Bennett murder trial goes to jury

Bennett

by Richard Byrd
| October 19, 2016 1:00 AM

MOSES LAKE — The fate of an Ephrata man who is accused of murdering an elderly Ephrata woman is now in the hands of a jury.

Chad Bennett, 27, of Ephrata, is currently charged with first-degree murder in the death of 82-year-old Lucille Moore in her Ephrata home in September 2014.

During his closing argument Deputy Prosecutor Ed Owens stated Moore’s death boils down to her intent to evict Bennett from one of her rental properties. Owens explained to the jury that Moore was a businesswoman and owned several rental properties, one which was rented to Bennett in late July 2014. Moore allegedly told a close friend before her murder on Sept. 7 she was going to “kick out” Bennett if he didn’t have the money to pay rent and the remainder of a damage deposit.

In interviews with investigators, Bennett admitted visiting Moore’s house three separate times on Sept. 7: once to pay rent, once to pay the remainder of the damage deposit and once to retrieve his wallet, which he said he accidentally left at Moore’s house. Owens suggested Bennett murdered Moore after she told him she was going to evict him and his family from her rental house.

“The defendant just lost it that day. He had enough,” Owens remarked.

Bennett’s defense attorney, David Bustamante, told the jury that Owens’ assertion that Bennett “lost it” on the day of the murder is based on assumption and has no evidence to back it up.

“What evidence is there that Mr. Bennett lost it? What evidence is there that he would have had enough? Enough of what? That’s the kind of thing that you might say if there is some history of dispute or abuse between two people,” Bustamante told the jury. “Then it makes sense to say he had enough. He finally lost it. But there is absolutely not one shred of evidence (of) that ever happening in this case.”

The prosecution’s case relies heavily on DNA evidence found at the scene belonging to the defendant. Investigators were able to find Bennett’s DNA on a pillow that was placed over Moore’s face after she was murdered, a cigarette butt which was found in the house, a blood swipe on a kitchen cabinet door and on the shirt Moore was wearing when she was killed, despite Bennett telling investigators he only sat down at her kitchen table and went into her kitchen when he was there on Sept. 7.

The only problem with the DNA evidence on the pillow and shirt is that along with Bennett’s DNA, crime lab technicians found DNA from two other unknown males on each of the items. Owens noted that Bennett claimed he had a coughing fit when he visited Moore’s house on the day of the murder and suggested his DNA could have been transferred to the kitchen cabinet door through the coughing.

Owens stated that assertion was more than likely false, as it would have been very unlikely that from where Bennett claimed to have sat at the kitchen table that his DNA could have gone around a corner and transferred onto the cabinet door as he coughed, he said.

Bustamante asserted the DNA evidence doesn’t indicate the exact date when it was deposited, or how it was deposited. He noted his client never said where he was when he was coughing and a Washington State Patrol Crime Lab technician testified that DNA could easily be transferred onto an object by coughing.

“He got a tickle in his throat and he was coughing and he asked for a glass of water. And he got up and walked over to the sink. Well, OK so you are coughing and what do people normally do when they cough? They are in someone’s house and they are in front of you. You turn your head and cough. Or maybe you cover your mouth with your hand,” Bustamante remarked. “Who knows what Chad did that day? He was coughing. He was in the kitchen. It stands to reason that would explain how his DNA got on the cabinet.”

Owens also brought into question different accounts Bennett gave to investigators in three separate interviews of his comings and goings on Sept. 7. He said Bennett’s timeline of events doesn’t quite add up and differs each time.

After showing the jury a series of still photographs taken from video surveillance at the Ephrata AutoZone, Owens stated Bennett visited the store two separate times on the day of Moore’s murder. The first visit, presumably, came before the murder of Moore and the second came after the murder. Evidence of that, Owens claimed, is that in Bennett’s first visit to the store he was wearing one set of clothing and in his second visit he was wearing a different set of clothing. Owens submitted that Bennett changed his clothes because they had blood on them.

“The question begs here, why would Chad Bennett change clothes between 12 o’clock and 4 o’clock? This is a guy that wears his VW shirt five days straight. This is a guy that doesn’t change clothes. Not very often,” Owens told the jury. “Why does he change his clothes? The state would argue because he had blood on his clothes. He had blood on his jeans. It appears to us that he has a different pair of shoes walking in. He’s changing those.”

Bustamante claimed Bennett changed his clothes because he was working on his car and didn’t want to get his favorite shirt ruined or dirty. With regard to his client’s statements not adding up with phone records evidence, Bustamante said that doesn’t automatically mean Bennett was fabricating a story.

“When you give a slightly different time and your stories don’t match up exactly, that’s evidence that should lead you to think the person is more credible. If every single thing the person said was always exactly the same and it always matched up exactly with phone records you should be very suspicious,” Bustamante said.

Richard Byrd can be reached via email at city@columbiabasinherald.com.