The motive has been uncovered, the gruesome chronology pieced together. The killers are behind bars, one of them for life. Case closed.
And so, a little over a year after the senseless murders of Half and Susanne Zantop, New Hampshire Attorney General Philip McLaughlin is finally able to discuss both the full details and his sentiments about the brutal killings and the resulting investigation.
A Case Apart
In a phone interview with The Dartmouth on Friday, McLaughlin-- whose office oversaw the investigation into the murders -- explained how the absence of "context" to the murders immediately set the case apart from the majority of crimes he has seen in the 25 years of his career.
In response to its unusual characteristics, McLaughlin's office put more staff on the case, altering the "mechanical characteristic" of their customary homicide investigation. Twenty to 25 investigators were assigned within a day or two, with 35 working together at one point.
Investigators did figure out one thing right away, despite the original lack of information: the killer had to be someone the Zantops had "deemed trustworthy to let in," according to McLaughlin. The Dartmouth professors had been known to regularly lock their doors, he explained, and there were no signs of a forced entry.
A Bargain for the Public
McLaughlin said that one reason his office reached a plea bargain with indicted Chelsea, Vt. teen James Parker was to obtain the details of the case for the public. A motive is not necessary to obtain a murder conviction, but McLaughlin said that providing the community with as many of the case's details as possible was always one of the prosecution's objectives.
Parker's testimony also allowed prosecutors to "checkmate" remaining suspect Robert Tulloch's "NGI" -- not guilty by reason of insanity -- plea, which the prosecution had anticipated he would use once the case came to trial.
The move resulted in a surprising early victory for the prosecution, when Tulloch pleaded guilty to two counts of first degree murder and one count of conspiracy to commit murder on April 4.
McLaughlin could think of only one other case he's had where someone pled guilty to murder. "That just doesn't happen," he said.
In this case, avoiding trial gave McLaughlin the opportunity to disclose the facts of the case that much faster. Had Tulloch gone to trial, McLaughlin was certain the prosecution would have won, but there would have been three to five years of waiting through appeals.
With the case settled, McLaughlin now answers questions about the prosecution's motives for making the deal with Parker as well. In his interviews with prosecutors, Parker, who pled guilty to a reduced charge of second-degree murder, which carries a maximum of 25 years, revealed that he was the one who slit Susanne Zantop's throat. But McLaughlin said he still feels the deal was fair.
Plea bargains "are not deals made looking backward," he explained. "They are deals made looking forward."
The prosecution had only circumstantial evidence linking Parker to the crime, while they had stronger evidence -- including DNA links -- against Tulloch. McLaughlin said his office concluded that they would probably win a conviction for second-degree murder against Parker and that he would likely receive a 30-year sentence.
In short, McLaughlin said, his team exchanged five years to achieve its larger goals: countering Tulloch's insanity defense and helping the public resolve its questions. He believes, however, that the unanswered questions in the case are equally as important as the answered ones.
Disturbing Questions
McLaughlin's comments on one of the big questions the Zantop murders raised -- what caused two seemingly normal teenage boys to commit such a horrific act -- revealed the profound effect the past year's involvement has had on him.
The "apparent nihilism,"--the lack of restraint the boys showed, the lack of any "rational" motive for the crime they committed -- especially as evidenced by Tulloch, "troubled" McLaughlin said. It also raised frightening questions as to the sources of such a cultural disconnection in a young person.
"I can understand man-angry-at-woman, woman-angry-at-man, man-angry-at-someone else," he explained. "There's still no excuse [for murder] but at least there is an historical precedence that lets you understand."
"But when we get into this 'Clockwork Orange,' Kubric understanding ... 'We killed them because they were there,' that has an undeniable emotional impact," he said.
Disturbing, moreover, because both teens seemed very different what the profile the general public assumes teens capable of murder should fit. They didn't drink, do drugs or come from troubled homes. Tulloch was president of his student council. Parker liked to play the guitar and perform in plays at his school.
"These youngsters were prototypical kids," McLaughlin said. The families they came from were "backbone of the community" types, he continued. "Anyone who met Mr. and Mrs. Parker would think that," he said, adding that the couple seemed like his own neighbors.
He said he couldn't say anything about Tulloch's parents because he has never met them.
The fact that in the Zantop murders there were two of them committing the same crime for the same irrational reasons leads McLaughlin to believe that such crimes indicate deeper problems in the society, specifically in the nature of the formation of children.
He pointed to the media -- television and movies full of violence, sex, and moral disregard -- as one, though certainly not the only, potential cause.
There has been ample scientific study indicating that children learn language just by hearing it during their early years, a sort of "osmosis," McLaughlin said. Yet we let this media conglomeration into our homes today without even thinking about the ways it might be "deculturizing, desensitizing" our children, he said.
McLaughlin stopped short of settling on a final answer to the societal question. In fact, he is concerned that people will come to a conclusion too quickly about why these boys were driven to such a crime without fully exploring the problem.
"We need to keep the questions out there. Why did this happen? My concern is that people will come to a conclusion too quickly, when we need to keep the questions out there," he said.
If the question of these teens leads us to settle on the idea that "there exist aberrant people who will act out," McLaughlin said that is the best conclusion we can reach, because it means that there are no deeper societal problems for which we are to blame.
