Objection! (33 page)

2 2 2

N A N C Y G R A C E

The Carringtons are known for their good works. From golf tourna-ments to fall festivals to candlelight vigils, the fund is raising reward money and awareness for a vital cause. Currently, rewards offered by the foundation have led law enforcement to suspects in five states, all of whom are in custody. As of this writing, the foundation has paid a total of $150,500 in rewards to citizens who did the right thing by coming forward and sharing information regarding these cases. I agree with the Sunds’ position that we all have a responsibility to do our part to help make the world and our own community “a safer place,” according to their spokesperson, Kim Petersen. The Carringtons are making a difference in what can sometimes be a cold world, especially for crime victims who don’t have the money or resources to fight back.

S H A R O N R O C H A

I first met Sharon Rocha when I interviewed her for
Larry King
Live,
before the judge issued the gag order in the Laci Peterson case. At that time, both families—the Petersons and the Rochas—were standing behind Scott Peterson. Later the truth behind Peterson’s affair with Amber Frey, along with other evidence, came out, and things changed.

I subsequently met privately with Sharon Rocha in Washington, D.C., when she was there fighting for passage of Laci and Conner’s Law.

I remember it like it was yesterday. What sticks in my mind is not so much her face, what Sharon Rocha was wearing, or even what she ordered for lunch—although I remember it all very well. Mostly, I remember her pain. It was so intense, so palpable, that she could barely speak. But she was determined to see that Laci and Conner’s Law became a federal statute.

Sharon Rocha and her family have endorsed the new law, which allows a violent crime against a pregnant woman to be treated as crimes against two separate people, allowing federal prosecutors to charge an individual who kills or injures an unborn child during the commission of a crime with a separate offense for the injury or death of the child. President O B J E C T I O N !

2 2 3

Bush signed the bill into law on April 1, 2004. The statute does not override existing state laws but would instead apply to federal cases.

“As the family of Laci Peterson and her unborn son, Conner, this bill is very close to our hearts,” wrote Laci Peterson’s family in a letter to the bill’s cosponsors, Representative Melissa Hart (R-Pennsylvania) and Senator Mike DeWine (R-Ohio). The letter went on to say, “We have considered various ways we could pay tribute to Laci and Conner.

When we heard about this bill, we immediately thought of placing a request to have it named ‘Laci and Conner’s Law’ in their memory. Knowing that perpetrators who murder pregnant women will pay the price not only for the loss of the mother, but the baby as well, will help bring justice for these victims and hopefully act as a deterrent to those considering heinous acts.” It is signed by Sharon Rocha, Laci’s mother; Ron Grantski, Laci’s stepfather; her brother, Brent Rocha; her sister, Amy Rocha; and her father, Dennis Rocha.

That is the theory used by the prosecution seeking the death penalty for Scott Peterson. California law provides that if a third party intentionally harms a fetus, the act can be construed as taking a human life. To get the death penalty, there are certain aggravating circumstances that must be met, such as the murder of a law-enforcement officer; the murder of a symbol of our government, like an elected official or a judge; or mass murder. Scott Peterson was charged with killing two people, Laci and Conner, the aggravating circumstance supporting the state’s seeking the California death penalty. By convicting Peterson on murder one in Laci’s death as well as murder two in Conner’s death,

“aggravating circumstances” kicked in.

The bill had been introduced and failed over and over. Opposition from many camps repeatedly threatened its passage. Politicians couldn’t do it, paid lobbyists couldn’t pull it off, and Capitol Hill was at an impasse. Twice, in 1999 and 2001, the House of Representatives approved the legislation, but it never passed the Senate. It took Sharon Rocha—and a mother’s love—to make it happen.

2 2 4

N A N C Y G R A C E

D O M I N I C K D U N N E

When I first moved to New York, far away from my home in Georgia, to cross swords with Johnnie Cochran on my first television show for Court TV, I didn’t know a soul. I remember sitting in my office alone one day, looking at the East River, when the phone rang. On the other end was a voice I thought I knew. It was Dominick Dunne. He invited me to lunch. At the time, I didn’t know how important and influential he was. He told me that he’d been a victim of crime. His only daughter, Dominique, who was just beginning a promising acting career after a star-making performance in the movie
Poltergeist,
had been murdered in 1982. Dominick Dunne was my first friend in New York, and he remains my friend today.

In 2004, I was honored with an award from AWRT, American Women in Radio and Television. In addition to being touched by receiving the award itself, I was extremely moved when the beautiful silver statuette was presented to me by my friend Dominick. I choked back tears as I thanked the women of the organization while he stood by my side. I remember that night so well, but I also remember that first time we had lunch and how eloquent he’d been when told me about his beautiful daughter in life.

Dunne belongs to perhaps the rarest of all classes: He’s a Hollywood insider with a strong sense of conscience. After his career as a successful producer and director ended, my friend left Tinseltown branded, by his own admission, a failure. He knew he had to begin again but wasn’t sure how.

A terrible tragedy changed the course of his life forever. When Dominique was strangled to death by her ex-boyfriend, John Sweeney, Dominick was enraged by the miscarriage of justice he witnessed at Sweeney’s trial. My friend picked up a pen to vent his anger and frustration and has been an articulate, impassioned voice for victims everywhere ever since.

He has written about his ordeal in books and magazines. “The lies that are tolerated shocked me, as did the show-business aspect that has O B J E C T I O N !

2 2 5

taken over the justice system,” he wrote about the ordeal. “Anything can be said about the dead, and much was, but the killer’s grave past offenses as a beater of women were kept from the jury. The testimony of another of his victims, who had been hospitalized as a result of his acts of violence, was inexplicably ruled inadmissible. John Sweeney received a sentence of six years, which was automatically reduced to three. He was released from prison after two and a half.”

For more than two decades, my friend has committed himself to examining and revealing the flaws, the misconduct, and the blatant manipulation that taint our justice system. He has exposed wrongdoing in the Sweeney and O. J. Simpson trials, those of the Menendez brothers, and the investigation of Ethel Kennedy’s nephew Michael Skakel for the 1975 murder of fifteen-year-old Martha Moxley. In fact, if it had not been for Dunne, the Martha Moxley case likely would have gone unsolved and unprosecuted.

With his talent, Dunne could do anything he wants. He is often a lone voice in the media wilderness. He is older now—his hair is silver, he ambles along slowly, and he peers at the world through thick glasses. But his voice and his pen are stronger than ever. These words were written for him: The pen
is
mightier than the sword. He speaks as a voice for victims who have no voice, he rails against injustice, and, thank goodness, millions of people listen.

T H E L M A S O A R E S

When I first saw Lori Hacking, I was struck by how radiant she looked. In the images that flashed across the television screen after her disappearance in the summer of 2004, her smile shone brightly; still photographs and videotapes depicted a lively and beautiful young mother-to-be. To others, it seemed she had the world by the tail: a loving husband headed to medical school, a happy home, and a baby on the way. Then she vanished, seemingly without a trace. On July 19, 2004, newly pregnant Lori Hacking was reported missing by her husband, Mark, a psychology student. In their hometown of Salt Lake City, 2 2 6

N A N C Y G R A C E

Utah, volunteers swarmed the canyons, trails, paths, and acres of forest looking for where she might have been abducted or hurt while jogging.

Her husband told police her car had been parked at the jogging trail.

Almost immediately, questions surfaced, largely due to Mark Hacking’s unusual behavior. Shortly after Lori was reported missing, he’d gone to a mattress store and purchased a brand-new mattress, strapped it to the top of his car, and took it home. He hadn’t told the police about his shopping trip but instead offered that he’d been running along her jogging trail. When telltale bloodstains were allegedly found in the couple’s apartment, Hacking checked himself in to a psychiatric ward and reportedly confessed to his brothers that he had murdered his wife, having shot her as she lay sleeping on the couple’s bed, and then disposed of her body in a nearby Dumpster.

It wasn’t long before it was discovered that Hacking had been living in a house of cards, built on an elaborate foundation of lies. The biggest lie of all: Hacking had not been accepted to medical school. In fact, he had never applied—nor even finished college. Lori went missing when his story began to unravel.

I interviewed Lori’s mother, Mrs. Thelma Soares, that summer, when Lori’s remains had not yet been located. Soares’s emotional wounds were fresh and raw. The devastated mother repeatedly touched her fingers to her throat and her earrings. I was moved when I found out why. The pieces of jewelry she was wearing had belonged to Lori, and Soares told me she wears them to feel close to the daughter she loves and lost. Even in her grief, her courage and deep religious faith shone through.

During my conversation with Soares, I learned much about her relationship with Lori. When Soares began adoption proceedings in hopes of getting a long-hoped-for baby girl, she was told she was number five hundred on the list for adoption. Five hundred! But then, like a miracle, Soares found Lori. Her eyes filled with tears as she told me one story about Lori as a little girl. When she was around three years old, her long curly hair would tangle every time Soares tried to brush it out O B J E C T I O N !

2 2 7

for her, no matter how much No More Tangles she poured on. Finally it was time for Lori’s first haircut. When Soares went into the hair salon carrying little Lori, a man and his wife stood up quickly, walked over, and begged her not to cut the child’s beautiful locks.

During our interview, Soares described Mark Hacking as a perfect son-in-law, who cooked surprise dinners for his wife, sold his own car to buy her a beautiful engagement ring, and asked Soares to move in with the couple when they bought a house. I interviewed Lori’s brother, Paul Soares, as well, and he agreed—Mark never gave even a hint that anything was wrong. Thelma Soares even described term papers Hacking had her proofread for his “psychology” degree. One was about an orangutan mistreated as a baby, and the other was about art therapy. I was struck by the level of detail in Hacking’s incredible web of lies. I wanted to ask Soares about the facts surrounding Lori’s death and what she thought the appropriate punishment for her son-in-law would be, but her pain seemed so intense that I just couldn’t bring up the issue of sentencing. She spoke of Lori in the present tense. I instinctively believed that the finality of a possible sentence, be it life behind bars or the death penalty, would have been too painful for her to discuss at that time, so I did not broach the subject.

Although she had wept openly throughout our entire interview, it was clear to me Soares had a strength of purpose. This grieving mother is channeling her pain into greater good. Thelma Soares has founded the Lori Kay Soares Hacking Memorial Fund. All monies donated to the fund go to the University of Utah to help women who have suffered financial hardship, abuse, and family difficulties. Lori had been an out-standing student at the university, having received the prestigious President’s Award, a scholastic honor. How many lives—those of our sisters, daughters, mothers, friends—will be changed because of Thelma Soares’s bravery and her desire in the face of overwhelming grief to turn evil into good? I know of one already: mine. She inspired me heart and soul.

2 2 8

N A N C Y G R A C E

S T O P P I N G T H E B L A M E A N D

T A K I N G R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y

At the end of the day,
it is the job of our justice system to protect all the parties involved. They have more of a responsibility in this than the media or any other party does. While advocates and concerned families must continue to speak out, the simple truth is that the courts are not doing enough to protect victims’ rights. That must change.

After a criminal trial, a victim can pursue a civil lawsuit against the defendant, but the reality is that most defendants don’t have any money anyway. Most times, victims are so torn up by the case that the thought of going through everything a second time in court is too much. But victims who have been slandered by the defense for being “promiscuous”

or liking rough sex should have grounds for an oral-slander charge.

Everything that’s said in court is public record. If the defendant himself did not take the stand and utter those words, I would like to see the possibility of legal action against the attorney. It’s all there in the court documents. I know it would be very difficult, but many victims would gain a degree of empowerment in having a court find in their favor on this matter. I am certainly in favor of slapping defense attorneys who raise these frivolous attacks on the victim or her reputation with ethical violations.