THE week after Thanksgiving 2011, Jim Freeman, Grant Hayes’s court-appointed attorney, presented the court with a motion and a letter handwritten by his client. In it, Grant asked Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens to appoint him a new public defender. Freeman told the court that there was “good cause” for this action but, ethically, he could not reveal anything more. He was replaced by Mike Klinkosum.
The state requested handwriting exemplars from both Grant and Amanda Hayes. In North Carolina, they could not be legally compelled to do so; nonetheless, both separately agreed to comply.
—
SHORTLY after her mother’s arrest, Sha Elmer went to Farmville, New Mexico, to live with her father. It was a rough, chaotic time for her. Her whole world had disintegrated almost overnight. After a few months, she got her thoughts and emotions under enough control that she recognized an obligation and responsibility to her half sister, Lily, and returned to North Carolina.
Thinking that it would help her to get custody of Lily, Sha jumped into a marriage with Matt Guddat on April 20, 2012. In many ways, Sha was cut adrift by her mother’s arrest. She had spent her life looking up to her mother. She had seen Amanda as “an invincible war goddess who made something of her life despite lousy beginnings.” Sha had wanted to be just like her. Now, when she tried to get custody of her half sister, Grant Hayes wrote to family services and told them that Sha was crazy and addicted to drugs. To make matters worse, Sha’s connection to the crime made getting employment difficult—she was damaged goods by association. When she went to the grocery store, she was hounded by people who told her that she should be ashamed. Before long, she gave up, leaving her inappropriate marriage and returning to her father’s home.
Sha wasn’t the only one harassed in the aftermath of Grant and Amanda’s brutal crime. Grant’s mother, Patsy, had run a day care for many years, but after her son’s arrest, two-thirds of the children stopped coming. In a short time, the endeavor was no longer viable. She lost her business and was now the caregiver for her three grandchildren, a challenging responsibility under the chaotic circumstances.
—
ON July 3, 2012, thirteen lounge chairs were donated by one of Laura’s friends to the Fairfield Sprayground in Kinston in memory of Laura and in honor of little Grant and Gentle. It is a spot where Laura brought little Grant and Gentle quite often, and Grant’s parents continue to make regular trips there with the children to play.
—
DR. Deborah Radisch, the chief medical examiner for the state of North Carolina, released the final autopsy report on September 6, 2012. Although it was clear that Laura had a sharp-instrument injury to her neck as well as other damage that suggested strangulation, exactly how Laura died was uncertain. “The cause of death is best described as undetermined, homicidal violence.”
—
GRANT Hayes requested a new attorney again in November 2012. He claimed that Mike Klinkosum, his attorney at the time, had not done what he had asked. Klinkosum reported that he had an ethical conflict. Grant told the judge that he wanted a black attorney from Durham. Judge Stephens granted his wish for new counsel, but told him it was the last time he would do so. He appointed Jeff Cutler, a white attorney from Raleigh, to the case.
—
ON March 1, 2013, Grant and Amanda Hayes sat at the same table with their separate attorneys for an appearance before Judge Donald Stephens. Both of them appeared paler from their time in lockup, but aside from that the differences were striking. Grant seemed to have put on some weight, his demeanor was relaxed and at times he looked indifferent to the proceedings. Amanda, on the other hand, appeared gaunt and maintained a tense, rigid posture throughout. The state requested that the two defendants be tried together, citing efficiency and cost savings for the taxpayers.
At that time, neither defense team objected to that arrangement. Judge Stephens said, “At this point, I think the state’s position is appropriate. Frankly, I think that the interest of justice would be best served if both persons charged with the same offense be charged at the same time by the same jury.”
The trial date was set for May 20, 2013.
A month later, on April 8, everything changed. Rosemary Godwin, an attorney on Amanda’s defense, filed several motions. In one, she requested that her client sit at a separate table during the trial, since Grant Hayes had written her a threatening letter. In another, the lawyer alleged that Amanda had an alibi for the time Laura was killed, and that she’d helped dispose of the body under coercion from Grant—she’d feared for her life, as well as for Lily’s, Sha’s and the two boys’ lives. Grant Hayes’s attorney told WRAL News that these motions called into serious question whether the two could be tried together. The judge set a new hearing on the matter for April 22.
On that date, Grant’s legal team requested that the joint trial be severed under the current circumstances. “Based on the filings of Amanda Hayes and her attorneys, it is now apparent that we have antagonistic defenses based on the reading of the motions. Clearly, they are going to attempt to make him look bad. That is part of their defense and I don’t believe that’s a manageable way to try a joint trial.”
The state objected. They contended that the expense of separate trials was not justified. Assistant District Attorney Boz Zellinger said, “The state’s evidence on Amanda Hayes shows her as, not just a conspirator and not just acting in concert, but as a principal in this crime.”
Judge Stephens spoke of his concern that each defendant might not be capable of receiving a fair trial and of the possibility that a mistrial would occur if they proceeded with the joint prosecution. “I know we can get this right by trying them one at a time. I have serious question to whether I can do it under this situation if we try them at the same time.”
With this ruling, Amanda’s trial remained on the docket for May 20 while Grant’s was moved to late August. The exact order of the two proceedings would be left to the state’s discretion regarding who they would like to try first. At the end of April, they made their decision to try Grant first, and Amanda’s trial was postponed to early 2014.
—
IN Grant’s pretrial arraignment before Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens, on the afternoon of Friday, August 16, 2013, his attorneys requested that the court allow testimony from Amanda’s sister Karen Berry about the confession made to her by Amanda.
Will Durham, another attorney working on Grant’s defense with Jeff Cutler, argued that after the state spoke about custody battles and dismemberment, the defense needed to respond. He wanted the jury to know that Amanda was “the one who did this—that she’s the one who hurt Laura.”
ADA Zellinger countered that the alleged confession was in bits and pieces, taken out of context. “The statements she’s made were so essentially choppy and unclear that I think it’s difficult to rule on them when there’s so much attached to them.”
The judge asked Amanda’s attorneys, Johnny Gaskins and Rosemary Godwin, if their client would be willing to testify at Grant’s trial. Gaskins told the judge that it was too early for them to decide. About the matter at hand, he said, “We will ultimately conclude that it is not a confession and that the use of the word ‘confession’ is rather loose.”
Upon a request from Grant’s defense team, the judge delayed the ruling on the matter, pending his opportunity to hear Karen Berry’s testimony and a decision from Amanda on whether or not she would appear on the witness stand.