On September 7, 1989, Kim Hickman, a masseuse, and the daughter of a Fresno police officer, was raped and murdered in her Pacific Grove, California studio apartment. Kristin William Hughes was subsequently convicted of the crime, and is currently on California's death row.
The victim was raped, both vaginally and anally, and she had numerous deep stab wounds to her neck and chest, though strangulation was determined to have been the cause of death.
When the body was discovered, her feet were propped up against a wall, with the defendant's suspenders around her neck. The defendant's fingerprints, including a bloody thumbprint, were found at the scene, and suggested that he had made a crude attempt at cleaning up the crime scene. It was determined that the body was put in this position after she had died, but that the sexual assault had occurred while she was still alive.
So the defendant strangled the victim with his suspenders, moved the body, cleaned up the crime scene, but left his suspenders wrapped around her throat.
There is another interpretation. Perhaps the suspenders had been wrapped around her throat, after she was already dead. The crime scene was obviously staged. Why should we assume the presence of the suspenders was a mere oversight?
Semen was discovered on the body, but it was determined not to have come from the defendant. This was presumed to have come from an earlier voluntary sexual encounter with someone else.
When searching Hughes' belongings, detectives found a Crown Royal bag, containing credit cards which had been stolen from two women during recent burglaries. Later, a Crown Royal bag containing Kim Hickman's credit cards was discovered elsewhere in the neighborhood. Hughes had also attempted to cash an altered payroll check belonging to the victim, shortly after the murder.
The manner in which Kim Hickman was murdered suggests that the perpetrator derived sexual gratification from killing her. This was not done afterwards, just to prevent her from reporting a rape. People who commit this type of crime tend to do it repeatedly, until they are caught.
There was no suggestion that Hughes had ever done anything like this before. Given his age, I believe he was around 28 at the time, it is unlikely that this was his first time. So maybe he was smart enough not to get caught, except that he had three prior convictions, for burglary, no violence, and no sex crimes. For this type of crime, he would actually be a better suspect, if he had no criminal record whatsoever.
Perhaps Kim Hickman was raped and murdered by someone else. Hughes was at the crime scene, he was under duress, and he was under the influence of a date rape drug, which prevented him from telling the police what happened.
When questioned the day after the murder, Hughes insisted that he did not have any gaps in his memory from the previous day. Hughes was a criminal. Lying to the police was second nature to him. If he had any gaps in his memory, that might indicate that he was guilty. So he lied about it, just as he lied about many other things. I am not suggesting that Hughes was an angel. On the other hand, he was precisely the kind of man who could be framed for this type of crime.
This is an interesting theory. But what evidence do I have? What I have presented so far is the type of scenario a defense attorney might cook up, in order to establish reasonable doubt. It is a possibility, nothing more, but it does not conflict with any of the known facts of the case.
If Hughes didn't kill Kim Hickman, who did? Prior to the murder, Hughes had been drinking and using cocaine with a man named Richard Stanley, who had been convicted of child molesting in Monterrey, California, back in 1985. Because it was so long ago, his DNA is not in any database. Is it possible that the semen that was discovered actually came from Richard Stanley? That possibility was never investigated.
I encountered Richard Stanley in Indianapolis, in September of 1999, ten years after Kim Hickman was murdered. I did not know him at the time, but I called 911, to report that I saw him taking a 12 year old girl into his hotel room.
I have reason to believe Carl Ritchie, the owner of the Dollar Inn where this was taking place, was paying off someone from the Marion County Sheriff's Department, in connection with prostitution. Exactly why I believe this is already on file with the court.
When the deputy arrived, Stanley was alone in his room. Later depositions indicated that he had been warned by hotel staff that the police were enroute.
To make a long story short, as I was attempting to drive away from the Dollar Inn, Stanley stepped out in front of me, and slashed his hand across his throat, mimicking a knife. I floored it. The windshield was demolished, and it was his head that did all that damage to the windshield.
At my arraignment, I was informed that Stanley suffered a fractured knee, a broken hip, and a concussion. I was charged with aggravated battery, a class B felony, which requires the loss or long term impairment of a limb or organ, based on the broken hip. At trial, Stanley took the stand, and stated that he suffered a broken hip, but never produced any medical records to substantiate that.
Interestingly, police were called back to the scene about a month later, regarding an attempted rape, allegedly committed by Richard Stanley. How does a man with a broken hip even get accused of such a thing?
This little fib about the broken hip wasn't Stanley's idea. Sergeant Roney, with the Marion County Sheriff's Department, suggested that to him during questioning, and he just went along with it.
The jury rejected the claim, regarding the broken hip, and convicted me of battery as a class C felony, which requires merely that the victim suffered a serious injury. I took the stand and admitted that much.
If I'm right, an innocent man is on death row, Richard Stanley is a serial killer, and he is free, in part, due to some crooked cops in Indianapolis. If I'm wrong, I might be hurting someone's feelings.
Maybe I have a beef with Richard Stanley, and I just made this whole thing up. The facts I have presented here are already a matter of public record. My credibility is therefore irrelevant. The only thing at issue here is my reasoning.
I would like very much for California Governor Gavin Newsom to look into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Kim Hickman, and determine whether there is reason to believe his state might be holding an innocent man on death row. If you agree, give him a holler.
Allen D. Montgomery