Scott Nelson Trial Prosecution Opening Statement

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: All right, Ms. Hicks, is the state ready to proceed? Yes, sir. Mr. Law of Defense. We are, however, at this time we would ask the rule of sequestration to be [00:00:07] Speaker ?: involved. [00:00:09] Speaker 1: Mr. Nelson, you ready to proceed, sir? Yes, sir. All right, the rule of sequestration has been invoked, so anyone who is a potential witness in this case, if you are in the courtroom, you need to exit the courtroom until you are called by your respective attorneys. To the extent there are witnesses who are not present, I'll leave it to the attorneys to explain to their witnesses that the rule has been invoked and the consequences for violating the rule. [00:00:35] Speaker 2: And, Judge, for the record, Robert Fulbert is in courtroom right now. [00:00:39] Speaker ?: He is a common survivor and has the right to be involved. [00:00:43] Speaker 1: Mr. Lahr? [00:00:46] Speaker ?: Yes, sir, I have added to provide other reports. [00:00:52] Speaker 1: All right, Ms. Hicks, other than the person you just identified, are there any other witnesses who do not have the right to remain for the state? I don't see them. Mr. Lahr, any defense witnesses other than potentially your client who are present in the courtroom and who do not have a right to remain? [00:01:08] Speaker 2: No, you are. No, you aren't. [00:01:10] Speaker ?: Okay. The second thing is, in reference to the defense, as we open the statement, we would ask the state if it's not referring to any specific. If it's not referring to it, we would ask the state if it's not referring to it, if it's not referring to it, we would ask the state if it's not referring to it. [00:01:27] Speaker 1: Okay. All right, so Ms. Hicks, is the state ready to bring in the jury? Yes, sir. Mr. Lahr, defense, ready to bring in the jury? Yes, sir. Mr. Lahr, defense, ready to bring in the jury? We are now. Mr. Nelson, are you ready to bring in the jury? Yes, sir. I just ask everybody to remain seated. Correct. All right. Please bring in the jury. Please be seated. Good morning, members of the jury. Good morning. Ms. Hicks, does the state acknowledge the jury? Yes, sir. Mr. Lahr, defense? Mr. Lahr. Mr. Nelson? [00:02:06] Speaker ?: Yes, sir. [00:02:07] Speaker 1: I apologize for the delay. We had various issues with some of the courtroom and courthouse equipment that delayed our start today. So, again, I apologize for the delay. Ms. Hicks, opening statement for the state. Yes, sir. [00:02:33] Speaker 2: Her name was Jennifer Holder. When her body was bound three days after she went missing, she was face down in a field, vacant glass, with grass all around her. Her ankles were bound together with duct tape. Her wrists were bound together behind her with a zip tie. When they turned her over to transport her into the medical examination office, they saw that she had duct tape wrapped around her entire head. It covered her face from her chin to her eyebrows. She would not have been able to see. More importantly, she would not have been able to breathe. She had two superficial stab wounds to her back, but she had five penetrating stab wounds to her chest. Two of which directly pierced her heart. A knife was located in the field not far from her body. It had a rather unique handle. It had a blade capable of causing stab wounds to her body. And most importantly, it had her DNA on it. The medical examiner will tell you that one of two things, possibly a combination of both, caused her death. One, the stab wounds. She would have bled to death. Two, asphyxiation. The duct tape was so tight against her nose and her mouth, she couldn't breathe, and she would have suffocated to death. During the course of this trial, you will hear that Jennifer Fulford, who was married. She and her husband lived in Altamont Springs, and she worked for a man named Reed Berman, a wealthy businessman who lived in a very nice house in Muir Park. She had worked for him for a little over six years as a house manager and as a nanny to his two children. You will hear that on the morning of September 27th of 2017, she got up, said goodbye to her husband, and went to work. She got to Mr. Berman's house a little before seven o'clock that morning. She let herself in, as she always did. She went upstairs and she got Oliver, Mr. Berman's son. She woke him up, got him ready for school, and a little after seven o'clock, Oliver and Jennifer left so she could take him to school at Lake Highland. She took him to school, dropped him off, and came back to the house. She saw Mr. Berman off to work at about 8:30, and she left shortly thereafter to go to a dentist appointment. Normal dentist appointment that she had planned for some time. She went to her dentist appointment, and you will hear how it was a normal dentist appointment, nothing out of the ordinary. The owner of the dentist office will tell you that she saw Jennifer, Jennifer was in good spirits, and when she left, everything seemed fine. The owner of the dentist's office was the last person to see Jennifer Fulford alive. The last person, except of course, as the evidence will show, for the man who put the duct tape around her ankles and the zip ties on her wrists. The alarm records from the Fulford house support that Jennifer got home from the dentist no problem. While she was on the way home from the dentist's office, she made a phone call. She called a woman named Janet Grimm. Janet Grimm is an art lady. She owns an art business in Winter Park, and she was scheduled to come to the Berman house that afternoon to do some work on the arts. In the house. And the day before, on September 26th, Jennifer and Janet had worked out that Jennifer would call Janet, but she was leaving the dentist's office. To tell her, you know, "I'll be home in about 10 minutes, and you can come on over to do the work." Everything went in accordance with the plan. Jennifer called Janet, actually left her a voicemail. Jennifer got home, as the alarm records would show, and she was in the house for some period of time, doing her housework. The evidence will show that at 11:30 a FedEx package was delivered. It was expected. It was left on the front step. It contained the bacon of the month club, bacon, that needed to be refrigerated. The evidence will show that shortly after the FedEx package was delivered, the front doors of the Berman residence opened and closed. Shortly thereafter, Jennifer Palford made her last phone call. She made a phone call to Janet Grimm. Despite the phone call she had made earlier telling Janet to come on over, this time she was panicked. And she told Jennifer, "I've got a call from the school. Something has happened to Oliver. I have to go get him. Don't come over." Janet Grimm was the last person to hear Jennifer Fulbright's rules. The last person, except of course, was the man who put the duck tea over her eyes and mouth. The evidence will show that nothing was wrong with Oliver at school. The school hadn't called. Jennifer didn't have to go pick him up. [00:09:55] Speaker ?: He was fine. [00:09:57] Speaker 2: He was fine up until about 3:15 in the afternoon when his nanny did not show up to pick him up as she was scheduled to do. And that was the first suggestion that anything was wrong with the gentleman. When nobody came to pick Oliver up from school, the school called his parents, reached out to his parents. And his father ultimately came to the school to pick him up. His father, Mr. Berman, will tell you that that was completely out of the ordinary. In the over six years that Jennifer had been nanny to his children, she had never once failed him. She had never once failed him. She had never once failed to take care of his children. It caused him concern. He made phone calls, tried to reach out to her. No, no luck contacting her. He went to the school, picked up his son, took his son home. When he got home, there wasn't really much amiss in his house. He did have never find Jennifer's purse inside the house. And he found the FedEx package near the front door. Now he was concerned because the thing that wasn't in the house was Jennifer. He searched, he made phone calls. He tried to call her husband at work. He tried to call hospitals to see if maybe she had had some sort of emergency. Maybe she had been in a car accident. Ultimately, he called the Winter Park Police Department to report her missing. And with that phone call, it initiated a missing persons investigation into Jennifer Fulford's disappearance. Law enforcement met with Mr. Berman. They met with Mr. Fulford. And the investigation actually moved kind of quickly. Because law enforcement very quickly learned that someone had used Jennifer Fulford's ATM card at 12:10 on September 27th. About 40 minutes after the front door opened and closed. The man who had used her ATM card at the ATM Wells Fargo in Winter Park was wearing a white T-shirt. He had a white towel around his neck. And he was wearing a watch with a rather unique flag band. Nobody knew this man, so the investigation continued. With the help of Robert Fulford, law enforcement was able to track her car through an onstar-like system. And Jennifer's car was found on September 28th, the very next day, in a Publix parking lot. The Publix located at the intersection of Colonial Drive and Shine Avenue, just outside of downtown Orlando. And then, of course, the discovery of Jennifer, on September 30th of 2017. Face down, in a vacant field, off of Hopka Violent, over near Disney. Her cell phone was never recovered, but law enforcement was able to use information from her cell phone company and cell phone towers to track her body to that location. Jennifer Fulford's timeline ended on September 30th of 2017, with the discovery of her body. With the discovery of her body, the investigation changed from a missing person's investigation to an investigation into her death. The defendant was very quickly identified as the man in the ATM photo. The man wearing the white t-shirt, the towel, and the watch. And he was arrested in Jacksonville, Florida, on October 1st of 2017. But the defendant's timeline, as it relates to this case, doesn't begin on October 1st. It doesn't even begin on September 27th, the day she went missing. It actually begins on September 16th of 2017, 11 days prior to the day Jennifer was taken. As you see, on that day, you will see a video of the defendant going into a Walmart here in Orlando. He bought a number of items. He bought a hat that said UCF on it. He bought a pair of bright blue tennis shoes. He bought duct tape. [00:15:34] Speaker ?: He bought zip ties. [00:15:37] Speaker 2: And most importantly, he premeditatedly bought a knife. A knife that perfectly matched the knife that was located in the field not far from Jennifer's body. [00:15:53] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:15:56] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:07] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:08] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:13] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:15] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:46] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:47] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:54] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:16:56] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:17:19] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:17:22] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:17:42] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:17:44] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:17:57] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. [00:17:58] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:02] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:11] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:12] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:15] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:20] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:22] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:28] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:29] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:53] Speaker ?: He bought a knife that was taken. [00:18:54] Speaker 2: He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. He bought a knife that was taken. And as I mentioned, the defendant was arrested on October 1st up in Jacksonville. Several months after the defendant was arrested, he wrote a letter. He wrote a letter to law enforcement. And in that letter, he told law enforcement where to find the keys to Jennifer Fulfer's car. They had never been discovered during the investigation. So law enforcement went to the exact spot where the defendant said they would be. And there they were. In a bush, next to the bus stop, across the street from the publics, where Jennifer's car was located. During the course of the investigation, as I mentioned, law enforcement found her car. In Jennifer's car, there were a number of items of evidence. Jennifer drove an SUV-like vehicle. And way in the back of the SUV, there was a bedspread. A king-sized bedspread. It was actually a duvet with a duvet cover over it. And it was identified as having come from Reed Berman's master bedroom. There was also a beer bottle in the car. A single bottle of beer located in the center console next to the driver's seat. That beer bottle matched several other beer bottles that were found in Reed Berman's home. He had recently had a graduation party for his car. On that beer bottle was the defendant's DNA. In the car was a bag, a gin-like kind of bag. Inside that bag, law enforcement found a white T-shirt that matched the white T-shirt he was wearing in the first ATM video. They found a white T-shirt that matched the white T-shirt that matched the white T-shirt he was wearing in the first ATM video. The T-shirt, the towel, and the watch all had blood on him. There were two people's DNA found on those three items. Jennifer Fulpert and the defendants. Ultimately, during the course of this investigation, law enforcement determined that six things were taken from Reed Berman's home. A wealthy man who had a lot of very nice things that could have been taken, there were only six things that were taken from his home. One, the comfort from his bed located in the back of Jennifer Fulpert's car. Two, a bottle of beer found in the center console with the defendant's DNA. Jennifer Fulpert's car keys found right where the defendant said they would be. [00:23:00] Speaker ?: Jennifer Fulpert's cell phone. [00:23:01] Speaker 2: Jennifer Fulpert's cell phone, never located, but used to locate her. Jennifer Fulpert's ATM card, used multiple times by the defendant after she went busy. Jennifer Fulpert's cell phone. And finally, the last thing that was taken from Reed Berman's home that day was Jennifer Fulpert's cell. Found in the field, bound with the duct tape that he bought, the zip ties that he bought, and stabbed with the knife that he bought. Once the state has presented its case to you, there will be no doubt that this man went into Reed Berman's home, committing a burglary of a dwelling. He kidnapped her, he carjacked her, he robbed her, and lastly, her name was Jennifer Fulpert, and he is guilty of her first degree murder.