Jurors told of frequent nosebleeds

Kim Smith

Thursday, April 19, 2001 | 11:06 a.m.

Jurors in the Margaret Rudin murder trial heard this morning that Ronald Rudin had a propensity for nose bleeds and for secretly taping employees' conversations.

Susan Raesbeck, who worked for Ronald Rudin Realty for six to eight months in the late 1980s, also told jurors she was often sneezed on by her boss.

Defense attorneys for Rudin are hoping to convince jurors that blood found in Ronald Rudin's bedroom did not stem from his murder. They also hope to cast doubt on the state's contention that Rudin bought bugging equipment to secretly tape her husband's telephone conversations.

This is the eighth week of testimony in Rudin's trial. She faces charges of murder, murder accessory and wiretapping.

On Wednesday, John Thornton, a criminalist with almost 40 years of experience, told jurors that 14 drops of blood found on the walls and ceiling of Ronald Rudin's bedroom don't point to foul play.

All of the blood together amounts to less than one drop from an eye-dropper and are too far from each other to constitute the back spatter one would expect from a single gunshot wound, let alone four, Thornton said.

"I don't think the blood stain evidence indicates Ronald Rudin was shot there," Thornton said.

Prosecutors hope to convince jurors that Margaret Rudin, 56, shot her multimillionaire husband in the head four times as he slept in his bed on Dec. 18, 1994.

The murder weapon, the state says, was a .22 caliber handgun. Ronald Rudin's decapitated and charred remains were found by fishermen near Lake Mohave on Jan. 21, 1995.

One of Rudin's defense attorneys, Thomas Pitaro, used a partial mock-up of Ronald Rudin's bedroom in an attempt to cast doubt on the state's theory.

At one point jurors watched as Pitaro ran from one side of the bed to the other as he simulated shooting a plastic skull once in the face and three times in the back of the head. Moments later, he stood on the bed and simulated shooting the skull.

Each scenario, Pitaro said, was ridiculous and yet would have to have occurred if the state's experts are correct regarding how the blood got on the walls and ceiling of the room.

Under cross-examination Thornton said he is not a certified blood pattern analyst. The former University of California-Berkley professor also could not offer an opinion as to how the blood did get there.

"I see them as medium velocity spatter," Thornton said. Such spatter can be achieved by flicking blood from your finger after cutting yourself, he said.

Thornton said he couldn't say how many flicks it would take to account for the blood.

Prosecutor Chris Owens generated laughter from jurors when he asked Thornton if he often goes throughout his house flicking after cutting himself. He drew more laughs when he asked Thornton if "flickers" generally stick to one area of a house or a room.

The mood in the courtroom wasn't always so light. Owens asked District Judge Joseph Bonaventure to sanction Pitaro after the veteran attorney -- without warning -- simulated shooting fellow attorney John Momot while loudly yelling, "Bang" five times.

Pitaro engaged in the theatrics while trying to make the point that it was more likely for Ronald Rudin to have been shot while standing than while sleeping.

"It's unprofessional, it's unethical and I've never seen anything like it before," Owens told Bonaventure after jurors were led from the courtroom.

"I didn't think it was outrageous. I thought it was good advocacy," Pitaro responded.

Bonaventure told Pitaro he was going to tell jurors to disregard the scene, causing a brief shouting match between himself and Pitaro.