Closing argument by Defense Counsel Horton Lance

State of Missouri v. Byron Case

May 2, 2002
Pages 1188-1218
Page 1188

THE COURT:

Mr. Lance, are you ready to proceed with closing argument on behalf of Mr. Case?

MR. LANCE:

Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT:

You may do so.

MR. LANCE:

Anastasia WitbolsFeugen was the victim of a random act of violence committed by some unknown
stranger who has never been caught to this day. How do we know that?

You listened to all of the evidence. We saw it was a very attentive jury listening to every single
witness. Anastasia made a mistake. She got out of the car where she shouldn't have far from home in a fit of
rage and tried to walk back through the cemeteries, back to familiar areas, and she was caught alone in a
deserted dark cemetery alone, unarmed. She made a mistake.

And the prosecutors are up here arguing, well, she never would have got herself in this position by
getting out in that area. She wouldn't have tried to walk through a dark cemetery. Anastasia that evening
wasn't being calm, cool, and reflective.

Page 1189

Of course she would never done that if she were calm, cool or reflective. This happened in a fit of
rage.

She got out of the car in a fit of rage. She isn't thinking where I'm at. She isn't thinking to herself
there is nobody at home to call for a ride. The jury heard that evidence. She realizes that after she is out of
the car, sure. But it happened in a fit of rage.

She tries to take the shortcut, and she made a mistake, because she was alone unarmed, young teen-
age girl. I think, if you look at the map, you can see what happened.

She gets out of the car right here at the stoplight at 435, and she starts walking east. And you can
see this is a vain attempt to take a shortcut to somewhere. You've heard the testimony. Nobody at home to
call.

She is found shot dead right here in Lincoln Cemetery. Is this a vain attempt at a shortcut to cut
through that cemetery back to Mount Washington, perhaps even Dairy Queen, which was over here at 24
Highway at the exit of Mount Washington.

Page 1190

The people at Dairy Queen were friendly to her that night. They helped her get a sanitary napkin.
They let her use the pay phone numerous times. Let her hang out at Dairy Queen.
 Is this a vain attempt to cut through the cemeteries or get to Dairy Queen? She never made it. She
was the victim of a stranger who has never been caught. This is still an unsolved crime. That's a hurdle that
I understand the jury has to get over to reach the proper verdict here.

It's not a comfortable verdict, because, if you vote not guilty, you're saying we don't know who did
it. There is no closure.

Do you understand the psychological term closure? Everybody wants closure and wants to know
what happened. That makes it easy to wrap up.

To vote not guilty, you have to get over that hurdle. There is no closure in this case. This case has
never been solved. The gun has never been found.

Page 1191

Nobody knows who that unknown stranger was or if he was tying to rape her or rob her or what
happened. It could have been a robbery. One witness thought Anastasia was carrying a brown purse that
night. She is found in Lincoln Cemetery later, there is no brown purse there.

There are little clues here. There is no reason to disbelieve it couldn't have been a random attempt at
a rape or a robbery.

The contact wound. Whoever confronted her in the cemetery, the gun went off right against her
face. Does that sound like somebody who is tying to rob her or rape her?

The time passage. The time passage is one of the keys in the case, because it's not just an unsolved
crime. It goes unsolved for three years. And all the people in the car that night are being interviewed and re-
interviewed. All the friends like Abraham Kneisley are being interviewed. So this allows Kelly to come up
with this idea.

Everybody familiar with this case begins to realize the police aren't solving this case. They've never
had a suspect. They've never had evidence. They've never had the gun.

Page 1192

The passage of time over three years allows Kelly Moffett to begin to formulate this idea that, you
know, the police have no idea what happened. The police have no clues, literally, of what happened here. I
can come up with any story.

So how can she come up with that kind of a bizarre story? So I'm going to ask the jury to get inside
Kelly Moffett's head. We're going to go in Kelly Moffett's mind and crawl around in there and find out
what's going on in the brain of Kelly Moffett, okay?

And I think what you're going to find is there are really two Kelly Moffetts. Let's talk about the two
Kelly Moffetts. Here is the first Kelly Moffett. "I'm a crack addict, alcoholic. I've ruined my life. I got to go
to rehab and psych counseling. I've just totally ruined my life, and I have no excuse. I'm just a screw-up.
I'm a total screw-up. My family has forbidden me to go to the family home." That's one Kelly Moffett.

Page 1193

Here is the other Kelly Moffett. "I'm a crack addict and an alcoholic, but wait. I have an excuse. I'm
a victim here. I'm a victim here. I saw a brutal murder. Now I have an excuse. I'm not a worthless person
that ruined my life. I saw a brutal murder. It ruined my life. Take me back in the family. It's not my fault."
That's the second Kelly Moffett.
 Now, if you have a choice, which Kelly Moffett are you going to be? She played a game on her
parents. Drug addicts are very manipulative. They'll do anything to get money out of people, to get the
drugs. Lie to people. You heard that's the history here. Until finally she burned all her bridges with the
family, because she lied to them that many times.

She would lie where she was at, if she was still using drugs. They had to bar her from the family
home. And when she gets around to the story to start saying she may have seen the murder, even though she
has told the police repeatedly for years it's obvious she didn't see the murder, nobody knows who did this
murder. It's an unsolved crime.

Page 1194

She finally comes around, "I got to get back to my parents. Sympathy from my parents." So she
starts with some excuse. "Brutalized by this murder. Traumatic to me. I saw Justin do it." That's her first
story. "I saw Justin do it." That's not just a short story either.

According to the mother, this went on for months. Did she go with that story for a few days or a few
weeks or for months? For months she tried to create the impression it's not my fault I'm a crack addict. I
saw Justin commit the murder. I was brutalized that way.

But the parents don't immediately accept her back. So she has to change the story. She was
homeless at the time. And I hope you caught that point. I asked the question to the mother, Debbie Moffett.
Was it after she had been barred from your home, she was homeless? Was it after all that she started saying
she saw the murder?

Page 1195

The answer was yes. She is very manipulative and her parents bought it hook, line, and sinker. We
asked Debbie Moffett on the stand, "Do you think Kelly Moffett's life was ruined by witnessing a
homicide?"

"Oh, yes." And she is welcomed back into the family home, and you have a lot of sympathy for her.
But there are little clues in there that she is not even telling the truth, like psych counseling. She says she
went to psych counseling. But I asked her, "Did you ever tell one of your counselors you saw a murder?"

"No."

The game she is playing is on her parents to get back, sympathy and attention. The counselor, if
they're to help you through problems and that's your main problem, how could that be your main problem
when you never told any of your counselors you saw a murder? That's where the problem would start. But
that is not who she is trying to impress, her counselor.

And what's the other side issue here? Did she have an axe to grind with Byron Case? This is a man
she admitted she once loved him. She once told him repeatedly she loved him.

Page 1196

After their stormy relationship and breakup, she tries to get back with him. That's Byron's
impression. But he's moved on by then. He has other girlfriends. He doesn't want to get back. Does she
have an axe to grind there? Is that just another side issue?

The story that Kelly Moffett comes up with in September of 2000 when she finally comes to the
police and says, "Wait a minute. I saw this murder." Total opposite of what she said before.

She says that they had this plot to murder someone. They come pick her up, they have a plot to
murder someone, they ask for her help. As the prosecutor used, the word absurd, we'll go with that for
Kelly Moffett's story. And, if you were listening closely to the evidence, and I'm sure you were, this is the
opposite of what the other witnesses are saying like the victim's sister, Francesca.

She is saying she talked to Justin on the phone and Justin is reluctant to drive to Missouri. He
doesn't want to come to Missouri.

Page 1197

What's really happening is they're going to have this big discussion about the relationship. Justin on
the phone is saying Anastasia couldn't get a ride. I don't really want to come over there now. I'm over here
in Lenexa. Blah, blah, blah. It's the complete opposite of someone plotting we're going to drive over there
and we're going to shoot her.

He's on the phone saying, "I don't think I can get over there now. I've already made plans." But
Kelly is telling completely the opposite story of the truth.

"When I got in the car with them, they asked me if I would help them with something. We were on
the way to a gas station where they wanted me to call her and ask her to meet them at Dairy Queen."

Again, if you recall the evidence, that's a complete opposite of the truth. It was Anastasia wanting to
meet. Anastasia set up this meeting. Tried hard all day to get a ride there, to Mount Washington, and she
only went to Dairy Queen across the street when she found herself sitting there waiting for hours. She went
to Dairy Queen to use the pay phone.

Page 1198

So it's Anastasia's idea to meet at Dairy Queen, saying, "I'm waiting here. I'm mad, Justin. I'm at
Dairy Queen now. Come get me." That's the evidence. But Kelly, when she comes forward with what she
calls the truth, "Did you call Anastasia?"

"Yes, I did."

And she is like, "Yeah, where am I supposed to meet you?"

And I just said, "The Dairy Queen." This is Kelly Moffett's story. She has picked up bits and pieces
of what happened that night and she is trying to formulate a story where she help set it up. It's the complete
opposite of the truth.

Basically, her story is "I'm Kelly Moffett. I'm going to call Anastasia and lure her out to the Dairy
Queen or whatever." It's the complete opposite.

Justin thought she didn't have a ride. He already made plans. He was running around. They went to
Funcoland and places in Kansas. Complete opposite of the truth.

Page 1199

Justin, on the phone, gave Francesca the impression, total opposite of someone who was wanting to
get over to Independence so he can hurt somebody.

He's making excuses on the phone like, "I don't think I can get over there now. I thought she didn't
have a ride." So Anastasia has to go to Dairy Queen and make four or five phone calls before they can talk
Justin into finally going to Missouri. That's why he's so very, very late. That's why Anastasia -- one reason
she is extremely mad. Justin is so very, very late.

If it's his plot, him and Byron are plotting and they're going to go do this now, we got a gun, why
are they so very, very late? They're late because it was a meeting to talk about the relationship. Justin
wanted to avoid that topic. He didn't even want to be there. Complete opposite of what Kelly Moffett is
telling you. Kelly never offers an explanation of why they're so late.

The Medical Examiner's testimony. You heard from two pathologists. Basically, they're saying Kelly
was done with an unknown type of gun at an unknown time of day.

Page 1200

If you think about that and the medical evidence, anybody can come forward with a story and tell a
story, and the prosecutor could argue that medical evidence supports it.

I mean, any high-caliber gun could have done it. It goes back to the vagueness of Kelly's statements.
She comes forward claiming she is telling the truth now, but she will never specify what kind of gun
exactly was used. She tells the police where the gun was dumped. When they search and don't find a gun,
now she is at trial saying I don't know for sure where that gun was dumped. She'll say I don't know for sure
the exact spot where Anastasia was found, but she can point out the general area because she went back
there two years earlier and found a memorial for Anastasia's murder.

Her story, Kelly's story, we'll go with the prosecutor's word, absurd. She tells Detective Kilgore in
September of 2000 when she is coming forward, I'm going to tell the truth, she says, "It looked like an old
double-barreled gun."

Page 1201

At the trial, you decide. It appeared the prosecutors at first were implying this was some kind of
high-powered hunting rifle, until the defense started bringing on the witnesses to say, no, Byron's dad never
had a hunting rifle.

Then, towards the end, you heard, now the prosecutor is trying to say, oh, it was done with Justin's
first shotgun. That's what they're implying. But that's not what Kelly Moffett said when she came in
September of 2000 and said I'm going to tell the truth now.

She said, "Byron said he got the gun from his dad. It was in old hunting rifle." And she said, Kelly
said, "I saw the gun once. I had been at Byron's dad house, and there was this hunting rifle hanging on the
wall. I saw it."

Now we're back to the prosecutor arguing it was done with the shotgun. You heard from David Hill,
an investigator that works out of our office. He drove from the murder scene to the gun disposal scene of
where she said the gun was dumped near Lake Quivira, Kansas.

Page 1202

First of all, when she is interviewed with Detective Kilgore, she is saying that gun was thrown out
nearby. We didn't go too far from the murder scene in Independence and dumped the gun. Not too far.

Mr. Hill testified he's driven those two different routes to that area where the gun was supposedly
dropped, and it took more than 30 minutes. That's not nearby. That's why she is on the stand changing her
story at the trial saying, well, I don't know for sure where the gun was dropped.

Nancy Nolker, Dale Case's brother, the Defendant's brother -- sister, she said Byron never went
hunting with Dale, at least not she is aware of. There was no gun at that house after Dale Case died
Christmas Eve, 1997. They even went in there to clean out the house. There were no gun racks, not even
pegs on the wall where you would hang a gun.

How does the State explain all these inconsistencies in Kelly Moffett's stories? Well, they can't.
Because Kelly Moffett is what I would call a devil in disguise.
Page 1203

She comes up here, young girl, clean-cut looking. You have to crawl inside her brain to figure out
what's going on in there, because she is the devil in disguise.

After her and Byron's relationship got real stormy, she called the police and lied to the police in
1999 saying he's suicidal. Better get him. He got taken to a mental hospital for 24 hours observation just on
her word, which is a total fabrication.

By the way, what do you think Kelly Moffett learned from that experience? They're on the phone
having an argument. Byron hangs up on her. She is infuriated. She calls the police and says, "You better go
check on this guy. He's suicidal."

Total fabrication. But she learned she had some power that night, because he was taken by the
police to the mental hospital for observation.

So, first of all, she has learned she has a little bit of power there. The police actually believed me.
She has learned this now. She has lied to the police before and the police believed her and lied to them
about Byron.

Page 1204

So she has learned that lesson. She has a little power. And she has also learned that she can retaliate
against Byron if something happens she doesn't like.

But anyway, this is Kelly Moffett. This is their star witness. If you don't believe her, they don't have
a case, because there is no other evidence. So you ask is Kelly Moffett believable?

In one part that came out in the trial sort of unexpectedly is she told Byron when they started dating,
"My dad is an alcoholic. He beats me," all this stuff. And then later, as they were dating for a long time,
Byron found out it's not true. That was not even true either. That's a pretty big whopper of a lie too to be
telling people.

NOTE: Mr. Lance's statement that the information that Kelly Moffett claimed her father was an alcoholic
who beat her "came out in the trial sort of unexpectedly" is misleading; the only mentions of this claim
were volunteered by Evelyn Case, who said she had been told that by Byron Case, and by Byron Case
himself. Besides being an unverifiable accusation on Case's part, it was not very "unexpected".

So what's going on inside Kelly Moffett's head? If you meet a new boy you want to impress, a boy
you want to date, and you say, "My father beats me," that's immediate attention and sympathy from a boy
you like.

Page 1205

And, if your parents have burned all bridges with you and you can't get back in the home and you
say, "Wait, I saw a brutal murder, and it traumatized me, so that's why I'm a crackhead," that's immediate
attention and sympathy to get back into the family. Because now she is the victim. I'm a victim and none of
this crack addict is my fault.

Well, enough about Kelly Moffett. You can see she has no credibility. Let's talk about the other
witnesses and how is the State going to explain these other defense witnesses? Are all these defense
witnesses lying like Don Rand? Don Rand is an independent witness. He's just a mechanic working at that
gas station. He sees a girl get out at the stoplight the night of the murder and walk east, the general
direction of the cemetery.
 So is the State saying that guy is full of it? He's an independent witness that doesn't even know
Byron Case. And he was interviewed two days after the homicide, and he remembers what he saw that
night, in a well-lit area, where there is numerous businesses.

Page 1206

And the only thing the prosecutors can say is, well, she didn't use the phone. Well, Byron Case told
you on the stand, "I thought she was just going to call her parents." But he doesn't know their work
schedule. Anastasia knows what was happening that night. Did she stop at the pay phones? She knew there
was nobody at home. That's why I kept asking those witnesses. Nobody was at home at that time.

Dawn Wright, the lady that was working at Dairy Queen. She talked to a young lady in the Dairy
Queen. The young lady we now know is Anastasia. Said she was angry at her boyfriend. He was late for
their meeting. Needed to borrow a sanitary napkin.

When she saw the people pick her up, it was three people, two boys and a girl. As soon as Anastasia
went outside, she appeared to be arguing with one of the boys and this young girl was carrying a brown
purse.

Now, what's wrong with that witness? Is the prosecutor saying that was a different girl who
borrowed a sanitary napkin and was arguing with the boyfriend and carrying a brown purse?

Page 1207

Because there is no brown purse found at the murder scene in Lincoln cemetery. Could it be a
random robbery? How does the prosecutor explain that?

Are all these witnesses that the defense -- again, this is another witness produced for trial. She was
interviewed October 24th 1997, right after the homicide, She remembers what happened. And the other
people, are they all lying? Abraham Kneisley? Tara McDowell? Good friends of Anastasia and the
Defendant, but good friends of Anastasia wh6 said on the stand I wouldn't lie to protect Anastasia's killer.
They saw the two boys.

You have Kelly Moffett saying right before the homicide Justin and Byron were drinking hard
liquor and all this stuff.

But the friends who saw Justin and Byron later said, "We didn't smell any liquor. I talked to them.
They weren't drinking." They saw the kid stop by, which according to the prosecutor, would have been right
after the murder. Right after Justin was pale, crying. He couldn't even drive he was so shaken up, so they
had to switch drivers and now Byron is driving. This is what Kelly Moffett is telling you.

Page 1208

Friends that saw them that night said there was nothing like that. Those guys acted normal. Nobody
was crying or pale or shaking and nobody was drinking. It was just an average night. It was a normal night,
because nobody knew that, when Anastasia got out of the car, she was going to try to take a shortcut up
through the cemetery and was going to get confronted by some stranger who killed her, a stranger who has
never been arrested.

Motive. The prosecutor brought up motive. Already tried to explain that, because they have no
motive. Byron Case has nothing to gain from this homicide, favor to a friend. That's their theory. He did it
like a favor for a friend? That's their whole motive, apparently.

Quick notes I made during the trial. Evelyn Case testified, the Defendant's mom. Do you remember
the prosecutor was attacking her or cross examining her, "You have seen the file. You have seen the police
file."
Page 1209

"You saw all the evidence." And do you remember what her honest answer was? Well, "there is no
evidence." That's the remark of someone that's read the entire police file. There is no evidence.

And then the prosecutor said, "Well, what about Kelly?"

And the witness said, "Oh, you mean Kelly?" That's what they have. Kelly.

Again, quick notes during the trial. Control. They're arguing Byron dated Kelly just to control her
and didn't want her to tell the truth. Well, you ask yourselves. The guy that's leaving town and moving to
St. Louis and not giving her his phone number or his address and trying to break off all contact with her,
does that sound like somebody who is trying to control her and keep her from going to the police?

So what else do they have? They got these audiotapes. They're trying to make a big deal about the
audiotapes, and I think their argument is it's like a confession. Well, you heard the tapes. There is no
confession on there.

Page 1210

The prosecutor is arguing you should make the adverse inference, an inference. You understand the
term inference. They're asking you to assume something or infer. Is that what evidence is all about to you,
proof beyond a reasonable doubt? You should assume he's guilty is basically what they're saying there.

Well, the inference cuts the other way. If somebody says something totally crazy to you, like you
killed somebody or I think you're the one that stole my car last week or something that's totally not true and
you remain silent or don't deny it, does that mean you're accepting or adopting that statement? That's what
they're asking you to believe.

But the opposite is equally inferred. If somebody says something crazy and you ignore it, you think
that's not even worth responding to. It's like when an idiot confronts you or something. You may or may not
have heard that saying. An idiot comes up to you and starts to make an argument if you join in the argument
with the idiot, then you just have two idiots. It's simpler and easier to ignore an idiot.

Page 1211

So when Byron Case is on the phone that night awakened from a deep sleep, and she starts rambling
on about this crazy stuff, he's going this is my crazy psycho ex-girlfriend again.

And the medical records, that's Exhibit 31, that he went to the doctor and wasn't just sometime that
week. It was the very next day. The medical records, you can't fabricate medical records later for the trial.

If he really is half sick, half awake, half asleep, and he doesn't respond appropriately -- well,
anyway that's up to the jury to decide. If he didn't respond quickly enough or appropriately enough, you
decide that, but it's not a confession, and the inference can cut either way.

As long as you're inferring or assuming make sure you follow the Court's instructions, because there
is nothing about assuming there. You need proof beyond a reasonable doubt before you send somebody to
prison.

Page 1212

Shutdown. Byron Case mentioned that he sought counseling because his emotions were shut down.
Does that help the jury understand how he responds on the phone to Kelly Moffett? He has said for years to
her he doesn't want to talk about the murder. Maybe that's a man thing to understand, but typical red
blooded American man. You don't want to talk about your emotions, usually. That's just typical.

Something terrible happens like the loss of a parent or anything traumatic, a lot of men don't want to
talk about it. I'll go chop wood all day or something and maybe tomorrow I'll feel better, but I don't want to
talk about that. And Kelly knows that's his reaction. Has been for a long time.

So, if he's staying saying on the stand -- if he's saying on this tape "I don't want to talk about it. We
shouldn't talk about it", is that just a typical male reaction?

Page 1213

While we're talking about these audiotapes, if you caught one point on the tape, Byron did say something
like, well, when I talked to the police, I told them everything. I don't remember the exact words. But that's
on there.

He's saying, well, Kelly, you're all worried. You're saying the police are going to call you. I talked to
the police. I told them everything. Why isn't that an inference that he's innocent then? He's saying I told
them everything. October 24th 1997, I told them everything. It was the truth.

Little clues throughout the case. When Byron Case was being cross examined by the prosecutor,
he's attacking them about what he told Detective Kilgore on that date, October 24th, it came but in a
question. But you and Kelly were amazingly consistent with your story. Like that's suspicious now or
somehow sinister? That's our whole defense. They told the truth October 24th. Their stories were
amazingly consistent because it was the truth.

And for three years it was the truth until she came up with this idea that I didn't have to blame
myself for being a crack addict or a worthless person.

Page 1214

No excuse for this. I'm going to blame somebody else. I'm a victim. Family will take me back.
Parents bought it hook, line, and sinker.

What really happened is Anastasia made herself easy prey, terrible mistake, but it was made in a fit
of rage. She walked up that hill into the cemetery, at Truman Road, four lanes, very fast cars going by.
Maybe she didn't want to walk on the shoulder. It's a little dangerous maybe, right? it's easier to take a
shortcut up through where there is no traffic.

Little did she know there was some stranger up there, maybe a drug addict also desperate for money
with a gun looking for easy prey. Unarmed teen-age girl alone in the cemetery after dark. She didn't know
there was going to be somebody there.

Remember the questions -- the very first questions that defense asked Kelly Moffett? So you lied to
your own mother. Are you saying you lied to your own mother. You lied to the police, but you're here to tell
the jury the truth today, That's their star witness.

Page 1215

She came and told the jury a story without a shred of evidence in support of her. You determine her
credibility.

This is a witness who, in May of '98, sent a computer e-mail to Anastasia's father. This is the
victim's father. She is saying, "If we could get together and talk, we could swap stories." That would be
ludicrous, if there wasn't so much at stake today. What type of a mind does Kelly Moffett have? She wants
to get together with the victim's dad and swap stories. We know who would be swapping the biggest stories
of all, Kelly Moffett, who says my dad beats me or something, which isn't true, to get sympathy and says,
"I saw a murder. Justin did it." She is just saying that to get sympathy.

They never got together, apparently, to talk. If they would have been swapping stories, we know
who would have been swapping the biggest one.

Let me talk about some key dates in the case. As a reminder, in few minutes we'll be done and you'll
be deliberating. I want to talk about some of the key dates.

Page 1216

June 5th, this audiotape phone call is made where they claim it infers he's guilty. Very nearly midnight. The
medical records show the next day he's at the doctor's. You can't fake a strep throat. It's not like a soft tissue
injury that you can say your back hurts. You can't fake to the doctor you have strep throat, you've been
throwing up.

June 5th the call is made. You heard Abraham Kneisley's testimony. Good friend. He said he talked
to Byron on the phone that week too. He said Byron was practically incoherent, giving answers to
questions that didn't follow. Byron is the next day at the doctor's. They can't deny that.

September 13th, Byron moves to St. Louis. The key here is he has decided to -- when he does move,
he's going to have no ties to Kelly. He's tired of her coming back around, talking about her drug problems
and whatever. She broke up with him. He doesn't feel he has to deal with her anymore. He's got other
girlfriends now.

Page 1217

So September 13th he goes to St. Louis. No ties. He won't give her the phone number or address.
September 19th of 2001 -- I'm sorry. This is 2000. This was 2001. I apologize. These phone calls are in
2001. Below the line, this is in 2000.

September ]9th 2000, Kelly Moffett is at the Prosecutors Office saying I can testify if you give me
immunity. I can testify that Byron Case did the murder. Now, is this a coincidence, the closeness of these
two dates? Is that just a timing coincidence or is that important? We'll let the jury decide.

Kelly Moffett gets on the stand and says, well, this drug addiction and alcoholism got worse
because I saw a murder. Well, isn't that a typical spiral of addiction? She admitted she had these problems
and was using drugs before Anastasia ever died. So the typical drug addiction or crack addiction or spiral
addiction is getting worse and worse and worse. Would that have happened anyway without Anastasia's
death? I mean, that's the way a drug addiction progresses anyway.

Page 1218

But it's very convenient, isn't it, to say, well, after Anastasia's death, that's when it all got worse, the
crack use and everything.

Well, that's all of my notes from the trial. So in conclusion here, I just want to wrap up. You've seen
all the evidence. The Prosecutors Office has had five years to bring in all this what they call evidence. The
defense would submit to you what one of the witnesses said on the stand. What evidence? Kelly Moffett?

There is only one right verdict here. You saw all the evidence. We were watching the jury. You were
very attentive. Very good jury. You listened to every witness. Thank you for being so attentive. There is
only one correct verdict here, the verdict of not guilty.

In a few minutes you'll be upstairs deliberating, trying to reach a decision here, and just remember
that Byron Case will be downstairs here waiting for you.
 Byron and his attorney are waiting for you, waiting to hear the truth being affirmed, waiting to hear
the verdict of not guilty. Do the right thing. Thank you very much.