Dave Hawk's defense team rested its case on Monday morning after only a single day of defense witness testimony.

The 10th and final day of witness testimony lingered on many of the fundamental questions that lie at the heart of Hawk's case.

Retired Fresno law enforcement officer William H. Lehman was called to testify about the state of Debbie Hawk's home when it was found bloodied and in disarray on June 13, 2006.

Attorney Dennis Peterson pointed out once again that no physical evidence exists that links Hawk to the disappearance of his ex-wife.

"It's all just speculating about possibilities, isn't it?" Peterson said. "There are no eyewitnesses and no physical evidence that Mr. Hawk even left his house on the night Debbie went missing."

Hawk is charged with murdering his ex-wife to help cover up the embezzlement of more than $300,000 from his children's trust fund accounts. The prosecution claims Hawk murdered Debbie to cover up the illicit transactions, while the defense maintains Hawk's use of the trust money was for the benefit of his kids.

Debbie's body was never recovered.

Forensic experts from the FBI were called to the Taragon Avenue home on July 14, 2006 to conduct a search for hair along with fiber samples. The defense pointed out that this would have been one month after the Hanford woman was first reported missing.

"The basic rule of forensic work is that you have to preserve the crime scene," Lehman said. "A month later, a number of people had already gone through that home, including a cleaning lady."

Prosecutor Shane Burns jumped on this, asking what good forensic evidence would be without a body to test it against.

"Yes, but how helpful would it have been to find evidence of the defendant inside the house?" Lehman fired back.

Further testimony focused on the trust fund documents which were found pulled out of Debbie's ransacked desk.

Burns asked if a common thief, a drug manufacturer, a meth addict or even someone Debbie met on an online dating service would have cared about these documents enough to look for them.

"No, I suppose not," Lehman said.

Other unusual characteristics of the crime were also discussed. The fact that Debbie's bed had been made sometime after the attack. The single key left in the ignition of her abandoned van, rather than her full ring of keys. The fact that Debbie's body was even transported at all, which Lehman called "unusual."

"There's a whole new element of extra risk involved in taking her body," Lehman said. "Why someone would do that, I don't know. There had to be some motivation to do so."

Burns insinuated that Hawk may have tried to overpower Debbie with the stun gun, but resulted to "blunt force" when the weapon failed to work properly.

"Is there any evidence that connects Mr. Hawk to this crime?" Peterson asked Lehman, who shook his head. "Any evidence that a stun gun was used in this crime? There's no connection at all, then? So, everything we've been discussing is purely theoretical."

Lehman, who was initially called to the stand on Thursday, was the final witness for the defense. Attorney Mark Coleman told the court that the defense rested its case following Lehman's testimony.

Judge Daniel Creed told the court that the jury will be called back today for final instructions before they can begin deliberations and to hear the closing arguments by both sides.

The reporter can be reached at 583-2425.

(Aug. 25, 2009)

By Joe Johnson

jjohnson@HanfordSentinel.com

Dave Hawk's defense team rested its case on Monday morning after only a single day of defense witness testimony.

The 10th and final day of witness testimony lingered on many of the fundamental questions that lie at the heart of Hawk's case.

Retired Fresno law enforcement officer William H. Lehman was called to testify about the state of Debbie Hawk's home when it was found bloodied and in disarray on June 13, 2006.

Attorney Dennis Peterson pointed out once again that no physical evidence exists that links Hawk to the disappearance of his ex-wife.

"It's all just speculating about possibilities, isn't it?" Peterson said. "There are no eyewitnesses and no physical evidence that Mr. Hawk even left his house on the night Debbie went missing."

Hawk is charged with murdering his ex-wife to help cover up the embezzlement of more than $300,000 from his children's trust fund accounts. The prosecution claims Hawk murdered Debbie to cover up the illicit transactions, while the defense maintains Hawk's use of the trust money was for the benefit of his kids.

Debbie's body was never recovered.

Forensic experts from the FBI were called to the Taragon Avenue home on July 14, 2006 to conduct a search for hair along with fiber samples. The defense pointed out that this would have been one month after the Hanford woman was first reported missing.

"The basic rule of forensic work is that you have to preserve the crime scene," Lehman said. "A month later, a number of people had already gone through that home, including a cleaning lady."

Prosecutor Shane Burns jumped on this, asking what good forensic evidence would be without a body to test it against.

"Yes, but how helpful would it have been to find evidence of the defendant inside the house?" Lehman fired back.

Further testimony focused on the trust fund documents which were found pulled out of Debbie's ransacked desk.

Burns asked if a common thief, a drug manufacturer, a meth addict or even someone Debbie met on an online dating service would have cared about these documents enough to look for them.

"No, I suppose not," Lehman said.

Other unusual characteristics of the crime were also discussed. The fact that Debbie's bed had been made sometime after the attack. The single key left in the ignition of her abandoned van, rather than her full ring of keys. The fact that Debbie's body was even transported at all, which Lehman called "unusual."

"There's a whole new element of extra risk involved in taking her body," Lehman said. "Why someone would do that, I don't know. There had to be some motivation to do so."

Burns insinuated that Hawk may have tried to overpower Debbie with the stun gun, but resulted to "blunt force" when the weapon failed to work properly.

"Is there any evidence that connects Mr. Hawk to this crime?" Peterson asked Lehman, who shook his head. "Any evidence that a stun gun was used in this crime? There's no connection at all, then? So, everything we've been discussing is purely theoretical."

Lehman, who was initially called to the stand on Thursday, was the final witness for the defense. Attorney Mark Coleman told the court that the defense rested its case following Lehman's testimony.

Judge Daniel Creed told the court that the jury will be called back today for final instructions before they can begin deliberations and to hear the closing arguments by both sides.

The reporter can be reached at 583-2425.

(Aug. 25, 2009)