The Haunting: Memories of a Hometown Murder

I remember it like it was yesterday. The 10 year old boy was standing on the asphalt of the playground at my elementary school. He was staving off accusations that his mother may be a murderer. "I know her. She never would have done anything like that," he'd responded. My heart felt for the kid. While I hadn't had the guts to stick up for him, which is why I kept my mouth shut, I knew the other kids had crossed a line.

I'd heard rumors of the case from my parents talking about what they'd read in the local newspapers. The suspect kind of became my childhood boogeyman, so to speak. Or boogeywoman, I guess. My sister would tell me I needed to be good or she'd get me. Typically at bedtime.

Despite what appeared to be a miscarriage of justice, I really didn't think much more about it after that. Until 34 years later. Then I started thinking about it again. A LOT.

I'm not sure if it was because I'd been watching a ton of "48 Hours" or "Dateline NBC" or if it was because I'd taken three weeks vacation during the Christmas season of 2010 and had waaaay too much time on my hands. Probably a combination of the two. But I recall waking in the middle of the night and not being able to get back to sleep when the thought came to me. Man, this case would really make a great episode. Maybe I could get journalist and fellow Canadian Keith Morrison to take a crack at it?

I'd been classmates of the suspect's son, which was why I was present during the schoolyard interrogation years before. Maybe that, in part, was why I found the case so fascinating. That, and my firm belief that someone got away with murder.

So, I took my retired ex-cop/ex-firefighter buddy to breakfast early one winter morning to chow down on burritos and discuss my vague recollections of the case. He looked at me like I was nuts. I may have, in fact, been suffering from temporary insanity. Or at least obsession. That, I won't deny.

My wife and kids, to this day, accuse me of acting a lot like Tom Hanks' sidekick in the movie "The 'Burbs" during that period.

Let me lay out the highlights of the case for you. (I was fortunate enough to get my hands on some of the original press clippings of the case as well as a book dedicating a chapter to the case from a  librarian who had gone to high school with my sister.) What follows are some of the facts presented in those articles. They have been heavily summarized.

In November 1976, firefighters responded to a house fire. The heat was so intense that it had blown out the home's windows. When they had extinguished the blaze, they found the body of a 34 year old female doctor. She had suffered severe blunt force and other trauma and she had been stabbed 126 times. Despite the fire, there did not appear to be any other signs of a struggle.

The following evening, a police sergeant was summoned to the residence of a local criminal defense attorney. The lawyer accompanied the policeman to the home of his client, another 34 year old woman. She turned over some freshly dry cleaned clothing to the authorities and then led the cop and her lawyer to a dirt pile a few blocks from her home. She unearthed a towel containing a solid metal bar as well as a pair of blood soaked women's gloves and gave an explanation of how they came to be in her possession. The following day, the woman was placed under arrest. Before being taken to the station, she took out a kitchen knife, tossed it across the table and said to the sergeant, "I suppose this is the type of knife you're looking for." She later took a polygraph and was told it showed evidence she was not being truthful about her version of events.

During the trial, evidence was presented that the suspect had been having a "romantic liason" with a local doctor. During the time of their affair, he was also having an intimate relationship with the victim, with whom he shared an office.

The doctor testified that about a year before to the murder, the accused had arrived unannounced at his home and found the victim there. Prior to that occasion, an unknown individual had left a ticket to the symphony on his office desk. The victim expressed interest in attending the event so he bought them two tickets. While at the concert, he noticed that the person sitting in the seat next to his "mystery ticket" seat was the suspect.

The doctor ended the relationship with the suspect several months prior to the homicide. Despite the break up, he received a message from her on his answering service four days prior to the victim's death. He didn't return the call.

The victim received a call from the suspect on the day of her murder.

The accused took the stand at her trial. She testified that on the night of the murder, she couldn't sleep. She drove around the city in the early morning hours, as was her insomniatic ritual, she claimed. While passing the victim's home, she said she noticed smoke coming from the upstairs. She parked two blocks away and walked back to the house. She rang the bell and when no one answered, entered. She looked around, saw smoke, and discovered a lifeless body. Thinking the occupant had been overcome by the smoke, she knelt beside her to assist. That is when she claims she noticed the victim's injuries, which accounts for the blood on her clothing. She added that she may have passed out due to shock. Coming to, her hand unconsciously moved over an object. Thinking it was her handbag, she picked it up. It was the metal bar. Since the fire was now raging and threating to destroy everything, she figured she'd do the police a service and take some of the items she'd found at the scene with her. Then, instead of going directly to the police, she apparently panicked on her way home and disposed of the evidence in the dirt pile.

Her first trial was declared a mistrial. Apparently her words, "this is what you're looking for" had been improperly introduced. So, a second trial was set for the summer of 1977. She was found not guilty due to a lack of sufficient evidence.

So, what do you think? Was justice served?

I poured through the articles. Not sure why I lost interest shortly thereafter. Probably because my vacation ended and I went back to work.

If I could go back in time, knowing then what I know now, perhaps I could try and talk sense into the jury. But, I think I'd rather go back to that day on the playground. I'll never forget the look on her son's face. I wish I'd stuck up for him.