Closing arguments made in Bennett murder case

EPHRATA — For the second time in a year, attorneys presented closing arguments in the case of an Ephrata man who is accused of murdering his 82-year-old landlord.

Chad Bennett, 27, of Ephrata, is on trial for stabbing Lucille Moore to death in her Ephrata home in September 2014. Prosecutors believe Moore’s murder was done in a bout of rage after she informed Bennett of her intent to evict him from one of her properties because of past due rent and an outstanding damage deposit. A previous trial in the case resulted in a hung jury and a mistrial was declared after a unanimous decision could not be reached by the jury.

The state spent considerable time during the five-week trial going over DNA evidence that was found at the scene of the crime. The defendant's DNA was found on a cigarette butt that was left at the scene, on a pillow that was placed over Moore’s face, on Moore’s shirt and in a blood swipe on a kitchen cabinet door.

With regard to the kitchen cabinet door, during his closing argument Deputy Prosecutor Ed Owens said a crime scene investigator concluded there was three ways it could have been deposited: before the murder, during murder or after the murder.

“Blood evidence indicates the swipe in blood stain ‘f’ (on the kitchen cabinet door) occurred between one to five minutes after the blood was first deposited there,” Owens said.

The prosecutor also mentioned an investigator concluded the hand of the person who committed the murder would have come into contact with Moore’s shirt during the stabbing, which is one possible explanation for the presence of Bennett’s DNA on Moore’s shirt.

Bennett’s defense counsel, David Bustamante, countered Owens’ argument by pointing out Moore was choked during the altercation with her attacker and his client’s DNA was not found on the collar of Moore’s shirt.

Bustamante didn’t deny his client’s DNA was found in the four locations, but he did point out the DNA does not come with a time-stamp of when it was deposited, or even how it was deposited. Missing from the state’s closing argument was mention of the DNA of other unknown males being found along with Bennett’s DNA on the four items.

“In the state’s close they talked to you about all the evidence that helps support their position, which they are trying to argue to you that it was Chad that did this. But they left out in their presentation key evidence that shows it wasn’t Chad, it may have been someone else too,” Bustamante told the jury.

There was also considerable time spent by both the prosecution and defense discussing recorded phone conversations between Bennett and his wife Trisha while Chad was lodged in the Grant County Jail. Bennett used the personal identification number of another inmate at the jail to contact his wife, which Owens said he did because he believed prosecutors wouldn’t be able to get hold of the conversation and use it as evidence against him.

During one of the conversations Bennett instructs his wife to thoroughly clean one of his knives, telling her to bleach it, run it through the dishwasher and make sure it doesn’t smell like bleach.

Owens claimed the two were discussing destroying possible evidence from the murder, such as blood on the knife. The defendant admitted to having a knife in his pocket when he was at Moore’s house and claimed he shook her hand and then placed his hand in his pocket and touched the knife. During Bennett’s direct testimony when he took the stand he said he was worried Moore’s DNA could have been transferred onto the knife because of the handshake.

“Ladies and gentlemen the state would argue that conversation (between Bennett and his wife) is a consciousness of guilt. Not a person who is innocent of a crime,” Owens remarked. “If he didn’t kill Lucille Moore what’s he worried about the DNA of Lucille Moore getting on the knife that was in his pocket? What does he have to hide?”

Owens and Bustamante also spent considerable time discussing a moment in the conversation between the Bennetts in which Chad states, “Trisha I’m not going to drag you down in this. I am going to say this on the phone so it’s set in stone. OK? You know that I did it and you were there with me.”

The prosecution contends Bennett is referencing Moore’s murder when he states “you know that I did it.” Bustamante claims the state’s assertion is taken out of context of what the conversation was actually about. He says the conversation as a whole was about problems the Bennetts were having in their marriage.

“He (Bennett) made a lot of stupid phone calls from the jail,” Bustamante admitted. “Believing that he was innocent and wanting to gather evidence and wanting the stories to match up with other witnesses. But that doesn’t make him then guilty of murder.”

Owens stated on Sept. 8 Bennett arrived to work at an Ephrata farm about 7 a.m. and informed his boss “don’t be surprised if the police come out and talk to you about my landlady.” Owens noted Moore’s body was not found until about 10 a.m. that day and Ephrata City Administrator Wes Crago did not send out a news release regarding the finding of the body until about 11 a.m.

Bustamante made the assertion that Cobb’s statement wasn’t a reliable piece of evidence, due to the fact that Cobb was interviewed by the defense’s investigator a few months after the murder and she said she didn’t remember when Bennett made the landlady comment. It wasn’t until about a year-and-a-half after the murder in an interview with police that Cobb claimed the conversation had occurred on Sept. 8.

Closing arguments continued today. Grant County Prosecutor Garth Dano said he the case will be handed off to the jury for deliberations by the end of the day.

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