Closing arguments describe Denise Frei as calculated killer, protective mother

DAVENPORT - Denise Frei's plan to kill boyfriend Curtis Bailey wasn't justified, she had a specific intent to kill him and her claim of being a battered woman doesn't give her a license to kill, Assistant Attorney General Douglas Hammerand said Wednesday in his closing

“She was cold and calculated,” Hammerand said after playing a portion of her confession in a police interview for the jury.

Hammerand said she thought she had the “perfect” plan to suffocate Bailey with plastic wrap, so there would be no marks, until he awoke. They could have stopped at that point but instead, Frei picked up a rock and started beating him – 11 to 30 times – and didn't stop until he died.

“Curtis Bailey created this situation that led to his death,” Kjas Long, Frei's attorney in his closing. “Denise Frei just wanted to escape his abuse, verbal belittling and the sexual acts forced on her. Bailey had many chances to back off but he refused.”

Long said the evidence shows Frei's motive was to save her son and grandson.

The jury started deliberating about 12:15 p.m. The trial started Aug. 15 and testimony wrapped up Tuesday.

Frei, 45, of Marengo, is accused of beating to death Bailey, 33, of Marengo, with a rock and other objects July 19, 2009. Frei's son Jacob Hilgendorf and friend Jessica Dayton, both 21, were convicted and serving life sentences for their part in the crime.

Frei testified Monday she killed Bailey because he sexually, physically and verbally abused her and threatened to burn or kill her children if she left him. She had no other way out, except to end his life, she said.

Hammerand said the state met its burden of proof for first-degree murder. The jury shouldn't consider the defense's claims of self-defense or insanity because the killing wasn't justified and the defense didn't meet the burden for legal insanity.

Hammerand said Frei wasn't justified in killing Bailey because she wasn't in imminent danger, which is required for self-defense.

“She's not justified if she started or continued the incident,” he said.

Frei isn't legally insane, Hammerand said. A person must be incapable of understanding the nature and quality of an act or not able to distinguish right from wrong, Hammerand said. Both expert witnesses said she understood her actions and knew it was wrong.

Marilyn Hutchinson, a psychologist from Wichita, Kans., testified Frei suffered from post-traumatic stress and battered woman syndrome, Long said. Frei perceived danger differently than others because of her mental illness. She believed her son was in imminent danger.

“Frei didn't act with malice, she wanted to escape,” Long said. “She didn't have an evil heart. She tried to kill Bailey in a way so he wouldn't suffer (using plastic wrap). You can consider manslaughter because malice wasn't involved.”

Jurors should consider insanity if they decide she's not guilty of the lesser offenses, Long said.

“So, now it's Curt's fault or it must be the police or is it Denise Frei's fault?” Hammerand said on rebuttal argument. “Pick a defense. This isn't a game show.”

Frei wasn't justified, Hammerand said. There was no imminent threat. She chose suffocation because it was something she thought nobody could detect, not because she was being humane.

“No malice in this case, seriously?” Hammerand said. “They took a rock that left a deep impression in his head. If that's not malice, what is?”

“Frei chose to kill him. Nobody had to die,” Hammerand said.