17 Jan 2011

Transcripts of Elizabeth Smart's testimony in trial of her Mormon fundamentalist abductor and sexual torturer

The Salt Lake Tribune - November 9, 2010

Smart says she complied with Mitchell to keep her family safe


By Elizabeth Neff, Aaron Falk and Sheena Mcfarland



Elizabeth Smart took the witness stand Tuesday morning for a second day of testimony, focusing on how Brian David Mitchell forced her to comply with his demands — even as they ventured from a mountain campsite into the public. [see transcripts below]

A few weeks into her captivity at a campsite above her Salt Lake City home, Smart said Mitchell removed a cable that tethered her ankle to the site. But that didn’t mean she could leave.

“He said even though you have this cable removed of your ankle now that doesn’t change the fact that you will be killed if you try to escape. Your family will be killed,” Smart testified.

Smart said either Mitchell or his wife, Wanda Barzee, were always with her at the camp. Mitchell was a light sleeper and sleeping arrangements were also handled in a way that prevented her escape, Smart said.

When the three hiked down into Salt Lake City where Mitchell shoplifted items from a Whole Foods grocery store, Smart testified he made her wear white robes as a disguise and told her to say she was the couple’s daughter if anyone asked. Again, she said, he threatened her life and the lives of her family if she tried to escape.

At a Salt Lake City party the three attended, Mitchell again warned her he would be watching and made her wear the robes, which included a veil for her face.

“He said to stay next to him at all times and if I tried to run away I would be killed,” Smart testified. “He said that I wasn’t to talk to anybody. I wasn’t to go anywhere without him. That I needed to stay next to him at all times. And I had some blue toenail polish that my younger sister and I had painted our toenails earlier with it. There wasn’t a lot but there were remnants left of that. He said I needed to get rid of it so there couldn’t be any sort of mark or sign that I was Elizabeth Smart.”

Smart also recounted Mitchell’s failed attempt to kidnap her cousin in July of 2002, and his efforts to distance her from her family by making her refer to her parents as Ed and Lois.

Although Mitchell made Smart burn the red pajamas and shoes she was wearing when he took her from her home that June, she told jurors she tried to save parts of the items. Smart said she retrieved a safety pin from the pajamas and a piece of her shoe and put them in a three-ring binder she had at the time.

When asked why she did so on the witness stand, Smart replied: “Because I didn’t want to let go of my family, of my life.”

Other visits to Salt Lake City followed, including times the three spent the night with people Mitchell met, Smart testified. One day, Mitchell told them they were to leave Utah.

“He said that he felt like we needed to find a new city for a new life,” Smart testified. “He said he received a revelation that seven different wives were going to be from seven different cities so he wanted to go to the library to look at maps of different places.”

At the library, Smart detailed how close she came to being rescued when a Salt Lake City homicide detective approached the trio and asked Smart to lift her veil. He told her he was looking for Elizabeth Smart.

Mitchell refused to allow the detective to lift Smart’s veil, and the detective left, Smart testified.

“I felt like hope was walking out the door,” she said. “I felt terrible that the detective hadn’t pushed harder, that he had just walked away. I felt upset with myself that I hadn’t done anything, that I hadn’t taken a chance....”

Smart also went into the difficulties of life in California, where the trio traveled by bus. There, she said, she was forced to view pornography and had very little to eat when Mitchell would leave her and Barzee alone at a campsite for days without food.

Smart detailed how Mitchell changed his appearance and demeanor to interact with members of an LDS church there.

“He would brush his hair and but it into a ponytail, and he would tie his beard into a ponytail on his face. He would wear normal clothing. He tried to wash up a little bit so he didn’t smell quite as bad,” Smart testified.

Mitchell befriended a member of the church who invited him to dinner, Smart testified. He then targeted the man’s stepdaughter to take as another wife failed in a kidnapping attempt.

When Mitchell began talking of moving to another city, Smart testified she suggested they go back to Salt Lake City. There they might find another wife for Mitchell, she told him, in Mormon girls’ camps held in the mountains.

“...I felt that the more cities we went to and the farther we went out, the less chance I’d have of being found,” she testified.

The trio would hitchhike back to Utah — the beginning of Smart’s ultimate rescue.

Smart’s testimony concluded for the day at 2 p.m. Tuesday in U.S. District Court. She resumes her testimony Wednesday morning.

This article was found at:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50640085-76/smart-mitchell-testified-lake.html.csp

*****************************************************************************

The Salt Lake Tribune - November 10, 2010

Elizabeth Smart cross-examined by defense

By Elizabeth Neff, Aaron Falk, Stephen Hunt and Sheena Mcfarland


Wednesday marked the third straight day of testimony given by Elizabeth Smart at the trial of her alleged kidnapper, Brian David Mitchell, and the first day the 23-year-old faced cross-examination from the defense. [see transcripts below]

But defense attorney Robert Steele’s cross-examination of Smart was brief, just 40 minutes. It was also was polite and fairly non-confrontational, with Steele mostly seeking to clarify statements Smart made during direct testimony.

Smart at one point thanked Steele — who at times referred to Smart’s interview with psychiatrist Park Dietz soon after her rescue in March 2003 — for refreshing her memory. Yet Smart showed a touch of defiance at times, most notably near the end of Steele’s questions, when he asked about her description of Mitchell waking her in the night with a knife to her throat during her 2002 abduction from her Salt Lake City home.

“That first night in your bedroom, you describe feeling something,” Steele said. “It was the knife, cold, sharp, him saying ‘Don’t make a sound. Come with me,’ it’s a clear, clear threat to harm you, if you don’t?”

“Yes,” Smart replied.

“And it doesn’t necessarily matter what he says next, it’s a threat to kill you?” asked Steele.

With an edge to her voice, Smart replied: “I have no other idea how to interpret it with a knife at my neck.”

“Is it possible that time, not the other times, that he said ‘I don’t want to have to hurt you and your family’,” Steele asked. “Still a threat to kill you, but were those were his words?”

“It was possible,” Smart said, this time with less heat.

Over the past two days, Smart has testified about the harrowing nine months of captivity she spent with Mitchell, 57, and his wife, Wanda Barzee, 65. She has recounted Mitchell subjecting her to near-daily rapes and forcing her to drink alcohol and smoke drugs after abducting her.

Prosecutors arguing against Mitchell’s insanity defense have elicited testimony from Smart demonstrating Mitchell was focused on sex, able to change his appearance and mannerisms to avoid detection, and had carefully planned her kidnapping.

Smart recounted Mitchell’s calm demeanor when a Salt Lake City detective looking for Elizabeth Smart approached the trio in a downtown library and asked Smart to lift the veil she was wearing. The detective, who is slated to testify later Wednesday, left when Mitchell told him Smart couldn’t lift her veil for religious reasons.

Smart during direct testimony Wednesday said that Mitchell, when alone with her and Barzee, would espouse religious views that he was a prophet, the Davidic King. But Smart also said he never stated those views in any situation that would lead to his detection as a kidnapper.

Defense attorney Steele, focusing on Mitchell’s beliefs, asked Smart whether Mitchell had ever said others were not “ready to receive my testimony.”

Smart replied yes to that question, and also recounted a loud religious argument at a Salt Lake City party the trio attended in the summer of 2002 in which Mitchell yelled “repent” while being expelled from the home.

Smart under cross-examination described a time when Mitchell experienced a seizure in the middle of raping her. She also recounted his views on the LDS Church.

“He said that the LDS Church was the true church but they were also the most wicked church because they had the most truth and knowledge and that they went against it,” Smart testified. “And from the time of the death of President [Ezra Taft] Benson that it had led astray, but that it still was God’s church.”

Mitchell believed he would guide the church “back to the correct path,” Smart testified.

Steele also asked about Mitchell’s motivation behind the failed kidnapping attempt of a California girl during the time the trio spent living there.

Smart affirmed Mitchell had said “I have to do everything I can, but if the Lord doesn’t open a way then it’s not something I need to do.” She also confirmed that Mitchell referenced a test of his faith in connection with the attempt.

Smart’s cross-examination concluded just before 10:30 a.m., followed by three questions on redirect from prosecutor Felice Viti.

This article was found at:

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50647531-76/smart-mitchell-steele-testimony.html.csp


*************************************************************************************

Transcript: The Nov. 8 testimony of Elizabeth Smart

By Sheena McFarland and Aaron Falk | The Salt Lake Tribune updated November 9, 2010

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50632966-76/smart-viti-yes-defendant.html.csp


Below, The Salt Lake Tribune is providing an accurate-as-possible transcript of what is happening in the federal courthouse in Salt Lake City. The Tribune is making every attempt at accuracy and timeliness, and will update this story as the day’s proceedings continue.

WARNING: Some of the statements made in court contain graphic language.

Come forward and be sworn in. Right before the clerk of court.

[Sworn in]

Elizabeth Smart: Elizabeth Ann Smart. [She spells it.]

Judge: Excuse me, push the mic up a little. Go ahead Mr. Viti.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Felice Viti: How old are you?

Smart: I’m 23.

Viti: What is your date of birth?

Smart: November 3, 1987.

Viti: Where do you currently reside?

Smart: In the upper Avenues.

Viti: Do you live anywhere else at this time?

Smart: I’m living in Paris, France.

Viti: How long have you been there?

Smart: For about a year?

Viti: And what are you doing there?

Smart: I’m serving a full-time LDS Mormon mission.

Viti: How long have you been in Paris, France?

Smart: For about a year.

Viti: When is your mission scheduled to end?

Smart: The end of April.

Viti: Prior to beginning your mission, what were you doing?

Smart: I was a student at Brigham Young University.

Viti: When you complete your mission, do you plan to return to BYU?

Smart: I am currently a music performance major with emphasis on harp.

Viti: I’d like to turn your attention. On June 4, 2002, how old were you?

Smart: I was 14 years old. I lived in my parents’ house in the upper Avenues.

Viti: Who are your parents?

Smart: Ed and Lois Smart.

Viti: Do you have siblings?

Smart: Yes, I do. Four brothers and one sister.

Viti: What number are you?

Smart: Second of six.

Viti: What is your sister’s name?

Smart: Mary Katherine Smart.

Viti: How old was she?

Smart: 9 years old.

Viti: Were you attending school at that time?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What school?

Smart: Bryant Junior High.

Viti: What grade?

Smart: Eighth.

Viti: What were your interests in June 2002?

Smart: I was interested in excelling in school. I loved to read, loved to horseback ride, enjoyed running, I was very dedicated to playing the harp and learning how to perform with the harp.

Viti: Were you active in church?

Smart: Yes, very active.

Viti: On June 4, 2002, what if anything were you supposed to do?

Smart: I was going to attend my junior high awards assembly.

Viti: In what capacity?

Smart: I was supposed to perform the prelude music as well as accept several awards.

Viti: What did you do prior to the ceremony?

Smart: I went out running with my younger sister.

Viti: What did you do?

Smart: I came home. It was a bit rushed. We stayed out longer than we were supposed to. It was a little bit rushed. I ate as quickly as I could and changed for the awards assembly.

Viti: Did you shower for the awards assembly?

Smart: I don’t remember.

Viti: Did there come a time you attended?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What time?

Smart: I attended with my parents.

Viti: Did you play the harp?

Smart: No, I got there too late.

Viti: Did you receive an award?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Which award?

Smart: A history award, language award, and I received a presidential fitness award.

Viti: Ms. Smart, I’d like to put exhibit 4 in evidence. You recognize that?

Smart: Yes, I do, it’s a picture of me. I’ve just accepted my envelope of awards from my principal and was walking off the stage.

Viti: Is that what you have in your hands?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Ms. Smart, after the assembly what did you do?

Smart: We went home and we did the normal evening things, got ready to go to bed and gathered together for family prayer. And we went to our separate rooms and I read for quite a while to my younger sister.

----

Viti: Ms. Smart, prior to gathering for family prayer, did you and your dad do anything?

Smart: Yes, we went through and closed windows and locked doors.

Viti: Did you close all the windows?

Smart: No, I did not.

Viti: Which window didn’t you close?

Smart: There was one window above my kitchen sink I didn’t close because the smell of burnt food was still lingering in the air.

Viti: Could you describe the window you didn’t close?

Smart: There is a big square window right above the sink. On either side of the big square window there are smaller, skinnier rectangular windows. And they are able to be opened and closed, and I did not close the rectangular window on the right side of the bigger square window.

Viti: The right side if you’re looking from inside the house?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: I’d ask you to look at government exhibit 13. What is that?

Smart: It is a picture of the inside of our kitchen.

Viti: Hopefully, Ms. Smart, the pointer is still there. Could you point to which window you did not close?

Smart: This window right here.

Viti: How do you open and close that window?

Smart: There is a hand crank that you crank it open with.

Viti: Ms. Smart, on June 4, 2002, did your home have an alarm system?

Smart: Yes, it did.

Viti: Was the window that you described part of that alarm system?

Smart: No, not that I know of.

Viti: Are there any doors in the vicinity of the kitchen?

Smart: Yes. There is a door even further right on the other side of the cupboards. Next to the refrigerator.

Viti: Using exhibit 13, could you show the jury where that door is?

Smart: Yes, it’s right here.

Viti: If you could put up government exhibit 14 please. What is government exhibit 14?

*******************************************************************************

Part two of Elizabeth Smart’s testimony on Nov. 9

By Sheena McFarland and Aaron Falk | The Salt Lake Tribune updated November 10, 2010


http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50639245-76/smart-viti-yes-cable.html.csp

Elizabeth Smart continued testifying about her 2002 kidnapping Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City.

Smart began testifying Monday about her ordeal at the hands of Brian David Mitchell and his wife, Wanda Barzee. She described how she was taken from her home in the middle of the night, forced to a campsite in the foothills above her home and held captive and raped repeatedly for several weeks.

The Tribune is continuing to produce its own transcript of the testimony via its reporters at the courthouse. This is a complete account of Tuesday’s testimony. Smart will again take the stand on Wednesday.

WARNING: The testimony contains graphic language, including curse words and explicit depictions of sexual abuse.

Brian David Mitchell enters the courtroom singing the hymn of “Reverently, Quietly” but with different words. He then begins singing Jesus Once of Humble Birth.

Judge: Good morning everyone, we’re here for continuation of the trial. We’ll get the jury and continue Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, thank you for being back promptly, it’s good to see you. Mr. Mitchell, you have a constitutional right to stay, but if you continue to sing or disrupt the proceedings you will be removed. [Mitchell continues to sing and is escorted out of the courtroom into a room with an audio/video feed of the proceedings.] You can resume the stand Ms. Smart, you’re still under oath. Mr. Viti, as soon as we’re advised that Mr. Mitchell is in the room, you can begin.

Viti: Good morning, Ms. Smart. Judge, may Special Agent LaRoe approach the witness stand?

Judge: Yes.

Viti: Ms. Smart I’ll ask you to look at government exhibit 31-D as in David. Do you recognize it?

LaRoe: Yes.

Viti: What do you recognize?

LaRoe: It was part of the cable system that wrapped around the tree.

Viti: How do you recognize it?

LaRoe: Because I can see where the cable is dirty from being wrapped around the tree, and it’s a little bit egg-shaped because of pulling on one of the sides of it.

Viti: Do you recognize that silver circle around that tree, Ms. Smart?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Is that the same cable you’re holding? (Smart is holding exhibit 31-D)

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Thank you. Ms. Smart, where did the defendant keep the bolt cutters we saw yesterday?

Smart: They were in a bucket far out of my reach in the underground house he was digging out.

Viti: The cable system, did it not allow you to reach the bolt cutters?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: When the defendant placed the cable around your ankle, were the other components of the cable system already in place?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Did there come a time when you were held in the upper camp where the defendant gave you a name?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What name?

Smart: Shear-Jashub.

Viti: Did he tell you why?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Why?

Smart: It was out of the book of Isaiah, the son of Isaiah was named Shear-Jashub.

Viti: Did he tell you what it meant?

Smart: Yeah.

Viti: What?

Smart: It meant “the remnant will return.”

Viti: Was there a time you chose another name?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Explain.

Smart: Yes. I asked the defendant if I had to be called that name and he said he would allow me choose a middle name that I could be called for a time. However, I could not be Elizabeth or Ann, and it (the name) had to be out of the Bible.

Viti: And did you choose a name?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What did you choose?

Smart: I chose Esther.

Viti: Did you ever speak to the defendant about your parents?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What types of things would you discuss?

Smart: How much I loved them and how much they meant to me.

Viti: How did he react?

Smart: At first he was a little more patient with me but as time went on, he became more [pause] he didn’t want me to talk about them so much. He didn’t want my focus to be on them so much, so he told me to refer to them as Ed and Lois and to cut back on talking about them.

Viti: Did he ever tell you to refer to him and Wanda Barzee as mom and dad?

Smart: There was a time he told me to refer to him and Wanda as mom and dad, but it was only in public.

Viti: Did the defendant use vulgar language while being held in Utah?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Could you describe when he used such language?

Smart: He used it fairly frequent, but he would especially use it while he was drinking or before he would rape me.

Viti: Would he use vulgar language to refer to the male and female genitalia?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Would he use that kind of language before raping?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Were there other times he would use vulgar language?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Would you explain to the jury those times?

Smart: Um, he would use vulgar language. Well um, there came a time when he said that we had to sink below all things so one day we could rise above all things, and he brought pornography in the camp and he would talk about the women using vulgar terms.

Viti: The pornography, was that in California or in Utah?

Smart: That was in California.

Viti: Focus on the time in Utah. Were there times he would use vulgar language when he returned from Salt Lake City or return to the camp?

Judge, I wonder if it would be appropriate to repeat a phrase used.

Judge: Yes.

Viti: When he was returning to the camp did he ever say to you “I’m going to f*** your eyes out”?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Would he do that often?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What would happen when he returned to the camp and said that?

Smart: He would rape me.

Viti: And on these occasions before he would rape you would he refer to religion in any way?

Smart: No.

Viti: Ms. Smart, did there come a time when the defendant removed the cable from your ankle?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Could you describe the events leading up to him removing the cable?

Smart: Um. The night before he gave me a key to wear around my neck and then the next morning he cut the cable off my ankle.

Viti: What did he tell you when he gave you the key? Did he tell you anything about that key?

Smart: Um ... not that I can recall.

Viti: Is this the key that was on the green lanyard? [Viti holds up a key.]

Smart: Yes.

Viti: That evening when you had that key, what were the sleeping arrangements? Where they the same as when you described them yesterday?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What would you have had to do to use that key to unlock the lock?

Smart: I would have had to stand up right next to him, unzip the tent right next to this head, go outside and unlock the lock that connected me onto the stationary cable, coil my cable up and run down the mountainside.

Viti: Would you have had to climb over the defendant in order to reach the tent zipper?

Smart: No.

Viti: What kind of sleeper was the defendant?

Smart: He was a light sleeper.

Viti: What happened the next day?

Smart: The next day, he took the bolt cutters out and cut the cable off my ankle.

Viti: Did he say anything to you before he removed the cable?

Smart: He said, “Even though you have this cable removed of your ankle now, that doesn’t change the fact that you will be killed if you try to escape. Your family will be killed. (If you try to escape).”

Viti: When he removed the cable did he dismantle the other components of the cabling system?

Smart: No.

***********************************************************************************

Complete: Third day of Elizabeth Smart’s testimony


By Sheena MCfarland and Aaron Falk | The Salt Lake Tribune November 10, 2010


http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/50647494-76/elizabeth-mitchell-smart-viti.html.csp

Elizabeth Smart continued testifying about her kidnapping for a third day Wednesday.

Brian David Mitchell entered singing “Behold the Great Redeemer Die.”

Judge Dale Kimball: We are here in the matter of the United States versus Brian David Mitchell ... if we’re prepared to proceed, I will get the jury in. ... [Jury enters] Good morning, ladies and gentlemen of the jury. Thank you for being here promptly, we appreicate your work. Mr. Mitchell, you have a constitutional right to be here unless you continue to disrupt the proceedings. [Mitchell is ejected.] Ms. Smart, you may resume the stand.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Felice Viti: Ms. Smart I’d like to direct your attention to the “Book of Immanuel David Isaiah” for a moment. Just by way of refresher, who

acturally wrote the book?

Elizabeth Smart: The defendant.

Viti: Did you ever during your nine months see him write in it?

Smart: It was written before I was kidnapped, but I can’t remember for certain but I think he may have added one last section when I was with him.

Viti: Did you see him spend a lot of time often with the book?

Smart: Um, I saw him spend time with the book.

Viti: Did you see him spend a lot of time writing in the book in the nine months you were obseving him?

Smart: No.

Viti: Did you read the book?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Did the defendant tell you details about the night he took you from your home?

Smart: It was spoken about, um, I don’t know what you’re ...

Viti: Did the defendant ever describe that evening and how he took you?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: During that description, did he ever tell you he did not use a weapon?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: He told you he did not use a weapon?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Did he ever tell you that your parents knew you were all right during your course of the nine months?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Did he ever tell you your parents invited him in to take you and be with you?

Smart: He didn’t use that exact language, but yes.

Viti: Did the defendant ever tell you why he wasn’t wearing any robes when he first met your mom in the fall of 2002?

Smart: Yes, he said that he felt directed by the lord to dress in normal street clothing so that he could find a girl to take.

Viti: Did he ever include in his rationale for wearing street clothes at that time Sept. 11, 2001?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What did he say about that?

Smart: He said there were too many people that became immediately prejudiced

against him in thinking that he was Muslim or a terrorist, and it got to be so much he said he felt directed to stop wearing the robes for a time.

Viti: Ms. Smart, did the defendant during the nine months you described give blessings directed toward you or with you?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What types of blessing were they if you recall?

Smart: It was always if he wanted me to do something, he always wanted me to feel that God had something to tell me.

Viti: When he did say he wanted you to do something, what types of things did he

want you to do?

Smart: To clean up around the camp, to be there sexually for him when he wanted me, to tell me that I was chosen and fore ordained to be his wife before I ever came to Earth and ... um, at the beginning he said that it was OK for me to have a time of mourning but when that time came to an end, I needed to stop crying.

Viti: Any physical aspects of these blessings?

Smart: He would lay his hands on my head.

Viti: Did the words and these actions given to you or Ms. [Wanda] Barzee [Mitchell’s wife], did they sound familiar to you? Were you familiar with them?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Prior to June 5, 2002 did you ever experience blessings?

Smart: Yes, but not like that.

Viti: And that was part of your religious beliefs and upbringing within the LDS church?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: When you say “not like that,” what was different?

Smart: Well, the blessings I had always received had been blessings of comfort or -- they were just comfort and reassurance that I have my choices and I can make the right choice. Compared to the blessings that the defendant tried to give me. He told me what to do. He told me what was expected to me. He never said I had my agency to choose. It was all very dictated.

Viti: Are blessings something that are very important? These types of blessings that you have received prior to June 5, 2002, are they very important in spiritual life for yourself?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Are any blessings you may have received prior to June 5, 2002 ... did they involve cleaning up the house or your room or involve sex?

Smart: No.

Viti: Did you ever ... when the defendant provided these blessings did you ever believe them in any way?

Smart: No.

Viti: When you observed the defendant provide Wanda with blessings, in your observations did you think that Wanda believed them?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: Ms. Smart you talk ... I’d like to direct your attention to some things the defendant did during the nine months to avoid detection. Was there anything else besides what you have told us about the defendant, what steps he took to avoid detection?

Smart: He had cut off all relations with his family or past friends that I knew of. I never saw him communicate with anyone.

Viti: Did he ever direct while here in Utah, let’s focus your attention to your time in Utah. (Were there) certain routes or paths you would take up and down from the upper camp?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What would he say?

Smart: He said we didn’t want to make a beaten path to the camp. So we would take different ways down the mountainside.

Viti: I’d like to focus or direct your attention to some of the conversations he had with you about ever being caught or discovered. Did you in fact have those conversations with him about getting caught?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: And did he talk about the consequences of that?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What did he say?

Smart: He said that he had friends that would come after me and my family if he couldn’t. He said that if he were free he would come after me.

Viti: Did he ever speak about what would happen to him if he got caught?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What did he say?

Smart: He said that, well, there were several things he said. But he said he knew he would go to prison for what he had done. But then he also said that I would, myself and the other wives he was going to kidnap. He said we would come and testify in his behalf. And that we would plead on his behalf. And he said that he would be released and he would be killed and lie dead in the street for three days and then he would be resurrected and he would go on to fight the Anti-Christ.

Viti: I’d like to turn your attention to what you observed when he related to other people that you had come into contact with during your nine months. Especially people he may have wanted something from. Can you describe how he would relate to such people?

Smart: He was very ... charismatic and very ... tried to give the feeling of ... or tried to create the attitude of sincerity, and honesty and that he really did need whatever he was asking for.

Viti: And during the times that you observed him engage in such behavior, did you believe that he was being sincere at those times?

Smart: No.

Viti: At any of these times that he engaged with others besides you or Ms. Barzee, did he ever proclaim that he was the Davidic king?

Smart: No.

Viti: Did he ever proclaim he was the one mighty and strong?

Smart: No.

Viti: A prophet?

Smart: No.

Viti: Did he discuss polygamy with anyone?

Smart: No.

Viti: Would he tell them to repent?

Smart: No.

Viti: Would you ever observe him with other people shutting his eyes, folding his hands and singing religious hymns?

Smart: Not that I can recall.

Viti: Did the defendant ever discuss your family with you?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: In these discussions with your family, did he ever discuss how bad they might be feeling that you might be away from them?

Smart: Yes.

Viti: What did he say?

Smart: He said that I was the apple of their eye and that they were heartbroken I wasn’t there but that they would be comforted and reassured that I was in good hands.

Viti: In your discussions with him about your family, did he ever seem concerned over their heartbreak?

Smart: No.


RELATED ARTICLES:


Trial begins for Elizabeth Smart abductor whose religious extremism is heavily influenced by Mormon polygamists

Trial of Elizabeth Smart abductor delayed on first day after defense asks to move it out of state


Elizabeth Smart abductor competent to stand trial, forensic psychiatrist discusses research on Mormon polygamous 'prophets'

Are religious beliefs of Elizabeth Smart kidnapper delusional or normal within the Mormon fundamentalist context?

 

Elizabeth Smart testifies in mental competency hearing of her Mormon polygamist abductor

 

Testimony in competency hearing for Smart abductor indicates feigned mental illness to manipulate court proceedings

 

Forced medication brings Smart abductor back to reality, but past abuses make her children still wary

 

Mormon fundamentalist survivor testifies against Smart abductor, compares 'family cult' to terrorist training camp

 

Smart abductor may have fooled experts, but not the lay witnesses in his competency trial

 

Expert for defense says Smart abductor incompetent to stand trial because of delusional religious beliefs


Competency hearing ends for Mormon polygamist kidnapper - decision not expected until new year


Elizabeth Smart's alleged abductor kicked out of court again 


Some religious practices, such as polygamy, are inherently harmful and should not be tolerated in modern society

New study on polygamy in Malaysia finds evidence of harm to everyone involved

Women's adovcates: polygamy is an “oppressive institution” that abuses and enslaves women and children

The polygamy problem

Senate hearing: "Crimes Associated with Polygamy: The Need for a Coordinated State and Federal Response."

Polygamy is not freedom

Polygamy and Forced Sex in the Name of God

Polygamy in Canada: Our dirty little secret?

Polygamy debate brews in Canadian community

Ex-sect members escape polygamy but not pain

Should People Be Free To Be Enslaved?: Polygamy, Prostitution, and the "Consenting Adults" Argument

'Wives' and children of Israeli cult leader begin recovery from abuse with help from specialists and family members

Israeli messianic cult leader charged with sexual assault, rape, incest, sodomy and enslavement

Israeli politicians and women's advocates call for immediate change to polygamy law to protect rights of women and children

No comments:

Post a Comment