Murder of Stanley Cohen Part XII

What if the key to uncovering the truth lies in the tiny details of a gunshot wound? This episode of The Murder Book dives headfirst into the intense courtroom proceedings of the Stanley Cohen murder trial, where Dr. Whitley's forensic testimony about the nature of the gunshot wounds and the shifting timeline of Cohen's death sends ripples through the courtroom. With his expert presentation of forensic evidence, the medical examiner transforms the trial into a gripping examination of science under scrutiny.

As tensions rise, Defense Attorney Alan Ross fiercely interrogates Dr. Whitley, challenging the reliability of his conclusions based on lividity patterns. The defense narrative thickens with accounts from neighborhood witnesses who recall seeing a mysterious figure on the day of the murder, raising questions about the possibility of a third-party suspect. Alongside the forensic battle, courtroom tensions flare with disputes over seating and familial dynamics, creating a charged atmosphere where every gesture and word is weighted with significance.

Amidst these legal skirmishes, emotional testimonies bring the personal stakes of the case to light. Witnesses like Sam Smith unravel under pressure, revealing timelines that clash with their alibi narratives, while the introduction of evidence suggesting Joyce Cohen's innocence pushes the boundaries of courtroom conventions. As the drama unfolds, the episode captures the relentless pursuit of justice amidst a backdrop of strategic legal maneuvers and emotional revelations, leaving listeners on the edge as the trial edges towards its climactic conclusion.

Transcript

Speaker 1 1:24

Welcome to the Murder Book. I'm your host, kiara, and this is Part 12 of the Murder of Stanley Cohen. Let's begin. A huge viewing screen was erected opposite the jury box. Everyone knew what would be projected upon it the medical examiner's slides of Stan Cohen's nude corpse. The courtroom filled to capacity and many frustrated onlookers were turned away. Several tried to peer into the courtroom through small glass panes in the door, but the judge dispatched her bailiff, alex Bosque, to keep order in the corridor outside. Alex Bosque to keep order in the corridor outside.

Speaker 1 2:08

That Thursday morning, november 2nd, joskoine looked grim, face swollen, as she had cried all night, and her attorney, mr Ross, said to the judge that the defendant does not wish to be present during Dr Whetley's testimony and slide presentation. And the judge replied that Mrs Cohen does not have to remain but she must waive her presence. So Joyce rose from her seat, she addressed the judge and she was excused, but Gary Cohen and Jerry Helfman remained in the gallery with the other spectators. Jerry had never seen the grisly photographs that would soon dominate the courtroom and she had no intention of looking at them now, but she was determined to hear Dr Wesley's testimony, to know how it went. It was something she had to do. How it went. It was something she had to do.

Speaker 1 3:12

So now a hush descended over the courtroom as the lights were extinguished, leaving only dim illumination over the witness box. The first light was projected on the screen and brought into sharp focus. There, nearly life-size, was Stan Cohen lying on his back on the floor of his bedroom, nude arms and legs spread, equal genitals clearly visible. The eyes were closed, the right eye purplish and swollen. The nose was bloodied, the small mouth slack. The nose was bloodied, the small mouth slack. There was a heavy gold change encircled his neck. There were round cardiomonitor patches still clunked to his chest. Blood pooled on the floor beneath his head.

Speaker 1 4:02

As he stepped into the witness box, dr Whitley looked very neat and composed in his gray suit and he knew that defense attorney Alan Ross was still seething over his change of opinion about the time of Stan Cohen's death. His cross-examination would be brutal. The two men had dueled before and Ross was an excellent attorney, one of the best in the city. Yet in a strange way Dr Whitley was actually looking forward to the contest. The Cohen case was a marvelous professional opportunity for him an important, high-profile case in which the medical examiner's testimony would be controversial and maybe decisive. Such cases were rare and Whitley had reserved an entire year's road of seats so the residents in his training program could observe his testimony. Residents have to learn how to testify at trial, he believed, especially under the kind of blistery cross, alan Ross was sure to deliver. It was going to be some show, but Dr Wedley would start out easy with DeGregory leading him through his background and qualifications, then the autopsy of Stan Cohen and finally his conclusions about the time of Cohen's death.

Speaker 1 5:34

Ignoring the awful picture on the screen, whitley told the jury that he had been with the Dade County Medical Examiner's Office for 12 years, nine of those as deputy chief medical examiner. He was the author of Practical Forensic Pathology as well as 55 book chapters and publications on the subject. He had performed over 5,000 autopsies, about 20% of which involved gunshot wounds. Turning to the autopsy in the Cohen case, whitley used a diagram to illustrate the four gunshot wounds he found on Stan Cohen's head. They were penetrating wounds one a grace that didn't enter the cranium. He showed the jury the stippling pattern of red dots he found around one wound. He made the comment that that was unburned gunpowder. One shot had been fired from intermediate range. And now Prosecutor Deregory wanted to make sure the jury knew just how how devastating these gunshots had been and what was the cause of stan Cohen's death. And he asked Dr Whetley that and he replied gunshot wounds to the head. In this case large portions of the brain were destroyed. There was destruction of vital centers of the brain. The bullets caused this, but by what they struck and the energy Whetley showed the jury the bullet fragments he had removed from Stan Cohen's brain. One fragment was compressed and rounded off and he said that bullets are designed to expand after they hit a target like bone.

Speaker 1 7:49

Despite the dry scientific delivery, the mental image brought shutters to the courtroom. He was called to the Cohen home about 3 pm on March 7, 1986. Dr Worley told the jury to examine Mr Cohen's body and he took numerous slides of the crime scene and of the corpse. The detectives at the scene had told him that the victim was killed around 5.30 in the morning. Months later the investigators changed their minds. They suspected that Cohen had died between 2 and 3 am, not 5.30, they said. But he found nothing to confirm 2 to 3 am as the time of death until he reviewed the deposition of Dr Michael Bowden.

Speaker 1 8:43

In that deposition Dr Bowden stated that if Cohen had been killed between 2 and 3 am and if he had lain face down on the bed until nearly 6 am when paramedics rolled him onto the bedroom floor, there should be visible lividity on the front of his body. You know a broken pattern of reddish discoloration and pale areas. This is what they call contact partner, where the body had pressed down on the rumpled bedsheets after death. According to Dr Botlin, that pattern would have been sufficiently fixed during the three or four hours that Cohen's dead body had lain face down on the bed so that it should still be visible in Dr Whitley's slides taken around 3 pm that afternoon. When he took another look at his original slides, wesley told the wrapped jury he saw just such a pattern. He saw just such a pattern.

Speaker 1 9:46

Dr Whitley turned to the life-size slide projection of Stan Cohen's corpse. Using a pointer he outlined the right side of the body. There are stripes on the right side of the chest and thigh, typical of lying on the right side, and there is contact parlor on the right knee. The body was lying on the right side on sheets for a couple of hours after death. So the jurors and courtroom spectators saw something in the area that Dr Wedley indicated, but was it lividity, as he claimed? How could the jury decide?

Questioning the Timing of Death

Speaker 1 10:27

Watching Dr Wedley waiting for his chance to cross-examine Alan Ross, the defense attorney could only hope that his high-powered experts, dr Michael Baden and Dr Werner Spitz, could convince the jury that what they saw on the slide of Cohen's body wasn't a pattern of fixed lividity at all. Ross watched juror Dr Catherine Poole and pondered her inscrutable face. What was she thinking Now that there would be direct contradiction between the medical experts? Would Dr Poole become, in effect, the jury's expert on the medical evidence Based upon the slides? Dr Whetley concluded I can now narrow the time of death because of the fixed lividity, which takes several hours to appear and become fixed. The body was on its right side for two to four hours before the body was moved. So the prosecutor DeGregory asked is this consistent with the time of death at 5.28 am? And Wedley replied firmly inconsistent. And he asked is this consistent with death between 1.30 and 3.30 am? And Dr Wendley answered consistent with that time frame.

Speaker 1 11:53

At last, defense Attorney Ross took center stage for his cross-examination of his nemesis and he began on what date did you get to reviewing the slides and come to a new opinion regarding the fixed lividity. And Dr Whartley answered on October 20th 1989. That was, of course, after the trial had begun. And so Ross continued with a little bit of sarcasm, you know, beginning to tinge his voice. He said your cursory examination of the body at the scene, is that offered as an excuse as to why you didn't see lividity at the scene? And Welly replied no. On the day of the murder he simply had no reason to make any observations related to the time of death. And in response to Ross's questions he admitted that the scene observation report he prepared contained nothing about lividity. He said to an extent I relied upon a summation of what the investigators told me about the case at the time.

Speaker 1 13:09

So now Ross's tone turned hostile. He said everything now is to an extent right. Just to an extent, dr Whitley. So Whitley knew that worse was coming. So he said isn't it true that your testimony is tailored to fit? And Dr Whitley shut back while Ross was still talking. He said no, I do not draw a conclusion and then make the facts fit the conclusion. So Ross said so the reason for your change of opinion about the time of death is libidity. Is that correct? And he said yes, is that correct? And he said yes. And then Ross said did you know residual libidity during the autopsy? Dr Wedley, and he said no, I may have seen it, but I didn't notice it or make note of it.

Speaker 1 14:00

So Ross took the witness through a series of meetings with homicide detectives regarding the time of Cohen's death and he said you offer absolutely nothing inconsistent with Joy Cohen's statement about the time of death. Did you, dr Wedley? And Wedley said that's correct. And then he said in preparation for your deposition on September 18, 1989, did you review your slides, dr Wedley? And he said yes, I look at the slides, but I didn't project them.

Speaker 1 14:33

And Ross' voice rose and he said did you see any lividity? Dr Wedley, and he said no, no, I didn't. He said so. Are you blind, dr Wedley? You blind, dr Whetley. And at least Whetley and others in the courtroom thought that's what they heard. His face flushed, bright pink, but Ross couldn't shake him. He steadfastly maintained that Stanley Cohen had probably died between 2 and 3 am on March 7, 1986, rather than at 5.30 am as Joyce Cohen claimed. 1986, rather than at 5.30 am as Joyce Cohen claimed. But what would the jury made of Dr Whitley's sudden discovery of lividity on Stan Cohen's body more than three years after his death. Was it simple error or was it simply convenient?

Speaker 1 15:23

At 3.30 in the afternoon the state of Florida rested its case against Joyce LeMay Cohen and it was Alan Ross' turn to lay out the defendant's case for the jury. He began by calling witnesses from the Cohen's neighborhood like Hal and Lane Kendall, who recall being awakened early in the morning of the murder. There was a strange man knocking on doors and ringing bells. They told the jury he wanted money and he told a tale about needing cash to have his car towed or to take his sick father to the hospital. He was a dark man with a Latin-sounding name. After the stranger left, lane Kendall sat up nervously watching the front door, a loaded revolver in her lap, as her young children slept nearby. But none of the neighborhood witnesses had heard gun shots or alarms or sirens that morning.

Speaker 1 16:19

Next Ross paraded experienced police officers and paramedics across the witness stand to testify that they believe Stan Cohen had died only moments before they arrived at the Cohen house about 5.30 am on March 7. His body was still warm when they found him. They said they saw no lividity nor rigor mortis. The blood was wet, not dry, and Joyce Cohen was hysterical, crying a grieving widow. Former Miami homicide detective Steve Vinson had noticed something else. He said I saw a tissue on the front doorstep, on the front porch. It was clearly visible in police photos taken at the crime scene. The tissue paper was white Recall Vinson. He said the same color as the two tiny bits of tissue that clung to the grip of the murder weapon. But by the time ID technician Sylvia Romans went back to the Cohen home to collect tissue samples, the white tissue had disappeared from the front step.

Speaker 1 17:24

After a long break and during the weekend, the trial resumed on Monday November 6. With the jury ensconced in the tiny airless jury room, the lawyers argued motions to the judge. Ross wanted to ask the Miami homicide detectives why they didn't follow up on leads pointing to fugitive Miami attorney Frankie Diaz as a suspect in the case the third-party culpability issue. But he wanted to make sure the detectives would not be allowed to answer. He said we already knew Mrs Cohen was our prime suspect because she refused to let us search the house on the morning of the murder and made us get a warrant. Judge Smith had already ruled that she couldn't come before the jury and Ross didn't want to open the door to it now.

Speaker 1 18:15

While the lawyers debated, an attractive, stylishly dressed blonde woman entered the courtroom and settled herself in a choice seat in the press section, the seat that Jerry Helfman had occupied every day since the trial started nearly a month ago. No sooner was the woman seated than Jerry came into the courtroom. She approached the older woman and asked her to move and she said I'm Alan Ross's mother. The woman replied with a trance of hantere and she had a theatrical air and she said well, I'm Stan Cohen's daughter and I have been sitting here every single day Ever. Her father's daughter, jerry Huffman, was not about to be dispossessed, so Alan Ross's mother moved.

Speaker 1 19:06

The jury returned to the jury box. Tony Pollack, joyce Cohan's business partner in SIC Interiors, took the witness stand. She was a woman who spoke rapidly in a heavy Latin accent. In an animated voice she told the jury how she met Joyce Cohen in interior design classes at Miami Dade Community College, how they decided to go into business together in 1980. And she said we wanted to use all the available sources that Stan had. We wanted to have our company perceived as an extension of the construction company. After a lengthy description of their decorating projects, pollack turned to the last week of Stan Cohen's life. She said that on Wednesday March 5th she and Joyce had worked all day collecting fabric and floor covering samples for a warehouse that SAC Construction was building for Morris Fudinick in Tampa. At 5.30 or 6 that afternoon they went to the SAC Construction office to put together a proposal for interior design of the project. Joyce planned to take the proposal and samples to Tampa for a presentation the following day.

Speaker 1 20:28

Stan remained at the SAC office until around 8.30 pm. Joyce and Stan said goodbye, kissed at the door. After he left, we locked the door, made sure the door was locked and I saw Stan leave in Joyce's jag and Stan left his stand bronco for Joyce to drop. And so attorney Ross prompted did you do anything different that night? And she said yes. We double checked the door to be sure it was locked. I was concerned to be working alone there. The phone rang at least three times. It was Stan. Stan never called like that before while I was there. I got in my car and left. Around 1130 pm Joyce locked the door behind me.

Speaker 1 21:18

If the jurors were left, wondering what Pollack's testimony was all about? The answer was provided by Metro-Dade Police Officer Sylvia, who testified that he was called to the Sack Construction Company office that night around midnight. When he arrived, sylvia said that he found Mrs Cohen alone in the office. She told him that two Latin men had come to the door of the office, but she didn't let them in. She was frightened so she called the police. It was Ross's predicate for the third-party culpability argument. Stan Cohen had been involved with some very bad men, including Frankie Diaz. These men were threatening Cohen and he was frightened. They not his widow murdered Stan Cohen.

Speaker 1 22:12

Russ moved on to the next issue, the state of the Cohen's marriage. On his witness list were several of the Coen's friends, beginning with Stan's pal Edward G Smith. Smith had thinning gray hair. He was a pioneer of self-confidence and he said I met Stan Coen in 1968 or 69, and we became very good friends, skiing together, boating, drinking. We saw each other constantly. We were very, very close friends. I met Joyce when Stan brought her into the Grove into our crowd as his date, girlfriend, future wife. She was a little overpowered with a group filled in on life a long weekend party, exclusive cargo, ski vacations, a mansion, a Christmas party and still more parties in Miami in each other's home. And DeGregory. The prosecutor later asked Smith at one point during his cross-examination it's a very enjoyable lifestyle that you and your wife live? And he answered yes, I'm very happy and proud of that.

Speaker 1 23:32

Defense Attorney Ross led his witness through his recollection of the comments. He said I last saw stan and joyce together on february 1st through 8 1986 in steamboat springs, colorado. I saw stan and joyce at least five days at a skiing uh press ski or dinner. I went to stan and joyce party, large dinner, dancing party for the entire ski club. Joyce and Stan just were, mr and Mrs, wonderful Hosts and Hostess to a gathering of 80 to 100 people. They were lively, they were fun, they danced together. They were just perfect hosts and hostess. They danced together. They were just perfect host and hostess. And he said I skied with Joyce and Stan many times that week. Smith went on. I never saw either of them consuming any drugs. So Ross asked did the conduct of Mrs Cohen cause you to suspect that she was using drugs? And he said there were times that Joyce acted a little hyper or more outgoing than normal. I didn't realize or really know why, what or if anything was causing that and I just don't know. So I would say no.

Speaker 1 24:55

Sitting in the gallery, gary and Jerry, stan's children. They were listening intently to the testimony. They wondered whether Ed Smith was giving a watered-down version of his observations of their stepmother. How could he not have suspected that Joyce was doing coke? Had Smith's strong will, wife Sam convince him that Joyce didn't do drugs. And he said my wife and I went skiing in Europe at the beginning of March to mid-March. We were skiing in Stade when he learned of Stan's death. Skiing in Stade when he learned of Stan's death, I first saw Joyce.

Questions About Travel and Testimony

Speaker 1 25:44

Five or six weeks after Stan's death Joyce came to live with me and my wife. She stayed two or two and a half weeks. I don't think Joyce slept for those two weeks, except when she was physically exhausted. And so attorney Ross asked what were your observations of the emotions and demeanor of joey scohan when she lived in your home for these two and a half weeks, please? And he said it was very difficult to describe and he broke down, mr smith. He said, excuse me, it's very emotional to see what she was going through. He said she would sit on the floor for hours rocking back and forth crying, sobbing incoherently and talking to herself as to why something like this should have happened. Who could do something like this to Stan? And just go on for hours and hours and hours, and he said you couldn't have a coherent conversation with her, and I would get up in the morning and she would be doing these things. I would come home from work and she would be crying. I would go to bed or at night and she would be acting the same way. I don't know how a body can produce so many tears. She could not have been involved.

Speaker 1 27:08

When Smith had finished his testimony, joyce was crying too, and so now it was time for the cross-examination. At the prosecutor's table, there was a hurried conference. Castronakis was taken aback by Smith's performance on the stand, although he had prepared for the cross-examination. He had not anticipated this. A distraught, sobbing witness, a grown man blubbering like a baby, blubbering like a baby, huge tears running down his ruddy cheeks. Castronakis was completely nonplussed.

Speaker 1 27:53

Degregory, prosecutor DeGregory wasn't impressed by Smith's tears, and he whispered to Castronakis let me take him, I owe you one anyway. So he marched to the podium and he said in fact, though, your very close and dear friend was murdered. You didn't get back to Miami until he was already dead a week. And Smith replied that's correct, said it's okay. So, as a matter of fact, during that week's time that you were in Switzerland, you were still skiing, you were still going to these upper-esk ski parties while your friend lay dead. Correct asked this and he said well, mostly because we couldn't get a flight back in time. And so the prosecutor said you're telling us that you couldn't get a flight back, even to comfort, mrs Cohen, is that what you're telling us? And he said well, I had a prepaid trip to Switzerland. We tried to make airplane arrangements to get back and we could not make them. And he sounded defensive when he answered.

Speaker 1 29:08

Next, smith's wife, sam took the stand and Sam Smith had been outside the courtroom while her husband was on the stand, but her testimony echoed his. The Cohen's marriage seemed very good. In December 1985, stan had given his wife a beautiful diamond ring for the wedding anniversary. Joyce was very excited about it. Sam never saw either of them doing drugs. After Stan's death Joyce was distraught.

Speaker 1 29:43

The prosecutors were more interested in Sam's recollections about the European ski trip that they kept the Smiths from Stan's funeral. You extended your trip so that you could do something sightseeing. So the Gregory asked her this you extended your trip so that you could do something sizing. So did Gregory ask her this? And she said well, I say I may or may not have, I don't remember. And he says and my final question of you is you are a travel agent, aren't you? And he said well, part-time travel agent. And he says an unspoken question was hanging in the air Couldn't a travel agent have arranged a quick flight home for a dear close friend's funeral?

Speaker 1 30:43

So next Ross called Patty Bartell, a longtime co-friend and house guest at Wolf Run Ranch on Steamboat Springs, and they asked did you observe any conduct on the part of either that make you believe there was any problems in their marriage? And Burrell replied firmly absolutely not at all. They asked did you ever observe Royce Cohen or Stan Cohen ever using cocaine? And she said never. Bartell described a blissful ski vacation that she and her husband and two sons spent with the Cohen's and steamboat of springs at Christmas 1984. Some days he said I would go skiing and come home and Joyce would have dinner ready and she would have my clothes all washed and ironed, which was embarrassing for me that she would do all this for me, but she did. The last time we saw the Coens, she continued, was the Sunday before his death. We met them at the art short in South Miami and he says well, we walk around, started looking at the different art and Joyce was very excited about Jerry's wedding.

Speaker 1 32:04

So Jerry Helfman groaned aloud from her seat in the gallery. Alan Ross flew to his feet, said your Honor, may we collect to site for a moment? And Judge Smith sent the jury back to the jury room. And Judge Smith sent the jury back to the jury room and he said your Honor, I renew my motion to exclude Mrs Helfman. So the judge addressed Jerry, who was still sitting in the gallery, and he said Mrs Helfman, I think the reason the motion is being made is because you made an audible sound, which I heard as well when the witness just testified. I know that the wedding that was referred to was your wedding. You can only remain in this court if you don't do that. You can only remain in this court if you don't do that. And Jerry said okay, I understand. She didn't seem embarrassed at being single out in the courtroom.

Speaker 1 33:06

So the jury returned and Bartel resumed her testimony and she said we're very excited about the wedding. That's all we could talk about. Jerry at this moment was silent and she said I saw Joyce right after Stan's death. Bartell went on. She was just what you would expect. She was very, very upset. She couldn't believe it. She just sat in one chair. She had his jacket over her. She was like hugging the jacket and I guess it had a scent. So Joyce was watching from the defense table, she was sobbing a little bit and she twisted a tissue in her hands.

Speaker 1 33:53

On cross-examination, castronakis pursued a comment Bartel had made in her deposition. He asked you feel this prosecution is ridiculous? And she said yes, ross saw an opening and he sees it. He knew that Patty Bartel believed in Joyce Cohen's innocence, partly because she knew that Joyce had taken and passed two polygraphs. Since polygraphs are inadmissible in Florida, ross had no way to get his client's test results before the jury but maybe Bartell would do it for him in response to the state's own question.

Speaker 1 34:41

So Ross had one question on redirect Please tell the jury why you feel this prosecution is ridiculous. And before the witness court answered, castronacki was on his feet Objection judge. He gets what Ross had in mind. And the judge said overruled. And Castronacki was adamant. He said, judge, excuse me, I would object and ask for a sidebar for one specific area. So the judge sighed and said okay, uh, you may come to the sidebar. Um, the lawyers approached the bench on the side away from the jury and Judge Smith leaned over to hear them, although neither spectators nor jurors could hear their words. There was no mistaking the waving arms, the agitated features. Abruptly, the lawyers returned to their places. The jury's excused until 1.30 this afternoon, said the judge After the jury filed out of the courtroom. This afternoon, said the judge After the jury filed out of the courtroom.

Speaker 1 35:43

Ross turned back to the witness still seated in the witness box and said Mrs Bartell, tell us in your own words why you think this prosecution in this case is ridiculous. And he held his breath. Would she mention Joyce's polygraph results? He willed the words to come out of her mouth. Castronachis stood by ready to pounce with an objection at any mention of the polygraph tests and Bartel began well, I have been talking to the main people since the beginning and I know what everyone else knows and I don't see the way they see it. I don't understand what has happened to those people, to these people, and I'm only doing what I think is right and being a compassionate person. They are basing their decision on love and hate and jealousy and I just think it's terrible. So attorney Ross couldn't bear it no longer and he said did the fact that Mrs Cohen passed a polygraph examination? And of course Kastronacki cut him off and said objection and the judge said sustained? At this point the judge was probably the only calm person in the courtroom those two hours she said, those two hours I spent with Joyce on March 2nd could not have been fake. I just don't see if the way the prosecution sees it. And after that that was her conclusion. So the witness was excused and after that that was her conclusion. So the witness was excused.

Speaker 1 37:20

And Judge Smith's rule she can give her original answer but not include the polygraph results. But it shouldn't be excluded just because the witness didn't say it first as a reason. Rust argued because I told all the witnesses not to mention polygraphs. I gave her a further opportunity to say why and she didn't mention the polygraph. Judge Smith said so she can answer with her original and prompted answer, but no mention of the polygraph. John Smith was firm.

Speaker 1 38:00

Court recess for lunch. Attorney Ross was undeterred. He said you don't see many chances like this. I haven't given up yet.

Speaker 1 38:09

When trial resumed after lunch, ross tried again. The only reason Mrs Bartell didn't mention the polygraph in response to the court's question is because I told her not to be reiterated to Judge Smith. The problem is this gets into areas not otherwise admissible. Judge Smith explained if she can't answer honestly without the polygraph, can't answer honestly without the polygraph. Mr Ross can't ask the question. If she can answer honestly without the polygraph, you can ask her. Tell us why you think the prosecution is ridiculous. The bailiff brought the jury back into the jewelry box and Ross repeated the questions to the witness.

Speaker 1 39:03

Bartell launched into another impassionate defense, minus the polygraph results. She was a normal person, married to a normal man, living a normal life, and they took pieces out of it and twisted it. She had a great marriage. She had everything she wanted in the marriage. There would be no advantage in a divorce, he said. I have never seen anything to tell me that she's guilty. Tell me that she is guilty. So so, mercifully, judge Smith excused the witness from any other attempts to explain her personal convictions. Alan Ross returned to the council table with a rueful smile, conceding defeat gracefully. The jurors had no idea what had transpired or what they have almost learned about Joyce Coyne.

Speaker 1 40:06

The trial was an emotional roller coaster for Joyce. Some days she seemed composed and confident, others she looked harried, exhausted, depressed. And every day jurors, they tried to make eye contact with her because they were hoping to read the truth in the dark eyes behind the black-rimmed glasses. But when she returned her gaze black-rimmed glasses, but when she returned her gaze Joy's face remained a mask that the jurors couldn't penetrate. The effect was disquieting. To some she appeared defiant, hard, to others simply inscrutable.

Speaker 1 40:54

During her ordeal Joy stayed with Ed and Shu Sampson. Robert Dietrich and Sean had remained behind in Chesapeake, virginia. Neither one wanted to be available in Miami for a last-minute prosecution subpoena to testify at the trial. Call Terry Jacobs, the makeup artist who used to do her face for parties and special events when she was a Grove socialite, it seems so long ago. Would Terry be willing to do her makeup now? Of course she responded come to the studio. She could see that Joyce needed her help. She didn't look so good on the nightly television news, terry thought. But Joyce never showed up for her makeup session. The next morning she called and said she had car trouble Terry never heard from her. Again. Car trouble Terry never heard from her again. Joyce was excused from the courtroom again on Wednesday, november 8. Another slideshow was scheduled and this time it would be conducted by Alan Ross's forensic pathology doctor, michael Bowden, and Dr Battam summarized his impressive professional credentials for the jury and you know Dr Battam for those who do not know, but you have seen him on TV many times, he's board certified in anatomic pathology, clinical pathology, forensic pathology, chief investigator of the 1971 Attica prison deaths, chief forensic pathology for the US House of Representatives Select Committee on the assassinations of Dr Martin Luther King Jr.

Speaker 1 42:56

President John F Kennedy, former chief medical examiner for New York City. Technically he was demoted allegedly because he went into a political dispute with Mayor Edward Koch and at this moment, during this time frame, he was the medical director of forensic sciences for this New York State Police. He had performed over 20,000 medical legal autopsies by that time, mostly in New York time, mostly in New York. And at Ross defense attorney Ross' request, dr Baden launched into an explanation of lividity, rigor mortis, algor mortis, so the cooling of the body after death, how these features help a forensic pathology establish time of death. He made an excellent witness because he is articulate, pleasant, speaking directly to the jury, gesturing, illustrating as he went along, and he helped them effortlessly. Turning to the Cohen case, dr Baden described the information he had reviewed witness statements, depositions, autopsy report and photographs. All he declared supported his conclusion.

Speaker 1 44:29

Stan Cohen died shortly before 5.30 am, ross projected the now familiar slide of Stan Cohen's nude body lying supine in the bedroom floor. He directed Dr Biden's attention to the area where Dr Wedley had seen an interrupted pattern of lividity and Ross asked do you see lividity on the right side of the body? And several jurors leaned forward intently and Biden said no, this is an area of paleness of the photograph, not color of the skin. I said that on the basis of thousands of bodies and photographs I have seen, this is an artifact of the photograph. And so they asked is this pressure parlor on the right kneecap? And Biden said again no, there's some slight discoloration in the middle, but it doesn't have the appearance of pressure pallor. It was caused by the flashbulb. And so Ross said Dr Bowden, do you have an opinion, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, as to when Stan Cohen was killed? And he said yes, I do. He said when. He said within less than an hour before 5.30 am, close to 5.30 am. This opinion takes into account all factors discussed today.

Speaker 1 45:54

So now Prosecutor DeGregory waited patiently through Ross's direct examination of his second medical expert, dr Werner Spitz. Dr Spitz speaks with a very strong German accent. He also has a strong background. He was trained in Geneva. He had at that time 36 years experience as a forensic pathologist. Before he retired in 1988, he had been chief medical examiner of Wayne County, michigan. His practice now was mainly consulting on cases such as this. Like Dr Bowden, spitz saw no lividity in the photographs of Stan Cohen's body. The dusky look of the skin was due to cyanosis, not lividity. His opinion as to the time of Cohen's death he said no reason to believe he died at any other time than 5 or 5.15.

Speaker 1 47:09

On cross-examination, degregory took the witness back through the slides and his own deposition testimony probing for inconsistencies. The exchanges grew loud and angry In a final effort to cast doubt on Spitt's expertise. Degregory said you left Wayne County in October 1988. You retired. The county supervisors thought you spent too much time on outside consulting work rather than time at the Wayne County correct. He said.

Speaker 1 47:35

Well, there was a little bit of story preceding that. And this is when the witness for the first time looked uncomfortable. He said did it have anything to do with your dismissal that you allow police officers to use bodies for gunshot experiments? And Dr Spitz got angry. He said wait a minute, no, no, no, no, no, wait a minute, no, no, no, no, no, wait a minute. And of course defense attorney Alan Ross was on his feet saying objection, your honor, I would like to go to sidebar. So the lawyers huddled near the judicial bench on the side for this from the jury and Judge Smith leaned down to hear them In an urgent whisper.

Speaker 1 48:20

Ross objected vehemently to DeGregory's attempt to impeach Spitz with inflammatory charge and the judge asked DeGregory said do you have good faith basis to ask it? And DeGregory handed the judge a copy of a June 29,. Hand the judge a copy of a June 29, 1989 article from the Chicago Tribune reporting on Spitz's testimony in another trial. In that case, according to the article, spitz acknowledged that he had allowed two or three bodies in the county morgue to be used for gunshot experiments and the judge agreed. He said it's horrible sounding, but why does it have anything to do with his credibility as a witness? Is it Judge. It has everything to do with his competency as a human being, let alone as a medical examiner. This is just outrageous conduct.

Speaker 1 49:18

But in the end Judge Smith agreed with Ross that the information was not proper impeachment material. While the lawyers argued at the bench, the jurors chuckled openly and finally Judge Smith sustained Ross's objection. She said I'm going to ask the jury to disregard that last question. In the jury room the jurors joke about the episode and they said it was a hyperbole and they couldn't imagine that there was any truth to the outrageous allegation. We will continue with this case next week. Thank you for listening to the Murder Book. Have a great week.