CLEARFIELD – The husband of a 40-year-old DuBois woman who has been accused of kidnapping her 4-year-old daughter and fleeing to Utah testified this morning during the first day of her trial.
Laura D. Kilmer, 40, of DuBois is charged with kidnapping to facilitate a felony, kidnapping to inflict injury or terror and interference with the custody of children.
Kilmer’s husband, Joseph Kilmer, 41, said he married the defendant in 2002, and they shared their current 6-year-old daughter who was born in March 2006. At the time, he said they were residing in New Bethlehem and excited about the birth of their first child.
However, he testified that within months of their daughter’s birth, his wife’s behavior changed dramatically. She became suspicious of “everyone and everything” that involved their daughter.
In addition, he said his wife became “obsessed” with Internet sites that filled her with ideas about aliens, which she felt were “out to get her.” She often discussed the need for “escape money” and even went so far as to borrow money and to sell their household appliances.
When their daughter was 4 months old in July 2006, Joseph Kilmer offered to take her to a medical appointment. His wife said he couldn’t and threatened to contact police if he did. She planned to “make something up” for police, he said. At the time, he said their daughter was impacted and the pediatrician suggested a medical procedure.
According to him, the defendant objected and wanted to consult with another pediatrician. He said a second pediatrician recommended the same procedure, which was performed on their daughter. Afterward, he said his wife accused him of allowing the medical staff to molest their daughter right in front of them.
In early 2010, Joseph Kilmer testified that his wife feared that he would leave her and their daughter once he completed his education. She often asked him to leave their marital residence before being asked to return. She began making threats that if he didn’t resolve their differences, he’d never see their daughter again.
He said that in April 2010, his wife went to New Jersey and stayed with friends or relatives. She took their daughter with her for a couple months and he only had “sporadic” telephone contact with their daughter. At this point, the defendant stipulated that if he wanted to see their daughter, he would have to move to New Jersey.
Joseph Kilmer then sought legal counsel to have custodial rights, which angered his wife. He said she threatened that he’d never see their daughter again if he didn’t drop his attorney. His attorney petitioned the court in June/July 2010, and there was a custody hearing scheduled.
He told the jury that his wife contacted him the day before, and he saw their daughter at their marital home in New Bethlehem for the first time in months. His wife instructed their daughter to leave the room, at which time she (the defendant) threatened to “go on the run underground and off-grid” with their daughter if he didn’t drop his attorney.
The defendant also advised him that she’d never get caught. If she sensed being caught, she’d kill herself and their daughter, he said.
“It made me numb. I said, ‘you can’t be serious; this is our baby here.’ She had this cold look in her eyes. I cried,” testified Joseph Kilmer. He called his attorney and advised he and his wife had reached a resolution and agreed upon him seeing their daughter 5 days per week.
He said their lives never improved and only worsened. Any time he offered to spend time with their daughter, his wife told her not to go with him, because he’d hurt her. Laura Kilmer shook her head in disagreement during his testimony.
In October 2010, Joseph Kilmer saw his daughter occasionally and always in a public place, as that’s where he felt safest. He wasn’t permitted to be alone with his daughter.
He saw his daughter Dec. 3, 2010 at the DuBois Wal-Mart and McDonalds. The defendant was staying with her parents in DuBois at the time. He said his wife wasn’t following their custody agreement and he sought his attorney who filed a petition with the courts.
He said they had a custody hearing scheduled for Dec. 17, and his wife indicated plans not to attend. On Dec. 4, 2010, she again threatened to go on the run and to kill herself and their daughter if she was ever caught. He described his mental state as “terrified,” knowing the defendant owned a handgun.
On Dec. 17, 2010, Joseph Kilmer said he and his attorney and the defendant’s attorney appeared for the custody hearing in Clarion County Court. However, the defendant didn’t appear with their daughter. “I was sick. I was nervous. I was terrified. She was doing the first part of her three-folded threat,” he said.
At the hearing, the courts granted him supervised visits, which were to begin Christmas Eve that year. However, he neither saw his wife nor their daughter. He said that he became numb again, as she appeared to have moved into the second phase of her plan; she wasn’t anywhere to be found.
At that point, Joseph Kilmer notified his attorney who petitioned the court for full custody. He said another custody hearing was scheduled for Jan. 4, 2011, at which time his wife didn’t appear. He appeared before the court with his attorney and was awarded full custody of his daughter.
On Jan. 4, 2011, he didn’t see his daughter and said he hadn’t since Dec.3, 2010. He contacted the DuBois-based state police. On Feb. 28, 2011, he was notified by U.S. Marshal James Phelps that his daughter had been rescued in Utah. He then flew to Salt Lake City to assume custody of his daughter.
Kilmer was initially scheduled to stand trial Dec. 28, 2011 for these charges; however, it was declared a mistrial by Judge Paul E. Cherry.
In December, Juror No. 8 didn’t show for the trial and cited a mix-up in dates. Cherry said the trial could have proceeded with an alternate juror in that seat.
In Pennsylvania, two additional jurors are picked alongside the 12 regular jurors. The alternates can fill a vacancy left by one of the regulars if for some reason they cannot complete the trial.
Cherry said ultimately, it was Kilmer’s decision regarding how the court would proceed, at which time she sought a mistrial.
When asked by the judge, Clearfield County District Attorney William A. Shaw Jr. didn’t object to the mistrial even though he was prepared to prosecute the case.
Shaw said he wanted to proceed “cleanly” and to avoid any appellate issues; therefore, he wouldn’t object to the mistrial if the defendant wanted it.