The Big Thaw - Donald Harstad [54]
I had a question I just had to ask. “Doc, would either of the victims be capable of any significant movement after the shots were fired?”
“I don’t think so,” he said. “Although Victim Two might not have gone straight down.”
“Dirk Colson,” I said. “The one with two wounds.”
“Right. The first one went well forward, and might not have laid him down immediately. Which may well have been the reason for the second. I would expect him to have been seated or kneeling. Didn’t topple with the first shot. But both wounds came from just about the same angle, in just about the same spot. From the nature of them, not more than a second apart.” He thought for a second. “The scene tells me that they weren’t lying down when they were shot. The angles aren’t right for that, given the clearance. And, if somebody’s lying down, on a floor, for example, the shots would come in the front, back, or sides of the skull, not the top. And the one with the exit wound put the round into the wall. So, no, they were seated or kneeling, or standing. Not lying down.” “Why were you thinking they were lying down?” “That’s common in executions,” said Dr. Peters. “Just as common as kneeling.”
“You think that’s for sure what we have here?” “Now that I’m certain of the contact wounds, and the track … Yes. I should think so.”
Ten
Wednesday, January 14, 1998, 1708
It wasn’t exactly a revelation, but there’s always a certain sense of having sailed over a major hurdle, when the pathologist reaches a definite conclusion.
So, where did that leave us? Well, we were still in the creek, but with fewer holes in the boat.
“The lab results will be in a few days, I hope,” said Dr. Peters. “There have been some problems lately …”
True enough. The state kept cutting the criminalistics laboratory budget, reducing the number of criminalists and analysts every year. There was such a backlog that they were currently unable to guarantee processing marijuana samples within forty-five days, for example. Doesn’t sound like much of a problem, but since forty-five days is the limit for a speedy trial, it meant that a savvy defendant could get you in court before you had any confirmation of evidence. As in “acquittal.”
We would have priority. But it still would be several days, at best, before the toxicology report came back.
“Any real problems with that?” I asked.
“Well,” drawled Dr. Peters, “unless somebody got to them with an aerosol that caused instant paralysis … probably not.”
“There’s no sign of restraints,” I said. “Is that going to give us a problem with the execution approach?”
“No,” said Dr. Peters. “Not at all. The fact that there were no marks, I mean. Marks are caused by very tight restraints, by strong overpressure caused by someone resisting the restraints, or residue left by adhesives. And by length of time.” He shrugged. “It’s like wearing a belt with your trousers. It doesn’t leave prominent marks when you take it off.” He looked at me, and smiled. “Well, with some exceptions, of course.”
“Thanks.”
“Don’t mention it.” He leaned back against a stainless-steel sink. “Don’t forget that many things can restrain. Fear. Surprise. Dominance. The totally unexpected.”
He described a case where a man had shot three women in the lingerie section of a department store. The three had been several feet apart, when the man came in and shot the clerk. He turned, and shot the customer she’d been waiting on, and then walked over to another clerk and shot her. Only the first clerk had died. She’d been his ex-wife. The other two victims had both been rooted to the spot by disbelief.
“He was quick about it,” he said. “If he’d hesitated a few seconds, either of the other two victims probably would have reacted. But he shot all three within two to three seconds.”
“Pretty efficient,” I said.
“Remarkably so. And he never said a word. Lent an aspect of unreality to the whole thing. The other two women said in interviews that they’d been so immobilized by disbelief that they didn