriend, Stacy Tipton, often traveled from Visalia to visit him but refused to drive up into the Hollywood Hills because it was too difficult. Mahler had to come down and meet her somewhere. I also knew of Mahler's alcohol and drug usage, and wondered how he could have negotiated the narrow, twisting roads while under the influence. I decided to see for myself what everyone was talking about.
After carefully planning my route, I left my office in downtown Los Angeles, behind the wheel of my aging SUV, and took the freeway to Hollywood. At the corner of Sunset Boulevard and Laurel Canyon Boulevard, I turned north and joined a line of BMWs and Mercedes-Benzes all going too fast. Within a few minutes, I came to the historic Canyon Country Store and swung left on Kirkwood Drive. Right away, I realized that neither maps nor written instructions, not even a sophisticated GPS system, reveal the true story.
At first, Kirkwood Drive gives the impression of a rustic, pleasant mountain road. Petite wood-frame houses, with minimal front yards, are crammed into the hillside, with tall trees providing a sun-blocking canopy.The “pleasant” part vanishes as the lane constricts and begins twisting and turning like a roller coaster. As I climbed higher, I could see rows of houses on the right side jutting out over a bottomless ravine. Some structures rest on stilts, and others are secured to a few feet of bedrock and cantilever out over nothing but air. All the homes cling to the street, tied to it by concrete driveways.
What becomes immediately apparent to any visitor is the harsh parking environment. As Kirkwood narrows, parking is legally permissible on only one side of the street. This makes the passage of two vehicles in opposite directions next to impossible. Large vehicles left along the curb bring two-way traffic to a halt and precipitate the negotiating game to see who will be the first to pull into someone's driveway so the other can pass. Nonaggressive types could never survive the drive up the hill, since staring down the other driver for passage is a survival skill. I had the feeling that daily users of the street must be type A personalities and don't want to back down for anyone. David Mahler would fit in quite well.

Other books

Green Darkness by Anya Seton
Town Burning by Thomas Williams
The Lost Level by Brian Keene
War of the Eagles by Eric Walters
Diplomatic Immunity by Lois McMaster Bujold
The People of the Eye: Deaf Ethnicity and Ancestry by Harlan Lane, Richard C. Pillard, Ulf Hedberg