Harold Lingle

Case record: Harold Lingle

Background

Harold R. Lingle committed a mass murder in Springfield history on January 19, 1999, together with Richard Delong and Stacie Y. Leffingwell. Lingle drove Erin Vanderhoef, a 36-year-old woman, to a nearby grocery store to buy donuts with food stamps. While they were gone, Delong and Leffingwell strangled Erin’s three children, and later strangled Erin as well, killing her full-term preborn baby.

Delong and Leffingwell lived in the same apartment complex as Lingle and his wife. Delong had previously had a relationship with Erin Vanderhoef. The court decision described that, at times when Leffingwell was out of town, Vanderhoef would come to Joplin and sleep with DeLong. Leffingwell was dying from AIDS and was furious that Vanderhoef was attempting to replace her as Scooby’s mother.

Renee Allen, a friend of the defendants and the victims, testified that Leffingwell was upset because DeLong also was dating Vanderhoef. Allen said Leffingwell “hated Erin because Erin was the 'other woman'.” Allen further testified that Leffingwell resented the fact that DeLong had less money for their methamphetamine habit because he was paying Vanderhoef child support. Allen also testified that Leffingwell told her that she and DeLong were going to a hospital appointment in Columbia on the day of the mass murder. Allen said that when Leffingwell and DeLong returned, Leffingwell was hysterical and told Allen that she and DeLong had killed Vanderhoef and her children. Allen quoted Leffingwell as saying, “She said (Erin Vanderhoef) got what she deserved but that the children did not deserve to die.”

The court decision stated that because Vanderhoef’s children would be witnesses to the event, Delong and Leffingwell also intended to kill the children, and that they asked Lingle if he wanted to participate. Lingle initially declined, but agreed after a promise of methamphetamine.

Leffingwell and Delong were also described as having a son, Scooby, who lived in the same apartment complex as Lingle and his wife.

The offence

On Tuesday, January 19, 1999, Delong, Leffingwell, and Lingle planned and carried out five murders: Erin Vanderhoef and her three children. The children were Darlene Vanderhoef (8 years old), Jimmy Vanderhoef (11 years old), and Christopher Franklin (10 years old). Erin Vanderhoef’s asphyxiation resulted in the death of her unborn child, Hannah, so there were a total of five victims murdered.

Delong and Leffingwell strangled the three children while Lingle took Erin Vanderhoef away from the house. In one description, Delong found it was not easy to strangle Jimmy with his bare hands, so Delong shoved clothes down the boy’s throat to silence him and then strangled him with an electrical cord. Delong then murdered the other two children in the same fashion.

When Lingle brought Erin back to her home, the three strangled Erin with an electrical cord as well, and Erin’s full-term preborn baby died as a result.

The trial court’s decision also described the sequence in detail at Erin’s house in Springfield: Lingle took Vanderhoef to Dillon’s Supermarket while Delong and Leffingwell strangled the three children. When Lingle and Vanderhoef returned, Delong told Vanderhoef the children had been disciplined and were in their rooms. While Lingle and Vanderhoef sat on the couch watching television, Delong moved behind Vanderhoef on the pretext of putting a necklace on her and attempted to wrap a cord around her neck. Vanderhoef resisted by grabbing the cord, and Vanderhoef and Lingle fell off the couch onto the floor. The decision stated that Vanderhoef was able to resist being strangled until Lingle stepped in, grabbed her hands, and pulled them down to her waist, giving Leffingwell the opportunity to stuff a rag in Vanderhoef’s mouth so her screams could not be heard.

The court decision stated that it took another 10 minutes for Vanderhoef to pass out. It further described that Delong and Leffingwell bound Vanderhoef’s feet with another cord, pulled them up tightly behind her back, and wrapped the end of this cord around her neck so the weight of her feet and legs would help suffocate her. It took another 10 minutes for Vanderhoef and her unborn child to die from asphyxiation.

Delong kicked Erin in the head so hard that he limped for several days, according to the narrative description of events.

Investigation

After Lingle was arrested, he gave a videotaped statement to police. During that statement, Lingle admitted planning the five murders with Delong and Leffingwell and agreeing to participate in exchange for drugs. Lingle also admitted holding Vanderhoef’s hands down at her waist while Delong and Leffingwell strangled her.

In a later portion of the statement, Lingle claimed he only helped strangle Vanderhoef because Delong threatened to kill him if he did not help. Lingle also said that after he and Delong returned to Joplin on the day of the murders, Delong threatened to kill him if he told anyone what they had done.

The trial record included testimony from Karen Chambers. Chambers testified that on the afternoon of the day the murders were committed (January 19, 1999), she observed Delong and Lingle standing in Lingle’s bedroom in his apartment in Joplin. Chambers said she saw Delong give Lingle two small packages containing white powder and tell Lingle, “this was payment for something that he did.”

Arrest

Lingle was arrested before his trial, and after the arrest he gave a videotaped statement to police.

Trial

Charges and parties

Lingle was charged by information with five counts of committing the class A felony of murder in the first degree, in violation of section 565.020. These five charges stemmed from the strangulation deaths of Erin Vanderhoef and her three children: Darlene Vanderhoef, Jimmy Vanderhoef, and Christopher Franklin.

Delong was indicted by a Greene County grand jury on five counts of first-degree murder. Leffingwell was also ordered to stand trial.

Lingle was arraigned on five counts of first-degree murder by Greene County Circuit Judge Max Bacon.

Leffingwell’s status

Leffingwell died of AIDS before she could stand trial.

Jury verdict and sentence

A jury found Lingle guilty on all five counts. The sentencing included five concurrent sentences of life imprisonment without the possibility of probation or parole, and the narrative description also stated that he was ordered to serve five life sentences.

Lingle’s conviction and sentence were later reviewed on appeal.

Evidence and planning details

The trial court’s decision described that on Monday evening, January 18, 1999, Delong, Leffingwell, and their son, Scooby, were living together in an apartment in Joplin, Missouri. Lingle and his wife lived in the same apartment complex. Vanderhoef lived in a house in Springfield, Missouri, with her children.

On Monday evening, January 18, 1999, Delong and Leffingwell came to Lingle’s apartment and told him they intended to go to Springfield the next day and kill Vanderhoef to get her out of their lives. The court decision stated that Delong and Leffingwell also intended to kill the children because her children would be witnesses to the event.

They asked Lingle if he wanted to participate. The decision stated he initially declined, but changed his mind when Delong said he would give Lingle an “8 ball” of methamphetamine in exchange for helping to kill Vanderhoef and her children.

At trial, Lingle’s attorneys sought to depose Delong prior to trial. During that deposition, Delong refused to answer questions. At trial, Delong was the first person called as a witness during Lingle’s case. Defense counsel asked for a hearing out of the presence of the jury and stated: “[w]e’ve previously tried to take his deposition, and he refused to answer my questions .... So I would ask that Mr. DeLong be brought into the courtroom so we can determine what his intentions are with respect to giving testimony in this courtroom today.”

During that hearing, defense counsel elicited:

Would you state your name, please?
Richard Ivan DeLong.

Defense counsel asked whether Delong was the same Richard DeLong convicted of five counts of murder in the first degree. Delong answered, “Yes, ma'am.” Defense counsel asked whether he was currently serving five life-without-parole sentences in the Missouri Department of Corrections; Delong answered, “Yes, ma'am.”

Defense counsel then asked about threats made to Lingle during the course of the events of January 19, 1999. When asked if he made any threats, Delong answered: “I'd rather not even talk about it, really. I mean -- sorry.”

When defense counsel asked whether he was asserting a privilege in refusing to answer or simply stating it was a preference not to talk about it, Delong answered: “Just a preference, ma'am.”

Defense counsel asked: Q. “Are there any questions, Mr. DeLong, that I could ask you here today that you'd be willing to give me an answer to about the events that took place on January the 19 th , 1999, and the days following?” Delong answered: “A. No, ma'am.”

The prosecutor then elicited testimony from Delong about the Fifth Amendment:

Mr. DeLong, you don't know exactly what the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is, do you?
No, sir.
Q. And that's the same answer you gave us at your deposition quite a while back?
A. Yes, sir.

After arguments, the trial court asked an additional question and issued its ruling:

THE COURT: Mr. DeLong, even if I ordered you to testify, would you still just prefer not to talk about it and not say anything about it?
THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Okay. I'm not going to order [DeLong] to testify. It's clear that he would not testify. He probably does have the right to refuse to testify under the Fifth Amendment, and so I am not going to order [DeLong] to testify.

Lingle claimed the trial court erred by not forcing Delong to testify in Lingle’s behalf and by not ordering a mistrial when Lingle asked for one.

Delong’s prior conviction at the time of Lingle’s appeal

The trial court’s decision described that, before Lingle’s trial began, Delong had already been tried and convicted of five counts of first-degree murder, and the narrative description stated that Delong was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison in July 2001.

Expert evidence relating to diminished capacity

At trial, Lingle’s diminished capacity defense was supported by the testimony of expert psychologist Dr. Thomas Blansett. Blansett opined that Lingle lacked the capacity to coolly reflect on helping murder Vanderhoef.

The court decision stated that Blansett reviewed information contained in Lingle’s videotaped police statement and that it supported his opinion. Blansett also conducted his own interviews of Lingle, with the purpose described as determining “what [Defendant's] state of mind was, whether or not he felt threatened at all -- you know -- those kinds of things.” During one interview, Lingle told Blansett he only assisted Delong in murdering Vanderhoef because Delong threatened to kill him if he did not help.

Appeals

Lingle appealed his convictions. In his appeal, he argued:

1. the trial court made a mistake when it did not force Delong to testify in Lingle’s behalf; and
2. the trial court erred by not ordering a mistrial when Lingle asked for one.

The appellate court rejected both points.

First point: refusal to compel Delong to testify

Lingle argued that the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to order Delong to testify. The appellate decision stated it did not abuse discretion because Delong would not testify even if ordered to do so, because DeLong sufficiently invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, and because Lingle made no adequate offer of proof.

The decision also stated that it was up to the jury to decide whether Lingle participated in killing Vanderhoef because he was offered drugs or because he was threatened with death.

Second point: motion for mistrial during closing argument

Lingle argued the trial court erred in denying a motion for mistrial made during closing argument. The appellate decision quoted the prosecutor’s remarks in full, including a discussion of Lingle’s videotaped statement and the prosecutor’s characterization of parts as self-serving. The motion was made after the State concluded the first portion of its closing argument, and the appellate decision held the issue was not preserved for review due to the lack of a timely objection. It therefore reviewed for plain error.

The appellate decision stated there was no plain error, and it rejected the claim that the prosecutor’s comments were improper.

Appellate result and panel details

The appellate decision affirmed. The opinion stated: “Opinion Vote: AFFIRMED.” It also stated that Rahmeyer, C.J.-P.J. and Shrum, J. concurred.

The narrative included the appellate court procedural identifiers: “Case Number: 24812” and “Handdown Date: 06/15/2004,” with the appeal from Circuit Court of Greene County, “Hon. Henry W. Westbrooke, Jr.” and the opinion author “Jeffrey W. Bates, Judge.”

Outcome

The appellate court affirmed Lingle’s convictions and sentences. Lingle had been convicted on five counts of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of probation or parole on each count, to run concurrently.

Delong was found guilty of all counts and sentenced to life in prison in July 2001.

Aftermath

The narrative described that on the same day as the mass murder planning and execution, DeLong gave Lingle an “8 ball” of methamphetamine for participating in the murders, and Lingle used the drugs.

The appellate decision concluded that the trial court’s judgment of convictions and sentences was affirmed.