Ouellette Trial Closing Arguments - Strong Showing by the State

[00:00:00] Tony DeWitt: I have a bit of a cold, so if I sound a little different, that's probably why. Today we're going to look at the closing arguments in the Ouellette case, and I have to tell you, I thought the prosecutors did a pretty good job, but this is one of those situations where when you have two defense lawyers, you need to pick the best orator and the person who has the best command of the facts to do the closing argument, and I think perhaps the defense attorneys made a bad call by letting the person who did that take the command. So we're going to start with a couple of segments from the prosecution's closing argument, then we'll move to the defense closing argument, then we'll go back to the rebuttal by the prosecutor. And I'll tell you what I think, and I'm hoping that the jury doesn't come back with a verdict before I can get this out. Hi, Tony DeWitt here. Thanks for being here. I'm a retired Missouri attorney with more than 30 years' experience in courts around the country. I've now un-retired so that I can bring you informed commentary on trials and legal topics. Because I deal generally with trials and legal topics, I'm not offering any legal advice, and I'm not intending to form any lawyer-client relationships with anyone. This is a trial channel, and today we're discussing this. Starting with the prosecutor, we know that how you begin is often a good indication of where you're going to finish. And I thought the opening part of this argument was very sound. Take a listen. [00:01:45] Speaker 2: Good morning. I didn't still make it. Good morning, Mr. General. Before I begin my closing argument, I'm going to start by saying thank you. I know within trying times in the courtroom, out of the courtroom, early exits, delayed starts, but it's been clear to everyone throughout that we've had your full attention. You haven't wavered until that. I'm sure I speak for everyone when I say that. Now, before I begin my closing argument, I'll give you four rules about what I'm going to argue. First, if there's anything that I say about the evidence or what the testimony shows differs from what you remember, disregard when I say it is your memory that controls me. You are the ultimate arbitrator of this act in this case. [00:02:25] Tony DeWitt: I think this is very wise. Tell the jury they're in the driver's seat. They're the one who will give you a verdict if you get one. Second, if there's anything that I say about the law [00:02:35] Speaker 2: or the instruction that I expect Judge Pelosi to give it to you, differs from what Judge Pelosi tells you. Again, disregard what I'm saying, Judge Pelosi has given our verbal law. Third, probably not surprising, but I'm going to be making arguments about what the state submits the evidence shows. But at the same time, I'm not going to add that little preparatory statement. So when you hear me arguing the facts or inconsistency drawn from those facts, just add that little evidence that the state submits to you or the state submits the evidence shows. Because again, you are the arguments of the facts. And finally, I don't intend to give you my personal opinion on anything during this closing argument. If there is a statement that you believe is me expressing a personal opinion, please disregard that. That is not my opinion. So I'm going to begin by discussing the burden of proving the case. You've all heard it before. You were asked to have a jury selection and soon you're going to get the legal definition. What is proof beyond a reasonable doubt? What I want you to focus on is what does the state need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt? I expect that you will hear that the state does not need to prove each and every fact beyond a reasonable doubt. Simply the elements which comprise each effect. [00:03:48] Tony DeWitt: This is another very smart approach because a lot of times people do get that mixed up, saying, well, you know, they didn't prove the clothing was run over by the truck. They didn't prove that because they didn't get that test. And so they didn't prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. No. As long as they prove the elements of the crime, even if they haven't proved all of the individual facts in their case, they've still made a submissible case and one that... [00:04:21] Speaker 2: Each crime has specific elements that have to be met. And the state must prove those beyond a reasonable doubt. You as reasonable men and women come together and decide what facts have been proven in this case. You apply it for the law that the judge gives. And you come up with whether the state has met a burden of proving those elements beyond a reasonable doubt. So the state has charged the defendant Cooper Ouellette for two crimes: manslaughter on the first degree and delivery of alcoholic liquor to a minor. I'd like to start with the crime that I don't expect that there's much argument about: delivery of alcoholic liquor to a minor. You'll hear from Judge Belowca that there are three elements the defendant has to deliver, what he delivers has to be an alcoholic liquor, and it has to be delivered to a person who is a minor. So let's review the evidence. It is completely uncontradictive that Cooper Ouellette delivered alcoholic liquor to that party at the Schultz Corporation. You've heard all the testimony about the Yeti Cooler. You've seen the receipts of that purchase when their phones were co-located at that Edgewood Wine and Spirits. And Judge Pelosi will tell you that deliver has everyday meaning. When you call up and order a pizza, the delivery driver simply brings you the pizza. He doesn't make it. He delivers it. Cooper Ouellette driving that Yeti Cooler full of alcoholic beverages to that party is delivering that alcoholic liquor. [00:05:43] Tony DeWitt: That was an excellent way for the prosecutor to tie an example to the facts of the case with respect to delivery. He's hitting a lot of really good notes here early on. [00:05:53] Speaker 2: So that gets up to that second album, alcoholic liquor. Lawyers love to define terms, and that is legally defined term. What Judge Pelosi, I expect, will tell you is that alcoholic liquor includes beer and wine, includes spirits like Dr. McGillicuddy's, and it is anything that has more than one-half of one percent alcohol-biting on. You've seen the contents of that cooler, ladies and gentlemen. All of those beverages are alcoholics, like you've heard testimony about that. There's no Dr. McGillicuddy there. You saw the receipt of 20 being bought. You've heard testimony about everybody drinking those beverages. That alcohol being delivered to that party, that alcoholic beverage satisfies that second note of the defendant delivering alcohol to the party. So the third element, probably the simplest, right? A minor in terms of this charge, anyone who has not attained 21 years page. There's testimony from the people at the party, only one person was over one and one. Everybody else has tried out the time of that party. They were under 20. [00:07:07] Tony DeWitt: This next segment, where he talks about essentially the elements of manslaughter, is really well done too, I think, in that he gives some good illustrative language from the testimony and lays out the case [00:07:23] Speaker 2: against Ouellette fairly clearly. Most specifically, there's clear evidence of Soap being 17 years old at the time and ended up with a 0.151 blood alcohol content. The Ouellette delivered that alcoholic beverage to those minors, including Soap. I submit to you that the state has proven that crime beyond any reasonable doubt. Let's get to where I expect there will be a great deal of dispute, prevent water in the first group. Do you have to tell you that there are four elements to that So let's start with that first element. Conduct creating a grave risk of death. He acted recklessly, he evinced an extreme indifference to human life, and he caused Sylvia's death. So let's start with that first element. Conduct creating a grave risk of death. Whatever evidence in this case is there that the defendant's conduct created a grave risk of death. That car riot, ladies and gentlemen. Let's break it down. They're at the Schultz Corporation. You heard about all of what the witnesses described as an argument between Cooper and Sylvia. You heard about him kicking Sylvia. You heard about him shoving her into his truck. You heard about loud arguments. You heard about Cooper knocking the phone out of Sophie's hand when she's trying to get another ride. And you heard him yell to get in the truck and let's go. He tears out of that park out of that parking lot and he gets to the drive. So what happens next? We've heard a lot of testimony about Locus Road, right? Take a look at the exhibit here. You can see he's driving up Route 72. That connects with Route 4. Why did he turn off Locus Road, which goes to Harmony Tilbury. I also know what happens on Locus Road is that Sophie hangs out her cell phone and starts recording on her camera. Why? That's to make sure that a reasonable and logical inference is that the defendant has decided he's not going to take the phone. He's kicking her out of his truck. And that's why she picks up the phone, she hits recording, throws it into her purse. Why would she be recording if this was her choice? There's not a single word said on that video until Sophie says ow. [00:09:46] Tony DeWitt: I thought that was one of the more powerful moments in the closing, frankly. Nothing said until she says ow. People don't usually say ow when they're having a great time or they're doing something volitionally. They do say ow when someone hits them, hurts them, or in some other way scares them. And I do think, although he'll later characterize it as terrorizing, I think he was just trying to intimidate Sophie. And it came across as terroristic, threatening. And I think the prosecutor used what Ouellette gave him. And that's the problem. When you do bad things, they come back to haunt you. [00:10:24] Speaker 2: He knows something is going wrong here. That's why she's starting to record. That video also shows us the defendant's conduct at the time of that first separation. The defendant speeds off, in the words of Devin Crowe, like a bad eye. You can see through those points as he's driving down Mocus Road. Now, truthfully, I think he could have stopped right there. [00:11:27] Tony DeWitt: I think he's got all of the elements and he's got enough of the evidence laid out that the jury doesn't need to be grabbed by the nose and drug kicking and screaming into the jury room to fill out the paperwork. I think they know what the elements of the crime are and essentially all of the evidence that supports it. That was very well done. And, but there are a few other little vignettes that I want to throw in here because I think they are also somewhat powerful. [00:11:55] Speaker 2: So let's get to them next. Now we know from the animation that their phones continue back on PolyBan after stopping for a while in that area. And they'll take her home then. No. He stops, turns his truck around, and goes back up PolyBan towards Johnny Cape Mountain Road. She's now seven minutes, 11 minutes past her curfew. He's not taking her home. Ladies and gentlemen, when that photo is taken by Sophie and snapped, what do you think her emotional state is? When he dropped her off in the woods, she said she was scared. Do you think that fear [00:12:36] Tony DeWitt: intensified at this point? Next, we deal with a little bit of domestic violence. [00:12:41] Speaker 2: Part two. The defendant is arguing. He's angry. He's upset. He struck Sophie. He's not going to drop her off. He's passed her house on three separate occasions. He's just driven by her driveway here. But this time, he's not even going to stop. He slows down to about 15 miles per hour and locks the door. Sophie then separates and you know from Dr. Vincent that she got run on by that car. That is conduct that creates a critical issue. Sophie, with you to say I've proven that only beyond the risk of the law. Second element is that the defendant acted recklessly. Shedded Blosie, we'll instruct you that reckless toddler means that you are aware of and consciously disregard an unjustifiable risk. And you know that from your common sense or common usage of that word. What is reckless when you're operating in one vehicle based? From driving. Let's take a look at State Exhibit 79 on page three. You can see these texts from Cooper Ouellette to CJ McIntyre. Are we drinking tonight? That was his plan. That's why he went to Edgewood. That's why he got that liquor. That's why he delivered to that party. And you've heard the aftermath of that drinking. You've heard that voicemail. And I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, that he was drunk. I'll answer my own question. What's more dangerous than drunk driving? Beating while drunk driving. Recall animation two from State Exhibit 87. Mark Sanders testified about getting geolocation points of all the road signs and adding them into that animation. You can see what the speed limits are. And then take a look at Cooper Ouellette speed. There are points where he's doing 70 miles per hour. There are points where he's more than 20 over the speed limit. Excuse me, more than double the speed limit. I submit to you that that is reckless. He is consciously aware [00:14:41] Tony DeWitt: of the drift and he is doing it anyway. Now, there are a lot more that I could put in here that I thought were pretty good. But in order to keep this to a manageable number of minutes so that people actually watch it somewhere close to the end, which apparently makes YouTube happy. I've yet to figure out YouTube, to be honest. But at any rate, here is what I would call the end of the sales pitch, the end of the closing, where he asks for a verdict in a rather indirect way. But still, [00:15:15] Speaker 2: he's asking for a verdict here. He knew what he had done. Now, I expect that the defense is going to raise some claims and try to allege the state has not proven the case beyond a recent example. But let's examine some of the questions asked to these witnesses. And why are they asking these witnesses? They're asking the questions to the wrong witnesses. Why is Lynn being asked about the police investigation when Detective Chrisone is? Why is Detective Harrington being asked about pattern recognition when Dr. Vincent is? Why is Sergeant Pearson being asked about the FBI when she didn't have anything to do with it? Ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you that this police investigation would be lengthy because they were chasing down every lead. They wanted to be fair to both sides. Every lead they were given, they investigated, and they ran it down to the extent that they could. They secured every interview that they could. They secured search warrants based on probable calls for all the records that they could. Based upon that investigation, they submitted the case and it is now for you. Yes, the path went down originally based upon that information. But where did that information come from? Well, the defendant, he's the one that mislead the police and distracts him in the beginning. I would ask you not to let him distract him at the end of this investigation. Hold him accountable for his actions, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you. [00:16:54] Tony DeWitt: Now, the prosecution has laid out a very factual case given a strong first part of its closing argument. Now, the defense is going to get up and blame the police and talk about certain inconsistencies that it sees in the evidence. Whether or not this is effective depends a lot on the manner in which it is delivered. Normally, when you have a hard-hitting factual summary, you need to attack one or two central facts and you need to pull one element out of every cause of action and defeat it. If you don't do that, then you risk getting a verdict against you. In this situation, what I see them doing is just saying, well, the cops screwed this up and turned an ordinary traffic accident into a, you know, terrible, terrible tragedy into a crime. And it's not a crime. I don't think the jury is going to believe this for any, even for a minute. But listen, honest to goodness, if this was my case and I was in the dock and I had to pick which lawyer was going to close, it wouldn't have been this guy. [00:18:10] Speaker 3: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I had the opportunity to address you this morning. First of all, I want to thank you for day to night and night of your busy lives to be here. Second thing I want to close to you is sympathy. I'm a father, I'm a grandfather, and I'm a human being. Of course, I have sympathy for Sophie and his family. One thing is indisputable. No one knew how serious Sophie's injuries. No one. Not her mother, not Cooper, not her brother, not the brother's girlfriend. No one knew that. It's an indisputable effect. One thing I'm not going to do, which the state likes to do, is put words that they don't belong. Inuendo what we believe has no place in this program. Detective Slavey had two roles in this case. His first role was as an investigator. The second role was an affiant on a 30-page arrest point. Those were his roles. Detective Slavey turned a tragic accident into a crime. That's what he tried to do. [00:19:41] Tony DeWitt: I hate to tell you, Counsel, but he actually did do it. He didn't just try to do it. He did it, and he collected enough evidence to make a solid case for it. I understand you don't like that, but because he omitted a few things, doesn't make him wrong, at least not in this instance. [00:19:59] Speaker 3: Detective Slavey: They searched for him to get his blood. They never did that. That was the most important thing that slavery could do. He failed. That was an adequate police procedure. He failed. Detective Slavey: [00:20:40] Tony DeWitt: Now that's a solid point. He didn't get a search warrant, should have gotten the blood alcohol content, didn't do it. But that's the reason why Cooper isn't charged with DUI. Detective Slavey: That's why he's charged with, essentially, reckless manslaughter. [00:20:52] Speaker 3: Detective Slavey: What was his condition? What was his condition at 11:30? Not what was his condition at 9 o'clock or 10 o'clock. Detective Slavey: However, he chose not to do that. Detective Slavey: He sent an officer to guide and guard his truck. For what reason, I don't know. Detective Slavey: Now, as I said, he was not only the lead investigator, and I had him tell you, what does an investigator have to do? He has to gather all the evidence. Detective Slavey: Now, I asked him, you can judge his demeanor. In fact, he said this is the first time Detective Slavey: A defendant or a defense had to call me as a witness. Detective Slavey: This is in 20 years. [00:21:41] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: This is one of those things that, as a lawyer, you think has a lot of oomph, you know, and you want to get it out there in front of the jury. Detective Slavey: But a lot of times, the way lawyers think isn't the way juries think. Detective Slavey: And because of that, I don't think this has very much traction with the jury. Detective Slavey: Tell me what you think in the comments. [00:22:00] Speaker 3: Detective Slavey: Eric, I'm going to tell you one thing. We have an expression in the law. Detective Slavey: You can indict a ham sandwich. Detective Slavey: And you can always arrest a ham sandwich. You know why? Detective Slavey: Because when Slavey makes those statements to a judge, Detective Slavey: There's no defense lawyer in there questioning him. Detective Slavey: There's no cross-examination of Slavey. Detective Slavey: You saw his demeanor. Detective Slavey: You saw he didn't even know how many Detective Slavey: pages were in the report that he didn't give me for months. Detective Slavey: I never got those notes. Detective Slavey: And I had to then go through all his notes, Detective Slavey: Read it and digest it in a short period of time. [00:22:44] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: Weak. Just really kind of weak. [00:22:49] Speaker 3: Detective Slavey: What did you text your daughter? Detective Slavey: Remember what she said? Detective Slavey: Try to control your drinking this evening. Detective Slavey: Why would she say that? Why would she say that? Detective Slavey: She didn't say tell Cooper to control his drinking. Detective Slavey: She knew Cooper was going to be driving the car. Detective Slavey: She knew Cooper for three and a half years. Detective Slavey: There's never been any kind of incident like this. Detective Slavey: The mother, Lynn, testified there's been Detective Slavey: hundreds of encounters with these people. Detective Slavey: They loved each other. Detective Slavey: Whether it be this is a tragedy, a tragedy. Detective Slavey: If I were to talk about what kind of tragedy, Detective Slavey: Think of Romeo and Juliet. [00:23:40] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: Attacking the grieving mother. Detective Slavey: That's kind of a really sad look. Detective Slavey: It screams desperation. Detective Slavey: Why, Mama didn't say the right things. Detective Slavey: Because she didn't know how the night was going to end. Detective Slavey: Come on, let's not be stupid here. Detective Slavey: She wanted Sophie to control her drinking Detective Slavey: Because that was her child. Detective Slavey: I think whenever you attack a grieving parent, Detective Slavey: Someone who's lost a child like this, Detective Slavey: it makes you look crass and inarticulate. [00:24:12] Speaker 3: Detective Slavey: That was probably major crime's biggest mistake. Detective Slavey: I don't know, because I'd be doing what he did when he talks about arguments. Detective Slavey: I don't know what slave he is now. Detective Slavey: I only hope he's out of major crime. Detective Slavey: I hope he's sitting somewhere in an office taking fingerprints. [00:24:31] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: That was unnecessary. Detective Slavey: And really, he shouldn't have said that. [00:24:35] Speaker 3: Detective Slavey: His credibility is zero. Detective Slavey: Incomplete investigation as the lead investigator means nothing. Detective Slavey: He tried to take a tragic accident and incident and turned it into a crime. Detective Slavey: That's what took 12 months to get a warrant. Detective Slavey: That's what took 12 months, ladies and gentlemen, putting all the pieces together. Detective Slavey: You know, lawyers, I try it. Detective Slavey: And when people say, "Well, what does a lawyer do?" Detective Slavey: Well, a lawyer or even a prosecutor, what do we do? Detective Slavey: We're like waiters in a restaurant. Detective Slavey: The cops are the cooks. Detective Slavey: They make it. Detective Slavey: They do the investigation. Detective Slavey: They give us what evidence they recovered. Detective Slavey: And we have to present it. [00:25:21] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: If he's a waiter, he isn't getting a tip on this one. [00:25:25] Speaker 3: Detective Slavey: So I don't blame them. Detective Slavey: But I do blame Slavey. Detective Slavey: And I do blame the investigation. Detective Slavey: And I would ask you, please examine. Detective Slavey: Take as long as you need to decide this case. Detective Slavey: Because one person is lost. Detective Slavey: We could never bring her back. Detective Slavey: But I don't want the second half of that tragedy to occur. Detective Slavey: I don't want my client to be lost forever. Detective Slavey: Thank you. [00:25:55] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: I'm pretty sure that the penalty in Connecticut for Detective Slavey: This offense is not life in prison. Detective Slavey: So I don't think he's going to be lost forever. Detective Slavey: He may have to grow up behind bars a little bit. Detective Slavey: But I don't think he'll be lost forever. Detective Slavey: So I'm not sure that I'm not sure very much of that actually Detective Slavey: actually got processed by the jury in a positive way. Detective Slavey: It was angry. Detective Slavey: It was almost extemporaneous. Detective Slavey: It's like he didn't really have a plan to go through all this. Detective Slavey: So we'll see. Detective Slavey: But at any rate, I do want to have a couple of things from the rebuttal, Detective Slavey: which I thought were very good. [00:26:34] Speaker 4: Detective Slavey: If you recall these comments that my co-founder made Detective Slavey: about any statements that we made in the bigger picture in the Detective Slavey: in the closing argument, remember those comments tonight. [00:26:45] Speaker 5: Detective Slavey: So in the umpteen years that I've been a prosecutor, Detective Slavey: I'm always amazed that when a jury is encandled in a case, Detective Slavey: they come out, and as the first witness testifies, they select their seats, Detective Slavey: and they never change from the time at which they select their seats Detective Slavey: to the time of which the trial is over. Detective Slavey: We've all done the same. Detective Slavey: So let's talk about the testimony in this case. Detective Slavey: Dr. Williamson testified for the defense in this case. Detective Slavey: Do you recall that? Detective Slavey: Consider his testimony versus Dr. Vincent's. Detective Slavey: When you do that, Detective Slavey: Consider his experience versus Dr. Vincent's. Detective Slavey: Consider what he reviewed when he offered his initial opinion. Detective Slavey: He reviewed the autopsy report, Detective Slavey: some of the photographs, Detective Slavey: and he perused the accident reconstruction. Detective Slavey: Call that testimony when he said that? Detective Slavey: Right before he testified, Detective Slavey: he reviewed additional items to the state put in defense, Detective Slavey: including his sweatshirt silk he was wearing. Detective Slavey: He testified, Detective Slavey: he looked at that for a mere five minutes inside and out. Detective Slavey: A mere five minutes. Detective Slavey: He was paid over $7,000. Detective Slavey: Over $7,000 to review those few items. Detective Slavey: Dr. Vincent reviewed all of those, Detective Slavey: plus numerous investigative reports provided by the state police, Detective Slavey: including the movements of Sophie's cell phone and the defense. [00:28:02] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: As Joe Friday would have said, Detective Slavey: just the facts, ma'am. Detective Slavey: That's what he's doing. Detective Slavey: He's spitting facts up there Detective Slavey: and he's knocking down a lot of the arguments that were made by [00:28:13] Speaker 5: Detective Slavey: the defense in the defense closing. [00:28:18] Speaker ?: Detective Slavey: After that, he met up with some friends at Chile and Walmart. [00:28:18] Speaker 5: Detective Slavey: And they went to the Schultz Corporation to have that party. Detective Slavey: He brought that cooler who was with him Detective Slavey: because he was going to make good on that promise. Detective Slavey: While he was at that party, he got into an argument with Sylvie. Detective Slavey: Recall the witness's testimony as he pertains to that. Detective Slavey: Recall the witness's testimony as he pertains to what occurred at that party. Detective Slavey: He got into an argument with Sylvie, and he told her to find a ride home. Detective Slavey: She tried. Detective Slavey: Sylvie tried to give him affection while he was in the car with Christmas. Detective Slavey: How did Cooper react? Detective Slavey: He told her to stop it. Detective Slavey: Rearranged himself in the car. Detective Slavey: In that backseat. Detective Slavey: So he could kick her. Detective Slavey: He kick her, he did. Detective Slavey: Two to three times with his Chippewa boot. Detective Slavey: She fell to the ground. Detective Slavey: Testimony also indicated that he shot her against the straw. [00:29:12] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: I guess I just grew up different, but Detective Slavey: my parents, particularly my dad Detective Slavey: and my stepdad, both Detective Slavey: always told me Detective Slavey: you never hit a woman. Detective Slavey: You know, if you get upset, you get angry, walk away. Detective Slavey: Just it's not worth it. Detective Slavey: And nobody ever sees Detective Slavey: a woman throw the first punch. Detective Slavey: They only see that the man respond. Detective Slavey: I don't believe this was in response to anything. Detective Slavey: This is just somebody who is not a prince among men. Detective Slavey: And he is acting out his frustrations, Detective Slavey: alcohol powered in so doing. Detective Slavey: And sometimes that turns people Detective Slavey: who are otherwise gentle creatures into madmen. Detective Slavey: And kicking a girl in the backseat of a car? Detective Slavey: Really? [00:30:04] Speaker 5: Detective Slavey: Let me or call a message in. Detective Slavey: Is Sophie okay? Detective Slavey: He sent that text message. Detective Slavey: Can you go back up, please? Detective Slavey: He sent that text message at 12:36 on 5-21-23. Detective Slavey: Lynn responds to that text message. Detective Slavey: No! Detective Slavey: She's getting x-rays and line put in. Detective Slavey: And there are about five people working up. Detective Slavey: Go down, please. Detective Slavey: See any response from Cooper Ouellette? Detective Slavey: When he's told no. Detective Slavey: She's not fine. Detective Slavey: He never contacted with you. Detective Slavey: Never picked up the phone to call. Detective Slavey: Never sent a text to check on Sophie. Detective Slavey: Not a one. Detective Slavey: Look at his call records and look at the exhibits that are in this case. Detective Slavey: Not a single phone call or a single text after that. Detective Slavey: Now consider the next step. Detective Slavey: And look at when you do that, consider the phone records for the next day. Detective Slavey: That's better than evidence. Detective Slavey: Cooper learns from the police that Sophie is deceased. Detective Slavey: You see a single time when you look at those phone records and you review them. Detective Slavey: Where Cooper Ouellette called any member of her family to check on them. Detective Slavey: Or to see what was going on with Sophie. Detective Slavey: Not a single phone call. Detective Slavey: But those call records reveal that he called other people. Detective Slavey: Thank you. [00:31:42] Speaker 4: Detective Slavey: Thank you, Tony Watson. [00:31:44] Tony DeWitt: Detective Slavey: That was the perfect note to end on. Detective Slavey: He didn't care. Detective Slavey: Obviously, he was still mad at Sophie. Detective Slavey: I guess. Detective Slavey: Or somebody told him not to express any concern. Detective Slavey: I suppose if they had gotten legal help, someone might have said, "Do not communicate with the victim," etc. Detective Slavey: Because you don't want to be charged with Detective Slavey: trying to intimidate them or something. Detective Slavey: That could be. Detective Slavey: There could be a rational response for that. Detective Slavey: But heavens to Betsy, that was a very emotional and very powerful Detective Slavey: way to end a closing argument. Detective Slavey: Overall, I have to say I give the odds of a conviction to the Detective Slavey: to the state to be pretty high. Detective Slavey: We'll have to wait and see what a jury says. Detective Slavey: That's always the final determinant. Detective Slavey: But this was an interesting trial to do, Detective Slavey: even though I didn't get to do very much of it. Detective Slavey: I've enjoyed doing it. Detective Slavey: I thank the people who asked me to take a look at it. Detective Slavey: And it's on to next week. Detective Slavey: We'll see what develops for next week. Detective Slavey: Have a great weekend and thank you for being here. Detective Slavey: Catch me again next time. Detective Slavey: Thanks for watching my video. Detective Slavey: I really appreciate it. Detective Slavey: And today, as you go about your business, Detective Slavey: would you try to do just one kind thing for somebody? Detective Slavey: It doesn't have to be a big thing. Detective Slavey: You can open a door for somebody who has their arms full. Detective Slavey: You could help a stranger with directions. Detective Slavey: Pass along a helpful computer tip to a novice. Detective Slavey: Buy somebody a Coke, or a Diet Coke in my case. Detective Slavey: You could let the manager know Detective Slavey: when somebody did a really good job for you Detective Slavey: at the grocery store, or at Walmart, or somewhere else. Detective Slavey: I want to make the world a better place. Detective Slavey: And I know you're probably here Detective Slavey: because you want to make the world a better place too. Detective Slavey: So let's do that. Detective Slavey: And let's be respectful of one another in our comments. Detective Slavey: And thank God we live in the greatest country in the free world. Detective Slavey: Now, I do think that the good folks at YouTube Detective Slavey: have a few things they want to show you up here Detective Slavey: and you might be interested in. Detective Slavey: And if you are, I'd appreciate you clicking. Detective Slavey: Thanks. Detective Slavey: Have a terrific day.