THE TRIAL

Jefferson County Court House

Before the trial started, I was offered three plea bargains from the D.A.  First, I was offered 5 years in prison, plus 5 years probation for criminal neglect homicide.  Second, I was offered 3 years in prison and 5 years probation for first-degree manslaughter.  Last, I was offered 1 year in county jail, plus 3 years probation for third-degree manslaughter.  I was not guilty of anything, so I wanted to go to trial to prove my innocence.  I also wanted to prove to Family Court Judge Hunt that I was innocent, otherwise, he would never let me see my son without supervised visits.   

Mother of the child who died was next on the stand.  She testified that I was a good father and provider and that I never abused the children.  Mr. McGraw brought out the fact that I had brought her out of a relationship with an abusive husband.  This showed the jury that she was familiar with what abuse was.

The investigators were next on the stand.  Detective Lazarus was first.   The same line of questioning was asked at the trial as was asked at the Huntley Hearing.  He continued to say that I showed no concern or made any mention of the children or my girlfriend.  Mr. McGraw asked again about the interrogation room; but I can't remember his response at the trial.  Next, Detective Dence took the stand.  When he was asked about the interrogation room this time, he stated that the whole thing was planned out ahead of time--they were determined they were going to get a statement from someone, either myself or my girlfriend.  Mr. McGraw asked him if depraved murder was ever explained to me and Detective Dence told him that he assumed that I understood.  Mr. McGraw then said to him that Mr. Pickert is a truck driver by profession, how much do you know about truck driving?  Detective Dence said that he knew nothing about being a truck driver, so Mr. McGraw asked then how Mr. Pickert would know about depraved murder.  Detective Dence also mentioned that I did ask several times about my girlfriend.  At this point, Detective Dence's testimony was in conflict with Detective Lazarus' testimony; and in conflict with his own testimony at the Huntley Hearing. 

BCI investigator Hathaway was next on the stand, and he just stuck to his story of me saying to him "I don't know how they can arrest me when I didn't mean to hurt the baby." 

Next was Medical Examiner Dr. Mary I. Jumbelic. She was asked by the DA of what she found in the autopsy report and her opinion of it. Dr. Jumbelic basically told that the autopsy report showed signs of shaken baby syndrome--The swelling of the brain and other details. During the cross, Mr. McGraw asked her several times if the injuries were consistent with falling into a four foot pool.  The deck the child fell from was four foot from the ground.  He asked her the same question several times, her response each time was, "No, because when falling from a pool, you fall from ground level."  She obviously did not want to answer the question. 

It appears that there was a seminar of a child being video taped and had a fall. When Mr. McGraw asked her if she was at the seminar, her reply was that she couldn't remember.

The prosecution next called Dr. Hannan. He was the emergency room doctor that tended to the baby and was also on the Child Review Board with Dr. Jumbelic. He agreed with Dr. Jumbelic, that the baby died of shaken baby syndrome. He was working at the hospital at the time that the original medical examiner, Dr. Germaniuk, was working in 1991. Dr. Hannan testified that he wasn’t satisfied with Dr. Germaniuk’s report in 1991.  

The next person called was Investigator Gary Corbett. His was there in 1991, and testified about the pink outfit the child was wearing at the time of the accident.  He stated that there were no grass stains on the outfit.  It was in the statement that the child was thrown from the lawn mower onto a freshly mowed lawn.

December 14, 2001. Dr. Humphrey Germaniuk took the stand.  He was the original medical examiner in 1991.  He stuck to his original autopsy report that the markings on the child's body coincided with falling down a few stairs.  He stated that he had also gone to the seminar on shaken baby syndrome and had seen Dr. Jumbelic there.  At this seminar they were told of a video tape of a child playing on an indoor jungle gym and fallen to the floor from the top of it. The injuries that child sustained were similar to the ones my girlfriend's daughter had sustained.

After Germaniuk's testimony, court was adjourned because I had a sugar attack and was taken to the hospital.

December 17,2001.  Defense held their side.  I was the only one on the defense so I was called to the stand. Mr. McGraw asked how my girlfriend and I became involved.  I stated that I had taken her out of a relationship with an abusive husband. My relationship with the children was asked about and I said that I had a good relationship with them until I was taken out of the home. I was questioned about the day of the accident and also the day of the interrogation.  This was the point where evidence was brought in to prove that I did show concern about the whereabouts of my girlfriend and the children. Mr. McGraw showed the cellular phone bill for that day, which showed how many times I called home and the police station. This showed that the investigators stating that I showed no concern for my girlfriend were wrong.

I was then cross-examined by Ms. Inschert. She tried to make me angry to prove that I had a temper.  Before I went on the stand, Mr. McGraw warned me that she might do this. I was told to try not to get upset, and to tell the truth. She kept this tactic up for over an hour.

Later that afternoon, prosecution called back the three investigators.  They wouldn't change their testimonies.  But Mr. McGraw proved that they had been lying. He had a phone bill to prove that I had called the house and police station, on the day I was arrested, to check on my girlfriend and the children.

I found out later that Ms. Inschert also called back the mother, but she told her that she is not going to change her story.

Mr. McGraw's closing argument was short but to the point. He basically told the jury to please look at the facts.

Ms. Inschert's closing argument was very long. She seemed to go through the whole trial. She started with the same old line that I think every prosecutor does, "the burden of proof is on the prosecution."

The next few hours were the most intense hours of my life!

THE VERDICT