By the time Madeleine interrupted the process a little after twelve to let him know she was leaving for an afternoon shift at the clinic, he had reached two conclusions.
The first, reassuringly unchanged from what it had been, was that every piece of evidence against Cory Payne could be explained away, and the switched toilet handle was as convincing proof of a frame job as one could imagine.
His second conclusion, somewhat disconcerting, was that the evidence against Beckert and/or Turlock had the same weaknesses as the evidence against Payne. It was all portable and therefore plantable. Even the items bearing fingerprints—the pen he’d found in the grass in back of the Poulter Street house, the plastic bag at Blaze Jackson’s apartment—could have been acquired in an innocent environment for later use in an incriminating one. In short, although there was no proof of it—no equivalent to the switched toilet handle—it was possible that Beckert was also being framed. It was admittedly a rather farfetched scenario. But the evidence in hand against Beckert wasn’t nearly as solid as it seemed at first glance. In fact, a clever trial lawyer might make it appear very shaky indeed.
For some time after Madeleine left, Gurney remained at his desk, staring out the den window, wondering about the advisability of raising the issue with Kline. It would not be a welcome subject. He decided to speak to Torres first.
The call was picked up immediately.
“Hey, Dave, I was just about to call you. Big morning here, lot of stuff coming in at once. Bad news first. There was no CODIS hit on the DNA from that used condom found near the Willard Park playground. So that’s a dead end. But finding an eyewitness to what went down that night was always a long shot anyway. Now the good news. We got a report from the Albany computer lab on the laptop you found under a mattress in the cabin. Key discovery was a series of searches on brain structure, specifically something called the ‘medulla oblongata’ and the extent of protection afforded by adjacent bone structures. The kind of information—and anatomical diagrams—someone might need if they wanted to drive an ice pick into someone’s brain stem. It looks like a solid link between Beckert and the attack on Loomis.”
Gurney wasn’t sure how solid it was, but it certainly was suggestive.
“And that’s not all,” continued Torres. “The lab sent us a report on the phone that was taped to the bottom of one of the footboards. The call record confirms Payne’s explanation for why he was in the Bridge Street area the night Steele was shot. He claimed he’d gotten a series of texts, setting up a meeting behind the apartment building, then moving it to the other side of the bridge, then canceling it. Those texts were sent from that phone you found in the cabin.”
“Interesting,” said Gurney. “Kline have any reaction to that?”
“He’s a happy man. He says it feels like we’re finally tying the bow on the package.”
Gurney’s idea of a bow on the package would be a credible confession from Beckert. Kline’s use of that wrapped-up image to describe the accumulation of a few extra pieces of portable-plantable evidence seemed to make the search for the perp a postscript. That could turn out to be a major mistake.
Gurney ended his call with Torres and entered Kline’s number.
“David. What can I do for you?” The man’s hurried tone suggested that ‘nothing’ would be the only welcome answer.
“I want to share a concern.”
“Oh?” There was more anxiety than curiosity in that single syllable.
“I’ve been thinking about the evidence that appears to incriminate Beckert.”
“Appears to?”
“Exactly. The evidence against Cory Payne had weaknesses that a defense attorney could have exploited at trial. Successfully, in my opinion.”
“Your point being?”
“The evidence against Beckert has some of the same weaknesses.”
“Nonsense. The evidence against Beckert is overwhelming.”
“That’s what you said three days ago about Payne.”
Kline’s voice was tight and cold. “Why are we having this conversation?”
“So you don’t walk into a courtroom thinking you have more than you do.”
“You’re not suggesting that Beckert is being framed just like Payne was, are you? Tell me you’re not that crazy.”
“What I’m telling you is that your case isn’t the slam-dunk affair you think it is. From an evidentiary point of view—”
Kline cut him off. “Fine. Point taken. Anything else?”
“Hasn’t it occurred to you that there’s too much evidence?” He could picture a half-angry, half-puzzled frown on Kline’s face in the ensuing silence. He continued. “Framers want to make sure their targets look guilty as hell. So they overdo it. I can’t prove that’s what happened here, but you shouldn’t dismiss the possibility.”
“Your possibility is the craziest hypothesis I’ve ever heard. Just listen to yourself. You’re saying that someone framed Cory Payne for the sniper attacks on Steele and Loomis, then framed Dell Beckert for the same attacks? Plus those on Jordan and Tooker? And Jackson and Creel? Have you ever in your life heard of any case remotely like that?”
“No.”
“So . . . you just dreamed up the least likely scenario on God’s earth? And decided to drop it in my lap?”
“Look, Sheridan, I’m not saying I understand what this White River mess is all about—only that it needs to be investigated further. We need a full understanding of who did what, and why. It’s vital that Beckert be located and—”
“Hold on! Hold it right there! Our goal is not a full understanding of anything. I administer a process of criminal investigation, indictment, and prosecution. I’m not running the Ultimate Truth Psychology Club. As for finding Beckert, it’s possible we never will. Frankly that wouldn’t be the worst thing. He can be indicted in absentia. If the case were to end with him seen as a guilty fugitive, that would be an adequate conclusion. A well-publicized indictment can project the same sense of law-enforcement success as a guilty verdict at trial. I’ll just say one more thing. It would be inadvisable for you to go public with your baseless double-frame theory. It would do nothing except create more chaos and controversy—not to mention a loss of credibility for this department and you personally. Our discussion of this topic is over.”
In retrospect, Gurney found nothing surprising in Kline’s reaction. Having the case careen around another curve was simply not acceptable. Kline’s own public image was his ultimate concern. Procedural smoothness was a key goal. Surprises were unwelcome. Yet another course reversal was to be avoided at all cost.
If anyone were going to upend the case once again, Gurney realized he was the one who would have to find answers to the questions raised by his own unlikely hypothesis—the first of which was the most baffling.
Cui bono?
To whose advantage would it be to frame both Payne and Beckert?
55
Despite Hardwick’s sometimes grating skepticism and verbal abuse, Gurney respected the intelligence and honesty that made him a valuable sounding board.
Rather than trying to explain his new concerns by phone, he decided, after checking with Hardwick to make sure he’d be home, to drive to his place in the hills above Dillweed later that afternoon.
The challenging grin that Gurney knew so well was already on the man’s face as he opened the door. He was holding two bottles of Grolsch. He handed one to Gurney and led the way to the small round table in the corner of the front room.