“So death would not have been instantaneous?”
“In my view, no. Though the victim would have been unconscious from the instant that she received the blow causing the skull to fracture.”
“How can you tell that death was not instantaneous, Doctor?”
“I took samples of brain tissue from the victim. These were samples of tissue from the cerebral cortex, the outer covering of the brain near the wounds. Under microscopic examination I was able to detect evidence of hemorrhagic contusions in the tissues on these slides. That would mean that there was hemorrhaging into these tissues after the initial wounds were inflicted.”
“And from this you can tell that the victim was alive for at least a brief period after she suffered the initial wounds?”
“Correct. If the blood pressure had fallen to zero with the initial blow, because the heart stopped pumping, there would be negative blood flow, and no evidence of bruising in these tissues.”
“Doctor, did you have occasion to view the victim’s apartment?”
“I have.”
“And do you have an opinion as to the instrument or instruments which caused the fatal injury?”
“Based on an examination of the death scene, in the living room of the victim’s residence, there is no doubt in my mind. The fatal injuries were caused by successive blows, forcing the head of the victim into the sharp metal corner of a low table in that room.”
Kline has two bailiffs bring the table from Hall’s apartment forward into the well of the court, where Angelo identifies it. This is made of welded wrought iron, patinated to a green luster, with raised edges sculpted in the forms of leaves like sharpened spear tips at the corners. They have removed the heavy glass top from the table for ease of movement, and bring it out separately. Kline asks the medical examiner to demonstrate for the jury how the blows were administered. For this Kline has brought one of the secretaries from his office, a woman who by build and even the color of her hair looks amazingly like Hall.
They have clearly practiced this, as the woman knows precisely where to stand in relation to the table, the moves all choreographed.
“The assailant would have come up behind the victim, like this,” says Angelo. “His hands were placed around the victim’s neck in this manner.” Angelo has both thumbs pressed against the nape of the woman’s neck, the fingers of each hand gripped around her throat until the tips meet near her Adam’s apple in the front.
“We found ligature wounds on the victim’s throat which would correspond to marks that would be left if someone gripped the victim hard in this fashion,” says Angelo.
“Before we move on, Doctor,” Kline interrupts him. “Did you observe an abrasion on the left side of the victim’s neck in the area of these ligature marks?”
“I did.”
“Do you have an opinion as to what may have caused that abrasion?”
“From its location on the neck, and the bruising in the tissues, it is clear that it was caused before death, part of the control wounds when the assailant gripped her throat from behind,” says Angelo. “In my opinion it was probably caused by a ring worn by the assailant, on the third finger,” says Angelo. “Here.” He holds up the ring finger of his left hand.
The state’s inference is unavoidable. The murderer was a married man.
It is only through peripheral vision that I glance the move that makes me shudder. Without thinking, Acosta slides his left hand off the counsel table onto his lap underneath. It is wholly innocent, one of those involuntary reactions, like a yawn. But when I look over, at least five members of the jury, those that I can count as obviously gaping, have noticed this gesture. It is the subtle things in a trial that can be more damning than the evidence.
“You can continue with your demonstration,” says Kline.
Angelo tells his assistant to assume a position on her knees, her head less than a foot from the corner of the table.
All eyes are riveted in the jury box.
“After being knocked to the floor from behind, we believe that the victim landed near the side of the table, roughly in this position,” says Angelo. “Her head was near the sharp edge of one corner. Here.” He points.
“She would then have been dragged the few inches that separated her toward the table. We found heat abrasions on her knees that would correspond to her being dragged on a carpet. The assailant then thrust the victim’s head onto the corner of the table.” He mimics this but stops short with each blow. The image is akin to pictures I have seen from the South Seas: island natives husking coconuts on a sharp piece of bamboo driven into the sand. It has a sobering effect on the jury, some of whom are taking notes.
“Thank you,” says Kline. He has Angelo resume the stand.
“Doctor, in your professional view have you formed an opinion as to how many times the victim’s head was slammed against the table in the fashion you have demonstrated here in court?”
“Based on examination of the body, as well as blood-spatter evidence, I would say between eight and ten times.”
“Can you explain what you mean by blood-spatter evidence?”
“There is often a pattern created by cast-off blood. Usually a trail in the form of an arc, flung onto a target, like a wall or a ceiling. In the usual case, this is the result of blood being picked up on a blunt instrument, for example a pipe, or a heavy stick. As the instrument is swung back in preparation for the next blow, blood on the weapon would be flung off onto, say, the ceiling. By examining the angle of the arc and the number of arcs, it is possible to determine the number of blows struck, the probable force of the blows, and the position of the assailant when each blow was struck.”
“And you can tell all of this from blood found at the scene of Brittany Hall’s apartment?”
“Yes. There was a definite arc of cast-off blood, in this case coming not from a blunt instrument but from the victim’s own head as it was slammed against the tabletop. We found successive patterns of cast-off blood against the living room wall, and on the carpet leading away from the table.”
“So in your medical opinion this was no accidental fall in which the victim struck her head?”
“Absolutely not.”
Angelo offers further opinion that the killer was right-handed, since the blows seemed to be directed more forcefully from the assailant’s right side.
“Do you have an opinion, Doctor, as to how long it would have taken to inflict these particular wounds on the victim, from the first blow to the last?”
“A matter of seconds, less than a minute.”
“So in your opinion it would have been very rapid?”
“Yes.”
“Would the manner of death in the fashion which you have described here be consistent with a victim being taken by surprise?”
“Yes.”
“Would it be consistent with a larger assailant attacking a smaller victim?”
“In my opinion, yes.”
There is no disagreement as to how Hall died. Our own reconstruction experts have concurred with Angelo’s scenario. Lab experts have identified brain fluid on the glass tabletop. The fact that Hall was attacked from behind leads to two possibilities: First, that she was taken unawares by a killer she did not expect. The second is, however, more probable; that she may have said something to the murderer that sent him into a rage, perhaps some dismissive comment while her back was turned. A psychologist called earlier in the state’s case has testified that the circumstances surrounding the crime demonstrate considerable rage on the part of the killer. This is of course consistent with their theory that Acosta attacked her when Hall refused to back off the solicitation charge.