Interviews, Howard K. Stern on Greta, Don Clark on SM Radio

Former FBI agent and Houston Bureau Chief turned investigator Don Clark appeared on Scared Monkeys Radio to speak about the results of the Bahamian inquest into the death of Daniel Smith.

The following is a rough outline of some of Mr. Clark’s comments to show host Dana Pretzer.

Clark: Focus in the inquest was switched to an individual who could not testify or come back and refute. The people that were there, their testimony was totally different from what we have heard and read before. There was a 180 degree turn.

The person that had the finger pointed at her that was listed as the responsible party, concerning drugs, types of drugs and doses taken.. that person was not there to testify. I will give the jury credit, when they heard that information, they had to be stunned.

Where things seemed to have broken down was that there was no real opportunity for the jury to compare factual information, testimonial information of what people have said in this inquest or other judicial proceedings. There are clear records. I’m not going to pull any punches, there were clear records of certain things that Howard Stern said in court in Florida and certain statements that Bahamian police have taken and that was totally different than what was said on the witness stand and by other witness as well.

The host Dana Pretzer asked what has today’s society done to contribute to this particular tragedy?

Clark: An old FBI agent said, it’s all about the money. I’ts about whatever a particular entity can get on camera or on film and be able to display and show. Unfortunately that is what it seems to be. Unfortunately for the viewing public, they only get what someone else has decided the public needs to see and hear.

This case, in my life, I have never seen anything like this, that has moved to the scale that it has. It seems certain outlooks and certain people have different views on things and they only paint those and paint the other party in the worst light whether they deserve that or not.

Clark: Bottom line, this pretty much closes the lid on this aspect of the case. I don’t know what could pop up now. I go back to the initial investigation. Even if the jury had decided an open verdict, an open verdict would mean they know something happened, they didn’t think it was an accident, they did not think it was a suicide, they just did not see enough facts and evidence to move it forward to the next level. Even if it would have come back with that, I just don’t see that there is enough evidence available in the Bahamas to be able to present to a regular court and jury to find someone guilty of something or to say there was no guilt here.

I take that back to the investigation from everything that I know about the investigation at this point. From the way that the scene was handled in the hospital, to the way that witness were handled, to the way the statements were taken, I don’t see that the evidence is there to make a case.

But the reality is if any person takes a look at transcripts in the Bahamas, and if statements were taken and analyzed properly, they will see that there was a lot of opportunity there for significant investigation to try to find out what happened in the death of Daniel.

Having said that, I think there is an opportunity to find out what happened in the death of Anna. I just don’t believe that the envelope should be sealed at this point. I think there is opportunity there to see what really happened in the case of her death in Florida.

Dana Pretzler: What can we in the media do to be fair in a case like this?

Clark: People want to surmise and come to their own conclusions but the way to find that is to follow the facts and not put a particular twist on it concerning the direction that you want it to go. If media sticks to facts and circumstances and not be so selective as to what pieces of sound byte they put out there then we can move on to the next program.

Just be a little more responsible about what they say about people that someone may have casually said to them and they don’t even know this person. This person is a nice person with a great reputation. Then all of a sudden one bit of info comes up and this person is terrible and that is not a good thing for a professional media outlet to be doing.

Pretzer concluded that this has happened in this case to all sides.