A Rip in Heaven

In September 1992, over a year later, Tom and Gene meet with prosecutor Nels Moss in a hotel to prepare Tom as a witness in the upcoming trial. While Tom had previously identified each of the four suspects in a lineup, Moss still did not believe Tom’s whole story. They argue about the details of the bridge’s sub-deck. Moss shows him pictures, and Tom recognizes that they have the wrong manhole. Moss states that they need to clean up these details to have a strong case, and he wants to offer Winfrey a deal of life in prison to nail the case against the other three. Though he is upset that Winfrey is being partially excused for his actions, Tom agrees. A few days later, Moss calls Tom to confirm that they found the correct manhole and that all of Tom’s details proved correct. Moss confesses that he had not believed Tom completely until now.

Gray’s trial begins in October 1992. Ginna and others speak as witnesses. While Ginna speaks to the facts of the case, she is unable to express the gaping wound in her life at the loss of her daughters. Winfrey has taken a plea agreement to testify against the other three in exchange for a 30-year sentence. Cummins briefly recounts Winfrey’s history of delinquency, which never became severe until the murders at the bridge. Winfrey is lucky to have been offered the plea deal.

The next day Tom is scheduled to testify in court. He is extremely nervous and requests that his family be absent from the courtroom during his testimony. In the witness stand Tom watches Gray’s “blasé” and “uninterested” expression (254). His nervousness evaporates, replaced by his hatred for Gray. His testimony lasts over four hours, and he is too confident to be intimidated by the defense attorney.

Days later, Winfrey testifies in the trial, explaining in brutal detail what he and his companions did. He has previously apologized to his victims, appearing “genuinely regretful” (256). Yet the family is horrified to hear the terrible details of how he held Julie down while she was raped, and they cannot bring themselves to forgive him.

Gray testifies five days later. He adamantly denies any part in the crimes. He cries when he describes his treatment by the police. Under cross-examination, he admits to joking about killing the girls but insists it was a joke. He challenges the prosecuting attorney at every turn, only serving to make himself look more guilty.

The case concludes, and Gray is found guilty on all counts. Afterward, the penalty phase of the trial is emotionally brutal, with Julie and Robin’s friends and loved ones testifying as to the loss they have incurred. Friends and loved ones of Gray also testify on his behalf, but on the stand, Gray’s girlfriend admits that he hit her. Gray is sentenced to death.

Three months later, Tom testifies at Clemons’s trial. The defense attorney casts every detail of the case in doubt, but it only irritates the jury, who find Clemons guilty on all counts. Despite this, public sympathy has been high for Clemons, whose family has been extremely, publicly articulate about their son’s innocence and good nature. The jury is unmoved, however, and sentences Clemons to death.

Richardson rejects a plea offer in his trial due to the influence of an activist named Bob Williams, who insists that the trials and convictions have been racially motivated. His organization, the Coalition for Justice, stages protests outside the courtroom. Cummins provides the text of their flyer, rife with typos and grammatical errors. At the trial, Richardson mouths a threat to the daughter of Ron Whitehorn while she is on the witness stand. This trial is more of a circus than the others, but Richardson is ultimately sentenced to death row with Gray and Clemons.

Later, Tom attends a criminal justice program at the University of Maryland, and he also settles a lawsuit with the city of St. Louis for eliciting his false confession. Tom wants to become a prosecutor like Nels Moss. Kay has, in the intervening years since the murders, become a prominent activist in the field of crime victims’ rights. She has helped establish new local and state laws to help crime victims.

Tom and Tink return to St. Louis seven years later to testify at Winfrey’s parole hearing. They visit the Old Chain of Rocks Bridge, which has been converted into a state park, with manicured paths and a visitor’s center. Families walk across the bridge together. While the poem has largely been erased, Julie’s initial “J,” her peace symbol, and parts of the poem are still legible. The siblings visit their cousins’ shared gravestone, cry, and speak to their lost cousins.

At the parole hearing, Tom imparts to the judge that Winfrey was not a good kid in a bad situation, that he is instead a double murderer who has served only seven years in prison. Tink recounts to the judge how Julie inspired her to be a writer, explaining that Julie’s loss has immense ramifications to many people. Other members of the family testify as well. Winfrey is denied parole.

In 2000 Tom is invited to participate in a documentary about Richardson for Court TV. Skeptical, Tom agrees to fly to New York to meet with the producers. They tell Tom the purpose of the documentary is to explore the widespread impact one violent event can have. They provide unclear answers as to why they are focusing on Richardson. Tom and Tink agree to be in the documentary.

In 2001 Tom is notified that Richardson is scheduled to be executed in four weeks. One night, a week before the execution, Tink happens to see Richardson on The Ricki Lake Show. On the show Richardson apologizes to the Kerry family, but he also denies any involvement in the crimes. He accuses Tom of perjury, and Ricki Lake paints Richardson in a sympathetic light. He complains about his life in prison, and Tink screams in frustration in her home.

The same week, Richardson’s lawyer instigates a successful media campaign against Richardson’s execution. Students at Julie’s university protest on Richardson’s behalf, and even Julie’s beloved Amnesty International advocates for Richardson, breaking the heart of the family. Tink writes a letter to the local, regional, and national presidents of the organization. To her surprise, all three write back to her with “empathetic responses,” consoling her somewhat (284). The New York Times prints an editorial that argues against the death penalty in Richardson’s case, arguing that it “diminish[es] ourselves” and continues the “cycle of death” (285). Such articles and media are full of factual inaccuracies about the case and focus little to no attention on Julie or Robin, or the fact that they never had the chance to debate for their own lives. Cummins corrects some of these inaccuracies in turn, painting a grim picture of Richardson and his upbringing.

One local article from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch misnames Ginna Kerry as Ginna Richardson. As recompense, the article’s author conducts an interview with Tink and publishes a front-page article imparting the family’s justified rage at the Ricki Lake interview. The newspaper also prints three letters to the editor from Tink, Nels Moss, and one of Julie’s uncles. This is the first backlash to the media storm that Richardson’s lawyer has begun. Tink becomes the voice for the family, which has previously been quiet due to a justified distrust of the media, their personal grief, and a desire to preserve their privacy.

Tom, Kay, and Tom’s Aunt Jacquie prepare to go to Potosi State Penitentiary to witness Richardson’s execution. Kay and Jacquie only go to provide moral support to Tom. The execution is temporarily stayed by the Eighth Circuit Court before being put back on by the US Supreme Court. Then, before the execution, the Supreme Court temporarily stays the execution again, based on Richardson’s baseless argument that he is mentally retarded. The emotional catastrophe is exacerbated when Tom, Kay, and Jacquie are mobbed by news reporters and film crews on their way out of the penitentiary.

As Tom flies back home, he reflects on why he wants to be present for the execution but finds no clear answers. He realizes that the single reason he has to attend is his hope that, in his last moments, Richardson will admit his guilt and honestly apologize. Tom wants to be present to forgive him. Tom lets go of these “unrealistic hopes” (294).

When the Court TV documentary airs, it includes none of the footage of the Cummins family. Instead, it focuses only on Richardson, painting him in a sympathetic light. It celebrates Richardson’s stay of execution. Tom is the only member of the family who is not bothered. He moves on. He lets go of his guilt and anxiety over how others see him. He finally, purely grieves for Robin and Julie.

Cummins notes that society is fascinated with murder and violent crime but that we forget about the victims. She writes, “The dead can’t tell their own stories” (298). The action after the crime lies with the murderer, not with the families and friends of the victims. Cummins explains that she has written this book to “change the reality that Julie and Robin’s rightful place in our collective memory is being usurped by the very thugs who killed them” (298). Cummins notes that she has experienced fear and questioned her right to tell this story, but ultimately she wants to memorialize Julie and Robin and who they were as people.

Cummins describes her personal struggle with the issue of capital punishment. She says that she does not desire their deaths, nor does she hold any mercy for them. The fact that they are on death row has only instigated sympathy for them, sympathy they would not have if they were serving life sentences instead. It allows these criminals to act like victims.