Primal Fear (35 page)

“Yes sir. Doctor, did you discuss his sexual orientation?”

“We didn’t question her about that.”

“Why not?”

“It hardly seemed appropriate. She was just his teacher, after all.”

“I see. I want to talk about Aaron’s religious orientation for a moment. Are you familiar with the defendant’s relationship with a Reverend Shackles?”

“Yes. Josiah Shackles.”

“Did you interview Shackles?”

“No sir. We were informed that nobody has seen or heard from him in years.”

“What do you know about him?”

“Apparently he was a Fundamentalist, basically, but he had very severe attitudes about sin.”

“Did the defendant discuss this with you?”

“Yes, he did. We also had your interview with him in the jail.”

“What was your analysis of that relationship?”

“Unfortunate.”

“Why?”

“As I said, Reverend Shackles was a Fundamentalist. From what I understand, he believed once you are tainted with sin, there is no redemption.”

“In other words, he believed in abstinence from all sin?”

“Yes.”

“How about prayer?”

“As I recall, Aaron quoted Virgil on that. He said that Shackles believed what Virgil wrote.”

“Which was?”

“May I refer to my notes?”

“Of course.”

Bascott leafed through several pages of a black notebook before stopping. “Here it is,” Bascott said. “Quote: ‘Cease to think that the decrees of the Gods can be changed by prayers.’ Unquote.”

“Shackles believed that, right?”

“According to Aaron.”

“Did Aaron accept that thesis?”

“Well, he was a child at the time. Eight, nine years old. Naturally it impressed him.”

“Did he
believe
it?”

“Objection, Your Honor,” said Venable. “The defendant would be the best source for that information.”

“Except the defendant does not have to testify,” said Vail. “In which case I believe the state’s witness would certainly be the best source. After all, he and his team are responsible for determining that Stampler is sane. And this information will be corroborated in defense interviews conducted by Dr. Arrington.”

“Overruled,” Shoat said. “Continue, Counselor.”

“Did Aaron believe Shackles when he said there is no absolution on earth for sin?”

“I think it had an effect on his religious outlook.”

“Do you believe it? That there is no absolution on this earth?”

“Objection. Immaterial.”

“On the contrary, Your Honor. The doctor’s viewpoint is quite material in analyzing this information.”

“Overruled,” Shoat said, looking at Venable and raising his eyebrows.

“Well, it would seem to nullify the basic premise of Christianity,” Bascott said.

“I asked if you believed it,” Vail pressed.

“No.”

“So you believe in absolution?”

“Well, I… Not really. I, uh … I’m an atheist.”

His answer caught Venable completely off-guard. Suddenly it became obvious that Vail was trying to taint Bascott in the eyes of a jury that was comprised of devout Christians.

“Objection,” she roared. “The doctor’s religious beliefs are immaterial!”

“He said it, I didn’t,” Vail said with a shrug. “Okay with me if you strike it.” He smiled at the jury as he returned to the desk and picked up a legal pad. “The point is, Doctor, that Aaron Stampler was definitely affected by his exposure to Shackles, was he not?”

“Yes.”

“So his original religious orientation was somewhat distorted.”

“Unless you agree with Shackles.”

“Did Aaron change his mind about that?”

“Yes. Years later he was studying to be a Catholic with Bishop Rushman. The Catholic viewpoint, of course, is exactly the opposite.”

“So his religious message was mixed, correct?”

“Absolutely.”

“Is religion important to Aaron?”

“Well, he talks about it a lot. Yes, I think so. But I think the bishop helped him to resolve the conflict.”

“So the bishop convinced him that there is absolution on this earth?”

“I believe Aaron when he says that, yes.”

Vail flipped through his legal pad. “Doctor, in your third interview with Aaron, page seven, there is this exchange:

“Bascott: So you believe in absolution then?

“Stampler: Well, the bishop was very convincing about that. But Ambrose Bierce wrote, ‘To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled on behalf of a single petitioner is unworthy.’ And absolution comes through prayer.

“Bascott: So you still have doubts?

“Stampler: Well, I do think about it, sir.”

Vail dropped the tablet on the desk.

“Now, Doctor, don’t you see a conflict present there?”

“Because he thinks about it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a conflict. We’re talking about a very intelligent young man. He asks a lot of questions.”

“So is it your opinion that this conflict did not cause any stress in the defendant?”

“It did not appear significant to the team.”

“Is it not true, Doctor, that a large percentage of mental
diseases can be attributable to religious and sexual disorientation?”

“I suppose you could say that.”

“It is not true, Doctor, that more than
fifty percent
of cases involving schizophrenia are attributable to these two factors-sex and religion?”

“I believe that’s fairly accurate, yes.”

“So if Aaron Stampler received, let’s say, divergent religious and sexual signals from Shackles and Rushman, this very likely would create the environment in which schizophrenia thrives?”

“Well, I suppose you could say that. ‘Thrives’ might be a bit strong…”

“Fifty percent of all cases …?”

“Well, hmm, yes, I guess I would have to agree with that.”

“But you didn’t consider this radical difference in religious messages to him as significant?”

“We did not see any effect,” Bascott said. “Therefore we didn’t look for a cause.”

“I see.”
Pretty good answer,
Vail thought. “Dr. Bascott, was there ever a time when you had reason to believe that Aaron Stampler’s mother suffered from schizophrenia?”

Venable’s antenna went up.
Where the hell’s he heading now?
she wondered.
Well, all the phone interviews were borderline hearsay—if he gets too far out of line.
She focused on Vail’s interrogation.

“Not… really,” Bascott answered.

“Did you talk to anyone else in Crikside? I mean, did you personally talk to anyone else?”

“Objection, Your Honor. This is all hearsay.”

“All his testimony pertaining to Crikside is hearsay, Judge,” Vail said, holding his hands out at his sides. “If he considered this information in his analysis, then we feel it’s pertinent and open to cross.”

“All right, I’ll let you go on, but tread carefully, Mr. Vail. Restate the question, Ms. Blanchard.”

“ ‘Did you talk to anyone else in Crikside? I mean, did you personally talk to anyone else?’”

“Yes,” Bascott answered. “Her doctor.”

“That would be Dr.… Charles Koswalski?”

“Yes.”

“And what did he tell you about Aaron’s mother?”

Bascott chuckled. “He said that she was lonely-crazed.”

The courtroom erupted in laughter, prompting Shoat to again gavel them quiet.

“Lonely-crazed?” Vail asked. “Is that a specific mental disorder, Doctor?”

“I’m afraid not, sir.”

“What did he mean?”

“Her husband and oldest son were both dead, and when Aaron left she became eccentric.”

“Eccentric?”

“Yes.”

“Is that how he described her? Eccentric?”

“Not in so many words.”

“I refer to my notes, Doctor. Did he describe her as ‘crazy as a full moon dog’?”

More laughter from the gallery. Shoat glared out at the audience and this time they quieted down without the gavel.

“I believe that’s the expression he used.”

“And what were her symptoms?”

“Uh … she was reclusive. Never cleaned the house or cooked for herself, her neighbors took care of her. She did not relate to her peers. Talked to herself. Yelled at people passing the house.”

“Dissociative?” Vail asked.

“Uh, yes.”

“Spatially disoriented?”

“… Yes.”

“Doctor, aren’t these the symptoms of schizophrenia?”

“Well, yes …”

“So would it be fair to say that it is possible that Mrs. Stampler was schizophrenic?”

“Object!” Venable bellowed. “There is no way Dr. Bascott could possibly make such an analysis, sir!”

“Your Honor, we are merely saying that Aaron Stampler’s mother suffered some kind of mental disorder before she died and that should have been enough to raise serious questions about Aaron Stampler’s mental health in the minds of the state’s team. Perhaps enough to follow up by going to Crikside—as the defense did.”

“Your Honor, prosecution moves to have that entire testimony about Mrs. Stampler stricken from the record as hearsay.”

“Your Honor,” Vail shot back, “we submit that the facts concerning her condition are certainly admissible. And it is a
medical fact that her symptoms are indicative of schizophrenia. What’s to object to?”

“I repeat, Your Honor, this is off-the-cuff analysis and it is meaningless.”

“All right, all right. I’m inclined to agree with Ms. Venable’s position here, Counselor. I understand your argument, but since the information is blatantly hearsay I must rule it out. The jury will disregard it. Move on will you, Mr. Vail?”

“Exception,” Vail snapped.

“Noted. Get on with it.”

“I’d like to go back to symbols for a moment. Doctor, will you explain very simply for the jury the significance of symbols. What they are, for instance?”

“Symbolic language is the use of drawings, symbols, uh, recognizable signs, to communicate,” Bascott said. “For instance, the cross is a symbol for Christianity while the numbers 666 are a universal symbol for the devil. Or to be more current, the symbol for something that is prohibited is a red circle with a slash through it. That symbol is recognized both here and in Europe. As a sign along the road, for instance.”

“In other words, symbols transcend language?”

“Yes, but not always.”

“Could a symbol come in the form of words. A message, for instance?”

“Hmm. Possibly. Yes.”

“So symbols can come in many forms, not just drawings or pictures?”

“Yes, that is true.”

“Now Doctor, you have testified that you have seen the photographs of the victim in this case, Bishop Rushman?”

“Yes, I have.”

“Studied them closely?”

“Yes.”

“Were there any symbols on the body?”

“Uhh…”

“Let me put it more directly. Do you think the killer left a message in the form of a symbol on the victim’s body?”

Venable was thinking a question ahead of Vail.
He’s going to make something of the numbers on Rushman’s head,
she thought.
Possibly use it later to discredit Bascott in some way. Or maybe he’s fishing—trying to find out whether we know what the symbols mean.
That was more likely. Venable wrote out the
word “symbols” and “B32.156” on her legal pad and turned it over so no one could read it. But she decided now was not the time to spring it. She would wait until Arrington was on the stand and trap her into admitting the message came from Aaron.

“I can’t say for sure,” Bascott answered. “It appears that the killer was indicating
some
thing but we never figured that out and Stampler was no help.”

“Did he say he didn’t know what the symbol meant?”

“Objection, Your Honor. We have not established that it was a symbol.”

“Sustained.”

“Doctor, we are talking about the letter and numbers on the back of the victim’s head, correct?”

“I assumed that is what you meant. Yes.”

“Do you recall what the sequence was?”

“I believe it said, ‘B32.146.’”

“Actually, ‘B32.156,’” Vail corrected.

“I’m sorry. Correction, 156.”

“And do you believe that this was a symbol left by the killer?”

“Uh. Well, yes, I think we all made that assumption.”

“Did you try to analyze the symbol?”

“Well, we asked Stampler about it.”

“And he professes no knowledge of its meaning, correct?”

“Yes.”

“And that is as far as you took it, correct?”

“We did discuss it with Ms. Venable.”

“When?”

“Early on. I think before we ever talked with Stampler.”

“And what was the conclusion?”

“That it was probably immaterial to our responsibility.”

“Which was?”

“To analyze the patient.”

“Wouldn’t that be a significant piece of evidence in your analysis?”

“If we understood it. It takes years, sometimes, to break through, to decipher all these subtleties …”

“In other words, you really didn’t have time to examine all the facets of Mr. Stampler’s problems, did you?”

“Objection, Your Honor,” Venable barked, jumping to her feet. “Defense is trying to muddle the issue here. The doctor has stated that it might take years to decipher this symbol, as the counselor calls it. We are here to determine this case on the
best evidence available. This line of questioning is completely irrelevant. The numbers could mean anything—maybe even an insignificant phone number.”

“Then let the doctor say so,” Vail countered.

“Rephrase, Counselor,” Shoat said, rather harshly.

“Doctor, do you think this symbol is relevant?”

“Anything is possible.”

“Do you think it is irrelevant?”

“I can’t really answer that.”

“But what do you
think
?”

“Objection! Can we stick to the facts, Your Honor?”

“Yes, Ms. Venable. Objection is sustained. Let’s keep conjecture out of this,” Shoat said.

“Doctor, are you saying that the numbers and letter on the back of the victim’s head probably have some significance, but that you just haven’t figured out what it is?”

“Yes, possibly they are significant.”

“Thank you. Now I believe you testified earlier that the diagnosis of mental diseases is as precise as the diagnosis of physical diseases, correct?”