Excess insurance sends up a red flag to insurance companies. One way to circ.u.mvent that would be to obtain smaller insurance policies from a number of companies. The insurance industry had a safeguard here too. Applications have questions like "Is this to replace another similar policy?" and "Do you have life insurance with another company?" Moreover, there are central clearinghouses where underwriters can check to see if applicants are currently insured elsewhere. Even so, nothing is foolproof.

McLean's investigation turned up numerous applications for life insurance by both Linda and David Brown. Linda had been in perfect health; David had been meticulous about listing all of his many ailments. Not surprisingly, Linda had been accepted for coverage (all her applications said that she had no other coverage), and David was accepted only if he was "rated." If an applicant is in poor health or older, he may obtain insurancea"but at a higher cost. Many customers decline policies that are offered only at "rated" higher premiums.

Which was exactly what David Brown had done. At first glance, he and Linda would have appeared to be a young couple seeking security. Looking closer, a suspicious detective might deduce that David wanted Linda's life to be heavily insured, but never intended to have policies on himself. Why else would he practically guarantee he would be turned down or "rated" by playing up his health problems? However, dual applications would have eased a wary wife's mind.

McLean found that David Brown had worn a path into insurance offices, applying many, many times. And yet, he himself was not currently insured. He was the chief wage-earner, the avowed head of the household. Wouldn't he have been the one to be insured? Apparently he was not as concerned about coverage as he appeared.

However at the time of her murder Linda Marie Brown had been insured with: American General Life and Accident: Issued 2/24/84 New York Life: Issued 3/12/84 Capital Life: Issued 1/21/85 Liberty Life: $100,000 and $100,000 (accidental death) $100,000 and $100,000 (accidental death) $200,000 and $150,000 (accidental death) $200,000 and $200,000

Application 2/21/85 (accidental death)

The last policy was never actually approved, but an application and a first premium were received on February 21, 1985, twenty-six days before Linda was murdered.

Within the thirteen months preceding her death, Linda Marie Brown's life had been insured four times, all double indemnity, all listing David Brown as sole beneficiary. Brown, McLean found, had collected rapidly. Shortly after the funeral, American General received a handwritten letter from Brown demanding payment, and he received a check for $208,043.60.

Capital Life paid Brown $361,833.08 on August 8.

New York Life paid him $200,000 on September 9.

The last policy had been in the underwriting process when Linda died. Liberty Life had not issued its policy, but had accepted the first premium that accompanied the application.

McLean contacted Dillard Veal of Rainbow, South Carolina, an agent with Liberty Life for thirty-three years, always in the home office, and a virtual walking encyclopedia of knowledge about the business.

Dillard Veal remembered David Arnold Brown well. His application had been turned down for health reasons.

Linda's was pending when she died. "Because the premium was paid, we made a compromise settlement. Mr. Brown made a claim in April of 198 5,'and we negotiated with him that June in Orange County."

Veal said he and Brown had tentatively agreed on a $50,000 settlement, but the next time Veal returned to Orange County, that was not enough. "Mr. Brown referred me to his attorney. I negotiated with his attorney, and we settled for a payment of $73,750."

Actually, David Brown had done rather well. His first, and only, premium on Linda's policy had been $133.34.

Veal mentioned that Brown had made application for five members of his familya"not only for himself and Linda, but for $100,000 double-indemnity policies on Patti, Cinnamon, and Krystal. Cinnamon's had been postponed for a year, Patti's withdrawn, and Krystal's lapsed in November 1985.

In all, although he had denied it to Cinnamon on tape, David Brown had collected $843,626.68 within six months of Linda's death. If a few more months had elapsed before Linda's murder, if Cinnamon had died of an overdose, and if Dillard Veal had not found out that Linda was overin-sured, David Brown's total payoff would have been $1,239,876.86.

McLean studied the signatures on Linda's applications; they looked dissimilar to him, but he was, admittedly, no handwriting expert. He contacted the agent who had sold the New York Life policy, Stanley Gudmundsen. McLean explained the case that had been reopened and asked him if he remembered his contact with the Browns.

He did. He had had no prior contact with either of them when they walked into his office to obtain life insurance for Linda on March 12, 1984.

"Can you describe them?" McLean asked.

"Let's see," Gudmundsen said. "I was working in the Bank of America Building at the City Mall in Orange when they came in. The womana"Linda Browna"was a slight, small person, with light hair, maybe long, worn down.

David Brown was larger, and he had aa"a 'chunky' face. I saw them just that once. After that, I had contact only by phone and letter with David Brown and his attorney."

McLean glanced over the application form with the insurance agent, and Gudmundsen pointed out two questions that were noteworthy. Those questions asked if there were any other policies extant on Linda Marie Brown, or if this policy was meant to replace any other policy. Both questions were answered no.

McLean asked if David Brown had applied for life insurance on himself. Gudmundsen checked his records and phoned the detective. He had found a similar policy issued on the life of David Brown, but it was marked "Declined." "It was declined because of poor health," Gudmundsen said, "and adequate insurance already in effect. It possibly was a rated policy."

McLean wondered if Linda Brown had ever applied for insurance at all. Since she and Patti looked more like twins than sisters, it would have been a fairly easy thing to subst.i.tute Patti during the application interview. He made up a "lay-down" of photographs of young blond women, including pictures of both Linda and Patti, and asked Gudmundsen to point to the woman who had accompanied David Brown to his office.

Gudmundsen eliminated all but #4 and #5 and finally settled on #4. "This is closest."

It was Linda.

But McLean still wondered. Gudmundsen had not mentioned that "Mrs. Brown" was pregnant when she came to his office. On March 12, 1984, Linda had been five months pregnant. She was a small woman and her condition would have been apparent, especially apparent to an insurance agent who was insuring her life.

Newell checked with Linda's obstetrician on the off chance that she might have been in his office on March 12. No luck.

McLean took the signatures on Linda's applications to an expert. The word that came back was a little disappointing.

"They're all signed by Linda Browna"they all match the exemplar of her handwriting. The changes only indicate different moods, whether she was in a hurry, tireda"that sort of thing."

So there it was. Linda Brown had accompanied her husband to apply for insurance at least four times in the year before she was murdered. She had grown up so desperately poor; she wanted her baby to be taken care of. Did she ever know that David refused his insurance or made sure he was turned down? Perhaps not.

With McLean's persistence, Robinson and Newell had made the case against David Arnold Brown very much better. Over $800,000 sweetened the pot. But Robinson asked for more, more, and still more.

Enough. The usually laid-back Newell looked at the prosecutor and said, "d.a.m.n, Jeoff. I'm giving you this on a silver platter. Now you want David Brown's name engraved on it!"

Robinson held up his hands in defeat. "Okay. Let's go!"

The charge would be murder. California P.C.-187.

And beyond that, the complaint would list "overt acts." Robinson and Newell discussed which overt acts they could include, and indeed, how many. It had been a long time coming, this moment when charges were filed. They worked over the doc.u.ment.

"What can we put in?"

"What else?"

Once the complaint was the way they wanted, Jay Newell would walk it through all the steps needed until he was handed two arrest warrants. "If we waited for the usual slow progression from desk to desk and department to department," Newell said, "it could take awhilea"and we had waited long enough. I walked it to the munic.i.p.al court clerk, who sent me up to the judge's chambers. I briefed him, and he signed the warrants. I kept those copies in my hand right to the end."

And there they were, the most beautiful pieces of paper Jay Newell had ever seen: IB THE MUNIc.i.p.aL COURT WEST JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ).

) FELONY COMPLAINT Plaintiff, ) ) NO. vs. )a ).

DAVID ARNOLD BROWN, DOB: 11-16-52 ).

1: )-.

Defendant(s) ): Personally appearing before me on September 21, 1988, J. NEWELL, O.C.D.A., who, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: That at and within the above County and State, the defendant(s) hereinbefore named violated the law as follows: COUNT I: That on or about Harch 19, 1985, at and within Orange County, California, the crime of FELONY, to-wit: Violation of Section 187 of the Penal Code of the State of California, was committed by DAVID ARNOLD BROWN, who at the time and place last aforesaid, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, and with malice aforethought, kill Linda Brown, a human being.

COUNT II: That between March 19, 1984 and Harch 19, 1965, at and within Orange County, California, the crime of FELONY, to-wit: Violation of Section 182.1 of the Penal Code of the State of California, was committed by DAVID ARNOLD BROWN and Patti Bailey, who at the time and place last aforesaid, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously conspire together and with another person and persons whose identify is unknown to comit the crkte of murder in violation of Section 187 of the Penal Code, a felony; that pursuant to and for the purpose of carrying out the objects and purposes of the aforesaid conspiracy, the said defendants comnitted the following overt act and acts at and in the County of Orange: OVERT ACT NO. 1.

Defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN and Patti Bailey have initial discussions regarding the murder of Linda Brown.

OVERT ACT NO. 2.

Defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN recruits Cinnamon Brown to a.s.sist in murder, stating that Linda Brown is planning to kill him.

OVERT ACT NO. 3.

After Cinnamon Brown observes defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN and Patti Bailey embracing, defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN instructs cinnamon Brown not to tell anyone of his relationship with Patti Bailey.

OVERT ACT NO. 4.

While riding in van enroute to Long Beach, both defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN and Patti Bailey discuss murder. They both agree that they must "get rid of" Linda Brown.

OVERT ACT NO. 5.

On another occasion in the van, with Arthur Brown present, Patti Bailey discusses specific methods of killing Linda Brown, with defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN. Patti Bailey suggests to defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN that they could throw Linda Brown from van.

Defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWS obtains two additional life insurance policies on the life of Linda Brown.

ova; ACT NO. 7

Within one week of the murder, defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN tells Cinnamon Brown to take the blame for contemplated murder. He further tells Cinnamon that because of her age, that she will spend little or no time in jail.

OVERT ACT NO. 8.

Defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN instructs Cinnamon to practice writing auicide notes; he further states that this will make the homicide look like a murder-suicide.

OVERT ACT NO. 9.

Defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN prepares and instructs Cinnamon to ingest a mixture of drugs just before the killing of Linda Brown in a further effort to demonstrate a suicide attempt.

OVERT ACT NO. 10.

Just prior to the murder, defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWN wakes up Patti Bailsy and Cinnamon Brown; gives final directions; then leaves premises per the original plan.

OVERT ACT NO. U.

On March 19, 19BS, Linda Brown, while sleeping, is killed with a .38 cal. handgun.

It is further alleged that the murder of Linda Brown was intentional and was carried out by the defendant DAVID ARNOLD BROWS for financial gain, within the meaning of Penal Code Section 190.2(a)(1).