the Macumber case file handed to the lawyers. At this trial, Linda Primrose—and that thatch of hair—just did not exist.
Except for a half dozen character witnesses, in the end the defense had nothing to offer but Bill Macumber himself. He took the stand on Monday, January 20.
Kemper walked Macumber through his personal history, aiming to convey to the jury a full sense of this man. Bill talked of his upbringing, his education, his background with hunting and guns, his time in the army, his employment record, his involvement in the Deer Valley Little League, and his launching of the Desert Survival Unit. He talked also of his marriage and his separation from Carol in the spring of 1974. “She started staying out later and later every night after school,” he said. “And I questioned her about it, just asked her more or less why she was out so late, and she always had an excuse, and I guess I just had a feeling—”
The prosecutor objected at this point: “I would like to remind the Court, Your Honor, we can sit here and turn this thing into a tremendous character assassination on Carol Macumber. We can’t call anyone else in the world to refute that testimony.” Judge Hardy, after considering, allowed testimony about Carol studying fingerprinting at Glendale Community College but not about Carol “running around with someone else, I can’t see that has any relevancy.”
Kemper eventually asked Macumber about his statements of August 28 to Deputies Diehl and Calles.
KEMPER: You will recall, and this again is from Officer Diehl, that he saw or heard another sheriff’s detective named Barnby place his arm around your shoulders and Officer Diehl said that he heard Barnby say to you, “Did you tell Carol you killed those people?” And Officer Diehl testified that he heard you say, “Yes” to Barnby. Now, did Barnby in fact ask you that question?
MACUMBER: No, sir, he did not.
KEMPER: Did he ask any question?
MACUMBER: Yes, he did.… He asked me why would I say that to my wife.
KEMPER: And what did you say?
MACUMBER: Well, there was some preliminary—there were other things that went on prior to that, and I said, “I suppose to keep her from leaving us.”
It had been, Macumber would forever after explain, a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question. He didn’t regard it as an admission of any sort, so he never disavowed it, here or in subsequent interviews. Minutes later, Kemper asked Macumber to recount his conversation with Deputy Ed Calles. Macumber’s unequivocal response: “He asked me first of all, he said, ‘Bill did you kill those kids?’ And I said, ‘No sir, I did not.’ And he asked, ‘Did you tell your wife that you killed those kids?’ And I said, ‘No, I did not tell her I killed those kids.’”
On cross-examination, prosecutor Larry Cantor hammered at the notion that Macumber’s defense essentially hinged on a claim that everyone in law enforcement was lying, everyone framing him. Macumber struggled to respond, for he would not, could not, point a finger.
Q: Is Sergeant Calles a liar?
A: I would prefer to say Sergeant Calles is mistaken, sir.
Q: Are you telling us that you in no way ever said words to the effect to Sergeant Calles that you told your wife you had shot and killed those kids?
A: No, sir, I did not tell Sergeant Calles that I told my wife I killed those kids.
Q: Now, you say he’s very mistaken when he testified to that, is that correct?
A: I didn’t say very mistaken, sir. I said I would tend to say that he was mistaken rather than lying.
Q: Does he have any motive to lie?
A: I don’t know.
Q: You’re saying he may have a motive to lie?
A: Yes, sir, he may have a motive for lying.
Q: What you are saying is, someone tried to frame you?
A: I’m saying something has happened.
Q: Let’s get this straight now. Officer Jacka has substituted a phony print, is that your testimony?
A: No, sir.
Q: Who substituted a phony print?
A: I would
Except for a half dozen character witnesses, in the end the defense had nothing to offer but Bill Macumber himself. He took the stand on Monday, January 20.
Kemper walked Macumber through his personal history, aiming to convey to the jury a full sense of this man. Bill talked of his upbringing, his education, his background with hunting and guns, his time in the army, his employment record, his involvement in the Deer Valley Little League, and his launching of the Desert Survival Unit. He talked also of his marriage and his separation from Carol in the spring of 1974. “She started staying out later and later every night after school,” he said. “And I questioned her about it, just asked her more or less why she was out so late, and she always had an excuse, and I guess I just had a feeling—”
The prosecutor objected at this point: “I would like to remind the Court, Your Honor, we can sit here and turn this thing into a tremendous character assassination on Carol Macumber. We can’t call anyone else in the world to refute that testimony.” Judge Hardy, after considering, allowed testimony about Carol studying fingerprinting at Glendale Community College but not about Carol “running around with someone else, I can’t see that has any relevancy.”
Kemper eventually asked Macumber about his statements of August 28 to Deputies Diehl and Calles.
KEMPER: You will recall, and this again is from Officer Diehl, that he saw or heard another sheriff’s detective named Barnby place his arm around your shoulders and Officer Diehl said that he heard Barnby say to you, “Did you tell Carol you killed those people?” And Officer Diehl testified that he heard you say, “Yes” to Barnby. Now, did Barnby in fact ask you that question?
MACUMBER: No, sir, he did not.
KEMPER: Did he ask any question?
MACUMBER: Yes, he did.… He asked me why would I say that to my wife.
KEMPER: And what did you say?
MACUMBER: Well, there was some preliminary—there were other things that went on prior to that, and I said, “I suppose to keep her from leaving us.”
It had been, Macumber would forever after explain, a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question. He didn’t regard it as an admission of any sort, so he never disavowed it, here or in subsequent interviews. Minutes later, Kemper asked Macumber to recount his conversation with Deputy Ed Calles. Macumber’s unequivocal response: “He asked me first of all, he said, ‘Bill did you kill those kids?’ And I said, ‘No sir, I did not.’ And he asked, ‘Did you tell your wife that you killed those kids?’ And I said, ‘No, I did not tell her I killed those kids.’”
On cross-examination, prosecutor Larry Cantor hammered at the notion that Macumber’s defense essentially hinged on a claim that everyone in law enforcement was lying, everyone framing him. Macumber struggled to respond, for he would not, could not, point a finger.
Q: Is Sergeant Calles a liar?
A: I would prefer to say Sergeant Calles is mistaken, sir.
Q: Are you telling us that you in no way ever said words to the effect to Sergeant Calles that you told your wife you had shot and killed those kids?
A: No, sir, I did not tell Sergeant Calles that I told my wife I killed those kids.
Q: Now, you say he’s very mistaken when he testified to that, is that correct?
A: I didn’t say very mistaken, sir. I said I would tend to say that he was mistaken rather than lying.
Q: Does he have any motive to lie?
A: I don’t know.
Q: You’re saying he may have a motive to lie?
A: Yes, sir, he may have a motive for lying.
Q: What you are saying is, someone tried to frame you?
A: I’m saying something has happened.
Q: Let’s get this straight now. Officer Jacka has substituted a phony print, is that your testimony?
A: No, sir.
Q: Who substituted a phony print?
A: I would
Similar Books
