Danny Coston
WHITE CO.—The stand-in attorney for the supposedly powerful Rosenblum law group representing accused murderer Danny Coston was dropping distinct hints today that the defense at trial may be one of “mental problems.”
But whether this is “up to and including” insanity remains unknown at this time…and may be something not determined—or at least, made public—until time of trial, which a date was set for today by Judge Tom Foster, who seemed more than a little annoyed that there has been virtually no movement in the case since the last time all the attorneys were in the courtroom.
Coston, 37, is charged in the double homicide of Jacob Wheeler, 22, of Centerville, and Jessica Evans, 17, of Norris City. Their bodies were found in remote rural locations of White and then Wayne counties in late August of 2012, both shot; Evans had been sexually assaulted. Coston allegedly confessed to the crimes upon his arrest, which was affected when Wheeler’s father found pieces of an underpanel of Coston’s truck at the scene of one of the deaths; Coston was a neighbor of the Wheelers and drove a very distinct truck, making it easy to link the pieces to it. He’s been held in the White County Jail ever since his late August arrest, his family apparently choosing to get him a powerful attorney as opposed to posting bond on a $3 million bail for him.
Today (March 27, 2013), there were two defense motions taken up in court in the case, and both of them basically shot down by Foster.
Once again in front of a packed courtroom—which, sadly enough, included Coston’s newborn infant, being toted by his co-defendant in at least one aspect related to his alleged crimes (Obstruction of Justice), Candice Brown—Coston’s defense attorney, this time John Rogers and not Scott Rosenblum, of St. Louis, appeared…and once again, things appeared they would drag on. That is, until Gallatin County resident Judge Tom Foster, assigned to the case, let the attorneys from both the state and the defense know that he was very unhappy with the way things were—or in this case, were NOT—proceeding.
“This case doesn’t appear to be moving at all,” Foster said in no uncertain terms, peering over the bench at both the defense and state’s tables. “I want there to be some movement forward today, if we can get it done.”
Foster noted that he had before him two motions both filed by the defense: One for a “contact visit” for Coston while jailed; the other for a very specific order regarding a psychological evaluation to be conducted by a doctor chosen by the defense, in order to aid in the defense at trial, to discover if there were any “mental diseases or defects” in Coston. There was no clarification as to whether this meant currently…or at the time of the murders (August 26, 2012).
The second motion was taken up first, with much haggling over what could be perceived as “special treatment” of Coston as an inmate: Rogers indicated that they wished to have a psychologist evaluate Coston in the jail, but that the regular jail policies and procedures be eased so that the state couldn’t find out who the psychological evaluator was, and subsequently, couldn’t subpoena his or her records from the interview to use against Coston at trial. Rogers insisted that it was imperative this be kept out of the state’s hands because the defense “needed to decide whether or not they were going to use the results of the evaluation” before they disclosed those results (and consequently the evaluator) and proceeded to trial.
Foster appeared flummoxed.
“How do you keep it a secret?” he asked Rogers. “The jail has a procedure whereby people who are there to see an inmate must sign in.”
“We’re asking them not to do that,” Rogers answered. “We’re asking that he jail not generate any kind of documentation with regard to our evaluator.”
“But how do we do that?” Foster asked. “Someone’s going to see this person. Do I ask the state’s attorney to make sure he’s not looking out his window that day so the evaluator can make his way into the jail? Do we somehow fix it so there’s some sort of protective screen to funnel your expert in to see your client? What are you asking??”
Ultimately, this silliness gave way to Rogers asking that the jail staff review the expert witness’/evaluator’s credentials, then give him a pass on through in to the jail to talk to Coston without making a record of his presence there in the facility—in other words, to subvert the policies and procedures already in place. Rogers insisted that they weren’t asking for any “special treatment” in Coston’s case. He was basically told, however, by Foster that in order to properly execute this, he would first have to ask the court for a “protective order” keeping the evaluator’s identity, and subsequently his findings, secret…and the court would take that matter up at a later date if the two sides couldn’t come to an agreement on how it could be carried out prior to that date.
The second request was not spoken of in specifics in the courtroom other than the basic request—for a “contact visit” to be ordered by the judge for Coston to have there in the jail. This would be as opposed to a “behind a glass partition” visit, which is currently the order of the day there in the jail as per regulations.
The attorneys were very careful to not say in open court who or what the contact visit was about….but outside the courtroom, media was advised that this had to do with Brown wanting to bring the two-week-old infant to the jail for a visit with Coston. This was not granted by Foster, as he stated, “There will be no special treatment” for Coston.
As regards the ongoing continuances and “no forward movement” in the case, Foster advised Rogers (over Rogers’ clear objections to it) that the case was going to be set for trial, since it had been making its way through the court system for the past six months now. Rogers’ complaint was that the state kept sending him “little reports” of discovery, and in fact were on their ninth supplemental discovery just recently received, a situation which Rogers seemed to find untenable. He mentioned that the defense team was now in the process of hiring a private investigator and “tracking down several witnesses to interview,” so it “wouldn’t be my request to ask for a trial date,” Rogers said.
White County State’s Attorney Denton Aud told Foster that the state was “ready to go,” however.
“We need some sort of structure,” Aud, sitting with Special Prosecutor Ed Parkinson of the Appellate Prosecutor’s office in Springfield, told Foster. “At lease we’ll have a target” if a court date was set.
Foster agreed and set the jury trial for May 21, 2013, 9 a.m., with a pretrial date of May 8 and a final pretrial date (wherein all lists of witnesses, exhibits, stipulations if any, and proposed written orders in limine would be due) of May 15.
After a little more haggling over the how’s and why’s of the defense’s expert witness/psych evaluator getting in to see Coston without being disclosed to the state, a date of April 17 was set for the defense and state to work it out or, presumably, it just wasn’t going to happen. Rogers said he could do that, and a status hearing was set for that day to occur at 1 p.m.
Coston, still appearing in street clothes but now having put on quite a bit of weight since the last time he was in court, was allowed to leave first and clear the courthouse before anyone else was allowed to leave. Early on in the hearing, Parkinson took issue with Coston appearing in street clothes and without handcuffs, which is NOT the usual way things are done in these hearings; it’s possible that the next time Coston appears, he might be in shackles and jail orange gear, as Parkinson is the type of prosecutor to find out not only why and how this kind of apparent special dispensation occurred, but to undo it if at all possible.
Brown is next in court for a pretrial conference on April 10; she was seen driving away from the courthouse, but stopped to chitchat with friends out on the parking lot, apparently showing off the new little one. Disclosure has just learned that the baby is a boy, and his name is Bryce.