BANQUET OF CONSEQUENCES-Paul Sanders

Olivia five and Nathan three, arrived at the house. Within the hour, they too had been pitilessly slain in an act of violence that was breathtaking in its scope and cruelty.

With his highly anticipated third book, Paul Sanders takes the reader inside every day of the trial of Michelle Anderson with his customary attention to detail from December two thousand fifteenth until March two thousand and sixteen, and in a unique digression from his other works, Sanders includes something he has never done before an interview with one of the killers, Joseph Macenroe at Walla Walla Penitentiary. Banquet of Consequences is the first of two books of what came to be

known as the Our Nation Murders. Were the killings of premeditated act or had the defendants acted in self defense? And what of the deaths of Olivia Nathan who shot them? And why it would not be an easy task for a jury to decide? The reader has taken into a world few of us who have ever received a jury

summons will ever experience. The book that we're featuring this evening is Banquet of Consequences, A juror's plight, the Carnation murders trial of Michelle Anderson, with my special guest journalist and author Paul Sanders. Welcome to the program, and thank you very much for a Green News interview. Paul Sanders.

about the Carnation murder. So tell us a little bit about your background and how you came to be involved with this, and maybe you could tell us about who you were there on behalf of at the trial. Tell us a little bit about who you are associated with and how you came to be in a position to want to and be able to write Banquet of Consequences.

the killer life or recommending life in prison without parole. Coincidentally, in that trial, a prosecutor used to show up. I think somebody who's been on your show, as a matter of fact, Juan Martinez, and especially when psychiatrists were on the stand, and we recognize him as a high profile prosecuting attorney, and we all wondered, why is he here? What does he have to do with this case? It's not our prosecutors a Eric bat Well. The answer was

found out soon. Juan Martinez was actually scheduled to do our case, but another very similar killer, Jody Arius, her trial five months before hours the jury hung on her trial in the penalty phase, the death penalty phase. So just a few months after my trial completed, I was working on Brain Damage of Jurors Tale, my first book, the story of what it is like to be a death penalty juror, and I thought, on a whim I hit I heard on TV there was going to be

this short penalty phase retrial. This thing was scheduled to be maybe six weeks in length, and I by, you know what, it might be interesting to go down there, maybe do a little blog or journal it, and maybe post it online. I did that and their response was unbelievable.

It took time, but that trial also ended up six months so I wrote my second book, Why Not Killer Juris did the death penalty trial of Good to the Areas, And when that book was complete, I found myself, as many authors do when they're first starting out, I found myself broke. So I put a message out on Facebook. I've gotten a lot of followers. I'm honored to have

every single one of them. And I put a message on Facebook and I said, hey, I'm looking to move, but it doesn't have to be in Phoenix, Arizona any ideas. And the suggestions came back worldwide, mostly around the country, but people said've moved to Canada, I've moved to Australia, moved to Great Britain, moved to New York, moved to Boston. And I had a list of things that were important to me, and one of them was I need to have an income aside from my book income, which was

still growing. I need to have a roof over my head. And gosh darn it, the state needs to have a death penalty because if I do a trial again, I really only do death penalty trials. Old friend of mine road and said, when you come up here, I got a job and a roof over your head. And you can do what you want. And I asked him, does Washington have the death penalty? He said yes, and I moved to Washington. It was suggested by a girl by the name of Jennifer Wood. She had brought up before

I moved up here. She said, you know, there's a really interesting trial that just occurred on Joseph McEnroe, but there's still to be a trial on Michelle Anderson and the Carnation murders. And that's how it started. I typically don't research before I sit in a trial every day, and the reason being is I want to the impact of the case presented the same as what might as

what it might be to a djur. Jurors who are selected are selected partly because they know nothing about the trial they're about to be seated on, and I like

being in that position. It's there's the dark side of trials, which is the victim and what happened to him, her or them, and then there's the other side that I really enjoy, and that is what a juror must feel when they sit in a seat in a very formal circumstance, in a high profile circumstance, and what do they feel is the information is said to them on a day

to day basis. And because I have had that unique opportunity to in that seat, when I sit in the gallery, it is very easy for me to understand what they are going through and of course my interpretation when I write it. The support I've had for this trial has been amazing. I've been honored to meet Pamela Mantle, who was the mother to Erica. Her son in law was Scott, and her two grandchildren were Olivia and Nathan. I was honored to meet four jurors from both the McEnroe trial

and the Michelle and Anderson trial. I built a connection with the prosecutor. I am just unbelievably grateful for that. And then and I also met I had become friends with Ben Anderson, who was the grandson to Judy, the son of Mary Victoria. And she was the daughter that's called off the native Christmas Eve not to join the family. She'd been there ten years in a row, but that Christmas Eve she called juty let the message on the machine and said she would not be attending because her

son had a cult. So she and her son did not Christmas Eve. And from there you know the rest of the story would happen.

jurors knew it. What are those basic particulars that we spoke to in the introduction of what happened on Christmas Eve two thousand and seven at the Anderson home. Just what the public would have known and you would have known at that time.

of a mile up the driveway. Because Michelle and Joe lived in a trailer just down the driveway, which was owned by Michelle's father Wayne for a year let them live their rent free. Very near to Christmas Eve, Wayne had said, Michelle and Joe, you need to start paying rent, maybe a snipe in five hundred dollars four five hundred dollars a month, and it would be a good idea to get a job, which neither one had. Michelle took offense to that, and at two o'clock on Christmas Eve,

they walked up. In Michelle's waistband, she had a nine millimeter Joseph in the back in his back under the belt with his shirt over it. He had a three fifty seven magnum and he also carried an empty box with him. It would come to be known as a decoy box. Judy opened the door, one could smell the Christmas the roast in the oven, the Christmas spice in the air. As she opened the door, he greeted her son and her daughter and potential son in law. She

hugged them. Wayne called over from his easy chair he was watching the game on TV, called over with Merry Christmas, and within about forty five minutes, while Joseph was wrapping presents with Judy in another room. Michelle pulled out her nine millimeter gun and fired directly at her father Wayne. She missed. Joe came running out with Judy. Joe then fired his three fifty seven, contacting the bullet contacting Wayne

in the head, and Wayne died immediately. He dropped. Then Michelle and Joe cornered Judy, Michelle's mother in the kitchen. While Michelle was screaming shooter, shooter, and Joe shot twice. The first bullet grazed her, the second one when she was in a croups position looking up, she faced the bullet of the three fifty seven magnum. The last words she heard were from Joe and he said, I'm sorry, Mom, and shot her. They then moved the bodies. They dragged

them out to the shed outside. It was another three hours before her husband, Scott Olivia Nathan came over. Michelle and Joe waited in the living room. When the door opened welcoming the rest of the family. One could still smell the roast in the oven. Everything looked normal. The only thing not normal were Wayne and Judy were missing, and at some point Scott inquired about it. About twenty or thirty minutes after we were there, and at that point in time mayhem broke out. They were about sixteen

bullets fired. The first to die was Scott. He was shot in the face by Michelle fell on the living room floor. The attention then turned to Erica, who was with her two children, five and three, and in a panic, she grabbed for a cordless telephone. She picked it up called nine one one. She got through it was an eleven second call. The voice connection was about six and a half seconds, enough to cry to but never really

got words out. Then the phone was knocked out of her hand by Joseph, and he then proceeded to execute Erica, Nathan, and Olivia there in the living room floor. They left. When they left, they went down the driveway, passed their single wide trailer another three half a mile down the driveway, locked the gate premises, at which time two police cars showed up at the bottom of the driveway. By law, they did not have cause to go to cross the gate because of the nine one one call was said

to have been a possible party call. By the person who answered the nine one one call, one could not tell exactly what the sounds were, so it's understand though she made the mistake, nobody could faint that something like this would happen. And about fifty two hours later, after the police had left her after duties work, people at work were wondering where she was. She had never been

late in the seventeen years she worked there. And finally Linda Teey went directly to Judy's house the day after Christmas and entered the premises and then at that point saw three bodies, went in the panic ranto the back bedroom, called nine one one from the back bedroom, stayed on the phone for about an hour, then nine one one she was extricated from the building. Six bodies were ultimately discovered, and those were the Kannasian murders.

all departments to be there. Michelle and Joseph drove up in their black as ten pickup, pulled over, and just so, just so happened to walk up to Scott Prompkins, who would become the lead detective in the case, and said, hey, what's going on, pretending of course they were innocent, and Scott not knowing anything. All he knew was I have a family member here. This is a probable death notification.

It's a very difficult circumstance, and I'm going to have to break the news to Michelle where her family is deceaits. And over the next hour and a half, Michelle sat in the front seat of the car with Detective Scott Thompkins. Another detective, Detective Peters, sat in the backseat and Michelle talked and she was questioned for about an hour and

a half. It was under the premise it was a death notification, but what came out because of about a half hour of inconsistent, inconsistent stories, both actors figured out that it looked like Michelle was hiding something, and suddenly Michelle broke down and said, I did it. And then for the next forty five minutes, amidst a myriad of some untruths and lies, she confessed, and Jose McEnroe did the same thing with Detective Tavlovitch in his car just

one hundred yards. Police to find out who who really the suspects were. The difficulty came in the fact that since both of them spent much of their confession with lies intermingled in them, their job was to figure out what really happened.

parents or neglect. Tell us a little bit about the background here of the parents and what the excuse was, What the reason was that Michelle gave for not only the argument that led to the murder, but also also talk about the disagreement, longstanding disagreement she had with her brother Scott.

why don't you come live up here. I'll even give you a job at the post office, and we've got a residence for you, and you know what, go ahead and bring Joe. And so they came up. They moved in a single wide and they lived there rent free.

Joe worked for a number of targets. Michelle worked part time for the post office, pretty much three two three days a week, a job given to her by her mother about a year and a half or about oh goodness, okay, about six months before the murders, Michelle quit her job at the post office, saying that being on her and they were talking about her behind her back, and Jolle

even helped with her quitting. He with Michelle went into the postmaster's office and eventually they were asked to leave because voices were raised and Michelle was adamant she had been screwed by somebody. Well, the same resentments were the same resentments building with her family. Wayne felt she had lived there long enough without working and increased the pressure on her to say, hey, you need to get a job, be you need to pay rent. You're not just living

in it. This was supposed to be a transition for you. Michelle took offense to that. She also her brother loved her very much. And where the dynamic gets really weird is the fact that when Scott, her brother, married Erica, Tension stayed with Erica. He eventually had two children with Erica. It's understandable his attention would be more on Erica than on Michelle. But Michelle was living in this world that things were not like her childhood. They had changed and

she was not accepting of it. But she took whatever help Scott would give her, like maybe working on her eighties camaro Irock. He spent a lot of time replacing the engine, give her money for cards. She then paid him to fix the car. For whatever reason, the car just never got running, and instead of Michelle being grateful her brother's help, she got very angry, and she built up this number in her head that he owed her

thirty thousand dollars. So her intense on Christmas eat was to get her thirty thousand dollars back, and the way she would do that is she would go to her father first. And she blamed her father for not coercing Scott into giving her money. She blamed Wayne for not

supporting her cause and loving Scott more than her. So when she and Joe walked in on that Christmas Eve, the first thing she asked once the pleasantries of Christmas were done, the first thing she asked of her father is I need you to get my money from Scott. And nobody knows exactly what Wayne said, but one can imagine that Wayne had been patient for the prior year, with her living on his property rent free. One can

imagine he probably didn't take very well. He could not have anticipated she would whip out a gun and fire at him. But in her mind everything is about her getting screwed over by everybody, and now she was going to put her foot down and come hell or high water, she was going to get her money. In the end, when she searched the pockets of the victims, she pulled forty dollars out of Scott's pocket. She somehow missed the pocket with three thousand dollars in it, so maybe that's

a common thing. Who knows, But this whole argument was about money and her feelings. She was entitled and a deep seated evil jealousy.

the evidence at this scene will never change. So what they do is they take the words from both of the defendants and then ultimately line it up to the story that the crime scene tells them. So if they tell the truth, then the facts that the scene should line up. If they don't tell the truth, that the suspicion falls into this. If you're not telling the truth, what are you hiding? So it's this balance that goes in.

Joseph mcenrope that with Michelle, you know, looking at her, except for the fact that she's this horrid, murderous but you pretty well know what you're going to get when you look at her or she talks. She's not a smart woman by any means, but you pretty much line are not lying. You pretty much can get a good idea of what she's about. It doesn't take a rocket

science to do rocket scientists to do that. Joseph McEnroe, on the other hand, Joseph McEnroe, as it came out in the trial later, he was able to change his personality pecture like a chameleon, blending into a scene. That's what he was good, really, really good at doing. If one.

When he and Michelle contacted their story before they sat down with the police, they both kind of lined up at first, but once evidence from the scene didn't line up to the stories, and then the detective gets to pride further for more information to find out why this stuff isn't lining up, and what are you hiding and what are you concealing? It's this consciousness of guilt. The detectives aren't saying this out loud, but they're thinking it.

But Joseph was tricky because on the surface, Joseph looks like this kind of a weird guy, kind of off very solitary guy, speaks a little bit strange. You would never guess once you talked to him that he could be this a murderer of six and when you looked at him as he was. In two thousand and seven, Hamila Mantle, the mother the Altite, referred to him as Mansiness.

He had a blackbeard, he only wore a black as Michelle only wore black black being long, long, untent, stringy hair, didn't pay a lot of attention to his personal appearance, didn't like looking people directly in the eye, and some people had to interview for the book have said he struck them as creepy. But what really makes him frightening is when he was put on trial eight years later for these six murders. The man responsible for putting a bullet in the victim of every victim's head except for

Scott's in prisons. He rehearsed for eight years how to change his aspect, his personality and his countenance. And I cannot remember the name of the movie with Richard Gear where he's defending this criminal and you think this criminal is our pistrict or what have you, and then you find out in the end, oh my god, he played me. He's not the person who portrayed himself to beat. That is Joseph Maca.

But he said he recently had tried to find and hire one new employee to replace somebody who had finally retired from the industry, and he was having a hard time. So, he said, after he heard details on a True Murder episode about Zip Recruiter, he decided to check out what ZipRecruiter was claiming, and he looked at how ZipRecruiter worked, and he appreciated their choice of resume formats and really

liked their unique mobile apply process. Where As promised, he said, he got a lot of applicants and very quickly and in short order found the new employee, the ideal employee said he was looking for. And he called me to thank me and sing the praises a zip recruiter. Are you hiring? Do you know where to post your job to find the bess candidates? With ZipRecruiter, you can post your job to one hundred plus job sites with just one click. Then their powerful technology efficiently matches the right

people to your job better than anyone else. And that's why ZipRecruiter is different. Unlike other job sites, ZipRecruiter doesn't depend on candidates finding you, it finds them. In fact, eighty percent of employers who post a job on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate through the site within one day. No juggling emails or calls to your office. Simply screen, rate, and manage candidates all in one place. The zip recruiter

is easy to use. Find out today why ZipRecruiter has been used by businesses of all sizes to find the most qualified job candidates with immediate results. And right now my listeners can post jobs on ZipRecruiter for free. That's right free. Just go to ZipRecruiter dot com, slash murder. That's ZipRecruiter dot com slash murder. One more time to

try it for free, go to ZipRecruiter dot com slash murder. Paul, we were just talking about what was happening with the two people involved in this this murder, Michelle Anderson, and so talk about the trial of Michelle Anderson, which you chronicle day by day basically journal of what happens at her trial. Before we talk about the faithful interview you have with the other murderer in the Walla Walla penitentiary. So tell us a little bit about what lines up

at this trial for Michelle Anderson. Tell us a little bit about some of the particulars and the dynamics that are there from the very beginning.

person's filt or innocence? And yet in front of you are six people who were murdered that you are going to intimately know. And when I say intimately, I am talking all the way down to the phone fragments that are presented by the corner. But fifteen hundred people show up at the King County Courthouse, and now the bailiff and the court clerk have the job of somehow corralling these people and getting them in the right spot and so on. And then the attorneys somehow have to take

fifteen hundred people and whittle it to sixteen. And so during that process the processes for the juror is called blade, where it begins with them the first day a written questionnaire which can be very lengthy. In this case it was easily over one hundred very personal questions for each year. And the expectation is you are honest when you fill out the bladeir if you are asked a question. You are not there to hide information, You're not there to

alter information. You are there to tell the truth and nothing. But and during Very's selection, I was ironically, as a member of the media, I was given the opportunity to actually sit in the jury box during jury selection, which was really strange to me, but that's where I was

directed to sit. And during selection, I sat there and took notes and I looked at this sea of hundreds of jurors sitting there like a college seminar, like a college lecture, and I watched as they filled out each of their questions, and I wondered who would be the final sixteen. And the next time Jews come back, they go through the I call it attorney interrogation, but you are randomly asked questions, and again the field, although it's been narrowed down, it's still hundreds, and so you sit

there as a potential juror. Wild questions are thrown out there, and that to me is fascinating, not only in the information surge, but in their reaction by the potential dirty It can make people very, very uncomfortable. And then then the final day and then this series of musical players within the jury box while while the attorneys are dismissing for whatever reason, and they finally get down to sixteenth and then the trial begins. And for me, but at

that point for a jerror, once you're selected. The one thing I learned from every one of these jurors, at least the ones I interviewed, but it's not uncommon, is that every person selected says the same thing. I thought there was no way they would select makers, which is just interesting for me because I went through that same that they said things. So I wondered, how in the world is the prosecution and the evidence, how is it going to be able to figure out how six people

were killed? How are they going to put that in order? And so this trial did go for months, and much of it is tedious and some is very interesting. But you know that that was finding of the gun in the Stiliguamish River, and that was a great moment in the trial. Linda Teely, the person who first discovered the bodies, it was a great moment for the trial. Victim impact

statements were great moments in the trial. And then there's a lot of the tediousness, but that they're a day when the jurors can feel something is about to happen. They see the you know, running around in the courtroom, and they see their bailiffs in the jury room and she's letting them know they're about to go on to is they're going to go in a different room in the courthouse, and the jury doesn't know what they're gonna see.

And for me, when I sit in the gallery and I'm taking notes, I have great empathy for the poor juror because I know what they're about to see. They don't. And everything when your jertor every day is surprised every day, whether they are planned or not planned. Being a juror is impopful emotionally, physically, and it's taxing. So these jurors find out they're going somewhere, and so they're gonna go that morning, and then the jud says, no, we're going

to move that to the afternoon. So the jury is still waiting water and what are you doing? And then finally they come back after lunch and the court takes them down to the first from the ninth floor to the first floor of the building and they are led into this room on the first floor down this fallway and they see some police take and they see is this is story room? They see chairs stagged and where are they going? What are they doing? But they are doing what jurors do. They are lands to the law.

They follow the bail off where they need to go, and she leaves them into this big room and there are at this point there were fifteen jerors. There are fifteen serves lined up in a series of four rows, and the jurors are sad. And then the judge is there. They are sworn in, and then the prosecutors, scattered fill steps forward and in front of them is the exact replication for Rensing, replication of the murder scene where all

six victims were killed. Everything from the blood blood spatter on the floor, to the blood spatter around the walls, to the bullet hole in the TV, to the actual furniture, the love seat where Eric and the children died. Everything set up as if it were Christmas Eve. The only thing you're missing is the smell of the roast in the other.

recreated scene? And the judge and doctor Harris said nope, there should be no harm in that. And so the jurors are given an opportunity to walk in this living room and it's not a big living and say fifteen by fifteen, but you see that two perpendicular couches, the coffee table where Judy had laid the trees for that Christmas Eve, the TV with a bullet hole that drapes with Scott's blood impacted all sixty down the drapes. You see that the afghan rack where one of the bullets

had gone through. And the jurors are given that opportunity to walk and only three or four jers out of the fifteen actually walked on that floor and looked at the scene. And it's not that they're going to discover something something that hasn't been learned, but the court wanted to give them the opportunity to feel the impact of

this tragedy. So at the end of the trial, when I was interviewing jurors, or I interviewed three did not take the opportunity to walk through that living room, and I asked, why why not you have the opportunity to look, you know, And the response I got was it's hallowed ground. I didn't feel I should be there. And then there was the juror who did that. I interviewed who did walk through, and she said, now, I think it was important to feel the impact of what they did, to

see what they did. This be important to me in deliberations, and it was. But that was the climax of the trial, was the scene recreated exactly as it had been incarnation on Christmas Eve two thousand and seven.

many jurors is suffered from post traumatic stress syndrome. Sure, because it is one thing hearing about somebody being shot in the face. It is another to see that person on an autopsy table, and another when you're looking at blood spatter evidence. And this whole case both trials not to put Waying, Judy Scott or Erica on a lesser plane, but once you have children, a five year old in a three year old, you have beyond the pale, and you have jurors who have children exactly the same age

as the victim. And those jurors were picked because they have children the same age as the victim, and that is something that will never leave jurors. But when you have that ownership and responsibility a job to do in that dreary box, it is a hard It is one of the most difficult tasks a person could ever be given in their life.

this woman claimed to be a pro say attorney. So to explain what she explained as the definition of pro say attorney, what was she doing there on behalf of the defendant and just tell us just a little bit about what she was trying to do and what kind of like I already mentioned these disruptive force, tell us a little bit about this pro say attorney at trial.

why are you writing about this misredacted? If you give attention, then more people will be out there like that, And that's what she wants and what was important, And this girl misredacted was as you saw in the book and as potential readers, this seed at random moments throughout the trial, the judge is supervising the case, the attorneys are doing what they need to do, and the most important thing that goes on was you have to remember this was

the most expensive trial in Washington's safe history, and we're talking between Joseph and Michelle in the tens of millions of dollars. This is not a thing to be taken likely. And it's not only the case itself. Remember fifteen hundred jurors were summoned, with sixteen chosen to be in the jury box. The court is going to do everything it can to preformation flow to the jerk. Now you have an X factor in The X factor is a person who just starts talking out loud to the judge during

the trial. The gallery is not an audience, or the gallery is an audience, but it's not meant to interplay with the court at all. In any way, girl kept same things in confronting the judge, and she would say, well, I'm a pro say attorney, and I have to command both the defense and prosecuting attorneys for not reacting out loud or taking this personal. And Judge Ramsdell did handle her well. He had to protect the trial and the juror and my concern, and we lost a juror in

this trial. And I can comfortably say had it not been for misredacted, the court would not have lost during sixteen because in her vocal explanations she mentioned something about the Maxima trial. These jurors not only were they really not to know about it. They could know the murders happened, but could not know really about the merged. That's why

they were selected. And then you had this random person in the gallery and mis redacted who gives them information about Joseph athenrote and everything about Joseph Macimo was supposed to be excluded from this trial. If you can believe that it is. It's hard to do. But that's why this whole thing became two books. But this redacted is also a symbol for people like her that do this in high profile trials all over the country. It is not that this person was all vocal in the gallery.

It was the first time this ever had file. You know, when I was at Jolly Areas, it was a factor we had to deal with. When I was a juror myself, it was a factor we had to deal with, and maybe not to the degree that this person was in the book. But the thing that was important to me in the book, and I kept the motion of day. But the thing that is very frustrating for a judge if it would be much easier to kick a person out and call it a day. And Judge Ramsay did

the fair use balanced the letter. Have your piece, But people like this are dangerous for trials. They're just dangerous. And it is my belief that if you are in the gallery and you are allowed to watch the trial, we have ports that are open to the public, you are not to say anything. You are to be seen and not heard. Literally. So there was frustration not only

from from Judge Ramsell and irritation from the attorneys. They did a great job at keeping calm, but the family, and the family is in the galley, the family of the victims, and the fact that they have to hear this brothers is really an insult to them, to the victims, and for the process of justice. Now, in talking to surgerism to the Seattle Browns, she'll never put that in a newspaper. I understand that. But I as a writer of books, I think all facets of the trial are important,

All facets of what the jerius is. So although her actions did not cause them this trial, they came down close.

So it's important that you see and feel the genuineness of the defendants and hopefully remotest all of that information for the jury may mitigate them to the point where they don't give the defendent debt so that came a day it had Michelle Anderson had made it clear with first of all, if I may back up game. The trial actually started two weeks late because her defense attorneys said,

we can't do it. You're on her. They've filled out emotion and everything and asked to be lifted of the responsibility of defending Michelle because she would not communicate with them. As a matter of fact, she had not communicated with her attorneys and over seven years is the most stated. So the trial was supposed to start, the motion went through, it got delayed, and the judge said, nope, you're in. We got to have you and that set so they

had this. They had a very difficult task in front of them, trying to defend a defendant who wouldn't tell them anything, who resented them, who these were attorneys given to her by our tax dollars. She didn't have to pay a dime for these. We give her these attorneys, but she wouldn't communicate with them. So they had a weak case. Even the opening statement. The defense didn't give an opening statement. They had nothing to work with. She

wouldn't communicate. So it comes towards the very end of the trial before the jury Sept Bt for deliberations, and all of a sudden, the shell blerts out that this is not fair. She wants new attorneys, and she wants to get on the stand. Ah my goodness. And that day everything went upside down and created and you could see the judge were up in his forehead. The prosecution, however, took it cool as a cucumber, because when he made his presentation to the judge, after Michelle said I want

to testify, well, Judge Ramsdell didn't see it coming. The defense attorneys didn't see it coming. So the judge explains to it, if you do this is I don't recommend it at this point, at this point in time, but it is. Of course, he relapsed. But when Scott O'Toole presented his case, he said, I want to make it clear that the questioning of the witness will be unfailing,

intense and without reports. And by the time lunch rolled around, and after lunch, Michelle, who I believe was friends or an acquaintance of misredacted, spat out some lines that were identical to things misredacted at seven Court about her constitutional rights were being violated and I'm gonna I'm going to

find my own attorneys, Okay, I won't testify. Decided not to testify, but for a moment there we thought she would get on the stand, and if she had done that, it would have been regally it just really would have been suicide.

she downplay her responsibility? What exactly did she say in response that was contradictory to forensic evidence and still something that she maintained throughout.

everybody that it was all Michelle. She made me do it. I was the victim, and he really was like that. Or this is eight years after the fact, but he really portrayed himself like that, the victim. She made me do it. Oh, I wouldn't have done it if it weren't for her. That's not It's just not true. And I'll tell you this then once once you get the visual of who Michelle is, one of the first things he realizes she isn't very smart. Matter of fact, we

could say comfortably, she's done. And the thing that bothered me and bothered the jurors, because they look at her as a jury you look at the defundant and the thing that bothered them was not only how she could do it, but realistically, if you decide, Dan, I want to murder somebody, and you go to execute that plan to kill one person, how many things can go wrong to prevent you from doing that. There's a million things.

So how in the world did this very stupid girl, Michelle Anderson, somehow without getting one scratch on her one defensive offensive wound on her. How was she able to execute sit people in two different time periods within two of the people being three hundred pounds meant how did she pull that up? And it sure wasn't Oh shut him, Joe, shoot him, Joe. It much more than that. There was planning,

there was execution. If Michelle and Joe had not met each other, I do not think these murders ever would have happened. But Michelle was mentally incapable of manifesting a plan like this and having it work out like that. Joe, on the other hand, as he said in his trial, as Scott O'Toole eloquently pointed out, and had him trapped

in the corner when he caught him. When when and Judy were killed and they were lying on the floor into waying in the dining room, at the dining room table on the floor in a crumpltee, Judy tucked in the corner by the refrigerator, dead blood. Michelle fell apart. Oh my god, Oh my god. I don't know what to say, Oh my god. And Scott asked Joe. So, Scott o'phill somebody was in charge? Who was in charge? And it came out, Joe was in charge. It was his idea to move the bodies and where to move them.

It was his idea how to clean up the scene, not to hide it from the cops, but to hide it from the four unsuspected victims that were going to be there in two hours. It was Joe who came up with the idea of burning that the drugs and sheets out in the fire pit in front of their trailer. Joe who came up with the idea of wincing everything in the bath hub so they could make the house look all normal again, so that when Scott, Derek had Nathan Olivia got there, they wouldn't notice anything going on.

And it was Joe who made the decision to leave the oven on so that the new visitors would smell the roast in the oven, thereby thinking everything was normal. And it was Joe after the murders, after the police made the initial visit at five point thirty in the evening on Christmas Eve, when Michelle and Joe came back and they searched the bodies and hid more evidence and manipulated things, found the phone battery. But it was Joe's idea before they'd left Wayne and Judy's house for good.

It was Joe's idea to turn the oven off. What you saw was not necessarily really transpired.

diary of of what happened at the trial. And before I did that, somebody messaged me and said, Paul, I'm really nervous about you. We're doing this. I'm even afraid to really even read about it. You have to understand how emotional this is. And she said, I'll give you an example. One of the people that I am good friends with is the kindergarten teacher to Olivia, and she can't bear the look at being involving this. Ben Anderson married Victorious was He lost his grandparents and the rest

of his family all in one fell swoop. He was only a teenager when this happened, so how does he rectify this? The rest of his life. Then you have Pamela Mantle, who spoke with Erica, her daughter every day, who was there at the birth of the children, who was there when when when Olivia was excited about her first day of school, Pamela Mantle had bought her that Christmas a pink bicycle something Olivia, Oh, just trade forward

and Olivia never got to ride the bike. So this gives me just the slightest can't thrust of a slope of the emotion involved to the people who were in the ripple effect of these murders. So since the murderers, there's a memorial built at the Carnation Carnas Post office.

Kimberly Moody is still there to this day. Kimberly Moody still works and the same spot Judy was in and she still thinks of it every day when she goes out and back and sits on the park bench, the same park bench that Judy sat on every day during the break. And there's a little memorial sign up there for Juke Anderson. She thinks about Judy every day. There's a little memorial garden right outside the post office that

has meant just for Judy. There's the memorial that was built in Seaside, Oregon, overlooking the oocean, the favorite place that Scott Erica and the children used to love to go to during the summer. There is the more memorial built at the Black Dynings element gul where Olivia went to school, and the community got together and built a memorial outside. And then ultimately I'm working at a permanent

memorial for Carnason. But this impacted far wide, indeed in the Northwest, and the biggest thing is really the senselessness of it. And then when you had children into the victims, that's it. It ripped people's hearts out.

and then what you do around that sentencing time. In terms of regarding Joseph McEnroe.

over again. And what was I about that? What was extremely important about that was there was a juror who said somebody had asked way back injury selection. They had said to the they were talking about premeditation. One of the jurors said, oh, pre meditation takes five minutes. Well, pre meditation is not determined in five minutes. And what the jury had to grapple with was, is each squeeze

of the trigger premeditation. You know what, most would argue it is premeditation, But the jury strives for something a little more than just that. They have to know individually that the decision they make is something not only the family has to live with. They have to live with and in this case, it came down to that eleven

second phone call. And what was important about the eleven second phone call was the fact that in that eleven seconds, Joseph McEnroe and Michelle Anderson had the opportunity to stop to not make the next decisions that they made. It was right there, and they didn't. They chose to go to the other side, and that that's what the jury

had to deal with. So they made their decision and in it, even though there's comfort in a jury collectively reaching a decision, at the end of the day, it is a mere pittance of a band aid for the horror of six murders. In other words, they have done their job, but they feel like it's someone inadequate because it will not bring six people back. But there is some solace in being able to collectively make that decision, but it's minor compared to what the base of the situation.

So the day of sentencing comes, you have the verdicts, and then there's usually anywhere between you a month and a two month delay between verdict and sentencing. And so for the jury, even though they are released from their admonishment after making their verdict. Jurors typically will not come out and talkil until after sentencing, and it's always interesting

to see how many come back for sentencing. And in this case, I am pretty comfortable in saying it was nine jurors came back from both the mac and Roe trial and the Michelle Anderson trial, and they came back to sit in the front row and see the render of sentencing. It's that it's the fruit of their labors, but more importantly to the juror, when they see sentencing,

it's something for the family. Although little, it's something, but there is still even though in this case it was obvious on the surface these six victims and how they were killed and who did it and who premeditated it, there was still that anticipation of will the law actually work or somehow is the sencing going to be less than what? And they got the whole sabang, they got

the banquet of consequences. And what's really interesting that I really never took note of before was that for what once the judge permitted on the sentence sentencing to life without arole, there's a process that starts. And it's not just that the defendant is fingerprinted, the defendant is handed as a series of documents to sign and one and these are things that we as common law abiding citizens take for granted. But one of them is the right

to vote. So it's it's there is some comfort to the family and to the jurors to watch as Michelle Anderson signed her way to her rights to vote ever again, as she's signed a way to rights to ever own a firearm again, as she signed away her rights to her life. And it was something that some of us would feel not or not because it was never put

on the table. The death penalty was not put on the table for her for two reasons, Washington stays, the governor is put a moratorium on any executions and number two on the penalty phase of the death penalty trial of Joseph McEnroe. The jury hunt. So the state had to make a decision do we go after death where we may end up with a hung jury and we may never actually execute Joseph McEnroe, or do we just have the jury deal with the guilt phase. And that's

what happened. So after the trawl nothing jury they have to meet that. But I was looking for the conclusion of the banqueted Consequences. It was six people dig two murders about with one. But there was a Malcolm Rose trial that happened while I was at the Jilly Areas trial, so there's no way I could see that live. So I thought, you know what, I'll be like Truman Capoti, and what I'll do is I will go meet the killer. And although right now I approached with some levity and comfort,

it wasn't that. It was not that comfortable. When I went out to see him, I thought I was falling off my rocker or something. Why in the world would I want to do this. Why would I want to risk upsetting the family by going and seeing him? And it would upset the family because you're giving attention to his name, where the names that should be remembered are

the victims, not him. But I had questions. And my thing, as you and I had discussed earlier, was that Michelle, at the end of the day convicted life without parole or not. It was really hard to say see how she was able to do all of that. So I thought, we'll go there's a mac moro. Well, here what he has to say. People said he had remorse. Let's see if he's got it, and then there you go, there's the end of the book. We'll call it a day. So I went out and I sat with him for

seven hours. Mind it took three months sets or get the interview, and then you go for background shacks and prison and oh the rules are really crazy. But I found myself finally in front of him, hands on the table, no no pad, no pen, no recording devices, no cell phones. We talk about for seven hours. Well, what I wanted to talk about is what happened? And how could you do that? Really is why can you do that? I wanted to see kind of inside inside his head and

thinking he showed remors part of remorse. What goes part and parcel with remorse is true. If you're remorseful, you're truthful. How that works? So I thought, this is what I was going to get. So I did the interview and then and then I left Wallawalla Prison. I drove through the gorge, ended up inside, saw the memorial, cried my

heart out, went back home. Finished the book. And one thing I do before it finished books, or when I finished books before, I don't just put it out there what I want or What is extremely important to me is that the jurors I've interviewed read the book ahead of time. The family most importantly needs to read the book and when it's a paper manuscript before it goes out there. I gave it to family Mantles, she loved the book. I was honored. Gave it to the jurors

from both trials. The jurors from Michelle Anderson trial said, wow, great book, loved it. Love that end with Joseph macenroe. But the jury foreman from Joseph macknroe, she wrote me long letter and she said, even though we are family, and we are and I know what your intent is when you wrote this, she said, you're wrong. And then Scott Scott O'Toole. I had sent him a copy because he helped me on various things questions. So that's a trial.

I sent a copy of it him. I want the past three day's approval before I put this hat to the popult said you know what. I love the books. He said, but you are wrong. And from ball came the new book, which I'm looking to release this winner. I'll be on the Taal rod jeror the Joseph McEnroe death penalty trial and cause of the honesty of the foreman, because of the honesty of Scotto tool. Once I've bund deeper into the rest of the story specifically and goes

to Macenrol, it's frightening. It's absolutely frightening. But I'm glad I interviewed him, and I'm glad I took the advice of the people involved in the search for justice.

What was that one thing or how was it that moment where you broke through and thought, you know what, I'm getting the real truth from this psychopathic killer.

back at that night. But we'll deal with this more in the new books. But there was the point in time I said, Joe, I got to ask you if Mary Victoria had showed up on Christmas Eve with her six year old son, which would be presumably after you had killed Wayne and Judy, and probably before Scott, Eric and Nathan Olivia, would you have killed them as well? And he one of the only times he ever stopped and looked me direct in the eye, and he said, never. Never. Now,

what's incongruous about that? Dan is Olivia and Nathan five and three years old? You put a three fifty seven into their forehead and fired. So what makes Mary Victoria? And that's the question I want you to ponder, because what that doesn't make sense to me at all. Now. The other thing about that interview is I used to call it a kaleidoscope of ironies, when in fact it

was a painting of lives. So my job, as a writer, not a prosecutor, not a defense attorney is to is to say it and pull that information out and make good decisions from that. That's a question, why would Mary Victoria be different than a five year old and a three year old? And I think once we get to the heart of that, it's a fighting proposition.

able to contact you about this or anything else. Tell us a little bit about that.

You will see my author central page which has got all my books, which is bring Damage to His Tale, Why Not Killer? A juror's perspective, as well as Banquet of Consequences, which a minor to say has been a bestseller the last few weeks. And then the new book expected at this Christmas is called Beyond the Pale Rogue dur the Death Penalty Trial of Joseph McEnroe. But I'm out there. I'm available on Facebook, my website, Twitter, reach out, want to meet new people.