Authors note:
While this submission is little different than my usual offerings, some things remain constant.
I believe that, even when we are the central players in a drama, we NEVER know the whole story and my writing reflects that belief. This story is no exception.
I know that there are a lot of detail purists on this site that get rankled when an author bends, breaks or ignores reality when it comes to things like legal details. Well, I'm neither a legal expert nor a paid researcher/writer.
This is a story.
I made it up.
This is NOT a how-to manual - it is a piece of fiction.
Oh, and as usual there is no sex in this story. None.
TCct
*****
-Murder scene-
June 29, 2015
There was an eerie kind of quiet despite all the noise.
Scenes like this were always like that; CSI techs, uniformed cops and plain clothes detectives were busy everywhere. There were several quiet conversations, potential evidence being tagged and bagged, cameras clicking, chatter on police radios, cell phones chirping. There were EMT's waiting, nosy neighbors mulling around just outside...but despite all of that noise it always seemed like the air was too heavy for the sound to carry properly.
Like a muted guitar string in a sound proof room.
Detectives Michael Reyes and Gil Mumford were longtime veterans of the Dallas Police Department (DPD); Reyes and Mumford had joined Homicide 10 and 8 years ago respectively and were the lead detectives assigned to this case.
They received the call at approximately 10:30 am and headed over to the address in Oak Cliff; a gentrified part of South Dallas.
They took in the scene quietly for a few moments and then quickly set about their work.
Reyes made his way over to the prone body on the floor and engaged the coroner in conversation while Mumford began questioning the uniforms around the room.
While this area, Oak Cliff, was quickly becoming one of the new, trendy areas of Dallas for young professionals as whole neighborhoods were purchased and renovated there was still a lot of the inner city problems lingering and gunshots were not uncommon still. Not uncommon but nerve-wracking for the young white professionals trying to claim this part of the city. And so after a single gunshot was fired that morning a nervous young CPA dialed 9-1-1.
The body was discovered slumped back in a desk chair - a single gunshot wound to the head - a small entry hole through the right temple and a massive exit wound slightly below and forward of the left ear. A 9mm semi-automatic lay on the ground next to the body.
There was no sign of forced entry or of a suicide note.
The dead man was identified by his driver's license and confirmed by his address and interviews with neighbors.
Daniel Alexander Pratt, deceased. Time of death approximately 8:30am June 29, 2015.
It seemed like a simple case of suicide.
-Suicide or murder?-
July 3, 2015
Gil Mumford had a gut feeling on this one and he and Reyes both respected and trusted that feeling. Most Homicide detectives will rely on their instincts to help them solve a case. Instinct, intensive training and years of experience - but above all they'll always ask themselves; "what is my gut telling me here?"
Mumford kept turning over the scene in his mind. There was something wrong but as yet he couldn't quite put his finger on it. He had delayed speaking with Mike about it hoping he could get a better handle on his uneasiness. They had processed the case as a suicide but increasingly Gil felt they were short changing this guy Pratt and decided it was time to bring Mike on board and see if their two perspectives could bring his thoughts and concerns into focus.
"This just doesn't feel like a suicide, Mike."
"Okay, what are you thinking? There was no forced entry, no prints except Pratt's, no one saw anyone enter or leave the house."
"Right, but there was also no suicide note and the place was clean - too clean. The CSI tech said the gun appeared to have been wiped clean and there was only one set of prints and..."
"Whoa, slow down, Gil. You and I both know the absence of a note doesn't mean a damned thing. Sure the place was weirdly clean but again that doesn't mean anything."
"But what about the beating he took back in..."
"Yes, we know he took a brutal beating in 2009 that left him scarred for life but I think that could easily explain depression and suicide, Gil."
"Yeah, but we also know that not everyone who is depressed is suicidal. I'm telling you something smells bad, Mike."
"Alright, Gil. You look into this beating he took and I'll keep looking into Pratt. But Gil, we can't afford too much investment in this."
July 5, 2015
"So, James Harold Scott was released on parole in May 2013 after serving approximately 3 years of a 6 year sentence for aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury to Pratt."
"Okay, so he's out, we know he beat the shit out of Pratt..."
"Let's be honest here, Mike - he fucked him up good. A broken nose, perforated eardrum, a crushed testicle, two broken ribs and a punctured lung. Pratt had to have three surgeries, lost a testicle, a tooth and the hearing in his left ear."
"Yeah, so he had a lot of surgery and months and months of painful physical therapy; just about enough to make anyone depressed. Just because Scott is out doesn't mean he murdered Pratt."
"You're right, Mike but Pratt was terrified of Scott. I have been through the initial arrest report, trial transcripts as well as Scott's prison and parole files. There's a lot of smoke there."
"Okay, draw me a picture - convince me. Gil. "
"It seems, Pratt began an affair with Scott's missus and Scott didn't take to kindly to that. He beat him real bad and did a three year stint in B2. Here, here's his file; have a look at this. He made no secret of his intentions."
Gil handed him a file and Mike flipped it open randomly.
***
Parole Hearing Transcript - April 01, 2010 Type: An Institutional Parole Officer (IPO) of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles interview James Harold Scott - TDCJ Number: 3259416 Location: The Louis C. Powledge Unit (B2) Texas Department of Corrections
GF: This is George Flute. I am an Institutional Parole Officer, or IPO, of the Texas Board of Pardons. Today is Wednesday, the first of April 2010. The purpose of this interview is to prepare a parole case summary for the review board convening on October 1st, 2010 for inmate James Harold Scott. I am conducting this interview today at the Louis C. Powledge Unit, or B2 and recording with the use of a digital recorder. Prior to this interview I reviewed the inmate's file. Mr. Scott, for the record would you state your full name and TDCJ number, please.
JS: James Harold Scott TDCJ number 3259416
GF: Thank you. Now...
JS: My pleasure.
GF (unintelligible) Uh, Mr. Scott according to your file, in October of 2009 you were convicted of aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury to one Daniel Pratt and sentenced to, um...
JS: 6 years. And yes, I beat the bark off that Pratt.
GF: Okay, we'll come back to that. I want to clear up some procedural stuff first. You were sentenced to 6 years and have been incarcerated now for approximately 6 months.
JS: Really, has it been that long already? Time flies...
GF: Yes, well, uh...oh yes, in the state of Texas you are entitled to an annual parole review. This interview is to prepare for your first review. If you are denied parole, preparations for subsequent annual reviews will begin 4 months prior to the review date hearing. Do you understand?
JS: Perfectly.
GF. Great. Now, according to your file you are currently housed in G1, or general population, you have no work assignment currently and no behavioral summaries. Do you agree?
JS: Yes, yes and yes.
GF: I also note that you had no prior criminal convictions before this, correct?
JS: I was convicted of a vehicle inspection infraction in 2003 but otherwise, I have been a good boy.
GF: Okay. What we're trying to accomplish today is to review your institutional record, uh your behavior since coming here; summaries, work assignments, self-improvement etc. as well as review your reaction to the crime you committed and your state of mind during the commission of the crime. That way I can summarize for the board review the elements that they'll be taking into consideration when evaluating whether to grant parole or not. They'll look at the nature of the crime, as well as your contrition, potential for recidivism and how releasing you may impact your victim or victims and society in general. To be more specific: the seriousness of the offense, Letters of support and/or protest, Sentence length compared to the amount of time served, your criminal history and any subsequent prison incarcerations, juvenile history and your Institutional adjustment - uh, participation in specialized programs. Do you have any questions before we begin?
JS: Yeah, what's the memory capacity of that recorder?
GF: Pardon me?