Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 1 · column 6 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
and Gatewood. He opened the left hand door, shot Starks in the head, killing him almost instantly and walked to the other side of the car, opened the passenger door and shot Gatewood through the head, according to Davis.
These were “willful, premeditated, deliberate killings”, Davis stated. He maintained that evidence would show Carter “guilty of killing and murdering the two victims willfully with malice aforethought.”
Carter was represented by Rappahannock attornies Sharon Genebach and Maurice Biddle. In his preliminary remarks to the jury, Biddle noted that the Commonwealth was required to prove the case as set forth in the indictment—first degree murder.
“The issue is not if Carter shot the victims but if the crime committed was cold, calculated and premeditated as contrasted with a crime done in rage, a crime of passion,” Biddle stated. If Gatewood and Starks were shot by Carter while he was caught in the grip of uncontrollable rage, then the crime was less than first degree, the defense attorney maintained.
“Crazy Mad”
Carter was “crazy mad”, insisted Biddle, “because he’d been embarrassed, been made a fool of by his onetime friend . . The Hook had stolen Frank Junior Carter’s woman from him,’’ said Biddle. (Starks nickname of Hook was due to a prosthetic device he wore in place of an arm lost in an accident.)
Biddle concluded his opening remarks by reminding the jury that the benefit of any doubt as to whether the crime was actually first degree murder must go to the defendant.
Rappahannock Sheriffs deputy Martin Orfila was the first prosecution witness. He testified that he arrived at the
92.3%