Foreman found guilty in 1995 murder of Mary Catherine Edwards

After lying dormant for decades, evidence collected in the aftermath of Beaumont schoolteacher Mary Catherine Edwards’ 1995 murder was shared with a jury seated before Jefferson County Criminal District Court Judge John Stevens beginning March 12. Seven days of prosecution testimony against the accused killer, Edwards’ former classmate, Clayton Bernard Foreman, concluded March 20; no defense witnesses took the stand.

In closing remarks, prosecutor Pat Knauth urged the jury to return the only verdict he said the evidence would allow: Guilty.

“A job half-done is a job un-done. You are the voice her family, her friends … this community has waited 30 years to hear,” Knauth said.

After less than an hour of deliberation, the jury returned a guilty verdict. During the seven-day trial and upon the announcement of the verdict, Foreman remained notably devoid of emotion. His only discernible reaction throughout the proceedings occurred when Judge Stevens informed him that a competent attorney would be appointed to aid in potential appeals; Foreman simply shook his head in refusal.

Foreman’s trek to trial was long; a local, statewide and national investigation finally came to an end after 26 years when advances in technology led officers to match DNA at the crime scene to that of former Beaumont resident and 1978 Forest Park High School graduate Foreman, subsequently resulting in his extradition from Ohio and 2021 capital murder indictment.

With prosecutors Sonny Eckhart, Mike Laird and Knauth representing the state, and defense attorney Tom Burbank representing Clayton Bernard Foreman, the jury was presented with dozens of testimonies including that of two of Foreman’s alleged victims, whose statements included several similarities to the sexual assault and murder of Mary Catherine Edwards.

Day 1: March 12

“My daughter has been murdered,” Mary Edwards wailed as she spoke to 911 dispatcher Dorothy Gray after finding her daughter’s defiled and lifeless body in 1995. “We found her, she’s handcuffed and has been tortured…I think they drowned her.”

Mary’s baby, Mary Catherine Edwards, is remembered by twin sister Allison (Brocato) as a beloved and trusting individual, who left fond memories of a shared life. Details emerged about Edwards’ routine existence as a fifthgrade teacher, living alone with her dog in a quiet townhome.

Other details were harder for the family to share – such as the state of Mary Catherine Edwards when her parents discovered her lifeless body, hands handcuffed behind her back, naked from the waist-down, poised on her knees with her head resting in a bathtub filled with water.

Key witnesses, including neighbors that heard unusual noises on the night of the murder, provided insight into the events leading up to Edwards’ demise and the day concluded with emotional testimony from Brocato, who vividly described the devastating impact of her sister’s death on their family.

Mary Edwards, as well as the victim’s father, Lum Edwards, have both since died.

Day 2: March 13

The second day of the trial delved deeper into forensic evidence and expert testimonies. Dr. Charles Harvey, a certified forensic pathologist, offered insights into the autopsy findings, remotely testifying due to health reasons, to reveal details about Edwards’ injuries and the circumstances of her death.

The jury was presented with critical pieces of evidence, including the clothing Edwards wore at the time of her death and the results of the sexual assault kit, which ultimately led to Foreman’s identification as the perpetrator. Defense attorney Burbank scrutinized the cause of death determination, challenging the initial conclusion of drowning and suggesting alternative theories.

Retired law enforcement officers explained processing evidence from the crime scene, highlighting challenges faced due to limited resources and 1995 technology limitations. Expert witnesses from forensic laboratories shed light on the advanced DNA analysis techniques used to identify Foreman as the killer decades after Edwards’ death.

Day 3: March 14

Thursday morning testimony started with Melissa Staples, a New Hampshire scientist, who received evidence at Cellmark Diagnostics on Jan. 24, 1995, to analyze and compare samples taken from Edwards’ body to blood samples willingly provided by Edwards’ ex-boyfriend at the time of her death, and a second male. Upon comparison, Staples said neither man was a match to the DNA evidence taken from Edwards’ body.

Staples testified that she later received samples from several individuals to compare to cavity swabs, nail clippings and unlabeled blood collected at the scene. None were a match.

Day three continued with forensic biologist Angela Fitzwater taking the stand. Fitzwater, a former employee of the Jefferson County Crime Lab, served as a forensic analyst for evidence collected at the scene of Edwards’ murder. Fitzwater testified to being responsible for analyzing Edwards’ flowered comforter in search of evidence. It was Fitzwater who confirmed a positive test for seminal fluid.

Next, jurors heard from Cassie Caradine, former DNA analyst at the Austin Crime Lab, and Allison Herd, DNA section supervisor at the Austin Crime Lab, who took the stand to add that she had been involved with evidence in Edwards’ case over the last couple of years.

Day 4: March 15

Friday morning began with the defense attempting to suppress a key piece of evidence – the “trash pull” that occurred on April 15, 2020, wherein evidence that formed the basis of the search warrant to acquire the defendant’s DNA was found. Judge Stevens heard the argument outside the presence of the jury.

The prosecution described how FBI Agent Tom Gill was contacted by the Beaumont Police Department to determine the location of where Foreman was residing at the time. Gill subsequently contacted a Reynoldsburg, Ohio, police 

With the jury returned to the courtroom, retired FBI Agent Gill took the stand, testifying that BPD asked him to attempt to covertly collect a DNA sample to match it with a known sample from the crime scene – and he complied. Evidence presented included hair, a plastic fork, five empty medicine bottles labeled with Foreman’s name, a plastic spoon and dental floss.

Next, BPD Detective Tina Lewallen described the Gedmatch database, which allows files from companies such as acestry.com and 23&Me to be uploaded to empower law enforcement to make familial connections and comparisons. According to Gedmatch.com, their program has contributed to the successful resolution of more than 400 investigations. Using the DNA profiles obtained from the Edwards case and comparing them to data found on Gedmatch, Lewallen described the process of linking familial matches to the samples on hand, creating a family tree of secondary connections, and narrowing down the link to the Foreman brothers. In short succession, Lewallen decided to focus on Clayton Foreman as a prime suspect and began the process of obtaining his DNA sample by gathering samples from his trash by way of Gammell and Gill, as mentioned in previous testimony.

Shera LaPoint, a forensic genetic genealogist with DNA Labs International, then took the stand to describe her professional experience in assisting with criminal cases such as the Texas Killing Fields. LaPoint described a process by which she established a family tree of over 7,000 people starting from the list of Gedmatch names and narrowing it down to the Foreman brothers.

The jury was dismissed for an extended lunch with Judge Stevens indicating there was business needing to be handled in their absence.

“The defense has filed a motion to suppress warrantless search and seizure…,” Stevens advised, in reference to the 2021 questioning of Foreman in Ohio.

Burbank added that any statements made in the video should be suppressed, alleging Foreman was not properly Mirandized before being interrogated. Prosecutors agreed that Foreman was not Mirandized but added that there was no requirement to do so.

“He was not in custody; the video makes that clear,” the prosecutor argued. “Ranger (Brandon) Bess told him he could leave at any time.”

Day 5: March 18

Monday morning, Judge Stevens overruled Burbank’s Friday objection and admitted into evidence the April 2021 police interrogation video of Foreman. Given that Foreman was not yet in custody at the time of the interview, Stevens ruled, no Miranda was required.

After an agreed delay for technical editing of the video to redact “an unrelated statement,” approximately 45 minutes of video was introduced as Bess took the stand to answer and clarify statements as the video played out.

In the video, Bess enacted a line of questioning to allow Foreman the opportunity to explain any legitimate reason to have been in Edwards’ townhome or having had relations with her, he said. Denying any involvement with Edwards at the time of her murder, or even a decade prior, Foreman also denied knowing of her death, a detail the prosecution said evidence would prove is a lie. (See Day 7 testimony.)

Nearing the end of the interview, Bess told Foreman about the DNA match and questioned him as to how his DNA became present at the crime scene.

“The only way for that to have gotten there would be for you putting it there,” Bess told Foreman just prior to Foreman’s request for an attorney and subsequent exit from the interview room.

A brief walk down the hall and around the corner later, Foreman was arrested for Edwards’ murder.

The day continued with testimony from Bess and Beaumont-based Detective Aaron Lewallen. At rest on day five, Tanya Dean, a DNA supervisor at the Houston DPS Crime Lab testified that DNA taken from the scene ranged from 15,6000 to 461 septillion times more likely to belong to Foreman as opposed to another male.

Day 6: March 19

Tuesday morning began with the defense’s cross-examination of Dean regarding her processing of the buccal swabs from Foreman in 2023 compared to the DNA extract of the anal swab box and fingernail scrapings. Dean stated that the defendant was excluded as a match to these samples.

Prosecutor Sonny Eckhart addressed Dean, expressing the need to clarify: “If, when Catherine Edwards was raped and murdered by Clayton Foreman, her hands were bound by handcuffs, would that be an explanation why you did not find any DNA attributable to Clayton Foreman underneath either of her fingernails?”

“Yes,” Dean replied, adding that, “There must be some sort of physical contact,” to get DNA under fingernails. Dean further agreed that a woman with her hands handcuffed behind her back would be unlikely to create defensive maneuvers allowing DNA collection under her fingernails. DNA collected from Edwards’ comforter and vaginal swabs, Dean advised, offered more scientific evidence to support Foreman as a possible contributor.

“There is scientific evidence that the profile can be explained as having come from Clayton Foreman and Mary Catherine Edwards versus Mary Catherine Edwards and an unknown individual,” said Dean.

Following Dean’s testimony, Judge Stevens advised the jury that they would recess until 9 a.m. Wednesday morning while the court handled legal matters through the afternoon.

With the jury gone, the court then heard from two women who claimed to have been assaulted by Foreman in the past – both with stories similar to the details offered up in the death of Mary Catherine Edwards. Prosecutors contended that the testimony would show Foreman’s modus operandi; defense argued prior bad acts are irrelevant to the current murder charge.

“From the state’s perspective, the similarities between the cases are a signature,” said prosecutor Knauth.

Day 7: March 20

The last day of testimony began with the prosecution calling Dianna (Daleo) Coe, Foreman’s ex-wife, as a witness. Coe said she and Foreman were married from January 1982 to 1993. She acknowledged knowing he had been arrested for rape approximately three weeks before marrying him, and that he told her it was a big misunderstanding and that the charges had been dropped.

“The wedding invitations had already been mailed out,” Coe said, adding that she wanted to believe her fiancé’s story. “His story to me was that he had picked up a hitchhiker and they went to Rogers Park and they made out and he felt her up.”

According to Coe, Mary Catherine Edwards taught at one of the schools their son attended, and there were occasions when Foreman would go to the school.

“He had said that in high school he would see (Allison and Mary Catherine) in the hall and always thought they were so cute because they were twins and he felt as though he wanted to make sure he protected them and nobody would mess with them,” said Coe, who didn’t think anything of the comment at the time.

During their marriage, Coe said Foreman worked as a salesman and store manager, but that he never worked in law enforcement or security. However, she described finding a briefcase in the trunk of Foreman’s car containing a gun, a set of handcuffs and pornographic material sometime between 1986 and 1988. Coe then was presented with a pair of handcuffs from evidence that, she said, “look like handcuffs that I saw.”

Not long divorced when Edwards was murdered, Coe said she called Foreman and told him about the tragedy. She said she was dumbfounded, as Foreman had no reaction to the news.

Kristy Weimer, a resident of Grove City, Ohio, said she also saw foreman with handcuffs.

“In the back corner of the middle desk drawer on the right-hand side was a pair of handcuffs,” Weimer, who worked for Foreman at a debt collection agency in 2008-2009, said. “We work in debt collections; there’s not really a need for handcuffs.”

“She doesn’t know what she’s talking about,” Judge Stevens admonished Foreman for loudly voicing as the jury and Weimer were exiting the court in front of him.

Teresa Brewer, Foreman’s fiancée at the time of his arrest, testified that she discovered pictures of young girls Foreman knew and that he told her they were his friends’ kids.

“Eventually, he said to me that he had them so that he could fantasize about taking their virginity,” said Brewer, who added that she found out about Foreman’s rape charge and that he explained it as a false accusation. “He liked to look at badges and had a lot of pictures of badges saved.”

Foreman further had fascination with Beaumont, Brewer said, and every morning before he got out of bed, Foreman would read the Beaumont Enterprise online and then the news in the evening, which she found to be strange.

Finishing out the state’s case, prosecutors elicited testimony from Victim 1 before the jury – words that mirrored the prior day’s testimony outside of the jury’s ears.

Electing not to introduce testimony from Victim 2 as presented to Judge Stevens in the absence of the jury the day prior, the state rested.

Questioned by his attorney, Foreman stated that he decided not to testify, and the defense rested.

After closing remarks by the prosecution and defense, jury deliberation began at 4:19 p.m. Wednesday afternoon with a verdict of guilty returned less than an hour later.

“Because the death penalty was passed on by the state, the only option is life imprisonment,” Stevens said in delivering sentencing. After 30 years, Foreman, now 63, will be eligible for parole, Stevens added.