Larissa Schuster Trial, Day 24, 12/4/07
The day started with the attorneys speaking in chambers. The remaining rebuttal witnesses include Dr. Gopal, Sally Hunt, Jim Cook, Jospeh Boatwright and Leslie Dobbs. Ms. Hunt was the councilor for Timothy and Larissa Schuster. She will be called briefly to verify statements the defendant made to Clovis Police before she was arrested. Kristin Schuster offered a privacy waiver. Kristin Schuster is Larissa Schuster’s daughter.
Larissa Schuster’s father asked to be heard. The judge said no. Then Judge Wayne Ellison discussed four photographs displayed for the jurors, “gruesome photographs.” The photos were displayed during Dr. Venu Gopal’s rebuttal testimony. The defense’s expert argued there may have been evidence of cutting on the body. The judge did not allow the photo which shows Timothy Schuster’s ankle severed, because there was no dispute about that happening. On Monday when the photos were displayed, the defense said, jurors 2, 4 and 5 were visibly shaken. Another juror covered her mouth. Juror 10, who is normally smiling, was frowning at the photos. Juror 9 was crying and others were looking away. The judge said the jurors were visibly upset by the photos. He said that is why he limited the use of the photos. The defense is not asking the court to do anything about that, they simply wanted to make record of it.
DR. VENU GOPAL, FORENSICS PATHOLOGIST
Testimony resumed at 10:15 a.m. Dr. Gopal was back on the stand. He performed the autopsy on Timothy Schuster’s body. He was called by the prosecution as a rebuttal witness. Peterson finished questioning the witness. Defense attorney Roger Nuttall began the morning by asking Gopal about the cause of death, chloroform and acid exposure. Even though that was the official cause of death, Gopal has testified he can not really say the true cause of death. Gopal said there are some facts that need to be considered. When he examined the body, he only had half the body intact. In cases like these, Gopal said, there was chloroform present at a toxic level. Another toxicologist said the amount found in the tissue may or may not be at a toxic level. Gopal said, because he was not able to examine the other half of the body, he could not rule out certain scenarios, such as head injury. 10:20 a.m. Because the body was immersed in hydrochloric acid, and the person may have been alive when placed in the barrel, he said, all these factors were taken into consideration. If the chloroform wasn’t high enough to cause the fatality, the acid would have caused the death. 10:21 a.m. “It’s possible Mr. Schuster died from chloroform poisoning?” “yes. “ Chloroform was found in most of the tissue. Gopal said it’s possible the levels of chloroform were much higher than what the tests were showing, considering evaporation. He said the acid would prolong the stay of the acid in the body. Nutall suggested there are other possible causes of death, such as a knife or gunshot wound. Gopal said he considered many things before listing the cause of death. “This is the best opinion I can give, and that’s what I’ve given.” 10:26 a.m. Gopal said if there was no chloroform in the system, certainly you could say it was some sort of homicidal violence. But he said because the chloroform was in the system, it was the likely cause of death. Nuttall referred to Gopal’s earlier testimony, regarding chloroform listed as a cause of death. “The exact cause we can’t be 100 percent sure.” 10:29 a.m. Gopal does not know the exact time and place of death. He said there are signs of decomposition. He believes the death occurred within three or four days of the body’s discovery, based on skin slippage. “You can not say when the body was placed in the barrel?” “I can not.” 10:33 a.m. Nuttall asked him if he knows where Timothy Schuster died. Gopal said that is not his job. Gopal said there is an attempt to melt the body, and the acid was poured over the body. He said, that tells him, there was an attempt to melt the body. Somebody who had a knowledge of all the acids, and a knowledge of the extent the acid would dissolve the body, participated in the disposing of the body.” 10:35 a.m. There were lacerations of the ankle above the feet. Gopal said he doesn’t know who made the cuts. He said the projecting part of the body was cut, so it could be fit in the barrel to apply the lid. 10:36 a.m. He said the injuries were done after death. “You don’t know who did that?” “No, I don’t.” Gopal said there is evidence the acid was poured on the body. He said at some time, the acid was poured most likely after being placed in the barrel. He said there are patches of skin missing on the extremities around the knees, where the acid would be poured in. Timothy Schuster’s brother and mother remained in the room to listen to Dr. Gopal’s testimony. Gopal said the body was snuggly fitting in the barrel, but there was enough space for the acid to be poured into the barrel. He said he can not be 100 percent sure the body was alive or dead when placed in the barrel. Nuttall concluding his questions.
Peterson asked Gopal if it is his job to determine who killed someone. He said that is not his job. He said his job is to determine the cause of death. He said generally an autopsy is done within a week of having the body, and sometimes a suspect isn’t named yet. Gopal said this was a very complicated case. He consulted with other experts on how to handle the autopsy. At 10:57 a.m., Dr. Gopal displayed a miniature skeleton, to demonstrate Timothy Schuster’s likely position in the barrel, and the damage the acid did to his remains.
Peterson asked Gopal about stun gun injuries. Gopal said general the stun gun doesn’t leave an injury, but a taser can do some damage.
Nuttall then asked Gopal about the defense’s expert, Dr. Herman. Gopal said he’s disappointed in Herman’s interpretation, “we’re talking about a body that is melting.” 11:04 a.m. Gopal said the defense expert didn’t ask to see the body right away. He said he didn’t feel Herman’s opinion really mattered. Herman testified that he did not think there was enough acid in the barrel to melt the upper half of the body. Gopal said the expert is only as good as the information he wants to hear.
Gopal was excused from the stand at 11:08 a.m. The judge asked juror #1 to remain seated, as the other jurors were excused. Juror #1 shrugged to the other jurors as they walked past her. The court has had repeated problems with the juror with tardiness. The judge commented on her moving a lot. She came into the courtroom with food, and goes in and out of her purse. The judge said it’s distracting to the other jurors. The juror said she’s sorry. The judge said the juror doesn’t need to bring in her purse. The juror said she’ll leave her purse in the jury room from here on out. After juror #1 left the room, the judge said a couple of jurors brought the problems to his attention. The judge asked the attorneys if they want to do anything about the juror. Neither side said they want to take any action.
Testimony continued at 11:25 a.m. Another attorney joined the prosecution’s table. She represents the councilor for Timothy and Larissa Schuster. Kristin Schuster once again offered a privacy waiver for the purposes of this testimony.
SALLIE OVERPECK-HUNT/SCHUSTERS’ MARRIAGE THERAPIST
Sallie Overpeck-Hunt took the stand at 11:27 a.m. Ms. Belanger-McNaire is her attorney. Overpeck-Hunt is a licensed marriage therapist. She contacted the district attorney’s office. She read in the Fresno Bee that under oath Larissa Schuster had testified a misquote, and that her husband Timothy Schuster had never sought treatment for a medical problem or function. Timothy Schuster was her patient. The witness said there was a quotation, she said the witness said she feared or Larissa Schuster’s life. 11:29 a.m. Timothy Schuster was not being treated for impotence. A clip of video from the July 11, 2003 interview with Clovis Police was displayed for jurors.
THIS IS NOT AN EXACT TRANSCRIPT
Is he the type of person that might try to hurt himself?
Let me tell you, before we divorced, we were seeing a councilor, she’s also a professor at Fresno State. She talked to us separately. We needed to meet together to find out if we would reconcile. It started out ok. We were doing our thing. About an hour before it was over, he came at me verbally. He was sitting here like this. You could tell he was angry, nervous, whatever. He started coming at me with stuff that was ridiculous. She kind of calmed him down. It doesn’t look like we’re going to bring this marriage together. So we parted.
She said, Larissa, I’m so glad you’re ok. I’ve been worried about you. I feared for you this weekend. I’m freaking out, why are you telling me this now. She said I’ve studied a lot of people before. Tim is the type of …it’s people like him who can snap. She scared for me. She said she feared for me all weekend long.
You had a little snapshot?
I’ve seen some personality traits of his over the years, that’ I haven’t liked. I was always the problem in anything. It was always me, a passive aggressive approach, and they have a hard time accepting anything they do wrong, they usually blame someone else. It was the first time I ever really saw that kind of anger. It made me feel uncomfortable. I didn’t feel like Sallie felt, that I should be scared. 11:34 a.m.
The prosecution asked, did you tell the defendant you feared for her, “No I did not.” 11:35 a.m. The witness said she met with Timothy Schuster 27 times, and met with Larissa Schuster 4 times. She met with the couple one time. The witness then acknowledged the defense’s expert, who earlier testified that Larissa Schuster seemed to suffer from a perceived battered spouse syndrome.
Nuttall then asked the witness about the victim allegedly having a passive-aggressive personality. The witness contacted her attorney after she read the Fresno Bee’s article. They had a meeting within the last few weeks, with the prosecution concerning these issues. The subject matter of her treatment of Timothy Schuster was discussed at length. The witness said she needed to create an understanding the difference between what was allegedly the issue, what the issue was, and the outcome of the treatment. The nature of the treatment was for sexual dysfunction and one other diagnosis. The witness’ attorney objected. The judge privately spoke with the witness. The other part of the treatment was for a depressive disorder. It’s a chronic depression of a mild to moderate nature. Larissa Schuster has testified that her husband suffered from premature ejaculation. She claimed he never sought treatment for the problem.
After the afternoon break, Det. Jim Cook was called to the stand as a rebuttal witness for the prosecution. He discussed testimony regarding James Fagone’s keys. They were seized during Fagone’s arrest Monday July 14, 2003. The keys that were seized, and released to the Fagone family, included three keys. The prosecution stated that after Det. Cook, two more witnesses will testify for the prosecution, then the defense will call Det. Daily and recall Larissa Schuster. Det. Cook displayed a set of keys for the jurors. The keys were inside of Fagone’s car in a center consol. Cook examined a copy of a receipt from a sporting goods store, for a SG3 Stun Master stun gun. It was dated for June 20, 2003. Two other exhibits were handed to Cook.
Nuttall asked Cook about James Fagone’s arrest, confirming the date. The witness left the stand.
LESLIE FICHERA (FORMERLY LESLIE DOBBS), LARISSA SCHUSTER’S FORMER EMPLOYEE
Prosecutor Dennis Peterson advised Fichera that he needed to follow up on a few questions. Peterson verified that Larissa Schuster’s lab regularly cleaned the glassware. Fichera said there did not seem to be any large-scale cleaning project planned in the future. Larissa Schuster claimed that she ordered 18 bottles of acid to clean at the lab. The three separate orders for acid were placed within a month of Timothy Schuster’s murder.
Nutall then asked Fichera if Larissa Schuster would always relay business plans with her. He then asked the witness about the importance of glassware being clean.
Peterson then asked if cleaning the glassware was a concern once, wouldn’t it be a concern after every time one used the glassware for samples. Work was ongoing at the lab after Larissa Schuster was arrested. During that time, Fichera said there was no slow-down in business at the lab. Larissa Schuster claimed that a mass glassware cleaning would be done at the lab around August 2003, because they were expecting business to slow. Fichera was excused.
The next witness to take the stand was Joseph Boatwright. He was recalled to talk about the time he worked at CCRL in 2003. He continued to work at the lab after Larissa Schuster was arrested. One of his major responsibilities was to clean glassware at the lab. He said they washed the glassware with warm soapy water. They were rinsed with acetone. He said there was a standard operating procedure for glassware cleaning. He said he never used “aqua regia” to clean glassware. He said he never heard to cleaning in that way. Aqua regia is a blend of acids, including hydrochloric acid.
Nuttall asked Boatwright about Larissa Schuster’s role at CCRL. Nuttall asked about the contamination in the lab, and his job of doing day-to-day cleaning. Boatwright said everyone at the lab shared glassware. The witness said there was no reason he would need to know about aqua regia.
Peterson asked if glassware was ever discarded. He said only if it was broken. Even if it was really dirty, it was not discarded. Boatwright said a diluted acid solution would be used occasionally to clean glassware. The solution was 30/70 acid to water. This was not standard procedure, Boatwright said. The witness only recalled one study in which the diluted acid solution was used. He believed the lab used about two liters for that one study. He said everyone grabbed the chemicals they needed. 2:26 p.m. The prosecutor asked if Boatwright was aware that Larissa Schuster ordered three cases of acid in or around July 2003. He said he wasn’t there. He was on a honeymoon. Boatwright continues to work at the former CCRL lab. He’s worked at the location for five years.
The people rested their case at 2:27 p.m.
The defense called their first rebuttal witness.
RETIRED DET. TOM DAILEY, CLOVIS POLICE DEPT.
Det. Tom Dailey was recalled. He described his interview of witness Tami Belshay. Nuttall asked him about the conversation Belshay had with Larissa Schuster, in which Schuster said she had to go to James Fagone’s home to pick up her son Tyler’s bike. The retired detective said Belshay told him that Schuster went to get the bike and then left again to go to her lab. Belshay said she had agreed to watch Tyler. Schuster apparently left the house around noon to go to the lab. Dailey said Belshay told him that Schuster was concerned about being watched, and her phone records being accessed. Dailey and Det. Kirkhart both questioned Belshay, but at different times. Nuttall asked Dailey if Belshay ever said anything about Schuster telling her that she had gone to the lab during the morning hours of July 12. Dailey said he was only told that Schuster said she was going back to her lab at noon. “I don’t recall her telling me that.” 2:37 p.m. He said there’s no mention of that in his report, and he would have likely noted that if he was told.
Dennis Peterson then asked the witness to review a document from July 12, that shows the entry and exit log of the CCRL, when the alarm was deactivated and reactivated. The lab was accessed in the early morning hours, which would be consistent with Tami Belshay’s testimony. Belshay told the court Monday Dec. 3, that Larissa Schuster had told her if authorities were tracking her, they would know she had been to the lab early that morning. The witness was excused.
The prosecution decided to call Meagan Boatwright to the stand. She also worked at CCRL. She is married to previous witness Joseph Boatwright.
MEAGAN BOATWRIGHT, LARISSA SCHUSTER’S PRIOR EMPLOYEE
She said she also continues to work at the lab formerly known as CCRL. She discussed the locks and keys at the lab being changed. She said since 2004, the locks have been changed at least four times. In 2003, she said the keys looked like typical house keys. She said there was only one style. She said there was a round top.
LARISSA SCHUSTER, DEFENDANT
Larissa Schuster was recalled at 3:05 p.m. Nuttall said he would briefly address the evidence since she last testified. He first asked her if she recalled the testimony of James Fagone’s father. Anthony Fagone had indicated on July 12, in the morning, around 9 a.m., she supposedly came to his house. She said she remembered hearing him testify to that. To the best of her recollection, she said she went to the Fagone residence late in the morning. She said it was before noon. When she went over that morning, she said she did not have any discussion with Anthony Fagone. 3:07 p.m. She said doesn’t recall seeing Anthony Fagone that morning. She said she spoke with James Fagone that morning face to face.
Nuttall then asked her if she recalled hearing the testimony of Tami Belshay yesterday. Schuster said she is confidant that she did ask Belshay to come over the morning Belshay called her. Nuttall said there’s been a lot of testimony about the purchase of the acid. The subject matter of using aqua regia, Larissa Schuster said she had used it before. She said it isn’t used everyday, but she said some people use it at their discretion when it is necessary. Schuster said she did not feel the need to discuss the method with other people in the lab. During July of 2003, Larissa Schuster said she had several studies going on.
Nuttall asked the defendant about the photos that were shown to the juror yesterday, images of Timothy Schuster’s half-dissolved remains. Nuttall asked her if she ever saw the contents of the blue barrel with any human remains in them, “no I have not.” 3:37 p.m. She said before yesterday, she had never seen those pictures before. She said she didn’t look at the pictures. With every question, the prosecution objected to the relevance. Some objections were sustained. Nuttall asked to be heard in chambers. The attorneys and judge left the courtroom. “When was the first time you learned that acid had been poured into a barrel similar to that with human remains?” She said she first learned that after her arrest. 3:42 p.m. When she was in Texas, she said a client advised her that Timothy Schuster had apparently been found dead. Nuttall appeared frustrated, and said he had no other questions.
Prosecutor Dennis Peterson asked Schuster about purchasing cleaning products to get rid of the smell of her husband’s body decomposing in the barrel, which was briefly stored at her lab. Peterson continued to question Larissa Schuster about her cleaning methods at her lab. Schuster continued to insist that the use of acid to clean was an outdated method to some, but one she preferred. She said it worked, and that’s why she used it. Peterson asked Schuster to name anyone with whom she worked where she used the aqua regia method to clean glassware. She said there was a part-time female worker, but she can’t recall her name.
Peterson then asked Larissa Schuster talked about Anthony Fagone’s testimony, 3:58 p.m. She said she does not recall having a discussion with James Fagone’s father that morning.
Peterson then asked her about the conversation she had with Tami Belshay. She said she did not say that to Tami. She said Leslie wasn’t working on a soil study at that time. Peterson asked why Belshay would lie. 4:01 p.m. “ there’s nothing to her knowledge, obviously she was mistaken.” Larissa Schuster said she insisted that she did not tell Tami Belshay that she went to the lab that morning. Then Peterson asked why Anthony Fagone would make up a conversation they had. Larissa Schuster said she had no reason as to why anyone would lie. Peterson then moved on to talk about the therapist. “I was not lying. Ms. Hunt even said I could have walked away with that impression.” 4:02 p.m. Larissa Schuster said at a later time, the therapist recommended Larissa Schuster find a different therapist. “What I recall is she told me she was concerned for my safety and had thought about calling me. That’s what I remember hearing and interpreting from our discussion.” 4:04 p.m.
Peterson then handed Larissa Schuster a set of keys and asked her if any of the keys on the ring were her house keys. She said she doesn’t remember what her house key looks like.
Isn’t the truth of the matter you went with James Fagone and placed it at CCRL 4:06 a.m.
Isn’t it true you intentionally purchased acid for the use of the disposal of your husband’s body, and solicited james fagone to 4:07 a.m. no that is not true at all.