IN THE MATTER OF: ) )ALAN JEFFREY BANNISTER, CP-24 )Potosi Correctional Center
)Mineral Point, Missouri 63660 ) )
APPLICATION FOR COMMUTATION OF A SENTENCE OF DEATHTO: HONORABLE
MEL CARNAHAN Governor of the State of Missouri INTRODUCTION Alan Jeffrey "A. J."
Bannister, by and through his attorneys, respectfullysubmits this application, pursuant to art. IV,
§ 7 of the MissouriConstitution, and §§ 217.800 and 552.070 RSMo., to the Honorable Governor
MelCarnahan, requesting that he exercise his constitutional and statutory powersto commute his
death sentence to the alternative sentence of life imprisonmentwithout the possibility of parole
for 50 years. Mr. Bannister's appeals are almost entirely exhausted and he fullyanticipates that
his execution will be set by the Missouri Supreme Courtbefore the end of this calendar year. Mr.
Bannister respectfully requests anopportunity to present evidence and argument in support of
this application toGovernor Carnahan and the Board of Probation and Parole, or to a Board
ofInquiry. Mr. Bannister also respectfully requests that Governor Carnahan stayhis execution, as
contemplated by Rule 30.30, Missouri Rules of Court, so thisapplication will receive the full and
fair review which it deserves. See,e.g., Potts v. Zant, 638 F.2d 727, 730 (Sth Cir. 1981) (Georgia
governorgranted 90 day stay of execution pending clemency consideration); Miller v.State, 473
S.W.2d 413, 414-415 (Mo. 1972) (Stay of execution ordered bygovernor of Missouri pending
psychiatric review). A. J. Bannister has never denied that he shot and killed Darrell Ruestman
inhis trailer in Joplin, Missouri on August 21, 1982. Mr. Bannister does,however, dispute the
prosecution's theory that he was a hired assassin whokilled Mr. Ruestman for money. At trial,
the prosecution's theory that Mr.Bannister was hired "hit man" was not refuted in any way by the
defense. Sadly, as has been a common occurrence in Missouri capital cases, Mr.Bannister
received a woefully inadequate defense by the Missouri PublicDefender's office at trial. His
appointed public defender, Ray Gordon, did noinvestigation of the facts surrounding the case
and presented absolutely nodefense during either the guilt or penalty phases of trial. Not
surprisingly, it took the jury little time to convict Mr. Bannister and sentence him todeath. The
true facts surrounding the killing of Darrell Ruestman, which never cameout at trial due to the
inadequacy of his trial attorney, have recently beenbrought to light through the tireless efforts of
journalist and filmmakerStephen Trombley. Mr. Trombley became interested in A. J. Bannister's
caseafter meeting him at the Potosi Correctional Center in 1991 while filming thedocumentary
THE EXECUTION PROTOCOL, which was aired on the Discovery Channelin 1992. Mr.
Trombley aiso wrote a book with the same title in which Mr.Bannister is prominently featured.
After meeting Mr. Bannister in connection with the aforementioned book andfilm, Mr. Trombley
took an interest in the facts of A. J.'s case. As result,Mr. Trombley conducted his own
independent investigation into the facts of A.J. Bannister's case and is currently working on both
a book and a documentaryfilm about the case. Mr. Trombley's investigation of A. J. Bannister's
casehas revealed a much more complicated story of the events leading to theshooting of Darrell
Ruestman involving a series of events which preceded themurder occurring in the Peoria, Illinois
area and Phoenix, Arizona. The events leading to the shooting of Darrell Ruestman begin in the
Peoria,Ilinois area, where A. J. Bannister was born and raised. The central figurein the killing of
Darrell Ruestman is Peoria area crime boss, Ronald Wooten,a.k.a "Indian." Indian was the major
crime boss in the Peoria/Chillicothe,Ilinois area. Indian's primary criminal enterprises included
selling illegaldrugs, prostitution, and stolen property. Indian was a very violent personwho was
feared by everyone, and was reportedly responsible for numerousmurders for which he had never
been prosecuted. Ironically, Indian iscurrently serving a life sentence in an Illinois prison for the
1989 murder ofhis wife. In the summer of 1982, A. J. Bannister sold drugs for Indian. A. J. saw
anopportunity to get out of the drug business and remove himself from Indian'sdomination and
control by moving to Phoenix, Arizona to live with his adoptedsister, Patti Bannister. A. J. gave
a quantity of drugs that he had not yetsold for Indian to a young man named Eric Vincent, and
directed Vincent toreturn the drugs to Indian. A. J. and his adopted sister Patti then drove
toPhoenix, Arizona. For some reason, Eric Vincent did not return the drugs that A. J. had
givenhim to give to Indian for several days. As result, Indian believed that A. J.had left town and
ripped him off for the drugs. On July 9, 1982, A. J. was stabbed four times by unknown persons
outside asuburban Phoenix, Arizona tavern. He was hospitalized in intensive care for over a
week and in fact almost died. There is strong circumstantial evidence suggesting that Indian
ordered thestabbing of A. J. Bannister in Phoenix. There is also circumstantial evidencethat A.
J.'s step-sister, Patti Bannister, conspired with Indian to set up A.J.'s stabbing. The most
interesting piece of circumstantial evidence in thisregard is the fact that Patti placed a 17 minute
phone call to Indian, chargedto her mother's phone number, shortly after A. J. was stabbed. After
checking out of the Phoenix hospital, A. J. hitchhiked back tolllinois. A few days later, while
sitting on the sea wall along the Illinois River, a passing car fired several shots at him. A. J.
interpreted thisincident as another attempt on his life. Feeling that Indian was behind
theseattempts on his life, A. J. decided to confront him directly. When he confronted Indian, A.
J. was told by Indian that the attempts on hislife were orchestrated by a major drug dealer whom
he later identified asDarrell Ruestman. At a meeting at Indian's home on or about August 17,
1982,Indian convinced A. J. that the only way to prevent future attempts on hislife would be to
confront Mr. Ruestman directly. That night Indian gave A. J.an old .22 pistol to take with him
when he confronted Ruestman. The following day, August 18, 1982, Indian drove A. J. to the
Triple T Tavernin Mossville, Illinois. A. J. remained in the car while Indian went insidethe
tavern for approximately 20 minutes. When Indian returned, he gave A. J.a piece of paper with
Darrell Ruestman's name and address on it. Indian latergave A. J. $400.00 in order to buy a bus
ticket to Joplin and cover otherexpenses. After arriving in Joplin, the facts leading up to the
shooting of DarrellRuestman are basically correct as presented at his trial. However, the
majordispute involves the manner in which the actual shooting occurred. A. J.contends that he
knocked on the trailer door in order to confront Ruestmanabout the prior attempts on his life, and
never had a preconceived plan tokill him. After knocking on Ruestman's door, A. J. stated "I'm
fromlllinois." Immediately thereafter, he and Mr. Ruestman engaged in astruggle. A. J. pulled
the old .22 from his back pocket and the gun went offduring the struggle. In contrast, the
prosecution's theory at trial was that A. J. shot DarrellRuestman from the porch of the trailer
immediately after Ruestman answered thedoor. An examination of the physical evidence,
however, strongly supports A.J.'s story as opposed to the prosecution theory at trial. The most
significant piece of physical evidence supporting A. J.'s story isthe angle of the bullet. The
autopsy report indicates that the angle of thebullet was markedly downward. Photographs of the
trailer indicate that theporch was 3 to 4 inches lower than the threshold of the doorway. In
addition,it is well established from the record that both A.J. and the victim werelarge men. Thus,
if the shooting had occurred from the porch immediatelyafter the victim opened the door as the
prosecutor suggested at trial, theangle of the bullet would have been either upward or at the very
least,horizontal. Other independent factors also strongly support A. J.'s story,and are inconsistent
with the prosecution's theory A. J. was a paid "hit man." A. J. Bannister was arrested some seven
hours after the shooting at theJoplin bus station. On Monday, August 23, 1982, A. J. was
arraigned inMagistrate Court and the public defender was appointed to represent him.Shortly
thereafter, A. J. purportedly gave incriminating statements to theNewton County sheriff and led
the authorities to certain pieces of evidence,including the torn up note with Mr. Ruestman's name
and address. During these statements, which were not written or recorded, A. J. purportedly told
the authorities about a murder for hire plot involving Indian and a payment to himself of
$4000.00, $1500.00 up-front. However, A. J. never directly confessed to committing the murder
of Darrell Ruestman. In fact, A.J. has steadfastly contended that many of statements attributed to
him were fabricated by the Newton County sheriff. This theory of fabrication issupported by the
fact that the Newton County authorities had receivedinformation from Illinois authorities prior to
A. J.'s interrogation that thishomicide was a murder for hire arranged by the estranged husband
of LindaMcCormick, who was living with the victim at the time of the shooting. Ray Gordon, a
state public defender from Joplin, Missouri, was appointed torepresent A. J. Bannister at his trial.
Gordon conducted little or noinvestigation into the facts of the case, and only met with A. J.
three orfour times prior to trial. At trial, Gordon presented only one witness in theguilt phase and
put on absolutely no defense. Both A. J. and his family maderepeated attempts to contact Mr.
Gordon to inform him of witnesses andevidence which should be presented at trial. Inexplicably,
Gordon failed toreturn phone calls from A. J.'s family and refused to conduct anyinvestigation
into the facts and circumstances of the case. Moreover, given the limited resources of the
Missouri Public Defender's office at that time, there would have been no funds or resources
available to do the necessary investigation which would have involved a considerable amount of
work in both Illinois and Arizona. Given the fact that no defense was presented at trial, it is not
surprisingthat the jury convicted A. J. Bannister of capital murder after less than anhour of
deliberation after a short three day trial. In addition, Gordonpresented no evidence in mitigation
of punishment during the sentencing phaseand conducted no investigation into Mr. Bannister's
background or history inorder to discover any potential mitigating evidence. As result, it can
comeas little surprise that the jury assessed the death sentence. Since his 1983 conviction and
death sentence, A. J. Bannister has beensitting on Missouri's death row while his case worked its
way through thecourts' appellate process. During his incarceration, Mr. Bannister has been
amodel inmate and poses no threat to either prison staff or other inmates. Mr.Bannister has
become a sort of international media celebrity, in light of hisprominent role in the book and film
THE EXECUTION PROTOCOL. As result of hismedia fame, A. J. met and married an English
woman, Lindsay Bannister onOctober 30, 1993. A. J. has demonstrated genuine remorse for the
death of Darrell Ruestman.However, at the same time, he has steadfastly contended that the
prosecution'sportrayal of him as a hired hit man was untrue and that the jury who convictedhim
and sentenced him to death did not hear the true facts of the case due tothe limited resources and
clear incompetence of his public defender, RayGordon. In addition, the same Missouri Public
Defender's office represented Mr.Bannister in-his state post-conviction proceedings and due to
the lack of timeand resources also failed to develop any evidence that would mitigate
Mr.Bannister's guilt for the killing of Darrell Ruestman. The current evidencewhich shows that
A. J. was not a paid killer was totally developed through theindependent efforts of writer and
film maker Stephen Trombley in connectionwith his current project of writing a book and doing
a documentary film aboutA. J. Bannister's life. Mr. Bannister and his undersigned attorneys
strongly believe that a thoroughexamination of the true facts surrounding this particular crime
and thehistory of the condemned prisoner will establish that permitting A. J.Bannister's
execution would be disproportionate to the nature of the crime anda clear miscarriage of justice.
A. J. Bannister, therefore, asks that theHonorable Governor Carnahan after a full and fair review
of all the factssurrounding his case, commute his death sentence to a sentence of
lifeimprisonment without the possibility of parole for 50 years. BACKGROUND AND
PROCEDURAL HISTORY On February 3, 1983, A. J. Bannister was convicted for the capital
murder ofDarrell Ruestman which occurred on August 21, 1982, and sentenced to death.On
November 20, 1984, the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed A. J. Bannister'sconviction and death
sentence. State v. Bannister, 680 S.W.2d 141 (Mo. banc1984). Thereafter, Mr. Bannister sought
post-conviction relief pursuant to MissouriSupreme Court Rule 27.26. The circuit court denied
Bannister's 27.26 petitionon December 17, 1985. Thereafter, the Missouri Court of Appeals
affirmed thedenial of Bannister's 27.26 motion. Bannister v. State, 726 S.W.2d 821 (Mo.App.
1987). Mr. Bannister thereafter sought habeas corpus relief in the federal courtspursuant to 28
US.C. § 2254. On August 23, 1991 Judge D. Brook Bartlett ofthe Federal District Court for the
Western District of Missouri entered anorder denying habeas corpus relief. Bannister v.
Armontrout, 807 F.Supp. 516(W.D. Mo. 1991). The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed
the denial of habeas relief in Bannister v. Armontrout, 4 F.3d 1438 (8th Cir. 1993). The full
Eighth Circuit thereafter denied rehearing en banc over the dissents of Chief Judge Richard
Arnold and two other active circuit judges. The United States Supreme Courtthen refused to hear
the case, by denying Bannister's petition for a writ of certiorari on October 31, 1994. Bannister v.
Armontrout,___ U.S. ___ (1994). Mr. Bannister does intend to seek further judicial review of
his convictionand death sentence. However, because of the strict procedural bar rulesgoverning
such review, it is unlikely that any court will agree to hear themerits of any future appeal. Mr.
Bannister will keep the Governor's officeapprised of the status and progress of any future
judicial proceedings in thecase. REASONS FOR COMMUTATION OF SENTENCE L Newly
discovered evidence clearly establishes that A. J. Bannister is notguilty of capital murder and
that the death sentence imposed in his case isdisproportionate to the true facts of the crime. The
prosecution's theory at A. J. Bannister's trial, which went unchallengedby his public defender
Ray Gordon, was that A. J. killed the victim for$4000.00. A. J. purportedly received this money
from a middleman named RonaldWooten, a.k.a. "Indian," at the behest of Richard McCormick,
the estrangedhusband of Linda McCormick, with whom the victim was living at the time he
waskilled in Joplin. A. J. Bannister admits to shooting Darrell Ruestman -- butfor a far different
reason than the theory advanced by the prosecution. Thecase of A. J. Bannister and the killing of
Darrell Ruestman is a much morecomplicated story involving several people, and events
occurring in Illinoisand Phoenix, Arizona. Before discussing the events leading to the killing
ofDarrell Ruestman, it is important to first learn a little backgroundinformation regarding the
persons involved in this case. 1. Richard "Dick" McCormick. In 1982, Dick McCormick ran a
garbage collection business in Minonk,[linois. He had married Linda, a petite strawberry blond,
when she was only14 years old. Linda kept the books for Dick's garbage business.
DickMcCormick was a large heavy set man, who was a hard drinking womanizing type.Dick
McCormick is well known in numerous taverns on both sides of the Illinoisriver. Darrell
Ruestman began working for Dick McCormick in 1981. By the spring of 1982, Darrell Ruestman
and Linda McCormick had fallen in love. To escape herunhappy marriage with Dick
McCormick, Linda agreed to leave Illinois withDarrell to move to Joplin, Missouri where
Darrell's uncle had a job waitingfor him in a construction business. After his wife left him, Dick
McCormick became very angry. Dick had approached a number of people during the summer of
1982, offering them moneyto go down to Joplin to kill Darrell Ruestman. One such plan was for
BillRussell,-who ran the local flea market in Minonk, to go down to Joplin to giveDarrell
Ruestman a good beating. Russell, in fact did take some of Dick'smoney and went to Joplin, but
failed to do the job. McCormick also approached Terry Widmer, who was Bill Russell's son.
Dickoffered Terry money to bring Darrell back to Minonk so he could torture himwith acid out
of his garbage dunip. Terry Widmer thought about thisproposition, but ultimately refused Dick's
offer. Marvin Wehrli, who workedat a service station at Minonk, turned down McCormick's
offer of money to killRuestman on at least three separate occasions. Frustrated at his lack of
success in obtaining a hit man to kill DarrellRuestman, Dick McCormick made the rounds at the
local taverns openly offeringanyone $5000.00 to kill Darrell Ruestman. As will be further
explained, itappears McCormick ultimately succeeded in his plot when he contacted
RichardWooten, a.k.a. Indian. However, it is extremely interesting, and unusual fora murder for
hire case that there was no evidence introduced by theprosecution in A. J. Bannister's trial that
Dick McCormick was behind themurder for hire plot that culminated in the shooting of Darrell
Ruestman. While A. J. Bannister's case was awaiting trial, Illinois authorities chargedDick
McCormick with four counts of solicitation to murder. However, McCormickplea bargained and
pled guilty to a misdemeanor, conspiracy to commitaggravated battery. Part of this plea bargain
involved his agreement tocooperate and in return McCormick served six months in the
Woodford CountyJail and thereafter received probation. Today, McCormick lives in
Bloomington, Illinois, where he runs a smallcatering business. Since the day after Darrell
Ruestman was killed, he andLinda have lived together and remained married. No direct
connection was everestablished between McCormick and A. J. Bannister, and in fact there is
none. 2. Ronald Rick Wooten, a.k.a. "Indian". The man called "Indian", whom the state refers to
as the "middle man" in itscase against A. J. Bannister, is a criminal who terrorized central
Ilinoisfor more than twenty years. He was at one time president of the Ilinoismotorcycle gang
the Arapahoes. He was a big time drug dealer, and used hisjob as a long haul truck driver for
Caterpillar to build a network ofnarcotics distribution throughout the United States. He was also
into prostitution. His sexual preference is young girls, and he recruited a numberof schoolgirls
from broken homes who would come and live at his farmhouse in Sparland, Illinois. When he
was finished with them, he turned them into prostitutes, and worked them out of a number of
properties he owned locally. Indian is a scary character, and while he is currently serving a
lifesentence in Illinois for the murder of his former wife, Kimberly Ray, localsto this day are
frightened to say very much about him, for fear ofretribution. Many local police officers become
nervous and testy when pressedabout why Indian was allowed to menace a community for
twenty years beforebeing sent to prison. Wooten, now forty-five years old, is the grandson of a
wealthy and respected farmer. Years ago, the grandfather made a fortune by selling a large
parcelof land on which Caterpillar built its main factory, just a mile from thehouse where A. J.
Bannister was raised. During A. J.'s childhood, Caterpillaremployed 26,000 people. It is still the
largest employer in the region. Acondition of old farmer Wooten selling the land to Caterpillar
was that Indianshould have a job there for life. Wooten's FBI records show a long history of
arrests for crimes such as theft,assault and battery, narcotics and, finally, murder. The FBI
records makeinteresting reading, because Indian never posted a cash bond higher than ahundred
dollars. Apart from the murder charge that finally put him behindbars, Indian has never been
convicted of any of the felony crimes for which hewas arrested and charged, despite compelling
evidence of his guilt. The present chief of police in Chillicothe, Illinois is Steve Maurer, who
was oneof A. J.'s closest friends in high school. Maurer believes that Indian may be implicated in
as many as twenty murders. The reluctance of people to speak openly of their dealings with
Indian isunderstandable. His reputation as someone to fear was based on the certainknowledge of
some locals that he was capable of murder. Some knew becausethey had been witnesses to
murders which, to this day, remain unsolved. Andthey knew that Indian's wealth and influence
within the community put himabove the law. As long as he was at liberty, he was the law in
certaincircles in central Illinois. If you made Indian angry, you would pay. An ex-girlfriend tells
how Indianterrorized her for two years after she left him and obtained a courtrestraining order
forbidding him to come within a mile of her. It made nodifference since Indian often used a
combination of fear and money to getothers to do his dirty work. Despite the restraining order,
the girlfriend'sbrake cables were cut. On another occasion, a man annoyed Indian at a partyheld
at his farmhouse in Sparland. He took the man outside. Other guestsheard a single gunshot. The
man was never seen again. During his trial forthe murder of Kimberly Ray, it was revealed that
Indian had one of hisflunkies shoot her while he watched. One of the three killers then had
sexwith the corpse. Kimberly was later buried in a ditch near the Caterpillarplant where Indian
worked. After one of the killers led police to Kimberly Ray's badly decomposed body, Indian was
finally brought to justice. He received a natural life sentence,and is presently incarcerated at
Joliet Correctional Center. For the firsttime in his criminal career, Indian couldn't bargain his
way out of jail byrolling on another criminal. Now that Indian is safely locked away, somepolice
officers will admit, off the record, that the system of "policeinformants" was responsible for
keeping one of the areas most dangerouscriminals on the streets and above the law. Although
Indian is serving a natural life sentence, many of the Illinoislocals continue to fear him. One
woman who had the courage to testify againstIndian in his trial for the murder of Kimberly Ray
continues to receive deaththreats. Others, who have witnessed the results of Indian's anger, do
notbelieve that he will be incarcerated for the rest of his life, and that hemight someday wreak
terrible vengeance against them. Perhaps more than anyone, A. J. Bannister had reason to fear
Indian.According to A. J., when he was seventeen, he was riding around Peoria onenight in
Indian's van with another biker. Without saying a word to either ofhis two passengers, Indian
stopped his van across the street from where afifteen year old black youth was standing. Indian
beckoned the youth over.As he approached the van, Indian pulled out his .44 and shot him dead,
thendrove away calmly. Indian never mentioned the incident again to A. J. It wasone of Indian's
ways of demonstrating that he meant business, and that hedidn't need a reason to hurt someone:
anyone. 3. A. J. Bannister. A. J. Bannister was born on July 1, 1958 in Peoria, Illinois, the first
childof Bob and Alice Bannister. A. J.'s father worked at the Caterpillar plant,which was the
area's largest employer. In 1963, the Bannister family moved toRome, Illinois, a smaller town 15
miles north of Peoria. A. J. grew up inRome and generally did very well in elementary and high
school. A. J. beganto get into minor scrapes with the law about the time he finished highschool.
But up until that time, he would have been what would be considered amodel student and young
man. In the summer of 1982, A. J. was twenty-three years old. He had been in andout of prison
since his senior year of high school, when he was sentenced to1-3 years at Menard Penitentiary
for the theft of a CB radio from a truck.After two further stints in the penitentiary, A. J. had little
chance ofgetting a job locally. Indian offered him the opportunity to make some easymoney by
giving him a quantity of cocaine to sell. He wanted $1500.00 backfrom the sales. Any money
that remained was A. J.'s profit. The cocaineturned out to be poor quality, and a local narcotics
bust put the fear ofarrest into A. J. He decided to return to Indian the remainder of the drugsand
the money he had made so far. A. J. went looking for Indian, but couldn't find him. A. J. had just
takenup with a new girlfriend. His adopted younger sister, Patti, was planning atrip out west to
meet her boyfriend in Colorado, and A. J. and his newgirlfriend wanted to go. He gave the drugs
and money to a friend named EricVincent, with instructions to return them to Indian. A. J., his
girlfriend and Patti ended up in Glendale, Arizona - a suburb ofPhoenix. A. J. found a job with a
local construction company, and was due tostart work on the following Monday. That Saturday
night, July 9, 1982, hewent to a bar, the Cactus Inn. It was hot, and he went outside for some
ny
air.A man called to him from across the parking lot. Suspicious, A. J. decided togo back inside.
As he moved, the other men came up behind him and stabbed himsix times in the back. The
wounds were up to six inches deep, and one of hislungs was punctured. He was left to die in the
parking lot. As he lostconsciousness, A. J. could hear the man in front of him say, "he won't rip
offnobody's drugs again.” A. J. thought he had seen the man before, but to thisday cannot place
him. A. J. was rushed to hospital by helicopter, where he underwent emergencysurgery. That
night, someone made a seventeen-minute phone call to Indian,charging it to the phone of Alice
Bannister - A. J.'s mother. Alice isadamant that her adopted daughter Patti made the call. Twelve
years later, A.J. cannot understand why Patti would have called Indian. (Since that time,Alice
has refused to talk to Patti. Patti continues to live in Arizona, andrarely visits Illinois, avoiding
Alice when she does.) A. J. was in intensive care for ten days. Against doctor's orders, he
checked himself out of hospital as soon as he felt strong enough to walk. He hitched a lift with
two women who were heading to Houston, and spent the night with them. He hitchhiked another
full day, sleeping at a roadside rest area,and arrived back home the next day. A. J. believed that
Indian had ordered the stabbing. He believed thatIndian's influence, and his network of criminal
connections, was sufficient toget the job done. There was talk in Chillicothe of a confrontation
betweenthe two men. A few days after A. J. returned home, he was sitting on the concrete sea
wallalong the Illinois River in South Rome, a mile from his mother's house, whensomeone took
a shot at him from a passing car on Highway 29, which runsparallel with the river. He ducked
behind the wall and waited for the car topass. A. J. resolved to confront Indian. A. J. called
Indian and demanded a meeting. It was set for later that nightat Indian's farmhouse in Sparland.
A. J. was nervous, and was relieved to seethat Indian's then wife, Trish Vandervere, was there.
Trish was unlike mostof Indian's other women. She was middle class, dressed conservatively,
andhad a good job with TWA down in St. Louis, where she normally stayed duringthe week. A.
J. demanded to know if Indian had ordered his stabbing. Indian told A. J.that Eric Vincent did
not return the unsold drugs and money owed to Indianright away. Before he delivered them to
Indian, Vincent went on a three-daydrunk. During that time Indian heard that A. J. had left
Illinois, andassumed that A. J. had ripped him off. Indian explained that he, in turn,owed the
man who had supplied him with the drugs. He had given the man A.J.'s name. Indian said that
when he realized it was all a mistake, he triedto call the other guy off, but it was too late. He
apologized.
A. J. only half believed Indian, but had no way of countering hisstory. At that point, A. J. was
motivated by revenge. He wasdetermined to find out who had him stabbed, and "to make him
feel someof the pain that I felt." A. J. told a friend he was going to "carvehis initials on the guy's
ass, one on each cheek", so that "every timehe sat down, he'd remember me." Indian said, "I
know who's responsible for your stabbing." There was aloaded .22 caliber pistol on the coffee
table between them. Indian gavethe gun to A. J. that evening. It turned out to be the murder
weapon. The next afternoon Indian drove A. J. to the Triple T Tavern inMossville, Ilinois. A. J.
remained in the car while Indian went insidethe tavern for approximately 20 minutes. Indian
returned with a pieceof paper with Darrell Ruestman's name and address on it. Indian thendrove
A. J. to a store where he purchased some gloves, and later gave A.J. $400.00 to purchase a
round-trip bus ticket to Joplin, Missouri, andto cover other expenses during his trip there. The
next day A. J.Bannister boarded a bus for Joplin, Missouri. 4. The shooting of Darrell Ruestman.
After arriving in Joplin on August 20, A. J. Bannister checked into alocal motel. He made his
way to the trailer park where Darrell Ruestman resided on August 21, 1982. At the trailer park,
A. J. befriended ayoung man named Glen Miller, who lived next door to Darrell Ruestman
andLinda McCormick. Most of that afternoon and early evening, A. J. stayed at Glen
Miller'strailer, hoping to get a glimpse of Darrell Ruestman. Early thatevening, A. J. observed
Ruestman and Linda McCormick coming and goingfrom the trailer. A. J. needed to get Glen
Miller to leave the trailerpark and to accomplish this told him to meet him later at a local bar. At
approximately 10:00 p.m., armed with the .22 caliber pistol thatIndian had given him in his back
pocket, A. J. Bannister approached thetrailer of Darrell Ruestman and Linda McCormick. After
knocking on thedoor, Darrell Ruestman answered. A. J. immediately told Ruestman uponthe
opening of the door, "I'm from Ilinois." Upon hearing this,Darrell Ruestman began scuffling
with A. J. in the doorway. A. J.pulled the .22 pistol from his back pocket and a single shot went
offduring the struggle. A. J. immediately ran from the trailer and madehis way back to the motel.
At this time, A. J. did not know whether theshot had hit Ruestman or not. In any event, A. J. had
no idea that hehad fatally wounded Darrell Ruestman during this scuffle. After disposing of the
gun and changing clothes, A. J. returned to the motel for a short period of time. A. J. later went
to a local tavernuntil closing time. A. J. checked out of the motel at about 4 a.m. andtook a cab to
the Joplin bus station. While waiting for a bus to returnhim to Illinois, A. J. was arrested by
members of the Joplin PoliceDepartment. The autopsy of Darrell Ruestman revealed two
significant factssupporting A. J.'s story of how the shooting occurred. First, thebullet that
penetrated Darrell Ruestman's heart entered his body at amarkedly downward angle. Had the
shooting occurred as the prosecutioncontended, from the porch immediately after Ruestman
opened the door tothe trailer, the entrance wound would have not been at a markedlydownward
angle. In addition, there were powder burns on the victim'sclothing around the area of the
entrance wound, which suggests that theshooting occurred at extremely close range. Both of
these irrefutablefacts arising from the autopsy support A. J.'s story of how the shootingoccurred,
and clearly contradict the prosecution's theory that this wasa murder for hire in which A. J. shot
the victim from the porch of thetrailer immediately after Darrell Ruestman answered the door. II.
A. J. Bannister's trial counsel, due to lack of resources and incompetence, failed to investigate
and discover the true factssurrounding this crime, and further failed to present any
meaningfuldefense in either the guilt or punishment stage of A. J. Bannister'strial. A. J.
Bannister's trial presents the unfortunate, yet common occurrencein death penalty cases, where
the death sentence, if not the capitalmurder conviction itself, could have been avoided had the
defendantreceived competent representation during his trial. In the four monthsbetween A. J.'s
arrest and his trial, A. J.'s appointed attorney, Ray Gordon, met with him approximately four
times for approximately an hourof total time to discuss potential trial strategies and courses
ofinvestigation. A. J. and members of his family repeatedly attempted to._prod Ray Gordoninto
conducting a more thorough investigation of the facts of the case,in order to provide A. J. with
witnesses and a defense to the charge.These pleas, for whatever reason, fell upon deaf ears. As
result, RayGordon went to trial representing a man whose life was at stake withoutever having
conducted any investigation into the facts of the crime orthe background of his client. Gordon
simply did not present any defenseat all. As result, it can come as little surprise that it took the
juryless than an hour to both convict and sentence A. J. Bannister to death. Ray Gordon's failure
to investigate is probably not entirelyhis fault. At the time of A. J.'s trial, the Missouri Public
DefenderSystem was dreadfully underfunded and understaffed. Ray Gordon did nothave any
available funds nor investigative staff at his disposal withwhich to properly investigate the case,
even if he had the desire andinclination to do so. The necessary investigation for this case, if
funds had been available,would have taken several man hours and several days of work. In fact,it
has taken investigative journalist, Stephen Trombley, several monthswith which to compile all of
the facts in connection with his book anddocumentary film. A. J.'s entire trial, beginning with
jury selection and ending with thejury's pronouncement of the death sentence, lasted a scant
three days.At the guilt phase, Ray Gordon called only one witness for the defense,a police officer
who had little to offer to A. J. Bannister's defense.At the penalty phase, Gordon called no
witnesses and offered no evidenceon A. J.'s behalf in support of his argument that the death
sentence wasnot appropriate in the case. A. J. Bannister firmly believes that if hehad been given
an adequate defense at trial, he would have beenacquitted of capital murder, or at the very least
received a lifesentence instead of the death penalty. If the case had been properly investigated
and an effective defense presented at trial, the following facts could have been presented forthe
jury's consideration in both the guilt and the penalty phases oftrial. In the guilt phase, as
previously noted, there is substantialevidence that A. J. was not knowingly acting as a hit-man
on behalf ofIndian. This theory could have been established by the independentevidence
regarding A. J.'s stabbing in Phoenix, which could have beencorroborated by existing medical
records from the Phoenix hospital. A.J.'s story could have also been corroborated by telephone
records inPhoenix and Illinois. In particular the seventeen-minute phone callfrom Phoenix to
Indian, charged to Alice Bannister's phone, stronglycorroborates the theory that Indian was
behind A. J.'s stabbing. Inaddition, phone records clearly establish a link between Indian and
DickMcCormick through the Triple T Tavern. In addition, an investigation conducted in Illinois
would have revealed Dick McCormick's numerous attempts to hire someone to kill the man
whostole his wife, and the fact that he was under indictment for solicitingthe murder of Darrell
Ruestman at the time of A. J.'s trial. The juryheard nothing about Richard McCormick's other
attempts to solicit themurder of Darrell Ruestman, even though Linda McCormick was the
veryfirst prosecution witness at trial. Coupled with the existing physical evidence regarding the
powder burnsand the angle of the bullet, Ray Gordon could have presented aneffective defense
based on accident or self-defense under Missouri law.Had this evidence been presented to the
jury, Mr. Bannister is confidentthat he would have been acquitted of capital murder, and at the
veryleast been convicted of either second degree murder or manslaughter. Regarding the guilt
phase, one last issue needs to be addressed: A.J.'s "so-called confession." Many of the courts
reviewing A. J.'s caseon appeal have viewed the case as one where A. J. gave a
completeconfession to the contract killing of Darrell Ruestman. This conclusion is clearly not
accurate. On August 23, 1982, A. J. Bannister did give certain incriminatingstatements to
members of the Newton County Sheriff's Department. However, none of these purported
incriminating statements were everaudio or videotaped by the police officers involved, nor were
anywritten statements given by Mr. Bannister. This fact alone issuspicious, and casts doubts
upon the veracity of this "confession"testimony by the police. Mr. Bannister has always
contended that the police officers whotestified at his trial distorted and fabricated many of the
statementshe gave to them on August 23, 1982. A. J. doesn't deny that he toldthem about Indian
and Indian's complicity in the killing. However, thecritical detail upon which A. J. and the police
officers' storiesconflict is the question of whether A. J. told them that he received$4000.00,
$1500.00 up-front, to kill Darrell Ruestman. Several independent factors corroborate A. J.'s
contention that henever told the police officers that he was a hired assassin that hadbeen paid
$1500.00 "front money." First, Rodney Ruestman, the victim'sbrother and deputy sheriff in
Woodford County Illinois, called theNewton County Sheriff's Department immediately
following his brother'sshooting prior to A. J. Bannister's arrest. During these phone calls,Rodney
Ruestman told the Missouri authorities of his firm belief thatthe murder of his brother was a
contract killing arranged by DickMcCormick. Thus, it is clear that the Missouri authorities
possessed information that predisposed them to believe that the murder of DarrellRuestman was
a contract killing, prior to the arrest and interrogationof A. J. Bannister. Thus, it would have
taken little imagination forlaw enforcement officials to fabricate that A. J. admitted to them
hereceived a sum of money from Indian to perform the killing. Second, if A. J. had been paid
$1500.00 up-front to kill DarrellRuestman, he should have had a substantial sum of money on
his personwhen he was arrested at the Joplin bus station. However, in fact, A. J.had only 42 cents
in his pocket when he was arrested by the Joplinpolice. In addition, if he was a well-paid
professional hit-man, whydid A. J. remain in town for more than 7 hours after the "hit"
wasaccomplished? Finally, it seems very unlikely that a professionalhit-man would use a rickety
.22 caliber pistol instead of a morereliable and powerful weapon. All of these factors strongly
suggestthat A. J. was not a hired killer. One final point needs to be addressed in regard to A. J.'s
"so-calledconfession." Even the law enforcement officials who testified about A.J.'s oral
statements concede that A. J. never actually admitted shootingDarrell Ruestman. In addition, the
statements A. J. purportedly madewere vague, third person narratives of how the killer could
have accomplished the shooting. These vague, third person statementspurportedly given by A. J.
are a far cry from the total confession to acontract killing as this case has been described by
reviewing courts. Inexplicably, Ray Gordon did not effectively exploit any of theseweaknesses
in the prosecution's presentation of A. J.'s statements.Coupled with Gordon's failure to present
additional existing factsnegating the contract murder theory, the jury in this case did not
fullyunderstand the circumstances surrounding A. J.'s "so-called confession"due to Gordon's
incompetence. Had Gordon performed competently inpresenting these arguments and evidence
to the jury, Mr. Bannisterbelieves he would not have been convicted of a capital offense, or atthe
very least there would have been sufficient residual doubt to sparehim a death sentence even if
the jury had found him guilty of a capitalmurder. As to the penalty phase of trial, Ray Gordon's
utter ineffectiveness isalso self-evident. Gordon called absolutely no witnesses nor offeredany
evidence to the jury in support of any argument that the deathpenalty was not warranted in A. J.'s
case. It is well establishedunder Eighth Amendment principles that it is crucial for the defense
incapital cases to conduct a full investigation and present any relevant mitigating evidence in
support of a life sentence. Gordon conducted no investigation whatsoever into Mr. Bannister's
background and character.Had he done so, many members of A. J.'s family and friends
fromIllinois would have been willing to testify on his behalf in thepunishment stage. This type of
testimony could have very easilyconvinced the jury not to sentence Mr. Bannister to death. In
addition, there was existing evidence that could have been discovered by Gordon to call into
question the existence of the twostatutory aggravators found by the jury in support of the
deathpenalty: (1), that A. J. killed the victim for money; and (2), that A.J. Bannister had a
substantial history of serious assaultiveconvictions. As to the former aggravating circumstance,
as previouslynoted, there is substantial evidence to support A. J.'s story that hewas not a paid
killer. Had this evidence been presented to the jury,there is a substantial probability that they
would not have found the existence of this aggravating factor. The second aggravating factor
concerns the fact that the prosecutorintroduced records of A. J. Bannister's prior convictions, and
argued tothe jury that his criminal record was sufficient to establish that hehad "a substantial
history of serious assaultive convictions." (Supp.Trial Tr. at 68-69). In this regard the
prosecution introduced recordsindicating that A. J. Bannister was convicted of a residential
burglaryin 1976; the rape of woman named Diane DeVoss in 1979; another residential burglary
in 1979; the armed robbery of a woman namedKimberly Engquist in 1979; and finally an armed
robbery and deviatesexual assault of a woman named Jenelle Nelson in 1979. On their face
alone, his criminal "rap sheet" would seem to indicatethat A. J. Bannister had a substantial
criminal record of an assaultivenature, excluding the burglary convictions. However, a
cursoryinvestigation into the facts of A. J.'s prior convictions would haveindicated otherwise.
Specifically, the 1979 rape conviction of Diane DeVoss, was a''statutory" rape not involving any
assaultive conduct. The factssurrounding that charge involve the fact that A. J. had consensual
sex with an under-age girl; A. J. was 17 and Ms. DeVoss was 14 at the timethis consensual
sexual encounter occurred. Thus, had the true factssurrounding this incident been discovered and
brought forth by RayGordon, the jury would have learned that this rape conviction was not ofan
assaultive nature. Similarly, A. J. Bannister's 1979 convictions for armed robbery anddeviate
sexual assault of Jenelle Nelson involved a situation where A.J. and a companion, Tim Bailey,
had sex with a known prostitute, paidher, then took the money back and stranded her in the
country. In fact,A. J. only agreed to plead guilty to these offenses as part of a" package deal" plea
bargain involving other charges. The other 1979 robbery conviction of Kimberly Engquist
involved asituation where A. J. and Tim Bailey, while intoxicated, stole somepacks of cigarettes
from a gas station. During this robbery, A. J. hada gun in his waistband that was observed by the
clerk. The facts surrounding all of A. J.'s prior convictions could have beeneasily discovered by
Ray Gordon had he checked the police files from Illinois. Had he presented the true facts
surrounding theseconvictions, it is evident that A. J.'s prior convictions could haveconvinced the
jury to find that A. J. did not have a "substantialhistory of serious assaultive convictions." A. J.
Bannister's case does not present the situation where theevidence supporting his death sentence
was overwhelming. In fact, the sentencing jury obviously seriously considered the life
imprisonmentalternative, as evidenced by their question to the judge duringsentencing phase
deliberations, regarding whether A. J. could everpossibly be released prior to 50 years if they
gave him a lifesentence. (Supp. Trial Tr. at 84-86). The various state and federal courts who have
reviewed A. J.'sconviction and death sentence have never addressed these issues relatingto
Gordon's incompetence at trial. In state post-conviction proceedingswhere issues regarding trial
counsel's ineffectiveness must be raisedunder Missouri law, A. J.'s 27.26 counsel Robert
Wolfrum was denied acontinuance in order to conduct further investigation into the
factssupporting ineffectiveness claims against Ray Gordon. Wolfrum, a memberof the same
Missouri Public Defender's Office, also lacked the neededinvestigative and monetary resources
to fully investigate any ineffectiveness claims against Ray Gordon. As result of this defect
in27.26 proceedings, any such claim was forever procedurally barred fromreview on the merits
by the federal courts in the future. See Keeney v.Tomayo-Reyes, 112 S.Ct. 1715 (1992). A. J.
Bannister fully intends to ask the Missouri and federal courts toreview the merits of these
ineffectiveness claims against Ray Gordon. However, in light of the strict procedural bar rules
enforced by thecourts, it is very unlikely that the courts will reach the merits ofthese claims.
Thus, Governor Carnahan is the only authority who has thepower to remedy this obvious
injustice resulting from the incompetenceof A. J. Bannister's trial counsel. I. During his
incarceration on death row, A. J. Bannister hasdemonstrated genuine remorse for his crime, has
been a model inmate, andwould pose no physical threat to prison staff or other inmates if
hissentence were to be commuted to life imprisonment. Unlike many, if not most incarcerated
individuals, A. J. Bannister doesnot profess his innocence. A. J. has never denied shooting
DarrellRuestman or attempted to avoid responsibility for his actions. Duringnumerous interviews
with the press and media, A. J. has candidly admitted his involvement in the shooting and
demonstrated genuineremorse and sympathy toward the family of the victim. A. J. Bannister
realizes that he is deserving of punishment forshooting Darrell Ruestman, but strongly believes
that his death sentencefor his involvement in the shooting is clearly disproportionate andunjust.
This injustice is further highlighted by the fact that the twomasterminds of the killing of Darrell
Ruestman, Dick McCormick and Richard Wooten, were never brought to justice for their part in
themurder of Darrell Ruestman. A. J. Bannister has now spent more than 11 years on Missouri's
deathrow. During that time, he has never posed a serious disciplinaryproblem to prison officials.
In fact, A. J. has lived in generalpopulation since the restructuring of Missouri's death row at the
PotosiCorrectional Center. From his past behavior while incarcerated, it isabundantly clear that
if his sentence were commuted he would pose nofuture threat of violence toward other inmates
nor prison officials. As result of his prominent role in the book and film THE
EXECUTIONPROTOCOL, A. J. has developed numerous friendships and corresponded
withnumerous individuals from all over the world. Last year, he met andmarried an
Englishwoman, Lindsay Bannister. They recently celebratedtheir first anniversary together on
October 30, 1994. Currently, A. J. Bannister's life story and the circumstances of thiscrime are
being filmed for a Discovery Channel documentary by StephenTrombley, who previously
produced and directed THE EXECUTION PROTOCOL.This documentary and an
accompanying book will be released sometime inearly 1995. In light of his newly found media
fame, A. J. Bannister has grantednumerous interviews to the print and film media regarding not
only hispersonal situation on death row, but his outlooks on other subjects suchas illegal drugs
and other criminal justice issues. A. J.'s mediacontacts exhibit an intelligence and level of
humanity, as well as aninsight into the criminal justicesystem, that would be tragically
extinguished if he were to be executedby the State of Missouri. 1V. CONCLUSION Since his
appeals are nearly exhausted, Governor Carnahan is the onlyauthority with the power to prevent
the unjust execution of Alan JeffreyBannister. As is sadly all too common in death penalty cases,
A. J.Bannister faces death as direct result of an underfunded and incompetentdefense attomey
who represented him at trial. Mr. Bannister has aptlydemonstrated in this clemency petition that
had he received a competent defense at trial, he would not be forced to ask Governor Carnahan
tointervene to save his life. In an ideal world, the criminal justice system fairly sorts out
theguilty from the innocent, while at the same time doling out fair andjust punishment to those
convicted of serious crimes. However, thecriminal justice system cannot operate fairly in a
situation, as in A.J. Bannister's case, where an indigent defendant on trial for his lifeis provided a
totally inadequate and underfunded defense. In addition, the appellate process in death penalty
cases has become amorass of petty procedural rules, which many have argued is the resultof a
conscious effort by the United States Supreme Court to deny fulland fair review to death row
inmates of their constitutional claims. A.J. Bannister's appeals are illustrative of this legal trend
and dilemmaas well. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, as well-as the lowercourts refused to
hear the merits of the clear violation of A. J.'sconstitutional right to counsel, which would have
resulted in a new andfair trial, because of a procedural "technicality." Similarly, because27.26
counsel did not fully develop the aforementioned ineffectiveassistance of counsel claims in state
post-conviction proceedings, A. J.Bannister's claim that he received ineffective assistance of
trialcounsel will be never be heard on the merits by any court. Governor Carnahan should,
therefore, intervene and exercise hisconstitutional and statutory powers to prevent the obvious
injustice ofpermitting the execution of A. J. Bannister. For all the aforementionedreasons, A. J.
_ Bannister respectfully requests that Governor Carnahan, after a thorough and fair review of his’
clemency petition and supportingevidence, as provided for under Missouri law, enter an
executive ordercommuting his death sentence to a sentence of life imprisonment withoutthe
possibility of parole for 50 years, or grant such other and furtherrelief that the law may permit.
Respectfully submitted, Christopher D. Schneider #39544 and Bruce E. Baty #32386
MORRISON AND HECKER 2600 Grand Ave. Kansas City, MO 64108 816/691-2600 and Kent
E. Gipson, #34524 and Charles M. Rogers, #25539 MO CAPITAL PUNISHMENT RESOURCE
CENTER 5319 Rockhill Road Kansas City, MO 64106 816/363-2795
