Crime Raven

Murders on Main Street Kentucky Re-release

• Mark Rein • Episode 18

Share episode

This is a re-release where we reworked some pieces and combined two episodes into one.

In November 2015, the bodies of neighbors Pam Phillips and Ed Dansereau were found in a burned-out vehicle. Later the body of Calvin Phillips was found in his cellar. Who was the target, and who was just in the wrong place at the wrong time on Main Street in Pembroke, Kentucky? 

 

Resources:

Trial footage: https://www.courttv.com/trials/ky-v-martin-2021/

Amazon
Send gifts with Same Day delivery

Audible
Thousands of audiobooks, podcasts, and original content at your fingertips.

Disclaimer: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase, I may receive a commission at no extra cost to you.

Support the show

Marcy:

Welcome to Crime Raven; true crimes, real life stories from law enforcement and issues crime fighters face. This podcast highlights crimes researched by retired Detective Sergeant Mark Rein, using publicly available information, court records and personal recollections. Content may be graphic, disturbing, or violent. Listener discretion is advised. Suspects are considered innocent until found guilty in a court of law. One of the ways that you can support Crime Raven is to use our link to shop on Amazon. We know you already shop there. When you use our link, it doesn't cost you anything extra. It just tells Amazon to send us a few pennies of your purchase. Doesn't matter what you buy. Big or small, it all helps us cover our podcast costs. So next time you need to buy on Amazon, use our link. You can find our Amazon link in the show notes or at crimeraven.com/resources. Bookmark that Amazon link so you don't lose it and use it every time you shop at Amazon. Pembroke, Kentucky is a tiny suburb of the Clarksville, Tennessee Metropolitan Region. The area is home to Army Base Fort Campbell, which sits astride the western end of the Tennessee- Kentucky border. The base is home to the renowned 101st Airborne, whose current mission is air assault or highly mobile light infantry transported to and around the battlefield by helicopter. The population of the metro area is just over 300,000 with Pembroke claiming only 700 of that. The town is 20 minutes of gently rolling farmland northwest of Fort Campbell. It's barely a bedroom community. A wide spot split by Kentucky State Route 41, marked by a Marathon station, a Dollar General, and not much else. Pembroke's appeal is its rural sensibility. Farmland surroundings, but never too distant from the services and civilization offered in Clarksville to the south or Hopkinsville to the north. Main Street Pembroke is lined not with businesses, but with single family houses, some quite large and well over a hundred years old. It was in one of these homes, 4 43 South Main Street, on a cold and rainy November 18th 2015, that the unthinkable happened.

Mark:

The stately 4,000 square foot home loomed in the dim morning light as the man approached. The side entrance, the one everybody used was toward the rear, just off the driveway and parking area. The door itself was obscured by a lattice enclosed porch and walkway. He moved quickly nervous that his prey would be standing in the darkness behind the trellis. The man was familiar with the house and its residents. Familiar enough to know that only Calvin should be there because his wife always left early for work. He hit the threshold, the screen door, the point of no return. The back of his mind screaming that here was the moment of greatest danger. Cal like to shoot guns. He could have one readily available. But the man was banking on surprise. A Blitzkrieg attack. He swept up through the threshold, and luck was on his side. Calvin had just put on his raincoat and was stepping out onto the enclosed porch. For an instant, the two men looked at each other across the narrow room. Calvin recognized the threat, his face opening up in waves of shock and surprise that quickly turned to fear. The intruder brought the Glock pistol up and fired. Bullets punched through Calvin's chest and neck. He crumpled. Mortally wounded, but the attack had just begun. The man, consumed with anger, fueled by adrenaline surged forward. He viciously beat Calvin's head with powerful blows, shattering nose and jaw. When the attack was complete and Calvin lay on the floor enduring the last spasms of life, the man was a statue above him. The pause was not a moment of reflection. The 45 in that enclosed space had been a cannon blast, shatteringly loud for the rural Kentucky morning. He listened for sounds of alarm in the surrounding neighborhood. Hearing nothing, his mind pivoted to the plan. He picked up the 45 shell casings. He dragged Calvin out onto the porch, opened the cellar hatch and dropped the body down. He wiped blood stains from the floor with the towels and clothing that were close at hand. With the most obvious evidence gone from the first floor, he descended into the cellar. The man gathered a small pile of wood and cardboard around Calvin's body, and he lit it. As the conflagration grew and the cellar filled with smoke, the man retreated back up to the porch. He closed the hatch behind him. And trusted that the fire below would cleanse his sin. Hours after setting the fire, the man returned to inspect his handiwork. As he drove by, he was surprised to see the house on 4 43 South Main Street was still standing. In fact, he could see no change to the house. He considered what must be done to salvage the plan. Just before 5:30 PM the man returned to the Phillips house. As he approached, he was shocked to see Pamela Phillips' car already parked in its usual spot near the door. She was early. He also noted the neighbor, Ed Dansereau's car parked off to the side of the shared driveway. Ed's kitchen lights were on, and from those windows, it could be possible for Ed to observe the entire side of Calvin and Pam Phillips' house. Ed worked out of town for much of the week and had returned at a time that was inconvenient. For the second time that day, the man moved up to the house with cautious haste. From that morning's shooting, the echoes of the 45 still reverberating in its mind. The man had changed things up. He now carried a smaller and hopefully quieter 22 caliber weapon. The man paused upon reaching the threshold. He got lucky again. From behind the screen door, he could see Pam toward the middle of the house in the hallway, just beyond the kitchen. She was pacing back and forth like she was on a tether, talking into a landline, handset attached to a vintage phone. She seemed a little upset. The man looked to his right. The cellar hatch was still hidden under the dog bed. Even better, Calvin's ancient mutt was laying on it. The body remained hidden and the plan could still work. The intruder timed his entry for when Pam shifted away. He crept across the deck, increasing speed as he smoothly opened the door to the kitchen. He closed the distance in an instant. Pam turned, gasping, dropping the phone as she saw the man. He grabbed Pam by the hair as she tried to turn and flee. The first shot penetrated her chest as he brought the gun up. The next three went into her skull at almost point blank range. Pam collapsed, dead before she hit the floor. The sharp crack of the 22 was not as quiet as he would've liked. The man paused, standing over Pam's body in the dim hallway just as he had her husband 10 hours earlier. A few seconds later, he heard a man's voice toward the driveway."Pam!" There was a pause, and again, louder,"Pam!" The man moved across the kitchen. He recognized Ed Dansereau's voice. As he approached the door, the man could see Ed standing at the end of the fence line that divided the parking areas between the two houses. Ed had a phone in his hand and was craning his head from side to side, as if seeing better would allow him to decide what to do next. The intruder kicked into survival mode. The only thing to do when cornered is to attack into the ambush. He exited the kitchen door and without pausing on the porch, continued outside. As he opened the screen door, he called out to Ed, who recognized him and was confused. The man was an express train. Closing the gap, raising the gun. Ed simultaneously fumbled one hand in the pocket and his other hand brought up the phone to his head. The man fired three quick shots into Ed Dansereaux's face. The useless phone dropped from Ed's ear and he fell with it onto the grass. Ed's other hand was still gripping the pistol he had only partially cleared from his pocket. This had been three more shots, ones the man couldn't afford echoing through that neighborhood. Ed Dansereaux lay on the open ground between two houses, only a hundred feet from Main Street. They were exposed, obvious to anyone passing on foot, in a car, or anyone looking for the source of those shots. The man made an instant decision. Pure adrenaline. He grabbed Ed by the feet and dragged him 60 yards towards the back of the Phillips property, away from the road and away from prying eyes. He didn't notice the gun in Ed's hand as it slipped from its pocket where it came to rest only a few feet from where its owner lay slowly extenuating. In the dark field behind Calvin and Pam Phillip's house, the man paused for the third time that day, listening for anyone who might have raised. Hearing nothing, he cautiously returned to Pam's body and began covering his tracks. Just a few minutes into the cleanup, the man heard a car pull into the driveway. He hid as someone first knocked, then opened the door in the kitchen. A woman's voice called loudly into the house for Pam or Calvin. She repeated the calls several times, but did not venture inside. After a few minutes, the sound of the car backing out of the driveway could be heard from the man's hiding place. The close calls were taking a toll. The man decided he would have to come back later. He wrapped and hid Pam's body, locked the doors, and quietly walked away. In the evening hours of November 18th, 2015, the man who had killed three of the residents of South Main Street in Pembroke, Kentucky, contemplated his next steps. He considered a bigger fire, one that would destroy everything, including evidence he might have overlooked. But it hadn't worked before, and a fire would also serve as a giant beacon focusing all the scrutiny right there, right then. He needed to spread some evidence out, divert attention away from the crime scene. He wanted the uncertainty that elapsed time creates in a murder investigation. Fortune favors the bold, so at 1: 30 in the morning on the 19th, when there was no police activity at the Phillip's house on South Main Street, the intruder went back to work. He cleaned up the brass and the obvious blood. He loaded Pam and Ed's corpses into her car. He went into the cellar and tried to pull Calvin out, but by that time, the body was in full rigor and could not easily be carried up through the hatch. Much less compressed to fit inside the already crowded sedan. The man drove Pam's car to the far side of Pembroke across Highway 41 and two miles up Rosetown Road. He turned off onto a dirt path that bisected, a large pasture that was owned by the farmer named Homack. The field was bounded on either side by wooded strips at the property lines. The man knew if he had followed the dirt road far enough, he could disappear into the trees and there he could quietly dispose of the bodies. That was a plan until the speeding car skidded on the rain- slick mud, and was drug off onto the soft shoulder. The man's frantic attempts to reverse and rock her car from the mud were in vain. He got out to inspect and his fears were realized. The car was exposed, visible for Rosetown Road and stuck fast in the middle of the field. Feeling a combination of anger and panic, the man threw the keys into the darkness, doused the car, lit it and fled away from the road toward the sheltering trees. When the man made it back to South Main Street, he went to Ed Dansereaux's house. He came out with Ed's keys and wallet. He stole Ed's car, driving it east. He was sure to bring Pam Phillips' cell with him. He had a trick to play. A round trip of just over an hour took him to the destination and back to South Main Street. He dumped Ed Dansereaux's car in the parking lot of the elementary school. A few blocks away, the Phillips and Dansereaux houses were dark and quiet as the sun rose. To the west tendrils of smoke marred the morning air above the Homack farm.

Marcy:

John Homack and Hilbert Jet were neighbors. Each living and farming on several acres of land bordering Road. On November 19th, 2015, just after 2:00 AM. Both men were separately awakened from their beds to sounds Home-ec thought they were shotgun blast and figured that there were people illegally hunting the woods at

Mark:

the Southern end of

Marcy:

his property. He wasn't about to

Mark:

go out at that

Marcy:

hour to confront armed men, even if they were trespassing.

Mark:

Just to the

Marcy:

north. Hilbert Jet's dog was barking in

Mark:

response to those noises. Waking the entire

Marcy:

house.

Mark:

Jack calm the dog and

Marcy:

saw from his bathroom window, a fire burning in the field at the far side of the hedge row between the properties. The flames were in the general direction of

Mark:

Homax burn pit. Both men comfortable in their

Marcy:

rationalizations. Went back

Mark:

to sleep.

Marcy:

Then Hilbert

Mark:

jet left his house to run errands just before 9:00 AM on November

Marcy:

19th. As he

Mark:

drove south on Rosetown road, he

Marcy:

saw a burnt up

Mark:

car. And Homax field right

Marcy:

about where he'd seen

Mark:

those flames seven hours earlier.

Marcy:

The vehicle, a small sedan was still smoldering. Jet pulled up to the barn

Mark:

where home-ec lived and the men

Marcy:

agreed they should call

Mark:

9 1 1.

Marcy:

The first

Mark:

to arrive were volunteer firefighters who looked

Marcy:

into the charred

Mark:

metal shell of a car and saw

Marcy:

one, maybe two skulls lying

Mark:

on the floorboards.

Marcy:

The firefighters were treated to Rosetown road, blocked access and called for police.

Mark:

A deputy

Marcy:

from the Christian county Sheriff's office arrived a short time later. He verified

Mark:

the skulls in

Marcy:

the car. Which started the chain

Mark:

of

Marcy:

detective call-outs.

Mark:

The Sheriff's department also reached

Marcy:

out to Kentucky state police

Mark:

who assigned

Marcy:

one of their investigator. Leonard Smith

Mark:

to the case.

Marcy:

As

Mark:

an aside during

Marcy:

this case, Leonard

Mark:

Smith

Marcy:

retired from Kentucky state police. And was

Mark:

hired as

Marcy:

a detective Lieutenant

Mark:

by the Christian

Marcy:

county Sheriff's office. So we'll

Mark:

refer to him as Lieutenant Smith. When investigators

Marcy:

arrived at the scene, they examined the car stuck just

Mark:

off the dirt

Marcy:

road. There were still standing puddles across the field from recent heavy rains.

Mark:

One of the investigators saw the car keys tossed about 40 feet away

Marcy:

under a couple of inches of water. The investigators

Mark:

also matched

Marcy:

the few tire imprints on the road to responders

Mark:

and John Homax Toyota

Marcy:

Tundra. Lieutenant Smith

Mark:

noted that the car

Marcy:

fire had been scorching. Almost

Mark:

everything was ashes

Marcy:

in the

Mark:

bottom of the car. The rear window glass had popped and melted into the back dash.

Marcy:

And as he looked around the wreckage, he smelled the

Mark:

distinct odor of kerosene.

Marcy:

The license plate on the rear of the vehicle was burned off

Mark:

onto the ground,

Marcy:

but the tag was still readable.

Mark:

The tag came back to Calvin and Pamela Phillips at 4 43 south main

Marcy:

street in Pembroke.

Mark:

The vehicle was

Marcy:

wrapped, put on a slide back tow truck and

Mark:

take into a storage area for further processing.

Marcy:

The focus

Mark:

shifted to the Phillips residence

Marcy:

On south main street. The house sits back

Mark:

off the sidewalk about

Marcy:

75

Mark:

From

Marcy:

the front, it looks like an

Mark:

average

Marcy:

size lot for the

Mark:

size of the house, but the property extends back in a narrow corridor for

Marcy:

several acres. The lot is actually

Mark:

so large that

Marcy:

the house

Mark:

and the front yard sit in city

Marcy:

limits.

Mark:

and the rear acreage juts out on the county

Marcy:

land. The Phillips and residents on similarly situated properties,

Mark:

shoot firearms on the county land. and activity that's

Marcy:

prohibited inside the city

Mark:

boundary.

Marcy:

On November 19th,

Mark:

Christian

Marcy:

county Sheriff's deputies arrived at the Phillip's house. Around

Mark:

noon. All that they knew was that a car registered to that address had

Marcy:

been burned off Rosetown road with

Mark:

two bodies in it.

Marcy:

There was no answer at

Mark:

the door. As deputy stood in the driveway, one of them noticed drops

Marcy:

of what looked

Mark:

like blood on the paper. Widening their

Marcy:

focus. They

Mark:

could see numerous blood spots

Marcy:

and the drive

Mark:

and walkway centered

Marcy:

around the house aside door.

Mark:

The deputies entered the

Marcy:

house, clearing

Mark:

each room,

Marcy:

ensuring that no one was hurt or hiding.

Mark:

On the initial

Marcy:

sweep, deputies did not find anything alarming.

Mark:

It was a large old house

Marcy:

and parts were being remodeled. there was to construction debris that had not yet been

Mark:

cleared. In addition to the debris, the house was cluttered with the kind of objects amassed

Marcy:

over decades of lives being

Mark:

lived. The only resident

Marcy:

found in the house was a sickly

Mark:

German shepherd dog. Lying on

Marcy:

a dog bed

Mark:

inside the enclosed porch. During the wait for detectives

Marcy:

deputies did what they could to prepare.

Mark:

Animal control came and

Marcy:

took

Mark:

the

Marcy:

dog. The deputies made note of additional indication.

Mark:

that

Marcy:

something bad had happened. There were swipes of blood on

Mark:

the entry door,

Marcy:

blood on a blue tarp near where the dog had been

Mark:

lying. A pool of blood at the end of a privacy fence that formed the

Marcy:

border between the Phillip's backyard and ed Dan's rose. And next to that,

Mark:

a cell phone on

Marcy:

the ground with a swipe of dried blood. When deputies went to the

Mark:

side door of Dan's Rose

Marcy:

House, the one that faced

Mark:

the Phillips house, they found

Marcy:

that door open.

Mark:

No one answered when they

Marcy:

yelled inside.

Mark:

By two in the afternoon, detectives were working with a search

Marcy:

warrant that allowed a detailed search of the Phillip's house and property. Detective shot a video walkthrough of the entire home.

Mark:

They

Marcy:

took photos documenting

Mark:

the overall scene and

Marcy:

items of specific

Mark:

interest, including a Ruger pistol on

Marcy:

the kitchen table.

Mark:

Another semiautomatic

Marcy:

pistol laying

Mark:

next to the house phone on

Marcy:

the side table in

Mark:

the hallway. A nine millimeter pistol

Marcy:

next to the bed and the

Mark:

upstairs master, there was a subpoena

Marcy:

ordering Calvin Phillips to appear in a military court martial on a desk upstairs. They found more

Mark:

evidence in the grass, in the backyard. 60 yards behind the

Marcy:

house.

Mark:

An old looking semi-automatic pistol lay near a second pool of blood,

Marcy:

much larger than the pool

Mark:

of blood at the end of the fence.

Marcy:

As

Mark:

detective search, the enclosed porch, one picked

Marcy:

up a pair of sweat pants. One leg of the pants was

Mark:

trapped under what turned out

Marcy:

to be a hatch. The door was flush with the

Mark:

deck surface and had gone a notice because it had been covered with a large dog

Marcy:

bed.

Mark:

The detective

Marcy:

slid the bed away and pulled the door up. Below him and the dim light of the seller, he could see the body

Mark:

of Calvin

Marcy:

Phillips facing up Calvin was obviously dead, but investigators called for

Mark:

a paramedic to assess the body.

Marcy:

Katie Rogers examined Calvin's

Mark:

body and noted that

Marcy:

he was cyanotic because his nail beds were blue.

Mark:

His pupils were clouded fixed and dilated.

Marcy:

Lividity, which is the gravitational pooling of blood within the body.

Mark:

That happens after death had set in. Calvin's body was stiff,

Marcy:

also known

Mark:

as rigor,

Marcy:

mortis. Calvin was on his back with his arms extended up and his legs

Mark:

bent. It was apparent that Calvin was not lying in his original position of

Marcy:

death. He had been

Mark:

moved into this position after rigor had said. Investigators noted that Calvin had a bullet wound to

Marcy:

the chest. And injuries to

Mark:

his face.

Marcy:

he had dried blood on his pants and coat. Calvin was lying on a pile of burned wood, cardboard, towels, and clothing. He was wearing

Mark:

a rain coat

Marcy:

with a hood cinched

Mark:

down over

Marcy:

his head. One

Mark:

arm of the PVC

Marcy:

jacket had melted

Mark:

off during the

Marcy:

fire. when Calvin was moved. Investigators

Mark:

saw that the debris around and under the body was

Marcy:

a

Mark:

Pyre that had only partially burned. On the ground at the base

Marcy:

of the stairs,

Mark:

label at fragment

Marcy:

and a piece of tooth. While

Mark:

the Phillip's house was

Marcy:

being searched that day. Word

Mark:

spread around town and across

Marcy:

the state. And people began to call

Mark:

the police with

Marcy:

information. Marlene Larock who was a friend of Calvin's who lived nearby. They had bonded over their mutual love of German shepherds. On the morning of the 18th, the

Mark:

vet that they shared told Marlene, that

Marcy:

Calvin's dog was sick and likely to die.

Mark:

Marlene and her adult daughter, Michelle, who was visiting from out of state, went

Marcy:

to see Calvin around 2:00 PM. She said it was

Mark:

strange that the door to the house was open, but no one answered when she

Marcy:

knocked and yelled inside. Marlene called Pam on her cell phone and

Mark:

left a message about

Marcy:

the visit. Pam didn't call Marlene back

Mark:

until about 5:30 PM.

Marcy:

Pam said that she just arrived home from work and Calvin was not

Mark:

around, but his

Marcy:

wallet and cell phone were there. Pam said

Mark:

that she had just

Marcy:

gotten off the phone with the neighbor ed. Pam

Mark:

had asked ed

Marcy:

to check the

Mark:

back of the property

Marcy:

for Calvin.

Mark:

She was worried. Maybe Calvin had hurt himself

Marcy:

somewhere.

Mark:

Just then Marlene said she heard Pam

Marcy:

say something like, hold on.

Mark:

I see

Marcy:

something.

Mark:

Marlene heard her friend admit a startle type scream. And then heard nothing

Marcy:

more. Marlene thought the line was open. So she listened and waited for several minutes, but Pam never returned. Marlene was unsettled by the situation. So she asked her daughter, Michelle to go back with her.

Mark:

Marlene

Marcy:

said that Pam's car was there parked in its usual location No's

Mark:

in by the house.

Marcy:

And for the second time that

Mark:

day she found the

Marcy:

house doors

Mark:

open

Marcy:

again. She called inside,

Mark:

but no one responded.

Marcy:

Marlene said that she was

Mark:

afraid to go in the house. So after a few minutes,

Marcy:

they

Mark:

left.

Marcy:

When they

Mark:

arrived back at their house.

Marcy:

Marlene still felt disturbed. She really wanted to know that everything was all

Mark:

right.

Marcy:

So at 7:00 PM. She

Mark:

and Michelle. Returned to the Phillips house

Marcy:

for the third time. That day. This time, the

Mark:

house was closed and dark. Pam's car had been moved

Marcy:

now

Mark:

it was turned around and backed in near the door.

Marcy:

Marlene thought the car's position was unusual. But still no answer

Mark:

at the door. When

Marcy:

investigators call the

Mark:

army criminal investigations division or

Marcy:

CID. About the subpoena on Calvin's desk,

Mark:

detectives

Marcy:

were told that they would get a call back. Instead that afternoon,

Mark:

several CID

Marcy:

officers arrived at

Mark:

the scene.

Marcy:

About

Mark:

the subpoena. The CID guys literally pointed across the street to the yellow house, belonging to Christian

Marcy:

Martin. They said that

Mark:

Calvin Phillips was a key prosecution witness in a court

Marcy:

martial.

Mark:

Where Martin was being tried for

Marcy:

domestic violence

Mark:

assault. And mishandling of confidential information. The charges were severe enough to end Martin's

Marcy:

career and could send him to prison. They also said that Calvin Phillips

Mark:

was worried that Martin would retaliate. By the afternoon of

Marcy:

the 19th. The Investigators still had a lot of

Mark:

uncertainty as they began to talk to people close to

Marcy:

the potential

Mark:

victims. They knew that Calvin was dead in the cellar and they knew

Marcy:

they had two

Mark:

skulls in Pam's car.

Marcy:

Calvin and Pam's son,

Mark:

Matt lived two and a half

Marcy:

hours north Matt was able to give detectives some background on his parents.

Mark:

Calvin at 59 was a retired air force and army helicopter

Marcy:

pilot who had served in Somalia and

Mark:

the Gulf war.

Marcy:

As Matt grew up, Pam was a stay-at-home mom. And

Mark:

then vice-president at heritage bank in Hopkinsville, about 30 minutes from

Marcy:

Penbrook. The

Mark:

couple had been

Marcy:

married for over 30 years. And had lived in the same

Mark:

house for most of

Marcy:

that time. Matt knew the

Mark:

neighbor at Dan's row and said he was good friends with his

Marcy:

parents. Matt said his parents were worried

Mark:

about the pending court. martial.

Marcy:

The trial had been delayed

Mark:

several times and tensions increased with each

Marcy:

continuance. Calvin and Pam

Mark:

were discouraging people from visiting until the case

Marcy:

was resolved.

Mark:

Matt

Marcy:

didn't know all of the

Mark:

details of the court martial, but he knew

Marcy:

it involved his father

Mark:

turning over items to the FBI. That he had

Marcy:

obtained from Martin's

Mark:

ex wife, Joan

Marcy:

Hart. Matt explained that his parents had helped Joan Harmon

Mark:

move

Marcy:

out of the Martin

Mark:

house when the marriage broke up.

Marcy:

For a

Mark:

time after that split Harmon rented a property

Marcy:

in Pembroke that the Philips owned. Calvin identify classified material among Martins property during

Mark:

the move.

Marcy:

And Calvin took that to the FBI. That material

Mark:

and

Marcy:

photographs of Martin

Mark:

stepson's injuries were the basis for the court. Marshall,

Marcy:

Matt Phillips was asked to identify his father

Mark:

with a picture of Calvin's head.

Marcy:

showing only from the

Mark:

nose up.

Marcy:

investigators wanted to spare him the

Mark:

sight

Marcy:

of his father's mangled lower face.

Mark:

Penny Casey worked

Marcy:

with Pam Phillips at the Hopkinsville bank. When

Mark:

penny

Marcy:

talked to investigators, she told them that as recently as Monday, November 16th,

Mark:

Pam had voiced concerns about

Marcy:

the court martial situation.

Mark:

Pam told

Marcy:

penny that they were keeping family away during the holiday season because

Mark:

of the tension. Pam was worried that if they left Martin would break into their home

Marcy:

and might kill them when

Mark:

they returned.

Marcy:

On

Mark:

the 18th of November,

Marcy:

Pam left work

Mark:

at 5:00 PM, which was

Marcy:

a little early. She had been angry at Calvin because they were expecting a delivery of her birthday

Mark:

present from her son.

Marcy:

A new washer

Mark:

and dryer.

Marcy:

Calvin knew

Mark:

this and he was going

Marcy:

to be there

Mark:

to receive and set up the

Marcy:

appliances. The

Mark:

delivery people called Pam before

Marcy:

11 and told her no one was answering the door.

Mark:

By

Marcy:

the time Pam left work that evening, she

Mark:

was worried because

Marcy:

she'd been unable to reach Calvin all

Mark:

day. On

Marcy:

the 18th and 19th of November, Sally Jackson

Mark:

had tried

Marcy:

in vain to reach her longtime

Mark:

boyfriend at Dan's row. His house was in Pembroke,

Marcy:

but he usually spent much

Mark:

of his time during the

Marcy:

week with her in

Mark:

bowling green. Where he worked as a music instructor and

Marcy:

as a jazz musician.

Mark:

When the detective finally called her, he had no answers, only

Marcy:

questions. She told them

Mark:

that ed went to his

Marcy:

pembro comb on the afternoon of the 18th after finishing

Mark:

Ed's car

Marcy:

should be at his house.

Mark:

Ed was a gourmet cook

Marcy:

and he made high

Mark:

quality meals even

Marcy:

when he was just cooking for himself. And his plan was to make fish that night.

Mark:

The fact that he hadn't

Marcy:

called her was very unusual. She said that ed was good friends with the Philips. And ed

Mark:

was generally aware that there was some kind of problem with

Marcy:

Martin across the street, but ed wasn't involved in that.

Mark:

Sally was able to identify the pistol lying on the grass. 60 yards behind the Phillips house from a photo. She said the gun was

Marcy:

an old German pistol that Ed's father had brought back from world war II. The

Mark:

phone smeared

Marcy:

with blood found lying on the ground at the end of the fence was also ads. At Dan's

Mark:

rose car was eventually

Marcy:

found at the nearby elementary school. He's

Mark:

written the ignition and

Marcy:

his wallet was in the center

Mark:

By the

Marcy:

evening of November 19th. Christian county Sheriff's office knew they had a big case on their

Mark:

hands,

Marcy:

A body and a seller.

Mark:

two skulls

Marcy:

and a burned out car.

Mark:

Two missing people

Marcy:

and a potential suspect. The morning of the 20th. Was a busy

Mark:

one. Deputies had secured the Phillips and

Marcy:

Dan's rose houses overnight. They'd kept an eye out for activity across the street at Martins place. Deputies added to

Mark:

their account of search warrants. One for at Dan's rose car.

Marcy:

One for a Dan's

Mark:

Rose House.

Marcy:

And one

Mark:

for four 80

Marcy:

south main street, the Martin residence

Mark:

Dan's Rose House was

Marcy:

pretty simple. The scene

Mark:

told the tale, the

Marcy:

investigators expected. There appeared to be

Mark:

nothing unusual.

Marcy:

The inside of the house was tidy. They could

Mark:

see signs of

Marcy:

what

Mark:

Sally Jackson

Marcy:

said were Ed's plans for the previous

Mark:

evening.

Marcy:

Officially next to the kitchen sink. near a beer wrapped in a UK hugger sleeve. The kitchen window offered a

Mark:

perfect view

Marcy:

of the Phillips parking area and back door Across

Mark:

the kitchen in the living room. Ed's recliner was unoccupied except for a leather holster with an extra

Marcy:

magazine pouch that someone had dropped in the seat.

Mark:

The search warrant

Marcy:

for Martin's

Mark:

house was also executed on November 20th.

Marcy:

Entry

Mark:

and securing of the house

Marcy:

were accomplished using the regional SWAT team.

Mark:

The only

Marcy:

person home was Laura Martins, girlfriend.

Mark:

Investigators knew that Martin was at Fort Campbell and

Marcy:

Laura's kids were in school. However, this was

Mark:

a triple murder investigation

Marcy:

where many facts were unknown, which

Mark:

called for caution.

Marcy:

And the SWAT

Mark:

team. As the search of Martin's home progressed,

Marcy:

investigators seized

Mark:

several items. His pickup

Marcy:

truck was impounded, where they found a box of PMC 45 rounds.

Mark:

a rifle magazine

Marcy:

for a 22. A box of 22 ammunition.

Mark:

A five gallon kerosine container

Marcy:

was seized from a utility room an AR style 22 rifle and handgun on a closet shelf. A handgun and a flowered person,

Mark:

a closet. a rifle in the crawl space. A handgun in a nylon case behind a computer Uh, 1911 style

Marcy:

handgun in the master

Mark:

bedroom. a large century gun safe and the upstairs

Marcy:

den. And Martins video security system and phone were seized. Along with

Mark:

evidence, photos were

Marcy:

taken of a recently used fire pit in the backyard.

Mark:

Muck

Marcy:

boots, caked with

Mark:

dried mud. And an inside view of the house, his front

Marcy:

door showing a newer looking security brace.

Mark:

Not all

Marcy:

evidence seized in criminal investigations

Mark:

as found immediately after the cases

Marcy:

report.

Mark:

In

Marcy:

major cases like this evidence of one kind or another is found, gathered, or seized. As the analysis progresses.

Mark:

For example, months later, a sample of hair was taken

Marcy:

from Martin by search

Mark:

warrant, with the Assistance of the North Carolina bureau of investigations.

Marcy:

And additional search warrant was required to open Martin safe. And century safe company responded with a

Mark:

passcode.

Marcy:

Inside that safe was a

Mark:

Glock model, 21 pistol, which fires 45 caliber rounds. The safe

Marcy:

also held a power of attorney. That Martin had granted to his girlfriend, Laura Spencer.

Mark:

It was signed

Marcy:

on November 16th, 2015. Some evidence missed in the original

Mark:

crime scene

Marcy:

processing was turned in by members of the Phillips family.

Mark:

The

Marcy:

items had been discovered while they were in the process of cleaning out the

Mark:

house.

Marcy:

One was a dog

Mark:

tag with Martin's name on it, found on a

Marcy:

high shelf.

Mark:

off the kitchen.

Marcy:

The tag

Mark:

was attached to a simple white cord, similar to a kite string. The original crime scene

Marcy:

photos showed a string on

Mark:

a shelf still. It was high enough

Marcy:

to be overlooked by investigators.

Mark:

The Phillips family also turned over other items on two separate occasions that they found while

Marcy:

cleaning.

Mark:

a

Marcy:

22 caliber

Mark:

bullet. Swept from

Marcy:

under the kitchen stove. And a 45

Mark:

caliber casing from behind

Marcy:

a pile of wooden construction debris on the enclosed porch. On December 23rd, 2015, the Kentucky

Mark:

medical examiner

Marcy:

officially confirmed. That the remains from the burned

Mark:

out car

Marcy:

on Rosetown road.

Mark:

Were those

Marcy:

of Pam Phillips

Mark:

and ed Dan's

Marcy:

row

Mark:

On December 31st, 2015,

Marcy:

seemingly out of the blue, a woman identified as

Mark:

Martin's ex wife, Joan Harmon. brought

Marcy:

Pam Phillip's cell phone. The one that Pam used before she was

Mark:

killed. To the at T store in

Marcy:

Hopkinsville

Mark:

asking for

Marcy:

it to be unlocked. The arrest for the murders of Pam and

Mark:

Calvin Phillips and ed

Marcy:

Dan's row came on May 11th, 2019. By

Mark:

that time Martin was flying commuter planes for American airlines. He was

Marcy:

arrested just after

Mark:

passing through

Marcy:

security at the Hammad Ali international airport and

Mark:

Martin was

Marcy:

charged with three counts of first degree murder. Two

Mark:

counts of. Burglary

Marcy:

in the first

Mark:

degree,

Marcy:

two counts of arson. And

Mark:

tampering with evidence.

Marcy:

There's been extensive reporting and publicity about the crime.

Mark:

During the intervening

Marcy:

years, Martins

Mark:

defense team requested a change of venue and the proceedings

Marcy:

were moved to harden county, Kentucky. Trial began

Mark:

June 1st, 2021. The backstory began in

Marcy:

2011 when Martin was

Mark:

married to Joan

Marcy:

Harmon. They live together

Mark:

with her

Marcy:

three kids at four 80 south main in

Mark:

pembro, Kentucky. The marriage

Marcy:

ended after an

Mark:

argument during which they both called the

Marcy:

police. When officers arrived, Martin agreed to leave the

Mark:

house for them.

Marcy:

The following day, Joan Harmon

Mark:

was granted a domestic violence restraining

Marcy:

order.

Mark:

Calvin and Pam Phillips had

Marcy:

helped Joan Harmon

Mark:

move and allowed her

Marcy:

to

Mark:

temporarily rent one of their nearby

Marcy:

properties. During

Mark:

the move, Calvin Phillips had found some

Marcy:

items. A disc and a

Mark:

laptop where classified military

Marcy:

information was stored. In addition, Joan Harmon gave Calvin

Mark:

photos that she had taken of her son. Showing

Marcy:

bruises that they said were caused by Martin.

Mark:

Calvin turned the laptop and other materials over to the FBI.

Marcy:

Which became evidence in a court martial

Mark:

process.

Marcy:

Calvin Phillips was a key player in the original charges against The date of the court martial

Mark:

had been repeatedly delayed for almost a year. At the time

Marcy:

of the murders, the trial was scheduled to start

Mark:

in early December,

Marcy:

2015. Calvin Phillips and the others were murdered on November 18th. The court martial finally proceeded

Mark:

in may of 2016. Martin was convicted of misdemeanors instead of the original felony

Marcy:

charges.

Mark:

Calvin sister

Marcy:

Diana

Mark:

Phillips lives on the east coast. She was aware that

Marcy:

Calvin would be

Mark:

a witness against

Marcy:

Martin and knew that Calvin had assisted Joan when she moved out. Diana was worried that their involvement would

Mark:

cause problems with the neighbor who

Marcy:

she'd never After

Mark:

the murders, Diana returned

Marcy:

to Pembroke regularly. Estimating five or six trips to help her nephew, Matt Phillips deal with Calvin

Mark:

and Pam's property.

Marcy:

The house was full of

Mark:

stuff. They had to sort through

Marcy:

and clean

Mark:

everything.

Marcy:

She said that while they were going through this process,

Mark:

they also kept an eye out for anything that might be evidence in the case.

Marcy:

On November 30th, Dianna

Mark:

found a dog tag on a white string sitting

Marcy:

on

Mark:

a high shelf in

Marcy:

the foyer next to the kitchen.

Mark:

The dog tag had the

Marcy:

name, Christian Martin on it.

Mark:

A family friend who was helping

Marcy:

clean brushed uh, 22

Mark:

from under the stove.

Marcy:

Both items were bagged and handed over to a Sheriff's

Mark:

detective. On April 16th,

Marcy:

2016 during another trip. Diana

Mark:

said that she and her nephew, Matt were making

Marcy:

progress with the house. And most of the personal property had been removed. She

Mark:

cleaned the enclosed

Marcy:

porch near

Mark:

the door to

Marcy:

the house. She began to move a pile of

Mark:

construction debris left over from one of

Marcy:

Calvin's renovation projects.

Mark:

Diana found a bullet casing in the debris pile.

Marcy:

During the trial prosecutors play the security camera footage of Diana finding that casing. Diana and her family had installed the security cameras after the murders to monitor the

Mark:

often vacant

Marcy:

home. In Pam and Calvin

Mark:

son mats testimony,

Marcy:

he told how he

Mark:

Found out about his

Marcy:

parents'. Murders. And the process of sorting out their property. As the holidays that approached in 2015, Matt said

Mark:

his parents were discouraging anyone from visiting them because of the

Marcy:

friction with the neighbor. This was unusual because

Mark:

his parents often

Marcy:

had people visit Or they would travel to

Mark:

gatherings at the grandparents' home in Michigan. That holiday

Marcy:

season. They were not going to travel or

Mark:

have people over.

Marcy:

Because of the upcoming trial.

Mark:

During

Marcy:

cross examination. Matt said that he

Mark:

became increasingly frustrated as time passed

Marcy:

and an arrest had not been made. His family talked to an

Mark:

attorney about how they could pressure

Marcy:

police and prosecutors

Mark:

to move forward. They offered a reward

Marcy:

of a hundred

Mark:

thousand dollars for

Marcy:

information leading to

Mark:

arrest. And

Marcy:

they met with attorney general of Kentucky. Andy

Mark:

BearShare. Sally

Marcy:

Jackson, ed

Mark:

Dan's rose girlfriend recounted her

Marcy:

last conversation with him. And what do you plan for the evening of November 18th

Mark:

after he departed bowling

Marcy:

green?

Mark:

And when asked Sally said that she remembers Martin drinking a beer with ed on

Marcy:

his front

Mark:

porch,

Marcy:

but that

Mark:

they weren't good friends. And she

Marcy:

doubted ed ever had Martin over for dinner. Marlene LA rock took the stand to talk

Mark:

about her longtime friendship with the

Marcy:

Phillips.

Mark:

To other prosecution

Marcy:

witnesses, Steve

Mark:

Durham and Steve

Marcy:

Ballinger. were longtime friends of Calvin's. They both described separate conversations where Calvin expressed

Mark:

concern about his safety and

Marcy:

thought that

Mark:

Martin might try to kill

Marcy:

him. Penny Casey

Mark:

worked with Pam Phillips at the Hopkinsville

Marcy:

bank. She took the stand to recount what she told investigators

Mark:

about Pam's fear of Martin. Major

Marcy:

James Garrett is a us

Mark:

army JAG officer. He testified that he was the prosecutor in the court martial of Martin.

Marcy:

Garrett said that Calvin Phillips was the key to the court martial of Martin because

Mark:

Calvin identified and turned in

Marcy:

the disc containing classified information and

Mark:

photos of injuries of

Marcy:

Martin stepson.

Mark:

Between January, 2015 and the court

Marcy:

martial date set for early December, 2015.

Mark:

There were several

Marcy:

continuances.

Mark:

Garrett said

Marcy:

that Calvin was increasingly

Mark:

concerned that Martin

Marcy:

would do something to harm him.

Mark:

Major Garrett

Marcy:

said that during the buildup to the court, Marshall Martin was aggressive and complaining about how he was being treated, which included a congressional complaint, targeting the government prosecutors

Mark:

and the commanding officers at

Marcy:

4k.

Mark:

These complaints were investigated and the end result

Marcy:

was the

Mark:

JAG officers

Marcy:

and the commanders had done nothing wrong. Major Garrett said that Martin also spread misinformation that Joan

Mark:

Harmon was

Marcy:

motivated by financial assistance that she expected to

Mark:

receive from the

Marcy:

government. Despite

Mark:

knowing that

Marcy:

Harmon was never eligible for any financial assistance. Because of her lack of legal marital

Mark:

status.

Marcy:

Garrett was clear

Mark:

that contrary to

Marcy:

Martins public assertions, the defense and the court martial

Mark:

was calling. Calvin Phillips, not as a cooperator, but

Marcy:

to

Mark:

discredit him. After

Marcy:

the court Marshall, the jury panel issued Martin, a dismissal from service based on several counts.

Mark:

that They convicted him

Marcy:

of. For officer's a dismissal effects, benefits and retirement eligibility. John home-ec and Hilbert jet testified to their home locations

Mark:

and observations

Marcy:

of the burned

Mark:

vehicle on November 19th. Mr. Homax said he had CCTV surveillance that only showed north across his parking

Marcy:

area. And did not Cover the Rosetown

Mark:

road or the dirt road.

Marcy:

The defense showed smoke blowing from

Mark:

left to

Marcy:

right or west to east

Mark:

across the parking lot at around

Marcy:

11:50 PM. Home-ec said it was probably ground fog,

Mark:

which happens on the farm regularly. James Matlock was a resident of

Marcy:

Pembroke who worked on John Homax farm. James was

Mark:

a reluctant witness. After the murders. James mentioned to Bubba, his employer

Marcy:

and John Homax son that he saw Martin walking around on the farm.

Mark:

The Saturday before the murders. Sometime after

Marcy:

that Bubba reported what James said

Mark:

to the police.

Marcy:

During

Mark:

testimony. James looked at an aerial photo of the farm.

Marcy:

He indicated that he saw Martin walking around in a specific location near

Mark:

the woods. The

Marcy:

encounter happened as James was

Mark:

driving a three Wheeler and the distance was about 50 feet.

Marcy:

James said Martin was wearing a yellow shirt and blue jeans. And. May

Mark:

have been walking a dog.

Marcy:

In response. To a question. James said that he knows Martin

Mark:

and doesn't

Marcy:

like him. Mentioning

Mark:

that

Marcy:

there had been problems with Martin on James property in the

Mark:

past.

Marcy:

Lieutenant Smith described finding Calvin Phillips

Mark:

and burn debris in

Marcy:

the cellar. Some of the less obvious evidence was described. There was a long

Mark:

curl of dark hair on the kitchen

Marcy:

floor. There was suspected bloodstains

Mark:

collected from various places

Marcy:

in the The kitchen and the enclosed porch. Samples of stains from the cellar stairs,

Mark:

the sidewalk,

Marcy:

the blood patches and Phillips grass were all collected.

Mark:

Lieutenant Smith presented video

Marcy:

clips that showed the comings and goings of the residents from the rear of the Martin home. The back

Mark:

was the only

Marcy:

area covered by video surveillance system. Still. It clearly showed when everyone came and went by car. Lieutenant Smith also

Mark:

presented a video from

Marcy:

the at and T store in

Mark:

Hopkinsville on new year's Eve.

Marcy:

A woman identified as Joan Harmon accompanied by her three children. Entered the

Mark:

store and were held by staff

Marcy:

at the main counter. In the video,

Mark:

Harmon is taken aside by an employee and then she

Marcy:

and the children leave the store. Detective noise worthy testified that he was called to the Hopkins at

Mark:

and T store

Marcy:

for Pam Phillips Joan Harmon was gone when

Mark:

he arrived, but he identified her on

Marcy:

surveillance footage

Mark:

while detective Norsworthy was at the at and T store, Joan Harmon

Marcy:

and William Stokes tried to call him. noise worthy, left the store

Mark:

and drove to Joan Harmon's home. 20 minutes

Marcy:

away. In response

Mark:

to a pointed question. The

Marcy:

detective stated that Joan Harmon is not a suspect in this murder

Mark:

case.

Marcy:

The Prosecution showed detective Noyes worthy a photo

Mark:

of Martins front door

Marcy:

from the inside.

Mark:

He had described that the door was

Marcy:

secured by a newer looking brace bar

Mark:

that was wedged between

Marcy:

the door and the floor.

Mark:

The

Marcy:

most tedious

Mark:

part of the trial was the

Marcy:

forensic result analysis. for the most part, the evidence results were ambiguous.

Mark:

They did not directly point. to Martin. Nor did they exclude him? Dr. Jeffrey Springer, a state pathologist

Marcy:

and medical examiner did

Mark:

a painstaking

Marcy:

disassembly of the contents of Pam's car. Dr. Springer

Mark:

was able to identify two clear groupings of

Marcy:

bones. Both were identified. Through familial DNA as Pam Phillips in the front and ed Dan's row in

Mark:

the backseat. He

Marcy:

described the bodies

Mark:

as being burned up almost as much as you

Marcy:

can be burned up. The

Mark:

results had basically compressed into a heap on the floorboard.

Marcy:

Still Dr. Springer was able

Mark:

to identify

Marcy:

different organ tissues as strata

Mark:

in the mass.

Marcy:

He found three projectile

Mark:

fragments in Pam's brain tissue. And one in her heart

Marcy:

tissue. Ed Dan's row had three projectile

Mark:

fragments in his brain tissue.

Marcy:

And a surgical plate and Ed's remains matched an injury. He'd. Had early

Mark:

in life.

Marcy:

Dr. Randall falls

Mark:

also a state pathologist and medical

Marcy:

examiner performed

Mark:

the autopsy on Calvin Phillips. Calvin suffered

Marcy:

five gunshot wounds to his left

Mark:

neck collarbone

Marcy:

left chest, right chest

Mark:

and lower left

Marcy:

chest. Calvin was also beaten severely.

Mark:

He'd

Marcy:

suffered multiple head and. Face blunt

Mark:

force injuries, including abrasions,

Marcy:

lacerations, contusions,

Mark:

a broken nose, a

Marcy:

broken jaw, and a lacerated

Mark:

tongue.

Marcy:

The doctor determined that

Mark:

the head and

Marcy:

face injuries.

Mark:

were anti mortem

Marcy:

and. Peri mortem, meaning that

Mark:

Calvin was assaulted

Marcy:

with a blunt object or a fist before or during death. Dr falls

Mark:

noted. that Calvin had no injuries to his hands or

Marcy:

arms that might indicate defensive positioning.

Mark:

some hairs and ed Dan's rose car, where microscopic matches to the sample of Martins hair.

Marcy:

Still the

Mark:

FBI could not make

Marcy:

a definitive match for several reasons. The hair

Mark:

collected from the car was not

Marcy:

long

Mark:

enough.

Marcy:

And there wasn't enough of it. The loose clump of

Mark:

hair on the kitchen

Marcy:

was not Martins based on microscopic comparison, probably it

Mark:

belonged to Pam Phillips.

Marcy:

There was no blood found on any of

Mark:

the items collected from Martin.

Marcy:

And no DNA on the dog tag found at the murder scene. There was not enough DNA on the dog text string for analysis.

Mark:

The blood sample from the kitchen floor

Marcy:

and the back

Mark:

porch were Calvins. The blue tarp

Marcy:

had Calvin's blood on it. As did a white tag from the back

Mark:

porch. The bloodstains on the driveway and

Marcy:

pavement were Pam.

Mark:

The

Marcy:

blood taken from a carpet cutting. And the kitchen was also PAMs The blood pools in the side and backyard grass

Mark:

where at Dan's rose

Marcy:

and a hair in one of the tape lifts from Ed's

Mark:

car also belonged

Marcy:

To ed. The ignitable liquids

Mark:

analysis in the car

Marcy:

fire was a non event. The experts testified that if. They were present. Ignitable liquids would probably be completely burned off. In the center

Mark:

of a fire that was as hot and

Marcy:

complete as Pam's car was also a

Mark:

car fire is often

Marcy:

fueled by the flammable

Mark:

liquid in. The

Marcy:

gas The cell phone data

Mark:

continued the pattern of indefinite results.

Marcy:

The location info

Mark:

was of limited

Marcy:

use showing

Mark:

Martin cell phone was in the general area.

Marcy:

And that included his home, the murder site and the Rosetown road scene. As far as usage during the critical two

Mark:

days, Martin cell phone had been used

Marcy:

regularly,

Mark:

but there were gaps And

Marcy:

downtimes. During these periods, like the morning and evening of November 18th. The prosecution asserted. He carried out the murders. There was suspicious activity on Martin's phone. Usually he had a repeating

Mark:

alarm at 6:48 AM

Marcy:

with top gun

Mark:

ring

Marcy:

tone. What was unusual, was it on the 18th?

Mark:

At 11:27 PM. An

Marcy:

alarm was set. For 1:10 AM on the 19th. And there was no activity on the cell phone until seven thirty

Mark:

nine. On the

Marcy:

ninth. No activity means no calls,

Mark:

no texts and

Marcy:

no data exchanges. And analysis of Pam's

Mark:

phone showed

Marcy:

that it

Mark:

had been wiped to factory

Marcy:

restore. However, the experts said that this could have been intentional or the result of someone

Mark:

typing in the wrong password more than 10

Marcy:

times. As far as Pam Phillip's phone location. At and T gave information

Mark:

that the location data

Marcy:

is unreliable. What can you said is that the phone was hitting on three towers at once

Mark:

in the Pembroke

Marcy:

and Elkton

Mark:

areas. It's worth noting that both prosecution and

Marcy:

defense experts made errors in cell phone, data

Mark:

analysis. That were corrected just

Marcy:

before the trial. Each side pointed out the opposing sides, Mr.

Mark:

Phone records were obtained

Marcy:

for Calvin

Mark:

and Pam

Marcy:

Phillips. and

Mark:

ed Dan's rose

Marcy:

phones, including

Mark:

the landline and cell. These

Marcy:

searches allowed them to verify

Mark:

the times and lengths of

Marcy:

phone calls. At

Mark:

5:20 PM. Pam

Marcy:

Phillips 80 and T cell called

Mark:

ed Dan's rose landline. And they talked for. Five

Marcy:

minutes.

Mark:

At 5

Marcy:

25, pan Phillips 18

Mark:

T cell called ed Dan's row cell. The call us at three seconds,

Marcy:

but they couldn't verify

Mark:

it actually

Marcy:

connected. At

Mark:

5:30

Marcy:

PM. Pam

Mark:

Phillips

Marcy:

landline calls,

Mark:

Marlene

Marcy:

LA Rox Landline. And the call last one minute and four So.

Mark:

At 5:30 PM. Marlene Laura calls, Pam

Marcy:

Phillips cell. And the connection

Mark:

last six seconds. And at 5:31 PM. Marlene, the rock

Marcy:

calls, Pam

Mark:

Phillips landline, and the connection last seven

Marcy:

minutes. Lee Collier

Mark:

is a

Marcy:

firearms and tool mark expert who testified for the prosecution.

Mark:

For the most part, the bullet analysis followed the trend

Marcy:

of other trace analysis. The experts could not

Mark:

match evidence directly

Marcy:

to Martin, nor were they able to exclude Martin. None of the 22 rounds were usable for matching to guns due to deformity. Or fragmentation. They had

Mark:

the same rifle and characteristics

Marcy:

as Martins 22 weapons,

Mark:

but it's the

Marcy:

most. Common rifling used in the

Mark:

The physical characteristics of spent

Marcy:

bullets were consistent with the RWS brand. 22 bullets taken from

Mark:

Martins property. But that bullets shape is

Marcy:

also common.

Mark:

The bullet

Marcy:

found under the Phillip stove was also consistent with the RWS rounds taken.

Mark:

From Martin.

Marcy:

The bullets and fragments taken from Calvin

Mark:

Phillips body

Marcy:

were very

Mark:

likely fired from a Glock

Marcy:

pistol based on

Mark:

that weapons,

Marcy:

unique rifling. Pattern.

Mark:

The bullets were unique and challenging to match because they were designed to break apart and form eight

Marcy:

distinct wound channels. The butt end of these bullets had striation marks. Sufficient to match two of

Mark:

them to a

Marcy:

barrel with

Mark:

a distinct

Marcy:

polygon UL. Rifling pattern

Mark:

almost exclusively used by clock. The Glock barrel design is notorious for not leaving sufficient marking

Marcy:

as on bullets that were

Mark:

provide conclusive identification. The experts agreed

Marcy:

on one map.

Mark:

The 45 casing found under the debris pile on the Phillips porch had ejection

Marcy:

markings made by

Mark:

a Glock model 2145 caliber pistol.

Marcy:

Seized from Martins

Mark:

gun safe.

Marcy:

The primer of that casing also.

Mark:

Had the distinct Glock

Marcy:

elliptical firing pin

Mark:

impression.

Marcy:

Near the end of the prosecution case. The

Mark:

court heard emotion From

Marcy:

attorneys. for Joan Harmon and her son, Justin

Mark:

Harmon.

Marcy:

They

Mark:

wanted to assert their Rights

Marcy:

under the fifth

Mark:

amendment and. not be required

Marcy:

to testify in the

Mark:

Martin trial. The assertion was that both Harmons are potential suspects. And they are choosing not

Marcy:

to answer any questions. They're lawyers went further and said that it is

Mark:

clear that the

Marcy:

Harmons were being set up

Mark:

as alternate murderers by the Martin defense camp. The

Marcy:

unusual bigamy charge pushed by those same people. Evidence

Mark:

they say was planted

Marcy:

by Martin And public releases

Mark:

by private detective and defense team members

Marcy:

indicate the Harmon's legal jeopardy. They argued that Martin's sixth

Mark:

amendment, right. Does not Trump, Joan and Justin's fifth amendment, right? If Martin wanted

Marcy:

to claim Joan. Harmon

Mark:

was the real murderer.

Marcy:

He wasn't being barred from doing so. Neither the prosecution. Nor the defense was in favor of excluding the Harmons from testifying.

Mark:

The special prosecutor went further and said she had no intention of charging.

Marcy:

Joan Harmon with any crime. The defense wanted the Harmons to testify because their

Mark:

defense is that Joan and Justin are the real murderers that set Martin up. In the

Marcy:

end. the judge

Mark:

ruled that the Harmons could

Marcy:

assert their rights and would not be forced to testify. The jury was not present for this hearing. The Martin defense began with testimony from Laura Spencer's children who were in high school at the time of the murders. The kids had moved into Martin's Pembroke home with their mother in late summer of 2013. They lived with him for just over two years. Laura's now adult children testified that on November 18th, 2015, they were out of the house in school and later extracurricular activities. They didn't return home until 9:00 PM. Both Spencer children gave the same account saying that when they arrived home on the night of the 18th, Martin and their mother were together in the upstairs den, watching TV. They said that the rest of their evening was spent on homework and social media in their rooms before sleeping. Laura's kids noted that the house was old and creaky, and if Martin had left the house during the night and he hadn't, they would have heard him. When Laura Spencer took the stand, she gave a similar account of time as her children. Laura said she didn't know anything about the murders when they happened. Still, Laura said she was cooperative with the police and gave them codes for phones and devices. Laura was asked to go over what she recalled from November 18th through the 20th in 2015. Some of her recollections were refreshed by statements she had given to police on December 3rd, 2015. Laura said that on November 18th, the kids went to school in the morning and were gone until 9:00 PM. Martin came home at 5:30 PM and he had flowers to celebrate their anniversary. She said that they ate dinner, watch TV, and went to sleep between 10 and 11:00 PM. She noticed nothing unusual about the evening. Laura recalled that the following day, November 19 was also typical. She thinks that she spent most of the day at home alone. Martin went to work at 9:00 AM. He probably came home in the afternoon to drive Laura's daughter to horse riding instructions at 4, about 45 minutes away in Tennessee. On November 20, Laura said she was hanging around the house cleaning and doing laundry. At around 11:00 AM, a Police, SWAT team suddenly entered the house. At first, she didn't know what was happening. Laura said she heard a breaking window and someone yelling. She said she ran out of the house, traumatized, saying she was sure that they were there to kill her. Laura was emotional as she recounted this story, shaking with her hands over her face. The defense attorney asked who she thought was there to kill her, and Laura cried out"Joan Harmon!" When questioning continued, Laura revealed that the family lived in hotels after the police search warrant for a couple of weeks. They had a rental in Hopkinsville for awhile, and they later moved to North Carolina. In one of the last questions Laura was asked, she said that it was true that Calvin Phillips was going to be a witness for Martin in the court martial Martins, adult daughter, Amanda Flag, lived with Martin in the Pembroke house, when the marriage to Joan Harmon ended. Amanda told the jury that Joan and her dad had regularly argued before the breakup. During the decisive argument in 2012, Martin told Joan that he wanted a divorce. Amanda said that Joan told Martin she would ruin him and his military. After that Amanda and her father left the house and had to stay away for three weeks. They were allowed to go back after a court hearing. They arrived at the South Main Street house to find that Joan had taken everything personal property and animals. Amanda said for a time after that, Joan had regularly harassed them. They found tire slashed and dead animals in the mailbox. Catherine Foster was fresh out of law school and a newly minted Commonwealth's Attorney in 2012, when she prosecuted Joan Harmon for bigamy. She said that Martin was the victim in her case against Harmon. Harmon had not followed the process required to obtain a legal divorce decree before marrying Martin. US Army JAG Officer Major Garrett had called Catherine Foster about the Martin court-martial. Catherine said that Major Garrett pressured her not to prosecute Joan Harmon because she was a witness in the Army's case. Foster asserted that Garrett tried to influence the bigamy case, and that was unusual and unprofessional. Still, she admitted on cross examination, the discussion of defendants and witnesses by prosecutors from different jurisdictions was common. Lisa Petrie testified that she was the manager of LNR soda bar in the tiny community of Elkton, Kentucky. She said that most of the workers at LNR were locals and she managed around 25 people, seven to eight on each shift. One of the waitresses she worked with was Joan Harmon. Lisa also knew Joan Harmon from the local school where Joan's kids attended and Lisa helped out part-time as a teacher's aid. Lisa was called to testify by the defense because of a report that she had filed with the police. In the police statement, Lisa said that after the Pembroke murders, Joan Harmon's demeanor had changed. She came to work happy and excited. Lisa thought it was strange, disturbing behavior. Ken Buckner is a home improvement and remodeling contractor who lives and works in the Pembroke area. He'd done upgrade projects on both the Martin and Phillips homes. Ken testified that he once saw Joan Harmon carrying a concealed pistol, and that he worked on the Phillips home in the weeks after the murders. Buckner complained that he had arrived to find the house open and equipment moved during the project on some mornings. He said he didn't feel safe working there, so he quit. On cross examination, the prosecutor asked the Ken about working on Martin's house. He said that he had done some work on the front of the house, which included fixing the front door. Ken Murray's trucking company, employees Williams Stokes, who was Joan Harmon's boyfriend at the time of the murders. Murray testified that based on his records on November 18th, 2015, William Stokes took a truckload of lumber from Elkton to Bowling Green. This trip generally takes two hours plus 30 minutes to unload. Stokes logged no other work that day. Murray said that he gave the Christian County Sheriff's Office the schedule documents for Stokes after they'd served him with a subpoena. Doris Stokes is the brother of William Stokes. He was a volunteer firefighter in Christian County for about seven years, and over that time went on many call-outs. On November 19 he responded to both the Rosetown Road car fire, and later to Phillip's residence. In further questioning, Doris said that he has been friends with Joan Harmon in the past. Ed Stokes testified that he is the brother of Doris and William, but that he doesn't talk to any of his brothers regularly. Ed worked for Christian County Sheriff's Office for 17 years. On April 17th, 2013, he was working in the Sheriff's Office when Martin came in with a court order to release weapons seized following the disturbance at the Martin's house. Ed Stokes had the paperwork for the transaction and item number three on the form is a Glock 21, the suspected murder weapon in 2015. Several 22 caliber weapons, and a shotgun were also returned to Martin at that time. Ed said that in 2015, he was also one of the responding officers for the Rosetown Road car fire, and also went to the Phillips residence to help with the search warrant service. While there Ed was asked by a commander to leave the Phillips house to avoid possible family conflict because his brother, William, was in a relationship with John Harmon. Katherine Demps is Martin civil attorney who represented him in the divorce. She filed for an annulment of the marriage because Joan could not produce any record of a divorce decree from her first marriage. It turned out that Harmon was not married to Martin because she'd never divorced her last husband, which ultimately ended and Joan's bigamy conviction. In 2015, Demps said that she drafted the document, allowing power of attorney to Laura Spencer on November 16th, 2015. Demps noted that she and Martin communicated regularly and exchanged emails on the morning of November 18, starting at 9:00 AM and into the evening around 9:00 PM. On November 19, they emailed each other in the morning and periodically throughout the day, starting at 9:00 AM. Demps also represented Martin for part of the court-martial. The defense recalled Lieutenant Smith from the Christian County Sheriff's Office. They showed him clips of the CCTV video for Martin's home, focusing on specific clips that he had not shown in his earlier presentation. The defense was able to clarify that the prosecution case left out some of Martin's movements on the 18th. Some of these omissions could have given the false impression that Martin returned to the house when a corresponding departure was not shown. This happened because only one channel of the multiplex system was shown to the jury during the prosecution's case. Basically the defense was showing that at best, the police portrayal in the video is incomplete and at worse, deliberately misleading. As the defense presentation came to a close Martin, took the stand. He immediately denied any participation in the murders. Martin story started with him enlisting in the Army. He served from ranks E1 to E5, and then attended college in an ROTC program. Upon graduation, Martin received a commission, the start of three years of active duty flying helicopters. He then transferred to the Army Guard. After 9-11, Martin's request to return to active duty was granted. He served three combat tours in Iraq as a Battalion Commander. In 2016, after Martin was discharged from the Army, he wanted to continue working in aviation. So he went through a fixed-wing transition course and became an airline pilot. The defense attorney asked him a series of questions centered around when he lived in Pembroke. Martin said that the remodel of the house started right away and was always in progress while he occupied it. The front door was warped and never worked correctly. So he nailed it in place, hoping eventually it would unwarp. Martin said the front door was never used. Instead, everything was done out the back door through the screen porch. The house was old and it didn't have adequate insulation. So it was cold in the winter. He used a kerosene heater as a supplemental heat source and had just purchased a new one in the fall of 2015. November 18th, 2015 was the first time he used it. And that is why he set an alarm that would wake him up in the middle of the night so he could check on the heater. Martin met Joan online. They were together for nine years and married for eight. Martin said that towards the end of the relationship, Joan began to act weird. She became controlling and he noticed that she was lying. She changed key points in stories about her life that she had told over the years. He said, Joan didn't work. She didn't want to work, which was part of the problem. As things went downhill, they tried counseling, but the problems persisted. Martin said the marriage with Joan ended in 2012. Martin described that Joan had taken everything except the heaviest furniture. He added,"which the cops eventually smashed". Joan even took all the animals. His personal dog, a German shepherd named Sarge was brought back to him from Joan's by Ken Buckner. Sarge had a broken leg and was obviously malnourished. The vet told him it was the worst case of abuse he'd ever seen. The defense attorney asked Martin questions about the neighborhood and the neighbors. He said that his relationship with Calvin Phillips was initially cordial. They socialized shooting guns in the Phillip's backyard; went to an antique car festival. Martin said Joan spent more time with Calvin than he did. He knew Pam worked long hours going to work very early and coming home late Martin reasserted the claim that Calvin would give testimony at the court martial favorable to Martin. He said that his private investigator had an interview to that effect that it had been broadcast on a local TV news channel. This testimony was meant to imply that there was a recorded interview of Calvin by the private investigator. Martin described Ed as a good guy who had a regular schedule out of town. He also knew that Ed was a musician and played piano well. The defense attorney reviewed some of the prosecution evidence, which Martin generally dismissed, saying the expert testimony showed he was not guilty. Martin said that the timing of the power of attorney was not suspicious. He wanted Laura to have it in case anything happened to him. Martin had issued power of attorney whenever he was on Army deployment. When Martin looked at the dog tag that was found in Phillip's house, he denied it was ever his. He said he'd had numerous dog tags over the years and had given some to his kids, but no one else. He pointed to the string and said he would never have one on a string. Martin talked about his arrest at the Louisville airport. He would be the pilot on a departing flight. And he was arrested just after passing through security. He was incensed, saying the seamless chaotic. Martin was angry that it happened in public where passengers could see what was happening. The cross examination of Martin began with a brief recap of Martin's time in the Army. Martin had attended Ranger School and the prosecutor asked him to give details about that training. Martin said it was a strenuous course that lasted three to four months. It mainly involved training in small unit tactics and leadership while navigating challenging terrain. Questioning turned to Martin's two marriages. Martin said that he was married to his first wife, Stacy from 1991 to 2004 and they'd had three children. Stacy asked for a divorce in March 2004, but their relationship had been good since. The prosecutor challenged Martin on this assertion, presenting a copy of a letter that he had written to the State of Tennessee Child Support Enforcement. In the letter, he complained that Stacy was calling and emailing repeatedly threatening him. Martin was asked to read the most vitriolic parts of the letter. During that part of the testimony, Martin appeared agitated. He denied remembering anything about the situation or writing the letter. Martin had met Joan Harmon through an online service around June 2004. After they separated, Martin said he didn't know where Joan moved to, but he did see her around Pembroke from time to time. He denied knowing that Joan stayed with the Phillips across the street for some time after she moved out of the house. Martin met Laura Spencer online in November within two weeks of Joan leaving. Laura Spencer had been just widowed in October 2012. When the prosecutor asked Martin about what he knew about Calvin Phillips and his role in the court-marshall, Martin was evasive denying knowing the extent of Calvin's role. He did assert that Calvin was going to testify for him, clearly meaning that Calvin would give testimony favorable to Martin's case. The prosecutor challenged him on this, but Martin was insistent and denied his defense strategy was to discredit Calvin. The prosecutor then handed Martin a copy of the defense's reasoning for calling Phillips submitted before the court-marshall. Martin was asked to read it, and it clearly stated that Calvin was being summoned to refute inconsistent statements that he had made. The defense alleged that Calvin was one of the instigators in the investigation and had a motive to fabricate evidence. In follow-up questioning Martin admitted that Calvin was subpoenaed each time the court martial was reset. He also knew that the trial was going to proceed on December 1st. On November 19th, Martin noticed police activity around the Phillip's house. He said he talked to his lawyer and his private investigator that afternoon. The private investigator asked him about his weapons. Usually, Martin kept a Glock 45, his 22 and a 38 in the back passenger area of his truck. The PI told him to move his Glock from the truck to the safe, because Joan Harmon might still have a key to the truck. Martin denied that any of his guns had been used. He further disputed that the experts had left open the possibility that one of his 22s fired the fatal bullets, but acknowledged that the casing on the porch was from his Glock. He insisted that that casing was planted evidence. At the end of the testimony in a criminal trial, each side can sum up and draw conclusions from the body of information presented. The defense goes first. In the Martin trial, the defense attorney gave a lengthy oration along a simple theme. There was no real evidence. And where evidence existed, it had been planted by Joan Harmon, or was ordinary behavior interpreted to look sinister. The defense attorneys showed John Homack's surveillance video of his parking area. The north face and cameras showed wisps of white smoke from left to right around 11:50 PM. The defense asserted that It was a smoke from the car fire that happened two hours before the prosecution presented. The defense used the example of Martin being very organized to assert that he couldn't have committed the crime because whoever did was sloppy. They went back to the scene repeatedly, moving things around. Martin wouldn't do those things. And the final point the defense made was that it didn't make sense that Martin would commit the crime because he had no motive. Calvin wasn't going to testify against him. Instead, he would flip and testify in favor of the defense Prosecution's closing was focused on why and how Martin killed three of his neighbors. Martin had the means, the opportunity, and the motive. No one else did the crime because no one else needed or wanted to. For motive, Martin faced a fast approaching court-martial that would end his military career. He had hired two private investigators to dig up dirt to trash the witnesses and stop the trial. And they'd been unsuccessful. Another motivating factor was that Martin wanted revenge. The neighbor, a fellow Army guy living just across the street had betrayed him by helping Joan move out. The disloyalty was compounded when Calvin turned over evidence to the FBI. Calvin sensed this when he told people he knew that he thought Martin would try to harm him. Martin had the means to carry out the murders, not only in terms of equipment, but also know-how. The prosecution presented the Martin defense as a made-up conspiracy. Joan Harmon and William Stokes are diversions. There was no conspiracy by the Stokes brothers, no police conspiracy, no prosecutorial conspiracy, no conspiracy by the Phillips family against Martin. The crime was all about Martin killing Calvin as revenge and to keep him from testifying. The murders of Pam and Ed were just collateral damage. The defense's assertion that there's no evidence was wrong. The prosecutor said that the defense had manufactured an answer for every question. mark is here, and we're going to discuss this case. And after all of that, what was the verdict in the murder trial?

Mark:

Martin was guilty and all charges, including several aggravators.

Marcy:

And the sentence?

Mark:

He got life without parole on the multiple murder counts and max sentences on the other lesser counts.

Marcy:

Talk about why you chose to cover this crime.

Mark:

It pinged my radar for three reasons. First, the arrest coverage. Martin was an airline pilot arrested in uniform. as he was about to board a flight. I have a bunch of pilots in my family. I've been surrounded by pilots my whole life. My grandfather was an Air Force pilot who flew in Vietnam and for an airline. My dad was in the Air Force. I lived on an Air Force bases has growing up. I got a private pilot's license from my grandfather's flight school before I was 18. So initially I was like an Army officer? An airline pilot? A triple murderer? That doesn't sound right. Second. I recently bought a farm in Kentucky. So I'm interested in what law enforcement is doing here. And third, when I started reading about the case, the controversies were like a rip current that pulled me deeper and deeper in.

Marcy:

Let's talk about those controversies. Martin got really bent out of shape about when and where he was arrested. And his accusation was that the police and politicians made this arrest for maximum visibility, like political grandstand.

Mark:

Yeah, it might look like that, but here's why I don't think that criticism is legitimate. At the time of his arrest. He was living in North Carolina. He was arrested when he was flying out of the airport in Louisville, Kentucky. That avoided the necessity of an extradition. As far as the accusation that the arrest was meant to be public embarrassing or a public spectacle, I can tell you if I were making this arrest, I would have done it the same way. Think about it, you know where he's going to be, when he's going to be there. And he just went through a security screening. The very public arrest isn't optimum, but it never gets better than knowing when somebody's there, and that that target has been just screened in his unarmed.

Marcy:

In the months after the murders, the Phillips family became increasingly concerned that there was no progress on the case. So they began contacting people they thought could help. What do you think about that kind of influence in an investigation?

Mark:

Yeah, I think it's understandable. Think about it from their perspective, you know, they're going through the house, cleaning it out and they're finding multiple pieces of evidence just laying around It had to shake their confidence in the investigators, particularly as time pass and nothing was happening. So I've handled investigations that had victim pressure, you know, almost any major investigation has victim pressure, and some that had political pressure. I've also had cases that died on the vine cases where you're missing that compelling piece. The pressure is just part of the job. The real problem for an investigator is gathering enough evidence so you can sell a prosecutor on its success. That's the dying on the vine part. A good investigator- prosecutor relationship is one of mutual trust and respect. Some cases never get off the ground, but for those, where I was approaching critical mass, I would take the file to the DA's office and make the pitch. The response was often, you know, I need you to get this or go nail down that, make sure the witnesses are available. It was always a negotiation. And you could tell when the prosecutors were getting excited, the ones that got excited were the ones you loved as a investigator.

Marcy:

So the prosecutors in this case couldn't have been happy about the missed evidence.

Mark:

No, I'm assuming that was part of the delay, trying to sort all that out, that and the wait for an analysis of all the, evidence.

Marcy:

You found the victim's family testimony very sympathetic. Uh, then the defense attorney made snide comments about them hiring a New York city attorney and talking to politicians. Do you think that was an effective ploy for the defense?

Mark:

Yeah. The political controversy sounds good if you don't get into the details. Matt Phillips met with, who was then the Kentucky Attorney General Andy Beshear, talked about the case with him. By the time of the trial, Andy Beshear became Governor. The implication for the people that believe in this controversy was that Democrat, Andy Beshear rode this case into the Governor's mansion. That sounds good. But the next Attorney General, Daniel Cameron who's a Republican, and oversaw the prosecution of this case. Well, he's definitely not a supporter of Governor Andy Beshear. He could have dismissed the case, but he didn't. The case continued on Politically, a case like this can be a double-edged sword. Was charging Martin a popular move? I don't know. If a case is a rushed piece of crap and there's an acquittal, does a politician look bad? I don't know.

Marcy:

The defense put forth a theory about a grand conspiracy by the real murderers. Can you explain a little bit more about that?

Mark:

The defense and supporters have run a very public campaign and the conspiracy goes like this: Joan Harmon, and her boyfriend, William Stokes, committed the murders to a) pin them on Martin in the effort to seek retribution and ruin his life, or b) silence Calvin Phillips, who is going to change his testimony in the upcoming court-martial. In this scenario, Joan Harmon needed a successful court-martial to collect government money. An essential part of this conspiracy is that to get away with the crimes, William Stokes enlisted his brothers both in the Sheriff's department and the fire department to influence their respective organizations. Conspiracy was a key element of the defense. And I'll talk more about its effects later.

Marcy:

Many of the questions I initially had with this case had to do with the evidence that either wasn't found or found in a wonky way. So is the evidence a problem in this case?

Mark:

Yes, it's true there were evidence problems in this investigation. Some of the things that are missing are pretty basic. So that's true. There are things that really didn't come up in the court that I was surprised about. I was surprised that they were able to get a search warrant for Martin's house on day two, seemingly without interviewing him. He was the obvious suspect, but suspicion isn't enough. There are a lot of strong suspects in cases whose homes are never searched because probable cause does not exist.

Marcy:

The police didn't interview Martin before the search warrants?

Mark:

I don't think so. And the day of the search warrants day two of the investigation, they had him detained on base. According to Martin, he was taken to a remote location and starved. There were some basic things that procedurally were different than the way I think most investigations would be run.

Marcy:

Can you give us an example of that?

Mark:

Going through a suspect's house gets their attention. It's a perfect time to sit them down and say, Hey, give us your side of the story. We might've missed. You can get a read on the subject, even if he doesn't give an interview. And if he does, you have him pinned to a basic story. There's no indication that that happened from the trial testimony and you should see questioning that indicates other basic preliminary evidence gathering if that happened.

Marcy:

What else do you think was missing?

Mark:

The other thing that gets a suspect's attention is a body search warrant. In a case like this you'd want to take over all photographs of the suspect's body and obtain DNA from the get go. As the detective, you're trying to say to the suspect, a judge has found probable cause that allows us to search your house and scrutinize your body. Let's talk. Keep in mind, Calvin was badly beaten. We need to know what the defendant's hands and arms look like. If you have a suspect with corresponding injuries, you gather that evidence. He's also more inclined to give you a bullshit story about how suspicious bruises happened. Bullshit's okay. Any story pins him in. If on the other hand, there are no injuries, this is a detailed to be exploited by defense. In this case, those basic photos were not used by either side in the presentation. I suspect those photos don't exist and that's a problem.

Marcy:

Do you have any idea why those steps weren't taken?

Mark:

I'm not certain, there was some mention of staffing and support problems early in the testimony. It could be as simple as they were overwhelmed. In a 36 hour period, a department that doesn't handle many multi-victim, multi-scene crimes found itself with three houses, three bodies, two cars to process. And I'm sure there was a sense of urgency to get to the suspect's home before the evidence was lost. The problem is with too much haste, you miss things like the dog tag, like the remaining casing, and like the bullet that was loose under the stove. I mean, those things weren't in the peripheral area of the house, they were found just where you would expect to find them. My department, with several hundred officers to support a large crime scene team would probably have taken several days to meticulously sift through everything. There may not have been those kinds of resources available here for that kind of detail.

Marcy:

The defense made an issue of the prosecution's presentation of video evidence. What was the big deal there?

Mark:

That was an embarrassment for the prosecution. It made it look like they were intentionally excluding details to mislead the jury, when probably it was just a technical misunderstanding. Video systems are kind of like computer programs, they can all have the same consistent way of using them, and sometimes little details can be frustratingly different. I think in the prosecution's case, Lieutenant Smith, maybe didn't have a complete understanding of the system and miss part of the recordings. In my cases I would consult with other officers who are experts in video systems. Sometimes we'd have to go outside sometimes even to the manufacturer. Over the years, I developed several civilian contacts who I'd consult in different areas. I had a jeweler, an art expert, a local video and film producer. Those are the ones that come to mind.

Marcy:

So that's like an informant. Did you have to pay them?

Mark:

Mostly they do it for free. The jeweler I knew like cops. He had an uncle from out of state who was a Sheriff's Deputy. They'd mainly give you an opinion on what you're looking at for free in exchange for the interesting story. And if their testimony is needed by the DA, say for court, they had a contract procedure for that

Marcy:

During the closing argument, the defense said that the trial never should have happened because of the indictment was bad. So can you explain a little bit about that?

Mark:

Yes. In the trial, the defense made a big deal about erroneous technical information, cell data that was presented to the grand jury. The defense's assertion was that if accurate information had been given the grand jury never would've indicted. I'm really surprised the judge allowed them to say that without a correction. In reality, a factually flawed indictment, I mean, flawed in a meaningful way, must be corrected either with a dismissal or a re indictment.

Marcy:

The defense said that the shell casing, a critical piece of evidence, was planted. What do you think about that? And is it tainted?

Mark:

The shellcasing, the defense is not disputing that the casing was fired from Martins Glock 21. The dispute was what that piece of evidence means. Here's some, of the problems with that casing as evidence: It could have been fired anywhere, at any time, and then planted the scene. The defense asserts that Joan Harmon could have accessed the Glock because it was unsecured in Martin's truck. The murder scene was accessible and unattended for most of the five months between the killings and the casing's recovery. In addition, several people had access to the scene: the Durham family, because they were taking care of the house, Ken Buckner, the handyman, he said that house, or the porch was not secure. Also the casing could have been thrown through the open lattice on the porch. In this case, whether evidence is dismissed or except is completely up to the jury and how they feel about it, they obviously didn't buy that the casing was planted, but that it had been there waiting to be found the whole time. That piece of evidence is a linchpin because most of the gun forensic testimony was either inconclusive or leaned positively toward the defense. Logically. If the casing was planted, it probably would have been soon after the murders.

Marcy:

Why is that?

Mark:

People who plan evidence want to tell a story that's different from the one they know as fact. You can't just go placing random evidence around a crime scene. Early in my career, I was the responding officer, in a murder case that involved a staged scene. The staged evidence pointed in a direction that was inconsistent with other in alterable evidence. In this case, the evidence that the defense is saying is staged is ambiguous. If the scene was staged, then why clean up the casings? Why burn the bodies?

Marcy:

So do you think the dog tag was planted?

Mark:

If this were a stage piece of evidence, I would think it would have been planted or placed differently under, around the body. Something more direct, a clearer statement then way up high on a shelf in the back. I suspect this was incidental. Maybe it was left behind when Joan Harmon moved across the street. The interesting thing. Is that Martin made a big deal about how he would have never wear anything on a string, but in post-conviction shots, in an orange jumpsuit, he's wearing a wooden cross and the cheap looking string. Big picture in this case, I see an attempt to cover up and divert. I don't see the kind of evidence placement you might see in a staged scene.

Marcy:

So you don't think anything in this case was staged?

Mark:

Oh, I do. I do think things were staged and that's the next controversy. But, let me be clear, the staging in this case was not what is billed by the defense. It's the drawing of attention away from the scene that's the staging. The killer could have killed the three victims, left them there, hidden them from view and walked away. They could have all been in the cellar. What happens instead was diversion, the delay, the attempt to distract away from the truth and the location, And that led to the next controversy.

Marcy:

Ahhh! Joan Harmon!

Mark:

Here's what we know. The police are satisfied that Joan Harmon is not a suspect. The prosecutor wanted to hear her testimony and said she had no intention of charging the Harmon's. What Joan Harmon knows is that her ex-husband has repeatedly and very publicly accused her of the murder and that he planted evidence to frame her.

Marcy:

Yeah, much hay has been made about Joan Harmon taking Pam's phone to the AT&T store. And it was a really big question for me going into this case. So how did Joan get the phone?

Mark:

And the trial, there were some mentions of the phone that are significant. We know Pam used it immediately before her death. We know that the phone came into Joan's possession within a month of the murders.

Marcy:

We don't know what Joan told the police, but it can be reasonably sure that she had an alibi that satisfied them. That she's not the murderer.

Mark:

Yes. And based on what the prosecutor said in her closing statement, the phone was found around Joan's property. Remember what I said about staged evidence? It is identifiable as the evidence that stands out, that deflects or contradicts what the rest of the evidence is telling you. The murderer didn't take the victim's phone to the apple store. She had an alibi. That's why they had to pull in William Stokes and his brothers to suggest they're all involved.

Marcy:

Can you imagine what that experience was like for her at the store, with the phone?

Mark:

Like something out of a book. Imagine this: a month ago, you suspect that your husband killed three of your neighbors. Two of them were the people that helped you move out. Horrifying. Seemingly unrelated, one of your kids found an iPhone in the backseat of the car, on your porch, whatever. You try to open the phone who see whose it might be. No luck, no one reaches out asking if you have their iPhone, if they left it at your house. So one day you're out running errands, you take that pesky unclaimed iPhone in and boom, the trap is sprung. So what happened is immediately obvious to you, your ex is the murder and he has set you up. What'd you do? Well, you do what she did. You call the police. If what Harman is saying is true, evidence was planted. The case was being made to get her charged with a triple murder. She's already been convicted of bigamy, something that's almost never charged. She doesn't want to fall further into Martin's trap. So she decides to plead the fifth.

Marcy:

The prosecutor wanted their testimony. Why didn't they just set up an immunity deal?

Mark:

Prosecutors are hesitant to hand out immunity. It can have the appearance to a jury under questioning of impropriety. This is one of the areas I think might be reversed on appeal. And if that's the case, the prosecutor might have to offer immunity. The Harmon's testimony won't be the boone the defense is presenting. When Joan Harmon doesn't turn out to be a fire-breathing dragon. The second jury would likely be faced with the same basic facts as the first boat, the added testimony that Martin planted the phone trap.

Marcy:

So what aspects of this case do you think are the biggest problem for the defense?

Mark:

There's obvious overkill in this case. I don't think the prosecution uses this as effectively as they could have. I was once a case officer for a shooting where a guy was beaten badly after he was shot. It's not common in my experience. I mean, most of the time blowing holes in somebody is enough Calvin's shot five times and then had his jaw and nose broken. So the real question is who is motivated with that much anger? Just as a side note, the prosecutor opined that Calvin's facial injuries were from pistol whipping with the butt of the Glock. I agree it was probably hit with something, but this is the kind of lack of evidence detail I mentioned earlier. A pistol whipping should leave distinct pattern injuries. There should also be DNA tissue left on the pistol. I mean, there are a lot of places that gun might retain DNA, even after a thorough cleaning. But a Glock is a bad gun to do a pistol whipping with. The lower receiver is a plastic polymer. It's very durable, but if you go hittin' a guy you're likely to have a base plate failure. I've seen it happen. When it happens, the bottom of your magazine falls off and all of your bullets are injected down into the ground. So if I were to guess what caused the facial injuries based on what happened? I'm thinking a foot. It makes sense. After being shot five times, Calvin was likely to be down, but there again, you're looking for pattern injuries and the ME didn't identify any, so who knows what caused the damage.

Marcy:

Can you talk a little bit more about pattern injuries? What would, what kind of things would you expect to see?

Mark:

So the case I mentioned is a good example. The boy was shot multiple times, right on the well-lit street. The gang bangers who shot him kicked him over and over again. They knew they were being watched because both sides of the street were lined with multiple level apartment buildings. So they were sending a message. They were intimidating all the witnesses. The pattern injuries you expect to see in something like that, are shoe, shoe impressions, the edge of a soul, a heel. In some circumstances you might see a logo or a shoelace pattern, based on how the victim was kicked. And if the skin was exposed. You know, in that case it was witness intimidation. But in the Martin case, I think he's probably kicked, because he's on the ground and, a beating with hands on the ground is probably gonna create injuries to your hands. It just makes sense that kind of, that extensive amount of damage is probably a foot. Unfortunately we don't know.

Marcy:

Are there other aspects of the crime that are a problem for the defense?

Mark:

Yeah, it was a problem for the defense that none of the forensics let Martin off the hook. But there's a reason, like the car and the bodies were burnt to a crisp. Everyone could see that looked at the photos could see why the trace evidence was lacking there. In other areas, the crime scene had been cleaned. So we don't have the evidence. The jury could see that there was a lack of evidence in a lot of respect because it had been cleaned up. At the same time, the cleanup tells you something about that killer. That he's organized, meticulous.

Marcy:

What about the defense timeline? Were they effective and the assertion that he could not have done the crime?

Mark:

No. One of the things that makes this case provable is the tight timeline. We know about when Calvin was killed. We know exactly when the other two were shot. The problem for the defense is that Martin was available for what the prosecution says were the critical times on November 18th. The defense timeline weirdly focuses on the 19th. I think the defense was relying on jury confusion between the 18th, 19th, and 20th. The fact is there's unallocated time at critical points. The defense counter was, he was apparently busy leading a normal life.

Marcy:

So they found a power of attorney in Martin's safe. Why do you think that was significant?

Mark:

I know from deploying with the Marines about, you know, you get personally prepared for the time you're away. Martin, during his testimony said it himself, he'd gotten the power of attorney in the past. When deploying. To me the power of attorney timing is telling. He was preparing for a mission. He knows he's about to commit the worst crime and he's planning for contingencies like being captured.

Marcy:

Speaking of planning ahead, do you think that the murders went as Martin expected?

Mark:

I think Calvin's murder went as expected, but Martin thought the house would burn down. I think the rest of their crime was literally shoot on the fly. The defense attorney said it himself. Whoever did this with sloppy, went back to the scene over and over again. Things, the car position keep changing. The people committing these crimes are going in and out moving things. He's right. The takeaway from this is that the murderer had access over a long period of time. Had time to assess and adjust. Who had that kind of time and access? It was Martin. He had a front row seat to the murder scene.

Marcy:

And why do you think the bodies were moved away from the scene and why the car fire?

Mark:

I think Martin attempted to move them all away, but couldn't. This is based on the description of Calvin's body upon discovery. I'm thinking why would anybody flip and move a body in full rigor? Cops aren't going to do that. Neither are medic. The original fire, and later the movement of the bodies, serve three purposes: to delay discovery, to cast suspicion away from the immediate area and to destroy evidence that would link to the killer. Both cars were moved because it had to appear no one was at the houses. Why weren't the cars dumped further away? Because the distance to the burns scene is close enough to traverse on foot in a short time.

Marcy:

Which brings me to the defense video, where they showed smoke on Rosetown Road at 11:50 PM on the 18th. And they present that, that disputes the prosecution timeline. What are your thoughts?

Mark:

John Homac, the farmer, had a video camera that covered his parking lot. In cross examination testimony. He said that he thought the smoke was ground fog. Actually, you can figure out the truth of this by looking at the map and the video. The camera's north facing. The smoke or fog crosses from left to right, which is west to east. The car burning scene would have been a fair distance east and a little south. So the smoke in the video was blowing toward the area of the fire. Not from it. It was ground fog, just like the farmer sai. I'm surprised the prosecution didn't address this more completely.

Marcy:

What do you think was the biggest defense mistake?

Mark:

Not banging on the cops. Let me tell you a story about a prosecutor I worked with. Pam was a good prosecutor from my city. I went to trial with her a few times. She was formidable, aggressive, always prepared, a little tightly wrapped, but loved by police. The kind of person that takes work home. One night, Pam calls me wanting to talk about the case. I'm like Pam, it's 3:00 AM we have a trial in the morning, go to bed. She says,"I can't sleep. I'm getting ready." That enthusiasm was what made her great to work. After a couple of years, she went to private practice, defense work. Right? Her powers for good were going to be twisted to the needs of the dark side. Not too long after that, I'm sitting in a hallway waiting to go into a courtroom. Pam comes out of one of the other rooms. She looks at me and rushes over. She says,"Mark, tell Pollock that he didn't do anything wrong. Tell him, I'm sorry. It's just my job now. And even if there's nothing wrong with the case, I have to beat on the officer." Pollock was a friend of mine and academy mate. Later, Pollock said that being in trial against Pam was like having been eaten by Old Yeller. The point is a tried and true defense is to attack the credibility of the investigation. Attack the competence of the officers. It's a defense that works. Just ask OJ Simpson.

Marcy:

You think the defense should have attacked the officers more? Why do you think they didn't?

Mark:

The defense had a choice between brutalizing the investigation, and there's a deep well of flaws to choose from, or using the approach the police did a fine job and missed nothing because the evidence just wasn't there to find. That it was planted after the search. They chose the latter. And I think it was a mistake. If the defense had played it right, it is possible that the crime scene officers would deny they missed anything and therefore support the idea that evidence had to be planted. You can imagine that line of questioning. Who searched the kitchen? Who's responsible for missing the bullet under the stove? What? Nobody missed the bullet under the stove? Then it must be planted!

Marcy:

Is there another example of that?

Mark:

Yes. The prosecution omitting pertinent video evidence was a problem that was not fully exploited by the defense. I thought at the time that this mistake could destroy the trust between prosecutors and the jury. The defense pointed this out, but it just wasn't hammered home.

Marcy:

If the problems with the evidence didn't sink the prosecution, what do you think kept it afloat?

Mark:

I think that this case, the verdict was determined by the witnesses. The prosecution witnesses were just better, more authentic, more believable. Take Penny Cayce, the lady who worked in the bank with Pam Phillips. Penny had a long story. She said that she knows exactly when she and Pam talked about the court martial and Martin. It was on November 16th because that was the anniversary of her father's death. She said that Pam moved her workstation into Penny's office so that Penny wouldn't have to spend the day alone. When Penny told that story, it was very credible. It also humanized the victim. Same thing for Matt Phillips and Diana Phillips. They were great witnesses. They went through their process in a very believable way. If you listen to them, you had to be thinking, yeah, what would I do? That's how it would be if my sibling was killed. How would I handle that? And how would I get the answers I needed? RIght then, the defense attorney swings in with accusations of New York attorneys and political motivations. And talk about being tone deaf. The least reliable of the prosecution witnesses was James Matlock because his observations weren't reported until just before the trial and his recollections at the time was disputed by Martin's phone records. On the other hand, he claimed to know Martin and the defense made a big deal about how Martin walked his dog all over the place and how the prosecution was making that sound sinister. You know, that assertion from the defense kind of sabotaged their own efforts to undermine Matlock's testimony.

Marcy:

Can I just mention that I have really mixed feelings about Marlene Larock? On one hand, I feel like she is very lucky that she wasn't victim number four. But on the other hand, I'm having trouble understanding why she was so concerned that she went back to the house at 7:00 PM. Never made contact with anybody, but then went home and never took it any further. She never called the police. What do you think about that?

Mark:

I think she just rationalized the suspicious parts away. There's a famous trainer in police and military circles named Jeff Cooper. He has a system of situational awareness based on colors. The system starts with white, which is low-level awareness of any threat and progresses is upward to yellow, orange and red. Yellow being mildly aware or monitoring a potential threat and red, being fully aware and engaged in the fight. I'd say Mrs. Laura's situational awareness never left a white that day.

Marcy:

Okay, so this might be related to that. The Phillips clearly had a lot of guns in their home and not just in a safe or in a drawer, but laying out as if they expected there might be trouble. Why didn't they use one of them?

Mark:

Yeah. I was amazed at how all the victims had ready access to firearms, but didn't engage with them. I think the guns lying around the tables is a clear indication of the threat that Phillips were feeling. Your question is interesting. I once went to a call of a fight involving weapons. It turned out to be a guy with a steel pipe who had beaten the crap out of a guy who pulled a gun. I interviewed the guy with the pipe. I pointed out there was pretty brave or stupid. He said"a gun does you no good if you don't have the conviction to use it." Man are those deep words. The caveat to that is he could have easily been a guy holding a pipe at a gun fight. And I'm not trying to cast aspersions on the victims here. These people did not live the lives of gunfighters. Nor should they have to. I'm saying that being prepared with the right equipment is not always enough.

Marcy:

You said the prosecution witnesses were better. So are you saying that the defense witnesses were lying?

Mark:

No, not at all. They just weren't as believable in their assertions or that their assertions had a vailed motivation, or they just didn't provide pertinent testimony. The Spencer children were impeached by the security camera recordings. The children said that Martin didn't leave the house all night. The video clearly shows otherwise. This damaged Martin's alibi. The same is true of mark of Laura Spencer, a professional woman who should have made a fabulous witness and did for some of her testimony. Not only was the alibi damage by the video, but her dramatic assertion that she thought Joan Harmon was there to kill her when the SWAT team was coming in was jarring. It damaged her credibility. She also testified the Calvin Phillip was going to testify on Martin's behalf. Her willingness to go along with this, obviously misleading characterization, makes her testimony suspect.

Marcy:

Can you explain how people living in a house could not be aware when somebody is leaving the property?

Mark:

Yeah. This might seem unthinkable if you're in an urban environment, in a smaller house, small property or apartment. In those situations, you have to know when somebody leaves, but it isn't necessarily true. The distance between Martin and Phillips, houses, isn't huge. It's like 200 feet. Martin's property was 2.5 acres. The CCTV showed he was in and out of the house regularly. I live on a farm now. The distance between my house and the barn is about the same as the distance between the houses on South Main Street. I could go to the barn or almost anywhere else on the property without anyone knowing where I was. That is in fact common. We use cell phones to find each other sometimes.

Marcy:

Much has been made of Joan Harmon, being a bigamist. The defense called the Commonwealth Attorney to talk about it.

Mark:

And I don't think it went well for her. The reality is this kind of bigamy is almost never charged unless it involves a scam or other illegal act. It's actually, from what I read, it's not super common, but it's not uncommon. People just don't get, the order of, divorce. In this case, there was no apparent reason for Joan Harmon to not have gotten the divorce certified by the judge. And if she had, she would have been due all the benefits from the marriage to Martin. If anyone was scammed, she did it to herself by not finalizing the divorce. The special prosecutor did a good job of pointing out that the Commonwealth Attorney had just gotten out of law school when she convicted Joan Harmon. And the assertion that the JAG Major acted unprofessionally may have just been her inexperience.

Marcy:

What about Lisa Petrie? The manager of the cafe Joan Harmon worked at?

Mark:

I don't know enough about the dynamic there, but one thing Petrie said rings true. Most of the people she works with are locals. Non-locals being suspect is a cultural norm.

Marcy:

And Ken Buckner, the neighborhood contractor?

Mark:

I think it was a big mistake for the defense to call this guy. On the cross examination for the prosecutor, Buckner testified that he worked on the front door, in direct contradiction of what Martin said. This testimony, and the photo of the lock, destroys the assertion that the front door was impassable. It was the second stake in the heart of Martin's alibi. He could and did leave the house without others knowing, and he could leave the house without it being on video. Besides the Army Ranger war hero, couldn't have gone through a front window? What Ken Buckner didn't testify about was whether Joan Harmon really almost killed Martin's beloved dog. Why was that left out? In his closing the defense attorney very dramatically said,"we know that Joan Harmon is an abuser of animals." Do we? The only one who said that was Martin.

Marcy:

So then we have the three conspiracy witnesses, William Stokes' boss, and the two Stokes brothers. How do you think those went for the defense?

Mark:

What Ken Murray's testimony showed was that William Stokes drove to Bowling Green on the 18th of November, 2015. The problem is nothing indicated he also murdered anybody that day. The same for the Stokes brothers. We know they both worked in public service for a time. They didn't sound or look particularly evil. The fact that Ed Stokes was conflicted off the investigation is a solid indication of a department doing the right thing. They took action to avoid even the appearance of impropriety. I just want to reiterate, the defense's murder conspiracy was based on two motives: doing Martin's desire for money. This motive was destroyed as fiction by the Army JAG officer or to frame Martin for Joan's revenge. The defense's murder conspiracy fell apart because there was absolutely no information about why or how any of the Stokes brothers would be involved in that.

Marcy:

So let's talk about Martin's testimony. Why do you think he testified?

Mark:

I think he testified for two reasons. He needed to testify because he needed to sell the Joan Harmon conspiracy. I also think Martin was sure he could convince a jury of his innocence by telling his life story. He overestimated his jury appeal.

Marcy:

So you think it went badly for him?

Mark:

Yes. When I said the defense witnesses were not as good as the prosecutions, that was true for him too. I think he sealed the verdict he got. So I've spent some time in court, but I didn't learn how to testify until I started putting cases in front of the grand jury. The grand jury is structured less rigidly than regular court. You present your case in short form and only select witnesses are called. I got, so I really felt good about going. It was like showing off your new car. For me, the most important part was when the jurors asked questions. and if they had been enpaneled for awhile, they were comfortable asking a ton of questions. The DA kept the guardrails on, so they didn't go crazy. But I got to see what they were interested in, what they wanted to see from the case. From that process, I learned about effectively presenting my cases and where the pitfalls might be. I also watched other people testify. I learned that the jury knows when your shit's weak. You have to be open and honest. You have to talk directly to them. If you don't have an answer, you say,"I don't know."

Marcy:

So why do you think Martin's testimony was bad?

Mark:

I don't think you have to be a great public speaker to do well in front of a jury. But for a guy who is depending on selling his honesty, he made some mistakes. He spent a lot of time looking down or at the defense attorney, almost never at the jury. He seemed arrogant, not open and honest. He dismissed evidence in the trial, making sweeping statements about how expert testimony had proven his innocence. I mean, the jury is probably thinking isn't that for us to decide? I also heard that and thought this guy is high and his own supply, like at least his PR campaign worked on him. Martin appeared agitated and evasive. When he was questioned over areas like the letter he wrote to the state of Tennessee complaining about his first wife. His memory was great for other things. He could remember anniversaries and birth dates. I think that's why the prosecutor asked him specific questions. He had sharp memory on a lot of things, but in certain critical areas, his memory fail and it made him appear to be defensive and evasive.

Marcy:

Are there other times he seemed defensive?

Mark:

Martin said the forensic evidence exonerates him. That wasn't true. When the prosecutor pointed to evidence, he argued about what the experts had said. It was like he was trying to speak for those witnesses, framing them in a way that was better for him. He did this with Calvin Phillips too. Martin knew that Calvin Phillips was the person who turned over the court, martial material, the laptop, and photos of bruises- gave them to the FBI. With the prosecutor, Martin denied knowing this basic information, instead of being honest and admitting that he had a reason not to like Calvin, he tried in front of a jury to play, like, everything was fine. He said, in fact, Calvin had flipped, despite what everyone who knew him said that Calvin was going to testify for Martin. Like I said, people on the jury know when your shit is weak.

Marcy:

What struck me was that Calvin talked to many people about not just being afraid of what Martin might do, but about a specific fear that Martin would kill him. But let's just say that Martin was right in that Calvin was going to flip. What does that even mean?

Mark:

That's a problem with the whole defense. It sounds good until you think about, examine it. What would Calvin flipped have meant that evidence wasn't evidence? It just doesn't make sense.

Marcy:

The prosecutor said in her closing statement that Martin had an answer for everything. It seems like if you have a pat answer for everything, you're trying too hard.

Mark:

An example of this is that he normally kept the Glock 45 and the 22 and 38 in the back passenger area of his truck. On the evening of the 19th before any of the details were publicly known, Martin said his private investigator called him out of the blue and told him to move his Glock from the truck and put it in a safe. This is because Joan Harmon might still have car keys. This was offered as a reason why only the Glock was in the safe. The PI calling out of the blue about the murder weapon and just the Glock? It's unbelievable. Notice that the PI didn't testify. There's a reason for that.

Marcy:

You mentioned to me that many of Martin statements show that he feels like he's been victimized.

Mark:

Yeah. Several things come to mind. In public statements he'd made, he's made himself out to be a victim of bigamy. In reality he benefits greatly from the fact Joan had didn't have a divorce decree from her first marriage. When he described that Joan took most of his belongings except for the heavy wood furniture they bought in Germany, he followed that up with the odd statement,"which the cops eventually smashed." Really? The cops smashed all your heavy wooden furniture from Germany. When he was detained at Fort Campbell, he complained bitterly that they detained him in front of the Army command building, and they sent him to a barracks in the middle of nowhere with no food. His description of arrest the Louisville airport was similar. He was angry that he was arrested in public. Whined about it being chaos. Of course, I've never been to a security checkpoint at a busy airport where it wasn't chaos. From the way he described it, I suspect Martin was angry about the arrest because it was a complete surprise and it was out of his control. It was like they waited for him to come back to Kentucky and sucker punched him.

Marcy:

You think the victim mentality is key in this crime?

Mark:

Yeah, I think a lot of people who commit crimes, large and small justify it in that. It was the JAG Officer Major James Garrett, who got me thinking about this. His testimony was different than some of the other investigators. He seemed angry, pissed off. Then I realized as I thought about it, why. Not many cops have had cooperating witnesses murdered. If I'd ever had an informant murdered, especially by the target, I would have been angry too. When he testified by Major Garrett called out the lies, told them Martin's PR campaign. Some of those lies didn't make it into trial. Why? Because in court you have to prove up the basis and you'll be questioned directly about what you said. In media interviews, Martin called Harmon, the bigamist or his ex-bigamist. Martin said Joan was motivated by money either a) the victim compensation from the Army, or b) keeping military benefits due to a spouse. Major Garrett was angry because he knew the truth and he knew Martin was lying. Everyone close to the court-martial knew Joan was not going to get any money from the government. Martin said publicly that Joan and Calvin were having an affair. This never made it into the trial, but the labels bigamist, slut, golddigger and murderess were broadcast widely. In reality, a real or concocted affair wasn't used by the defense at trial because it would have added to Martin's motive. Martin's PR campaign even tried to speak out of the victim's mouth. I find this the most disgusting part. Martin asserted that his private detective had a tape of Phillips saying he was going to flip on Joan Harmon. This isn't true. I watched the news story. The private eyes said he thought Phillips might flip. Martin's assertion at trial was just another manipulation. In the end, I'm thinking about the defense attorney's closing argument. He proclaimed that Martin was framed with desperately planted evidence. It sounded like projection. I prefer the prosecution closing. Martin conducted a military style execution of the man who was a witness against him. He used his expertise and training to kill Calvin Phillips and then adapt the mission as the situation evolved. He almost got away with it, but he couldn't clean up everything.

Marcy:

Please rate and review Crime Raven wherever you listen. It helps us get better and it helps other listeners find us. Also, if you email us a screenshot of your review or send us a question or a case, we'll send you a promo code for$10 off our very cool merchandise. Send them to crimeravenpodcast@gmail.com. And if we use your question or your case in an episode, we'll send you a free Crime Raven t-shirt. Remember, email us at crimeravenpodcast@gmail.com. Thank you for listening. If you haven't already, please subscribe to Crime Raven, so you don't miss an episode Please recommend us to your friends too. Check our website at crimeraven.com crime Raven hosted by Mark Rein and Marcy Rein is written and directed by mark Rein and edited and produced by Marcy Rein And it's a 3 Little Birds, LLC production.

People on this episode

Head Shot

Mark Rein

Host
Head Shot

Marcy Rein

Co-host