The most used disclaimer:
The TV show "Starsky and Hutch", and the characters from it
are the property of the persons who hold the copyrights
and other legal rights to them.
This story is a work of fiction, written for pleasure only
and not for profit. It is not intended, in any way,
to infringe on these preexisting copyrights.

SNAPPED

Jacqueline©2021-09-18

The public, the defendant’s legal team, the prosecutor’s team, the clerk, the members of the jury, and the judge all took their places in the courtroom again after lunch, ready to hear the closing arguments.

The honorable Judge William T. Barnes re-opened the proceedings and with his deep, authoritative voice, summoned the head defense attorney to address the members of the jury.

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury,” Robert Madison spoke in his warm voice, as he approached the jury box,
“Over the past few weeks, you have been presented with a barrage of information, both verbal as visual, through testimonies of witnesses – albeit not witnesses to the actual act – but character witnesses. These witnesses testified on behalf of defendant’s character. And all, bar none, spoke highly of defendant both on a personal and professional level. It is true that defendant is not a perfect human being, but then who is? Perfection does not exist. None of you members of the jury are without flaws; neither are the rest of us present in this courtroom today. No matter what age, gender, creed, color, religion, profession…… none of us are perfect or without flaws. There is not one person on the planet who can truly say he or she has never made a mistake. Has never made a miscalculation. Has never made a misinterpretation. Not one person on the planet hasn’t done at least one thing that he or she has come to regret during the course of their lifetime. We are all made of a different fabric. Some of us may have lifelong regrets over trivialities that others don’t even spend a microsecond worth of thoughts about. Some have no regrets about grave mistakes, grave misunderstandings. Grave incidents with grave consequences. A common factor in all incidents, big or small, are feelings. Feelings often blur rationale which in most cases cause incidents that otherwise would not happen. If only we could do without feelings, then we would all interpret everything around us in a clinical, sterile, way and most incidents would most likely not occur. Of course, that is only half true, because without feelings, we would probably have less of a conscience which means certain crimes would still keep courtrooms like the one we are in today, busy. But cases such as the one we are here for today and have been these past few weeks….. such cases are purely the result of feelings ….. of misunderstanding or misinterpretation of feelings…….. of feelings of passion ……. Feelings of lust, of rejection, and disappointment……. Feelings of shame, rage, disbelief, shock and in the end feelings of endless regret and loss.”

Madison paused briefly, looked each member of the jury in the eyes before half-turning and pointing at his client.
“There is no denying that defendant is guilty of the charges as put forward. Defendant immediately, at the crime scene, admitted to indeed having been the one responsible for taking the life of the victim. As I stand before you it is not my intention to plead for defendant’s innocence. What I do want you to consider, though, is to place yourself in defendant’s shoes. To feel what defendant, albeit mistakenly, felt, thought, interpreted, and how that would have made you feel. How that would have made you react. Defendant made a mistake. A grave mistake with huge consequences that defendant is completely aware of and fully willing to bear. Defendant is a consummate professional, admired and revered by many, who has served many of us here present in this courtroom, whether we were aware of it or not. But defendant is also a mere human being of flesh and blood. A human being with feelings. Feelings that blurred defendant’s rationale and made things look different to defendant than they actually were. So, all I ask of you is to put yourself in defendant’s shoes while you go over the evidence. Consider the deep grief and remorse defendant has shown and consider how defendant is already experiencing the biggest, severest punishment due to feelings of sorrow, confusion, and guilt that will without a doubt last until defendant’s last breath. Thank you.”

The eyes of the detective and Captain met for a moment before they both focused on Tom Evans, the lead prosecutor in the case. Evans, like Madison before him, approached the jury box and nodded at the members of the jury.

“Ladies and gentlemen of the jury. The past few weeks we have been going over a truly open and shut case. Guilty. There is no other verdict that you can pass because defendant has, immediately and openly, pleaded guilty. Then why did this case still take up weeks of your and everybody else’s time to come to this final day of judgment? Because, as Mr. Madison just said, and this happens to be something the prosecution agrees with, this case more than most, shows us that even the most dutiful, knowledgeable, law-abiding, upright, and outstanding person can make a decision, whether it is conscious or not, that will forever change lives or, as in this case, end a life. We all know stories of young people who, in the heat of summer, intoxicated by fun and a sense of adventure, or just because they’re feeling hot, jump off a bridge or a rock to cool off in the water. They hit the bottom of the creek and they either end up dead or paralyzed from the neck down, just because of a bad choice that took less than a second to make. That’s not even long enough to determine whether it was a conscious choice or not. But these unfortunate people only change or end their own lives with such actions.
Most of us also know people or have even done this themselves, who in certain situations acted completely out of their own character, surprising themselves and those who’ve known them for a considerable time. These out-of-character actions are sometimes good and positive and in those cases can bring new and unexpected experiences and growth to people’s lives. But just as often out-of-character actions are bad and when I say bad, I actually mean the worst, because often out-of-character actions, whether they’re positive or negative, are invoked by feelings….. by emotions. And when such actions are invoked by bad or negative emotions, they are often devastating and deadly, both for the perpetrator as the victim. And that is what happened in this case. In defendant’s own words, “something snapped”. Everything went red and black, out of focus, a mixture of blind rage, rejection, embarrassment, unrequited love gave defendant a super-human strength that ended the victim’s life in a most gruesome, horrific, way. There is no denying that defendant is guilty of this heinous crime. But does the prosecution think defendant would do this again? That if defendant would get out before serving the full sentence because of good behavior, something in defendant could “snap” again, resulting in a similar, horrible, death? The answer to those questions is a simple but firm no.
The prosecution thinks that what caused defendant to come to this terrible, uncharacteristic action, was a love and a wanting so deep for this particular person, the victim, that it became defendant’s singular reason for living, for getting up in the morning, for functioning not just professionally, but as a human being. Defendant’s whole life and entire purpose for living centered around and focused on the victim’s presence in defendant’s life, both professionally and privately. And this has been the case, increasingly so, for about two decades, during which time, lines began to blur. During these two decades, defendant began to interpret things according to wishes, desires, and dreams, rather than reality. The victim interpreted things differently which became fatally clear on the night of November 15. According to defendant’s own admission, the victim did not become angry but seemed more surprised, or even shocked, when defendant interpreted something the victim said the wrong way, resulting in a physical action that caused the victim to set things straight, those were defendant’s own words, in a still friendly, even humorous way.
That, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, was the moment something within defendant “snapped”. The fact that the victim, innocently, rejected defendant’s deep and obsessive love with a light, humorous remark, caused the blind, embarrassed rage with which defendant ended victim’s life in an outburst so grossly violent that even large portions of the interior of the apartment were destroyed……. After some time, defendant notified the emergency services and confessed at the scene. Officers and detectives described defendant’s demeanor in their reports as broken and devastated. One officer even used the terms inconsolable and catatonic. Therefore, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, prosecution – although convinced of defendant’s self-admitted guilt – is of the opinion that defendant already executed the worst sentence possible: the death of the victim which will torture defendant’s heart and soul for the remainder of defendant’s life. The prosecution asks the members of the jury to take that into their consideration and rests its case. Thank you.”

***********************************************************************************************

It took the jury 7 hours after hearing the final arguments and receiving their instructions to come to a verdict. Court was called to session and the jury returned to the courtroom. The foreperson handed the verdict to the bailiff who, in turn, handed the document to the judge.

Judge Barnes read the verdict and the motivation, then nodded at the foreperson.
“Mr. Foreperson, has the jury reached a verdict?”

“Yes, your honor.”

“Will the defendant rise? Mr. Foreperson, deliver your motivation and verdict.”

“Thank you, your honor. During the course of this case, the jury has been presented with photographic evidence of the crime scene and the autopsy, written evidence such as police reports and statements, verbal evidence such as testimonies on the stand, and taped audio and filmed interrogations and statements. The jury has taken all evidence as well as the opening and closing arguments of both defense and prosecution into consideration to weigh its verdict. There was and is no doubt on the question of guilt. On that, both defense and prosecution agreed as did the jury. The main question that remained was the measure of punishment. The verdict of the jury in this particular case finds its weight mostly in the filmed interrogations of defendant. The jury, unanimously, was convinced that the fatal outcome of defendant’s actions on the night of November 15 itself is the severest degree of punishment that could be dealt to defendant. Defendant’s realization of that outcome and its consequences have rendered defendant a broken shell of his former self, as witnesses have testified. The psychiatric reports on defendant’s state of mind have also unanimously convinced the jury that there is absolutely no chance that defendant would repeat the crime for which he now stands trial. This was an isolated incident of an extremely personal nature. Nevertheless, this heinous crime was committed by defendant as he immediately confessed at the scene of the crime to the first responders. The motivation of defendant’s fatal action on the night of November 15 constitutes a crime of passion which is a crime that has been committed under extreme rage or emotional disturbance, commonly referred to as “heat of passion”. The most consequential evidence on which the jury based its unanimous verdict is this statement during defendant’s interrogation on November 16; if the court could start the tape at mark 45:17, your honor.”

The judge gestured to the court’s clerk to start the filmed footage of the interrogation.

Homicide Det. Gentry “Now, in your own words, take us back as much as you can …. As much as you remember now…what exactly triggered you? Was it anything the victim did, or..”

Defendant “No ….. it……it just was ….. You know what I just told you ….. he stood there in my kitchen …. Just chopping some ….. I don’t know ….. onions, I think. And ….. and I …. He ….. the light just hit him from a certain angle …. And all I could think of was how ….. how …..perfect he was…. Perfect hair, perfect eyelashes …… perfect smile. And….. he was talking and I was listening … at least, he thought I was listening, but ….. I couldn’t hear a thing he was saying ….. I could only hear my own thoughts …… like a mantra repeating itself ….. He’s beautiful ….. he’s perfect …..how come you never realized …… realized how much….. how much you….. love him…….”

Gentry “And then? …… Go on……”

Defendant “Then …… then I guess I expressed my thoughts out loud …. I ….. I think I said I love you ….”

Gentry “What happened next?”

Defendant “He uh, he kind of raised his brow and uh, as he …. As he put the onions into the pan he said something like ….. like my remark was an odd comment to what he’d been talking about but that he’d take it as a sign to get to the clue of his story ….. But I ….. I ….. my boundaries were just …. gone and so I repeated what I’d said ….. I told him I love you …. again ……”

Gentry “And what did he do?”

Defendant “He casually said he loved me too, and something about the dish taking a few more minutes on the stove and if I wanted another beer ….”

Gentry “Is that when you…..?”

Defendant “No, he uh, he handed me the beer and I ….. I took it, but I uh, I held on to his hand and uh….. I, again, told him I loved him and he uh …….. said something like, that he’d heard me the first time and …. Then he looked at me and said that maybe I’d already had too many beers…..”

Gentry “And?”

Defendant “And then it …. It just escalated…. I ….. I told him I was serious, that I really loved him and he gave me this ….. look …. A kind of ….. bewildered look ….. a look I’d seen so many times in his eyes but never addressed to me …… only at things or people or situations that he found odd or …. couldn’t wrap his brain around …..and my ….. my ….. I could feel my heart rate increase, but not in a good way ……He asked me what I meant …… and I ….. I guess I panicked ….. I blurted out that I loved him, and that probably my feelings for him …… developed over the years or changed …. Or, I don’t know ….. I just tried to explain what he meant to me and that I …. that I ….. loved him….”

Gentry “What happened next?”

Defendant “His eyes ……. His face sort of …. He looked confused and I think the first thing he said was something like ….. I believe he said …. Yes, he said that sure …. He loved me too, like brothers…. And then his eyes, those beautiful, long-lashed, eyes …… the look in his eyes was a mix of confusion, maybe even fear ….. and then ….. then he ……. “

Gentry “Go on …..”

Defendant “I guess he …… Oh, I don’t know what he was trying to do ….. He …. He made a …… joke out of it ……a stupid, silly, joke ….. He ….. as he looked at me he said that ….. if we loved each other as brothers and one of us ……. He clearly meant me, but he said one of us ….. one of us would …. act ….. out on that love ……. He asked if that wouldn’t be insect ……… and then he turned around to stir the food in the pan …….”

Gentry “Was that when you …..”

Defendant “He never turned his face back to me ……. It was like ….. it was like there was a freight train running through my head, or a Boeing or something …… the noise was unbearable and all I heard through that noise was his stupid incest joke …… INSECT ……. I felt I had lost him….. I’d bared my heart and soul to him ….. my innermost feelings ….. and he thought I was joking …. Or he hoped I was joking …… either way I’d lost him …… I had confessed my love for him and he hadn’t reciprocated …. If I’d just kept my feelings to myself ….. at least we could have remained friends, but I….. I just …… I felt I’d lost him forever in that moment and that’s when I just ……. snapped.”

Judge Banner nodded at the court clerk to turn off the monitor.

“Mr. Foreman, you may continue.”

“Thank you, your honor. As we just heard from defendant’s own account, the victim’s innocently humorous response was the complete opposite of what defendant had made himself believe the victim’s response would be to his confession of his feelings and subsequent advances. Said response provoked defendant, who in the heat of passion, then committed the crime. A killing that occurs under the heat of passion is done without premeditation, which essentially reduces a killing from murder to voluntary manslaughter. And so this jury has no other option than to render the following verdict. The jury unanimously agreed to the following sentence for defendant:  to serve a term of eleven years in California state prison, consequently to pay a reparatory fine of $10,000 to the immediate surviving relatives of the victim as well as 2 years following mandatory counseling services, which can be followed during his prison term and finally the loss of his right to own firearms after having served his term in prison. This is the jury’s verdict, your honor.”

Judge Banner nodded at the members of the Jury, then addressed the defendant.

“Does defendant understand the verdict as it was just read out to the court?”

“Yes, your honor.”

“Then I, William T. Barnes, judge at this trial of the DA’s Office against defendant Kenneth William Hutchinson, age 46, former Detective. Sgt. Of the BCPD, hereby confirm the unanimous verdict as rendered by the jury in case 89.473-BCHD/PC.
Defendant is hereby sentenced to a term of 11 years in California State Prison and is ordered to pay a fine of $10,000 to the immediate surviving relatives of the victim, Detective Sgt. David Michael Starsky, age 42. Defendant is also required to 2 years of mandatory counseling services, which sentence can be followed during his prison term. Finally, defendant will no longer have the right to own firearms after having served his term in prison. So the jury has decided unanimously and so I, judge William T. Barnes, have hereby confirmed.

I thank the jury members for their services and order defendant to be taken to processing to prepare him for transfer to his new accommodation. This trial is hereby concluded. Court adjourned.”