And Never See Her Again (30 page)

"Could he fake the mental tests?" Leon Haley asked.

"I guess anyone could fake it. He would have had to do so from the first grade forward," Dr. Lowrance answered.

"Do you know his mental age now?" Haley asked.

"I can guess, I didn't calculate it, but probably about a ten-year-old. The lowest would be a seven- or eight-year-old," Dr. Lowrance stated.

When Greg Miller stood to address the witness, he concentrated on Franks's abilities to adapt, rather than on Franks's test scores.

Dr. Lowrance admitted he hadn't talked to any of Franks's teachers, nor had he asked Franks how he had been able to function on his own. He had asked about jobs Franks had performed, but he hadn't asked about specific job skills. Dr. Lowrance admitted he had not seen the statement Franks had made to investigators.

It had been a long day. A couple of the jurors rested their elbows on the arms of their chairs and put their heads on their hands. They, as well as almost everyone in the courtroom, were weary. The dry testimony concerning IQ scores, personality tests, and mental evaluations did little to eliminate their drowsiness.

As long as the day had seemed, judge Gill was determined to squeeze every moment out of it, instructing the defense to call their next witness.

Colleen Vincent lived next door to Spencer Williams and his grandmother on North Hampshire in Saginaw. She sat in the witness chair, dressed in a lime green pantsuit, her red hair a blaze under the harsh fluorescent lights. While chewing gum, Colleen explained that she had been present in Spencer Williams's house the night that he had first seen a photo of Richard Franks on television.

"What did Spencer say?" Ed Jones asked.

"I asked if that was the man who got Opal," Colleen began. "He said, 'No."'

Having made his point, Jones passed the witness.

After Lisa Callahan asked Colleen to go over the description of the man Spencer had told her had abducted Opal-including the red ball cap, long hair in a ponytail, and rough face-she asked if the photo Spencer saw on television revealed a clean-shaven, short-haired Franks.

"I believe so," Colleen replied.

Lisa Callahan returned to the prosecution table, pleased that Colleen had given a reasonable explanation of why Spencer hadn't recognized Ricky Franks as the man he saw snatch Opal.

The defense's last witness was Billy Carl Strine. Strine had spoken in the first trial of seeing a little girl and her grandmother at the grocery store next to the pawnshop in Saginaw. Again he explained he had seen a man looking at the little girl-a girl he believed to be Opal-in an inappropriate way.

"Is my client the man you saw?"Jones asked.

"No."

After a few brief questions Leon Haley announced that the defense rested.

Judge Gill excused the jury for the night and requested they be back in the jury room at nine o'clock the following morning to begin another day.

Greg Miller would use the evening to prepare questions for his rebuttal witnesses. He intended to have his experts counter the defense's, and to come out with a guilty verdict.

William Parker was a former police detective who had begun Parker/Jones, Inc., an investigations company, in 1985. His expertise was in interviewing and interrogations, in particular with crimes against children. Well known by both the defense and prosecution, Parker was respected by both.

Greg Miller made a point of having Parker tell the jury he had real-world experience, not just academic theory like Dr. Leo, who had testified earlier. Parker had not spoken to Franks personally, but had conferred with Eric Holden, who had obtained Franks's statement, and he had read the defendant's statement.

Placing a chart on an easel in front of the jury box, Miller pointed out the four types of false confessions introduced by Dr. Leo. One by one, Miller read each of the confession types and asked Parker if they fit Ricky Franks's statement. Parker stated they did not.

Parker-who had interviewed people such as Darlie Routier, a mother convicted of killing her two young sons-reported to jurors that Eric Holden had reached a critical point during his meeting with Franks. When Franks was given the false scenario and had angrily insisted he hadn't committed the crime, Parker explained that was a significant indicator that Franks had told the truth when he admitted taking Opal.

"If you have someone who will admit to anything to make you happy, then when given a false scenario, they will admit to that as well, to make you happy," Parker explained.

"Is it common to blame the victim?" Miller asked.

"Yes, it's common."

"Are they trying to minimize their actions?" Miller inquired.

"Absolutely," Parker responded.

Leon Haley rose to address Parker on crossexamination.

"When we talk academia and practical experience, academia is what teaches us," Haley stated, smiling.

"Yes, sometimes," Parker said.

"You went to classes to learn to be a detective," Haley said.

"Yes, of course," Parker concurred.

Haley's smile faded and his words turned biting. "Why should these people believe anything you say when you have a bias because you're a detective?"

"You're making an assumption. I have no bias here," Parker said calmly.

Audrey Sanderford, who was late for the beginning of the morning session, slipped into the back of the courtroom, hand in hand, with Amber Hagerman's mother, Donna. Donna hadn't had the opportunity to attend the trial of the man who had taken Amber, he had never been identified, but she wanted to be there for Audrey. Donna wanted to give her support to Audrey through yet another emotional time.

Audrey and Donna, along with others in the courtroom, heard Parker state that it was very rare for a person to confess to a crime he didn't commit, and then Parker admitted that under certain conditions there could come a breaking point where a false confession might be made.

"In my experience I've placed a tremendous amount of pressure on people who never confessed," Parker stated.

"You have to be careful. The weaker the mind, the easier the confession," Haley said.

"Not necessarily. I have interrogated lawyers and gotten confessions," Parker said, smiling.

"You haven't gotten one from me, have you?" Haley rebuked.

"Not yet," Parker said with a grin.

Laughter broke out in the courtroom.

The attorney and witness began to banter back and forth as speculative questions were answered with flip responses.

"You know how to mislead people, don't you?" Haley asked.

"Define 'mislead."'

"The law allows you to lie to people, to trick them, doesn't it?" Haley asked accusingly.

"I don't think so," Parker said calmly.

"They lied to him," Haley stated, pointing to Franks.

"It gets down to the definition of `lie."'

"Oh, now you're getting down to Clinton," Haley said as the courtroom again burst into laughter at the reference to the former president.

After a few more questions concerning the difference between interviews and interrogations, Haley asked, "Someone other than my client could have taken Opal; is that not right?"

"Not in my estimation," Parker replied.

When asked why a video or a tape recording hadn't been made of Franks's interview, Parker explained that they were seldom used because suspects were often reluctant to talk in front of the electronic devices. Parker reminded the court that a statement had been taken from Franks and signed by him.

With one last effort to impart to jurors that psychological abuse was rendered on his client during the time he spent with Eric Holden, Haley then passed Parker back to Miller for further questioning.

"Texas is the only state in the United States that requires a written confession," Miller stated.

"That's right," Parker agreed.

"When you told him you thought he had killed Opal Jennings, his reaction was to get up and move to the corner. Was that significant to you?" Miller asked.

"Yes, it was."

"Do you think Ricky Franks killed Opal Jennings?" Miller questioned.

"Yes, I do."

Parker left the stand and took his seat in the section of the courtroom reserved for law enforcement. There he waited, along with courtroom spectators, for the next witness.

Like Parker, Dr. Randy Price, a Dallas clinical and forensic psychologist, was well known to both prosecution and defense attorneys. During his career he had testified for both defense attorneys and district attorneys alike.

The primary objective of Dr. Price's testimony was to present his analysis of Franks's confession. In forming his opinions, Price had read thousands of pages of documents, school files, defense documents, and psychological studies.

On a color-coded chart analyzing Franks's statement, Price pointed out the overwhelming majority of words used by Franks were one-syllable words, some twosyllable, 5 to 6 three-syllables, and none with more than three.

Dr. Price agreed with Dr. Lowrance's assessment and testing of Franks's IQ, but he noted that in Texas three factors must be present in determining mental retardation: the IQ must be below seventy; there must be evidence of defects in adaptive abilities or life skills; they both must have started in childhood. In Dr. Price's opinion Ricky Franks did not meet all three criteria.

"Is the content of the statement consistent with the statement of a person who would commit this type of crime?" Miller asked.

"Yes, the rationalization, blaming of the victim, minimization of his own culpability, raising the child to a pseudoadult status, and in some way being protective of her, are all similar characteristics," Dr. Price stated.

In discussion of Dr. Lowrance's estimated age of Ricky Franks being that of seven to ten, Dr. Price stated that the mental age idea is an outdated concept that was never intended to apply to adults, and shouldn't be used. Dr. Price insisted it was misleading to use a mental-age estimate.

"Can you give a true mental age?" Miller asked.

Using the chart Miller had setup, Dr. Price began his calculations determining that, in his opinion, Franks's mental age was nineteen years, two months.

"Different than ten or eleven, isn't it?" Miller asked.

"And certainly different than seven," Price responded.

Defense attorney Ed Jones attempted to reaffirm Dr. Lowrance's estimations of Franks's IQ and his inability to understand what was happening to him on the night he was arrested. But Dr. Price was confident in his own professional assessment. He remained convinced that Franks was aware of what he told investigators and that he comprehended the implications of his statement.

By 1:30 P.M., on the afternoon of day four of the second trial, both sides rested. All four attorneys were exhausted from the preparations and executions of two trials. None of them wanted to be back in court for a third. They all hoped, some prayed, for a conclusive verdict of guilty or not guilty.

Judge Robert Gill read the charge to the jury and counseled them not to consider all "possible" doubt but, rather, all "reasonable" doubt. As Judge Gill addressed the jury, Ricky Franks sat motionless, devoid of his often-present twitch. He stared straight ahead. Judge Gill then called for closing statements.

Lisa Callahan slowly walked to the center of the courtroom, placing the familiar confession on an easel before the jury.

"In all of the old Western movies, you see a group of men seated around a campfire," Callahan began. "They are seated in a circle of light and around them is nothing but darkness. And there are predators in the darkness. You hear them and you can see the shining of their eyes. You are that circle of light.

"You are people who go to work, who pay your taxes, who care for your children, who try to do what is right. But there are others in our community, others who stand outside, who wait for a moment of opportunity, for a second of lack of attention. Like foxes outside the henhouse, they wait for a moment to steal a chick. What are the odds that this defendant is just such a predator?"

Callahan pointed out the written confession she had set before them and the confessions Franks made in the county jail to four different people. She told the jury they could convict on the statements Franks made in jail alone. Even if they believed the written confession was improperly obtained, they had the evidence the prosecution had introduced.

The assistant district attorney pointed out that Spencer Williams had described events that were basically just like those contained in Franks's statement.

"What are the odds that a person who wasn't present, doesn't know anything about it, would be able to describe that series of events so completely, would be able to describe how many children were playing in a field?" Callahan asked.

Callahan continued with what she termed "incredible coincidence," including that Franks's statement indicated Opal lived in the house near the field. She asked the jury how the defendant would know that.

"There is no question about it. This is one and the same individual that committed the offense. Not only beyond a reasonable doubt, but beyond any doubt," Callahan stated.

In closing, Callahan tugged on the jurors' emotions.

"Ladies, at the heart of who and what we are as women is the idea that we protect life-and not just all life, but particularly new life. And, gentlemen, at the heart and the core of what you are is the idea that you will protect those who cannot protect themselves.

"It is too late for this little one," Callahan said, tears filling her eyes, her voice cracking from emotion as she pointed to the photo of Opal Jennings. "It is too late for her, and we grieve for that as a community. But it's not too late for others. Convict this defendant because he is guilty. Because he committed the crime. Because he did it.

"The state of Texas, the people of Tarrant County, and the family of Opal Jennings will await your verdict."

Callahan's participation in the second trial was over. She could only sit back and hope that her words had touched the jury, had helped to convince them that Richard Lee Franks was responsible for the disappearance of Opal Jennings.