Arkansas Blog: Vance trial, day 4 UPDATE

From David Koon: The murder trial of Curtis Vance in the slaying of KATV news anchor Anne Pressly continued this morning with testimony by LRPD crime scene specialist Stuart Bartlett, who showed the jury grisly photographs taken at Pressly's home Oct. 20, 2008, the day of the slaying. Bartlett was one of three in the crime scene search unit that gathered evidence, including prints and hair samples, at the house.

Vance's defense team, on cross examination, asked Bartlett about the method used in gathering fingerprints at the house.

Testimony didn't begin until 10:15 a.m. because one juror had trouble finding a parking place near the courthouse (there's a teacher curriculum meeting going on).

Circuit Judge Chris Piazza admonished the jury to get in earlier "because it's going to take us until Christmas [to hear the case] if we don't get started on time."

UPDATE:

Former Marianna teacher Kristin Edwards took the stand to testify about her April 21, 2008, rape. (Evidence in that case led to Vance's arrest.)

Edwards said she had just gotten out of the shower that Monday morning before school and was walking through her living room when a man came up behind her and put his hand over her mouth. "He said 'I have a gun, don't do anything, don't look at me, or I'll kill you," she testified. Edwards said the man was angry and loud and pushed her onto her couch face down, where he raped her, saying over and over again that he would kill her is she looked at him and "I know your house."

(Continued on jump)

After the rape, he put her purse in front of her and demanded her money. Edward said she gave him all the money in the purse -- $3 -- and he asked for her ATM card. She said she was between paydays and didn't know how much was in her account, which made her attacker even louder and angrier.

The attacker then pushed Edwards out her back door onto an enclosed back porch and locked her there. When she heard her front door slam, she ran to a neighbors home, but no one was there. She returned to her house through her front door to get her keys and saw that her phone and its charger and a DVD were gone. She then drove to the home of two fellow teachers and called police. She was transported to a Forrest City hospital, where a rape kit was taken and she was given medication.

Edwards said her car had been broken into two weeks earlier and that a GPS unit that she thought contained a house key had been stolen. Asked if her attacker ever struck her, she said no. At that point, deputy prosecutor John Johnson rose to ask Edwards why she thought that was. She answered that it was because she was "100 percent compliant." If she hadn't been, she said, "I would be dead."

Taking the stand just before Edwards was Stan Wilhite, like Bartlett a member of the LRPD Crime Scene Search Unit. He testified about taking prints at the Pressly home and about being called to MacArthur Park two or three days later to collect a paper bag that was believed to have bloodstains on it. He also testified that the unit processed the black Chevy Monte Carlo driven by Vance at the time, removing the seats, etc., and vacuuming for evidence.

Comments

What physical evidence incriminates Vance? I haven't heard anything yet, has it been introduced?

Posted by: OnlyinArkansas | November 5, 2009 02:14 PM

I can't believe the defense didn't object to the rape victim's answer to why she thought she wasn't beaten. I see this on TV all the time on all the Law and Orders. The defense always objects. Judge says "sustained." So it must be objectionable in real life, no?

Posted by: jimmyboy | November 5, 2009 02:22 PM

Physical evidence? Like fingerprints or DNA?

Posted by: Violettae | November 5, 2009 02:29 PM

Everything I know about court proceeding I learned from watching Law and Order and other TV shows --- which is to say I know nothing about court proceedings.

Posted by: Pavel Korchagin | November 5, 2009 02:29 PM

Maybe the first rape victim was allowed to answer the question because of the vastly different outcomes from the two crimes that were allegedly perpetrated by the same person. Seems like a reasonable question to me, but I am no lawyer!

Posted by: Violettae | November 5, 2009 02:34 PM

It's getting pretty obvious that this guy is guilty and he's an insane monster. It's also obvious that he is sick. I think all serial killers have sexual hangups that drive their insanity. This guy has talked about his impotence problems, and everybody from Chikatillo to Daumer couldn't get it up except for little kids or corpses or something equally weird and disgusting.

I don't think Vance's mental illness should get him off the hook. He needs to be locked up permanently and his fellow inmates need to be protected from him, but mental illness is still not taken seriously and still carries a stigma.

The lady with all the dogs... all the crazy ladies with way too many dogs or cats or whatever, are crazy. Larry linked a nice article on the Hoarding Syndrome on last night's open line. They think they are taking good care of their animals. because they are out of their minds. I have a lot more sympathy for these kind of crazies than for the homicidal, violent crazy of Vance, but I was reading a lot of compassionate liberal voices on this blog calling for the dog collector's neck in a noose. She couldn't help it, she's sick.

I guess you'll all get down on me if I die of diabetes or heart disease and leave my dog and family without their breadwinner and cook. I hope I don't get seriously sick (including going insane) around you bloodthirsty animal lovers.

Posted by: Whoscrumdown | November 5, 2009 02:36 PM

The lawyer for man who was executed in Texas for the arson murders of his children believed his client was guilty. Even now that a dozen or so experts have demonstrated the fire wasn't arson, the lawyer insists there was no reason to mistrust the authorities at the time of the trial. It would be hard to see the suffering of the victim and not feel some rage at the person who is accused, even for defense attorneys.

If the defense didn't object to the Marianna witness, they may have lost a significant issue for their client to use on appeal. Maybe they don't watch the Law and Order reruns?

It isn't true that the only piece of physical evidence implicating Vance is a hair found at the scene, is it? It just seems hard to believe that a mentally retarded (or at least limited) man could commit such a brutal crime and not transfer some of the victims blood into his car, home and so on. It is also hard to understand how he wouldn't have left more of himself at the scene. Surly, there is more than a hair.

Posted by: OnlyinArkansas | November 5, 2009 02:36 PM

"Maybe the first rape victim was allowed to answer the question because of the vastly different outcomes from the two crimes that were allegedly perpetrated by the same person. Seems like a reasonable question to me, but I am no lawyer!"

On the other hand, the vastly different outcomes don't show a pattern from the defendant. The first crime demonstrated that Vance doesn't beat his victims. I haven't been following this case closely, was Vance convicted of the first rape?

Posted by: OnlyinArkansas | November 5, 2009 02:42 PM

I can't find a story about his conviction of the first rape. It isn't possible that the victim testified against Vance and Vance hasn't had a trial for that crime, is it?

I's not that I'm some kind of civil libertarian, it's just that if the police did railroad this Vance, it means that there is an rabid murder on the loose. Someone reassure me please.

Posted by: OnlyinArkansas | November 5, 2009 03:34 PM

You folks are barely qualified to watch Law and Order.

Posted by: Sanford | November 5, 2009 04:54 PM

I can't believe folks are citing Law and Order as their authority for how the defense should be responding to the prosecution's direct evidence.

Posted by: ttlms | November 5, 2009 07:29 PM

OnlyInArkansas... they have matched Vance's DNA with that found on the scene in Pressley's house. I wouldn't call that railroading. That's good police work and the bad man's in jail where he belongs.

Posted by: cozmosis | November 5, 2009 08:04 PM

Ttlms, I just hope these bloggers aren't our local attorneys.

Posted by: Sanford | November 5, 2009 08:30 PM

Arkansas Blog

Vance trial, day 4 UPDATE

Comments

Post a comment