A Family Business (25 page)

When David asked him if he knew anyone who could carry out his plans, Dubois said, he replied in the affirmative.

“Money is no problem,” Dubois said David replied, adding that he could have the cash delivered.

Roger Diamond met with reporters outside the courtroom after Rojas and Warren testified, to denounce their claims against his client. Warren was nothing but a “jail-house snitch” Diamond asserted, insinuating that he and Rojas made up their testimony so they could get extra privileges while they were behind bars.

Despite Diamond’s denials, Lewis continued to have faith in what the inmates had said. Although he eventually had to withdraw as prosecutor because he had become a potential victim, Lewis remained significantly disturbed by the experience. Nothing Diamond would ever be able to say would convince him that David had not been actively seeking his murder.

But Lewis apparently was not the only one on David’s hit list.

According to Gerhardt, David told him that he wanted to have his grandparents killed because that was the way his mother could get her inheritance. David planned to accomplish the task, the inmate said, by poisoning the Lambs’ bottled water.

George Bristol, Dave Edwards, Andre Augustine, and Dan Galambos also testified that David had mentioned to them at different times that he wanted his grandparents dead.

“He said to me that he hated his grandparents so many times that I can’t remember how many it was,” said Bristol, who added that David’s preferred method of dispatching Lawrence and Lucille Lamb was by poisoning them.

About a week after first hearing David make such remarks, Bristol said he went to Jerry, telling him that his son, David, might be planning to “off the old man.”

And what was Jerry’s response? Lewis asked.

“He put his fingers to his lips and said, ‘Shhhhh,’” Bristol answered.

Despite this testimony, the grandparents, as well as Jerry and Laurieanne, continued to publicly support David, professing to disbelieve the statements. They were, they proclaimed, manufactured by the district attorney’s office in an attempt to frame David. Nevertheless, as a result of what he had heard, Lewis filed additional charges against David, accusing him of solicitation of murder—with himself and David’s grandparents as the intended victims—and conspiracy to murder, with Elie Estephan as the potential prey. Since David had already been charged with soliciting the murders of his grandparents, the information furnished by the inmates led to no additional charges on that count.

Of the two new charges, the conspiracy accusation was by far the more serious. As far as the courts were concerned, a conviction on conspiracy to murder carried the same penalty as one on murder: twenty-five years to life. On the other hand, the solicitation count was comparatively benign. A conviction on that charge carried a maximum sentence of only six years.

Shortly after filing the new charges, Lewis asked for a meeting with his superiors in the district attorney’s office to discuss his possible immediate withdrawal from the case. The decision was that Lewis would not withdraw at that time. The reasoning was that the district attorney had decided long before not to be pressured into withdrawing a prosecutor until the current proceeding had been completed. Otherwise a defendant who wanted to delay legal action against himself could indefinitely postpone it simply by threatening the prosecutor. A number of cases—this one in particular—are so complicated that it may take a prosecutor months to prepare. That work could then be negated by the defendant making a threat. If the district attorney’s office responded to every threat by withdrawing the prosecutor, it also would be an effective way for a defendant to effortlessly get rid of a prosecutor he thought was doing too good a job, hoping that the replacement prosecutor would be less efficient.

With the decision made for him to continue as prosecutor, Lewis returned to questioning the inmates. There were other issues that he wanted to bring out as well, ones that would send him back to amend the charge sheet yet again. By the time
those
issues had been probed, David, in addition to the accusations he already faced, also would be charged with bribing a witness, offering to bribe a witness, and solicitation of perjury; Laurieanne with offering to bribe a witness, bribing a witness, conspiring to bribe a witness, and solicitation of perjury; and Jerry with conspiring to bribe a witness and solicitation of perjury. Plus, one other family member, Brad Sallard, David’s brother-in-law, would be accused of trying to bribe a witness. The charges came about this way:

Rojas, David’s inmate barber friend, who had testified that he did not pursue David’s request to help him find a hit man, also swore that David paid him $200 in anticipation that he would lie for him on the witness stand.

However, since inmates are not allowed to have cash, the money was not given directly to Rojas. Rather, according to Lewis, it was left for him in a sealed envelope at the home of his stepmother, Concha Rojas, who testified that there had, indeed, been a plain white envelope containing cash delivered to her house and addressed to her stepson.

Concha Rojas’s granddaughter, Anna Marie Aguirre, testified that the envelope was dropped off at the Rojas home by a blond-haired woman who arrived in a white van driven by a man. When asked if she could identify the woman, Aguirre pointed to Laurieanne.

But the real kicker was additional testimony from David Gerhardt, the inmate who claimed that David offered to let him live at the Lamb mortuary and work for the Sconces while he planned the murder of Walt Lewis.

With Lewis pumping him, Gerhardt, who proved to be an extremely articulate witness, spun a tale about a plot that would have been worthy of Len Deighton for its complexity and shrewdness, a tale that would have been extremely damaging to the Sconces if it had been related by anyone but a convicted felon.

Under Lewis’s questioning, Gerhardt said the idea had been dreamed up by David. According to the plan, Gerhardt was to contact the prosecutor and volunteer to testify against David. When he got on the stand, however, he was supposed to say that Lewis and Diaz had put pressure on him to appear in court against David because they wanted to frame the crematorium operator. What the prosecutor and detective were to have done, Gerhardt was to say, was ply him with information from David’s confidential file and order him to reveal it on the stand under the guise of information gleaned from conversations between him and David.

In theory, when he testified about the alleged frame-up, the prosecution of David and his family would be thrown into disorder. Maybe, with any luck, it would have to be abandoned altogether.

Gerhardt’s reward for participating in this intrigue was to be $2500.

But there was one other condition. Before Gerhardt would get the money, David insisted that he sign a statement summarizing their agreement. This Gerhardt was reluctant to do.

He not only was hesitant to sign the document, Gerhardt said, but he had serious doubts about the efficacy of the plot, telling David there was too much of a chance it could backfire. David, however, had argued that he was going to give Gerhardt such solid information that it would appear that the
only
place it could have come from would have been the prosecutor’s file. The information was
so
good, David said, that there would be no way for anyone to cast doubt on Gerhardt’s claim that it had come from investigators.

Gerhardt said that when he continued to exhibit reluctance, David started turning the screws. First, David’s wife, Barbara, came to see him and promised to deposit $160 in his jail account as a down payment on the full amount. Then Jerry got in touch with him, verifying that the deposit had been made. Then he was visited again by Barbara, who brought along her brother, Brad Sallard. On that visit, Gerhardt said, they gave him a bag full of climes. Later, he added, Laurieanne sent him gift packages containing socks, underwear, and a
Penthouse
magazine.

To substantiate the inmate’s
real
testimony, Lewis introduced two letters that Gerhardt said he had received from Laurieanne.

One, dated September 1, 1987, was designed to encourage him by quoting a passage from Ephesians which dealt with King David’s imprisonment and the biblical figure’s ability to endure. The letter also urged Gerhardt to testify honestly. It was signed with a religious platitude.

The second letter, dated the next day, September 2, addressed David as a “friend.” It quoted from a hymn that was part of the Chapelbelles’ repertoire and gushed platitudes about angels and God’s promises. Laurie signed it with their nicknames, Mom and Coach Sconce.

Lewis further corroborated Gerhardt’s claims by calling a woman, Stephanie Moten, who worked in the cashier’s office of the L.A. County Jail. She said that on September fourth a man who identified himself as “Mr. Sallard” deposited $160 into Gerhardt’s account.

Lewis did not offer any corroboration for Gerhardt’s testimony regarding the alleged roles of Barbara and Jerry in the bribery attempt. Barbara, Jerry and Laurieanne were not charged. Charges against Sallard are still awaiting a probable cause hearing.

24

The defense, naturally, was anxious to demolish the testimony of the inmates who had spoken against David. One attempt to do this came from David himself.

When Warren had been on the stand detailing the alleged murder plot against Lewis, he also told how David had mentioned to him his involvement in another proposed escapade, one that came about, Warren said, when he and David were discussing ways of murdering people. David suggested that poison might be the perfect weapon, remarking specifically that one way to accomplish the job might be to use leaves from the poinsettia plant, which could be added to an innocent-looking salad. Another, he said, was to use a compound called “zytel.” When Warren uttered the strange-sounding word, David straightened in his chair. “Hook, line, and sinker,” he muttered sotto voce.

At the time, Detective Diaz happened to be sitting on David’s immediate left. In Pasadena Municipal Court, the defense and prosecution tables abut end to end, in effect forming one long table. Seating at the table was fairly standard. Going from right to left, looking from the bench, was the prosecutor, his chief investigator, the defense attorney, and the defendant. The defendant’s attorney, in this case Roger Diamond, would usually be sitting next to Diaz, a buffer between the prosecution team and the defendant, but Diamond had difficulty hearing in his right ear and so had moved to David’s other side. This put Diaz in a unique position, literally, since David had a habit of keeping up a steady stream of patter during the proceedings.

At first, when he made the comment regarding Warren’s testimony, Diaz thought David was speaking to him.

“Pardon?” the detective said.

David whispered that Warren had fallen into his trap, that he, David, had fed Warren the word “zytel” just to see if he would repeat it. And he had. Diaz glanced sideways at David. What the hell
is
this? he asked himself. David was claiming on one hand that he had never talked to anyone in jail about anything remotely related to murder, but on the other hand he was saying that he baited a trap
during a conversation about murder
, so that one of the snitches would repeat what David wanted said, thereby proving what David suspected—that he was being ratted upon. From Diaz’s viewpoint, the very fact that David fed Warren the word “zytel” was an admission that he
had
been talking to fellow prisoners.

Had he fed Warren the word before he realized that he was going to be turned in? the detective wondered. Or was it afterward, in an attempt to cover up? As far as the detective was concerned, David’s back-door admission that he had talked at least to Warren about murdering others strengthened rather than weakened what the inmates had said about his potential dangerousness. David’s affirmation only gave credence to their testimony.

Apparently, Person agreed. When Lewis asked the judge on December eighteenth to revoke David’s bail order—that is, to make it impossible for him to be released even if he could have come up with the $500,000—Person went along. Lewis’s request also marked the end of testimony. At that point Person gathered his papers and gaveled the court into an indefinite recess. He wanted to study the transcripts and the evidence, he said, to determine how to proceed.

Five months later, on May 9, 1988, Person summoned Jerry, Laurieanne, and David, along with their lawyers and Lewis, back into the courtroom to hear his decision. What he said surprised no one: that he had determined that there was sufficient evidence to bring the Sconces to trial. But the fervor of his response was unexpected.

Person began reading his thirty-seven-page ruling sedately enough by acknowledging the uniqueness of the case. “It has raised a number of legal and factual issues of first impression in this state,” he said. “In fact, the complaint in and of itself weaves a pattern of allegations which this court believes to be unique in the history of law of the state of California and perhaps in this nation.”

In what would prove to be incredible understatement, he added: “I am fairly certain that before the legacy of this case is final, that the appellate courts and perhaps this state’s supreme court will be reviewing this case and the many issues raised by it.”