2015-2016 High School Mock Trial Case

State of Connecticut v. Brock Gabriel Suzik

This case has been adapted from a case originally from Missouri.
* This case is a work of fiction. Although the original concept for the case was in part inspired by one or more
real-life legal scenarios, the witnesses, people, events or actions described herein are not based on real witnesses
people, events or actions and any similarity to real witnesses, people, events or actions is unintentional and purely
coincidental. Authors: Mary Johannes; Michael Skinner, J.D., & Brian Johannes

The State of Connecticut vs. Brock Gabriel Suzik

If only shed left her home 30 seconds earlier, or laterIf only shed taken another route
At approximately 11:40 p.m. on the night of October 9, 2014, Linda Bennett, a 34-year-old private practice
attorney who is 36 weeks pregnant, is on her way to the emergency room at Wrightville Hospital fearful that
her unborn child is in danger. While driving east on Pine Tree Parkway, Mrs. Bennett loses control of her car
and plunges down the embankment near Highway 131. Her car comes to a stop after hitting an overpass
support, at which time her airbag deploys. By the time emergency response crews arrive at the scene, more
than an hour has passed and Ms. Bennett is unconscious and in critical condition. She is rushed to the
emergency room at Wrightville Hospital just two miles away where she is immediately treated for her injuries.
Despite the heroic efforts of the rescue crew and hospital emergency medical team, Mrs. Bennetts baby is
delivered stillborn and Mrs. Bennett herself is left paralyzed and unable to speak. She is thought to be suffering
from what is known as locked in syndrome, a condition in which the patient has normal functioning brain
activity, but cannot speak.
At approximately 11:35 p.m. on the night of October 9, 2014, 18-year-old Brock Suzik and his high school
classmates Jamie Ashman and Terri Good enter his car after leaving a party at Club Glee, a Wrightville dance
club popular with area teens. Brock gets behind the wheel and heads west on Pine Tree Parkway to begin his
quest to find the next party spot.
These facts are uncontested. What happened next is a matter of dispute.
Was this a one-car accident in which Linda Bennett lost control? Did Brock Suzik cross the centerline and
sideswipe Linda Bennett causing her car to careen off the road? Was a third, as yet unidentified car
involved?
After a time-consuming investigation, Detective Dylan Morgan forwards his investigation on to the county
nd
prosecutor. Brock is subsequently charged with leaving the scene of an accidenta class D felonyand 2
degree murder for the death of Baby Doe Bennett. Charges for the injuries to Linda Bennett are being held
back pending medical developments.

Students may not refer to the statement of the case at any time in any way throughout the course of the trial. It
is provided as a preview of the case only and contains no facts admissible at trial.
Defendant:

Witnesses for the Prosecution:

Corey Saccharin Medical Doctor
18 years old, senior in high school, passenger in Brock Suziks car
Dylan Morgan police detective investigating the case
Witnesses for the Defense:
Logan Sanders PhD psychology
Alex Langsdorf accident reconstructionist
Terri Good 19 years old, senior in high school, passenger in Brock Suziks car
Included Exhibits:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

Photo of Ms. Bennetts car at scene of accident.

Photo of front end of defendants car taken by police officer after accident.
Photo (partial) of defendants car taken before accident.
Curriculum Vitae of Corey Saccharin, M.D.
Curriculum Vitae of Logan Sanders, Ph.D.
Wrightville Crime Lab paint analysis report
Wrightville Police Department photographic lineup and lineup procedures.
Wrightville Crime Lab fingerprint analysis report
Wrightville Police Department blood alcohol charts.
Wrightville Police Department transcript of interview with Linda Bennett.

Call/text log and phone directory from the defendants iPhone .

Wrightville County Emergency Response system 911 call transcript.
Transcript of voicemail left by Linda Bennett for her doctor.
Wrightville Hospital autopsy report on Baby Doe Bennett.

Formal Criminal Complaint In The Circuit Court for Wrightvillle, CT Judicial District 17

Prosecution
vs.
Brock Gabriel Suzik,
Defendant

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

STATE OF CONNECTICUT,
Case No. 10-CR-1017 EC

CRIMINAL COMPLAINT

The complainant, being duly sworn, makes complaint to the above Court and states that there is probable cause
to believe that the Defendant committed the following offenses:

COUNT I

Charge: Leaving the Scene of a motor vehicle accident. Statute Violated: Connecticut Revised Statute 577.060
Penalty: Class A misdemeanor, except that it shall be a class D felony if the accident resulted in:
(1) Physical injury to another party; or
(2) Property damage in excess of one thousand dollars; or
(3) If the defendant has previously pled guilty to or been found guilty of a violation under Statute 577.060
COUNT II
Charge: Murder in the second degree: Felony Murder. Statute Violated: Connecticut Revised Statute
565.021.1 Penalty: Murder in the second degree is a class A felony and the punishment for second degree
murder shall be in addition to the punishment for commission of the related felony and requested by one of the
parties or the court.

COUNT III
Charge: Driving while intoxicated.
Statute Violated: Connecticut Revised Statute 577.010
Penalty: Driving while intoxicated is, for the first offense, a class B misdemeanor. No person convicted of or
pleading guilty to the offense of driving while intoxicated shall be granted a suspended imposition of sentence
for such offense, unless such person shall be placed on probation for a minimum of two years.

FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE

Based upon the sworn facts, any supporting affidavits and/or supplemental sworn testimony of the complainant, I, the Issuing
Officer, have determined that probable cause exists to support, subject to bail or conditions of release where applicable,
Defendants arrest or other lawful steps be taken to obtain Defendants appearance in court, or Defendants detention, if already
in custody, pending further proceedings. Defendant is therefore charged with the above-stated offense.
SUMMONS

SUMMONS THEREFORE YOU, THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANT, ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to appear on the
20th day of November, 2014 at 9:00 am before the above-named court at to answer this complaint.
IF YOU FAIL TO APPEAR in response to this SUMMONS, a WARRANT FOR YOUR ARREST shall be issued .
WARRANT
To the Sheriff of the above-named county; or other person authorized to execute this warrant: I hereby order, in the name of the
State of Connecticut, that the above-named Defendant be apprehended and arrested without delay and brought promptly before
the above-named court (if in session), and if not, before a Judge or Judicial Officer of such court without unnecessary delay,
and in any event not later than 36 hours after the arrest or as soon as such Judge or Judicial Officer is available to be dealt with
according to law.

Execute in CT Only

Execute Nationwide

Execute in Border States

ORDER OF DETENTION
Since the above-named Defendant is already in custody, I hereby order, subject to bail or conditions of release, that the
above-named Defendant continue to be detained pending further proceedings.
Bail: $1.000,000
Conditions of Release: Forfeiture of US Passport
This complaint, duly subscribed and sworn to, is issued by the undersigned Judicial Officer this 22nd day of
____October, 2014.
JUDICIAL OFFICER: Mykail Skynner
NAME:
TITLE: Assistant Prosecuting Attorney

SIGNATURE: Mykail Skynner

_____________________________

Sworn testimony has been given before the Judicial Officer by the following witnesses:
Wrightsville

COUNTY OF Wrightville
STATE OF Connecticut

STATE OF CONNECTICUT
Plaintiff,
vs.
Brock Gabriel Suzik Defendant

Clerks Signature or File Stamp:

Moe Spitooney
RETURN OF SERVICE I hereby Certify and Return
that I have served a copy of this Complaint upon
the Defendant
herein
named.
Signature
of Authorized
Service Agent:

Howard Taft

Connecticut Revised Statutes

Chapter 577 Public Safety Offenses Section 577.060
August 28, 2014

Leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident.

577.060. 1. A person commits the crime of leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident when being the operator or driver of a
vehicle on the highway or on any publicly or privately owned parking lot or parking facility generally open for use by the public
and knowing that an injury has been caused to a person or damage has been caused to property, due to his culpability or to
accident, he leaves the place of the injury, damage or accident without stopping and giving his name, residence, including city
and street number, motor vehicle number and driver's license number, if any, to the injured party or to a police officer, or if no
police officer is in the vicinity, then to the nearest police station or judicial officer.
1.

For the purposes of this section, all peace officers shall have jurisdiction, when invited by an injured person, to enter the
premises of any privately owned parking lot or parking facility for the purpose of investigating an accident and performing
all necessary duties regarding such accident.

2.

Leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident is a class A misdemeanor, except that it shall be a class D felony if the
accident resulted in:

(1) Physical injury to another party; or

(2) Property damage in excess of one thousand dollars; or
(3) If the defendant has previously pled guilty to or been found guilty of a violation of this section.
(L. 1977 S.B. 60, A.L. 1983 H.B. 287, A.L. 1986 S.B. 450, A.L. 1989 1st Ex. Sess. H.B. 3)
Effective 7-27-89

**Statutes, statute numbers and case law are not accurate to Connecticut. They were the statutes
and case law taken from the original Missouri case with the state name simply changed to
Connecticut. ***

Connecticut Revised Statutes

Chapter 565 Offenses Against the Person Section 565.021
August 28, 2014

Felony Murder
565.021. 1. A person commits the crime of murder in the second degree if he:
(1) Knowingly causes the death of another person or, with the purpose of causing serious physical injury to another person,
causes the death of another person; or
(2) Commits or attempts to commit any felony, and, in the perpetration or the attempted perpetration of such felony or in the
flight from the perpetration or attempted perpetration of such felony, another person is killed as a result of the perpetration or
attempted perpetration of such felony or immediate flight from the perpetration of such felony or attempted perpetration of such
felony.
1.

Murder in the second degree is a class A felony, and the punishment for second degree murder shall be in addition to the
punishment for commission of a related felony or attempted felony, other than murder or manslaughter.

2.

Notwithstanding section 556.046 and section 565.025, in any charge of murder in the second degree, the jury shall be
instructed on, or, in a jury-waived trial, the judge shall consider, any and all of the subdivisions in subsection 1 of this
section which are supported by the evidence and requested by one of the parties or the court.
(L. 1983 S.B. 276, A.L. 1984 S.B. 448 A)
Effective 10-1-84
*No continuity with 565.021 as repealed by L. 1983 S.B. 276.
CROSS REFERENCE:
No bail, certain defendants, certain offenses, 544.671
(2004) Unborn child is a person for purposes of section. State v. Rollen, 133 S.W.3d 57 (CT.App.E.D.).

**Statutes, statute numbers and case law are not accurate to Connecticut. They were the statutes
and case law taken from the original Missouri case with the state name simply changed to
Connecticut. ***

Connecticut Revised Statutes

Chapter 577 Public Safety Offenses Section 577.010
August 28, 2014

Driving while intoxicated

577.010. 1. A person commits the crime of "driving while intoxicated" if he operates a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated or
drugged condition.
1.

Driving while intoxicated is for the first offense, a class B misdemeanor. No person convicted of or pleading guilty to the
offense of driving while intoxicated shall be granted a suspended imposition of sentence for such offense, unless such
person shall be placed on probation for a minimum of two years.

2.

Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection 2 of this section, in a circuit where a DWI court or docket created under
section 478.007 or other court-ordered treatment program is available, no person who operated a motor vehicle with
fifteen-hundredths of one percent or more by weight of alcohol in such person's blood shall be granted a suspended
imposition of sentence unless the individual participates and successfully completes a program under such DWI court or
docket or other court-ordered treatment program.

3.

If a person is not granted a suspended imposition of sentence for the reasons described in subsection 3 of this section for
such first offense:

(1) If the individual operated the motor vehicle with fifteen -hundredths to twenty-hundredths of one percent by weight of
alcohol in such person's blood, the required term of imprisonment shall be not less than forty-eight hours;
(2) If the individual operated the motor vehicle with greater than twenty -hundredths of one percent by weight of alcohol in
such person's blood, the required term of imprisonment shall be not less than five days.
(L. 1977 S.B. 60, A.L. 1982 S.B. 513, A.L. 2014 H.B. 1695, et al.)
(2004) Section applies to the operation of motorized bicycles. State v. Laplante, 148 S.W.3d 347 (CT.App.S.D.).

**Statutes, statute numbers and case law are not accurate to Connecticut. They were the statutes
and case law taken from the original Missouri case with the state name simply changed to
Connecticut. ***

Applicable Case Law

**Statutes, statute numbers and case law are not accurate to Connecticut. They were the statutes
and case law taken from the original Missouri case with the state name simply changed to
Connecticut. ***
Connecticut is one of seven states that penalize harm inflicted against the unborn at fertilization or conception.
It has been determined that a fetus is included in the definition of a person for the purposes of the first degree
murder statute, second degree manslaughter statute and, presumably, the felony murder statute 565.021.1
Murder in The Second Degree.
Courts in Connecticut have interpreted their statutes to include the fetus as a victim for specified crimes.
See State vs. Knapp, 843 S.W.2d 345, 346 (CT, 1992); State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286, 290-91 (CT.
Ct. App. 1997).
The Connecticut statute specifies that the term unborn child includes offspring from the moment of
conception until birth. See CT. ANN. STAT. 1.205.3 (West 1969 & Supp. 1999). The Connecticut
Supreme Court held that this definition applied to both the states involuntary manslaughter statute and first
degree murder statute. See State vs. Knapp, 843 S.W.2d 346 (CT, 1992).
State vs. Knapp In Knapp, the defendant drove across the highway centerline while intoxicated and collided
with a car driven by a woman who was six-months pregnant. See id. at 346. The mother survived, but the
viable fetus died prior to birth from injuries sustained in the accident. See id. The court determined that the
definition in 1.205.3 applied to the involuntary manslaughter statute. See id. at 349; see also CT. ANN.
STAT. 565.024 (West 1999).
State vs. Holcomb In State v. Holcomb, 956 S.W.2d 286 (CT. Ct. App, 1997), the defendant was found
guilty of murdering his girlfriend and her unborn fetus. See id. at
288. The court, consistent with Knapp, held that an unborn fetus was a person for the purposes of the
murder statute. See id. at 290; see also CT. ANN. STAT. 565.020 (West 1999).

STATE OF
CONNECTICUT,
Prosecution
vs.
Brock Gabriel Suzik,
Defendant

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 10-CR-1017 EC

Evidentiary Order

EVIDENTIARY ORDER
Come before this Court counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant and upon hearing motions in limine of both parties,
this Order rules on certain evidentiary motions and resolves evidentiary issues.
Fourth Amendment Issues. Defendant argues that some or all of the evidence obtained by the police
was procured through improper and unconstitutional means, i.e., dependence on unnamed sources. The Court
disagrees. Evidence obtained from an improper and unconstitutional search should be deemed inadmissible.
State v. Winthrop, 419 M.W.3d 645, 652 (1998). Broadly speaking, the fact that a witness providing
information to a police investigation chooses, either for Fifth Amendment reasons or others, to remain
anonymous, does not in any way negate the relevancy or credibility of such information.
In the present case, Officer Morgan had a good faith reason to rely on the information of anonymous
sources and their probative value justifies their admissibility at trial. The Court agrees. Such a ruling does not
preclude opposing counsel from arguing under other grounds, such as hearsay. Consequently, Defendants
motion is DENIED.
Crime Scene Photographs. Defendant also argues that the photographs of the injured mother and
miscarried fetus taken by Officer Rollins and others should be excluded on the ground that they are unduly
prejudicial when compared to other evidence within the case. Evidence may be deemed inadmissible when its
presentation to the jury would be likely to inflame the jurys passions due to its graphic or inflammatory
nature. State v. Quick, 554 M.W.2d 456, 487 (1984). This is the case even when the evidence itself is clearly
relevant to the proceeding. State v. Zannicoco, 324 M.W.3d 766, 784-85 (1997). Due to their graphic and
inflammatory nature, the photographs are deemed inadmissible, and Defendants motion is GRANTED.
th

So ORDERED, this 26 day of October, 2014.

/s/ Judge Hiram T. Walker

Presiding Circuit Judge

JURY INSTRUCTIONS

MAI-CR 3d 302.02 Evidence and Rulings of the Court

You must not assume as true any fact solely because it is included in or suggested by a question
asked of a witness. A question is not evidence, and may be considered only as it supplies meaning to
the answer.
From time to time the attorneys may make objections. They have a right to do so and are only doing their
duty as they see it. You should draw no inference from the fact that an objection has been made.
If the Court sustains an objection to a question, you will disregard the entire question and should not
speculate as to what the answer of the witness might have been. The same applies to exhibits offered but
excluded from evidence after an objection has been sustained. You will also disregard any answer or other
matter which the Court directs you not to consider and anything the Court orders stricken from the record.
The opening statements of attorneys are not evidence. Also, you must not consider as evidence any
statement or remark or argument by any of the attorneys to another attorney or to the Court. However,
attorneys may enter into agreements or stipulations of fact. These agreements and stipulations become
part of the evidence and are to be considered by you as such.
MAI-CR 3d 302.03 General Instructions
The law applicable to this case is stated in these jury instructions and the two instructions that the court read
to you immediately after you were sworn as jurors. All of the instructions will be given to you to take to your
jury room to use during your deliberations.
You must not single out certain instructions and disregard others or question the wisdom of any rule of
law.
The Court does not mean to assume as true any fact referred to in these instructions but leaves it to you to
determine what the facts are.
MAI-CR 3d 302.04 Burden of Proof and Related Matters
The charge of any offense is not evidence, and it creates no inference that any offense was committed
or that the defendant is guilty of an offense.
The defendant is presumed to be innocent, unless and until, during your deliberations upon your verdict,
you find him guilty. The presumption of innocence places upon the state the burden of proving beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty.
Reasonable doubt is a doubt based upon reason and common sense after careful and impartial
consideration of all the evidence in the case.

Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that leaves you firmly convinced of the defendants guilt. The law
does not require proof that overcomes every possible doubt. If, after your consideration of all the evidence,
you are firmly convinced that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged, you will find him guilty. If you are
not so convinced, you must give him the benefit of the doubt and find him not guilty.
MAI-CR 3d 302.05 Unanimous Verdict
When you retire to your jury room, you will first select one of your number to act as your foreperson
and to preside over your deliberations.
You will then discuss the case with your fellow jurors. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but
you should do so only after you have considered all the evidence, discussed it fully with the other jurors, and
listened to the views of your fellow jurors.
Your verdict, whether guilty or not guilty, must be agreed to by each juror. Although the verdict must
be unanimous, the verdict should be signed by your foreperson alone.
When you have concluded your deliberations, you will complete the applicable forms to which you
unanimously agree and return them with all the unused forms and written instructions to the Court.
MAI-CR 3d 331.10 Leaving the Scene of a Motor Vehicle Accident.
As to Count I if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that on or about the 9th of October, 2014, the defendant operated a Motor vehicle on a street
traveled by the public at or near Highway 131 and Pine Tree Parkway, in the County of Wrightville,
State of Connecticut, and
Second, that while so doing the defendant was a party to an accident that caused physical injury and
property damage to another person and
Third, that defendant knew that such physical injury and/or damage in excess of $1000 had occurred, and
Fourth, that at the time of the accident or shortly thereafter the owner of the damaged property and a police
officer were present at the scene of the accident, and
Fifth, that the defendant left the scene of the accident without stopping and giving sufficient information by
which the defendant could be readily identified and located to the injured persons or to the owner of the
damaged property or to the police officer at the scene, and/or then you will find the defendant guilty
under Count I of leaving the scene of an accident.
However, unless you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of the
propositions, you must find the defendant not guilty of leaving the scene of an accident under this instruction.

MAI-CR 3d 313.06 Murder in the Second Degree: Felony

As to Count II, you must consider whether he is guilty of murder in the second degree under this
instruction. As to Count II, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt: First, that the
defendant is guilty of the felony of leaving the scene of a Motor vehicle accident as submitted in jury
instruction 331.10, and Second, that victim was killed as a result of the Motor vehicle accident, and Third, that
Baby Doe was killed as a result of the perpetuation of that felony, then you will find the defendant guilty under
Count II of murder in the second degree.
However, unless you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of the
propositions, you must find the defendant not guilty of murder in the second degree under this instruction.
MAI-CR 3d 331.02 Driving While Intoxicated
As to Count III, if you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt:
First, that on or about October 9th, 2014 at or near Highway 131 and Pine Tree Parkway, in Wrightville,
Connecticut, the defendant operated a Motor vehicle, and second, that he did so while in an intoxicated
condition, then you will find the defendant guilty under Count III of driving while intoxicated.
However, unless you find and believe from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt each and all of these
propositions, you must find the defendant not guilty of that offense.
As used in this instruction, the term intoxicated condition means under the influence of alcohol.

STATE OF CONNECTICUT, )

The parties in the above-entitled action do hereby agree to and stipulate as follows:
1. Both parties waive any and all objections arising under the Constitution of the United States, including (but
not limited to) all objections grounded in First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth and Fourteenth
Amendment rights.
2. Both parties waive any objection as to the laying of foundation for the following expert witnesses and agree
that it is unnecessary to tender the following individuals as experts to the court in their designated expertise:
a. Dr. Corey Saccharin as expert in Medicine and Emergency Room Care.
b. Dr. Logan Sanders as an expert in Neuropyscology.
c. Alex Langsdorf as an expert in criminal procedure and accident reconstruction
d. Dylan Morgan as an expert in criminal procedure and accident reconstruction.
3. The prior stipulation does not apply to the tendering of any proposed expert for areas of expertise beyond
those designated in stipulation 2.
4. It is stipulated that the 2014 Honda Accordlicense plate CT PBK 784is legally registered to Brock
Gabriel Suzik.
5. It is stipulated that all exhibits are authentic and accurate in all respects and no objections as to authenticity
shall be entertain by the Court herein.
6. No objections may be made regarding the transcript of the voicemail message left by Linda Bennett for her
doctor concerning any violation of doctor-patient privilege.
7. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff and shall be beyond a reasonable doubt.
8. The signatures on any witness statement and all documents are authentic.
9. No party may conduct a voir dire of any witness. All expert witnesses were timely disclosed.
10. Motions in limine, Motions for directed verdict, and other such Motions for judgment on the pleadings are
not allowed.
11. The parties may use exhibits in opening statements unless opposing counsel makes a sustainable 403
balance argument.
12. Jury instructions may be used in closing arguments only.
13. The actual time and date of the accident in question was 11:48 p.m., October 9, 2014.
14. All police reports, medical reports, forensic laboratory reports, and other police records have been
authenticated as records of regularly conducted business activity by the appropriate custodian of records.

15. The chain of custody for all police evidence and reports including, fingerprint analysis and line-up
photographs was proper and may not be challenged. Any physical evidence is in substantially the same
condition it was when the crime was committed.
16. All witness statements prepared for trial were prepared under guidance of counsel, signed under oath by the
witnesses making the statement and all such witnesses were given ample opportunity between the completion
of their statements and the start of trial to make any corrections or changes and none have chosen to do so.
17. **Statutes, statute numbers and case law are not accurate to Connecticut. They were the
statutes and case law taken from the original Missouri case with the state name simply changed to
Connecticut. *** This is the law that will be used for this mock trial.

Witness Statement of Dylan Morgan

1
2

My name is Dylan Morgan, and Im a police detective. Im here to give my statement about the events of

October 9 and 10 , and my investigation into the crime. A 911 call came in about

12:10 a.m.an anonymous caller reporting a hit and run. He gave the location of the accident as Highway

151 and Pine Tree Parkway. We went out there right away, but couldnt find a thing. Probably would have

helped if hed given us the right address, huh? Eventually, we made our way to Highway 131 and Pine Tree

Parkway, where we found Mrs. Linda Bennett and her car at the bottom of an embankment. The EMTs were

frantically working on her (apparently, they went to the wrong site first, too). They loaded her into the

ambulance and took off for the ER, and we got to work trying to track down the other driver.

th

th

10

Based on what the caller gave us, we were looking for a dark-colored, possibly gray, Toyota Camryor

11

similar sedanwith Connecticut license plates starting with PBK. We ran the plate options through the

12

system and came up with about a dozen possibilities. The tip mentioned that that car was last seen in a

13

neighborhood north of Pine Tree Parkway, which narrowed it down further. Our first choice was 18-year-old

14

Brock Suzik, since his age most closely matched the description given by the caller.

15

I approached the home and noticed the dark Honda parked in the driveway. Upon closer inspection, we saw a

16

recent-looking scrape and dent on the left front fender. I used the flashlight and checked through the

17

windows, which is how I was able to see the empty beer cans lying around the floor of the back seat. So far,

18

this vehicle was looking pretty good for the LSOA leaving the scene of an accident.

19

I rang the doorbell, and Brock himself answered the door, looking more than a little out of sorts. I identified

20

myself and asked Mr. Suzik if he had been driving the Honda earlier that evening. He was cooperative with

21

us, which always makes it easier, and admitted that he had been driving while he was out with several friends

22

that night, but said that they didnt get into any trouble. I asked him when he'd gotten back home, and he said

23

it had been at "about 2 a.m." I asked if his parents were at home, and he said they were not, that they were in

24

L.A. at his aunt's third wedding. Not that it mattered: Brock is 18 and has achieved the age of majority; he is an

25

adult in the eyes of the law. I asked if his parents had left him at home unsupervised when they went out of

26

town. He said he was supposed to be staying at his friend Jamie's house and that he hoped I wouldn't tell his

27

parents. I saw a stamp on his right hand, and I asked him to show it to me. He complied. It was a stamp from

28

that Club Glee downtown that attracts a lot of kidsparticularly those looking to engage in underage drinking.

29

I spoke with the bartender at Club Glee and showed him a picture of Brock; he remembered serving Brock as

30

many as four beers. He seemed unsteady on his feet, and his speech was slurred. We ran him through a few of

31

the standardized field sobriety tests. These tests are optional, and people are completely free to refuse to take

32

them, but Brock consented. We used the Walk & Turn and the Stand-on-One-Leg tests. These are considered

33

tests for checking divided attention, which is a critical skill when operating a Motor vehicle. If a subject

34

doesnt do well on these tests, then you know he isnt able to function well enough to drive, either. For the

35

Walk & Turn, we ask the subject to take nine steps along a line, heel to toe, then stop, turn, and take nine steps

36

(heel to toe) back along the line. While the subject does this, we are checking his ability to keep his balance,

37

follow instructions, see if hes putting any space between his heel and toe, and whether he steps off the line.

38

Brock was noticeably shaky and off balance, and he couldnt even count to nine, so the results were fairly

39

obvious on that one. With the Stand-on-One-Leg exercise, the subject is asked to stand with his heels

40

together and arms at his side. He should raise one leg six inches off the ground and count out loud until we tell

41

him to stop. For this one, we check to see if he has to raise his arms to keep his balance, if he sways, hops, or

42

puts his foot down. Brock didnt do so well on this one, either, not even making it to the count of five before

43

having to put his foot down.

44

The first complication is that while Brock is underage and should have had no alcohol in his system at all, he

45

was NOT driving at the time these tests were performed. It is possible he'd been drinking at home after he'd

46

gotten back from his night out with friends. I thought this was unlikely considering the quantity of beer cans in

47

the car. If Brock was the driver in the LSOA, I needed to get a BACblood alcohol contentreading right

48

away, before any more time passed.

49

The next step to verify our suspicion of intoxication is always to administer a Preliminary Alcohol Screening

50

test, using the portable Breathalyzer unit we carry in the vehicle. Brock refused to take the test, which wasnt

51

surprising. I told him I would be taking him into custody and bringing him downtown. He was visibly

52

upset by this, and asked for a minute to let his parents know. He made a cell phone call to his parents, but was

53

unable to reach them. He was officially Mirandized, and then I put him in the squad car and took him to

54

headquarters.

55

I submitted an affidavit to the Wrightville County Prosecuting Attorney for a search warrant for two vials of

56

blood to be drawn from Brock Suzik, as well as to obtain his cell phone records and to search his home and car.

57

At approximately 4:45 a.m., October 10, 2014, a judge signed a search warrant for the blood, which was

58

executed at the hospital at 5:28 a.m. The other warrants were granted as well. With the matching description of

59

the car, driver and partial plate, as well as our preliminary assessment of Brocks intoxication, and the probable

60

cause with the empties visible in the car, it was a no-brainer, really.

61

So we were able to get the subjects blood at 5:28 a.m. Even though it was hours after the accident, the results

62

came back at .065. Thats below the legal limit, which is .08, but that doesnt make it completely useless.

63

Under normal circumstances, your blood alcohol level will drop .01 every 40 minutes or so. So if you work

64

backwards, he would have been far above the limit at the time of the accidentperhaps as high as .15. The

65

Wrightville Police Department has a BAC table we use that indicates the number of drinks consistent with

66

various levels of BAC. The .15 consistent with a 180-pound male having had approximately seven beers in a

67

short period of time. Remember, alcohol is a depressantit depresses the central nervous system. In this

68

BAC range, one would expect to see a significant delay in reaction time, significant impairment of gross

69

motor control, staggering, and slurred speech. If Brock was operating a vehicle under these circumstances,

70

he'd have been a serious menace on the road.

71

When we processed the car, we came up with some more interesting findings. We sent the prints we found on

72

the beer cans to the lab, and the fingerprints on five of them were confirmed as being Brocks. You can see all

73

this in the report filed by the Wrightville Crime Lab (WCL). There were other fingerprints on the cans, as well,

74

which ended up matching his friend Terri, the passenger, but the DNA we collected from the saliva on those

75

five cans was also a match for Brock. This is in the WCL report as well. In our interview, Brock denied having

76

had anything to drink before arriving home at 2 a.m., but that story doesn't hold water. He's out with his

77

buddies on a Saturday night and drinks nothing, then gets home at 2 a.m., drinks himself into a stupor, then

78

passes out? I don't think so. I had a warrant to search his home, and no beer cans were found anywhere. Not in

79

the refrigerator, not in the garbage, nowhere. If hed been drinking beer at home, where was the evidence of

80

that? In fact, there was no alcohol in the house at all. He claims hed been drinking Coke while driving, but

81

there were no Coke cans in the car, just beer.

82

We were able to send a sample of paint from the scrape on the Bennett Camry into the lab so the techs could

83

see if there was a match with the paint on the Suzik car. The results came back as being. what was it oh,

84

yeahconsistent with the paint on the defendants car. I was hoping for an absolute 100% YES answer,

85

but apparently paint chip technology is fairly complicated. The way they explained it to me is that there are a

86

LOT of layers of paint on a caryouve got electron coats, primer, color coats, and clear coats. Any time you

87

repair a car or repaint it, you get MORE layers. So, obviously, the more layers you can get to match between

88

the sample and the car, the higher the probability theyre the same. Kind of like fingerprints for cars, you

89

know? They use a fancy spectrometer to shoot laser beams of light at your sample, and then it compares it to

90

the database to see how close they can nail down what car it came from. Our sample wasnt the bestthey

91

called it a partial sample, so maybe it was missing some layers. So the best answer they could give us was

92

that yes, it was consistent with a late-model charcoal-gray Honda Accord or Civic. You can read all this in the

93

official report on the paint analysis from the WCL. Now, the defendant claims this damage was done a week

94

previous, but weve really got nothing that corroborates that story. There are no witnesses from the movie

95

theater where Brock claims it allegedly happened, no claim filed either with the police or with the insurance

96

company, no estimates requested from repair shops, and he didnt even mention it to his parents at the time. In

97

fact, we have a picture from Brock's phone the day before the accident that shows nothing on the front left

98

fender. It was taken at school on Friday 10/08/2014. The timestamp is right on it. The kids were dressed in

99

costumes getting ready to go do some community service at a local grade school. They were all dressed up.

100

Looks like the type of picture these kids would put on that Facebook thing they like so much. Whats important

101

is that there is absolutely NO evidence of a scratch on that car. Looks as good as new. Yes, the light reflects on

102

the front left fender and makes it a little hard to see clearly, and there are shadows, but the crime lab analysts

103

found no visual evidence of a prior scratch.

104

I had the chance to question both of the other passengers in the carTerri Good and Jamie Ashman. Jamie is

105

willing to testify as to Brocks reckless driving that night, his failure to pay attention, and his consumption of

106

alcohol both before and during the drive. He/She is also confident that Brock was aware, or should have been

107

aware, that hed struck another car. This witness may be wound a little tight, but I found him/her believable,

108

with nothing to gain by fabricating a story. The other passenger, Terri Good, has a completely different

109

version of events. But in light of his/her past lying to try and protect this same defendant, I dont find his/her

110

statement to be credible. Especially his/her story about being the one who was doing the texting with Brocks

111

phone! What a hoot. How can he/she not know that we can easily get phone records?

112

Brock himself is a piece of work, too. The jury is not going to warm up to him at all. Hes got a history of

113

reckless behavior and poor judgment. School suspensions, accusations of bullying, and destruction of

114

property. His grades may be decent, and he does appear to have some athletic ability, but his school record

115

reflects a history of impulsive and antisocial behavior. He does have a clean driving record. No tickets, that

116

is. But that doesnt necessarily mean hes a good driverjust that hes never been caught. And based on the

117

text message weve seen, he also lies to his Mother. That isnt going to score him any points, either.

118

Once Mrs. Bennett was stable, the doctors allowed me to interview her. The interview took place on October

119

18, 2014 in Mrs. Bennett's hospital room. Sure, it was atypical, but then a lot of interviews are strange in one

120

way or another. You really cant discriminate against them, you know. If this is how the woman

121

communicates, then thats what you have to work with. Ive interviewed witnesses who spoke different

122

languages, some who used sign language, some with picture boards or letter boards. This was a slower

123

process, but the blinking thing worked OK. I asked some control questions at firstquestions I already knew

124

the answers to. That helped me get a feel for the speed and pacing of her blinking responses. I also intentionally

125

asked several questions More than one time, and I found her answers to be consistent and reliable. I also

126

organized what we call a simultaneous photographic lineup. Yeah, I know that a sequential photographic

127

lineup is preferred, but being short staffed at the Wrightville Police Department, we hardly ever bother to take

128

the additional time to set up a sequential. Besides, Im convinced that a simultaneous photo lineup is every bit

129

as good. I worked hard to ensure that department policy was followed in setting up the lineup. I know that

130

policy suggests that I get a super to sign off authorizing a simultaneous lineup, but my super was not available,

131

and the policy says that is necessary only when possible and, since I only had limited access to Mrs. Bennett

132

because of her medical issues, I did not get my supers initials on the lineup form. No big deal.

133

I followed all other policies in administering the lineup. The suspect was not placed in the first position of the

134

lineup and all fillers generally fit the description of the perpetrator. There were no writings or other info visible

135

on the lineup. I instructed Mrs. Bennett prior to viewing that the suspect may or may not be in the lineup and to

136

be wary that characteristics such as hairstyles, beards, etc. may look different. I asked if Mrs. Bennett

137

understood my instructions, and she indicated that she did.

138

I gave all the proper instructions to Mrs. Bennett, handed her the simultaneous photographic lineup, and asked

139

her if she recognized anyone in the lineup as the driver of the car in the alleged hit-and-run. Mrs. Bennett,

140

through blinking, did not hesitate one bit and selected suspect #4, who was the defendant Brock Suzik.

141

What do I think? I think the kids guilty as sin. I know, the defense says that none of that is proof positive, its

142

all circumstantial, and everything can be explained away. You know what I say? I say, sure, there are

143

coincidences. Sometimes there are even a couple. But if you have to explain away this many findings, well,

144

thats just not a realistic scenario.

145
146
147

Date _____11/22/2014____ _____/s/ Dylan Morgan________

Flora Lichtman Notary Public Notary Seal STATE OF CONNECTICUT Wrightville County My Commission Expires: Oct. 8, 2012
Commission # 16513544

Witness Statement of Jamie Ashman

1
2

My name is Jamie Ashman. I was born on February 29, 1992. That makes me officially 4 years

oldbecause of the leap yearbut 18 years old and an adult in the eyes of the law. I am a senior at

Wrightville High School in Wrightville, CT. I am an outstanding student with a 4.22 GPA. The GPA is above

4.0 because in our system the GPA is weighted for honors courses or

A.P. courses, and, of course, I take only honors courses. I am active in student government, the history club,

the "Scrabble and Tea" club, the National Honor Society, and Science Olympiad. During the summer, I

intern at the Historical Society doing research. I am applying early decision to Princeton University, and

cannot imagine being denied admission. I plan to be a historian and study the development of government in

10

early primitive civilizations.

11

On the night in question, I was a passenger in the backseat of the car driven by Brock Suzik. We had been at

12

Club Gleea typical high school gathering spot, with pointless conversation, anonymous groping, and an

13

abundance of alcohol. A bumbling drunk-fest, to be precise. I didnt even want to be there, but my Mother said

14

I need to get out more. Shes afraid Im becoming a geek, but I keep reminding her Bill Gates was a geek and

15

hes doing pretty well. She and Brocks Mother are friends. Goody for them, but theyve been pushing Brock

16

and me together for years, wanting us to be buddies, which is simply NOT going to happen. Brock is not in the

17

same classes I am. He is not in the same clubs I am. He isn't involved in any clubs, as far as I know. We have

18

NOTHING in common. But Brock was volunteered by his Mother to be my transportation that night;

19

otherwise, I wouldnt have set foot in his vehicle. He is a terrible driver. Do you realize that he failed to use his

20

turn signal four times in the first 15 minutes I was in his car?! And that was on the way TO the club, when he

21

was still sober.

22

Its amusing that HIS story revolves around his exceptional driving skills and his sobriety. Total nonsense.

23

The boy refuses to keep his eyes on the roadconstantly texting, blaring the radio incessantly, and is famous

24

throughout the school for his willingness to consume alcohol both before and during driving. Ask anyone at

25

school, theyll tell you; it is common knowledge. My best guess on that night is that Brock had about ten

26

drinks. That would be fairly common for a night out for Brock. So when we got to the club, we were asked to

27

show identification before entering. Minors are allowed in, but are not allowed to consume alcohol. If you are

28

21, you are given a Club Glee stamp on your right hand that you show to the bartender to order an adult drink.

29

Brock showed his fake ID at the door and got a stamp. I know he paid a lot for the ID. It says he's 22. I didn't

30

hang out with him at the club, and so I never saw what was in his glass, but I saw him at the bar off and on all

31

night, and he always had an adult drink in his hands. Once or twice I think I saw him showing his hand with

32

the stamp to the bartender. I don't think he'd be doing that if he was drinking Dr. Pepper, right? While I have

33

had a few beers over the years, I did not drink in the clubI had no stamp on my handand I didn't drink

34

later in the evening either. I don't react well to alcohol, so I try to stay away from it.

35

We must have been there a couple hours or so, and then Brock said it was time to leave. He said he wanted to

36

head out to find a party, or something to that effect. I looked at my watch, and it was just about 11:30 p.m. I

37

was hoping to get home to catch up on my sleep, but I was totally at Brock's mercy. If he didn't want to take me

38

home, I wouldn't be going home anytime soon. Terri was riding shotgun; I got in the back on the passenger

39

side, and Brock drove. He was putting on his typical display. He was all over the road, and no wonderhe was

40

talking to Terri a mile a minute; the radio was on full blast with the bass on maximum; he was driving with his

41

knees so he could text somebody, making phone calls, zipping past cars left and right, and he was drinking a

42

beer. He was NOT paying attention; he was NOT staying in his own lane; he wasnt even watching where he

43

was going. I spoke up several times, politely pointing out the most obvious deficiencies in his driving

44

technique. But he chose to respond with a most immature gesture. I certainly did not feel safe in that car.

45

We were heading west on Pine Tree Parkway around 11:45 p.m. I know the time because I looked at my watch

46

and calculated how much longer I thought Id have to be stuck with these imbeciles. Brock had just gotten off

47

the phone with a friend of his from New York. I saw another car approaching us, and there was nothing out of

48

the ordinary about her driving. It looked like one of those foreign sedans that are so popular in suburbia these

49

days. I think it was a Camry the Toyota logo on the front is distinctivebut I really cannot be certain. I

50

guess it could have been an Avalon or a Corolla, or maybe something other than a Toyota; but, with my visual

51

acuity, I think I am likely to be correct in stating that the car was a late model Camry. The only swerving at this

52

point was the other car trying to get out of Brocks way. Unfortunately, there was nowhere for the other car to

53

go. The collision was entirely his faultBrock was on the other side of the road, after all. I definitely felt an

54

impact. It wasn't a head-on collision like you'd think. We basically sideswiped the car as it tried to swerve

55

away. If it hadn't swerved, we'd have hit it right on. I'm pretty sure the two cars did make contact, and

56

apparently the poor woman went off the road, though when I turned around I didn't see it. I spoke up, I said to

57

Brock, What was that? I think we hit that car! I heard a thump. I was emphatic about that. There is no way

58

Brock didnt know wed possibly hit something. But no one else said anything; they just acted like nothing

59

happened. Brock just kept on driving, drinking, and speeding. Totally oblivious. He didnt even slow down.

60

Theres simply no excuse. I dont know if he intentionally left the scene or if he was so drunk he had no idea

61

what was happening. Either way, he deserves to be put away for life for what he did to that poor woman and

62

her family. So we stopped at another party, again, typical high school scene. Terri headed straight for the keg.

63

Brock, on the other hand, didnt drink. He seemed distracted, like he knew that hed hit someone and he should

64

call and report it. I thought this was unusual because I was convinced the boy had no conscience, but you can

65

never tell. If I was so certain wed hit something, why did I not call 911 from the party? Thats a good question.

66

Was it my responsibility? Im not sure it really occurred to me, but I guess I was hoping Brock would save his

67

soul and make the call himself. After this party Brock finally dropped me off at home.

68

Brock never mentioned anything to me about someone scratching his car the previous week. If that had

69

happened, hed have taken it in to the shop right away. He is so vain that hed never drive around in a

70

scratched car if he could help it. When talking to Detective Morgan, I remember that I had taken a photo on

71

Friday 10/08/10 at school of Brock and his friends by his car. Of course, I wasnt asked to participate in the

72

community service event, because Im not really part of the group, but I was asked to take the photo with

73

Brocks camera on his iPhone. The light creates a strange reflection off the fender, but I think it is clear there

74

was no scratch on the car from the mystery accident Brock claims occurred the week before.

75

Terri confessing that he/she was the one texting, calling, and drinking and not Brock is just another

76

desperate attempt to score points with Brock. Its pathetic. Terri was in the front seat and undoubtedly had a

77

better view than I. As usual, I was relegated to the back seat in an overt attempt to make me feel like a

78

second-class citizen. Regardless, my lack of positioning is secondary to that fact that Terri was inebriated.

79

His/Her capacity for observation was severely impaired by his/her degree of intoxication. If anything,

80

hed/shed had more to drink than Brock. He/She was polishing off beers and tossing the cans in the back

81

seatoften trying to hit meat an astonishing pace. You cant rely on anything he/she tells you about that

82

night. How could he/she possibly remember? And hes/shes completely predictable. Hes/shes making a

83

habit of this, you know. Someone has informed you about the incident at school last year, correct? Brock

84

vandalized a car belonging to someone unfortunate enough to have been caught smiling at Brocks girlfriend.

85

Little Terri was so quick to step up and try to convince the authorities that he/she did the deed. Right. That

86

boy/girl couldnt figure out how to open a switchblade, much less use one without cutting off his/her fingers.

87

No one bought this story for a minute. Brock ended up suspended for three days. The criminal should have

88

been expelled, in my opinion. Terris plan didnt work, but Im not at all surprised that he/she would try it

89

again.

90

You can expect Brock to say a host of disparaging things about me. He has disliked me as long as I can

91

remember, and I did nothing to warrant that kind of treatment. I just try to stay out of his way, while he

92

deliberately seeks me out to torment me. I wont go into detail; its still too painful to speak about, but what he

93

did to me in front of the entire school body deeply scarred me. Deeply. The boy has no conscience. No soul.

94

Some may think that our history is enough of a reason for me to jump at the chance to get back at him. But I

95

dont stoop to revenge. I am so far beyond that. Why should I expend my time and energy trying to ruin

96

Brocks life? His future holds nothing but small, meaningless jobs and superficial friendships. I dont have to

97

do anything. I can be objective and logical and completely honest, because I have no reason to be otherwise.

98

Date _____11/13/2014____ _____/s/ Jamie Ashman________

99

Flora Lichtman Notary Public Notary Seal STATE OF CONNECTICUT Wrightville County My Commission Expires: Oct.

100

8, 2012 Commission # 16513544

Witness Statement of Corey Saccharin

This is a fascinating case, really. Heartbreaking, to be sure, but complex and controversial as well. No, I was

not Mrs. Bennetts OB-GYN during her pregnancy, but I was allowed full access to her charts, records, and

the transcript of a phone call she left for her doctor. I have spent a great deal of time examining and

researching this information. There is a lot of debate going on as to whether or not the unborn Bennett baby

was killed as a result of the car accident, or if he was already deceased before the collision occurred. After

reviewing her OB history and the patient record from the pregnancy, I can only consider the fetus to have

been alive up to the point of the accident. I dont see how anyone can say with any degree of certainty, based

on the information that we have, that the baby was already dead. The autopsy report confirms my opinion.

10

Not only was the baby alive at the time of the accident, the baby is likely to have lived had prompt medical

11

attention been received.

12

Mrs. Bennett had excellent prenatal care, kept every appointment, and the doctor notes from each appointment

13

indicate a normal, healthy pregnancy and a healthy fetus developing as expected. My understanding is that on

14

the evening of the incident, Mrs. Bennett was concerned because she hadnt felt her baby moving. The

15

transcript of her call to her doctor confirms this. She was afraid the baby was in danger. On her call to the

16

doctor, she was quite distressed, asking, What if the cord is wrapped around his neck? What if hes in trouble?

17

I have a really, really bad feeling about this! On the surface, that sounds terrible, and Im sure Mrs. Bennett

18

was truly frightened. But the patient had a history of calls just like this onecontacting her doctor because

19

she thought the baby wasnt moving enough, or not moving at all, afraid he was dead.

20

Mrs. Bennett was a high strung, excitable woman, and this was her first pregnancy. But regardless of that, the

21

record shows that her doctor always took her concerns very seriously. The doctor consistently instructed Mrs.

22

Bennett how to encourage movement from the fetus drinking something very cold, waiting about 10-15

23

minutes, then lying down on her left side. This usually results in an increase in fetal movement. This

24

particular process worked several times, and Mrs. Bennett would calm down and be fine. Other times, when

25

there still was not enough movement to allay her fears, the doctor instructed Mrs. Bennett to come in to the

26

office. The ultrasound machine and other medical equipment revealed that the baby was in perfect health,

27

with a good heart rate.

28

Part of the problem, I believe, was the patients size. With a BMI of 30, she was considered to be clinically

29

obese, even before she became pregnant. Its not at all uncommon for larger women to complain that they

30

dont feel their baby moving. The obesity decreases the ability of the Mother to feel distinct movements.

31

You must keep in mind that its normal for fetal movement to gradually decrease the further along in the

32

pregnancy. At 36 weeks, there is a significant decrease in hard kicking because theres just not as much

33

room in there anymore. The gymnastic style somersaults and turns and flips become impossible as the baby

34

gets bigger. At this point, Mothers often worry because their babies dont seem as active as they once were.

35

But this isnt indicative of anything dangerous its completely normal and natural. Were also talking

36

about a woman very close to her due date. Fetal movement slows down considerably as the Mother gets

37

ready to deliver. The baby drops, or descends into the pelvic cavity, and the baby calms down as it prepares

38

to be born. Mrs. Bennett was just days from her anticipated due date, and she could have delivered at any

39

time. Its entirely possible that the baby was suddenly so quiet because labor was imminent.

40

From the patient record, Im seeing that this was Mrs. Bennetts first pregnancy, and she was quite nervous as

41

well, as evidenced by her history of frantic calls to her doctor regarding the babys lack of movement. Never

42

once in any of these instances was anything found to be wrong with the fetus. There is no reason to think that

43

this last occasion was different in any way. The baby was healthy, and the Mother had no complications or

44

symptoms that would increase risk to the childno hypertension, no diabetes, no bleeding or abdominal pain.

45

There were actually many legitimate reasons for the decreased fetal movement, including the size of the

46

Mother, the size of baby and decreased space inside the uterus, and the fact that the pregnancy was very

47

advanced and labor could have begun at any time.

48

After an intensive review of the patient chart and all doctor notes from Mrs. Bennetts emergency room

49

admission, its apparent that she was attended to in a timely manner and all care provided was done according

50

to normal industry standards.

51

She was brought into the ER on a back board with a neck collar onobviously the EMTs suspected a spinal

52

cord injury right from the start. She had also been intubated in the field, and the EMTs were bagging her.

53

The techs told us she had been found in the vehicle in a supine position, which immediately alerted them to the

54

possibility of fetal hypoxia. She was transported on her left side, and once she was inside the hospital, they

55

quickly tilted her back board slightly to deflect the weight of the uterus off of her great vessels.

56

The resident on duty gave a quick verbal full body assessment, which a nurse documented as it was dictated.

57

Mrs. Bennetts clothes were cut off and they placed her on a cardiac monitor to get vital signs. One of the

58

nurses got to work right away locating sites for IV access so they could start giving fluids, medications, and

59

blood products as soon as possible. They ended up placing two large-bore IVs, one on her right wrist and the

60

other inside her left elbow.

61

Her blood pressure readings were low, indicating blood loss and/or shock (either would have detrimental

62

effects on the baby getting oxygen), so they started Lactated Ringers solution through one of the IVs.

63

The initial breathing tube was replaced, and the patient was placed on a ventilator, with

64

supplemental oxygen included. A portable chest x-ray was done (which is pretty much mandatory

65

anymore in any multiple trauma patient), and orders were given for additional CT scans and MRIs.

66

The resident also ordered a complete blood count, serum electrolyte levels, and a type-and-cross

67

match on her blood.

68

Once the patient was considered resuscitated, they turned their attention to the fetus, and checked for fetal

69

heart tones and movement. No fetal heartbeat could be located, even using the Doppler.

70

Many non-medical people would feel that care and attention should have been provided to the fetus at an

71

earlier point. Although the doctor who is treating a pregnant trauma victim has to remember that there are

72

two patients, the treatment priorities are the same as for the non-pregnant woman. The best initial treatment

73

for the fetus is the optimal resuscitation of the Mother. So the primary initial goal in treating a pregnant

74

trauma victim is to stabilize the Mothers condition, and evaluation of the fetus should begin only after the

75

Mother has been stabilized.

76

See, there are four factors in maternal trauma that determine whether the baby lives or not hypoxia,

77

infection, drug effects, and preterm delivery. Death typically results from hypoxia, which was

78

obviously the case here.

79

Hypoxia is a lack of oxygen available to the fetus. If the Mother is experiencing blood loss, as Mrs. Bennett

80

was from her injuries, there is less blood (hence less oxygen) transported to the uterus. Hypoxia is often caused

81

by maternal shock, which Mrs. Bennett was also experiencing, which has a significant impact on the baby.

82

Once obvious shock develops in the Mother, the chances of saving the fetus drop to about 20%. So you can

83

see that resuscitation of the Mother is ultimately in the best interests of the fetus as well. The supplemental

84

oxygen and IV fluids that were given to Mrs. Bennett were intended to maximize uterine perfusion and

85

oxygenation for the fetus. All the things that the docs were doing for Mrs. Bennett were also for the benefit of

86

the fetus.

87

I could tell from the notes how very devastated the doctors and nurses were when the baby couldnt be saved.

88

Everything possible was done, but it was just too late. The attending physician said repeatedly, If only

89

theyd gotten here sooner. He makes a very good point, too. Its important at any point during a pregnancy,

90

but in the third trimester especiallymaternal position has a great impact on the fetus. In the supine position,

91

the uterus obstructs the inferior vena cava and the aorta, reducing cardiac output as much as 25%. The

92

amount of time Mrs. Bennett spent trapped in the vehicle, on her back, had to have deprived the fetus of

93

necessary oxygen for an extended period. Add that to the decrease in oxygen resulting from blood loss and

94

shock, and its obvious that time was of the essence in saving this child. The other unfortunate circumstance

95

that makes this such an unusual case is the current condition of Mrs. Bennett. Injuries suffered in the crash

96

have left her completely paralyzed except for her eyelids. She requires a feeding tube for nutrition and a

97

ventilator to allow her to breathe. While this sounds completely bizarre, its not unheard of, and is known as

98

locked in syndrome. There may be relatively normal cognitive processes occurring in the brain, but the

99

patients muscles are completely paralyzed with the exception of the eyes or eyelids. So she can only

100

communicate by eye movement. Im hearing that the doctor for the defense is saying that its somehow not

101

proper to collect testimony from Mr. Bennett because she cant speak or write her responses. That because the

102

questions need to be in a yes/no format, and she answers by blinking, that somehow her answers arent

103

trustworthy, and cant be taken as seriously as spoken testimony.

104

My colleague seems to be stuck in a previous century. More and more, doctors and scientists are making

105

progress developing alternative means of communication for patients who have suffered strokes, or, like Mrs.

106

Bennett, are paralyzed due to injuries. Theyre moving far beyond the letter boards of the past, and are

107

utilizing computers to provide ways for these people to share their thoughts. There are patients just like Mrs.

108

Bennett who were taught morse code, and use it to spell words by blinking their eyes. Research is being done

109

right now to develop a machine that that uses a voice synthesizer to decode those eye blinks and translate them

110

into spoken words. Other experiments are taking place where electrodes are implanted in the brain that

111

interface with a computer, and convert thoughts into vocal sounds which are then produced through a voice

112

synthesizer. If the blinks were random, or meaningless, then theres no way this level of translation could be

113

taking place.

114

To say that answers, thoughts, and responses revealed by blinking arent good enough to accept as

115

testimony, well, thats just insulting. There are patients right now who use eyelid communication with their

116

families and medical staff to help make decisions and participate in their own care. And have you heard of the

117

movie, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly? That man dictated an entire book by blinking his left eye, spelling

118

words one letter at a time. Medical journals reported on another patient, with the same diagnosis as Mrs.

119

Bennett, completely paralyzed except for her eyes, and using a feeding tube and ventilator. She blinked her

120

eyes to communicate with her family and doctors that she didnt want to continue living like that. They took

121

her off the vent and allowed her to die, based on what she communicated with her blinks. You cant tell me

122

theres a doctor on the planet who would move forward with something like that if there was any chance at all

123

that those blinks were random reflexes.

124

Its just a shame that we have to collect Mrs. Bennetts testimony right now. If we had more time, we could

125

teach her morse code so she could move beyond yes and no. And if we had even more time, voice synthesizer

126

technology could catch up, and we could actually hear Mrs. Bennetts voice responding to our questions.

127

Theres no way anyone could argue with the validity of her responses then. I have reviewed the transcript of

128

her testimony and believe Detective Morgan did a fine job, under very difficult circumstances. I have no doubt

129

that Mrs. Bennett was communicating effectively in that interview. Yes, I was present at the autopsy of Baby

130

Doe Bennett. No, that is not unusual. I am on staff at the hospital, and it is hospital policy that any and all

131

autopsies performed by the Chief Medical Examiner involve at least one other qualified staff doctor who can

132

and will assist in all procedures during the autopsy and determinations made on the autopsy report. In reality,

133

this is a rare occurrence for me. Prior to that evening, I had not participated in an autopsy in over three years,

134

and while I am confident in the accuracy of the decision reached in that autopsy, I was a little uncomfortable

135

about being involved.

136

Date _____11/12/2014____ _____/s/ Corey Saccharin________

137

Flora Lichtman Notary Public Notary Seal STATE OF CONNECTICUT Wrightville County My Commission Expires: Oct.

138

8, 2012 Commission # 16513544

Witness Statement of Alex Langsdorf

Good afternoon. My name is Alex Langsdorf, and I am investigating this case on behalf of the defense. I have

14 years experience in the field of accident reconstruction, and have testified as an expert nearly three dozen

times in cases such as this one. I was hired by the attorneys for the defense and am collecting my normal

appearance fee of $5000.00. In the process of my investigation, I spoke with the defendant, read all witness

statements, reviewed the evidence released by the Wrightville Crime Lab and Police Department, reviewed the

autopsy report, 911 transcript, and phone records from the defendants iPhone. Ive formed my conclusions

based on my thorough review of these documents. I was unable visit the scene of the accident or view either of

the cars involved. I do not think this hampered my investigation in any way.

10

Theres really a limited amount of hard and fast evidence here, which is going to make it difficult for the

11

prosecution to prove anything. For example, theyre saying that Brock was drinking and driving that night.

12

Youve got two passengers, one saying, Yes, he did, and the other saying, No, he didnt. Classic he/she

13

said he/she said situation. There was no breathalyzer test done at the time of the alleged incident, and

14

without an official reading thats over the legal limit, youve got no proof whatsoever.

15

Their whole theory about the drinking is just full of holes. Theyre building a fairy tale based on a Blood

16

Alcohol Content level taken hours after Mrs. Bennett wrecked her car, and a level that was within legal limits

17

at that! Theyre claiming it dropped .01 every 40 minutes, and if you count backwards, he would have been

18

intoxicated at the time of the accident. But thats just stupid. Whos to say that his BAC was ever over .07?

19

Maybe he drank a few beers at home that night, went to bed, and then the police arrived. And how far back

20

are you going to count? Based on their math, at 2pm that afternoon, Brock was actually dead from alcohol

21

poisoning. You go back farther than that, and you could have attached a tap to his vein, and beer would have

22

flowed out like a keg. Ridiculous. Theyre assuming that the alcohol he drank came from the five empty beer

23

cans found in his car. You dont know how long those cans have been in his backseat. You cant even say that

24

they were all consumed the same day. And since when does finding empty beer cans in a car mean that they

25

must have been consumed while the drinker was driving?

26

Theyre so excited about the fingerprints on the cans, but do you know what those fingerprints on the cans

27

indicate? That at one time, Brock touched those beer cans. Thats it. Did he touch them the night of the

28

accident? We dont know that. Were the fingerprints deposited while he was drinking from the cans, or

29

could they be there because Brock simply threw them in the backseat after someone else drank them?

30

Impossible to say. Sheesh, I could go on for hours about the instability of their drinking evidence.

31

At some point, youve got to look at the people involved. Im not seeing that Brock has any problem with

32

the issue of character and credibility. Hes involved in several sports at school, and maintains good grades

33

as well. Ive listened to all the stories about who hates whom and why, and frankly I dont put much stock

34

in it. This is high schooleverybody hates somebody for no good reason. Jamies accusations in

35

particular shouldnt be taken too seriously. Have you talked to that kid? Total flake. Obviously biased.

36

Im much More impressed with the other passenger, Terri. Seemed very open and forthright to me,

37

stepping up and accepting responsibility for his/her actions in the car. Could have just kept his/her mouth

38

shut and let the driver take all the blame, but he/she spoke up and set the record straight. Thats admirable.

39

Lets start at the beginning, shall we? That anonymous tip. Its a fact that in order to give credence to

40

someones accusation, you have to know who they are. If they arent willing to put their name to it, then

41

why should we believe it? Otherwise, youre going to have every Tom, Dick, and Harry blaming anybody

42

they want for everything they can think up. Then youve got the anonymous caller giving a description

43

of a car, a driver, and a license plate at a location where nothing was found. You cant just take a

44

description of events that happened in one place, Pine Tree Parkway and highway 151, and then say, Oh,

45

Im sure he meant Pine Tree Parkway and highway 131. Theyre four miles away! It boils down to this:

46

no one has come forward to say they saw anyone matching Brocks description at Pine Tree Parkway and

47

131, where Mrs. Bennett had her accident. Brock and his car have NOT been placed at the scene at that

48

time.

49

Ive also got a problem with what the witness thought he saw on the license plate of the car at Pine Tree

50

Parkway and highway 131. PBK. Do you know those are three of the most misread license plate letters in

51

the country? Add in the fact that youve got a moving vehicle, a low light situation, plus a little dirt or

52

mudsuddenly youre seeing a P when its actually an F or an R. What you thought was a B could really be

53

an R or an 8 or even a 3. And is that a K, or could it be an X? Do you know how many possible combinations

54

that PBK could turn out to be? The fact that Brocks car fits one of them shouldnt fill them with

55

confidence. Heck, MY license plate probably fits, too.

56

So they took a bogus tip with this generic license plate combination, and decide that Brock is their man. They

57

wake the poor kid up at 4 in the morning and conclude he must be intoxicated because hes a little

58

disoriented. Really?! And you dont think being awakened from a sound sleep in the early hours of the

59

morning to find cops at your door might be a little disorienting all by itself?

60

be drunk, and proceed to run a few sobriety tests.

61

Now these are called Standardized Field Sobriety Tests for a reason. They are standardized there are very

So the officers assume he must

62

specific rules about how these tests are to be administered and what is to be said. If the officers didnt follow

63

the process to the letter, then the results are meaningless. Besides, there are so many innocent reasons why

64

people cant perform them. Poor lighting, an uneven surface, weather conditions, fatigue, nervousness,

65

flashing cruiser lights, any of these can affect a persons performance. And Im telling you right now

66

Brocks circumstances include at least five of these factors Ive just mentioned. And can I say one more thing

67

about these field sobriety tests? Completely unfair. They are designed to make you fail. Think about it

68

walking heel to toe in a straight line, standing motionless on one foot, touching your finger to your nose with

69

your eyes closed. Are these things that we do as part of our daily routine? Are these normal actions for us?

70

No, of course not. So theyre asking you to do something abnormal in order to prove that you are normal. Its

71

asinine.

72

The prosecution contends that the scrape on Brocks car is a result of the collision with Mrs. Bennetts car.

73

But theyve got no proof to back that up, either. The paint sample tested turns out to be one of the most popular

74

paint colors in America right now. It has a very common chemical composition, so common that Honda has

75

used it on every Accord and Civic produced in the last three years. Does it match the color of paint on

76

Brocks car? Sure. Does it also match the paint on 836 OTHER cars in the St Louis metro area? You bet it

77

does! Even the crime lab couldnt say definitely that it was a match, just that it was consistent. Try this one

78

on: Is it possible that a charcoal gray Honda Accord or Civic scraped against the supports for the overpass and

79

left paint at some point in time? Yes. Is it also possible that Mrs. Bennett, in her collision with the support got

80

some of that paint on her car? YES! Who knows how that paint got there! Well, that doesnt sound like a sure

81

thing to me. And it wont to a jury, either. Not when you consider that there were over 40,000 of those

82

carscharcoal gray Honda vehicles years 2008-2014sold in this country. If they had wanted to firm up their

83

paint evidence, theyd have ALSO taken a scrape sample from Brocks car and compared it with the original

84

paint on Mrs. Bennetts Camry. If that had been a match as well, then wed be looking at either a remarkable

85

coincidence or convincing evidence. Not surprisingly, this never occurred to the investigating officer.

86

Brock tells us that the damage on his car happened about a week before, when it was parked at a movie

87

theater. Says it was a hit and runhe came out after the show and noticed the dent on his fender. He didnt

88

call the police at the time to file a report because let me see what he said exactly its right here in my

89

notes Oh, yeah. I was just going to have my insurance company take care of it. It didnt seem like a big

90

deal. No, theres no claim on file with the insurance companyBrock said he hadnt gotten around to it

91

yet. It sounded reasonable to me, what with it just being a scrape. We did ask the lab to check it out, but they

92

said theres no definitive way to know if the damage was done in the accident, or a week previous. Its just

93

too tight a timeframe to know for sure.

94

Ive seen the photo that the prosecution says proves that the banged up fender occurred the night of the

95

accident. Seems that someone with a camera phone took a picture and caught Brocks car in the background.

96

The prosecution claims he can see an undamaged left front fender in that picture. But theres nothing clear

97

about it. There were a number of kids in Gumby outfits milling around, getting in the way. No way is it a

98

clear shot. And it was taken with a camera phone, for Petes sake. The level of detail is very poor, and that

99

type of picture is so simple to edit and thereby distort the image. Ive looked at all the police photos taken at the

100

scene of the accident, and once again, Im not seeing anything that incriminates Brock, or even any other

101

driver. Weve got skid marks on the highway where Mrs. Bennett braked and skidded off the road. There are

102

no skid marks present that can be attributed to Brocks vehicle, and no glass or debris on the road that would be

103

consistent with a two-car collision. In my professional opinion, this was a one-car accident, with Mrs.

104

Bennetts vehicle driving off the parkway for some unknown reason. I saw nothing that points to another

105

vehicle being the cause.

106

This whole case was just thrown together. Once they made up their minds that Brock was the culprit, they

107

didnt even look at any of the other cars and drivers on their list. They just went with the first guy they

108

thought fit. Proper police procedure would have been to run down all of the leads, talk to all of the people

109

whose license plates fit the tip. But they didnt.

110

Talk about proper police procedure Ill tell you, I really had to laugh when I read the transcript of the

111

interview with Linda Bennett. I mean, Ive seen some unconventional things in my time, but that couldnt

112

even be considered an interview. Counting blinks? You could make up whatever answers you wanted.

113

Remember, Ive seen the woman. I went to the hospital to see her, but Theres no talking to that poor

114

woman. I cant even imagine itcompletely paralyzed. The only thing that moves on that lady is her eyelids.

115

Sad, but kind of creepy, too. There were doctors there who said she could answer questions that wayas long

116

as theyre the yes/no kind. But I just didnt get a good vibe from it, you know? I wasnt getting the impression

117

that she was understanding me. No facial expression, no nothing. Believing that the random flickers of her

118

eyelids could be interpreted as a sworn statement, well, thats just preposterous.

119

And that police lineup that Officer Morgan did? That was so messed up, I dont even know where to start.

120

Once again, proper police procedure was completely disregarded. Wrightville Police Department policy on

121

photographic lineups clearly requires using an independent administrator whenever possible. Whats an

122

independent administrator? Thats an officer who doesnt know the identity of the suspect. Thats who

123

should be used whenever possible, as well as a sequential lineupshowing one picture at a time. I know there

124

are times when these conditions cant be met, the policy does add the caveat whenever possible.

125

Regardless, for whatever reason. Officer Morgan decided this was one of those times. Well, a simultaneous

126

photographic lineup isnt ideal, but it works. Except Officer Morgan didnt follow the instructions outlined in

127

his own departments manual. His photographic lineup was supposed to include the suspect and five other

128

individuals similar in appearance. But he didnt do that. His lineup consisted of just four photos, which is

129

far too few to be legal. There are also certain spoken instructions that must be given before the viewing. The

130

witness must be told that the suspect may or may not be in the lineup. The officer administering the test must

131

ask the witness if he understood all the instructions about the viewing and if the witness has any questions

132

about the procedure. If the officer followed these rules, then surely we would see that verbiage in the

133

transcript of the interview, wouldnt we? If Morgan didnt administer the lineup correctly, then the results

134

surely cant be admissible. Everything was just a little too rushed here, very sloppy police work. Im

135

confident that when the judge and jury hear the story and see the evidence (such as it is), theyll come to the

136

same conclusion that I didthat there is way too much doubt here for Brock to be found guilty.

137
138

Date _____11/02/2014____ _____/s/ Alex Langsdorf________

139

Flora Lichtman Notary Public Notary Seal STATE OF CONNECTICUT Wrightville County My Commission Expires: Oct.

140

8, 2012 Commission # 16513544

Witness Statement of Terri Good

1
2

My name is Terri Good. I am 19 years old and a senior at Wrightville High School. I am old for my class

because I had to repeat 10 grade. I was sent to a juvenile facility for shoplifting and missed my 10 grade year.

I admit I did it. I had been dared to lift some beer from a gas station, but I got caught. Im kind of glad I

didget caught, that is. I served my time and learned from the experience. Quite frankly, I am a better person

for it all. As they say, That which does not destroy me makes me stronger. Thats all behind me, I just want

to move on. That was three years ago, and Ive changed. Can we leave it at that?

Youve got totally the wrong guy for this. No way was this Brock. Sure he and I are best buds, have been as

far back as I remember, but Im telling the truth here. No offense, but youre just nuts if you think Brock did

th

th

10

this. I can totally explain away everything. Let me start at the beginning. We were at this club, right?

11

Jamie, the Brockster, and me. And ok, yes, there was a bit of drinking happening. Both Jamie and I had a little

12

to drinkI may have had three beers but Im telling youBrock? Not a drop. Yes, he had the club stamp on

13

his right hand, but Brock thought it was cool to use his fake ID all the time, even if he wasnt going to be

14

drinking. If he got any beers at the bar, and Im not saying that he did, he got them for someone else. He knew

15

he was driving; it was soda for him all night. Thats just the kind of guy he is, you know? Responsible as a

16

designated driver, and serious about his future. So even if he would have taken that stupid Breathalyzer thing,

17

like everybodys whining about, it would have registered zero. ZERO. Yeah, yeah, I know those empty beer

18

cans in the car look bad, I know. But they were mine or Jamies. Heres what happened. When we left the club,

19

I got the mini-cooler that I brought with us out of the trunk. The cooler had maybe eight or so beers in it, along

20

with some cokes. I put it in the front seat with me. Whenever I wanted one for myself, I got one out. When

21

Brock wanted a Coke, Id hand him one. A couple timesjust for funwhen he asked for a coke Id hand him

22

a beer, and hed take a sip. When he realized it wasnt a Coke, hed say, Ha, Ha, very funny and then pass it

23

back to me. Id finish it. I did that a few times. Hes gullible and fell for it every time. Sometimes, I would hand

24

Brock one of my empties, and hed throw it in the back at Jamie. So I guess that pretty much explains the prints

25

and the DNA on the beer cans, right? Check the Coke cans; thats what Brock was drinking.

26

I realize this is hard to believe but, as for the calls and the texts, that was all me, too. Brock would never text

27

and drive. He would never be so reckless with his car. He loved that car. If hed gotten so much as a minor

28

scratch on it, BaBam! Hed have it fixed the next day or so. Although I know this may sound fishy to you, it

29

isnt unusual at all that I was using his phone. Mine isnt cool. Its like from the Stone Agedoesnt even have

30

a full keyboard. I have to press seven buttons just to say, LOL. Brock is so cool about letting me use his cell

31

whenever I want. He is such a great guy. I made some calls of my own, and sent some texts to my friends.

32

Brock did not touch that phone while he was driving. Not once. Ive seen the call/text log from Brocks phone

33

that night, and I cant explain it. Someone at the old iPhone company must have screwed up. Anyways, heres

34

how things really happened. We were going west down Pine Tree Parkway; Brock was driving, and he was

35

definitely under the speed limit. Cars were passing us left and right. I was texting and drinking a beer. Sure,

36

we were listening to the radiowhat teenager doesnt?! But it was nothing extreme. Maybe a little Journey.

37

Or it could have been ABBA. Brock was absolutely focused on the road 100%.

38

Then Brock makes some comment about this car driving toward us, like, Gee, I wonder whats going on with

39

them? I looked up, and these headlights coming at us were weaving and stuff. Really weird. Going way too

40

fast. But Brock was all calm about it, stayed on his side of the road, both hands on the wheel, 10 and 2, the

41

whole bit. I dont think his hands left the steering wheel all night. That other car was freaking out, but Brock,

42

he just drove straight, nice and slow, and that was it. Nothing happened. Just like Brock saidwe didnt hit

43

NOTHING! There was no accident. I dont think we were even near highway 131 at the time. I got a look at the

44

car as it passed, and it was a Toyota Solara. How can I say so definitively? I am a car buff. I dont get great

45

grades at school, and I probably wont even get into college, but I KNOW cars. The car was a 2008 Toyota

46

Solara, V6 with a ragtopa convertible. Maybe it was someone elses entirely. If that woman went off the

47

road later, well, she did it all on her own. Dont get me wrongI feel bad for the lady, I do. I heard how shes

48

hurt and all, and lost the kid. Jeez, what a bummer. Its a tragedy, but it wasnt Brocks fault, and thats the

49

truth.

50

At the time we passed the car, Jamiethe backseat drivershouted something like, What was that? I think

51

we hit that car! He/She had no idea what he/she was talking about. First of all, he/she was in the backseat on

52

the opposite side of the car. He/She was sitting behind me. How could he/she see at all? Also, the music was

53

blasting this deep bass. Maybe he/she got confused between the music and a thump he/she thought he/she

54

heard.

55

The scratches above the front wheel well and on the fender of Brocks car were there a good week before.

56

Brock told me he got hit in a Chipotle parking lot. Someone had hit him when he went inside to get lunch. I saw

57

that scratch with my own two eyes days before this whole thing happened. Must have been October 6 , 2014 or

58

something like that. You can see these scratches in the pictureyou know, the one with all the Gumbies. I was

59

part of the group that went with Brock on the community service outing on 10/08/2014. I was the Gumby in the

60

front center of that picture. I dont know what everyone is making such a big deal about. It is not a very good

61

picture; it was taken with a camera phone, and the light is weird. Even with all that, I can see the scratches on

62

the car as plain as day. I cant believe you cant.

th

63

Can I say something about Jamie in the back seat? Dont believe a word he/she says. Jamie is so jealous of

64

Brock, its not funny. Hed/Shes say anything to get him in trouble. Jamie hates him because Brock is

65

everything Jamie isnt. I mean, Brock has friends, you know? Jamies just a loser. A loser and a liar.

66

has been out to get Brock all through high school, as long as Ive known him/her, anyway. Jamie claims that

67

when they were freshmen, Brock humiliated him/her in front of everybody at a pep rallysomething about

68

underwear, I dont know. I dont remember anything like that ever happening, and I go to that school.

69

Besides, why would Brock do that? Theres no reason for him to pick on anybody. Thats not the kind of

70

person he is, and its not like Jamie doesnt do a fine job looking like an idiot all by himself/herself. Is he/she

71

saying Brock was driving crazy? Oh, no way, man. Think about itJamie couldnt have been too

72

scaredhe/she never asked to be let out of the car, did he/she? Couldnt have been that bad, then, right? And

73

I cant believe the nonsense Jamies saying about me, trying to make it sound like Im a liar! Look, heres the

74

deal: yes, there was one time, long ago, when I made a small error in judgment while demonstrating loyalty

75

to my friend. I was just trying to help Brock out of a bad situation, you know? He was in a tough spot with the

76

principalsome misunderstanding about a slashed tire in the parking lot. I was just trying to help, you

77

know? I thought Id take a little of the heat off him. It was really no big deal. They figured out I couldnt

78

have done it, and Brock took his punishment like a man. I learned my lesson; end of story. But Im telling

79

youthis is nothing like that. I cant believe Jamie would drag up ancient history to try and make it look like

80

Im lying to cover Brocks butt. No way. This is totally different. I mean, youre the police. I wouldnt lie to

81

you, not even for a friend. You see that, right?

82

________ Date _____11/12/2014____ _____/s/ Terri Good

83

Flora Lichtman Notary Public Notary Seal STATE OF CONNECTICUT Wrightville County My Commission Expires: Oct.

84

8, 2012 Commission # 16513544

Jamie

Witness Statement of Logan Sanders

1
2

My name is Logan Sanders. I obtained a B.A. in Psychology and Social Relations, cum laude, at Harvard

University, and a Ph.D. in Clinical and Developmental Psychology at the University of Minnesota. My

doctoral thesis was Post-Neurosurgical Comas and Abnormalities Brought on by Pre-Operational Trauma. I

did Post-Doctoral Training in Neuropsychology with Jane Holmes Bernstein at The Children's Hospital in

Boston as well. After working for the Somerville Public Schools and with Russell Barkley at UMASS Medical

Center, I joined The Cambridge Hospital, where I became the Director of Neuropsychology. I am a former

President of the Massachusetts Neuropsychological Society. I am well credentialed. I have testified on dozens

of occasions as an expert witness in the fields of neuropsychology and neurobiology. I am, of course, being

10

paid for my testimony today. I typically charge $450/hour and expenses for my work. In this case, because of

11

the particularly heinous nature of the crime, I have halved my fee and am covering expenses personally. Yes it

12

is true that I only testify for defendants. To be honest you cant make as much money if you hop back and

13

forth between plaintiffs and defendants. Besides, I never much liked the way most prosecutors approach a

14

case. To my mind all they care about are convictions, regardless of the innocent people who might get

15

harmed along the way.

16

Ask any OB-GYN (heck, ask any med student), and he or she will tell you how very serious it is for an

17

expectant Mother to report that her fetus has stopped moving. The fact is that healthy babies move

18

frequentlyunhealthy ones do not. Mothers tend to feel less movement when they are hungry, thirsty, or

19

very tired, but thats less movement, not NO movement. Sure its true that the bigger the woman the less likely

20

she is to notice fetal movement.

21

Now, a baby doesnt move all the time. Its quite normal for a fetus to have periods of low activityhes

22

sleeping, or hes resting. Maybe hes just thinking deep thoughts. But Mrs. Bennett had not felt

23

movement in hours, even after attempting the tried and true method for eliciting fetal movement, which is

24

having a cold drink and lying on her left side (which is the position that provides optimal oxygenation for

25

the baby).

26

Ill admit this is not very scientific and my professors at Harvard would never agree with me but one really

27

shouldnt underestimate the importance of the Mothers intuition, either. Its her body and shes been aware

28

of this baby every minute of gestation for months, so she often has a sixth sense when something is wrong.

29

Sure, Ms. Bennett was abnormally high strungwe see evidence of this in the transcript of the voicemail she

30

left for her doctor. I cannot discount the relevance of that, but high strung or not, when a patient says,

31

Something just doesnt feel right, then chances are good that something is going on.

32

Mrs. Bennetts main worry was that the umbilical cord was wrapped around the babys neck. Thats what

33

we call a nuchalwhen the cord is wrapped around the fetal neck 360 degrees. This isnt as rare as you

34

might think. Research shows that anywhere from 25% to 60% of all pregnancies will experience this,

35

with about half of these resolving on their own before delivery.

36

increases as the pregnancy progresses. In other words, the further along the Mother is, the higher the

37

probability that it will happen. Another interesting statistic is that only about 35% of nuchal cords are ever

38

detected by using ultrasound. So it doesnt surprise me that the OB notes from the routine ultrasounds that

39

were done on Mrs. Bennett didnt pick up on anything like that. Ultrasounds are notoriously inconsistent

40

when it comes to detecting issues with the umbilical cord. The rule of thumb for counting fetal movement

41

is 10 occasions every 1-2 hours. To have felt nothing in at least 5-6 hours can only be signaling a grim

42

outcome, especially in the third trimester. I know there are doctors who believe that reduced activity is

43

expected during the last trimester due to lack of uterine space. But actually, the fetus may move less often,

44

but its movements should feel significantly more powerful. To feel nothing at all is not at all normal.

45

The question of the Mothers size is also a point of discussion. Theres significant research to show that

46

overweight or obese women tend not to feel the first fetal movements until slightly later in the pregnancy,

47

but after that there is no difference. Its true that fetal movements are more difficult to detect by a third

48

partyby visual observation or by placing hands on the abdomen, but the Mother herself can feel it just

49

fine.

50

Although the autopsy suggests that the fetus could have been saved but for the collision and subsequent delay

51

in receiving medical attention, theres little doubt in my mind that the baby was already deceased before the

52

attempted trip to the hospital. No, Im not 100% certain; nobody can be 100% certain of anything except

53

death and taxes. It had already been more than twelve hours since Mrs. Bennett first noticed her childs lack of

54

movement. Whether the issue was the umbilical cord wrapped around the neck, some other cause for lack of

55

oxygen to the baby, or another reason entirely, it doesnt take very long for the situation to become fatal. But

56

its simply wishful thinking to say, If only they had made it to the hospital sooner Getting there more

57

quickly, or even immediately, wouldnt have made any difference in the fate of the baby. First of all, its my

58

expert opinion that the child died earlier that day, as evidenced by the complete lack of fetal movement for a

59

minimum of 12 hours. Secondly, the autopsy report clearly indicates damage to the skull and brain of the fetus,

60

which would have caused immediate death. Either way you choose to look at it, the baby was dead at the

61

scene, and the delay in getting medical attention in no way contributed to its death.

62

Mrs. Bennett has been through hell. Not even through it, technicallyshes still there. To be paralyzed

The possibility of a nuchal occurring also

63

like she is and so young At least shes not aware of everything thats happened, with the baby at all. I

64

know the other doc is really pushing the fairy tale that theres really nothing wrong with Mrs. Bennett (other

65

than the not being able to move thing). The doctor is saying her cognitive function is all A-OK, she knows

66

whats happening, she understands everything thats going on around her and everything thats said to her.

67

And theyre swearing to high heaven that the woman is talking with her eyelids. They say she can answer

68

questions, but the questions have to be phrased as yes/no. Then you count the blinks, and voilatheres your

69

answer. And theyre trying to sell that as testimony. Come on, people. Leave the poor woman

70

aloneyoure turning her into a sideshow freak. Do you know how many possible reasons there could be for

71

her eyelids to flicker at any given moment? The blinking reflex can be triggered by puffs of air on the eyeball,

72

dry eyes, eyelid spasms, anxiety, and a host of other things. How can anyone in their right mind want to use

73

something as unreliable and subjective as counting eye twitches to help decide the fate of a teenage boy? In

74

many ways this reminds me of the case of Terry Schiavo.

75

On top of that, youve got the facilitated communication issue to take into account. Its been documented

76

that when you have a patient communicating in an atypical manner, the person doing the interpreting (or the

77

counting in this case) tends to translate the answers into the responses that they he himself is anticipating. Im

78

not saying people do it deliberatelyquite a bit of it is subconscious, Im sure. But it doesnt change the fact

79

that the answers are not coming from the witness, and theres no way to prove that they really are.

80

What happened to Mrs. Bennett was a tragedy. But what the prosecution is poised to do to this teenage

81

defendant would also be a tragedy. And to do that, to effectively ruin a young mans life, without using

82

solid, documented, medical, provable evidencewell, that would be a crime.

83

___ Date _____11/12/2014____ _____/s/ Logan Sanders

84

Flora Lichtman Notary Public Notary Seal STATE OF CONNECTICUT Wrightville County My Commission Expires: Oct.

85

8, 2012 Commission # 16513544