LEWISTOWN – State prosecutors sought to undermine a convicted murderer’s claims that a gang of Poplar girls was really behind the 1979 slaying, as Barry Beach’s proof-of-innocence hearing tentatively closed Wednesday with a judge saying a second part to the unusual proceeding might be needed.
Beach is bringing forward new evidence that relies heavily on testimony from various people that a few women have over the years indicated they were involved in the crime.
But one of those women told The Associated Press in an interview after the close of the hearing that she had no involvement in the crime, as Beach’s backers allege.
Sissy Atkinson said rumors that she and other girls killed fellow student Kim Nees, 17 at the time of the 1979 killing, are fabrications.
“Never, ever, would I do it,” Atkinson said in an interview.
Atkinson speculated that some of those making the allegation, which has been a big part of a high-profile case and the subject of many news stories over the years, are attention-seekers building on the legend of the alleged gang-of-girls theory.
Atkinson, under subpoena, was never called to testify by Beach’s lawyers. Atkinson said she was looking forward to the opportunity to clear her name.
“I wanted to defend my honor,” said Atkinson, who lives in Poplar. “They got to go up there and say anything they wanted.
“I have never been brought down in spirit over the years because I know I am really innocent.”
Beach’s lawyers have built a case based on testimony from former co-workers, friends and acquaintances of three women — Atkinson, Maude Grayhawk and Joanne Jackson Todd — that Kim Nees’ death was caused by a jealousy-fueled attack that got out of control. Grayhawk and Todd were not available for comment after the hearing but over the years have denied involvement when given a chance.
Prosecutors beat back the theory Wednesday.
The original investigator said the gang theory was a rumor around town from the start — and no proof was ever found to substantiate it. Former sheriff’s investigator Dean Mahlum said wounds to Nees’ body indicated one attacker, not a gang kicking the girl to death, as alleged by Beach.
“We were dealing with a single perpetrator as opposed to a large group of people,” Mahlum testified.
Atkinson’s brother, Robert Atkinson, who was on the Poplar police force at the time of the crime, told The Associated Press during a break in the hearing Wednesday that he agreed evidence was mishandled originally. He also said Beach may not have had a fair shake at his trial and has probably served enough time for the crime.
But Robert Atkinson said he believes Beach is the killer based largely on Beach’s confession.
Robert Atkinson said he also does not believe that his sister, Sissy Atkinson, who had lived a rough life as a drug abuser, was involved. He speculated, however, that she might have taken credit over the years for the killing as a way to bolster her credentials among a tough crowd.
“She likes that reputation,” he said.
Sissy Atkinson said she never took credit for it, even just as a way to brag about the reputation.
Beach long ago confessed to the killing, describing how he forcibly tried to kiss Nees. He described in that confession hitting Nees with a wrench and a tire iron, then thinking, “Oh, my God. What have I done?” after checking her pulse and finding she was dead.
Beach argues the confession was coerced by out-of-state detectives who picked him up on another charge and refused to let him go.
Beach lawyer Peter Camiel noted Wednesday that those detectives misunderstood key facts about what Nees was wearing. Their misconceptions made it into the confession, showing it was contaminated and unreliable, he said.
District Judge E. Wayne Phillips said he may have to hold another hearing on the constitutional claims over the confession, the effectiveness of Beach’s original lawyer and the actions of the original prosecutor, former Gov. Marc Racicot. That could force Racicot to again testify about those events.
Racicot testified about the case in 2007 before the parole board, which roundly rejected Beach’s same claims. During that hearing, Racicot forcefully beat back implications that he was guilty of misconduct in the case.
Phillips said he will weigh the credibility of the evidence as he considers whether it reasonably could have altered the outcome had it been presented at Beach’s trial in the 1980s. A new trial could be ordered.