The letter to and from Lamont Marshall
The police have tried to connect Lamont Waldron Marshall to the murder of women on or somehow connected with Grand Rapids’ Heritage Hill. So far, it’s been an unsuccessful effort in Shelley’s case. But it has been completely successful in another. He was charged in the 1975 murder of Laurel Jean Ellis. That arrest led to a trial and conviction in 2007 and it DID put him at the center of the series of murderous assaults. There were marked similarities in all eight cases (seven deaths and one other attempted murder) and Mr. Marshall is now serving a life sentence.
I wanted to talk with him, but as it turned out I went about it kind of backwards. Nothing new there; this is unfamiliar territory. First, I contacted the Department of Corrections. There is someone there who coordinates media interviews. He told me I needed to know that no cameras or other recording devices would be allowed. That’s the state’s policy. Pen or pencil and paper only. (I believe this policy is flawed, but, then, I would! I’m the guy who wants to use the video camera.) The contact there was polite and helpful. It would work best, he said, if I’d make the request on line. That way it could be more easily forwarded to the people who needed to know. Simple matter. So, I did that and VERY quickly received word that Mr. Marshall first agreed to be interviewed and then changed his mind. Boy, these folks at DoC moved quickly…thank you very much. When I received word that I’d been turned down I initiated another e-mail. Would things have gone better, I asked, if I’d written Mr. Marshall a letter first. Why, yes, came the answer. That’s most often how these things are done. Well, of course; it makes perfect sense. Now I know.
So I drafted a letter to him. Here’s what I wrote:
April 1, 2009
Dear Mr. Marshall:
I seem to have gone about my request for an interview somewhat backward. I realize NOW that I should have started with a letter like this one, telling you what I’m about and THEN asking for an interview.
I can’t correct my mistake, but I can admit it. I don’t know much about the way things are done in relation to interviewing prisoners.
I am working on a film about the murder of Shelley Speet Mills. I have told the stories of several others, including that of Janet Chandler in 1979. I want to talk with you about your growing up and your life, including the possibility that you may have met Shelley Speet Mills in 1970. I will not hide my intentions in my investigation: I’m trying to tell the entire story of Shelley’s murder. And the police have said they have tried to link you to that murder. I want to know more. I have talked with them.
And so I asked for an interview. I realize it may be difficult for you to write to me so I am going to put $20 in your commissary account to pay for stamps and paper. It’s a risk I’m willing to run.
I am probably not exactly what you’ll expect; I’m no dashing young journalist. Instead I’m a 60-year-old bald guy, a former college professor, filmmaker, musician who looks like what he is. Nor do I report for a fancy organization. I have my own website: www.delayedjustice.com. I don’t know if you have access to the internet in prison.
When you receive notice of the money in your account, you’ll know I’m serious.
Perhaps I’ll hear from you.
Sincerely,
David B. Schock, Ph.D.
Yep, that’s what I wrote and that’s what I did. I have known others in prison and I know that their options are few. That was the reason for the $20. I expected some time to go by, but by return mail came his response.
4-6-09
Mr. Schock:
Considering no cash amount can establish one’s seriousness… “I find your monetary offering to be an insult, so please keep your money…”
Since contacting me is a risk you were willing to take; then good, because it landed you proof that you and I have absolutely nothing to talk about, so again, and finally I decline your interview. Also, let me make myself perfectly clear; This is the first; last and only time you will hear from me, and all attempts you make to contact me from this day forward will be considered harassment…
Enclosed is page six of my presentence report. Please take note at comments end, I did not live in Grand Rapids in September of 1970. If this is’nt proof enough, feel free to contact Atlantic City High Schools’ Records Department, (you will need to pay for unreturned books before they will give you any information) but they should still be able to confirm I was an enrolled fifteen year old attending freshman in September of 1970.
In closing, Despite what the police have tried to link me to, in this case I was’nt a Michigan resident at the time, date or year in question. Considering the seriousness of this matter, I have no doubts as to your sincerity. During my proceedings I brought this information to my trial attorney’s attention, and I requested that he inform the Mills family, so they would not feel any justice had been served for their loss. Now this assignment rest with you kind sir… Good luck.
Sincerely,
L. Marshall
Well, oh, my! yes, that’s an interesting letter. I wasn’t glad to have upset him. But the upset changes. The letter starts with indignation and ends with some measure of encouragement, not to say obsequiousness. An interesting letter in all.
My initial response was that I had badly handled the matter. I should have known to write to him first. And perhaps I could have better phrased the request. But I didn’t want to hide my intentions. I sat at my desk pondering…what did I really have there. A failure…or was there something to redeem it? I had the letter, the presentence report…the letter, the letter, the handwritten pencilled letter. (Click on it to enlarge the document.)
Ahhhh, ever so slowly the light dawned. The letter is really what I needed. There are people out there who can tell much from our handwriting. I needed the services of a graphologist.
Oh, that’s something you’ll find in the Yellow Pages! Well, just in case, I did look there. Nope. So I trolled the net and up popped a story about a graphologist who had given a talk here in the state.
A phone call, an e-mail and he was back to me in a few hours. Could I send a fax? I could, I did. He took the time to analyze both the fax and a subsequent scan of the letter and come up with a lot I thought particularly interesting. But when it came time to put a name with the work, he demurred. There was a possibility, he said, that even though the sentence is for life without parole, Lamont Marshall will get out. And when he does, this graphologist did NOT want to be identifiable. Could I please keep him out of it?
I could. I would.
But I asked him for the name of another graphologist who might be willing to be identified. HE gave me a name. SHE was busy, but SHE gave me a name. And this second SHE was busy and far geographically distant, but SHE gave me a name and a first-rate endorsement: Linda Spencer.
Linda was willing to look, she said, so I sent on the scans, including a sample of my own handwriting; she needed to know with whom she was dealing.
As for here bonafides, here’s something of her background:
Linda Spencer gained certification as a Graphoanalyst in 1981 after completing an extensive course of study in handwriting analysis from The International Graphoanalysis Society. She has been working professionally as a Graphoanalyst since then. Her clients include businesses and corporations, community agencies, police departments, attorneys and security professionals as well as private individuals.
She came to the study of Graphoanalysis more than 30 years ago when a stranger asked Linda if she would provide a sample of her handwriting to analyze. The woman said she had just completed an introductory course in Graphoanalysis and wanted to see how well she could do with her new knowledge. Linda said the analysis surprised her in its accuracy and revealed things about her personality that helped her better understand herself. She decided to take the introductory course in Graphoanalysis to investigate its methodology and accuracy. Once she was satisfied that Graphoanalysis was based on sound scientific principles, she enrolled in the certification course.
She began working professionally with small business owners, corporate human resource departments and security professionals in 1982. Her business grew rapidly through word of mouth as her clients saw the results of her services. She has helped companies hire the best candidates, increase retention and reduce turnover, and increase productivity. In the process she has helped them save thousands of dollars in human-resource operation costs. “When a new hire doesn’t work out everybody suffers,” Linda explains. “Productivity slows and employee morale is affected, not to mention the emotional wounds to the person who didn’t work out. It’s costly in other ways, too: roughly $8,000-plus that’s associated with each new hire.”
Her investigative work covers a broad spectrum of crimes. She has examined suicide letters to determine the state of mind of the victims at the time of the writing, profiled the writers of threatening notes to determine motivation and seriousness of intent and consulted in many theft and fraud cases. She also assists in cold cases when handwriting is available.
Her training in profiling for dangerous behavior is in addition to her Graphoanalysis training. In 2004 she became acquainted with Graphoanalyst Kim Iannetta who introduced her to the behavioral profiling system, Danger between the Lines (DBTL). The system was developed during a ten-year research study conducted at the Hawaii State Mental Health Hospital. Ms. Iannetta worked with two research psychologists and a team of mental health specialists using the handwritings of both violent and non-violent hospital inpatients. The profiling system consists of graphological signs and their psychological implications as determined by the research psychologists. This system is the only one of its kind and melds graphology and psychology as determined by a neuropsychologist, a research and evaluation psychologist and a team of various mental-health professionals. Linda’s forensic profile training required her to write numerous blind behavioral profiles using the handwriting of convicted violent offenders. The types of crimes each committed was unknown to her. The cases included that from criminals who had committed most types of violent crimes. Among their numbers were serial killers, rapists, mass shooters, school shooters, professional hit men, cannibalistic killers, and child- and spouse murderers. Through careful study and practice, she achieved high accuracy in her profiles. She now uses the DBTL system when working with forensic cases involving violent crime. She has a handwriting collection of hundreds of convicted violent offenders which she uses in her training sessions and presentations to law enforcement. She recently presented Behavioral Profiling through Handwriting Analysis in four separate two-hour training sessions for The Illinois Chiefs of Police Association Summer 2009 training conference.
Linda holds a bachelor of science degree from Upper Iowa University (in management) and a master’s degree in Human Services from National-Louis University. She also holds a Certificate of Exceptional Merit from the Forensic Linguistics Institute, UK.
She teaches an introductory course in Graphoanalysis through a local community college. She is often a guest speaker at the Illinois Chapter of Handwriting Analysts and lectures on handwriting analysis for various organizations throughout the year.
She is a member of The American College of Forensic Examiners, the Illinois Center for Violence Prevention, and The International Graphoanalysis Society.
We exchanged e-mails, spoke via the telephone, and she went to work. This is the report she drafted:
Lemont Marshall’s handwriting is slowly and carefully written indicating that he hides his true self behind a persona. He can appear to be gentle and caring in order to gain trust and get what he wants. He keeps himself very tightly controlled emotionally and is highly conscious of how he appears to others. Inside he carries strong anger and even hatred. He has a distorted self image and can have a violent temper. His writing indicates that he has unusual or disturbed sexual desires, which include exaggerated sexual fantasies, anger and unconventional sexual practices. His sexual fantasies are unbalanced pathological obsessions which involve a desire to hurt or punish his victim likely through the use of sharp instruments of some kind. His mental or emotional brakes do not work properly so to keep himself from acting on his desires he has developed repression. He pushes his ideas or urges from his conscious mind and “forgets” about them. However these urges buildup in his subconscious until eventually his pent up desires find release in an explosion of emotion and brutal violence. Once he starts on a path of violent action he is prone to rush ahead and has difficulty controlling his impulses, it can be difficult for him to stop. After he finds release he reverts to being very careful, logical and methodical in his behavior.
He is very observant of his surroundings and of what goes on around him. His abnormal sexual desires are stimulated by what he sees both in reality and in his fantasies. He lacks empathy for others and sees people as objects. He lacks a sense of personal boundaries and he can invade other people’s space and rights. He has a distorted personal value system and justifies his actions. When he finds a victim his predatory actions will be carefully planned with methodical attention to detail. He will watch and wait for opportunity and will plan his approach behind the scenes to fool and manipulate his victim into a false security.
He takes pride in his planning ability and his meticulous attention to detail. He won’t leave much, if any, evidence to connect him with his crime. Appeals to his pride in this area might lead him to reveal some information but he is very secretive and deceptive. Pressuring him only causes him to become defiant and increases his defensiveness. He has strong manual dexterity and may like to draw. He is more comfortable writing and drawing than speaking. Because he is so visual he may have take pictures of his victim or victims.
Linda Spencer, CGA. B.S., M.S.
Certified Graphoanalyst
Interesting, interesting, interesting.
Terry McGee found it so as well, as did a forensic psychiatrist who is looking over the case. These are the comments of the psychiatrist, another very bright person:
I must admit that I am skeptical of the benefits of graphanalysis, but I have not had any training or much if any experience with anyone who was even possibly any good at it. On the opposite side, there are those who do not place much stock in criminal investigative analysis, profiling, forensic psychiatry, or many other things. Regardless, the graphanalyst’s thoughts are very interesting, and certainly appear to be consistent with those associated with the kind of person who could have committed this crime.
[...]
A man who I consider very wise in these matters once told me that in cold cases the information that will solve the case probably is “in the box” of the evidence and reports from the original investigation. I’ve read this elsewhere by another cold case/serial killer expert, though in somewhat different form. In that latter expert’s situation, he is convinced that in almost all such cases the person(s) responsible for the homicide were contacted and possibly interviewed within the first week, usually within the first few days, after the homicide.
Back to Mr. Marshall: are there any other written communications from him and of which you could obtain copies? What about transcripts (or, better, video or audiotapes) of any interviews he has given about anything, even seemingly unrelated cases in other jurisdictions? Are there available for review any records from any of his other cases? The more information about his behavior the better in terms of understanding him, his motivations and his actions.
More good questions that may lead to a better understanding. I don’t have any of it, but the folks on the Kent Metro Cold Case Team that investigated Lamont Marshall and tied him to the murder of Laurel Jean Ellis MIGHT have more material. Maybe.
Concerning Linda Spencer, I am deeply appreciative of her work on this case. I’ve asked her if she might serve as our Graphoanalyst of record and she’s agree.
In addition to the initial writing sample I supplied Linda Spencer, I asked for her analysis of my hand writing based on a longer sample. After all, I can always use a look at what makes me tick. At first I had thought to have just a simple, little analysis. Linda doesn’t work that way; there are no half measures in her professional approach. It might be like asking for a partial diagnosis from a medical doc. As soon as I understood that I was ready to ask for the full profile. So I did.
Oh, boy! Did I get an analysis! Now, I’m only going to share a little of it with you, but here it is:
You are a careful planner and have a good sense of timing. You like structure, balance and order and it frustrates you when things don’t go according to your well thought out plans. You tend to be impatient with setbacks, delays, or needless repetition. However, you have good determination to complete whatever you start out to do and you have the persistence to back up your efforts when you feel discouraged.
[...]
You think quickly and logically and can see into the essence of a matter, stripping away the extraneous and getting to the point or what is important. You can follow quick changes in subject matter without becoming confused. Open to new ideas, you will investigate and analyze new information and do not accept information as fact until you have checked it out for yourself. You intuition sometimes gives you immediate insight into a problem or new idea. You are willing to listen to ideas and practices that are different from your own and have a sincere desire to understand the point of view of others. However, you can be rather impatient and although you are likely hide it well, other people can get on your nerves at times. Still, you can be expected to be courteous and considerate under all but the most offensive of circumstances.
[...]
You have a tendency to be quite sensitive to personal criticism.
[...]
You also can be quite hard on yourself if you make a mistake.
[...]
There is every reason to believe that you can accomplish your goals. Be patient with yourself, acknowledge your areas of weakness so you can overcome them or lessen their impact and give yourself full credit for your strengths.
She literally read me like a book. Of course there was more…lots more, but I get to keep some things private. I shared the Graphoanalysis with my wife and she kept nodding her head as she read. ”Remind you of anybody?” she asked when she was finished. Oh, yes. Her reading of my nature was balanced, wide ranging, and plenty deep.
Now, how might this apply to Lamont Marshall? I think she’s as right about his handwriting as she is mine : He’s intelligent and he’s dangerous. And he’s never likely to speak about this crime–if he did it–with anyone.
On my own, I believe he could well have committed the murder of Shelley Speet Mills, even though he was only 15.
Now what?