Gambler’s actual name was Henry Hank Spencer Gambler, III. Butterfield was aware that if he continued to hammer away at the full name Henry Hank Spencer Gambler, III it would present to the jurors something deceitful and covert about a person with four names. If he continued to pound at the name it would have the same effect that condemned convicts have when news organizations use their first, middle and last names. It suggests guilt! The timing was perfect, and this was a severe blunder for the prosecution. They played directly into Butterfield’s plan. It was a stroke of brilliance.
The opening statements continued for 20 minutes when the judge recessed the proceedings for 35 minutes. When the courtroom was once more called to order Butterfield acquiesced to the prosecution.
This could possibly be a surprisingly short trial as there were no witnesses with the exception of the night clerk at the Cadillac Motel where Richmond, and the Whitmore brothers spent their nights while in Ogunquit. Although a body does not have to be located in order to convict or acquit, the prosecution would have a fighting chance if they were to produce two bodies. The probability of a conviction when a body is found is the usual decisive factor in any trial.
Under pressure from the cops, Gambler admitted his part in disposing of the bodies with Richmond, but the judge would not allow the jury to hear that evidence.
Butterfield would eventually call on his associate Bob Lowenthal to administer an outrageous and nerve-racking line of questioning - the purpose of which was to create a prompt response from the witness. Swiftly and quickly firing the same question in a rapid series would cause the witness to stammer and eventually waver. Lowenthal was a master at asking the same questions in a continual manner - an attempt at pinpointing the witness and extracting the valid response. The slightest wavering and indecisiveness was met with a determined but non-threatening mention of “Remember! You are under oath! - and we all know the penalty for lying under oath.”
Butterfield, Lowenthal and Martone were intimidating. These three in their multi thousand dollar suits. Butterfield, the down-to-earth person he appeared to be when he first met with Richard Rand now changed. His performance was awe-inspiring, and known to slowly and methodically turn up the heat. He was dressed in a custom tailored western style suit. The hand constructed Austrailian leather boots were one of the highlights of his appearance. His slacks were perfectly tailored - not a wrinkle in the fabric - not an ounce of fat on his 32 inch waist, he was a handsome sonofabitch!
He moved about the courtroom with all the ease of a man who radiated power over destiny. When he approached the jury all eyes were fixed directly into his baby blues. No one in the jury escaped his gaze - and his authoritative awareness. He was a master of the legal language and he was clever enough to use layman’s vocabulary when he addressed the jury. It has taken many trials before he dominated the art of his profession.
Following a thorough investigation, cops in Ogunquit issued a warrant for Doolie Weencer as a person of interest. In an unusual move, the D.A.’s office in Portland gathered enough evidence against Doolie to keep him in their sights. The subpoena compelled him to appear at the trial and advised that failure to appear in Monterey County would be reason to accuse him as a potential suspect.
This was a scheme often used by the police and law enforcement.
“Your Honor! I call Doolie Weencer to the witness stand!” Butterfield announced
“Mr. Weencer! Please tell the court your profession”
“I am the night clerk at the Cadillac Motel, in Ogunquit, Maine” the witness said leaning into the microphone.
“Were you on duty on the night of August 5, 2010?”
“Yes!” the witness stated.
“Do you recall renting a room to the defendant Richard Rand?”
“Yes!” the witness declared.
“Can you identify the person to whom you rented the room?” Butterfield again inquired.
The witness pointed to the person wearing the orange prison suit.
“Let the record show that the witness pointed to my client Richard Rand.” the defense attorney said directing his attention to the jury.
“Was Mr. Richard Rand the only person to enter the office that night”?
“No! there were two other men accompanying him.” the witness said.
“Do you know the identity of the two other men?”
“Yes! It is our policy to list the names of everyone lodging in a single room. They provided identification and one gentleman was Curt Whitmore and the other was his brother Tavis Whitmore.” the clerk stated.
“Are those two men present in this court today?” The attorney asked.
“No!” once again, the witness advised the court.
“Mr. Weencer! How good is your memory?” Butterfield continued the line of questioning.
“I have an excellent memory. Sir!”
The defense attorney continued with his line of questioning, this time, careful not to distance himself from the witness.
“To the best of your ability, can you describe how the defendant was dressed?”
This may have been a mundane approach, but Butterfield was attempting to establish that if Weencer could have been so precise with his description of how the defendant Richmond Rand was dressed it would be a lead-in to a surprise line of questioning to be used later when the witness was recalled to the stand.
“Mr. Rand was wearing a red tee shirt with a bunch of random letters on it - a pair of tan shorts - and opened tow leather slippers.” the witness carried on with the descriptions of clothing the other two men were wearing.
“How can you be so certain that Mr. Rand was wearing a tee shirt with random numbers?” Butterfield asked.
“Whenever I meet someone, I immediately relate the person’s name to a number, color or specific item. In the case of Mr. Rand, I connected the name Rand to that of a typewriter. The Remington Rand typewriter. It’s something I’ve done since I was a kid. it’s called word and name association - a Dale Carnegie course.”
Again, the question may have appeared unexciting and insignificant, but it was an attempt to test the validity of the witnesses memory.
“I have no further questions” the defense declared.
Witnesses were few, and the outcome of the trial will ultimately depend on the hotel night clerk, Richard Rand, Henry Hank Spencer Gambler, III.
The days activities wrapped up around 4:00 P.M. and would resume in the morning. Gambler was taken by the bailiff to a waiting vehicle and transported back to the county jail. Richard Rand on the other hand was escorted back to his home by Ryan Wagner.
Character witnesses were plentiful for Richard Rand. There was not a person in the town who did not benefit from his generosity. As soon as the court concluded for the day a huge number of Rand supporters staked their piece of sidewalk ‘real estate’ with the expectation of being selected as one of 75 court spectators for the day’s proceedings.
With the trial resuming in the morning, Butterfield planned for it to be an extremely exhausting session as he would prove that Richard Rand was innocent of the charge of murder. Most of the firm’s trials lasted on average 3 weeks. They were relentless in their pursuit of justice. With a succession of specialists, the land lines, cell phones, computers, e-mails, fax machines, experts, and personal interviewers, the cost for the Butterfield team to conduct the trial was never an issue. The partners in the firm of Butterfield, Lowenthal and Martone were wealthy beyond their adversaries wildest dreams.
They were in it for the hunt! Self-assured as to the outcome they hardly ever lost a case and the term hardly was not an option! They were going to win this case with an absolute acquittal - or an admission of guilt or better yet, a case of mistaken identity. In the 28 years defending high profile cases they lost only 3 cases out of their well known 238 murder trials. Still, they were never overly confident. In spite of everything, they remained nervous, a
nd when a jury walked back into the courtroom, they buckled at the knees.
This case would test their audacity and daring boldness. The jury has been selected with only 6 men and women chosen by Butterefield and 6 chosen by the prosecution. To make matters worse, the alternate jurors of which there were 6 were also split 3 for the defense and three for the prosecution.
For example, a juror may have given one of the accused a thumbs up, may have made a badly chosen or out of place remark - thus disqualifying them from the jury. Jurors who watched the proceedings on TV or have read a newspaper article when they were cautioned not to show any sign of support or condemnation - doing so would be cause for immediate discharge.
The best scenario would be to have a witness confess to the crime and as a result sanctioning the judge to make an immediate decision on the punishment.
Richmond Rand did make one critical mistake several days after his initial check-in when he boasted to the room clerk that he just won $17.7 million dollars. During a trial, attorneys do don’t want to frighten or intimidate a witness. Their goal is to befriend the witness who will be more likely to have gained the trust of the questioning attorney. However, when in the privacy of their office reviewing the case, everyone is suspect.
During the short recess Lowenthall arranged a pair of significantly large facial photos of both Richard and Richmond Rand. It was the first time jurors were made aware of the twins. Spectators, most of whom were residents of Pacific Grove were bowled over and amazed at the revelation.
Ryan Wagner obtained the close up detailed photo of Richmond from the U.S. military command personnel records unit in Saint Louis. The head shot measured 24” x 32” and from the back of the courtroom, one could easily make out every detail. The likeness was beyond belief to put it mildly.
The photos were identical. An expert in facial recognition was unsure when the defense asked that the courtroom be turned pitch-black at which time the photos were switched. When the lights were tuned up, the skilled professional admitted he could not differentiate one from the other. In his 34 years of facial identification he has never been involved in a case of this magnitude.
In keeping with the rules of evidence, the prosecution was supplied with the photos earlier in the day. A dismal assessment come together at their table.
Now for the coup’ de grace! The investigative effort by Officer Ryan Wagner was about to clear an innocent man. Had it not been for his conversation with Officer James Truslow of the Ogunquit police about the tattoo placed on Richmond’s body, the case would have come to an impasse.
“Your honor, at this time we call Dr. Jeremy Liberty.”
Dr. Liberty delivered Richard and Richmond and until the age of 18 provided care as their family physician.
“Doctor Liberty, can you tell the court what additional evidence you have to indicate the defendant Richard Rand did not commit this crime!” Butterfield continued.
“Following the birth of this incredible set of twins, their mother was concerned that she was unable to differentiate one from the other. In my 42 years of practice, I have never experienced this level of precision in twins. My research has discovered that these boys are only one of three sets of twins ever evaluated with a gene that makes it virtually impossible to make a distinction between the two.”
“Even their fingerprints are so close a match that as recent as 2005 the military requires all twins - whether or not only one enlists - to have a series of identifiable marks placed in their body to assist in identification. This was completed by the introduction of a series of tattoos in an unobtrusive location on the body.”
“In Afghanistan, the U.S. Department of Defense is experimenting with a small micro chip the size of a grain of salt inserted into the tip of the index finger. Similar to that of a pet identification technique.”
“In the case of The Rand brothers, I suggested and their mother agreed to have one of the twins tattooed with a series of two dark brown dots the diameter of pencil lead behind the left ear.”
“Their mother decided on Richmond and this is how she was to determine their identity. One condition upon which we both agreed is that Richmond and Richard were never to be told of the procedure.”
By this time, the prosecution was about to have their head handed to them in defeat.
Doctor Liberty produced a photo of an infant’s ear from behind the head and a close-up photo of two dark dots.
The courtroom erupted into a noisy tone at which point the judge warned about future outbursts.
Doctor Liberty was excused followed by a forensic pathologist who entered into evidence verification photos of the back of Richard Rand’s ears, confirming that following a series of tissue comparison, Richard’s skin has never been surgically altered - either to add or remove a tattoo.
* * *
Butterfield was about to destroy the prosecution. On the brink of financial collapse, California was not in a financial position to allocate more than the salaries of the prosecutorial team - and possibly a few thousand bucks for incidentals.
“Your honor! We re-call Doolie Weencer to the stand.”
Again, Butterfield approached the witness box - this time the “Mr. nice guy” image was stripped from his kind hearted demeanor.
“Mr. Weencer, I direct your attention the two photos on the easel. Please walk to, and kindly point to the person who entered your office on the night in question.” Butterfield instructed.
Weencer stepped from the witness box studied both photos and as if it was an ennie-meenie-minne-mo assignment, glanced at Richard Rand as though enlisting his help and pointed to the image on his left. Not even Richard Rand could tell the difference between he and his brother.
Earlier, following Dr. Liberty’s testimony the court entered into evidence the photograph supplied by the Department of Defense - the one with the tattooed ear - that of Richmond Rand.
“Now, Mr. Weencer! Are you certain this is the person you identified earlier as the person who entered the motel office on the morning of August 5, 2010 morning when he checked out?”
“Yes!” Weencer replied.
This was the point in the trial Butterfield was waiting for. It could go either way, and notwithstanding his years of experience, he was prepared to pull a rabbit out of his bag of tricks if the identification was not in favor of the defense. For the moment it all hinged on the witness choosing Richmond’s photo, thus exonerating Richard Rand. With the witness pointing to the picture, Butterfield asked the bailiff to remove the photo and pass it to the jurors for inspection.
When the jurors reversed the picture, it was the official U.S. Department of Defense photo of Richmond Rand. Butterfield then requested each juror step from the jury box walk to Richard Rand and carefully pull each ear forward. To further validate the procedure a camera man followed each juror displaying the result of the ear search on a large monitor. There was no tattoo or evidence of a mark on either of Richard’s ears.
Again, the court room erupted into a noisy roar - and for the second time Judge Stone cautioned their conduct.
On the basis of Doolie Weencer’s testimony it was proven that Richard Rand was not present in the motel on the early morning of the murders.
Butterfield had proven his case, there was no reasonable doubt and asked the court that the charge of murder and disappearance of the two bodies against his client Richard Rand be dismissed. Furthermore ruling mistaken identity.
Judge Stone promptly affirmed that there was no sufficient evidence on which to convict Richard Rand and so ordered the trial over - and the defendant a free man.
Doolie Weencer played right into Butterfield’s hands and as much as the attorney wanted to embrace him for handing the team the win, there was one more topic which Butterfield chose to explore.
With the trial now over, Doolie Weencer was hailed as an invaluable witness and thanked for having achieved a win for the defense. Evading incrimination and wi
th a sigh of relief, Weencer walked about three steps on the return to his seat when Butterfield was about to furnish an overwhelming conclusion to the murders of the Whitmore brothers.
“Oh! Mr. Weencer! I apologize for any further intrusion, but I do have several more questions!” directing his attention to the judge, Butterfield asked permission to continue the line of questioning.
Judge Stone was curious as to why Butterfield was in need of answers when the trial determined him the winner.
“Your honor! If I may, I need several answers for the record.”
The judge agreed and Doolie Weencer returned to the witness box. By now, he was ashen in color and beads of sweat formed on the top of his bald and trickled down the side of his face.
“Mr. Weencer! Would you say that you are an avid baseball fan?”
“What is the purpose of this line of questioning!” asked Judge Stone.
“Your honor! If the court will allow me to follow through. I would like the record to contain my line of questioning” Butterfield appealed.