Assistant U.S. attorney Bryan Schroder argued that on April 12, 2012, James Michael Wells executed a carefully planned attack and killed two co-workers who were steadily replacing his cherished role in their shared workplace at a U.S. Coast Guard communications installation.
In his closing argument Thursday, Schroder said Wells' alleged actions not only cut short the lives of 41-year-old James Hopkins and 51-year-old Richard Belisle, but the defendant multiplied the emotional turmoil of the victim's families by thrusting them into the court process – the defense implicated Debbie Hopkins as a potential killer and grilled Belisle's 18-year-old daughter on the stand. The government has argued throughout the trial that Wells was the only individual with the knowledge and motive to pull off the slayings.
Wells has been charged with murdering Hopkins and Belisle on Kodiak, the second-largest island in the United States and home to a major military base. The three men worked together at what is called the rigger shop, an antenna maintenance building.
Wells showed no emotion over the course of the monthlong trial and opted not to testify.
The Anchorage federal courtroom was packed with friends, family and acquaintances of the accused and the victims, many of whom were dressed in standard, navy blue Coast Guard uniforms. As they did at the beginning of trial, the prosecutors placed enlarged photos of the victims before the jury box. Both men are smiling in the photos.
Not a battle of the experts
Schroder synthesized the majority of the government witnesses' testimony and aimed to discredit theories put forth by the defense. He requested the jury use its common sense rather than rely on the testimony of expert witnesses.
"This case is not a battle of the experts," he said, adding that they'd largely been called upon to offer insight into the murder investigation. Still, he spent time debunking the defense's experts while highlighting the findings of the government's specialists.
Staying true to the government's "six strands of evidence," the prosecutor used geography, timing and the alleged tumultuous relationships between Wells and coworkers at the rigger shop -- where Wells worked for more than 20 years and solidified a position of dominance, despite his civilian status -- to pin the murders on Wells.
Prosecutors argue Wells left his home before 7 in the morning and stopped at Kodiak State Airport. He allegedly switched from his Dodge truck to a blue Honda CRV, his wife's vehicle that was parked there when she left for a work trip, in an attempt to cover his tracks and drive unnoticed to the crime scene.
A camera captured Wells' Dodge driving past the Coast Guard main base gate going to and coming from the rigger shop, a gap of 34 minutes. Additionally, a blurry image of a compact, blue SUV was momentarily spotted on a camera on the main communications building near the rigger shop.
Quashing the possibility of a murderous family feud
Wells could not explain the 34-minute time gap in initial interviews with law enforcement, a point on which the government focused Thursday when it replayed audio for the court.
Wells' defense team has called witness after witness, trying to imply there is another killer. Impossible, the prosecution argued, given the layout of the rigger shop, a collection of small rooms and a garage. The building "would be a very difficult tactical situation if the killer" wasn't familiar with the shop, Schroder said.
The testimony of Dr. Reid Meloy was recalled by both parties to support their claims. The forensic psychologist testified during the trial that one-third of workplace killings are targeted and intended. Schroder said witnesses painted a clear picture of Wells' motive: He was proud of his job and saw the victims as a threat.
Meloy's murder statistics were also used to debunk the idea that Debbie Hopkins killed her husband and her husband's co-worker. Schroder recited Meloy's testimony stating that women tend to kill in the home rather than the workplace, and their victims tend to be people with whom they have personal relationships. Also, according to court testimony, Debbie was sitting on her couch at home when the murders were committed.
As for Hannah Belisle, while her former acquaintances "may not be the highlight of any community," they had no ill will toward the teenager's father, Schroder said.
The blurry blue image captured by camera near the rigger shop -- allegedly Nancy Wells' blue CRV driven by the defendant -- was a point of contention, perhaps a bit of a battle among experts. Schroder argued the defense's car expert Michael DiTallo failed to compare blurry video images with others of the actual CRV taken at a later date, and he disregarded certain vehicle characteristics.
Astonishing lack of evidence
Defense attorney Peter Offenbecher called the government's case "a house of cards." Wells is innocent, he said, but more importantly, the prosecution failed to carry its theory beyond a reasonable doubt.
"You will not be satisfied after deliberation, because you will not know who murdered these men," Offenbecher said.
According to the defense's closing argument, the car experts hired by both parties essentially came to the same conclusion: The blurry blue car spotted near the rigger shop could be a Honda CRV, or it could be one of at least three other vehicles, if not more. The prosecution's whole timeline of events relies on the notion that the unknown image was Wells' wife's SUV.
Despite calling a plethora of witnesses -- more than 75 -- there's no physical, photo, video or trace evidence, Offenbecher said. He said the government worked for nearly two years to build its case and came up with an "astonishing lack of evidence."
"If there's a lack of evidence, you must acquit," he said.
Tunnel vision
A favorite phrase of Offenbecher's during the final day of the trial was "tunnel vision." Investigators had blinders on from 30 minutes after the bodies of Hopkins and Belisle were found; they suspected no one else, the defense attorney said.
He offered a list of evidence he believes the FBI and other investigating agencies ignored because eyes were already set on Wells: The rigger shop's boiler room door was found ajar the morning of the murders, and a boot print was on the interior door of the room; there were eight unidentified fingerprints taken from the doors around the shop; no one ever spotted Wells, for certain, with the alleged murder weapon, a .44 stainless steel Smith & Wesson magnum revolver; Wells' history of nonviolence; and so on.
Investigators kept an eye on suspect number one, and only, in the year following the murders, Offenbecher said. They dug up his septic tank twice. They dug through his garbage. They searched two of the Wellses' cars and found no trace evidence. The stakeouts and shakedowns resulted in no physical evidence, and the government has argued it was because Wells meticulously planned the murders.
However, Offenbecher contended nothing was discovered because there was nothing to find. Wells is innocent, he repeatedly said.
A hotly debated moment during trial occurred when then-Commanding Officer Peter VanNess testified that when he was tasked with informing the victim's spouses their significant others were dead, Nicola Belisle uttered two words to the officials who approached her at work: "Jim Wells." The defense requested the case be tossed due to the testimony. U.S. District Court Judge Ralph Beistline instructed the jury to give the statement minimal consideration.
Still, Offenbecher addressed the terse utterance Thursday. He argued Nicola's full statement was "Jim Wells wouldn't hurt Rich. He was always on the toilet." Nicola, sitting in the courtroom's front row, shook her head "no" for some time upon hearing the attorney's statement.
Following the arguments that took up the majority of Thursday, the jury received its sentencing instructions and began to deliberate.