Savage Son (30 page)

McDonald finished his closing argument and ADA Fred Felcman immediately popped up from his chair. He did not look happy.

“I always listen very intently to what the defense attorney has to say, and I listened for an hour, and I have never heard such rambling and doublespeak in all my life. Never does he talk about the defendant. He never talks about the evidence.” Felcman shook his head at the thought.

“I don’t quite understand this moral thing with Chris Brashear, that because he pulled the trigger, he is more evil or more heinous than the defendant. The defendant took his family out and ate bread with them, knowing full well they were going to be dead in a few minutes, and brought them back to be assassinated. Chris Brashear was the weapon that the defendant used to kill his family. He could have substituted another person in, but it’s always the defendant bringing back his family to be assassinated.”

Felcman spoke about the Christmas card Bart sent him before the trial and how it was indicative of his future potential as a threat. “I said to him, ‘When you sent me that card, what was that all about?’ He said, ‘Well, I don’t dislike you, Mr. Felcman.’ Ladies and gentlemen, he has no reason to dislike his family,” the prosecutor stated, and turned to look at the defendant. “He had absolutely no reason whatsoever to hate his mother or brother or father, but in his mind”—he poked his temple to hammer the point home—“he perceived in his mind that they had offended him in some manner, even though it had nothing to do with reality whatsoever.”

Felcman turned away from the jury to glance back at Bart. In a booming voice, he declared, “It doesn’t matter if you treat this defendant with kindness, as Mr. Kent Whitaker does. It doesn’t matter if you’re the ideal father. In his mind, somewhere along the line, he perceives it differently. You are now in danger. And not only that, there’s nothing you can do to stop it. There’s nothing you can do to stop it, until he’s in the grave.”

Felcman took issue with Randy McDonald’s guilt tactic. “I’m sorry Mr. McDonald said something about you killing him. Ladies and gentlemen, you’re going to answer these questions, but the state of Texas will execute him, all right? It was shameful for him to put you in that position, absolutely shameful.”

Felcman moved on to whether or not Bart Whitaker would prove to be a future threat. “He talked seven people, five on the murders and two on the burglaries, to do things with him. He manipulated a trained psychologist to write a letter that said,
Don’t worry, he won’t do anything like this again.
He even convinced Lynne Sorsby to marry him after he was a suspect in a capital murder case and had lived a double life in college. This is a good salesman. This guy could sell ice to an Eskimo. Even Lynne Ayres, the educational diagnostician, said, ‘He looks at people as tools.’ Now he’s looking at you as a tool to try to get out of the death penalty.”

Felcman continued to paint the picture of the real Bart Whitaker. “It doesn’t take him long to develop the perception that he hates you, or somehow you have offended him, and you deserve to die. He only does things when it comes to his advantage.”

The prosecutor had had just about enough of the defendant. “He’s the most heinous, evil thing you can think of. Without him,” he declared to the jurors, “you’re not here, and Mr. Whitaker still has his wife and son. The only person who is morally blameworthy is the defendant.”

Felcman had a final bit of advice for the jury panel. “Hug each other, make your verdict, and go home.”

At 11:55
A.M
., Judge Vacek instructed the jury members to head back to the jurors’ quarters to begin deliberating the fate of Bart Whitaker, and whether he should live or die.

Five hours later, the jury had not reached a conclusion. As a result, Judge Vacek ordered they be sequestered for the night, and to resume deliberations the following day.

March 8, 2007
Fort Bend County Courthouse
Richmond, Texas

Judge Vacek took his seat at the head of the courtroom. The members of the jury were quietly led to the jury box.

The judge wasted no time in getting down to business.

“Let the record reflect that we’re here in Cause Number 42,969, the
State of Texas
versus
Thomas Bartlett Whitaker.
The jury is present. The state is present. The defendant is present in person and with counsel. I’ve received the court’s charge on punishment from the jury. I will read the jury’s answers.

“Issue number one.
Do you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that there is a probability that the Defendant would commit criminal acts of violence that would constitute a continuing threat to society?

“Answer:
Yes.

“Issue number two.
Do you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant actually
c
aused the death of the deceased, or did not actually cause the death of the deceased, but intended to kill the deceased or another, or anticipated that a human life would be taken? You are instructed that in answering this issue, only the conduct of the defendant can be considered, and that the instructions pertaining to the law of parties heretofore given you cannot now be considered in answering this issue.

“Answer:
Yes.

“Issue number three.
Do you find from the evidence, taking into consideration all of the evidence, including the circumstances of the offense, the defendant’s character and background, and the personal moral culpability of the defendant, that there is sufficient mitigating circumstances or circumstances to warrant that a sentence of life imprisonment, rather than a death sentence be imposed? You are instructed that in answering this issue, you shall answer the issue yes or no. You may not answer the issue no unless the jury unanimously agrees, and you may not answer yes unless ten or more jurors agree. The jury need not agree on what particular evidence supports an affirmative finding on this issue. The jury shall consider mitigating evidence to be evidence that a juror might regard as reducing the defendant’s moral blameworthiness.

“Answer:
No.

“We, the jury, having answered the foregoing issues, return the same into the court as our verdict.

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, is this a unanimous verdict?”

“Yes,” the jury members declared in unison.

“Thomas Bartlett Whitaker,” Judge Vacek addressed the defendant directly, “is there anything you wish to say to this court before I pronounce sentence?”

“No, sir,” Bart answered. He never showed any emotion upon hearing his fate.

“Then, in Cause Number 42,969, the
State of Texas
versus
Thomas Bartlett Whitaker,
upon the verdicts received by the court from the jury, rendered unanimously by the jury in this cause, that is the verdict of the jury unanimously finding that you are guilty of the offense of capital murder, as charged by the state in the indictment in this case, and their verdicts answering Special Issue number one unanimously yes, answering Special Issue number two unanimously yes, and answering Special Issue number three unanimously no. You are guilty of the offense of capital murder, as charged by the state of Texas, and that you be punished in accordance with the rules of Texas law. That is, that you be sentenced to death by means of lethal injection. Sheriff, you may take him away.”

The courtroom remained silent as Bart Whitaker was escorted away to meet his final destiny.

Wednesday, September 19, 2007
Fort Bend County Courthouse
Richmond, Texas

Several months after Bart Whitaker was found guilty and sentenced to death, and after Steven Champagne was given a fifteen-year prison term, Chris Brashear finally entered a plea of guilty, as per his deal with the district attorney’s office. In exchange, he was spared a death sentence and, instead, received life in prison.

During Brashear’s hearing, Kent Whitaker was allowed to address the young man as part of the courtroom proceedings and offer up his victim impact statement. Many times, the statement can become a fiery scene between a murderer and the victim’s family. Kent Whitaker was there, instead, to let Chris Brashear know he was forgiven.

“Chris, this is a horrible day for everyone.” Kent nodded, almost as if he were embarrassed for both men to have to be where they were. “Not just for you, but also your family and loved ones, my family and loved ones, Tricia’s entire family, and everyone who loved Kevin and Tricia. It is also horrible for me, as I have to once again face, in such a public way, everything that was taken from me on December 10, 2003.

“But, Chris, the truth is that it was your actions, and your actions alone, that actually took the lives of Kevin and Tricia, and it was you who tried to take my life as well. You located my gun, you loaded the bullets, and you pulled the trigger.

“I am not happy that you are standing here about to spend the rest of your life behind bars. I
truly
wish that you, Bart, and Steven had possessed the moral strength to recognize how wrong this was, and had never come to Houston that night. I wish you were out enjoying life, as you could have been, as Tricia and Kevin could have been. But the three of you chose to commit this heinous crime, and society must be protected from people who have such low regard for others.

“The night you shot me, as I lay in the hospital, trying to decide if I could ever trust God again, some things happened that changed my life on the inside, as much as you changed my life on the outside. I made a conscious decision that night to trust God, even though I couldn’t understand why he would have let this happen. Amazingly, one of the results of my decision was that he gave me the ability to forgive everyone who was involved. This surprised me, because until then, I had been lusting for revenge, but the forgiveness was complete.

“You are facing many new challenges, and the road upon which you have placed yourself is dark and hard. But there are choices that can be made for great good, if you will ask God to give you the strength for them. I hope you will make those hard choices. Remember:
people can change.
That is the basic foundation of the Christian faith.

“The first step for all of you is to truly own up to what you did, and to accept
sole
and
complete
responsibility for your actions, without any conditions or limitations. Then you must ask all of us for forgiveness, including your parents. This is known as repentance, and it isn’t real if the realization of the depth of what you did doesn’t bring you to your knees. And while you are down there, ask Jesus to forgive you and ask him to take this and all your sins upon his back. Only when you do that can you, or any of us, expect to live a life of meaning.

“You took away the life of my wife and my son, and, in a real sense, you took my life as well. I have begun a new one, but it has been incredibly hard, and the loss is beyond your measuring. I choose to leave you with a gift to help make the building of your new life easier. You can accept it or reject it.

“Chris Brashear, I forgive you for everything.”

Afterward, Chris Brashear’s attorney, Edward Chernoff, spoke to the media plainly about his client, “He pleaded guilty today because he was guilty.”

Kent Whitaker, in true witness form, has taken his story to the masses. His appearances on
Oprah, 48 Hours,
and
20/20
to promote his book have opened doors to thousands upon thousands of more people curious to hear his tale of tragedy and forgiveness. He has taken it a step further, and on a much more personal basis, and has begun giving speeches to various churches across Texas and Arkansas. He has also been a special guest at various Christian literary gatherings in Texas and Colorado.

Kent’s story has been an inspirational anecdote for many who could not imagine the ability to forgive under such untenable circumstances. In an interview with Lauren Winchester, of the
Houston Chronicle,
Kent reiterated how God played the biggest role in changing his life:
“This was a gift I believe God gave me. The whole forgiveness thing was taken care of that night, and it was beyond what I could have done—but it happened.”

Kent added,
“I realized that maybe God had allowed me to live so I could display that unconditional love. By doing so, it surprised Bart. He could not believe that I hadn’t turned on him.”

Kent then summarized the tale:
“If someone only sees the tragic events of the crime, then they miss the real story,”
he said.
“The crime is only the framework upon which the real stories of forgiveness and God’s faithfulness are hung.”

On December 26, 2008, Kent Whitaker announced on his personal website that he would be getting re-married, to Tanya Youngling, a woman he met on a blind date. They were engaged on Christmas night.

The couple married on May 9, 2009. Kent told the
Chronicle
about his new wife,
“I am so grateful for Tanya. I had a wonderful life before the shootings, and have now been given a new one, full of hope and adventure; the way God has restored me should be an encouragement for everyone who faces hardships. Storms don’t last forever. If you trust Him through it all, in time you will emerge into the sunshine as I have. Tanya is such a precious gift.”

After the wedding, Kent and Tanya moved back into Kent’s home in Sugar Land, where his first wife, Tricia, and his youngest son, Kevin, were shot and killed by a friend of his oldest son, Bart, who had masterminded the entire plan.

Kent soon decided, however, that he and his new bride would finally sell the home and find a new place to start life anew.

“I’m moving because I’m married,”
he said, his mouth erupting in a smile.
“And that’s a wonderful, wonderful thing.”