The Baby Kate Trial Begins

[XLFD]

In opening statements, the prosecution said Sean Phillips had Baby Kate's clothes in his pocket when he was arrested. But the defense said the baby's mother, Ariel Courtland lied.

That drew the lines for the prosecution and defense. Phillips didn't want the baby, the prosecution said, while the defense claimed Courtland is a liar whose story can not be believed.

Baby Kate lines drawn: Sean vs Ariel: woodtv.com

Phillips, 22, is facing 15 years in prison on charges he unlawfully imprisoned the girl who came to be known as Baby Kate. She has not been seen since the afternoon of June 29, 2011 in Ludington.

"Sean denied he was Kate's father" and wanted Courtland to give her up for adoption, Mason County Prosecutor Paul Spaniola said in his opening statements to the jury. He also told the jury "You may not like" Courtland, who's been visiting Phillips in jail.

Phillips, represented by attorney Annette Smedley, was wearing a red dress shirt and tie, seated directly in front of a number of family supporters.

When Smedley addressed the jury, she said, "You have to be able to see if you can keep Ariel's lies straight." In a previous case, Smedley was Courtland's defense attorney.

Courtland took the stand around 11:35 a.m. as the first witness in the case.

She testified she was "shocked" to learn she was pregnant with Kate, but very excited. Under questioning, she said she had gotten adoption papers and filled them out, but only to appease Phillips -- which Mason County Prosecutor Paul Spaniola pointed out during his opening statements earlier Tuesday morning.

Courtland also testified she lied under oath during the preliminary exam against Phillips in August.

Phillips' parents were subpoenaed and are expected to testify, so they are not in the courtroom.

A jury was seated Monday for the trial expected to last up to two weeks with Mason County Judge Richard Cooper presiding. Jurors will be allowed to ask questions of witnesses during the trial, after the judge screens the question.

http://www.woodtv.com/dpp/news/local/nw_mich/sean-phillips-baby-kat...

 

WMOM also reports: 

"Courtland answered Prosecuting Attorney Paul Spaniola's questions for more than an hour before breaking for lunch, and her testimony included details of her activities on the day that her 4-month-old daughter disappeared as well as the state of her relationship with Phillips and his family. Courtland also recanted testimony she gave during the preliminary hearing last August. She had previously stated that she had not considered giving the baby up for adoption and that the couple's visit to a Department of Human Services office in Grand Rapids was only to use the restroom. Today she verified that she had in fact signed adoption papers and visited the DHS office twice."

 

I think it must be noted that one of the 'suspects', the one on trial, has not lied to the authorities up to this point.  Let's face it, Ariel appears to be a serial liar (as first noted in the Re: April Reynolds thread) and the investigation/prosecution has been flawed throughout for their own insistence that she was never considered to be anything more than a victim. 

Also there is a text message from Ariel to Sean about a year before Kate came up missing asking for money for an abortion for then-fetus Kate.  Sean apparently never gave her the money to do so.  Makes one wonder who would be more likely to get rid of the "nuisance" baby later, doesn't it?

 

Thanks to Leon Hendrix and the WOOD team for their coverage, which includes his up to date Tweets on Twitter, accessible here.  Don't forget to to review the other local coverage provided by the Mason County Press (whose initial story is on this link) and the news crew at WMOM, and add your comments on what's going on right here, at The Ludington Torch, where we won't find you guilty of a reasoned opinion of what's going on.

[XLFD]

Ariel Courtland's testimony finished today with some extra courtroom drama enfolding, along with four other state witnesses testifying.

1) After about a day's grilling by the defense attorney including the reading of about 80 text messages between the two parents of Kate and the contradiction of her prior testimony, Ariel noted she has not been charged with anything, including perjury or interfering with a police investigation.  But with the softball treatment she received as the prosecution's key witness, I doubt whether she will have to worry about PA Spaniola pressing those issues.

2)  After 51st Circuit Court Judge Cooper yesterday chided defense attorney Smedley for being "painfully slow"  (which is ironic, for Judge Cooper to say so), the Prosecutor redirects and asks the same questions he had asked yesterday.  No chiding was noted for this "painfully slow" tactic.

3) Near the end of the testimony, when Smedley pushed Courtland on a point that the missing child's mother could not remember clearly, Courtland testily said: "I don't want to say anything that I'm not sure of." She then sarcastically added, "I'm under oath, remember?"  The prosecutor was right, she is not too sympathetic of a victim.

4) Other witnesses included a neighbor who thought Ariel was a great mom, the 9-1-1 operator, a neighbor who overheard an argument that afternoon (didn't see the baby and contradicted some more of Ariel's testimony), and the initially responding officer, Chad Skiba, who has recently quit the LPD-- that's at least two recent LPD losses-- rats deserting a sinking ship?

5)  During a courtroom break Wednesday afternoon, the prosecutor and defense attorney were heard arguing:
"As an officer of the court, do not challenge my credibility!" Mason County Prosecutor Paul Spaniola shouted to Smedley as he stormed out of the courtroom. 

 

Is this his version of "Respect my authority?"  Let's face it; Paul's credibility is practically nil and he's shown that throughout his tenure as prosecutor since he was fired about 4 years back by the previous prosecutor.) 

[XLFD]

4-19-2012 halftime update:

The prosecution's witnesses continue...(...to show how weak the case is?) after Judge Cooper talks about his pet ducks and gavels court to order:

1)  The next door neighbor, Ellen Montgomery, had a "Walker: Texas Ranger" episode disrupted by a verbal spat between the two Baby Kate parents the day she went missing.  She never saw a baby, heard anything of note, or even knew what Sean Phillips looked like until the news broke. 

This confirms the other witness's version of verbal spats that day, but where is the crying baby in the background?  If you can hear arguing through the wall, do you expect a baby not to hear it in the same small Birchwood Apartment and remain silent?  Another witness that helps the defense team.

2) CPS worker Anne Appledorn comments on Ariel's behavior as 'frantic' when she showed up looking for Kate at the DHS-FIA shortly after Kate went missing and 20 minutes after the LPD was called.   Not much here, but one would believe the prosecution wished to show that Ariel was acting appropriately at that time.  Acting frantic can be caused by concern, or by taking part in something stressful.

3) The paramour of Ariel's mother, Dan Ruba, is the next witness.  Dan has some interesting testimony.  He says Sean had said after military training that he could hide a body without anyone finding it (while drinking, and about no one in particular), but also says that he controlled his temper whereas Ariel did not and had once put her fist through a window in anger.  Nothing solid for the prosecution, but more negatives about their star witness.

4)  One of Dan's friends, Bud Parrish is next who claims Sean had said (about Ariel) "I can't stand her.  I don't want to be with her." and witnessed constant arguing.  One may wonder: if Sean is going to kill someone, why did he not choose Ariel then?

5)  Next April Lange, Ariel's mother takes the stand:  She says Sean is a good dad, she liked Sean instantly, and believes Ariel is deeply in love with Sean.  She also says Ariel doesn't do anything anymore, would only search for Kate at night, and speculated to authorities that Ariel may have thrown the baby in the river.  Yes, this is Ariel's mom.  Let's not forget, Prosecutor Paul visibly angry at Ariel's testimony said that she impeached her previous testimony.

 

Could this at some point develop into some Perry-Masonesque trial where the charges get thrown out against Sean and the focus of prosecution gets placed on Ariel?   Wow.  Stay tuned.

[XLFD]

In the morning's testimony, the next door neighbor's testimony suggests that the arguments between the couple happened during her TV show, which started at 2 PM, and yet records show the police had already showed up around 1:30 PM.  More testimony that allows the defense to poke holes through the prosecutor's case, and establish reasonable doubt.

 

The afternoon saw the following prosecution witnesses come forth:

1)  Samantha Waters, Ariel's best friend testified that Sean ordered food to go from the Wendy's that she works at.  She did not see Baby Kate.  The timeline is being established, but only Ariel has acknowledged that Baby Kate was alive and well that day so far.  Credible?  You judge.

2)  The neighbor of Sean's parents, Christopher Merriman, goes next.  He saw phillips the day Kate went missing.  Without Baby Kate.  The prosecution says 'timeline witness', I say 'assisting the defense's case'.

3)  Abram Hernandez, a long term friend of Sean's is the next witness, arriving in jail-jumpsuit orange.  No he did not get any deals for his testimony, he confirms.  He reports that Sean brought fireworks that day around 2:30 to 3:00 PM.  No sign of Baby Kate once again, and why would you be buying fireworks after or before what he is claimed to have done during that time?  Another net loss for the prosecution; the timeline they are building makes it appear that Sean did not have the time to do anything with the baby-- if in fact he had that baby to begin with.

4)  The second LPD officer takes the stand.  Sgt. Tony Kuster and some of the physical evidence is brought in.  The evidence consists of things found with Sean: a Wendy's receipt, an infant car seat, and a diaper bag.  Also brought forth is some baby clothes in his back pocket, and some shoes with dirt on them.  This shows what?  That he's a dad of an infant and  lives in a very rural area on a private dirt road in a swampy area.  

Kuster notes Sean was not at his parent's house at first, and was left a note.  He called back shortly thereafter and met with them.  If Sean had done something nefarious, would he have kept the clothing in his pocket and clean off his shoes?  Thorough searches of that area by law enforcement professionals, with help from the LPD, did not find any scintilla of foul play or sign of 'unlawful imprisonment'. 

The defense wins another day.

[april]

Love this article.

[april]

And I dont know what Spaniola is doing but he is hurting his case more than helping it.

[masonco]

April

I think he has a reason for hurting his case more than helping it. Does he have any proof of anything after the botched investigation?

[XLFD]

The prosecution has so far shown that 1)  Ariel has lied under oath  2)  The timeline for Sean that day, established by a string of witnesses seeing him do mundane things without Kate, indicates he had no time to get rid of her.  3)  That Ariel was the only one who claims to have seen or heard Kate the day she went missing.  4)  Ariel is combative and capable of doing violent things in fits of anger.

They have made the defendant's case.  But let's keep an open mind about things until the last of the evidence is presented, the last of the witnesses testify.  At this stage, it looks like an incompetent investigation and prosecution, and that probably won't change, but I expect something dramatic to be revealed when the defense witnesses start up.  Just a feeling.

[XLFD]

Speaking of high drama, this just in.  The prosecution minutes ago called Ariel back to the stand with Smedley objecting unsuccessfully.  The PA showed her some of the evidence and she ran from the witness stand.  Smedley then claims the reaction was staged and asked for a mistrial, but before the judge can reply, Sean has  his attorney recant the call for a mistrial.  She's coming back in now...

[Marty Redman]

Great coverage, XLFD and others.  I was looking in on WOOD and the Lud. Daily News to follow this story.  Very diferent versions.  I changed over to here, and WMOM which also has good coverage, MCP to.  It looks to me that the LDN is the best witness for the prosecution with their stilted coverage.  This is a very weak case.  I don't think Judge Roy Bean Cooper would accept it, but I think Defense atty. Smedley should ask for a dismissal after the prosec. rests.

Courtland on stand, runs from court: woodtv.com

[Sweater Cows!]

 Bud Parrish was a civil informant and states witness on 13 marijuana cases back in 2000/1 . He 'set up; 13 of his supposed friends by coming to their houses over the course of about 6 months asking for marijuana. At some point all of 13 people helped him out and found him some or shared some of their own with him. In most cases the amount was less than  1/4 ounce which is about 7 joints or a couple days worth of pot (the cruddy brown compressed mexican weed back then)- the equivalent to a couple bottles of wine or a case of beer to a drinker. Now thirteen potheads( not dealers, just ,heads, who helped a "friend" are felons.

[XLFD]

Thanks for that info, Shrugs, it must also be noted that Chris Merriman had a previous felony conviction and made the same assertion that orange-suited Abram Hernanadez did, about making no deals with the prosecution.  Finks and potential finks are not the best witnesses. 

[XLFD]

Beyond the entering in of some photos and physical evidence of little significance and Ariel's brief time on the stand and away from it, the major event of the day happened with the admission of a note found by MCSO Correction Officer John Long that was found in Sean's clothing while he was taking a bath on July 11, 2011.  This note said: 

“I gave her to a guy along with a list of families that are adopting (addresses). He was to take her to one and they would report that the baby was left on their doorstep but that they wish to keep it.

Go on Parent Profiles.com and get contact info for families in the region.

“Hopefully the profile is still up."  If not then I can find contact info I have when I get back.”

 

Nothing was learned of the authorship of the note or how it got into Sean's effects.  Most telling was Attorney Smedley's cross-examination where it was learned that day was one day after visitor's day, implying that the defense will say a visitor passed it to Sean.  The visitor's of Sean for that day was not discussed.

What bothers me about this note: 

1)  why was it never brought up in the pre-liminary hearing which took place on 8-3-2011, three weeks after it was found by John Long.  They would have had plenty of time to gauge whether Phillips was the author, and to compare it with the handwriting of anyone who may have visited him.  And were there any fingerprints on it?  The absence of Sean's prints on this note would make one believe it could have been planted in the pants by some other person.

2)  if we forego the handwriting expert, and if we presume the note was made by Sean, why was he carrying it in his pocket just after visitor's day (Sunday), the only day he would be able to transfer it out?  More likely he received it the prior day.

3)  presuming he received it the prior day, who passed the note?  Wasn't this visit videotaped?  The drafter talks in the first person, so this should be a quick exercise to figure out. 

4)  could this have been drafted by Sean, another inmate, or a visitor in order to throw the investigation off track?  Let's say Sean did murder Kate, but wanted to cloud the issue by 'accidentally' leaving this note around so that the CO could find it.  Investigation resources would then be drew away from searches of the ground to searches on the internet.  Likewise, he or others may have felt this would be a way of avoiding a felony, by passing it to some anonymous person that would have Kate's best interests at heart.  This cannot be discounted.  Ariel Courtland's birth father stated this opinion himself.

 

I think the prosecution tried to play the jury once again by putting this stuff out just before the weekend so the jurors could mull on it over the weekend and perhaps hear every theory in the books from their friends over the weekend, whether they want to hear it or not.  Will this bombshell be a dud?  Next week, we'll find out.