Deliberations Begin in Tuffree Case

The jury began deliberations Wednesday in the murder trial of Daniel Allan Tuffree, more than a year after the former high school teacher shot and killed Simi Valley Police Officer Michael Clark.

The 12 jurors weighing Tuffree’s guilt or innocence stepped out of the courtroom at 1:45 p.m. and began discussing the case, something they have been forbidden to do the past nine weeks.

In that time, the six men and six women have heard testimony from 60 witnesses, viewed 176 exhibits and listened to detailed instructions on what constitutes first-degree, premeditated murder--a verdict prosecutors again asked them to return.

“That is the only verdict consistent with the evidence you have heard,” Deputy Dist. Atty. Pete Kossoris said in his closing arguments after walking the jury for a final time through the evidence.

Tuffree, 49, is charged with first-degree murder in the shooting death of Clark on Aug. 4, 1995, and faces a possible death sentence if convicted.

He is also charged with armed assault and attempted murder on Officer Michael Pierce, one of three policemen who came to Tuffree’s home to check his welfare after reports that he had been drinking alcohol, taking Valium and had stopped answering his phone. Pierce was not injured.

Clark was shot at close range through a kitchen window after asking Tuffree to step outside. The gun battle started after Clark asked to see Tuffree’s hand and he showed the 28-year-old officer his gun.

Defense attorneys have argued that Clark fired first, prompting Tuffree to shoot back in self-defense.

In an impassioned speech, Deputy Public Defender Howard Asher told the jury Tuesday that Tuffree was a troubled, frightened man who just wanted to be left alone. He was not an outlaw who wanted to kill a policeman, he argued.

But in his closing address Wednesday, Kossoris attempted to undo the sympathetic scenario presented by the defense, and he used Tuffree’s own words to do so.

“His first statement to a person of authority is, ‘Right now, I am a murderer,’ ” Kossoris said, quoting from statements Tuffree made to authorities after the shooting.

In his three-hour taped interview, which was played for the jury, Tuffree described how he saw officers enter his yard before he retrieved a .40-caliber semiautomatic gun from his gym bag.

“What could be more powerful evidence of premeditation?” Kossoris asked the jury.

He said Tuffree’s motive for killing Clark was his hatred for police. He suggested that Tuffree wanted revenge for what he believed had been harassment by the police and decided to kill Clark when he saw the officer in his yard.

In his three-hour summation, Kossoris attacked defense arguments presented Tuesday to persuade the jury to return a lesser charge of manslaughter.

He said there is ample evidence to show that Tuffree shot first. He pointed to the testimony of a crime lab expert who found splinters of glass on Clark’s jacket, indicating that the window was blown out by a bullet fired from inside the house.

And he referred to the testimony of a neighbor who said he heard two different types of shots, one muffled and the other sharp, supporting the prosecution’s theory that the first shots came from inside Tuffree’s kitchen.

“The witness who might remember most,” Kossoris concluded, “has been executed by the defendant.”

Kossoris also criticized the defense suggestion that police officers acted improperly when they came to Tuffree’s house last year.

He asked jurors whether they would want police to take the same actions if they had an elderly relative who failed to answer the phone.

“Ask yourself,” he argued, “isn’t this something the police ought to be doing?

“We don’t think this was in any way, shape or form an example of police being overbearing,” he said. “The officers were risking their lives--and it cost one of them their life--because of the defendant’s murderous, malicious, homicidal conduct.”

In the courtroom Wednesday were members of Clark’s family, including his parents and his young widow, Jenifer. Several Simi Valley police officers also attended the last day of the trial, including Police Chief Randy Adams.

The lengthy and often graphic trial has been difficult for both parties as defense attorneys questioned the tactics of Clark and other officers.

“It went as good as can be expected for the length of time,” Deputy Dist. Atty. Patricia Murphy said Wednesday evening.

The trial has also been a drain on Tuffree, his attorneys said. He has sat quietly in varying shades of gray suits throughout the trial, occasionally whispering to his lawyers or passing notes.

“He continues to have medication,” Deputy Public Defender Richard Holly said. “He has been holding up as well as can be expected.”

For the four attorneys in the case, the end of the trial brings on a new kind of stress--agonizing over the possible verdicts.

If Tuffree is found guilty of the charges, the case will enter a penalty phase that is expected to last about a month, Murphy said.

“Now is the anxiety time,” Holly said, “waiting for a verdict.”