The Pastor's Wife (18 page)

“I did not understand that.”

“You did not understand that?”

“No, sir.”

“Well, I mean, the vehicle was searched and inventoried by the Alabama Bureau of Investigation and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation.”

Shaking his head, Dan said, “I never gave it a single thought.”

“Well, today, do you know that happened?”

“I never gave it a single thought.”

“Well, today, do you know that happened or not?” Farese persisted.

“Yes, sir.”

“Well, so you know that the Alabama Bureau of Investigation and the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation had both searched that vehicle. Correct? You know that today?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Did you call anyone with the TBI on or about April the sixth, 2006, and tell them that you found something in that vehicle?”

“No, sir. I did not call TBI.”

With his impatience etching every word, Farese rephrased the question. “Did you call any of the authorities on or about April sixth 2006, and say you found anything in the van?”

“Yes, I called former District Attorney Elizabeth Rice.”

“Ms. Rice is the same one you talked to about Matthew's problems with medicine that's not listed anywhere? Is that correct?”

“Yes sir. That is correct.”

“Did you tell them that you had recovered an orange tackle box with shotgun shells in that vehicle?”

“I did.”

“Shotgun shells?”

“In the back of the van when we were…”

Farese interrupted. “The tailgate on that van lifts up, is that correct?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And then there's a space between the seats—the seats you sit in. To the best of your recollection…was it under anything?”

“Yes, it was under a lot of things.”

“Clothing?”

“I don't recall clothing. There was a stroller and beach toys…Those were the items that I recall right offhand.”

Just so I'm straight on this—after the TBI and the ABI had conducted their search and investigation in this case, you found an orange box with shotgun shells?”

“Yes, sir, that is correct.”

Farese next asked Dan about Diana Crawford, the counselor in Nashville who'd been seeing the children since May of 2006. “Do you remember speaking to Ms. Crawford on or about October sixteenth, 2006, and telling Ms. Crawford that you had spoken to the D.A.
about Mary's visitation with her children? Do you recall that?”

“I did not call to speak to the D.A. about Mary's visitation.”

“That's not my question. Did you speak to the counselor and tell her that the district attorney wanted visitation with Mary ratcheted down? Because the district attorney was concerned with the tampering of witnesses and Mary's persona. Did you say anything of the like to the children's counselor?”

“I received a phone call in reference to an article in a magazine.”

“Keep going,” Farese urged.

“‘Keep going'?”

“I want you to tell the jury what you told the counselor about Mary being able to visit her children and why you were cutting off visitation with them.”

“I didn't say I was going to do that,” Dan said in the same calm voice he'd maintained throughout the cross-examination.

“What does ‘ratchet down' mean?” Farese asked.

“Those were not my words.”

“Yes or no, were those the words you gave to the counselor?”

“Yes, sir, and the reason for that was the danger of trying this case in the media.”

“I thought the reason was the danger, if Mary was seen with her children, she would be considered as a loving mother, am I wrong?” Farese countered.

The state objected again and the attorneys whispered arguments to the judge. Upon returning, Farese asked, “My question, Mr. Winkler, is, What does ‘persona of Mary' mean to you?”

After a long pause, Dan said, “The way she's perceived, I guess.”

“The way she's perceived. Would you agree with me that if she's seen with her children, she may be perceived as a loving mother?”

“Depending on how she acts, yes.”

“Yes, sir. Did you also tell the counselor that the D.A. wanted visitation ratcheted down? Did you tell the counselor that?”

“He did not say ‘visitation ratcheted down,'” Dan said stubbornly, sticking to a strict compliance with exact words.

“Whose words are those?”

“He did not say those words.”

“Whose words are those?”

“He said ‘contact ratcheted down.'”

“Contact?” Farese parroted with an incredulous look on his face.

“Yes, sir.”

“Do you agree that that would have been on or about October sixteenth, 2006?”

“I would say it would be whenever that article came out in the magazine.”

“Did you tell Ms. Crawford that an article came out in
Glamour
magazine depicting your son as domineering, overbearing and abusive by Mary's sisters and father? Did you tell her that?”

“I told her that there was an article in there, and I faxed her that article.”

“Listen to my question,” Farese commanded.

“Okay.”

“'Cause I'll ask you a hundred and fifty times until you do answer.”

“Yes, sir, I will listen carefully.”

“Did you tell Ms. Crawford that there was a major article in
Glamour
magazine depicting your son as domineering, overbearing and abusive by Mary's sisters and father? Yes or no?”

“I'd have to say yes, I guess. I don't recall the exact words, I'm sorry.”

“If that occurred on October sixteenth, 2006, would you agree with me that Mary has not seen her children since that day?”

“That's correct—or before.”

Farese shot him a wide-eyed look of disbelief. “You sure you want to say that? You want to say ‘or before'? I'm going to give you another shot here.”

“Okay.”

“You want to take that back?”

“Okay, ask your question again, please.”

“Okay. When was the last time Mary saw her children?”

With a thrust of his jaw, Dan said, “That was not your question. I asked you to repeat your question.”

“This is the way it goes, I get to ask what questions I want to.”

“I thought…”

Farese cut him off. “Nobody controls me.”

“Can I ask you to repeat a question?”

“Yes, you can ask me to repeat a question. Has Mary seen her children since October sixteenth, 2006?”

“No, sir.”

“And then you added ‘or before that.'”

“And you asked me…”

“Do you want to reconsider that?”

“I'll retract that,” Dan conceded.

“Thank you. 'Cause that was not the true answer, was it?” Farese continued badgering Dan about visitation for several more minutes.

After this exchange in a cross that by now had lasted three times the length of the direct examination, Farese consulted with attorneys at his table, and Dan whispered a request for a drink of water to the deputy. Farese, whose previous attempt to bring in religion as a point for the defense was stopped, now crept up to the topic again. In reference to counselor Diana Crawford, he asked, “Does her group have a name?”

“Agape,” Dan said with a nod.

“What's ‘agape'?”

“You mean its location?”

Farese shook his head. “What does ‘agape' mean?”

“It's the Greek word for ‘love.'”

“Is it a church organization?”

“It's affiliated with the churches of Christ, but I don't know that you'd call it a church organization. I say it's affiliated with the churches of Christ, because monies from the church help support its existence, I guess.”

“They rely upon donations that are collected through the Church of Christ.”

“Well, they're helped by them.”

Farese and Dan exchanged dueling versions of the reactions of the children to seeing Mary in September and the scheduling of an additional visit. After an objection from the prosecution led to another sidebar, Farese continued. “On the day that Mary saw her children, how long did she get to see them?”

“Two hours.”

“Who was dictating how long she got to see her children?”

“This was a visit that
we
made available.”

“Who was dictating how long she got to see her children?” Farese repeated.

“My wife and I, I guess.”

Farese conferred again with co-counsel and then continued. “Mary sent letters to her children, did she not?”

“Could I qualify my last answer?” Dan asked.

“If you need to explain your last answer, I have no objection, sir.”

“The two hours was something, I believe, the therapist recommended in the best interest of the children.”

After that, Farese accused and Dan denied that Mary's letters were always withheld from the children and her phone calls were never answered. “Our agreement,” Dan explained, “was a letter one week and a phone call the next, on Tuesday, and if we weren't present on Tuesday, a phone call on Thursday.”

“Whose agreement was that? When you say ‘agreement,' that sounds like two people agree to something.”

“That's something we set up with Mary while she was in jail.”

“But Mary wasn't in jail. Mary was out of jail.”

“That's something we set up with Mary while she was in jail here in Selmer,” Dan repeated.

“But when Mary got out of jail, she wanted to see her children? Correct?”

“I would say that would be the case.”

“What do you mean, you ‘would say that would be the case'?” Farese said in a voice dripping with disgust. “That
was
the case, wasn't it?”

“All right, yes.”

Farese jerked his papers off the podium and said, “Nothing further,” and turned his back on the witness.

The state next called Kacey Broadway to the stand. She worked at Selmer Elementary as a teachers' assistant at the time of Matthew's death. She testified that the day before, Mary spent a lot of time on her cell phone, pacing back and forth, crying and looking distressed.

The witness following her was Doctor Drew Eason, family physician, church elder and Matthew's friend. On direct examination, he recounted the evening when he discovered his preacher's body in the parsonage.

On cross, Farese was more interested in eliciting testimony about Mary's medical condition. “You remember that I asked you last time [at the suppression hearing] a question about her swollen jaw? You remember that question?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And of course, you didn't have your records, and you were going to go back and check them. Did you in fact treat her for a severely swollen jaw?”

“I would not describe it as ‘severely.' I'm sure it was severe to Mary. It was swollen. She had some swelling of the jaw.”

“And what caused the swelling of the jaw?”

“I felt at that time, it was likely due to an infected tooth.”

“Is that what caused that swollen jaw?”

“I believe it was.”

“Do you know what caused that swollen jaw?”

“I believe it was an infected tooth,” Drew reiterated.

When the witness stated that he did not recall the time of the day or night he saw her, Farese asked if his records would reflect that information. Drew said that they should.

Farese then asked, “So on the day that I'm going to show you—Do you have your records with you?”

“I brought some of them.”

“Did you say you brought some of your records?”

“In the D.A.'s office. Because my office staff copied them for me, for me to bring.”

Farese approached the witness with a document in hand. It was clearly labeled “Mary Alice Winkler” rather than “Mary Carol Winkler.” The attorney hammered at the doctor because the record of the visit was filed in Allie's medical folder rather than Mary's. When Drew acknowledged the mistake, Farese asked, “Down toward the bottom, you have ‘assessment' and ‘new problems.' Would you tell the jury what your assessment is?”

“Abscess with cellulitis,” the doctor read, and then explained, “‘Cellulitis,' which means an infection of the skin. ‘Abscess' would mean an infection, which could be a pocket of pus, is what could relate to an abscessed tooth—this is kind of non-specific—it could also relate to an abscess, a pocket of pus within the skin. But uh, at the time, I did feel that it was due to a tooth.”

“The reason I'm asking you, is that before, you didn't remember treating her at all, do you remember that?”

“I vaguely remembered that at the time.”

“What I'm saying is, now why do you remember today why you thought it was an abscess of the tooth?” Farese asked.

“I hadn't thought about it much at the time. I did recall and had a conversation with my wife about that when we got home. And we were talking about that. Mary was going to go see her dentist in McMinnville.”

“Here's what I want to know, Doctor. Did you have independent recollection of whether you thought it was an
abscessed tooth, or is this something your wife told you?”

“Both.”

“Okay. Fair enough. But one thing that we would know, there would be certain things that would jump out at us that would tell us that this is not a child's report, would you agree with me?”

“Yes,” Drew concurred.

“Especially on the prescription that was given.”

“Correct.”

“And what was the prescription that was given?”

“Z-Pak, which is an antibiotic, and a pain pill, hydrocodone and prednisone.”

“Which is…?”

“A steroid.”

“So the prednisone and the hydrocodone would stand out to me as something that wouldn't be prescribed for a minor, is that correct?”

“That's correct. In some cases, we do prescribe steroids for minors, but not in the tablet form, and not to Allie.”

“Now, this was signed by you on seven-fifty
A.M.
on June the first, 2005, correct?”

“That's correct.”

“My copy's not really signed, but that is what's stated on the document, correct?”

“That's correct.”

“Okay, and that may be the way you signed it. Which means that would have been around Memorial Day, 2005? Is that correct?”

“If that's when that was.”

“Sounds correct, doesn't it?” Farese said, continuing to push for confirmation.

“Yes, sir.”

“If someone had come in your office and wanted to find Mary Carol Winkler's records, how would they have found them?”

“She does have a record; this particular note was not in there.”

“All the other records were complete and there was nothing of any significance, regular visits, cold, flu, things like that, correct?”

“That's correct.”

Drew knew that Farese was attempting to make it appear as if he deliberately concealed that note. He knew he hadn't, but he didn't know how to get that across without sounding defensive.

Once again, Farese pursued the point of the Winklers' religion. “Now, if I belonged to the Church of Christ—you were asked a question by Mr. Freeland about brothers in Christ and counseling—and I wanted to get a divorce, what would be the acceptable problem that I could get a divorce from?”

“Adultery.”

“And…?” After a pause, Farese added, “That's pretty much it, isn't it?”

“That's pretty much it,” Drew said with a nod.

“If you don't have adultery, you can't get a divorce that's accepted by the Church. Is that correct?”

“We don't expect people to live under certain situations, but in order to, the Church of Christ does believe to have an acceptable divorce so that it would be acceptable for someone to get remarried, would be adultery.”

“In other words, you could get divorced, but you just couldn't get remarried for other reasons?”

“Yes. We believe that the only way divorce would be right is adultery.”

“I understand, sir. If a minister for a Church of Christ was accused of domestic violence, would that affect his employment with the Church?”

“Yes.”

“Did you know Mary Winkler?”

“As well as most men in the congregation would know Mary Winkler.”

“What kind of person was Mary Winkler?”

“She seemed to be a nice, friendly lady.”

“Compared to Matthew Winkler's personality, how
would Matthew's personality compare to Mary's personality?”

“I think Matthew was much more outgoing,” Drew said.

 

Next to the stand was Investigator Roger Rickman with the Selmer Police Department. Through his testimony, the prosecution entered photographs from the crime scene as exhibits—including a close-up of Matthew's face with the bloody foam coming from his mouth. As the shots were displayed on a large screen in the front of the room, Mary bent her head and sobbed. Lawyer Leslie Ballin patted her on the shoulder.

“Were the wife and three children there in the house?” Freeland asked.

“No,” Rickman answered.

“Did this cause you some concern?”

“Yes, sir.” Rickman related calling in the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation to process what was obviously a suspicious death.

Ballin conducted the cross-examination. He swaggered to the podium with a feisty air, as if ready to pick a fight with anyone willing. His shaggy brown hair brushed his collar and hung down to his basset eyes. A prominent nose jutted out over a thick moustache, and his chin seemed to have a permanent dark bristle even in the morning.

He immediately attacked the reliability of Rickman's report. The officer disputed Ballin's contention that it was inaccurate because of the presence of a typographical error. Ballin then asked him if he knew how the family photo got into magazines, but Rickman denied any knowledge of that.

On re-direct, Rickman testified that there were no police calls to the Winklers' address in regards to domestic violence. On re-cross, he had to admit that just because the police were not called, does not mean that nothing happened.

Officer Jason Whitlock of the Orange Beach Police Department stepped into the stand to describe Mary's
arrest and the recovery of the girls. On cross, Farese asked, “You would agree with me that before Ms. Winkler said anything to anyone about herself or her predicament, she asked y'all to make sure the children could get something to eat?”

“Correct.”

“First thing?”

“First thing.”

“After a gun's pulled on her?” Farese said with incredulity.

“Yes, sir.”

Another Orange Beach officer, Travis Long, stepped in the box. He confirmed the statements of his fellow officer and testified that although there was an audio recording of the arrest, there was no video because of the angle of the camera on the police car.

And with the end of Long's testimony, the first day of court recessed just before 6:30 that evening.