IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND
STATE OF ALABAMA
)
)
VS. )
CC92-1893
)
BETTY WOODS WILSON,
)
)
Defendant. )
* * * * * * * * *
VOLUME I
Preliminary Proceedings
and
Juror Selection. . . . . .
. . . . . . Pg 2 to 193
Opening Statement – Jimmy
Fry,
State’s Prosecutor. . . .
. . . . . . .Pg 194 to 218
Opening Statement – Bobbie
Lee Cook,
one of Wilson’s defense
lawyers. . . . Pg 219 to 231
Direct Examination by Mr.
Fry –
Jimmy Dunnagan, Police
Officer HPD. . . Pg 236
Cross Examination by Mr.
Hooper –
Jimmy Dunnagan, Police
Office HPD . . . Pg 251
Direct Examination by Mr.
Fry –
Glen Nunley, Investigator
HPD. . . . . .Pg 261
Cross Examination by Mr.
Hooper –
Glen Nunley Investigator
HPD. . . . . . Pg 328
Page 1
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
TWENTY-THIRD JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR MADISON COUNTY,
STATE OF ALABAMA, )
)
VS. ) CC92-1194FY
) CC92-1893
BETTY WOODS WILSON, )
(Tuscaloosa County)
)
Defendant. )
* * * * * * * * * *
C A P T I 0 N
The above-entitled cause
came on to be
heard before the Honorable Thomas N. Younger,
Judge, on the 9th day of July, 1992, commencing at
2:05 p.m., Madison County Courthouse, Huntsville,
Alabama, when the following proceedings were had
and done:
A P P E A R A N C E S
For the State: Hon.
Mo Brooks
Hon. Susan Moquin
For the Defendant: Hon
Charles Hooper
Hon Marc Sandlin
Hon. Doug Martinson, II
* * * * * * * * * * *
A.D.
Official Court Reporter
(205) 532-3444
Page 2
P R 0 C E E D I N G S
THE COURT: This is a hearing on a motion
filed by the State in the matter of State vs. Betty
Woods Wilson.
Is the State ready?
MS. MOQUIN: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Is the defendant ready?
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir, Judge. Have you
got -- we had filed a motion, an objection.
THE COURT: I only have a motion --I only
have the State's motion.
MR. HOOPER: Okay. Let me
give you my
copy.
MS. MOQUIN: Charlie, we
don't have a
copy of that.
MR. HOOPER: It was delivered to your
office.
Judge, generally we would
have 14 days to
reply and, of course, since we not it late
yesterday --
THE COURT: Well, you have
a motion to --
an objection to a subpoena duces tecum, and I'm not
aware of a subpoena duces tecum. We are on the
motion for discovery, or in the alternative, motion
Page 3
to compel, which is -- which was filed by the State,
I believe, yesterday.
MR. SANDLIN: Judge, there was a subpoena
attached to the motion.
MS. MOQUIN: I don't believe so.
MR. SANDLIN: That's what that's about.
MS. MOQUIN: Judge, if any
subpoenas have
been delivered, they have been delivered
independent of this motion.
This motion stands on
its own.
THE COURT: I'm not aware of one.
MR. HOOPER: Delivered by Bruno Procopio.
I assume you all know about it.
MS. MOQUIN: We certainly
know about it.
THE COURT: Let me have
the motion.
MR. SANDLIN: Set today.
THE COURT: This is the
only one I have.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, our objection
certainly goes to that.
THE COURT: Do what?
MR. HOOPER: Our objection goes to that,
the motion which they have filed.
THE COURT: Well, I'm
going to hear it.
I'm going to hear the motion, and I'll listen to
Page 4
both sides.
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: So you may present whatever
you would like to going to your objection and going
to the motion by the State.
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: You may proceed.
MS. MOQUIN: Your Honor, to begin with, I
would like to cite to the Court and present to the
Court three cases upon which we base our opinion
that we are entitled to pieces of physical evidence
that the defense may have in its possession or
control.
And I cite to you first,
Your Honor, the
State -- Fisher vs. the United States, which is
located at 425 US 391, 46 L Ed 2d 39, 96 S Ct 1569,
which stands for the proposition that pieces of
documentary evidence are entitled to be discovered
by the State and are not privileged information,
nor are they a violation of a defendant's privilege
against self-incrimination.
Your Honor, we would cite
to you further
two Alabama cases.
Cotton vs. State. That is
Volume 6 of
Page 5
the Southern Reporter, page 396, wherein our Court
stated that "Between an attorney and a client --"
THE COURT: Give me the year.
MS. MOQUIN: It's an 1889
case, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: Well, I thought it went back
to --
MS. MOQUIN: Yes, sir,
because of the
volume.
Your Honor, to my knowledge,
it's never
been overturned.
THE COURT: Go ahead.
MS. MOQUIN: States for the Proposition,
and I'll read to the Court with regard to the
opinion. "As
between attorney and client, only to
communications made and received for the purposes
of professional action and aid," are entitled to
have the privilege extended to them. "Any
conferences in the presence and hearing of third
persons, whether they be officers of the law."
This case allows for the State to discover that
type of information.
Your Honor, I cite to you
further, State
vs. Joy. This is a
Louisiana case, 94 Southern
Page 6
Reporter, 910., wherein, Your Honor, in this case
two pieces of physical evidence were allowed in in
this case and held as competent evidence and was
not considered to be privileged communications.
Your Honor, I have
numerous other cases
from other jurisdictions. I was holding the
information to my oral argument to cases near or in
this jurisdiction or U.S. Supreme Court cases.
Based on these cases, we have filed our motion. We
are requesting that we be entitled to, as we have
set out in our motion, the list on Page 2 of the
motion, the items that we designated there. Each
of these items, Your Honor, are pieces of physical
evidence. Based on that, Your Honor, Item 4, we
have requested any items obtained, received, taken
directly or indirectly from the home of Peggy Woods
Lowe since May 22, 1992.
In the investigation by
the police
department, they determined that Jerry McDaniel
arrived at the home of Peggy Woods Lowe prior to
their arrival, and that he possibly removed
physical items from that location.
Your Honor, in that
regard we have
subpoenaed him here today to ask him on the stand if
Page 7
he did in fact take into his custody any physical
items And, Your
Honor, we would call him to the
stand at this time to ask him that question.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, I'm going to, of
course, object to that under Rule 16.4b. He was
employed by us. To
the -- Ms. Moquin's statement
that he arrived before the police, I wouldn't mind
him testifying to that.
He was not employed until
some, what, two weeks after Jack Wilson's death.
The police held this house for two weeks, at which
time they gave the house back over to us. And
certainly we had an opportunity to go in the house,
but that's an outright misstatement of the facts.
THE COURT: And you say
that you don't
object to his testifying to what?
MR. HOOPER: Only to this:
We will
submit to you that our investigator did not have
access to that house until it was released by the
police. Ms. Moquin's
comment was to the fact that
our investigator arrived before the police. So I
assume that she is saying our investigator arrived
the night of the murder.
That's an out -- that's
stupid.
MS. MOQUIN: Your Honor,
we are talking
Page 8
about the home of Peggy Lowe, not the home of Betty
Wilson.
MR. HOOPER: Okay.
Peggy Lowe?
MS. MOQUIN: Right.
MR. HOOPER: All right.
Judge, our
investigator has been to several places. I would
object to it.
MS. MOQUIN: Your Honor, I do have a case
cite with regard to this specific request. This is
a California case, Your Honor. The name of the case
is People vs. Meredith, 631 Pacific Reporter, 2d.
THE COURT: Give me that again. 631?
MS. MOQUIN: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Pacific?
MS. MOQUIN: Reporter, 2d,
page No. 46.
And I direct Your Honor --
THE COURT: Page No. 46?
MS. MOQUIN: Yes, sir.
I'm sorry, Judge,
I'm going too fast.
THE COURT: Okay.
MS. MOQUIN: I direct your attention,
Your Honor, to headnote No. 9 there, and I'll just
- if I may have your permission, just read that.
"Even though communication from murder suspect to
Page 9
his attorney that suspect had burned victim's
wallet and placed it in a trash can was privileged,
confidential communication, once counsel chose to
send investigator to retrieve wallet from the trash
can, original location and condition of evidence
lost protection of privilege, and, therefore, trial
court did not err, in murder prosecution, in
admitting investigator's testimony concerning
location of the wallet."
Based on that, Your
Honor, we believe
that we are entitled to ask him if he retrieved any
physical items from that location.
THE COURT: Well, the
Court, in its
ruling, will address that issue.
MS. MOQUIN: All right,
sir, Your Honor.
Your Honor, further, and just for the record, we
would state that this is the home of Peggy Woods
Lowe, and neither one of these attorneys, at the
current time, represent Peggy Woods Lowe. And,
therefore, we would assert that their attorney-
client privilege does not extend to her home or her
possessions.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, that's great. Let
her call Peggy Lowe, then, not my investigator.
Page 10
THE COURT: Okay.
Anything further?
MS. MOQUIN: Your Honor, we, of course,
based on the arguments that we have previously
presented, we believe that we are entitled to the
list of items on the second page of our motion, I
through 5.
Your Honor, if I might
speak to paragraph
5 there. Your Honor, we are asserting that we would
-- we need copies of any and all records that
concern the estate of Dr. Jack Wilson and/or Betty
Wilson, including wills, codicils, and records that
might be in the possession of Mr. Hooper or his law
partners. Your Honor,
we would assert that there
is no attorney-client privilege with regard to
records prepared for and at the request of Dr. Jack
Wilson, such as his will, any wills prepared by him
or an attorney for him, and that they cannot assert
unless they were acting as attorneys for Dr. Jack
Wilson in that regard; there is no attorney-client
privilege with regard to that information.
Your Honor, again, with
regard to our
motion, we have asked for any other documentation,
physical items that the defense intends to produce
at the time of trial.
And, Your Honor, that is in
Page 11
accordance with Rule 16.2, that we are entitled to
have an opportunity to review all of those things
before trial.
THE COURT: Is that it?
MS. MOQUIN, Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Mr. Hooper?
MR. HOOPER: Judge,
obviously we would
like to have an opportunity to respond. I don't
believe that the notice that was provided for us,
and the Court could expect us to really reply to the
cases --
THE COURT: You don't
believe what?
MR. HOOPER: That the
Court could expect
us to be able to reply to these cases she cited. I
know offhand Fisher vs. State involved tax
prosecutions and some tax records. We would like
to have an opportunity to review those cases and
respond.
We do believe that what
she has asked for
are provided under the rules of discovery,
specifically Rule 16.2, with respect to physical
items that can be recovered from the defendant. We
would ascertain that -- we would submit that Mrs.
Woods does still have some constitutional rights,
Page 12
one of which is to have counsel and also have some
preparation for trial.
We were glad to be
enlightened by the
State that apparently, by their argument, that we
are going to have access to all the persons they
have talked to and a summary of all the statements
they have taken. I
assume it would go both ways.
But we would like to have an opportunity to respond
to what they have asserted.
They are basically asking
us if we have
got an investigator, to turn it all over to them.
THE COURT: How do you
want to respond,
with a memorandum?
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir, just a memorandum,
but we certainly believe that their motions, we
submit to you, would be due to be denied.
THE COURT: Anything else
at this time?
MR. SANDLIN: Judge, the
only other thing
I could add, I know you are aware of this rule 16.2
of the Rules of Criminal Procedure, relating to
discovery by the State.
It's clear in there that
you have got 14 days, even if you grant their
motion, to respond to that stuff. Some of the items
that they have requested in their motion here,
Page 13
specifically the clothes and shoes -- some of the
items that they have requested in their motion has
been submitted to an agency of the State of
Alabama, the Department of Forensic Sciences, that
is under the auspices of the State of Alabama, and
they have that.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, in
response to that,
those items have been submitted to the State, as
conferences with that agency some weeks ago, to
perform certain tests. And it's my understanding
that if they want some tests performed on items
that we have submitted, then they are free to do
that. You know, we
believe this to be physical
evidence. We certainly don't want the State to
have it, something may happen to it. It might be
contaminated by their deeds.
So we think it's
important to us and we want to safeguard it.
THE COURT: Okay.
Anything further?
MR. SANDLIN: No, sir.
THE COURT: Anything
further?
MS. MOQUIN: Your Honor, if I might
respond with regard to the items that have already
been delivered to the Department of Forensic
Sciences. As far as
those actual items are
Page 14
concerned, we are not aware as to whether or not
they are the full number of items that were
delivered to Mr. Hooper's office by Mr. Cagle on or
about the 27th or 28th.
There could have been other
items.
Also, Your Honor, we
would like to have
the opportunity to have physical control of those
items for a period of time, to allow witnesses that
we have talked to to see those items and perhaps
give us an acknowledgement that she was or was not
wearing those items on that occasion.
Further, Your Honor, I
think that this
Court has an inherent ability, outside of the rules
of discovery, to make these orders. But if, per
chance, items have come into the control and
possession of the defense and are no longer in
their possession or control and have been given to
other persons or located in another area, Your
Honor, we would like to know what those items were,
because they are not available for us in their
original location.
MR. SANDLIN: [or Hooper] What's that all about?
MS. MOQUIN: Mr. Hooper, I
will be happy
to explain that.
Page 15
MR. HOOPER: I sure wish you would.
MS. MOQUIN: If someone has produced
something at your request and delivered it to your
office, and you had an opportunity to look at it,
then it's not in the same location as where one of
the defendants might have last placed it. And you
may have looked at it and done something with it and
given it to -- back to the person who delivered it
and now it's not in its original location where
it's available to us to find.
MR. HOOPER: And you want me to fill in
all the blanks for you; right? That's a fishing
expedition.
Ms. MOQUIN. Charlie, if
you want to put
words in my mouth, that's up to you.
MR. HOOPER: That's a good
one.
THE COURT: Anything
further?
MS. MOQUIN: No, sir.
THE COURT: Anything
further?
MR. HOOPER: No, sir.
THE COURT: Then, the
Court will take
under advisement your motion and will render a
decision.
Before we conclude this
hearing, however,
Page 16
I would like to admonish all that are involved in
this case, the parties, the attorneys for both
sides, and the various news media, that this case
should be tried in the courts and not in the media.
With this view in mind,
all of our
efforts should be directed to secure and maintain
and safeguard the rights of the individual accused,
to a fair and impartial trial , and on the other hand
to secure efforts by the media to safeguard the
rights of the public to know what's happening in
the court system.
In balancing First
Amendment rights of
freedom of the press and the Sixth Amendment rights
to a fair and impartial trial, we, indeed,
sometimes walk a fine line.
This Court recognizes
that the news media
has a right and responsibility to disseminate the
truth; that parties to litigation have the right to
a fair and impartial trial; that the public is
entitled to be informed; that editors and news
directors have the right to make news judgments,
but should do so with accuracy and with
objectivity, keeping in mind that the accused is
presumed innocent until proven guilty; that
Page 17
readers, listeners, and viewers are potential
jurors, and as such may be influenced by what they
see, hear, and read.
The Court also recognizes
that it bears
the final responsibility for maintaining order and
ensuring justice for all litigants in the judicial
process. This applies both legally and ethically,
and in fact Cannon 3 of the Cannons of Judicial
Ethics provides, and I quote, "A Judge should
abstain from public comment about a pending o@
impending proceeding in any court, and should
require similar abstention on the part of court
personnel subject to his direction and control."
This Court is concerned,
at this point,
that if the current dialogue continues, it will be
impossible to afford the accused in this community
a fair and impartial trial.
With this in mind, I want
to admonish all
concerned, the attorneys on both sides and the
various news media, to exercise restraint in all
matters relating to the trial of these cases, in
order that justice may be served.
Now, copies of my remarks
are available
to any of you that would like to have them. If you
Page 18
will see my secretary, they are available to anyone
who would like to have a copy.
And with that, ladies and gentlemen,
court is in recess. Thank you.
Page 19
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND
STATE OF ALABAMA
)
)
VS. )
CC92-1893
)
BETTY WOODS WILSON,
)
)
Defendant. )
* * * * * * * * *
C A P T I 0 N
The above-entitled cause came on to be
heard before the Honorable Thomas N. Younger,
Judge, on the 18th day of February, 1993,
commencing at 9 :0 3 a.m. , Madison County Courthouse,
Huntsville, Alabama, when the following proceedings
were had and done:
A P P E A R A N C E S
For the State: Hon.
Jimmy Fry
Hon. Kristi Adcock
For the Defendant: Hon.
Bobby Lee Cook
Hon. Charles Hooper
Hon. Marc Sandlin
Hon. Jack Drake
Page 20
P R 0 C E E D I N G S
THE COURT: Mr. Hooper, Mr. Sandlin, are
you gentlemen ready?
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry?
MR. FRY:
State is ready, Your Honor.
THE COURT:
Would you gentlemen like to
introduce your
co-counsel?
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: To the Court?
MR. HOOPER: Judge, this is Bobby Cook
from Georgia.
MR. COOK: Good morning, Your Honor. I'm glad to be here.
THE COURT: Nice to see
you, nice to have
you with us.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, you
may know Jack Drake.
MR. DRAKE: Judge, how are you? I don't
think we have actually met.
THE COURT: Not personally, but I believe
I have seen you and know of you.
MR. DRAKE: [THE COURT?]
I know two of your brothers , anyway.
Page 21
THE COURT: They are no doubt younger
brothers. All
right. Now, I believe that the
defendant has been arraigned.
MR. HOOPER: That's correct.
THE COURT: And you gentlemen have not
filed a written plea on her behalf?
MR. SANDLIN: That's correct.
MR. HOOPER: That is correct.
THE COURT: We discussed this at the last
meeting. I don't
believe that it's a
jurisdictional matter, but for the record, do you
both agree that the arraignment can take place
here?
MR. HOOPER: Judge, we had preferred that
the arraignment took place in Tuscaloosa before the
jury, that was our preference.
THE COURT: Well, before
the jury would
be -- she could be re-arraigned, if necessary.
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir, we
would like to
do that, and other than that it will be fine.
THE COURT: All right. Mrs. Wilson, if
you will, come around, please, ma'am. Mr. Fry, do
you have the indictment?
MR. FRY: Your Honor, I guess that would
Page 22
[PAGE 23 MISSING]
Page 23
Alabama 1975, 13A-5-40(a) (7), against the peace and
dignity of the State of Alabama.
That's Count No.I, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: Mrs. Wilson, you heard the
reading of Count 1 of the indictment charging you
with the offense of capital murder. To Count I of
the indictment charging capital murder, how do you
plead?
THE DEFENDANT: I plead not guilty, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: Read Count 2.
MR. FRY: "Count 2: The grand jury of
said county charge, that before the finding of this
indictment, Betty Woods Wilson, whose name is
unknown to the grand jury other than as stated, did
intentionally cause the death of Dr. Jack W.
Wilson, for hire, to-wit:
Betty Woods Wilson hired
James Dennison White to kill Dr. Jack W. Wilson, by
paying James Dennison White, to-wit: $2,500 in
United States currency, and promising to pay James
Dennison White more money, to-wit: an additional
$2,500 in United States currency, and James
Dennison White did kill Dr. Jack W. Wilson, by
beating him with a baseball bat or other blunt
Page 24
instrument, or stabbing him with a knife or other
sharp instrument, in violation of Code of Alabama
1975, 13A-5-40(a)(7), against the peace and dignity
of the State of Alabama."
THE COURT: Mrs. Wilson,
you heard the
reading of Count 2 of the indictment charging
capital murder. To
Count 2 of the indictment, how
do you plead?
THE DEFENDANT: I'm not
guilty.
THE COURT: All
right. You plead not
guilty, and the case is set for trial, set to begin
for trial on February 22nd.
The case having been
transferred previously by this Court to
County, will proceed and begin in the Circuit Court
of Tuscaloosa County on the morning of February the
22nd.
You may be seated.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Now,gentlemen,
it was
agreed, and by order of this Court previously
entered, motions pending -- outstanding motions
that are pending at this time were agreed to be
heard. What motions do you have, gentlemen, that
you would like to be heard on at this time?
Page 25
MR. DRAKE: Judge, it may
be best to
start with what I think is the easiest. If the
press reports are correct, Mr. Fry has agreed that
we can use a juror questionnaire. And if he does
agree to that, then that's one of our notions, to
ask the Court to allow us to do that and suggest a
procedure for doing it.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry,
what's the position
of the State?
MR. FRY: Your Honor, I
have no -- don't
want to invade the province of the Court. As far as
I'm concerned, the questions, with exception of the
last, which asks about whether or not the jurors
think the defendant is probably guilty, with
exception of that last question, I feel like they
are probably questions that the defense could ask
on an oral voir dire before the jury. So I'm not
suggesting to the Court that that's the way to go,
but I don't have any problems with the form being
used. And, in fact, I
think it probably would be
time saving and probably a very efficient way of
helping with voir dire in this case. I do object to
the last question. I
don't think there is enough
predicate laid for that to be a good question for
Page 26
the jury to have.
MR. DRAKE: Well, Judge,
may I speak to
that, just to the issue of the last question?
THE COURT: Well, let's
clear up the
other, first. First of
all would be the use of the
questionnaire. I don't
have any problem with that.
The problem is -- you know the courthouse in
Tuscaloosa because that's your circuit. The venire
room or assembly room probably does not have any
tables or anything.
And I note from the motion
there is about an eight-page questionnaire. How in
the world will the jury be able to fill them out?
Secondly, once filled out, both sides will need a
copy of them. How are
you going to get copies?
MR. DRAKE: I have talked
with the
Circuit Clerk about this a couple of weeks ago, and
a questionnaire has been used at least once in our
circuit. And, of
course, they have been used
frequently in Jefferson County.
Our jury comes in, they
look at a 15-
minute instructional film, and they are given
instructions, and so forth, pretty much the way it
is in most places. I
propose that we distribute the
questionnaire to people at that time, provide them
Page 27
with a pen to fill out the questionnaire, and give
them 30 minutes or so, however long it would take to
do it. I would then
undertake --
THE COURT: Where would
they do it?
MR. DRAKE: In the jury assembly room.
THE COURT: Are there tables?
MR. DRAKE: There are some tables. There
may not be enough tables --
THE COURT: I don't know how a juror will
hold a piece of paper on his lap and fill it out.
That's the problem that I see with it.
MR. DRAKE: Well, a great
many of the
questions just call for a checking of a box, you
know. If you don't
answer "Yes" in some instances
or "No" in some instances, there is no need to
provide
THE COURT: You think that presents no
problem?
MR. DRAKE: I don't think
so. And the
Circuit Clerk, I asked her and she didn't seem to be
troubled about it. We
will undertake to provide
copies to Mr. Fry and we will provide all the
material. So, you
know, nobody gets cost anything,
like in the post office, and I'll immediately start
Page 28
working with them to handle the mechanics of it.
THE COURT: Well, I have no problem with
the use of the questionnaire itself. Now, the last
question, if you want to address yourself to that.
MR. DRAKE: Yes. On voir dire to the
entire venire, we can ask that question. I mean,
obviously --
THE COURT: Certainly a relevant question
that you might ask. There might be some predicate
laid, some more information given to the 3'ury
before that question.
MR. DRAKE: Well, we do in
the
questionnaire. We tell
them basically the
essential facts of what has happened. And, of
course, there has been an enormous amount of
publicity about this case, as you know. And one of
the things that I have undertaken to do, and it's
strictly informal and anecdotal, is ask people what
they have heard about the case, and everybody in
Tuscaloosa has heard about it, as far as I know.
So, based on what they have heard, I want to know if
they have formed an opinion, and it seems to me we
would be entitled to ask that.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, have
you seen the
Page 29
questionnaire?
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: I haven't seen it, because it
was filed in Tuscaloosa and -- I have a copy of it,
it came in about two minutes before I came in the --
about five minutes before I came in the courtroom.
I have not had time to read it.
MR. DRAKE: May I read you the question
he is talking about?
It's No. 54. Says, "Do you
think, based on what you have read or heard, that
Betty Woods Wilson is probably guilty as charged?"
Yes or no.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, I don't
see anything
wrong with the question.
MR. FRY: okay, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: So the questionnaire will be
permitted. And you
will undertake, as I understand
it, to --
MR. DRAKE: Yes
sir. And if you think of
any special instructions or questions or whatever,
please let me know, but I'm going to undertake to
working on this probably Friday morning, tomorrow
morning.
THE COURT: And you don't
see that it
Page 30
will cause a delay in the
start of the impaneling of the jury?
MR. DRAKE: Not any
significant delay.
THE
COURT: Well, the word "significant"
is what bothers me.
MR. DRAKE: Well, I think it
can be
filled
out easily in 30 minutes.
MR.
FRY: Of course, Your Honor, that
would bring up the question,
just for our information, that it will take some time, though,
to collate that information.
MR. DRAKE: Right.
MR. FRY: So that the -- if
you are
talking about -- just
guessing, 150 or 120 jurors, even 100, that's quite a deal of information to go
through one by one and make some kind of note of
what the appropriate
responses are. So, Jack, if I may ask,
how were you going to propose to the Judge that we take time to use that
information?
MR. DRAKE: I propose that we adjourn
when the questionnaires are
filled out, give us the remainder of Monday to evaluate the information.
THE
COURT: That's not going to happen. That's not
going to take place. We are going to get
Page 31
started with the
qualification of the jury, and you will have time to peruse it at breaks, at
lunchtime, and through the
day, and before we are through with it. As a matter of fact, you have four
attorneys sitting in the courtroom here.
You can assign a couple of lawyers to handle that.
MR. DRAKE: Judge, I always like
to find the middle ground. Could maybe we start the voir dire, say, at 2
o'clock in the afternoon on Monday?
THE COURT: Well, we will
decide that --
we will make a decision on it, we will make a decision on it
in Tuscaloosa.
MR. DRAKE: All right.
THE COURT: Any other motions that could be considered at this
time?
MR. DRAKE: Yes. We had filed two
motions in limine. And those
motions concern, in part, statements of other people. And I suppose trying to
think of this as a trial, Judge, you might say, well, I'll wait until the
witness is called to see if it's a problem, but what I'm suggesting is that the
statements of Brenda Cerha and Janine Russelli and other people to whom Mr.
White made statements prior to the murder, that the District
Page 32
Attorney be instructed not
to refer to those statements in voir dire or in his opening
statement, until we get to a
point in trial where
you can hear this testimony
out of the presence of the jury and determine whether it's admissible or not.
THE COURT: Well, I don't see
any problem with that. Do you, Mr. Fry?
MR. FRY: Well, Your Honor, I
can live
with that, but certainly a
pre-trial motion ih a hearing
THE COURT: Well, let me put
it this way:
I think you are going to have
to live with it unless the Court has first had the opportunity to hear it.
MR.
FRY: Yes , sir.
THE COURT: And I have not had that opportunity. So unless you present it at this time and the
Court has the opportunity to hear it, I
would not have enough, I
would not know which way to rule on it.
MR. FRY: My only point was , Your Honor, there has been time
to file motions to discuss
that.
THE COURT: I agree with
that, but unless
Page 33
the evidence is presented
here, then it would be appropriate to wait until the matter is taken up by the
Court before it is mentioned to the jury.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
MR.
DRAKE: Judge, the second motion in limine
THE
COURT: my question is -- the next question, then, are you prepared to present that
evidence at this time for a ruling by the Court?
MR. FRY: No, sir.
THE
COURT: Then the motion in limine would be granted insofar as any mention to the
jury in opening statement.
MR.
FRY: In opening statement or voir dire?
THE
COURT: Sure.
MR.
DRAKE: Judge, the other ground and the second motion in limine refers to
alleged extramarital affairs engaged in by Betty Wilson. And, again, the
request is the same, that the District Attorney not mention it in voir dire or
in opening statements.
THE COURT: It would be the same ruling. Until such time as
the Court has had an opportunity
Page 34
to listen to the evidence
itself Any other
motions?
MR.
COOK: If Your Honor please, there is
one other matter in
reference to a subpoena that
Your Honor authorized and
which was directed to the custodian of the records at Brookwood Medical
Center back in November of
this year, directing
them to produce to Mr.
Hooper and to Mr. Sandlin, under certain conditions and restrictions as
imposed by the Court, the
medical and hospital records of Mr. James White, also known as Mr. James
Howell. Those records were never in fact produced and have not been received as
of this moment.
However,
only within the last three or four days, a motion for a protective order has
been filed by Mr. Christopher Eagan of the law firm of
Starnes & Atchison, on
behalf of the Brookwood Medical Center.
I have only seen that this
morning, and I notice in
paragraph 4, which to me is probably the definitive portion of it, says, and I
quote, "Counsel for the non-party has discussed production of these
records with the Honorable Roy Miller, attorney for James Dennison White, also
known as James Dennison Howell. Mr. Miller demands
Page 35
the records not be
produced."
It
is obvious to me that the reason the hospital is filing the motion for the
protective order is really to protect themselves against any potential
liability.
THE COURT: Mr. Cook, the
motion to which you refer was faxed and received by the Court about five minutes
before this hearing.
MR. COOK: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Mr. Miller had a case before this Court earlier in the week and went
home sick. And this morning called and said he is still sick.
So we need to get in touch
with him. But this
motion will be ruled on
before we leave this
hearing or before the day
MR.
COOK: Let me give the Court and I appreciate that, Your Honor, and I'm
sorry that Mr. Miller is not well.
THE COURT: Let me ask Mr. Fry about that -motion. As I
understood it, the order was entered previously without objection and by
agreement. You don't have any
objection to that?
MR. FRY: No, Your Honor. Apparently the hospital, maybe under
some federal law, has some
Page 36
kind of objection or maybe some
kind of privacy violation. The State has no objection to it. The State is not a party or had any kind of
conversation with either the hospital or Mr. Miller. And we are not doing
anything to obstruct that subpoena.
THE COURT: When we complete the motions, we will take a
recess and I'll call Mr. Miller at
his home, and we will --
MR. COOK: I just wanted to give the
Court the -- the law is very
clear on it.
THE
COURT: I don't have any question about
its production.
MR. COOK: All right.
THE COURT: But I think Mr. Miller is due
to
be consulted.
MR.
COOK: Absolutely.
THE COURT: The fact that he is sick -- otherwise we would ask
him to come in and be heard, but since he is sick, I guess it would be
appropriate
to just give him a call.
Okay. Are there any other
motions, now,
at
this time?
MR. FRY: Judge, we filed two
motions in
Tuscaloosa
and mailed you copies of them the same
Page 37
day. One was a motion in
limine, the other was a motion to quash a subpoena. They are, I guess you might say, housekeeping
details, probably just the kind of thing I think is preliminary to trying a
case like this.
If I may, let me start with
the motion to quash.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, I haven't seen the motions, I don't
believe they have been received.
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, we haven't got them, either.
THE COURT: I don't
believe the Court has received them.
MR. FRY: Well, Judge, they were mailed certified mail, I
certified service. I don't know why you
haven't gotten them.
THE COURT: Janna, would you check with Carolyn and see if we
have received any motions? Dc you have
copies of them?
MR.
FRY: They are matters that could be reserved, Judge, until Monday, but I
apologize, I don't know why you didn't have a copy. I guess we could have hand-delivered it, but
I thought the
mail
from Huntsville to Athens would get it
Page 38
through. Charlie, your copy was sent to Marc's
address.
MR. SANDLIN: I haven't got it yet. it may come today, my mail doesn't come
until around noon, and I didn't get it yesterday.
THE
COURT: Do you gentlemen have any other motions?
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, we have still got some outstanding, and probably one of those
would concern Mr. Miller, also, and that's our petii:ion for a psychiatric
examination of Mr. White.
THE
COURT: All right. Now, Mr. Hooper, you gentlemen were told about three weeks
ago, and
I don't know the exact date,
but you were told that the Court was not favorably inclined to grant that
motion. The Court has not entered a formal
ruling on that matter, but it is denied.
MR. HOOPER: Okay.
THE COURT: That motion is not granted.
MR.
HOOPER: Sure.
THE COURT: The motion, then, at this time, as a matter of
record, is denied.
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir. The State had opposed that; is that
correct, if I recall?
Page 39
THE COURT: I don't recall whether the State had opposed
it or not, but the Court had indicated to you that it would not be granted.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, in
addition we had a number of motions that were filed and outstanding since July
of 192.
THE COURT: Mr. Hooper, I had
discussed with you gentlemen on two or three different occasions, had entered a
general order of
discovery, and have been told by you gentlemen in conference
that there were no problems with any matters of discovery. I don't know specifically
any specific matter that
needs to be ruled on.
MR. HOOPER: Judge --
THE COURT: And the Court
will be glad to
do
that.
MR.
HOOPER: Sure.
THE
COURT: But I have been told that you
had
no problems.
MR. HOOPER: Well, Judge, I attended some of those in-camera
sessions, also, where there were problems.
THE
COURT: Well, with the exception of the specific motions you filed, for example,
the
Page 40
psychiatric examination,
which will be ruled on.
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, we have talked about original notes from the police department
all the time, we have never gotten those.
All we have is compilations of what they decided later on after taking
notes as to be their, I guess, document that they were going to present to
us. We have got a number of those
things.
THE
COURT: Well, the Court has entered
an order requiring liberal
discovery.
MR.
HOOPER: Sure.
THE
COURT: If you have any problem with
that, you were told to inform the Court
specifically.
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, I have. You know, we had
a motion --
THE COURT: What is it that
you want?
MR.
HOOPER: We want his original notes, we want all of the police officer's
original notes that they took in the course of this investigation.
THE
COURT: Mr. Fry, can you respond?
MR.
FRY: Judge, we have given everything that was requested. I met -- offered to meet with these gentlemen
on a state holiday to go through my
Page 41
file, but in fairness to
them, my file doesn't
contain officer's original
field notes. And, to my knowledge,
there was never an order of the Court directing that they produce those to the
District Attorney's Office before I got into this case,
which would have been Mr.
Brooks back then. I have never had
them in my possession, as far as I know, and I'm relatively certain that the
DA's Office never had them in their possession.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, Ray is not limited to what's in his
possession. He can't hide it out in
the police department.
THE
COURT: Well, did you give him copies of them?
MR. FRY: No, sir, I
haven't seen
original -- unless there
just happened to be some
in the file. I think there may be some notes that were
handwritten in hand and probably were field notes, but I haven't seen the
little notes and the little stenographer's pads or whatever. But I can say this: Having worked with the officers for the last
six weeks, I know of no exculpatory matter which could be contained, based upon
having talked to the officers in preparation for this case.
Page 42
THE COURT: Have you yourself used those? MR. FRY: No, sir, I have not.
THE COURT: Well, when we adjourn here
this morning, get with the
officers and give the Court a report back this afternoon, so that if
there is any further order
needed, there will be
time to do so.
Any other motions that need
to be discussed at this time? Bear in mind, gentlemen, that matters that can be
resolved here will save
time in Tuscaloosa. The logistics of trying the
case in Tuscaloosa, with the
witnesses, the
majority of them from this jurisdiction and others, is
tremendous.
MR. DRAKE: Judge, I
had made a couple of notes of sort of housekeeping things. If you have any instructions for us, we
would like to know
about the way the courtroom
will be run. I hear
from people in town that we
will have an overflow crowd, not only of local spectators, but media people
from all over the country, and courtroom management may be a problem. If you want us to assist you or be aware of
any rules, I would like to know about them.
Page 43
THE COURT: Mr. Drake, I
haven't been in the courthouse in Tuscaloosa in several years, and
I don't remember what the
courtroom even looks
like. I do not know what its
capacity is. I have a general
idea. So any information that you can give
would be helpful.
MR. DRAKE: Now?
THE COURT: At any time. And
anything
that you would like, both of
you.
MR. FRY: Judge, we talk
about capa'city.
I
learned yesterday by someone --
THE
COURT: As f ar as I am concerned, I know of no other way except first come,
first
serve. Now, if we have lineups outside bef ore
daylight, I guess they will just -- maybe some of
it -- maybe the weather will discourage some of it. MR.
DRAKE: The courtroom will seat 230
people, if I remember
correctly, and I think that's pretty well packed in.
MR. FRY: Jack, I was told yesterday that seating seven to a
pew, that it would be about 136.
MR. DRAKE: I'm sorry, I
meant 130.
MR. FRY: We have been told up to 200, but that was certainly
out of line.
Page 44
MR. DRAKE: I checked, just
like you did, and they expect between 80 and 100 jurors, so that part of the
thing won't be as difficult as if we had a full turnup of the venire. But there
will be --
THE COURT: Well, certainly
during the qualification and selection of the jury, the jury itself will take
up a big portion of the courtroom.
MR.
DRAKE: That's right. That's one reason I brought this up, is just to alert you
to
it.
THE COURT: All right. If you have any request to make, do so,
and they will be
considered, because you
practice in that court.
MR. DRAKE: Well, I was just thinking about things, about like
a rule that people can't come and go during a witness' testimony, for example.
THE COURT: Well, we will do
that, sure. MR. DRAKE: Sure. Have you talked with
the sheriff about the -- his
role to play, the Tuscaloosa sheriff?
THE COURT: I have not. I
have not.
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, one other thing, housekeeping thing, also, is this: We had
talked
Page 45
to the Sheriff's Office in Tuscaloosa
as late as yesterday, and it was their understanding that our client would be
transported to their facility on Friday. And, of course, we are going to be
there
and we need to have access
to her. We were informed this morning that she in fact may not be
transferred until the selection of the jury begins. THE
COURT: That is not the case. An
order has been entered by
this Court directing that she be transferred on Friday. That's tomorrow.
MR.
HOOPER: All right. That takes care of that. Thank you, Judge.
THE
COURT: Mr. Fry, anything else?
MR.
FRY: Judge,. were you given a copy of this motion
THE COURT: No -- yeah, maybe, if Susan put it up here.
MR.
FRY: I didn't notice it, either.
THE COURT: All right. Which one
is it? MR. FRY: Motion to quash. If you like,
it's the shortest
thing. It, again, is kind of a
housekeeping thing.
The motion basically is,
Your Honor, that the sons and -- stepson, Perry Wilson, and the
Page 46
sons, Steve and Scott
Wilson, have been subpoenaed in this case by the defense. They very well may be
legitimate witnesses called by the defense, but if they are it's beyond the
State's knowledge of what they could testify that would be relevant and also
benefit the defendant. The State does not plan on calling them as witnesses.
Quite
often, unfortunately, in my experience, the witnesses close to a victim have
been subpoenaed to prevent them from being in the courtroom, for whatever
reason that might be. All I'm asking in this motion to quash is some kind of
guarantee, at least to satisfy the Judge, not necessarily in my hearing, that
there is some legitimate reason why these young men have been subpoenaed so
they would be excluded from the courtroom, and that otherwise it seems fair and
equitable that they should be allowed to hear the case involving the murder of
their father.
THE
COURT: Well, first of all, the Court would not grant the motion to quash.
Whether or not they would be excluded would be a matter of -- I assume we can
take up at that time. However, if there is some problem with the attendance, it
may
Page 47
be necessary to require them
to be placed on call.
I have no problem with that.
MR.
FRY: No, sir, there is no problem
with attendance.
THE
COURT: You expect them to be there?
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Okay. All right. Well,
then, the only other question would be whether or not they
are under the rule.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: We will
take that up at the appropriate time. Now, your other motion?
MR. FRY: The other motion is a motion in limine, Your Honor.
And, again, just looking at
the subpoenas -- I think
there are something over 100 of them now that the defense side has issued --
seem to indicate some involvement or some taking of testimony from witnesses in
regard to matters not involving the murder, but rather the estate of Dr. Jack
Wilson. Civil attorneys who are in
matters collateral to his death have been subpoenaed and possibly, I think, one
of Mr. Hooper's law partners has been subpoenaed. I'm not certain what the law
is on that, but I thought in law school you weren't
Page 48
supposed to call law
partners to be a witness in your case. But, at any rate, that law partner, I
believe, has been involved in the estate over here involving Dr. Wilson. My
motion simply says that the State will object and will ask the Judge to exclude
matters relating to the estate matters, relating to things like movie rights,
publication rights, things that are collateral to Dr. Wilson's death, but
things that are not relevant to whether or not Betty Wilson killed or had
killed her husband, Dr. Jack Wilson.
THE COURT: Your motion is to
preclude mention by the defense counsel in opening argument.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir, voir dire, opening argument and also until
a predicate or a ruling is had by the Court, would be in the case in chief,
also, Your Honor.
THE
COURT: Well, it would be -- the
Court would treat it the
same as it did the motion in limine filed by the defendant.
MR.
DRAKE: Yes. May I just -- so I understand what you are
saying. Whether these matters are relevant with respect to a particular
witness, we are not dealing here with today.
I
Page 49
mean, obviously, if a
witness has a pecuniary interest in the proceeding, that's a matter of
cross-examination, but the witness has to be put up first. I mean, we can't get up and just start
talking about this out of
thin air.
MR. FRY: And that is all I am asking for, Jack.
MR. DRAKE: You are only asking at this point that we not
mention it in opening statement or voir dire?
MR. FRY: I'm asking that it not be mentioned until it's
relevant or a ruling by the Court.
MR. DRAKE: Well, it would
have to be,
anyway.
THE COURT: Well, the ruling is the same
as
the ruling made on your motions
MR.
DRAKE: Right.
THE
COURT: -- in limine.
MR. FRY: Your Honor --
THE COURT: So that the Court will, of necessity, need to hear
the evidence before making
a ruling on it, and
obviously if the evidence is not presented prior to opening statement, then
there
Page 50
should be no mention of it.
So your motion in limine is granted to that extent, likewise.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
That is all I have, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Anything further
from the
defendants?
MR. COOK: That is all, Your
Honor.
MR.
SANDLIN: There may be some things that would be proper to take up now, and it
may be proper to take it up later. I
have been talking with Jim concerning some stipulations, we can put those on
the record before we start the trial or we can do them now. It won't take two minutes, whenever you
decide to do it.
THE COURT: If it won't take any longer
than
that, we will do it.
MR. SANDLIN: It's my
understanding that the State has agreed that the medical records relating to
James White are properly certified medical records.
MR. FRY: Your Honor,
we will stipulate to the records received under subpoena by Mr. Sandlin or the
defense from the Veterans Administration are authentic records and we won't
Page 51
require a witness to come
and authenticate those. Being a veteran and also a member of the Armed Forces,
I can imagine the problems they could have having to get somebody from St.
Louis or somewhere else, to come and authenticate a record that's 20 years old.
So we will stipulate all of those
records received under subpoena under this Court, could be received as
authentic documents.
MR. SANDLIN: Judge, we have
also talked about phone records that were subpoenaed by us, as well as
the-State. And we can, I believe, enter
into a stipulation that those
are in fact authenticate records kept in the normal course of business at South
Central Bell, or whatever the facility is. of course, we would reserve the
right to object to the use of those records, for whatever purpose, during the
trial. We would simply agree
to
their authenticity at this point.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, that's limited to those records coming
from South Central Bell.
MR. SANDLIN: From the telephone company. MR. DRAKE: Can I
clarify something about
the medical records? Mr. Fry
only mentioned the Veterans Administration Hospital, and we know we
Page 52
have Brookwood records
potentially. Are you agreeing to Brookwood, also?
MR. FRY: Jack, all I was asked about was the Veterans
records.
MR. SANDLIN: We didn't know
about Brookwood when I talked to you.
MR. FRY: If there are other records that are received
under subpoena of this Court, and
after a reasonable
inspection they appear to be a complete set of records or you gentlemen will
assure me that they are, we
will stipulate to their admittance, also. Not admittance, but that they
are
authentic.
MR. SANDLIN: okay. Judge, we
have
talked about matters
involving the chain of custody of the body of Dr. Jack Wilson, and we can
eliminate the calling of several witness that handled his
body
from the removal from the house to Dr. Embry,
to prevent the state from
calling those witnesses. We do stipulate to the chain of custody on his body.
THE COURT: You want to do that at this time?
MR. SANDLIN: we can do that
at this
time.
Page 53
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. SANDLIN: I have been talking with
Jim this morning concerning
trying to enter into a stipulation concerning items of evidence that came out
of the house, car, and other places. And we hopefully will have something to
talk to you about
on that shortly. We haven't
worked out a procedure on that, but we are working on it. I think that's
it.
THE COURT: All right.
Anything fu'rther from the defendant?
MR.* COOK: No.
THE
COURT: Anything further from the State?
MR. FRY: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. We are
going to
take a recess and the Court
will be in touch and communication with Mr. Miller concerning those records
from Brookwood Hospital.
Now, you gentlemen stand by so that, if need be, we might
have to have a conf erence by
phone. I have a speaker
phone and we can all listen to Mr. Miller, but I'll get him on the phone first
and we will make a decision, but stand by on that.
Page 54
And, then, Mr. Fry, what
time would you be -- do you think you would be ready to discuss with defense
counsel concerning the notes?
MR. FRY: If I can work on that while you work on this
other, I can give you a better idea.
It may be a matter of
talking with one or two of the officers to see what's the better procedure to
follow.
THE COURT: All right. Let's
check on
those
records first.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir, I'll do that right
now.
THE COURT: Court's in
recess.
(End
of proceedings.)
Page 55
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND
STATE OF ALABAMA )
)
Vs ) CC92-1893
)
BETTY WOODS WILSON, )
)
Defendant. )
* * * * * * * * *
C A P T I 0 N
The above-entitled cause
came on to be
heard before the Honorable Thomas N. Younger,
Judge, and jury, on the 22nd day of February, 1993,
commencing at 9: 10 a.m. ,
Courthouse, Tuscaloosa, Alabama, when the following
proceedings were had and done:
A P P E A R A N C E S
For the State: Hon.
Jimmy Pry
Hon. Kristi
Adcock
For the Defendant: Hon. Bobby Lee Cook
Hon. Charles
Hooper
Hon. Marc
Sandlin
Hon. Jack Drake
Also Present: Ms.
Doris Turner,
Circuit Court Clerk
Page 56
P R 0 C E E D I N G S
(Whereupon , at 10 : 00 a
m. , February 22,
1993, the following occurred in the Court's
chambers, out of the presence and hearing of the
jury venire:)
THE COURT: Okay.
Now, Mr. Drake, I
believe you have --
MR. DRAKE: We had filed a
motion, which
you ruled on Thursday in Huntsville, to prohibit
the prosecutor from referring to Betty Wilson's
extramarital affairs during voir dire or opening
statements. Since that time we have had time to
reflect and talk among ourselves, and we have
decided that we think we need to get into that on
voir dire, and rather than kind of spring it on Mr.
Fry, we are just going to withdraw the motion.
THE COURT: All right. Mr.
Fry, of
course, you have no objection to that?
MR. FRY: Sure.
I take it, also, you want
to withdraw your motion in limine as to Brenda
Cerha, while we are on a roll?
MR. DRAKE: No.
THE COURT: Okay,
gentlemen.
MR. DRAKE: We would like
to know, before
Page 57
he testifies, what kind of
medication James White
is currently taking and what
kind of medication he will be taking when he testifies, if any.
MR.
FRY: None , that I am aware of , Jack. You can ask the deputies that have him
down here.
If he has any, they would
have it. But my understanding was he was under no medication.
MR. DRAKE: Well, I notice
that Meyers
said
he didn't need any as long as y1all kept him
locked
up.
MR.
FRY: Well, he has been locked up.
MR.
HOOPER: i don't think you can shift
it on us to find it out. I
mean, if he is taking medication, I believe --
MR. FRY: Charlie, I don't know, I didn't write the
prescription.
MR. HOOPER: But you can
inquire.
THE COURT: You can inquire and you will do that, won't you,
Jimmy?
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir, but all I know is to ask the people that brought him down here,
and if he has got a prescription, he will have it with him. Lord knows if he
needs it, he will need it today or
tomorrow.
Page 58
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: All right. Now,
gentlemen, Mr. Edger, to the left, and Mr. Johnson, both
deputy sheriffs from Madison
County, and Janna Ifshun. Now, all of
these people have filed oaths
of office, but to be
abundantly clear and for the record, I'm going to give them an oath at this
time.
So,
if each of you will raise your right hand.
Do each of you solemnly swear that you will honestly and faithfully
perform the duties as'
bailiff in this case, State of
Alabama and Betty Woods Wilson, the defendant in this case., to the best of
your abilities, so hep you God?
MR.
EDGER: I do.
MR.
JOHNSON: I do.
MS.
IFSHUN: I do.
THE
COURT: All right. Okay. Gentlemen, that will be it for the time being. Thank
you.
Okay. What else?
MR.
DRAKE: Judge, I feel like I should say this and I'm not trying to argue my case
or anything
THE
COURT: Well, one thing I wanted to say
before you get to that, what arrangements have
Page 59
you made to take these
questionnaires and get
copies made?
MR.
DRAKE: We have two people right out here, as soon as they are completed. We
have already made arrangements with a commercial copier to do it on an
expedited basis, and I hope we will have them back here in an hour.
THE COURT: And you are going
to make a copy available to Jimmy?
MR. DRAKE: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right. Go
ahead, Mr. Drake.
MR. DRAKE: I like for Judges to know
where I'm headed. And at the close of the State's case, we are
going to make a motion for a finding and adjudication of not guilty.
THE
COURT: Mr. Drake --
MR.
DRAKE: That's not a pro forma
motion
THE
COURT: I have never been involved in
many cases where that wasn't done.
MR.
DRAKE: I know, but I'm saying it's not
pro forma, we are not trying to make a record.
If you read our brief , that
the State has enormous
Page 60
corroboration problems --
THE COURT: I
understand. Mr. Fry?
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Anything else?
MR. FRY: Judge, it's a
housekeeping detail, but more than that, also. I think the Court has waited
until today to rule on the seating, on whether or not the sons of Dr. Wilson
would be excluded from the courtroom. What I had asked, basically, was a
showing, at least, to the Juage, that if they were going to be bona f ide
witnesses
for the defense. If not, it seems in all fairness they should
be allowed to witness --
MR.
COOK: I can address that, and I can
state in my place as an officer of the Court,'that our view is that they very
well may be bona f ide witnesses, or subpoenaing them is in the utmost
good faith. We have a basis in fact and a basis in law
for doing so. And although I would be quite reluctant to tell you the reasons,
if you insist, I would be more than happy to disclose it to the Judge in
camera.
MR.
FRY: No, I don't think so. I think
that is all I wanted to hear.
Page 61
THE COURT: Then, you are
asking that who be excluded? They are asking that --
MR. FRY: I filed a motion in limine,
Your Honor, to excuse the
three sons who were subpoenaed.
THE COURT: Right.
MR. FRY: That motion was not
granted, so
I suppose --
THE COURT: Well, ordinarily,
of course, members of the family would be excluded from the rule. However, in
view of Mr. Cook's statement, I think it would be wiser to exclude them.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Right.
MR.
FRY: I understand.
THE COURT: Any other
problems?
MR.
FRY: I have had cases, Your Honor, where
I couldn't get the representation that Mr. Cook just made.
THE
COURT: Right.
MR. FRY: I wanted to clear that up.
THE
COURT: All right. Mr. Sandlin?
MR.
SANDLIN: No, sir.
THE
COURT: Mr. Cook?
Page 62
MR. COOK: No, Your
Honor. Thank you.
THE COURT: Mr. Hooper?
MR.
HOOPER: No, sir.
THE COURT: Mr. Drake?
MR. DRAKE: No, sir.
(Whereupon,
proceedings were in recess at 9:25 a.m., until 1:15 p.m., at which time, with a
jury venire and all parties present, the following occurred:)
THE
COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, I"m Tom Younger from Huntsville. I'm pleased to be with
you today for the trial of a
case. I hope it won't take too long.
Mrs.
Turner has given you your oath, I believe, that you took this morning, touching
your qualifications as jurors. I have a
few more questions that I need to ask before we get
completed.
But,
first, the case that we are trying
is a case wherein the
defendant, Betty Woods
Wilson, is charged by
indictment with capital
murder. This case was transferred to Tuscaloosa
County from Madison County.
The defendant is represented
by Jack
Page 63
Drake, seated here at the table
to your right. Mr. Drake practices here in Tuscaloosa. Also, Marc Sandlin and
Charles Hooper. Both of these
gentlemen are from
Huntsville. And, also, Bobby
Lee Cook from Summerville,
Georgia.
The case is being prosecuted
by Jimmy
Fry, District Attorney from
Athens. And he is assisted by Kristi Adcock. She is an Assistant District
Attorney in Mr. Fry's office.
The
indictment in this case, ladies and gentlemen, was returned by the grand jury
of
Madison County in July of
last year, July 192. I'm sure none of you were members of that grand jury, else
you would not be here in this courtroom, but
for the record, if any of
you were, would you please raise your hand.
(No audible response.)
THE
COURT: Also for the record, ladies and gentlemen -- I'm sure some of these
questions
may have been asked by Judge
Karrh in his earlier examination. And, for the record, have any of you ever
been convicted of a felony? And, if so, please raise your hand.
(No audible response.)
Page 64
THE COURT: Have any of you ladies
and gentlemen been indicted within the past 12 months for a felony or some
offense similar to the one with which this defendant is charged? And, if so,
please raise your hand.
(No audible response.)
THE COURT: Are any of you ladies and gentlemen related
by blood or marriage to the defendant, Betty Wilson Woods, or to the
MR. DRAKE: Excuse, me,
Judge. it's
Betty Woods Wilson.
THE COURT: Betty Woods Wilson. Thank you, Jack.
If any of you are related by blood or marriage to the
defendant, Betty Woods Wilson, please raise your hand, or the alleged victim in
this case, Jack W. Wilson. And if any of
you are so related, please let that be known.
(No audible response.)
THE
COURT: Do any of you ladies and gentlemen
have an interest in the conviction or the acquittal of this defendant, or have
any of you
made any promise or given
any assurance that you would convict or acquit the defendant in this case?
Page 65
And, if so, please raise
your hand.
(No
audible response.)
THE
COURT: Do any of you ladies and
gentlemen have a fixed opinion concerning the guilt or the innocence of this
defendant which would bias your verdict? If so, please raise your hand.
(No audible response.)
THE
COURT: Are any of you ladies and gentlemen opposed to penitentiary punishment,
that is, punishment by imprisonment in the penitentiary? And if any of you are
so opposed, please raise your hand.
(No audible response.)
THE
COURT: Are any of you ladies and gentlemen opposed to capital punishment? And
if
any of you are opposed to
capital punishment, let
it be known at this time by
a show of hands. If you are opposed to capital punishment, please raise
your hand.
Would
you please stand, please, ma'am,
and identify yourself?
JUROR:
My name is Debbie Little.
THE COURT: All right. Thank
you very much.
Page 66
Now, ladies and gentlemen,
the attorneys in this case -- the jury will be selected by' the struck jury
system, meaning that a jury will be selected from your number, with the remainder
being eliminated by a process of striking, with the parties striking
alternately until that number remains.
In order to do this, the attorneys need to identify you with the name
that they have on their list. So for that purpose, as Mrs. Turner calls
your name, would you please
stand and tell us where you work. If
your wife is employed outside of the home, please state her employment.
Otherwise, you may -- might only state that she is a housewife. it is for the purpose of identification only
that we
ask you to do this. So that the attorneys and the parties in this
case will be able to select a jury. So as Mrs. Turner calls your name, please
stand and give us that information.
(Whereupon,
the clerk called the roll of the jury venire, and the prospective jurors gave
the
requested information.)
MRS. TURNER: Any jurors' names I did not call?
(No audible response.)
Page 67
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, are you
ready?
MR. FRY: Yes, sir, I am, Your Honor. (Whereupon, Mr. Fry
conducted a voir dire
examination of the jury
venire as follows:)
MR.
FRY: Good afternoon. I have been waiting all day to see you
all. You all have been waiting all day
on us, too, haven't you.
My
name is Jimmy Fry, as Judge Younger told you, and I'm here today visiting. I'm
going to be here probably all week and probably some of next week, visiting,
also. I'm the district attorney in
Limestone County, Alabama, and I have been assigned to come to Tuscaloosa and
try this case,
representing the State of
Alabama, that is, the people of the State of Alabama.
The Judge has explained to
you a little bit, I guess, about that this is a case that
happened in Huntsville. well, my office is in Athens, so I'm not
even from Huntsville. The District Attorney
over in Huntsville was unable to try this case for a legal reason. And so I got assigned to try it by the
Attorney General, that
is, Jimmy Evans, the
Attorney General of the State
of Alabama. I brought some people with me this week
Page 68
from home to help me on this
case. And some of you, 12 -- or 14 of you, anyway, are going to be seeing some
of them come and go as this trial gets underway and progresses. It may be that
the defense lawyers are going to want to know if you all know any of the people
helping me. So I would like to introduce
them to you from the very beginning. Some of my friends from
my office that work with me in the DA's office in Limestone County are here.
Beginning
with Mr. Bobby Smith, who is
an investigator.' He is
an investigator from my
office. Been with our office for about 15 years. Helping me on the legal end
some, probably as much out of the courtroom as
in the courtroom, is Miss
Kristi Adcock. You have already met Kristi. She is the only other lawyer
working in my office in Athens. And also from my office this week, we have our
victims service officer, Mrs. Sally Marks. While we are in here working, Sally
will be outside of the courtroom
most
of the time, hopefully keeping our witnesses
in line and ready to come
in, where we can have an orderly trial and, also, providing, of course, for the
overnight stays and that kind of thing for witnesses who are from out of town.
Of course, all
Page 69
of the witnesses, as far as I
know, at least most of them, are going to be from out of town. Madison County, Morgan County, Marshall
County. And so
they have to be put up when
they come down here, and that's what Mrs. Marks is going to be doing for us.
In addition, we have some folks who have been loaned to me
for this trial from the
Huntsville District
Attorney's Office. And in the
courtroom with us this
afternoon, we have Wanda
F a r r i s .Wanda, if you
will, stand. Wanda is also a VSO, and although not directly involved in the
trial
of this case, she will be assisting Mrs.
marks on providing
transportation and lodging and whatever comfort we can to the people who will
be coming down to testify. Also, Mr. Larry Smith, he is an investigator from
the District Attorney's office in Huntsville, and Larry is not here. Larry is working right now, as I speak, on
something for me. He is a big, big guy, my size and half over again, with gray
hair. You will recognize him when he
comes in. He will take half the door when he comes through it.
Also, we have one other person that is with me. We have an investigator from the
Page 70
Huntsville Police Department
who was the chief detective assigned to this case. Six weeks ago he was unknown to me; today
I'm proud to call him my friend. Investigator Micky Brantley is here, also from
Huntsville.
In addition, let me just say
one very brief note of thanks for District Attorney Charlie Freeman, your
District Attorney, who has been a gracious host to me and the people working
with me today, and even before we got down here.
As you can imagine, working without an office, working
without a library or a copying machine or anything else, can be something of a
problem. Mr. Freeman has very graciously given us
a working space and helped us
in doing our job down here while we are visiting with you all.
First
of all, let me begin this afternoon by thanking you all for the sacrifice which
you
have
made to be here. Now, I know everybody on this jury panel had somewhere else
they could have been this afternoon, whether it's family or your job or some of
you lucky retired people, maybe your hobby. Lord knows, you all could be
gardening down here as warm as it is, planting cabbage and turnips. I
Page 71
don't know what all --
onions. And all of you had something
else you could have been doing. I have
got a family and obligations
back in Athens, and
I'm sensitive to the
sacrifice you all are making
to be here with us for this
trial.
And
I want to begin by congratulating you and thanking you for making the sacrifice
and for giving of your precious time in the fulfilling of this very special
duty and obligation of
citizenship, that is, jury
duty.
Now,
what are we going to do here this afternoon? What we are doing is called voir dire.
Voir dire, as I understand it, comes from a French word or Latin word or phrase
meaning to speak the truth. And I read that in a book somewhere. I
don't know if that's really
true or not, but I know what it means to me.
To me it means that I get to speak with you all. We get to talk together, like
we would say in Limestone
County, we get to visit a little. And I like this part of the trial. Later
on 12 or 14 of you will get
to hear the lawyers
talk, but you won't get to
talk with us. Basically, you will be
listening. So this gives us a chance to
talk just a little bit.
Page 72
I don't know any of you. I
don't know anybody on this jury panel. This is a funny fee1ing.I have been
sriking juries for 12 years at home, and I always know somebody. I always know several of you. I don't know any of you all and, as far as I
know, none of you all know me. So we are
going to have to get to know each other just a ittle bit so I can strike this
jury. Because what we are preparing to
do, what we are getting ready to do, is strike a jury, a jury in a criminal
case, a jury in a murder case, a jury in a capital murder case, to be exact.
And we need to know something about you all. We need to know probably a little
bit more than what we just got by you all standing and introducing yourselves.
This is a capital murder
case and it is
as serious as it gets. So I want you all to share with me a little
bit and answer some questions
which
I'm about to ask. And, by the way, I'll try not to ask you any of the questions
that were on the survey. My questions may shade just a little bit, but I'll do
my very best not to ask you anything
that I'm going to have to go
through tonight on that stack of papers that fit.
Page 73
OOkay. we are going to pick
this jury and we are picking this jury for one particular case.
The jury we pick, as far as
I know, is going to hear one case before that jury is released. And the jury we pick is to hear this one
unique case where there is one unique fact.
We are not necessarily looking in this case for the most intelligent
people or the most educated people or the best looking people.
It may turn out that way,
maybe that's what we will get. But what we are looking for, ladies and
gentlemen, are some people who we think can be objective.
Now, what do I mean by objective? I mean that you have no
firsthand knowledge of the facts
of this case, that is, you
were not a witness or you were not present up in Huntsville, Alabama, May the
22nd, 1992, when Dr. Jack Wilson was murdered. You have no relationship to either the
defendant in
this case or the victim or
me or anybody directly involved with the trial of the case. Finally, you have no special reason why you
should not serve on this case. For
instance, perhaps you, yourself,
have been a victim of a
crime or had a special circumstance in your life that would make this a
Page 74
very difficult, if not
impossible, case for you to hear.
Now, I'm not going to ask
you any questions this afternoon intended to embarrass you or to humiliate you
or to offend anyone in the courtroom.
Please understand that my questions are not suggesting that anybody in
this courtroom on
the jury panel would either
be unfair or dishonest. We have just got to get to know each other a little
bit. The questions which I'm just about
to a6k you are very important to me, I promise you they are.
I'm not doing this just for
the fun of it. The questions are
important to me. I won't ask you any
questions that are not important to me. Your
answers are important to me
and I have to not only know your answers, your answers have to be recorded by
A.D., our court reporter here. So I'm going to ask you to do something for
me. If I ask you a question and that question
applies to you, I want you to raise your hand right where you are, and, if you
will., please raise it high enough so I can see it. It's just a whole sea of you all out there,
and I may miss one if you just give me one of those little weak numbers there. So if it applies to you,
Page 75
raise your hand, and then if
you will pardon my pointing, I'll point to you and get your name so
A.D. can get it down on
tape, and then we will let you answer the question.
All right. The Judge has asked you if
you are related to the
defendant in this case. None of you were. Now, I want to ask any of you do you
know or are you acquainted with the defendant in
this case? The defendant is,
as the Judge said, Betty Woods Wilson. Now, my understanding is Mrs. Wilson
grew up in Gadsden, that her maiden name was Betty Woods. After high school she
was married to a gentleman by the name of Sonny Taylor, she has
three children, three boys,
who are Bo, Dink, and Trey Taylor. She was married in the late 170s, I believe,
to Dr. Jack Wilson in Huntsville. You
will hear that Dr. Wilson
was a prominent ophthalmologist there, and she lived there with Dr. Wilson
until May 22nd of last year.
With that background, do any of you know or do any of you
have any reason to know the defendant in this case, Betty Wilson?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY: All right. She has four
Page 76
attorneys with her this
afternoon, and I want to
ask if any of you know any
of them. And let me take them in order. First, Mr. Cook, Mr. Bobby Lee Cook, is
an attorney from Summerville, Georgia. He practices in Summerville, but his
practice is not limited to Summerville, Georgia, nor the state of Georgia. I
don't expect that you would know him or would have had dealings with Mr. Cook,
but you may have, it's a small world. Do any of you know Mr. Cook? Have any of
you ever had any dealings or any acquaintance with Mr. Bobby Lee Cook?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY: Another attorney
representing
the defendant in this case
is Marc Sandlin. Now, Marc, as the Judge said, practices law in
Huntsville, Alabama, and has
for probably the last 10 or 11 years, but Marc, if I'm not mistaken, was
an undergraduate here at the
University and also attended the law school here. So he must have spent at
least seven years here, maybe more than that.
MR.
SANDLIN: Just seven.
MR. FRY: Just seven. Okay.
Do any of
you know Marc Sandlin? Did
all of you see him when he stood a moment ago?
Page 77
(No response.)
MR.
FRY: Nobody knows Marc. Well, let's see if I do any better with this one. Mr. Drake.
Mr. Drake, now, he is a
Tuscaloosa lawyer. Mr. Drake, I understand, has been practicing here for
several years or many years.
MR.
DRAKE: 23.
MR.
FRY: 23 years. That would qualify for
many, I guess. And he, I think, also went to school at Alabama and also went to
law school at Alabama, and has a law practice here. Do any of you know Mr.
Drake? Okay, I see a few hands. Put your
hand down just a moment and let me add onto that
just a little bit. What I
mean by knowing him is this: If you were at the Red Lobster and you saw Jack
across the salad bar, or whatever -- I don't think they have one at Red Lobster
-- but if you saw him in the line at Red Lobster, maybe at The
Landing, you saw him at The
Landing and you were at the salad bar, do you know him well enough to say,
"Hey, Jack," or do you know him because either you or someone close
to you has had some kind of either business or social relationship with him? By
that
I
mean, have you got a relative maybe that was
Page 78
involved in a lawsuit in
which Mr. Drake was on either side of the case, or maybe through the local
Democratic party or some political organization?
Do
any of you have any association with Mr. Drake? Now, let's start, again, with
the hands.
And, I tell you, there are so
many of them, let's take the right hand first.
My right side first. Okay. Now,
you are Mr. Drake?
A JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: Are you related to him?
A JUROR: No, I'm not. I
served on a jury about two and a half , three years ago, that Mr.
Drake represented one of the
sides.
MR. FRY: Okay.
A JUROR: That's my only real
dealing
with
him.
MR. FRY: Criminal case or civil case?
A
JUROR: It was concerning a will.
MR.
FRY: Concerning a will?
A
JUROR: Civil case.
MR. FRY: All right. Thank you, sir.
Working
our way back. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: He represented me in a case
once
and I have been knowing him since he was in
Page 79
college at the university. I was a policeman out there for 12 years.
MR. FRY: And your name, please, sir?
A
JUROR: Davis Nichols.
MR. FRY: Mr. Nichols. Thank you, Mr. Nichols. I saw another one, I thought, back there.
Did I not? Was that somebody scratching? on this side, I saw several hands. Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Mr. Drake is an acquaintance of mine. I also know his wife and his partner.
MR. FRY: Your name is
Burton?
A JUROR: Burton King Curry.
MR. FRY: All right. Thank
you. Yes, ma’am.
A JUROR: Hendrix.
He represented me in the past.
MR. FRY: He has been your lawyer before? A JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: All right, Mrs. Hendrix. I thought I
saw some more hands. Mr.
Robinson.
A JUROR: Jack and I were business neighbors about 20, 25 years, out on University
Boulevard there.
MR. FRY: Okay.
Anybody else? Yes, sir.
Page 80
A JUROR: Morgan
Tunstall. I have
treated his daughter
orthodontically about 20 years ago, and I say hi to him every time I see him.
MR. FRY: All right. That's
exactly what
I was talking about. Those
of you that know Mr. Drake in any form or fashion. Is there anyone whose relationship
with him is such that it would make it difficult for you to sit on a jury in
which he was representing one of the sides, without being prone to lean towards
his side of the house just be6ause
of your relationship with
him? Anybody?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY: Mrs. Hendrix, he
was your
lawyer.
Would you be able to sit on a jury --
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: -- and be fair and
impartial?
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: All right, I
believe you would. I'm coming to you, Charlie, I didn't mean
to
leave you out.
MR. HOOPER: That's all
right, Jimmy.
MR. FRY: Mr. Charlie Hooper is another Huntsville lawyer, he
practices in Huntsville. And I believe mostly Huntsville or maybe North
Alabama.
Page 81
He has got some partners up there
with him, George Beason and Doug Martinson. And I don't know that
any of you should know any of them,
but I don't
know, Huntsville is just right up
the road, you all may know some of them. Do any of you know either Charlie
Hooper, George Beason, or Doug Martinson?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY:
Jack, I'm sorry, you have a partner, do you not?
MR. DRAKE: Joe Pierce.
MR. FRY: Do any of you know Mr. Joe Pierce? Is he here?
MR. DRAKE: He is right
there.
MR. FRY: That's Joe. Okay. Mr. -- you know Mr. Pierce, also?
A JUROR: Yes, sir, I do. We
have had some business dealings, real estate dealings and office dealings.
MR. FRY: And your last name?
A
JUROR: King Curry.
MR.
FRY: I'm sorry. Did I see some other
hands? All right. All right, moving along here. I want to ask you something about the facts
of this case. I'm not going to tell you the case, we will
Page 82
do that when we start the
trial tomorrow, but the judge just asked you do you know anything about it. I'm
going to tell you just a little bit more about the facts, just to see if you
heard anything about this case. I'm not going to argue the case to you. But
this case is going to involve Dr. Jack Wilson. Dr. Jack Wilson being found dead
at his home at 2700 Boulder Street in Huntsville, Alabama, found by his wife,
the defendant, Betty Wilson, back on the 22nd of May last year. That is,
1992. And Dr. Wilson
was found dead, apparently from being beaten with a baseball
bat or softball bat and stabbed with a knife. Now, having given you just a
little bit more of the facts, do any of you know anything about this case? Do
any of you have any firsthand knowledge or have you talked with someone
involved in either the prosecution or the defense of the case? Have any of you
discussed this case with anyone in an official capacity? In other words, when
you found out you were on the jury service, did you call your friend the Chief
of Police, or your friend the Sheriff or somebody, and say, "What is this
about, you know, what have I gotten into, get me out of this”? Yes, sir, who?
Page 83
A JUROR: I saw Mr. Drake
yesterday at
the gasoline station.
Immediately when he recognized me, he said, "We can't talk." I said,
"I don't think I'll be on the jury, anyway." That was it.
MR. FRY: Well, you never
know, Mr.
Curry. You are on there so
far, aren't you?
A
JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: Thank you. Anybody else?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY: How many of you
have read about this case in the newspaper? I believe that was on your survey
and I'm not going to get into any
detail,
but could I just see your hands?
All right. Let me do it the
other way.
How many of you have not
read anything about this case? Looks like about half and half - Thank you.
How many of you have seen anything about this case on either
the television or heard
anything about this case on
the radio? A few more hands. I don't believe that's on the survey, is it,
TV
and radio?
MR.
COOK: I don't watch TV. I don't
know.
Page 84
MR. FRY: I don't either. I don't think that was on the survey about
TV and radio. I just think it said
newspapers. Could I see the hands on
this side, again? Would you give me your name, please, sir?
A
JUROR: James Collins.
MR. FRY: TV or radio.
A JUROR: No, newspaper.
MR. FRY: Newspaper. Okay. Just TV or radio now. Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: TV and radio.
MR.
FRY: And your name?
A
JUROR: Donna Johnston.
MR.
FRY: Johnson or Johnston?
A JUROR: --s-t-o-n.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Tom Floyd. Television.
MR. FRY: Television?
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: All right. Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Aleen Costes -- Laura. I'm
sorry. Laura Costes. Television.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Television.
Page 85
MR. FRY: Television.
Yes, sir, Mr. Nichols.
A JUROR: Nichols. Radio.
MR. FRY: Radio.
Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Radio and TV.
MR.
FRY: Radio and TV. Mr. Latham.
A
JUROR: No, James Wilkinson.
MR. FRY: I'm sorry, Mr. Wilkinson.
A
JUROR: Television and newspaper.
MR.
FRY: TV and newspaper. Yes, ma’am.
A
JUROR: TV and newspaper.
MR. FRY: The lady behind you.
A JUROR: Gala Walker. TV and newspaper. MR. FRY: TV and newspaper. Ms. Little,
Debbie Little.
A
JUROR: Yeah, television.
MR.
FRY: Television. Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: Phyllis Cook, television and radio.
MR.
FRY: And your last name?
A
JUROR: Cook.
MR.
FRY: Mrs. Cook, TV and radio. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Television.
Page 86
MR. FRY: TV. Anybody else?
Lady in the back.
A JUROR: Today's TV news.
MR.
FRY: Today's TV news. All right. Forgive
me, but your name, please, ma'am?
A
JUROR: Spencer.
MR.
FRY: I should have remembered your
name. I'm sorry. over here, now, radio
or TV, not newspaper?
A JUROR: TV. Herbert
Bruce.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Fred Darnell, TV.
MR. FRY: Mr. Darnell. Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: Judy Lamon,
TV.
MR.
FRY: Mrs. Lamon. I'm sorry I
skipped you all. Mr. Hine?
A JUROR: TV.
MR.
FRY: Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Margene Hinton, TV.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Hinton.
TV. Ms. Kizziah. A JUROR: TV and radio.
MR.
FRY: TV and radio. Let's see.
Yes, sir, Mr. Robinson.
A JUROR: TV and newspapers.
Page 87
MR.- FRY: TV and newspapers
. Yes, ma'am. A JUROR: Lueguster Robinson, the radio. MR. FRY: Radio.
Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: William Porter, the radio and TV.
MR.
FRY: Radio and TV?
A JUROR: Yeah.
MR. FRY: Going in the back, this back here. Yes,
ma'am.
A JUROR: Stephanie Turner, radio.
MR. FRY: Ms. Turner, radio. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Morgan Tunstall, TV.
MR.
FRY: Dr. Tunstall, TV. Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Doris Townsend, TV.
MR. FRY: Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Bernice Stewart, TV.
MR.
FRY: Mrs. Stewart, television. All the
way to the back. Mrs. Yourick.
A
JUROR: TV and radio.
MR.
FRY: TV and radio. Have any of you
on the jury panel heard
anything on either the TV or the radio that cannot be set aside? Have any of
you heard anything on either TV, radio, or the
newspaper that has already
-- that has made you
Page 88
make up your mind about what
you would do in the
case?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY: Is there
anybody sitting here
right now that thinks that
the defendant in this
case is either guilty or
probably guilty? Mrs. Yourick, you have got your hand up back there.
A JUROR: I have formed an opinion. I'm not sure it will stick, but I have.
MR.
FRY: Could you sit on a jury, Ars. Yourick, and listen to the evidence and
decide the case based on the evidence that you hear as a part
of the jury and based on the
evidence that the Judge would explain to you, do you think, or is there
something already in your mind that is so overwhelming that you feel like you
would not be
able
to set that aside?
A JUROR: I'm not real
sure I could set it aside.
MR. FRY: All right. Well, I appreciate your honesty. Voir dire means to speak the truth,
that's
what we are here for. Nobody is going to
be criticized for speaking the truth today, I promise
you.
Yes, ma'am.
Page 89
A JUROR: What I have read in
the newspapers, there is a possibility I think she is guilty, but I'm not absolutely
sure, but there is a doubt in my mind.
MR. FRY: Okay.
A JUROR:
Burns.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Burns. My
question is, would you be able to put that doubt aside and base a verdict, if
you were on the jury, based on what you saw and heard in court and not something
you have heard or seen in the media?
A
JUROR: I think I could be objective. MR.
FRY: Okay, Mrs. Burns, thank you.
Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: I'm basically the same way. I read quite a bit about it and from up in
the Huntsville Times, the Huntsville papers and all,
and I heard it when I was up
there visiting.
MR.
FRY: So you have read some
Huntsville
coverage of it?
A JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: I'm sorry. Your name?
A
JUROR: Porter.
MR.
FRY: Mr. Porter.
Page 90
A JUROR: Yes. I seen it on TV up there and heard it on
radio.
(Brief pause.)
MR.
FRY: Continuing on. I want to ask you some questions now to really get to your
feelings about serving on
the jury and your
feelings about the law and
your ability to -- and your willingness to follow the law in this case. By the
way, you all loosen up a little bit. Some of
you all got your backs and
necks so tight Ilmafraid you are going to pop. Nobody is going to be
throwing anything at you or
doing anything to scare you. I'm not going to be shooting a pistol or cracking
a whip or anything.
This case, ladies and
gentlemen, is going to involve the sudden violent and hideous death of another
human being, Dr. Jack Wilson. Now, there
is always unpleasantness in
a murder case, and this case is no exception to that. There will be, by
necessity in a murder case, also grotesque and gruesome evidence. It's just not a pleasant thing, it's an
unpleasant thing. No doubt everybody on this jury panel or at least every
normal person on this jury panel has strong feelings about death.
Page 91
And everyone has, I'm sure,
strong feelings about someone dying suddenly and unexpectedly without
reason. But is there anyone on the
panel, because
of some experience that
perhaps you or someone
close to you has had, feels
like this is just a case that you do not want to hear? Now, I'm not going to
ask you why, I'm not going to pry as to why you
might not want to hear this
particular case. Yes,
ma’am.
A JUROR: I just prefer not
to.
MR.
FRY: And your name?
A
JUROR: Lois Lindsey.
MR.
FRY: Mrs. Lindsey?
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR.
FRY: Anyone else?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY: Judge Younger is
going to
explain to the 12 or 14 of
you all who get chosen to be on this jury, what the law is in this case. Now, no one here today is expected or required to know
the law. Quite the opposite.
The law will be given to you all by the Judge at the end of the trial, not by
me, not by Mr. Drake or Mr. Cook, only the Judge . But he will instruct you
that you are required by
Page 92
your oath and the law of
this State to apply the law, which he explains to you, to the facts, which you
and only you will find and decide to be true, and then and only then arrive at
a verdict.
Will each of you give me
your promise that if you are selected to be on this jury, that you will take
the law that he gives you and, to the best of your ability, apply it in this
case?
(No response.)
MR.
FRY: You may say, well, why do you ask
that? Well, because sometimes, even though you take an oath and even though you
have an obligation to follow the law of this state, there are people who get on
juries who decide they will change the law, they have got a better idea about
what the law should be. That maybe there is some kind of unwritten law that
they can come up with on their own. Kind
of like I used to do in geometry, the teacher was always trying to get me to
memorize the formula, you know, to make the lines all meet up in the end, and I
always tried to come up with my formulas, because I couldn't remember the
formulas. Well, in this case you will be explained the law.
Is there anyone on the jury
panel who can't live
Page 93
with that? Is there anyone,
because of your
personal philosophy or because
of your personal religion, beliefs, just believes that the
individual ought to be able
to decide for
themselves what the law is?
(No
response.)
MR.
FRY: The Judge will charge the
people selected as jurors,
that they are to weigh
the testimony of the case
using their common sense and without sympathy or prejudice. Can each of you
give me your promise that if you are chosen for this jury you will do that? You
would weigh the evidence using your God-given common sense and without sympathy
or prejudice?
(No response.)
MR.
FRY: I take your silence to mean
that you would.
Let me say something to you
about circumstantial evidence. Now,
normally the
think in other charges to
the venire that I have heard, circumstantial evidence is mentioned. I don't believe it was mentioned this
morning by the Judge, but I believe it will be an important
element of the jury charge
as given at the
Page 94
conclusion of this case. So
I would like to talk a little bit about it, and then ask you a question or two about
circumstantial evidence.
What is circumstantial
evidence, what is it, what is it not? You hear a lot about circumstantial
evidence. Well, circumstantial evidence is evidence based upon something not
direct evidence, that tends
to prove a fact. I
could illustrate better than I can explain. First, let me give you an illustration of
direct eviaence. Let's say I'm at the Kmart at home and I know a guy,
I
have known him all my life, and I see him rob Kmart, and I see him do that, I
see him run away and he gets away. Later
on I tell the police, "Yes, I saw him, I know it was him, I have known him
all my life." That's direct evidence.
I identified the person positively as the person that committed the
crime. I would be called as a witness to
testify, "Yes, I saw him. I knew it
was him-"
Take this same example and let's say that it's snowing in
Athens, which is possible. That happens about once a year. And let's say instead of being able to
positively identify this person, this person has on a ski mask, a big heavy
Army coat, so
Page 95
I can't see their features
or face and I can't positively identify this person as my friend that I have
known all my life. But I notice, as
they
leave, they have got a limp,
and I can say I don't know it was my friend, but it certainly looked like the
limp, I can identify that, I think that's my friend because of the limp. That's just a circumstance that tends to
prove that it was my friend. I can't
say positive that it was.
Let
me get back to the snow example again for you.
Let*11s say you are walking across a snow- covered bridge. All right.
And as you get to the end of the bridge you notice parallel to you and across
the bridge some little tracks, and you get
to the edge of the bridge where
these tracks end, there is a child sitting up on a rail with some little red
boots on. Now, you didn't see the child cross the bridge, he is just sitting
there. You didn't see the child make
the tracks. The child is there, the tracks are there. That would be
circumstantial evidence that the child did in fact cross the bridge.
At
the conclusion of this trial, ladies and gentlemen, the Judge, I believe, will
explain
Page 96
to you that circumstantial
evidence is good evidence, not inferred evidence. And that a conviction can be
had on the basis of
circumstantial evidence, if
the State meets its burden.
Now, I want to ask you a
question based
on that, and it's very
important to me. Is there anyone on
the jury panel who would not consider circumstantial evidence?
(No response.)
MR. FRY: We hear people say sometimes, "Well, you know,
if I was on a jury I wouldn't ever convict on circumstantial evidence; it would
take more than that. I would have to
have positive direct proof . 11 Anyone on this jury panel, if they were
convinced of the defendant's guilt after the Judge had explained to you what
the burden of proof is, is there anyone who would, nonetheless, be hesitant to
convict on the basis that most
excuse me -- much of the
evidence, not most much of the
evidence was circumstantial?
A JUROR: Debbie Little.
MR. FRY: Ms. Little?
A JUROR: I think I would have a problem
Page 97
with it. It would be hard to
make a decision.
MR.
FRY: Okay. Another important
element of this case, something
that the jury that hears this case is going to have to wrestle with,
and I'm going to have to
wrestle with, is the burden of proof, that is, the burden on the State of
Alabama which today and this week is going to be on Jimmy
Fry, me, to prove this defendant guilty.
And to prove it with the standard that the Judge is
going to explain to
you. t
It's going to be something
like this:
That
there is a presumption of innocence that
follows this defendant
throughout the trial and until her guilt is established by the evidence
beyond
a reasonable doubt, she is presumed not guilty. We must prove -- the State must
prove every essential element of the crime charged. And to
find
the defendant guilty, the jury must be
convinced beyond a
reasonable doubt and to a moral certainty of the defendant's guilt, of each and
every element of the crime charged.
However,
notice this, please, this is
important. The Court, the Judge, will tell the jury, I believe in the closing
instructions, that the State is not
Page 98
required to prove this
defendant or any defendant guilty beyond all doubt. That in fact very few
things in life can be proven --
MR.
DRAKE: Now, Judge, I object to this. This is argument. I think it goes beyond the bounds of voir dire.
He is arguing legal principles to the jury.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, you
about through? MR. FRY: Yes, sir, I have
just got one
question to follow up on.
THE
COURT: All right.
MR.
FRY: Thank you. My question is
simply this, ladies and
gentlemen: This is a
serious case, the burden of
proof is the same regardless of what kind of case it is. That is, whether it's
a speeding case or a murder case,
theft, whatever, the burden
is the same. Is there anyone, however, on the jury panel, because this is
a serious case, is there
anyone who would require
me or the State of Alabama,
that is, to prove to you beyond the standard which the Judge will explain to
you, the defendant's guilt? Let me put it this
way -- and I accept your
silence to mean that you wouldn't make me do more than I'm required to do by
Page 99
law.
Let's put it this way: Let's say we
could convert guilt into
pounds or the burden of proof on the State, rather, into pounds. Let's say what I had to do to prove to you
all that this defendant is guilty is bring in here a wheelbarrow full of guilt
-- that's my burden. And in that wheelbarrow the Judge says, "If he brings
in ten pounds, then he has met his burden. And if he
brings in ten pounds and you
are convinced there is ten pounds there, then that would be for the jury to
decide, then your duty, your obligation, would be
to return a conviction.
Now,
is there anybody on the panel that
to be more than certain in
your own mind would require me to bring in 11 pounds or 20 pounds or ten pounds
and one ounce?
(No
response.)
MR. FRY: Judge Younger, do
you want us
to do our death
qualification at this point in the panel also?
THE
COURT: Sure.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir. Bear with me, folks. This is probably some of
the most important
Page 100
questions that I'm going to
ask you coming up right here. And I'm going to ask, as so many of you have
already been, for you to be very honest and very candid with me, because what
we are going to be talking about now -- and I hope you will talk with
me -- is life and death
itself .
This
is a capital case, and because it's
a capital case it's
different from any other case, criminal case, in the state of Alabama. This is a case where if the defendant is
found guilty there are only two possible sentences. one is life in the penitentiary without the
possibility of parole.
The other is death by
electrocution in the electric chair.
Only two possibilities. It's
different, also, in that the process of the trial works a
little different from other
trials, in that in a capital case the jury has to go a stage beyond what you
all would do in any other kind of a criminal case, anything other than capital
murder. Any
other case, other than
capital murder, the jury decides either the guilt or the innocence of the
defendant and they go home. And the
Judge then decides what the sentence is going to be. There is an extra step in
capital murder cases. And that is,
Page 101
after the jury. returns a verdict
of guilt in a capital murder case, then that jury is required to consider a
sentence and to render an advisory verdict to the Judge. After that the Judge
discharges the jury and at a later hearing the
Judge himself actually
sentences the defendant.
But the advisory verdict is
very important, very serious .In other words, in this case, if this defendant
is found guilty, the 12 people remaining on the jury, after returning a verdict
of guilty, will have to render an advisory verdict to Judge Younger as to what
the sentence should be, either death or life in the penitentiary without the
possibility of parole. Based on these facts, I
want to ask you a few
questions.
Is there anyone on the panel who has ever written an article
or a report or signed your name to anything in writing in regard to the death
penalty? Reports, letters to the editor, correspondence with a friend. Mr.
Curry?
A JUROR: I have written a report in
school
on capital punishment.
MR. FRY: All right. Was that
in
undergraduate
school or high school?
Page 102
A JUROR: High school.
MR. FRY: High school. All right.
That's Mr. Curry. Anybody
else?
(No response.)
MR.
FRY: Anyone else on the jury panel have you ever argued in favor or in
opposition to
the death penalty, either in
public or in private, either in a group which was informal or a group
which was formal? For
instance, we have argued
about capital punishment in
my Sunday School @lass. Maybe you have done the same thing. Have any of you on this panel ever expressed
an opinion publicly or privately to another person about the death
penalty? Mrs. Little, you
have already done it a couple of times today, I think. Outside of the courtroom?
A
JUROR: Yes, among friends.
MR. FRY: Pardon me?
A
JUROR: Among friends.
MR. FRY: Among friends. Okay.
And in an informal discussion, then?
A JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: I saw another
hand. Yes,
ma'am.
Page 103
A JUROR: I have in classes as well as among friends.
MR. FRY: Classes and among friends. And you are Mrs. Smith?
A JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: First name?
A
JUROR: R-o-b-i-n-a.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir.
A JUROR: James Wilkinson, informal among friends.
MR. FRY: Mr. Wilkinson. Did I see another hand on
the right-hand side? Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: Among friends.
MR.
FRY: And your name? Mrs. Palmer?
A
JUROR: No, Painter.
MR. FRY: Painter.
Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: Phyllis
Cook, and I have talked among friends and coworkers.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Cook.
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Tom Floyd.
I'm sure I have discussed it at times, but I don't remember
anything specific, among
friends.
Page 104
MR. FRY: All right, sir.
Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Among friends.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir. Your name, please,
s i r ?
A JUROR: Norman
Houben.
MR. FRY: Mr. Houben. Sorry, Mr. Houben. Did I see
another hand in the back? Okay, on the left-hand side. Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: Lueguster Robinson,
among friends and family.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Robinson. And Mr. Latham. A JUROR: Yes, among family and friends. MR. FRY: Family and friends. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Among family and friends.
MR.
FRY: And your name?
A
JUROR: Sammy Bartlett.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Family, friends, and coworkers. MR.
FRY: And your name?
A
JUROR: Atteberry.
MR. FRY: I'm sorry. Atteberry. Yes, sir, right here.
A
JUROR: Butler Hine. I'm sure I have
discussed it sometime, but I don't remember
Page 105
specifics
MR. FRY: Mr. Hine.
A JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR. FRY: The gentleman
back on my left.
A JUROR: Poole. Among friends.
MR. FRY: Mr. Poole.
Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Catherine Richardson. I have discussed it with friends.
MR. FRY: Catherine Richardson?
A JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: on this end.
A JUROR: Kellie Rowe. Among friends.
MR. FRY: Thank you, Mrs.
Rowe. Directly behind you.
A JUROR: Stephanie
Turner. In class and at home.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Turner. All right.
Trying
to keep them in order. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Informally among friends.
MR.
FRY: Okay. Mrs. Yourick.
A
JUROR: In Sunday School and with
friends.
MR. FRY: Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Bernice Ford, with family
Page 106
members.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Herbert
Bruce.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Deerman. Among friends.
MR.
FRY: Mr. Deerman. The lady behind you.
A JUROR: Judy Lamon.
I'm sure at some point I have discussed it.
MR. FRY: All right. Do any of you belong to any group,
association, whether it be religious, civic, or otherwise, that has an official
policy or an official philosophy in regard to capital punishment? Any group,
any church, religious organization that, as far as you know, has a policy one
way or another?
(No
response.)
MR.
FRY: Have any of you on the jury
panel ever belonged to or
contributed to an organization by the name of Amnesty International?
(No
response.)
MR.
FRY: Okay. I have told you that the law
in this state for this crime is, the only two alternatives for this punishment,
for this crime,
Page 107
is either death or life without
the possibility of
paro1e. My next question is
not intended to challenge anyone's beliefs, to diminish your right as a citizen
under the Constitution of the Federal Government or the State to express your
beliefs,
but I merely have to ask you
about your beliefs and what you choose as individuals to believe about the
death penalty. And you understand that
that is an authorized punishment in the state of Alabama.
Please
raise your hand if you are opposed to the death penalty as a form of
punishment. Ms. Little, we have already got yours down.
Thank you. Mrs. Robinson, you are personally opposed to it as
a form of punishment?
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR.
FRY: Are there others?
(No response.)
MR. FRY: This kind of gets into your religion and your
personal beliefs, I guess. It's not
something we always want to talk about with a room full of strangers, but I
really need to know this, this is serious.
Mrs. Robinson and Ms.
Little, do you believe there
is no place in society for capital punishment? Ms. Little?
Page 108
A JUROR: I wouldn't say that there is no place, but I
haven't made a decision. So if I
haven't made a decision, it's no right now.
MR.
FRY: You would answer that as far as you
know there is no place?
A JUROR: Right. Right now.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Robinson, how about you?
A JUROR: I feel the
same way. I don't really know that
there is a place.
MR. FRY: You can't perceive,
you can't,
in
your mind, see a place for it?
A JUROR: Right.
MR.
FRY: Okay. The rest of you, let me ask you this question
-- and I'm almost through, so bear with me.
I'm going to ask you a multiple
choice question. Let me
explain it to you, then I'm going to give you an A, B, and C answer, and
hopefully everybody will fall in either A, B, or C. If this works, you should.
Assume that you have
been chosen as a juror on a
capital murder case. After hearing all of the evidence and the law as explained
to you by the Judge, you are convinced under the law that the defendant is
guilty as
charged
of capital murder. Now, the Judge has
told
Page 109
you that you must render an
advisory verdict and
that there are only two
choices, life imprisonment without the possibility of parole or death. Now,
I'm going to read A, B, and
C. You should decide which one of these would
apply to you. Okay. Don't answer.
I'm going to read them to you first, then I'll go back and let you
answer in just a minute.
Based
on these facts, which would apply
to you. A: I
would consider voting on the death penalty.
B: I might consider voting on the
death penalty. And, finally, C: I would not vote, would not consider to vote,
on the death penalty as a sentence. Okay.
Is everybody with me? All right. You know, you decided the defendant is
guilty, you have got to make a decision, there are three
choices. Would you consider
the death penalty, you might consider the death penalty, or you absolutely
would not? First, let me see the hands, if I may,
of
those of you who would consider the death
penalty
as a sentence, that's answer No. A.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Answer No.
B, I might consider death as
a sentence. All right. And I would
like to get these names, if I may.
Mrs. Burns. Mrs. Carpenter. Mr.
--
Page 110
A JUROR: Collins.
MR. TRY: Mr.
Collins. Yes.. sir.
A
JUROR: Cowley.
MR. FRY: Cowley. Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Anthony Fair.
MR. FRY: In back, back
here.
A JUROR: Kell.
MR. FRY: Mr.
Kell. Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: McCalpine.
MR. FRY:
McCalpine. Spencer. Going on down. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Walter Simons.
MR.
FRY: Simons. Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Rachel Ruddock.
MR.
FRY: Mrs. Ruddock. In back. Mr. Wilson.
A
JUROR: Wilson.
MR.
FRY: James Wilson. And Mr.
Wilkinson. All right, anybody else on
this side? okay. On this side. Mr. Latham, Mr.
A
JUROR: Deerman.
MR. FRY: Deerman. And Mr.
A
JUROR: Curry.
MR.
FRY: -- Curry.
Page 111
A JUROR: Hall.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Hall.
What is your first name, Mrs. Hall?
A JUROR: Mavis.
MR. FRY: Thank you.
Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Nanette Davis.
MR. FRY: Nanette Davis. Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: Judy Lamon.
MR.
FRY: Lamon. Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Mrs. Kizziah
MR.
FRY: Kizziah. Pardon me for
pointing. My mother would
kill me. That's the only way I know to
do it.
A JUROR: Vera Mills.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Mills.
Behind you.
A
JUROR: Catherine Richardson.
MR. FRY: Catherine Richardson. Behind you.
A JUROR: Bernice Stewart.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Stewart. Mrs. Yourick in the back. And I finally have a hand from this lady.
A JUROR: Sylvia Springer.
A
JUROR: Celia Polke.
MR. FRY: Both of you, Sylvia
Springer
Page 112
and --
A JUROR: Polke.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Polke.
A JUROR: Yes.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Morgan
Tunstall.
MR. FRY: Dr. Tunstall. Okay, that's the A's and B's. Now, the C’s: I would not consider
the death penalty as a
sentence under any circumstance.
Okay. Mrs. Little. Did I see your hand? Your name, please,
ma'am?
A
JUROR: Robina Smith.
MR. FRY: Ms. Robina Smith.
Again, Mrs. Robinson.
A JUROR: Yes.
MR.
FRY: Okay. Now, be honest with me. Did everybody answer?
Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: Henry Patton. I think your question is a little general
and I would sort of have to look at the case on its own.
MR. FRY: Okay.
Well, I was just
assuming that whatever the
case was you had decided that the defendant was guilty, but still you
would -- you wouldn't be
able to base that without
Page 113
the full facts of the case?
okay. That's Mr. Patton?
A JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: Thank you, Mr. Patton. Anybody e1se
?Is there anybody else that felt like they couldn't answer the question?
(No response.)
MR.
FRY: Just really one last thing.
The jury that hears this
case, my understanding is, is going to be sequestered. You might have guessed that or expected that. It means that once the trial begins the jury
is going to be held together, eat together, stay in a motel, be put to more
inconvenience, frankly, than most juries would. Again, it's a part of the
service, I guess, we have to give as citizens.
Is there anyone on the panel, now that I have told you about that -- I
hope I didn't shock you or surprise you -- but is there anyone on the panel,
now that you know that, that
has
some kind of hardship which would render it difficult, if not almost
impossible, for you to serve on this jury? Maybe people sick, maybe you have
got a relative that's sick, you have got a
young
baby, maybe for some reason or another the
Page 114
prospect of being isolated
away from home and
family for some time would
just work a very difficult hardship upon you.
I saw one hand -- several hands.
okay. It's just a matter of timing, I guess. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: I have a grandson that has
leukemia and I have a brother that has
cancer.
MR. FRY: And I'm sorry, forgive me.
Your name?
A
JUROR: James Collins.
MR. FRY: Okay. Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Depends on the length of time. MR. FRY: I wish I knew. More than a
couple of days.
A JUROR: I mean, are you talking about more than a couple of weeks?
MR. FRY: I hope not.
A
JUROR: I'm embarrassed to even say
this, but I work several different places.
MR.
FRY: I noticed that.
A
JUROR: The only problem that I have is
economics. I mean, it would shorten my
workweek a lot.
MR. FRY: That's a problem most of us
Page 115
have.
A JUROR: Yes
That's why I said I was embarrassed to say it, because all of us have
those problems.
MR. FRY: Your name?
A JUROR: Aleen Costes. Laura
is the way it's listed.
MR. FRY: Okay.
On the right-hand side. Yes.
A JUROR: Robina Smith. I'm a student
and
I can be away for a week, but probably no more. MR. FRY: Can't miss tests, can't miss
class and all that. Yes, ma'am.
A
JUROR: Leigh Ann Locascio. I have a one-year-old child. It's not impossible, but my husband is
self-employed.
MR.
FRY: Do you have a babysitter?
A JUROR: I have day
care. It would just be pretty tough on
my husband, not impossible.
MR. FRY: Your husband may be -mad at us before this week is
over. Yes, ma'am, you had your hand up
first.
A JUROR: Physical reasons.
MR.
FRY: Okay.
Page 116
A JUROR: Necessity to be --
MR. FRY: That's
fine. That's fine.
other hands on the
right-hand side. Mrs. Little.
A
JUROR: I'll be honest. It's not a medical reason, but it's just I
have a meeting at
church that I have to be
there.
MR. FRY: You have to be there?
A JUROR: I just have
to be there.
MR.
FRY: You know, I have been ugly to
you all. I have been going from this side to this.
Yes, sir.
A JUROR: I have a limit of about a week. MR.
FRY: Mr. Brett?
A JUROR: Right.
MR. FRY: Mr. Brett, what do you do at the university,
by the way?
A
JUROR: I'm with the College of
Engineering, and I'm with the Bureau of Engineering Research. I have a number of critical projects
that
are at critical stages right now.
MR. FRY: Are you in
instruction or --
A
JUROR: Just research.
MR.
FRY: Just research?
A
JUROR: Right.
Page 117
MR. FRY: Thank you very much. Yes, sir.
A
JUROR: My wife does not drive an
automobile for health reasons, and she depends on
me to go to
the grocery store and run any errands . MR. FRY: Mr. Curry?
A JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: Yes, ma'am.
A JUROR: Wendy Mills. I have a four- month-old child.
MR. FRY: Four months old.
A JUROR: That's a good reason.
MR. FRY: It certainly is. Mrs.
Robinson.
A JUROR: I have two teenage daughters
and my husband is
deceased. one of my sons is in
the Army and the other one is
married and lives out of the county.
MR. FRY: You have got two teenagers home by
themselves?
A JUROR: Yes.
MR.
FRY: We might just ought to let you go
right now. Mrs. Mills, the other Mrs. Mills.
A
JUROR: Husband is a diabetic. He is
kind of slow about fixing food and I have got to get
Page 118
after him.
MR. FRY: Yes, ma'am. He wants to be eating sweets while you are gone?
A
JUROR: Yeah, he will.
MR. FRY: This lady back here.
A JUROR: Celia Polke.
My husband is
kind of ill and I have to
take the child to school
in the mornings.
MR. FRY: Mrs. Polke?
A
JUROR: Right.
MR.
FRY: I don't mean to pry, Mrs.
Polke, but would your child
have another way to school, could arrangements be made if you were delayed, if
you were on the jury?
A JUROR: Well, I don't know.
MR. FRY: I'm putting you on the spot. Would it be a
hardship to you?
A JUROR: Well, he really don't have another way.
MR. FRY: Then that
would certainly be a hardship. Yes,
ma'am. You are saying this child is
dependent upon you?
A JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: Okay. That is all I needed to
Page 119
know. And I appreciate your honesty. The lady behind you, did you have your
hand up also? No?
All right. Anybody else?
A
JUROR: I do.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir, Mr. Hitt.
A JUROR: My mother
and father is in
their 90s, and a lot of
times they call me at night with bathroom problems or a pilot light out. I
sometimes have to go over there during the night. And I'm a diabetic, also. I
have to have a lot of medication.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir. Anybody else?
(No
response.)
MR.
FRY: Ladies and gentlemen, I look
forward to working with whoever is chosen for this
j u r y .I'll be living with
you here in Tuscaloosa. Those of you that get stuck in a motel, I am, too.
So don't feel bad. Maybe time will go by quickly
and maybe something
meaningful will happen to all
of us.
Thank you very much for your patience and your consideration.
THE
COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, we are
going to take a ten-minute recess, but before we
Page 120
do -- so let me instruct you
not to discuss this
case with anyone, permit no
one to discuss it with you or in your presence. Now, ten minutes is not long. So take a quick break. Get some water or go to the restroom, and be
back in your seats in ten minutes. And,
again, do not discuss the case with anyone or permit anyone to discuss it with
you or in your presence. Take a break.
(Whereupon, proceedings were
in recess at 2:35 p.m., until 2:50 p.m., at which time the' following
occurred:)
THE
COURT: Mr. Drake, you ready?
MR. DRAKE: Yes, sir.
(Whereupon,
Mr. Drake conducted a voir dire examination of the jury venire as follows:)
MR. DRAKE: Ladies and
gentlemen, as you know by now, I'm Jack Drake.
We appreciate your cooperation and patience. We presented to you a questionnaire
designed to speed this process up,
and I think it's going to work
that way. And I particularly appreciate the fact that you took some care and
time in answering the questionnaire.
You
have met us all. Marc Sandlin and
Charlie Hooper are from Huntsville.
Bobby Lee Cook
Page 121
is from Summerville,
Georgia. And just so you will have some
frame of reference there, Summerville is ten mile east of Mentone, Alabama, and
about 80 miles away from Huntsville. We
represent Betty Woods Wilson, who is seated here, charged with capital
murder. Stand up, Betty, and let everybody
look at you. And we are happy to be her counsel in this proceeding.
I have a few questions and
I'll try to make them very specific and utilize the questionnaire, as best I
can. We have not had much time to look at the questionnaire, but we hurriedly
did that during the break, while we were trying to eat and look at the
questionnaires at the same time.
The
very last question on the questionnaire is No. 54, says, "Do you think,
based on what you have read or heard, that Betty Woods Wilson is probably guilty
as charged?" Some of you answered
that question, "Yes." And I take it that when you answered
"Yes," that you meant by that answer that you would require some
additional evidence from the defendant in order to change your opinion. Now, if
you did not mean that when you
Page 122
checked "Yes," let
me know right now.
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Thank you. We asked on the questionnaire
about your experience with the
justice system, we asked
about civil cases and criminal cases, both.
We did not ask a couple of questions.
One of them is: Have any of you
ever served as foreman of a grand jury?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: Any of you ever served as foreman
or foreperson on a criminal jury As opposed to a grand jury, but a jury hearing
a criminal case?
(No
response.)
MR.
DRAKE: Some of you have indicated on
your questionnaire that you have heard about this case, some of you have been
fairly specific. And
let
me supplement some of those inquiries.
Have
any of you ever been in
Huntsville and read the newspaper or heard a television report while you were
in Huntsville about this case? Is it
Mr. Porter?
A JUROR: Yes.
MR. DRAKE: You already said you had seen the Huntsville Times
or News, one of the two.
Page 123
Anybody else?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: Have any of you discussed
this case with somebody who
lives in Huntsville, friend, relative, somebody you used to work with that got
transferred up there, anybody who lives in the Huntsville area? And let me sort
of expand on that, too, because, you know, North Alabama is all kind of right
together, it's not exactly like it is here in West Alabama. And when I say the Huntsville area, I'm
really talking about Huntsville and Florence, Tuscumbia, Sheffield, Arab, Cullman,
all of that whole area. Decatur. Have you talked with anybody that lives up
in there about this case?
Yes,
ma'am.
A JUROR: I spoke with my sister who
lives
in Madison.
MR. DRAKE: Yeah, Madison is just
basically a part of
Huntsville. It's sort of a
suburb. I mean, it's not quite like
being from Northport, but it's pretty close. They have kind
of
grown together.
A JUROR: Right.
MR. DRAKE: All right. Anybody else in
Page 124
that area, ta1ked with
anybody in that area?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: some of you indicated in your responses on the questionnaire -- and,
again, we
had to do this hurriedly, so
I may not be totally
100 percent correct about
this -- but some of you indicated some relationship with the deceased, Dr. Jack
Wilson, either you had been treated by him or somebody in your family had been
treated by him. He was an
ophthalmologist. Seems like somebody
wrote down on one questionnaire, I remember seeing that
he operated on my sister or
brother or something
like that. Your sister in Madison?
A
JUROR: Right.
MR. DRAKE: You need to say
your name for the record every time.
A JUROR: Rachel Ruddock.
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Anybody
else that's ever been treated by Dr. Wilson or had a friend or family member
treated by him?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: Mr. Fry asked you about some legal principles, and I'm going to ask you
some similar questions as to the ones that he asked. He
Page 125
partly explained to you that
Betty Woods Wilson is presumed to be innocent of the charge against her, and some
of you wrote that down on the
questionnaire in answer, you
said, "She is presumed to be innocent." That's called the presumption
of innocence. It attached when she was
indicted. it
is with her today and goes
with her until the end of the trial. Now, is there anybody here who doesn't
either understand that or doesn't believe that?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: He mentioned the State's burden of proof. The State has to prove its charge here beyond
a reasonable doubt. And what I have
said all my life is a
reasonable doubt is a doubt that's based on a reason as opposed to something
you might think up or some
bias or whatever on your part. And is
there anyone here who does not understand or accept that the State has that
burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt?
(No
response.)
MR. DRAKE: This case comes
to you on the basis of an indictment, which is -- and the Judge at some point
will tell you this -- it's simply a means of initiating these proceedings. It's not in and
Page 126
of itself evidence of
anything. And is there anybody here who
doesn't understand that to be the case, that is, that an indictment is not
evidence
of
guilt? We all understand that, all accept that?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: I want to talk to you about some people
that we think will testify in this
case. And some of Dr. Wilson's family members are
here in the courtroom, and a great many of Betty's family are seated over here,
her mother and her children and sister and other relatives in her family. Some of them nay testify, depends on what
happens in the case. Some of the members of Dr. Wilson's family are seated over
in the jury box,
and some of them may
testify. And I would like to ask if any of you know any of them, and if you
don't mind I would like for you, 'when I call your name, to stand just
briefly. Stephen Wilson. And Stephen,
I understand, lived in
Tuscaloosa for a period of time; is that right?
MR. WILSON: Yes.
MR. DRAKE: And Scott
Wilson. There in the red tie. And then
Perry Wilson. Do you know
any of those three men?
Page 127
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: Now, Mr. Fry introduced members of his team, if you want to call it
that,
his people who are working
with him. Do you know
any of those people?
(No
response.)
MR. DRAKE: Now, I understand,
Mr. Fry, that this lady is a sister of Dr. Wilson?
MR. FRY: Jane English.
MR. DRAKE: Jane English, who
is a
sister. Mrs. English, where
do you live?
MRS.
ENGLISH: Tennessee. Knoxville,
Tennessee.
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Knoxville.
Does that ring a bell with anybody?
(No
response.)
MR.
DRAKE: You were introduced to Detective Micky Brantley of the Huntsville Police
Department, and he will be a witness.
You have been asked if you know him.
There are three other police officers, at least, if not more, from
Huntsville. Bill Payne, Glenn Hunley, and Harry Renfroe. Do
any of those people -- ever
had any dealings with them?
Page 128
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: There are some other people who
will be witnesses, too, a Russell Hughes in Vincent, Alabama. Any of you know Mr. Hughes?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: or Jeanne Ogle, Sylacauga, Alabama, might be
a witness.
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Brenda Cerha, who lives in Huntsville, was or
is a registered nurse. Does anybody
know her?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: On the questionnaire we asked if
any of you knew a man by the name of James D. White. And I have not had a chance to look at any
of those answers, and I'm
sorry, we will do that tonight, but let me ask some more specific
questions
about him. He is the man who killed Dr.
Wilson, and the State has entered into something called a conditional plea
agreement with him, in which the State says that it cannot prove its case
without his testimony. They have
admitted that.
So I want to know any possible
connection or knowledge of this man that they built this case
Page 129
around. Now, he has not always been known as James D.
White. He was once known as James D.
Howell . In fact, that's what his name
is, but his -- and his military records and his official records that we all
have compiled are basically under that name. Anybody ever know a guy named
James D. Howell?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: He went to high school in Sylacauga, I
believe it was, and he was known then
as Dennis Howell. He was there, as I calculated, in the mid
1960s, and dropped out of school in the
tenth grade and went in the
Army. Does that help ring a bell about
anything about him?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Quite a few of you -- yes, ma’am.
A JUROR: Excuse me, sir. My name is
Gayla Walker. You had this question on this questionnaire
and I'm not sure whether I checked it "Yes" or "No." I just
wanted you to know that.
MR. DRAKE: That's fine. Some people didn't. That's fine.
Let me continue on about
James D. White
or James D. Howell. He has been known as James B.
Page 130
White, Bob White,
Cookie. Those are the names that
I know about.
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Some of you
here work at the
VA Hospital
THE
COURT: Just hold up.
(Brief
pause.)
MR. DRAKE: Should I
continue?
THE COURT: No. I tell you what: You gentlemen come back up
here and let's make a
decision on where to go.
(Brief pause.)
(Whereupon, the following occurred at the bench, out of the
hearing of the jury venire:)
THE
COURT: No. 37, Julia Horton, excused
herself from the panel, and the information is that she is sick. Mr. Drake, you want the Court to wait or --
MR. DRAKE: No, we want to proceed. We will agree to have her
excused.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry,
what's the State's position?
MR. FRY: The state is
satisfied to let her be excused. No
objection.
Page 131
THE COURT: No. 37 will be excused. Mr. Drake, you may continue.
(Whereupon, Mr. Drake
continued to
conduct a voir dire
examination of the jury venire
as follows:)
MR. DRAKE: Ladies and gentlemen, we were talking about
James D. White, James D. Howell. He has been a patient at the psychiatric unit
of the VA Hospital here several times, and I wonder if any of you who have
worked there or had family members who worked there might have had any kind of
contact
with him.
(No
response.)
MR. DRAKE: He has been treated for psychiatric problems
at Brookwood Hospital in Birmingham, at the VA Hospital in Murfreesboro,
Tennessee, and, again, I wonder if that jogs any kind of memory you might have
about whether you
know
him or not.
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: We ask on the questionnaire about
those of you who served in the military.
we did not ask about types of discharges. Is there anybody on the panel who served in
the military who
Page 132
got anything other than an
honorable discharge?
(No
response.)
MR.
DRAKE: Finally, about this man James D.
White: He has been married four
times. I have tried to find out the
names of his ex-wives to see
if any of you might know an ex-wife,
and I haven't been very successful. But
one of them is named Cheryl Frost, and she has lived in the Vincent, Alabama,
area., at least at one time., if not now.
Any of you have any
knowledge of her?
(No
response.)
MR.
DRAKE: And one of his ex-wives was named Mary.
I don't know if it was Mary Howell or Mary White. Does that ring a bell with anybody?
(No response.)
MR.
DRAKE: okay. In this case there is going to be evidence
that Dr. Wilson and Betty
Wilson had an unusual
marriage. There will be evidence that
Betty had a couple of affairs during the time that she was married to Dr. Wilson.
I want to lay that out for everybody so that you know now that that
evidence will come in. Of course, she
is not charged with that kind of conduct, but I need to know if there is
anybody on this panel who would
Page 133
hold that kind of conduct
against her and would
not, for example, believe
her if she testifies in the case, would tend to disbelieve what she said
because she had had an affair while being married. Would it affect any of you
that way? Would it
affect any of you to the
extent that you could not give her a fair trial?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: And, again, there
is another
aspect to it that I have got
to just tell you about, and we have to do this, and I would appreciate your
honesty if it makes any difference to you. There will be some evidence that she
had an affair with a black man, and I need to know, again, if that would affect
any of you and affect your ability, for example, to believe her. Would you tend
to discount what she says because she had done that?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Would it affect your ability
to
give her a fair trial?
(No
response.)
MR. DRAKE: Betty is also an alcoholic.
I don't mean she drinks,
because once you are an alcoholic you are always one, if you know anything
Page 134
about the disease. She is a recovering alcoholic,
quit drinking in December 1986,
and has been extremely active in Alcoholics Anonymous since that time, often
going to as many as three AA meetings a day in Huntsville. But would the fact
that Betty is an alcoholic and has had a history of abusing
alcohol or even of being
addicted to alcohol, would that affect your ability, again as an example, to
believe her? Would you think less of her and tend not to believe what she tells
you or would it' affect, in any way, your ability to give her a fair trial?
(No response.)
MR.
-DRAKE: Do any of you know any
medical doctor in the
Huntsville area, any physician?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Any of you know a registered nurse or an LPN in
the Huntsville area? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't see your hand.
A JUROR: I'm Leigh Ann Locascio. I was in the National Guard in -- with --
MR. DRAKE: Would you stand up. We can't hear.
Page 135
A JUROR: I was in the medical National Guard and our
sister unit was in Huntsville, there was quite a few nurses. I'm not -- you know, I
don't correspond with them
now.
MR. DRAKE: Have you seen any
of them in the last 18 months?
A JUROR: Not in the last
year.
MR.
DRAKE: You talked to any of them about this case?
A
JUROR: No.
MR. DRAKE: And a hand back here, too.
Yes, Mr. Porter.
A JUROR: I have a daughter-in-law that's an RN.
MR. DRAKE: In Huntsville?
A
JUROR: Yeah.
MR.
DRAKE: Where does she work?
A
JUROR: Works for the --
MR.
DRAKE: For what?
A
JUROR: Human Services.
MR.
DRAKE: For what?
A JUROR: Human services. She goes to
the
houses and works with older people.
MR.
DRAKE: one of these home health care
Page 136
agencies, that kind of
thing?
A JUROR: Yeah.
MR. DRAKE: What's her name?
A JUROR: Susan Porter.
MR. DRAKE: Susan Porter.
Do you know if she knew Dr. Jack Wilson?
A JUROR: Not to my
knowledge.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay. Did she ever work at one
of the hospitals there?
A JUROR: No, she has been in there ever since she has
been up there.
MR. DRAKE: Anybody else?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Mr. Fry has
introduced
himself and you have been
asked some questions
about him. Do any of you
know Jimmy Fry from
Athens? Have any of you ever lived in Athens? Yes, sir.
A JUROR: Until I was one
year old.
MR. DRAKE: I don't
think that hardly counts. I appreciate
the answer, Col. Hine.
Anybody else who lived there at any time, anybody have any
family up in that area, Limestone County? Yes, ma'am.
Page 137
A JUROR: I have an uncle who lives in Huntsville.
MR. DRAKE: Your name?
A JUROR: Donna
Johnston.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay. Yes.
Stand up.
A
JUROR: I have an aunt -- I mean, not an
aunt, a cousin that lives there.
They just moved up there about two months ago.
MR. DRAKE: Who is that?
A JUROR: Pat Woodard.
MR.
DRAKE: Pat Woodard?
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR. DRAKE: Is that a woman?
A JUROR:
Yes.
MR.
DRAKE: Female?
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR.
DRAKE: Have you talked with her
about
this case at all?
A
JUROR: No.
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? Yes.
A JUROR: I have a
niece that lives in Decatur-Huntsville area.
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Let's start
with your
Page 138
name.
A JUROR: Eleanor Ewing.
MR. DRAKE: Mrs. Ewing. And
who is your niece?
A
JUROR: Rita Kent.
MR. DRAKE: Rita Kent. All
right.
Anybody else there? Yes,
sir.
A
JUROR: Henry Patton. My father-in- law,
Boswell Howell.
MR. DRAKE: Where does he
live?
A JUROR: Huntsville.
MR.
DRAKE: Mr. Ford.
A
JUROR: I have an uncle, Frank Ford, that
lives in Huntsville, and his daughter, Shelly Kaufmann, and her husband, Ernest
Kaufmann, which are my cousins.
MR.
DRAKE: Have you talked to them about this case?
A
JUROR: No, I haven't.
MR.
DRAKE: Anybody else? Yes.
A JUROR: My sister.
MR.
DRAKE: You have told us about your sister that lives in Madison. Yeah, Mr.
Porter,
you have told us --
Page 139
A JUROR: I also got a
daughter up there,
too.
MR. DRAKE:
Okay. What's her name?
A JUROR:
Laceys Spring. Hall. Shirley
Hall.
MR. DRAKE:
Have you talked to her about
this?
A
JUROR: No.
MR.
DRAKE: Anybody else?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Mr. Fry did not introduce Tommy Smith over
here at the end of the jury box, who is with the Tuscaloosa District Attorney's
staff , and he is assisting in some way
in this case. Do any of you know Tommy? Mrs. Holland?
A JUROR: I know Tommy.
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Would the fact that Tommy is involved in
this have anything to do with the way you would view the case?
A JUROR: No, sir.
MR.
DRAKE: Anybody else that knows Tommy on
a personal basis? He is sort of a public figure and I know that all of us know
him in one way or the
Page 140
other, but I'm talking about
if you know him to
speak to him and talk to
him, that kind of thing.
(No
response.)
MR.
DRAKE: And Charlie Freeman was here earlier.
Do any of you have -- would any of you consider yourselves to be friends
with Charlie Freeman? Mrs. Holland.
Anybody else?
A
JUROR: I know his mother.
MR. DRAKE: I do, too.
A JUROR: Lovely lady.
MR. DRAKE: I want to ask you
about a law firm called Sirote & Permutt. And a lot of times we read off
the names of everybody in the law firm, but they have got about a hundred
lawyers and I'm not going to do that.
They have offices in Birmingham, Mobile, Montgomery, Tuscaloosa, and Huntsville.
And they do estate planning
work, tax work,
corporate work, business
planning, civil
litigation, that kind of
thing. And they have had
an office here, off and on,
for years. And David Wooldridge, who is Bobby Wooldridge's brother, used to
come down here and meet with people once a week.
I
don't know if he still does it or not. But have any of you had any work done by
Sirote & Permutt?
Page 141
They represent the Wilson
children in some civil lawsuits pending in Huntsville, is the reason I'm asking
the question. Any of you ever had any
work done by that law firm?
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: Any of you ever
had any relatives or friends who are employed by that law firm? They have
several hundred employees.
(No response.)
MR. DRAKE: As Mr. Fry
brought out, I
have
been here a long time and I have been involved in a lot of legal matters, and I
wonder if my firm has ever been on the opposite side of any of you in
a dispute, whether it went to
court or not, whether we wrote letters to each other or had a meeting with
lawyers, anything of that sort. Have we ever been
in an adversarial position
with you or your business? Mr. Curry?
A JUROR: King Curry.
Somewhat of an adversarial situation with Mr. Pierce and one of
his clients, but we were
able to work it out on the table.
MR. DRAKE: Good. Good. Anybody else?
(No response.)
Page 142
MR. DRAKE: And that would
apply to me
and Joe Pierce. And we
practiced law for a long
time with Ralph Knowles, who
now lives in Atlanta.
If that would make any
difference. Ralph Knowles,
K-n-o-w-l-e-s. Does that ring a bell with anybody?
(No
response.)
MR. DRAKE: I have got a specific
question for Robert Anthony
Mann, if I can ask him
to stand. Mr. Mann, would you
stand up? on your questionnaire we asked if the Judge told you that
you should not give any
particular weight -- that's the wrong way -- ny more weight to a police
officer's testimony, would you follow those instructions, and
you said no, you would not. Do
you
think that a police officer's word is better
than
a non-police officer?
A JUROR: I was confused with the
question.
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Let
me ask it this way: Do you understand that every witness who takes that stand
is entitled to the same treatment --
A JUROR: Right.
MR. DRAKE: -- by you if you are a juror, whether it Is a
police officer or not? I mean, you
Page 143
can choose not to believe
somebody, but you don't have any presumption or predisposition to take the word
of a police officer over an average person, do you?
A
JUROR: No, sir.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay, thank you. Mr. Poole, you are a pharmacist, and I don't want you
to tell
me what you know, but is it
a part of a
pharmacist's -- I just need
to know if you know this or not. Are
pharmacists trained to determine the
effect of the combination of
the use by a person of alcohol and a narcotic like Darvocet? Would you
have some knowledge as to
how that would affect a person's ability to reason or how a person might react
to a given situation? Would that be
something within your field
of expertise?
A JUROR: Physically or psychologically? MR. DRAKE:
Either.
A JUROR: Physically, yes; not so much psychologically.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay, thank you. I have
asked a lot of questions, and
I think I'm about through here. But is
there any reason any of you
can think of why you should
not serve on this jury?
Page 144
Is there any reason why you
-- and you don't even have to tell me the reason, if there is a reason
why you can't be fair to
Betty Woods Wilson and treat her just like you would anybody else? I need to know that, need to know it right
now.
(No
response.)
MR. DRAKE: Thank you very
much.
THE
COURT: Mr. Fry, do you have any
other questions?
MR. FRY: I have no
further questions, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Then,
we are
going to take about a -- at
this point we will take a 15-minute recess.
Same instructions given at the other break, ladies and gentlemen; do not
discuss the case with anyone, permit no one to discuss it with you or in your
presence.
And, Mr. Drake, if you and
Mr. Fry and
the
other lawyers will --
MR.
DRAKE: Yes, okay. I wanted to tell you
about sort of a housekeeping thing.
THE COURT: Right. We are
going to
want to meet with you during
the recess, so we can do that, unless you needed to do it right now.
Page 145
MR. DRAKE: No, I was going
to introduce this questionnaire into evidence.
THE COURT: okay, ladies and gentlemen, take a 15-minute
recess. And when you return,
please come back to the same
seats that you are in,
if you can do that.
(Whereupon, the jury venire
was recessed at 3:25 p.m., at which time the following occurred
in the Judge's chambers out of
the presence and hearing of the jury venire:)
THE COURT: Okay. Now, gentlemen, during the recess,
let's take up any matters that need to
be taken up outside the presence of the jury. You have, if I recall, 95 jurors. And that means that with 14, which is the
selection of two alternates, each of you have 40 strikes.
MR. DRAKE: We have a lot of challenges
for
cause.
THE COURT: Now, I was going to -- well, I don't see too many,
but I see -- I don't know,
unless they come up on those
questionnaires, but I was going to point out to you, Mr. Fry, that it
seems that in any situation
that might be questionable, you certainly would not want to
Page 146
exercise a challenge for
cause with that many strikes.
MR.
FRY: Noted and understood, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Let me point out
to you that the juror that you inquired about, for your information Mrs. Turner
stated that his conviction is for a misdemeanor.
MR. FRY: I was misinformed., Your Honor. THE COURT:
That information
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: RSP3, 3rd.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir, I had
that. I also
had RSP 2nd, but maybe --
looks about like the same time. Maybe it
was reduced or something.
THE
COURT: I have no way of knowing.
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir. All I had was what I was told, Your Honor.
THE COURT: But if you don't
want to pursue it --
MR.
FRY: There is no challenge.
THE
COURT: -- in the way of challenge, then
it won't be necessary to talk to -- it won't be necessary to question that
juror individually.
Page 147
MR. FRY: That will be unnecessary, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right.
Both of you are -- are both of you through, have you both completed your
voir dire examination?
MR. DRAKE: Yes. I
would like to get
these questionnaires marked
and make them an exhibit. Do you want to make then a joint exhibit
or Defense Exhibit 1?
MR. FRY: Judge, I didn't get
those' until 20 -minutes after 12:00. 1 haven't had a chance to look at them.
All we could do was break then out into categories, basically. As long as what
you
got, Jack, is the ones they turned back in, that's fine.
MR. DRAKE: That's it.
MR.
FRY: If all we are doing --
MR. DRAKE: Just putting them in. How do you want to mark
them, joint exhibit or --
MR. COOK: Let's mark them
a joint exhibit, collective, Defendant's and State's exhibit, one court
exhibit.
THE COURT: It really
would be a joint exhibit, not a court exhibit.
Page 148
MR. DRAKE: Judge --
THE
COURT: Joint Exhibit No. 1, then, is admitted.
MR.
DRAKE: Your Honor, we have two other
matters we want to take up. One is that
-- and I'll start right on the heel of these questionnaires. A number of people answered question 54
"Yes," the question being, "Do you think, based on what you have
read or heard, that Betty Woods Wilson is probably guilty as
charged?" In my voir direI
followed up on that question by asking people that
I interpreted a
"Yes" answer to mean --
THE
COURT: All right. Now, Mr. Drake, let me tell you that I do not know what the
answers were, because I haven't seen the questionnaires,
but whatever their answers
were, you have a
right -- and I'll give you
that right -- to ask
those questions
individually. But for you to proceed on
the basis of their answers alone would not be sufficient, but you have the
right and I'll give you the right to individually ask them when we go back out
there about question 54.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay. Well, let me complete my
thought first, if you don't -- I mean, I'm not
Page 149
arguing with you.
THE COURT: I know it.
I interrupted
you. I saw what was coming.
MR. DRAKE: Okay.
THE COURT: And I may be wrong.
MR.
DRAKE: All I was going to add was I followed that up with a voir dire question,
that I interpreted that yes answer to mean that the defendant had to come
forward with evidence to change their minds, which means the burden of proof
changed.
THE
COURT: Mr. Anthony Mann told you
that he had misunderstood
the question.
MR. DRAKE: No, whole different
question. That had to do with police officers.
THE
COURT: He told you he had misunderstood the question insofar as it pertained to
believing a police officer. That may be
the same with these people who answered that question in the way that you assert. So you have a right to -- I'll give you the
right to question them.
MR. FRY: May I interject,
Your Honor?
on
each of those. none of those people have had any law explained to them, they
are like tabula rasa, a
Page 150
clear slate. The questions I asked, I think I asked all of
them, -based on what they knew could -they set aside whatever they knew, and
the whole panel indicated, I think, maybe they could, maybe with
one or two exceptions, but
that flies in the face of the response that Jack is trying to say his leading
question elicited. If they are going to
be
challenged and excluded from
the jury, they should have at least
THE
COURT: That's what I just got
through telling him, Mr.
Fry. He has the right to question them further, and you have a right to
question them in response to their answer to that questionnaire, but at this
time I would not be in a position to rule on your challenge, if you assert
one. Now, we are not through. The panel is coming back in in short order.
MR. DRAKE: Yes, sir. I'm challenging
them for cause. You asked if we were through, and I said,
"Yes," and I'm challenging these people for cause.
THE COURT: I'm not going to grant your
challenge based upon their
answer to that questionnaire, without more.
But I will give you
Page 151
the right to question each
one of them in regard to their response --
MR. DRAKE: Can I --
THE COURT: -- to question 54.
MR. DRAKE: Can I question them individually outside the
presence of the rest of
the venire?
THE
COURT: How many you got?
MR. DRAKE: There is at least
30.
MR.
SANDLIN: Yeah, around 30.
THE COURT: I don't know that it would be necessary.
MR. DRAKE: Well, you see the dilemma I'm in. I don't want them getting up and saying why they
think she is guilty and poisoning the jury venire.
THE COURT: I don't
think you can assume that the people out there are going to be misunderstood
and that they are dishonest. You can
explain it to them and further question them, and
if that stands as their
answer after explanation, then I'll grant you the challenge. I'll grant your challenge.
MR. DRAKE: Well, I think we have
page 152
established what we wanted
to in the record. I do not want to
question these people out in front of
the whole venire.
THE COURT: Well, then, the only other recourse --
alternative, would be to let you question them individually. I'm not willing to let that stand as a point
of contention.
MR. DRAKE: All right. The
other
matter -- may I tell you what
we have been told,
then let's see where we go
from there? We have been told by the Circuit Clerk that on Friday the presiding
Judge of this circuit, Judge Conger, instructed the Clerk's Office to identify
jurors by race and sex, and to provide that information to
the District Attorney's
Office, which in turn used it to access NCIC computer information on the
entire jury panel. We did not have that
information, and even if we
had, we could not have accessed the NCIC computers. Now, we are
concerned, being put at a
disadvantage. I frankly wonder, you
know, whether somebody has violated the law or not, because the next step, I'm
told, is you get the people's Social Security number and put it in a computer
and get information on them. I don't
Page 153
know if you can do that or
not.
THE
COURT: Well, Mr. Drake, that was a different question than the one you are
posing.
MR.
DRAKE: Yeah, but we would like a disclosure from the District Attorney's
Office.
And if we have to get the
Tuscaloosa District Attorney's office in here to tell us what happened, then
that's what we are requesting. We want a
disclosure of what was done, and if such
information has been made
available to Mr. Fry,
then we want the same
information.
THE COURT: Are you willing to give him your information?
Don't you think he is entitled
to have to make -- to make
investigation into the background and the information about jurors?
MR. DRAKE: I'm
concerned about him having information that he is not supposed to have, which I
think is what we are talking about.
THE COURT: Well,
information that he is not supposed to have is one thing, but how it impacts on
this case is another, and I don't see any.
MR. DRAKE: Well, it's information
that
--
Page 154
THE COURT: Well, hold on a
minute. Let
Mr. Fry respond to your --
MR. FRY: Judge, what I
have been given
is just a bit of
history. Charlie Freeman and his office
here is having a week of court, also, this week, and they have gone through their
preparation and their discovery, looking into the background of jurors for this
week.
Now, Jack, if it's the way they always do it or if it's
different, I don't know. All I know
is I was given a jury list
with remarks put on there by the District Attorney's staff. Someone had -- was a good citizen or someone
the District Attorney knew him to be a little different or watch this
one -- just the typical
kinds of things you would get. Plus criminal information, where people have
been arrested, which apparently would have come off of the NCIC. Including people who had been
arrested for felonies, all
of which apparently are no longer on the jury panel. Most of them, I think, didn't show up this
morning or they were never on the list. One or two of them that did show up, I
think the Clerk said she excused. But,
Judge, that is all I have. And I would
have been happy to have
Page 155
provided -- not the personal
information from the District Attorney.
I think that's work product. I
think I'm entitled to that -- but I would have been happy, if it had been
requested, to provide
whatever the NCIC
information was that was included in the list that I got.
MR. DRAKE: But
you,are saying the NCIC information applied to people that are not on this
venire now?
MR. FRY: No, I'm
saying it applies*-- as applies to felonies, people are not on there now.
And other than that, I
really don't know. There was some stuff on there for bad checks, there was
stuff on there -- information about speeding cases. And whether or not that was from NCIC or
District Court records or from the Assistant District Attorney's personal
knowledge, I don't know, I don't have case numbers or dates. All I have got is a name and
three speeding cases or a name
and convicted of carnal knowledge, that was one of them. And that
guy
didn't show up.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, could you possibly make that information
-- the information that you say you obtained, make it available to them? I'm
Page 156
not talking about work
product, the information
that you obtained from
NCIC. If he is complaining about there
being an unlevel playing field, make it available to him.
MR. FRY: I can give him what
I have, Your Honor, not vouching for -- as you have already
seen, there was one case,
apparently, that we were
in error about. I don't mind giving him exactly
what I have as goes to
criminal histories, bad checks, speeding or felonies. And, as I say, I
don't think there is any
more felons on the jury.
THE
COURT: Mr. Drake, would that solve your problem?
MR.
DRAKE: We would very much like to
have that information, and
if there is no other information, then I guess it does solve our
problem.
THE COURT: Sure. Okay. Well,
he says he can do that and that will solve the problem.
MR.
FRY: Is that a problem?
MR.
SMITH: Judge, I'm Tommy Smith with the District Attorney's office here in
Tuscaloosa.
THE
COURT: Right.
MR.
SMITH: And I'm usually the one in
Page 157
charge of getting the
background information for
the jury panel during jury
weeks and did in this
c a s e .Some of what Mr.
Drake said was not correct, but not necessarily needing to be a bone of
contention. What he is talking about are driver histories and NCI reports that
we routinely get within our office. They
are, in part, work
product, in that we make the
effort to get the background information.
I'm not involving myself, certainly, in Mr. Fry's case, but it is, I
believe,
a misdemeanor if anyone who
is unauthorized should get access or be given those reports. Mr. Fry is authorized as is the District
Attorney's office, certainly. And we do not routinely give that as a matter of
discovery for that reason. It's not that
we are necessarily trying to hide anything, but the law is the law. And the Supreme Court of Alabama has, on
occasion, addressed the issue, or at least once, and I'm sorry, I don't know
the case name, but they have said it's not a matter of discovery, but
if it is used in challenging
a particular juror or striking a juror, that certainly it would be appropriate
for the Court to view in camera. But
for
our office, we are not objecting to Mr. Fry's
Page 158
making it available, but I
think to comply with the requirements it would need to be an order as
opposed to an agreement.
MR. FRY: I think so, Your Honor. If you would order me to do that, I would be
covered. Be happy to do it, anyway.
THE
COURT: Well, whether or not I do it in the absence of your agreement, is one
thing, but otherwise, since you have agreed, then it is the order that you give
that information to the defendant. That
satisfy you?
MR.
DRAKE: Yes.
THE COURT: All right. Now, Mr. Drake, I don't have any way of
knowing these numbers on
these jurors.
MR.
DRAKE: I can give you what they are and maybe
I better do that to make it clear on the record. We would challenge the
following jurors who answered yes to question No. 54: Elizabeth Burns, No. 7.
THE
COURT: Hold on. Give them to me. Elizabeth Burns, No. 7. All right.
MR. DRAKE: James Collins,
No. 9.
THE
COURT: All right.
Page 159
MR. DRAKE: Phyllis Cook, No.
10. Laura Costes, No. 11. Nanette Davis, No. 17. Eleanor Ewing, No. 23. Cuple Gann, G-a-n-n, No. 29.
THE
COURT: No. 29 is not on this list. I mean, it's scratched out on mine. 29 on my list is scratched out.
MR. DRAKE: Well, I don't
know what to
say about that, except that
we have got a questionnaire on her, apparently.
THE
COURT: I don't know what happened to
that juror.
MR.
SMITH: There were three that were excused
this morning.
MR. DRAKE: Maybe she
was excused after filling out the questionnaire.
THE
COURT: I believe Mrs. Turner indicated
that one may have gotten sick this
morning.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay. The next one would be Margene Hinton, No. 34.
THE
COURT: All right.
MR. DRAKE: Betty Holland,
No. 36.
THE
COURT: All right.
MR. FRY: Isn't she gone?
Page 160
MR. DRAKE: No.
THE
COURT: 37 is off , 36 is Holland
okay.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 45, Mary Kizziah. No.
48, Ervin Latham.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR. DRAKE: No. 52,
Leigh Locascio.
THE COURT: Okay.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 571 Terry McGarrah.
THE COURT: 57 is off.
MR. DRAKE: okay.
THE
COURT: McGarah is off.
MR. COOK: 57 is off?
THE COURT: On my list it's marked off. MR. DRAKE: 59, Diana Mills. No. 62,
Elouise Montgomery. No. 69, Guy Pate. No. 73, William Porter. No. 88, Watson Taylor, Jr.
THE COURT: which one?
MR. DRAKE: 88, Watson
Taylor. 89, Doris Townsend. 97,
Monica Woods. 99, Dorothy Yourick.
THE COURT: okay. How many is
that?
MS. ADCOCK: 19.
THE
COURT: 19. Let me ask you this:
What
about dividing them up into panels rather than
Page 161
one at a time?
MR- COOK: I'm sorry,
Judge?
THE COURT: You are going to be here
awhile if you want to take them
one at a time. Why don't you divide them up and take about six or eight or ten
in a panel , and we will send these to the assembly room and keep about --
MR.
DRAKE: Just keep all of these people by themselves, maybe.
THE
COURT: Well, we will send -- we will just take you about six, a panel of about
six at a time.
MR.
COOK: Haven't we -- isn't this the only issue that's outstanding, the voir dire
issue with reference to this particular group?
THE COURT: There is one
other I want to ask Mr. Fry about, and that is on his challenges for cause on
the opposition to the death penalty. I
believe you would have to ask some more questions, but if you are not going to
-- there were two or three.
MR. FRY: Two.
THE
COURT: If you don't exercise a challenge
for cause, then it won't be necessary to
Page 162
go any further.
MR. FRY: I think we have enough strikes, Your Honor.
THE COURT: That's the reason I pointed
it out, I think you have got
a lot of strikes.
MR.
COOK: Just purely a suggestion,
Judge Younger, but might I
suggest that you excuse all of the other jurors for the day, other than this
particular group?
THE
COURT: Right.
MR. COOK: That is involved in the immediate problem, and see if it can be resolved that
way.
MR. DRAKE: I like that idea.
MR. SANDLIN: I do, too.
MR.
COOK: Then you won't have the
possibility, as Mr. Drake says, of any contamination.
THE COURT: I
understand that. That's
not what I was talking
about, though. Would it be agreeable
if I excuse all of them except these and let them stay there and you question
all of them in
a group?
MR.
DRAKE: Yes, sir, I think so.
Page 163
MR. COOK: Yeah, that's all
right.
THE COURT: I misunderstood you. it thought you wanted to line them up and close the courtroom and talk
to one at a time.
MR. DRAKE: Well, I did ask that at one time, but I told
you up in Huntsville I would meet you halfway.
THE COURT: I'm trying to go the extra mile, but if
that's agreeable, then, gentlemen,
I'll excuse the panel except
for these 19. They
will remain and you may
question then concerning their answer given to question 54, following which we
will consider your challenge.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay.
(Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m.,
with the jury venire present, the following occurred:)
THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to recess
until in the morning at 8:30. Now,
I need to keep a few of you
here for some additional questions. And
I'll call out your name and ask that you stay for a few minutes longer with us
for some more questions by the attorneys.
Those you that
are excused until in the
morning -- and, of course, this applies to all of you -- between now and then,
Page 164
do not discuss the case with
anyone, permit no one
to discuss it with you or in
your presence. Do not discuss the case with members of your family, with
friends, neighbors, or anyone else. I
would ask
you not to read anything in
the paper about it or listen to anything on television. I don't know
what might be printed or
what might be on
television, but if you are
listening to television or if you read the paper, you will be alerted to it by
a by-line of some sort. So, please, remember
this admonition and just
wait until later, at which
time you can go back and
review it. But it is important at this time that you not discuss it with anyone
or permit anyone to talk to you or to discuss the case with you. Those of you, then, with the exception of
those that I'll call out your name at this time, may be excused until in the
morning at 8:30.
The following jurors please stay with us for a few additional
questions. Elizabeth Burns, James
Collins, Phyllis Cook, Laura Costes, Nanette Davis, Eleanor Ewing, Margene
Hinton, Betty
Holland, Mary Kizziah, Ervin
Latham, Leigh
Locascio,
Diana Mills, Elouise Montgomery, Guy
Page 165
Pate, William Porter, Watson
Taylor, Doris
Townsend, Monica Woods, and
Dorothy Yourick.
Now, with the exception of
those people whose names I called out, the remainder of you may
be excused at this time
until 8:30.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Are you ready,
Mr. Drake?
MR.
DRAKE: Yes, sir, I am.
THE COURT: All right.
(Whereupon, Mr. Drake
continued to' conduct voir dire examination of the jury venire as follows:)
MR. DRAKE: Ladies and
gentlemen, we are concerned about the answer those of you who remain gave to
this question No. 54, which I read out earlier.
The question basically is, "Do you think, based on what you have
read or heard, that Betty Woods Wilson is probably guilty as charged?" All
of you who remain answered
"Yes-" Some of you wrote down
comments, particularly in response to the
prior questions about what
you had read and what
you understood the facts to
be. We are concerned that those of you
who answered "Yes" there do in
fact think that Betty Woods
Wilson is guilty as
Page 166
charged. Are there any among you who do not believe
that? I mean, you have answered that you
do.
A
JUROR: I'm Elizabeth Burns. I thought possibly guilty, possibly she is,
possibly she is not. I don't know. I guess I should have written
"I don It know, 11 but
from what I have read in the papers there is a possibility. You know, I can't
say for certain.
MR. DRAKE: Right.
Yes.
A
JUROR: Aleen Costes, Laura Coste*s. I think what my idea of when I read that,
when I first read it in the paper, was my thought was, well, she probably
did. I mean, I'm being honest. But I
don't mean that that is set
in concretel and that if I were to hear the evidence and hear the true facts. I
don't believe everything I read in the paper.
And I think that a lot of times what you see on the surface is not
necessarily the truth, and that you may find out a whole lot more information
and
change your mind. I think all of us can change our mind. That's
my opinion.
MR.
DRAKE: Mr. Pate.
A JUROR: Really, I must have
misunderstood the question, because today is the
Page 167
first I have heard of this
case. I work 12, 14
hours a day, I-don't read
the paper, I don't listen to the TV.
MR.
DRAKE: You still work for Harold
Elliott on University Boulevard at all?
A
JUROR: No, sir.
MR. DRAKE: You did at one time, didn't you?
A JUROR: Six or seven years ago.
MR.
DRAKE: Yes, that's where I
remembered you from.
A JUROR: I never did put
that in view until you just said that, you know. I have got a two-and-a-half-year-old
daughter, when I come home
I spend time with her. Undoubtedly I misunderstood the question.
MR.
DRAKE: Well, let's kind of go around
and let everybody have an opportunity.
A JUROR: That's what I was thinking. I really misinterpreted the question myself,
because it seems like it was asking more of what do you know of this trial, and
I'm just really pretty much listening, you know, to what is going on around,
hearsay and what is happening, and she supposedly
Page 168
did this, that, and the
other.
MR. DRAKE: Your name,
again?
A JUROR: Monica Woods.
MR. DRAKE: Okay.
Anybody else over here want to explain their answer? Mrs. Holland.
A JUROR: The way I read the
question was if what we had read in the newspaper, did we believe she was
guilty. And the one or two articles
that I read, they did indicate it, but I should be smart enough to know not to
form an opinion based on
what's in the paper.
• JUROR: That was my reaction, also.
•
JUROR: Mine, too.
• JUROR: Yes, sir.
MR. DRAKE: Does that pretty much go for all of you?
A JUROR: That's the reason I put on mine that it was an
unfair question.
MR. DRAKE: Let me ask --
A
JUROR: She has to be proven guilty.
A
JUROR: From the way the article was
written, did I believe, and that's why I put --
A
JUROR: What you read in the newspaper sound that way, I guess.
Page 169
MR. DRAKE: Okay. Let's kind of
shuck it on down. Is there anybody here, now, among this group, who thinks that
Betty Woods Wilson is
guilty? Any of you think
that?
A JUROR: We have got to hear from everybody. She is
innocent until it's proven. I mean, you
have got to keep that in mind, you have
got to have an open mind to
the situation. You
can't say, well, she is
guilty and close your -mind. You don't need to be here.
MR. DRAKE: Would any of you assume going in that she was
guilty?
A JUROR: No, you can't do that.
MR. DRAKE: Do any of you believe for purposes of proof in
this courtroom, that what you have read or seen or heard on TV is true?
A JUROR: Repeat that.
MR. DRAKE: Do any of you assume that
what you have read in the
newspaper or been told or seen on television about the facts of the case is
true?
A JUROR: No, sir.
MR.
DRAKE: All right, we are making some progress here. Let me ask about -- direct
some
Page 170
specific questions to some
particular people. And
I have lost my chart, so I
may not know where you
are at. Well , you are sitting by that, you are
still sitting where you were.
A
JUROR: Yes.
MR.
DRAKE: Diana Mills.
A
JUROR: Right here.
MR.
DRAKE: Yeah . You had said in
response to question 53, 1
understand that Mrs. Wilson hired Mr. White to murder her husband
because he cut her out of
his will.
A JUROR: This was in the paper.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay.
A JUROR: That's why I said that, because
I was going by what I read
in the paper, that is the way they indicated that.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay. That was the exact words.
It would make a difference to you, I guess, if the true fact was he didn't
cut her out of his will?
A JUROR: Well, I don't know that. I haven't heard all the evidence yet. I mean, I don't
know.
MR. DRAKE: Would any of you
believe
Page 171
somebody under oath if we
proved that he is a pathological psychopathic liar? Would you believe what he
had to say?
A
JUROR: You mean if you proved that he
is lying?
MR. DRAKE: If we proved that he has lied his whole life
about every matter of importance in
his entire life, that he is
a compulsive
pathological liar, would you
believe him?
A
JUROR: If you prove it?
A
JUROR: If you prove it, no.
MR.
DRAKE: Okay. Let me see if I can
maybe end this thing right
here. I sort of like
what Jimmy Fry did earlier
when he asked if you all would promise him something. I'm going to ask you
on
Betty's behalf will y’all promise me that you
are not going to put any
weight on anything that you have read or heard or been told about this case?
Will you promise me that,
every one of you?
Everyone
raise your hand. Okay. All right.
Thank
you very much.
THE
COURT: Mr. Fry.
MR. FRY: State is satisfied, Your Honor. THE COURT:
All right. Anything further,
Page 172
Mr. Drake?
MR.
DRAKE: No, sir.
THE
COURT: All right. Ladies and gentlemen, those
of you that remained for those additional questions, you may now at this time
be excused until in the morning at 8:30.
The same instructions that I gave the entire panel apply to you, also.
So do not discuss the case with anyone
or permit anyone to discuss
it with you or in your presence. Be back
in the morning at 8:30.
(Whereupon,
proceedings were in recess at 4:10.p.m., February 22, 1993, until the next
following consecutive day, February 23, 1993, at 8:33 a.m., at which time, with
the defendant and
all parties present, the
following occurred out of the presence of the hearing of the jury venire:)
THE COURT: Let's see if
everybody is
here. We have got the
defense counsel and the prosecution and the defendant.
Before we start, is there anything
further
from the State?
MR.
FRY: No, Your Honor.
THE
COURT: Anything further from the defendant?
Page 173
MR. DRAKE: No, sir.
THE
COURT: All right. You gentlemen are ready to strike?
MR. DRAKE: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Then there will be -- we have 95 jurors.
MRS. TURNER: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Gentlemen, there will be 81
strikes. The State, by virtue of striking first,
has 41 strikes. The defendant has 40 strikes: And, of course, the State strikes first. The last -- excuse me. And that doesn't include the
alternates, does it?
MRS.
TURNER: No. See, really, the 42nd strike is the State's
second alternate and the 41st for the defense is their first alternate.
THE COURT: Okay. Well, in any event,
the last two are alternates;
right?
MRS.
TURNER: Yes.
MR. DRAKE: The way I understand it, if there is a --
replacements will be our strike and then the State's strike if there were two
replacements.
MRS. TURNER: Yes. Right.
Page 174
THE COURT: Beyond the 41st and the 40th strikes, that
would leave 14, then there is an additional strike which would be the
alternate; right, for each side? Which would be 42 for the State and 41 for the
defendant. I just want to make sure we
are understood on it.
MRS. TURNER: Before we get started, now, this young man,
Mark Kell, No. 41, came in this morning and said he would have a problem being
locked up, that he is a student.
MR. DRAKE: He is still on
the list,
isn't he?
MRS. TURNER; Yes, he is
still on the list. I thought I would relay that on.
THE COURT: That
information is being
made available to both
sides, the information given to the clerk.
MRS. TURNER: This morning.
MR.
DRAKE: Well, do you want to agree to let him go?
THE
COURT: It would be agreeable with
the Court, but --
MR. COOK: That's agreeable with us.
THE
COURT: All right. I'll excuse
Page 175
No. --
MRS. TURNER: 41.
THE COURT: 41. And that changes the -- MRS. TURNER: composition is --
THE COURT: -- to 41
and 41.
MRS.
TURNER: Yes.
MR. DRAKE: Judge, it might be
helpful for all of us if Doris will go through and let us know absolutely
certain who is on.
MRS.
TURNER: The ones that are off is
No. 29 --
MR. COOK: 29?
MRS. TURNER: 29, Cuple Gann.
The next one is 37, that's the girl that got sick yesterday. 43, Hardin
Kizziah.
THE COURT: Hold on.
41 is also off?
MRS. TURNER: What's 41?
MR. DRAKE: The one we
just excused.
MRS. TURNER: Yes. Let me mark him off here. Then 43 and
57.
THE COURT: Okay.
MRS.
TURNER: Okay. That's five.
MR.
COOK: What was the other one?
MR.
DRAKE: She said, "That's
five."
Page 176
MR. COOK: Oh, I'm sorry.
THE COURT: That leaves 94 jurors, and it means that your
41st strike is the alternate. Each
41st strike is the alternate.
If you are ready, Mr. Fry,
State's first strike.
MR. FRY: No. 51.
MRS. TURNER: 51, S-1.
Debbie Little.
MR.
DRAKE: 36 .
MRS. TURNER: 36, D-1. Bettye Holland. MR. FRY: No. 82.
MRS.
TURNER: 82, S-2.
MR. DRAKE: No. 3.
MRS.
TURNER: No. 3, D-2.
MR.
FRY: No. 75.
MRS.
TURNER: 75, S-3.
MR. DRAKE: No. 9.
MRS.
TURNER: No. 9, D-3.
MR.
FRY: No. 39.
MRS.
TURNER: 39, S-4.
MR. DRAKE: No. 78.
MRS.
TURNER: 78, D-4.
MR.
FRY: No. 14.
MRS.
TURNER: 14, S-5.
Page 177
MR. DRAKE: No. 16.
MRS. TURNER: 16, D-5.
MR. FRY: No. 68.
MRS. TURNER: 68, S-6.
MR. DRAKE: No. 99.
MRS. TURNER: 99, D-6.
MR. FRY: No. 48.
MRS. TURNER: 48, S-7.
MR. DRAKE: 62.
MRS. TURNER: 62, D-7.
MR. FRY: No. 87.
MRS. TURNER: 87, S-8.
MR. DRAKE: 35.
MRS. TURNER: 35 f D-8
MR. FRY: 22.
MRS. TURNER: 22, S-9.
MR. DRAKE: 34.
MRS. TURNER: 34.1 D-9.
MR. FRY: 54.
MRS. TURNER: 541 S-10.
MR. DRAKE: No. 80.
MRS. TURNER: 80, D-10.
MR. FRY: No. 84.
MRS. TURNER: 84, S-11.
Page 178
MR. DRAKE: No. 79.
MRS. TURNER: 79, D-11.
MR. FRY: No. 8.
MRS. TURNER: 81, S-11.
MR. DRAKE: He struck No. 8
but it's his 12th strike?
MRS. TURNER: 12th, yes.
Excuse me. 12th.
MR. DRAKE: No. 12.
MRS.
TURNER: No. 12, D-12.
MR.
FRY: No. 15.
MRS. TURNER: 15, S-13.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 7.
MRS.
TURNER: No. 7, D-13.
MR.
FRY: No. 77.
MRS. TURNER: 77, S-14.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 10.
MRS.
TURNER: 10, D-14.
MR.
FRY: No. 91.
MRS. TURNER: 91, S-15.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 11.
MRS. TURNER: No. 11, D-15.
MR.
FRY: No. 74.
MRS.
TURNER: 74, S-16.
Page 179
MR. DRAKE: 73.
MRS.
TURNER: 73, D-16.
MR. FRY: No. 17.
MRS.
TURNER: 17, S-17.
MR.
DRAKE: 72 .
MRS.
TURNER: 72, D-17.
MR.
FRY: No. 47.
MRS. TURNER: 47, D-18 -- I
mean, State 18, S-18.
MR. DRAKE: 53.
MRS. TURNER: 53, D-18.
MR.
FRY: No. 71.
MRS. TURNER: 71, S-19.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 88.
MRS.
TURNER: 88, D-19.
MR.
FRY: No. 60.
MRS.
TURNER: 60, S-20.
MR. DRAKE: No. 86.
MRS.
TURNER: 86, D-20.
MR.
FRY: No. 5.
MRS.
TURNER: No. 5, S-21.
MR.
DRAKE: 98.
MRS.
TURNER: 98, D-21.
MR.
FRY: No. 46.
Page 180
MRS. TURNER: 46, S-22.
MR.. DRAKE: 59.
MRS. TURNER: 59, D-22.
MR. FRY: No. 25.
MRS. TURNER: 25, S-23.
MR. DRAKE: 28.
MRS. TURNER: 28 , D-23
18 apiece.
MR. FRY: 38.
MRS. TURNER: 38, S-24.
MR. DRAKE: No. 30.
MRS. TURNER: 30, D-24.
MR. FRY: No. 50.
MRS. TURNER: 50, S-25.
MR. DRAKE: 44.
MRS. TURNER: 44, D-25 .
MR. FRY: No. 58.
MRS. TURNER: 58, S-26.
MR. DRAKE: No. 67.
MRS. TURNER: 67, D-26.
MR. FRY: No. 55.
MRS. TURNER: 55, S-27.
MR. DRAKE: 49.
MRS. TURNER: 49, D-27.
MR. FRY: No. 61.
Page 181
MRS. TURNER: 61, S-28.
MR. DRAKE: No. 94.
MRS. TURNER: D-28.
MR. FRY: 83.
MRS. TURNER: 83, S-29.
MR. DRAKE: Judge, I think we
need to consult a minute, and we don't have any place to do it, other than
here.
THE
COURT: You need to consult with your
attorneys?
MR.
DRAKE: Yes.
THE COURT: okay. Do you want to go in the chambers?
MR. DRAKE: That's fine.
THE COURT: Why don't you go in chambers and we will wait
on you, and we will make that available to you.
(Whereupon,
proceedings were in recess for approximately 10 minutes, after which the
following occurred:)
THE COURT: Okay. Now, the
jury has been sitting out there for an hour, and it's going to be a little
while longer. I think we ought to give
them a break.
Page 182
MRS. TURNER: Yeah, them seats is mighty
hard.
THE COURT: Do you want me to go out there and give them
a break and instruct them, or is it
all right if Mrs. Turner
goes out there and tells them to take about 20 minutes and come back?
MR. COOK: I think Mrs. Turner -- if I
may, Judge, I think she can
handle it.
(Brief pause.)
MRS.
TURNER: All right, Jack, fire away. THE COURT:
Defendant's next strike.
MR. DRAKE: 21.
MRS. TURNER: 21, D-29.
12 more apiece. MR. FRY: No. 18.
MRS. TURNER: 18, S-30.
MR. DRAKE: 23.
MRS. TURNER: 23, D-30.
MR. FRY: No. 95.
MRS. TURNER: 95, S-31.
MR.
DRAKE: 45 .
MRS. TURNER: 45, D-31.
MR.
FRY: 92.
MRS.
TURNER: 92, S-32.
MR. DRAKE: No. 56.
Page 183
MRS. TURNER: 56
D-32 . Nine apiece. MR.FRY: 66 .
MRS.
TURNER: 66 S-33 .
MR.
DRAKE: 63.
MRS.
TURNER: 63, D-33.
MR. FRY: 52.
MRS.
TURNER: 52, S-34.
MR.
DRAKE: 89.
MRS.
TURNER: 89, D-34.
MR. FRY: No. 70.
MRS.
TURNER: 704, S-35.
MR. DRAKE: I think we
need to talk just a minute, again.
THE COURT: Well, it would be simpler
for --
MR.
FRY: We can step out, Judge.
THE COURT: -- for us to step out. (Whereupon, proceedings
were in recess
for approximately 10
minutes, after which the following occurred:)
MRS. TURNER: 35 coming up.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 4.
MRS.
TURNER: 41 D.-35. Six apiece.
MR.
FRY: No. 24.
Page 184
MRS. TURNER: 24 , S-36.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 19.
MRS. TURNER: 19, D-36.
Five apiece. MR. FRY: No. 96.
MRS. TURNER: 96, S-37.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 42.
MRS. TURNER: 42 , D-37
Four apiece. MR. FRY: No. 32.
MRS. TURNER: 32, S-38.
MR.
DRAKE: 97.
MRS. TURNER: 97, D-38.
Three apiece. MR. FRY: No. 36.
MRS. TURNER: 26, S-39.
MR. DRAKE: No. 85.
MRS. TURNER: 85, D-39. Two
more.
MR.
FRY: 76.
MRS.
TURNER: 76, S-40.
MR.
DRAKE: No. 20.
MRS. TURNER: 20, D-40. Okay.
This is the alternate. Second alternate
coming up.
MR. FRY: 27.
MRS. TURNER: 27, S-41.
That's the second alternate.
MR. DRAKE: No. 40.
Page 185
MRS. TURNER: 401 D-41.
That's the first alternate.
(Brief pause.)
MRS.
TURNER: Okay. Let's call them out. No.
1, Mark Allison. No. 2, Roger
Atteberry. No.
6, Herbert Bruce. No. 13, David Crawford. No. 27, Thomas Ford. He is the second alternate. No. 31, Mavis Hall. No. 33, Butler Hine. No. 40, Daniel Junkin. He is the first alternate. No. 64, John Nero. No. 6511 Davis Nichols. No. 69, Guy Pate.
No. 81, Lois Smith. No. 90, Morgan Tunstall. No. 93, Milton Washington. Is that 14?
(Brief pause.)
MRS. TURNER: All right.
I'll call them out, again.
MR.
COOK: That's 14.
MRS.
TURNER: 1 and 2. 6, 13, 27.
Put on there second alternate -- well, that's all right.
31,
33. Then 40, 64, 65, 69. 81, 90.
90 and 93. (Brief pause.)
MR. DRAKE: Judge, we have a
motion to make.
THE COURT: All right.
MR.
DRAKE: Do you want us to do it in
Page 186
here?
THE COURT: We might as well.
MR. DRAKE: I Im going to close the door. MRS. TURNER: Close the door, Harry.
MR. DRAKE: We want to make a
Batson motion. We think that the jury
was struck by the prosecutor utilizing impermissible race considerations.
I don't know how you want to
handle the preliminary part of it, and, that is, the identification of blacks
on the venire. I can do that, and if
Mr. Fry agrees with my identification, then maybe that would handle it.
The
blacks who were struck by him were
No. 51, No. 82, No. 75.
THE
COURT: Hold on. You are not going in order
and it's tough to keep up with you. No. --
MR. DRAKE: Do you want me to
go in numerical order?
THE COURT: Well, if you have
got it.
MR. DRAKE: Okay. No. 17, No.
48, No. 51, No. 55, No. 60, No. 66.
THE COURT: Okay.
Keep going.
MR. DRAKE: No. 71 and No. 75 and No. 82.
Page 187
MR. FRY: Mrs. Turner, how
many were there to begin with?
MRS. TURNER: Let me look back here just a minute.
(Brief pause.)
MR. FRY: 94, is that one?
MRS. TURNER: Yeah, 94.
(Brief
pause.)
MR. DRAKE: Should I continue,
Judge, just identifying people?
THE COURT: Yes.
MR. DRAKE: The other blacks on the jury would have been No.
561 Melvina McCoy. No. 97, Monica
Woods. No. 93, Milton Washington. No. 87, Bernice Stewart. No. 81, Lois Smith. No. 64, John
--Nero. Have I missed
anybody?
(Brief pause.)
MR.
DRAKE: So there were a total of 15 blacks on the venire. The prosecution struck nine of those people,
we struck two.
Might as well go ahead and say the reasons we struck. We struck Melvina McCoy, No.
56, because her mother had
been murdered. And No. 97, Monica
Woods, because she answered "Yes" To
Page 188
question No. 54 on the juror
questionnaire.
THE COURT: What number
was that?
MR. DRAKE: 97.
(Brief pause.)
MR.
DRAKE: I suppose it's obvious, but race
will be a factor in this case, in that it is likely that there will be evidence
that the defendant had an affair with a black man who, I understand, will in
fact testify. And, therefore, the jury will know that he is black. So we th'ink that the exclusion of blacks
for racial reasons is prejudicial to the defendant.
THE
COURT: Anything else?
MR.
DRAKE: Violates the rule announced first in Batson vs. Kentucky; it's denial
both of equal protection and due process under the United States Constitution and
the Alabama Constitution.
THE COURT: Anything else?
MR.
DRAKE: I have two recent cases in my
notebook out there.
THE
COURT: I do not believe you have
made out a prima facie case
of discrimination.
Mr.
Fry, do you want to respond to his motion?
Page 189
MR. FRY: I don't believe there has been
a prima facie case made,
Your Honor. Are there three or four
blacks left after your last strike?
MR. DRAKE: I will have to go back and look.
MR. FRY: I think one of your last
strikes was a black person.
(Brief
pause.)
MR. FRY: Your Honor, without responding to the Batson,
all I would say is there is -- 'a quarter of the jury is black. It appears that this panel started out --
from which we struck -- with about ten percent black. And I would say that
there's not been a prima facie case made by the defendant in alleging or
proving that there has
been any systematic
exclusion of blacks. In fact, the
black population is well represented on this jury.
THE COURT: The motion is
overruled. All right. Now, you
gentlemen ready, and lady?
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
MR.
DRAKE: I think some of us might like to make a stop in the bathroom.
THE COURT: Well, what I plan
to do,
Page 190
then, is to put the jury in
the box and let them go
to the jury room, and we
will take ten minutes and
be ready to start your
opening in about ten
minutes .
MR.
FRY: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Hold on a minute. We have witnesses that are present. Mrs. Turner, do
you swear witnesses?
MRS. TURNER: No, not
usually.
THE COURT: Do you have some witnesses that we need to
swear in now?
MR. FRY: A couple. And
I have got a ton of them coming tomorrow.
THE
COURT: I'm talking about a group of them that are here to be sworn in at this
time.
MR. FRY: Only about two,
Judge.
THE
COURT: All right. And you have a question?
MR. FRY: Yes,
sir. I don't know how you handle your
opening. Will you allow me to reserve a rebuttal in opening?
THE
COURT: Just one per side.
MR. FRY: Okay.
THE COURT: I mean, we have
got to stop
Page 191
this thing somewhere.
MR.
DRAKE: I'm for that, Judge. (Whereupon, at 10: 22 a.m., the following
occurred in the courtroom in
the presence of the jury venire:)
THE COURT: Mrs. Turner, you
going to
call their names?
MRS. TURNER: Yes.
THE COURT: Ladies and gentlemen,
as Mrs. Turner calls your name, please come around and take your place in the
jury box.
(Whereupon, the jury was duly impaneled.) THE COURT: Ladies
and gentlemen, we are
going to take a ten-minute
recess before we get started with the opening arguments in the case. During
that ten minutes I'll let you go back to the jury room at the rear of the
courtroom. Please go into the jury room
-- hold up and, if you will,
stand before you go to the
jury room. If you will stand and raise
your right hand, Mrs. Turner will give you your oath for this case.
(Whereupon, the jury was
duly sworn.)
THE COURT: Thank you, ladies
and gentlemen. You may go to the jury
room. We are
Page 192
going to take a ten-minute
recess.
(Whereupon, proceedings were
in recess at 10:25 a.m. , until 10:36 a.m. , at which time the following
occurred:)
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, do you have any witnesses in the
courtroom that need to be sworn?
MR. FRY: No, I don't.
THE COURT: Before we
get started, before opening arguments?
MR. FRY: No, sir.
(Brief
pause.)
MR. FRY: I'm going to ask
for
Investigator Brantley to be
excused, but this lady here is a family member, but she is not subpoenaed nor
is she a witness . That's the victim's sister.
MR. DRAKE: Some of these
family members have been subpoenaed. You
may need to tell them if they are a witness that they need to leave the
courtroom.
THE
COURT: I don't know who they are. Do you mean from your side?
MR. DRAKE: I'm just saying
some of them
expect you to make that
announcement as a time when they get up and leave, is what I'm saying.
Page 193
THE COURT: You have some
witnesses in
the courtroom that need to be sworn?
MR. DRAKE: No. I mean, I
don't think we
want to do that right now.
MR. FRY: You don't want to
--
MR. DRAKE: I didn't
realize they had
talked about it. Nobody is going to invoke the rule
until after opening statement.
THE COURT: That will be
fine. We will
swear them in and do it at that time.
Mr. Fry, are you ready?
MR. FRY: Yes, sir, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: Mr. Johnson,
if you will,
bring the jury out.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, are you ready?
MR. FRY: The State is ready, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Mr.
Drake, are
you gentlemen ready?
MR. DRAKE: Yes.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, you
may make your
opening statement.
(Whereupon, Mr. Fry
addressed the jury in
opening statements on behalf of the State as
Page 194
follows:)
MR. FRY: Good morning, ladies and
gentlemen.
Congratulations, I hope. We will
see,
I guess, as the week and the time passes by. We
congratulate you and, again, thank you for your
willingness to participate and serve on this jury.
As I told you earlier,
I'm Jimmy Fry and
I'm the District Attorney for Limestone County,
Alabama, and I'll be prosecuting this case on
behalf of the people of the State of Alabama. This
is a case that all of the people of the state have
an interest in, as in all criminal cases, not just
Madison County or Limestone County or even
Tuscaloosa. So you
all, as you sit here today, are
representing the people of the State of Alabama.
You are a composite of your neighborhood, of part
of Alabama that's basically, I guess,
County. I want to
thank you, of course, for your
service.
What you are going to do
here in the next
days or the next week is important for everyone
involved. You will
become a part of the history of
the State of Alabama being on this jury. And I hope
that something meaningful, something good, will
Page 195
come out of this experience for you.
Now, what are we doing
now? This is the
part of the trial that is called the opening
statement. This is where we get to give you our
explanation, the lawyers, that is, of what we think
the trial is going to be about. Yesterday you all
sat out there and answered questions for us and you
responded that basically you didn't know anything
about this case, maybe you had read something in
the newspaper, maybe you had heard something on the
radio, but personally you didn't know anything, or
at least not much. So we are kind of starting out
here kind of like this whiteboard -- used to be a
blackboard, now they are whiteboards -- clean
slate. You all don't know what is coming to pass.
You are like that board, waiting -- your mind' is
like the board, waiting to be written on, to have
the blanks filled in. There is a beautiful Latin
word, tabula rasa, which, I believe, means clean
slate. And that's where you all are right now.
Your mind is like a clean slate -- at least that's
what we hope, that's what we think. But it would be
a little bit unfair to you all to have to begin
hearing witnesses and taking testimony right away,
Page 196
without knowing anything about the case. So here
and now we get a chance to give you all what you
might call a jump start or a head start into the
case, to tell you what we think is coming up.
When I was a kid seven
and eight and nine
years old, I had one of the best babysitters in the
world. My babysitter was a movie theater. My mama
worked at the telephone company, and right next
door to the Ritz Theater was the Bell Telephone
Company where she worked as a clerk. And I would
get out of the elementary school in the second and
third grade, walk the two blocks to her office, and
every afternoon from 3 o'clock until mama got off
at 5:00, I sat in the Ritz Theater. 15 cents to see
a movie, and a dime would get you a bag of popcorn
and a little Coke. one thing I-'Il never forget --
and every time I talk to a jury I think about
this -- is that big screen and the way I remember it
in black and white, "Previews of coming
attractions." And they told you what was going to
be on the next week. Sometimes the previews were
about as good as the movies. What you are getting
right now is your previews of coming attractions.
Why are we here today?
Why are you here
Page 197
today? What is it that you all have to determine in
this case? What is your job going to be? Well, you
are going to have to determine whether this woman
over here did something or didn't do something.
And you really don't know what exactly, you have
had it kind of danced around a little bit the last
day or two, about what I and the State of
are alleging that she did, but I think you need to
know. I think you need
a little road map as we go
through this case of things you need to be thinking
about or considering, so that you will be able to
make a decision at the end of the case.
So where are we? Well,
this whole thing
started out -- at least as far as the court system
goes -- with an indictment, a piece of paper, a
formal piece of paper, a document, being returned
by the grand jury up in Huntsville, that is,
Madison County, Alabama, back in June of last year,
that is, 1992. And
they heard evidence, not a
trial, just one side was represented. It was a
grand jury, it wasn't a jury like you all. They
heard evidence and based on what they heard they
returned this indictment, sending this case, then,
to be heard by a Judge and a pettit jury to
Page 198
determine the actual guilt or innocence of this
defendant.
Now, they didn't find
anybody guilty in
Madison County by returning this indictment. All
it does is establish what is called probable cause.
That is to say that this case needs to be heard by a
jury .They were people just like you, they weren't
judges or lawyers, and they returned this
indictment. And let me
read it to you so you will
know what the charges are.
"State of Alabama,
Madison County. The
grand jury of said county charge, that before the
finding of this indictment, Betty Woods Wilson,
whose name is unknown to the grand jury other than
as stated, did intentionally cause the death of Dr.
Jack W. Wilson, pursuant to a contract, to-wit:
Betty Woods Wilson agreed to pay James Dennison
White money, to-wit:
$5,000 in
currency, to kill Dr. Jack W. Wilson, and James
Dennison White did kill Dr. Jack W. Wilson, by
beating him with a baseball bat or other blunt
instrument, or stabbing him with a knife or other
sharp instrument." And that was against the peace
and dignity of the State of Alabama.
Page 199
There is a second count
that kind of says
the same thing, I guess, in a different way. The
Judge will explain to you how you can receive these
counts at the end of the case. She can't be
convicted but one time.
You can consider these
counts.
Count Two says, "The
grand jury of said
county charge, that before the finding of this
indictment, Betty Woods Wilson, whose name is
unknown to the grand jury other than as stated, did
intentionally cause the death of Dr. Jack W.
Wilson, for hire, to-wit: Betty Woods Wilson hired
James Dennison White to kill Dr. Jack W. Wilson, by
paying James Dennison White, to-wit: $2 , 500 in
United States currency, and promising to pay James
Dennison White more money, to-wit: An additional
$2,500 in United States currency, and James
Dennison White did kill Dr. Jack W. Wilson, by
beating him with a baseball bat or other blunt
instrument, or stabbing him with a knife or other
sharp instrument, in violation of the Code of
Alabama." And, again, against the peace and
dignity of the State of Alabama.
Those are the charges. This is going to
Page 200
be the bottom, line for you all in considering at the
conclusion of this trial whether or not this woman
paid a man to kill her husband and did he in fact
kill her husband pursuant to that contract. Did
James White kill Dr. Jack Wilson, and did he do it
pursuant to a contract for money or promise of
money given by this woman.
Now, what are the facts of
our case going
to be? By the way, our case is going to come to you
all from right here, the witness stand, by
witnesses called to testify about things that they
have knowledge of from maybe photographs, exhibits,
documents, things that you can touch and feel, some
of which you probably will take back to the jury
room with you and look at.
Speaking testimony and
physical evidence that you will be able to have,
all will play a part in this case.
What are the facts going
to be? Well,
the facts are going to be, to begin with, that a man
is dead. Dr. Jack W.
Wilson. He was a good man and
a decent man. And he
has been murdered,
dreadfully, painfully murdered. The last day of
his life, the evidence will be, he was with this
woman, his wife, in Huntsville, Alabama, on the
Page 201
22nd of May of last year.
And they were,
apparently, preparing to go on a trip the next
morning, which would have been a Saturday morning,
to Santa Fe on a vacation.
He was with her at lunch
after having worked in his office that Friday
morning, seeing patients.
Dr. Wilson was an eye
doctor, or ophthalmologist.
He was a doctor. He
waited on patients that morning. He had lunch that
day with his wife and some people that were up there
at the house. Went
back to work that afternoon,
left work probably about 4:30, got back to his
home. The
testimony and the evidence is going to be
that sometime around 4:30, a man by the name of
James Dennison White, whom I expect you will get to
meet very shortly, was waiting on him there in his
home. And that he was
waiting there for the express
purpose of killing Dr. Wilson. He had been there
for some time, the evidence will be. He was
nervous, he was anxious.
And when Dr. Wilson came
in, he set upon him and that night when Dr. Wilson's
body was found some approximately five hours later,
his forearms were beaten and broken, his skull was
beaten and crushed from an aluminum bat. He had
been stabbed in the abdomen, one of the major veins
Page 202
or arteries in his abdomen had been pierced. He
died in his home, second story of that house, just
outside his wife's bedroom, in a pool of his own
blood. Well, that's Dr. Wilson.
What is our evidence
about this woman,
the defendant? our evidence will be, ladies and
gentlemen, that she was a vain, selfish woman. She
was obsessed with her own image and her own
appearance, with having things, with having a house
and having a car, having two cars. The evidence
will be a Mercedes convertible and a BMW. Having
everything that all of us, I guess, would think of
as the good life. And our evidence will be, ladies
and gentlemen, in this case, that although it would
appear that she had everything, she wanted more.
in fact, she didn't want more, she wanted it all.
She wanted it now.
We are going to prove to
you, ladies and
gentlemen, that Dr. Jack Wilson was a loving and
devoted husband, that he showered his wife with a
good life, with a magnificent home in a fashionable
neighborhood, designer clothes, jewels, furs,
whatever she wanted to make her happy, but his
treatment wasn't the same.
The testimony will be
Page 203
that this defendant in public places made
derogatory remarks, rebuked her husband publicly,
called him names, cursed him, humiliated him in
front of clients and workers at his place of
business. And that in
fact she told some of her
closest friends that she was disgusted by Jack
Wilson, and the only reason she didn't leave him
was because she might lose her lifestyle. She
couldn't give that up.
Mrs. Wilson, you are
going to find out,
had a public life and she had a private life. She
had a life people knew about, she had a life that
only a few people knew about.
You are going to find
out that there was a secret Betty Wilson, a secret
Betty Wilson who took money from her husband
without him knowing it, that had lovers into the
house he gave her, had lovers in Birmingham and in
New York and wherever she wanted to go, that were
secret.
Why did this all come
about, then?
That's a little bit about Dr. Wilson and a little
bit about Betty. How
did it all come about? Well
we have got to add another figure to this story.
You see, this story, what you are about to see this
Page 204
week, I think it's like a triangle, three sides. I n
the center there is a fellow by the name of James
Dennison White. And on one side of the triangle is
this woman, Betty Wilson. On the other is her
sister and not only her sister, her twin sister,
Peggy Lowe. I guess at the bottom, actually, of the
triangle, then, is Mr. James White, because you are
going to see that these two women, working with Mr.
White, dealing secretly with Mr. White, brought all
of the elements together that made this tragedy
happen. Just like putting wet hay in a barn and the
hay begins to mold, and sometimes you have
spontaneous combustion, all of the elements are
present when hay is wet and it' s in the barn and it
catches on fire, you take all of the elements apart
and nothing happens, but you put all right elements
together under the right circumstances, and you get
spontaneous combustion, you get fire. Well, in
this case the elements were this woman, James White
and her sister, Peggy Lowe. And the three of them
coming together at a place and in a time and under
circumstances, have created this tragedy.
Well, I mentioned Mrs.
Wilson, you all
heard old James White mentioned yesterday in voir
Page 205
dire, and you are going to hear, I'm sure, a whole
lot more about him.
How about James White? What's
the story on James White? Well, I think the story
is going to be that he grew up around Sylacauga. I
don't think his parents were married, I think he
took his daddy's name the first 15, 16, maybe 20
years of his life.
Later on maybe took his mother's
name. I don't think
his parents were married. He
wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth, in
other words. Had it
kind of rough growing up.' A
lot of us do, a lot of people do. Joined the Army
when he as 17. Now,
folks, I believe, if I'm not
mistaken, that was in about 1967 or 1968. Some of
you all may remember, as I do, that the Army was the
happening place to be in '67 and '68, or maybe it
wasn't the happening place to be, depending on how
you felt about the war.
But as a young kid, he
signed up, joined the Army.
He wasn't drafted,
joined the Army to go off to war, and he did, he
went to Vietnam. While he was there, like a lot of
other people, he got screwed up. He was sent home. Messed up.
An alcoholic. A pill-popper. Using drugs, marijuana. And from the time he got out until, I guess,
within the last year or two, he has
Page 206
been in and out of VA hospitals, he has been here in
Tuscaloosa, he has been in Birmingham. Not going
to get any awards for good citizenship.
But what happened to him?
Well, in the
summer of '92, James had been married to a woman for
several years, and they had two children together,
and unexpectedly she moved out and left him. In
fact, I believe moved in with his best friend. I
say she moved out, I don't believe that's right. I
think she kicked him out and his best friend moved
in. Mr. White was
pretty upset about that. He was
depressed and disconsolate.
In August of last year,
then -- excuse
me -- not last year, '91. In August of 191 he began
working as a maintenance person at Vincent
Elementary School, which, I believe, is in
County on Highway 231 going towards Pell City. He
wasn't a full-time employee, he was not a state
employee, or I think -- or not on the payroll of the
Board of Education, but he was building shelves
kind of on a contract basis or part-time basis. And
there was a lady there teaching by the name of Peggy
Lowe, who is the sister to this defendant. And they
are twins. I don't
think they look exactly alike,
Page 207
but they are twins. And somehow or another this old
fellow from Sylacauga, just divorced, and this nice
schoolteacher, Ms. Lowe, struck up a friendship.
Mrs. Lowe is married, by the way, has a couple of
kids. And her husband
also is a schoolteacher in
that same school system. But they began talking to
each other and James was awfully struck by Mrs.
Lowe. Here he saw, for the first time, I think, in
his words, "A woman of another statute," his words.
Another class. That was taking up time with him,
being nice to him.
And I think the evidence
will be he
became, to say the least, infatuated with her and
they developed what you might call a telephone
romance, calling each other, talking sometimes
hours at a time. This went on beginning sometime
around the first of the year of '92, up until the
spring.
Now, their romance, as
far as I know, was
mostly over the telephone.
And he was telling her
he had strong feelings for her, she told him that
she had strong feelings for him. This had old James
pretty worked up. So that by March or April of
1992, I guess you could say he would do almost
Page 208
anything for Mrs. Lowe, because she began talking
about how unhappy she was with her husband and how
she wished he wasn't around.
Not Dr. Wilson, now,
another man, her husband.
James is going to tell
you he said,
"Well, you know, something could probably be
arranged," but nothing was. The talk went on and
on, and then there came a time in the spring last
year when Mrs. Lowe told James, you know, "My
sister is awfully unhappy." First she didn't tell
him who it was, but eventually she said, "My sister
is awfully unhappy, she's just miserable, she would
like to have something done about her situation.
She's married to a man she is disgusted with."
Again, James said, "Well, maybe something could be
done, something could be arranged. Maybe I could
talk to somebody for you." Next thing you know they
ask him -- Peggy asked him, told him, "Well , how
much would this cost?"
He said, "I don't know.
$5,000. $5,000. Give me $5,000 and we will have it
done."
Guess what? The facts are
going to be
that James White -- he was broke in April of 1992,
suddenly came into some money about the first part
Page 209
of May 1992. He is
going to tell you he was paid
$2500, half the money up front, to do the job, kill
Dr. Jack Wilson. And
he took the money and paid
bills, thinking maybe that's the end of it, but it
wasn't. Because he is
going to tell you that the
defendant, Betty Wilson, and Peggy Lowe, then began
working on him to get something done. He had his
money. What-s the
deal? What's going on here?
Let's see something happen.
He is going to tell you
that on May 15th last year, that is, 1992, that he
rode by over to Huntsville and actually went to
Huntsville and, as they say, cased the job. He
wanted to see where Dr. Wilson's office was, where
his house was, but also he needed some more money.
He had spent the $2500.
And he told these ladies he
needed $200 expense money.
You know, any good hit
man needs expense money.
You can't be riding all
around the State of Alabama, casing places, without
some expense money.
Now, the evidence is
going to be that the
next night, on the 16th of May, 1992, James White
went to the state park in Guntersville, Alabama, in
Marshall County, and he was supposed to have picked
up a book with money in it, $200.
He was supposed,
Page 210
he is going to tell you,
[covered
by post-it
lodge, reached into the
post-it
note
black BMW, which would b
that
was
parking area there at the
copied ay,
is probably a mile with come
in -- he was supposed to reach page] d be
opened, the book would be there, take the book and
it would have money in it or get the money out of
the book. Well, he got
there too late. I don't
know if you all know this, but they close some of
the state parks at night.
Even when they have got
guests there, unless you are a guest or have some
special authority to enter after 9, 10 o'clock at
night, they won't let you in. So James was stuck.
He couldn't get in to get his money. They told him
to go down the road, you can call the front desk and
maybe somebody can bring
this book to you.
Well, the evidence is
going to be, ladies
and gentlemen, that Mrs. Wilson went with a
security guard to her car, got the book out of the
car, gave it to the guard, told him to take it to
James White, tell him to have a good time, she
wanted the book back.
The guy drove the mile or
whatever to the front gate, gave him the book, he
Page 211
left and went back to Vincent, Alabama.
Now, the next week, the testimony is
going to be, he still hadn't committed the murder,
and he told these ladies, "Well, I don't have a gun.
I have been looking for a gun but I don't have a
gun. I don't have a
gun. I have an old gun but I
can't get bullets to fit it." So the evidence is
going to be that on Wednesday, May 20th, these
ladies brought a gun to James White and gave it to
him on the dam at Logan Martin Dam, which is a dam
that I think connects probably Talladega and
County there, just on the other side of Vincent. A
little, I call it almost an earthen dam, it's not
like dams I'm used to up in North Alabama, like Joe
Wheeler and Wilson, but a small dam. He is going to
tell you there an exchange was made and he got a
pistol from these ladies.
On Thursday, the 21st of
May, he drove to
Huntsville, Alabama, and was outside Dr. Wilson's
office at 6 o'clock in the morning, and he decided
he couldn't do it. I think he will tell you he
probably just decided he would get caught if he did
it. In Huntsville, in
that area where Dr. Wilson's
office is , near a hospital , was busy even at 6
Page 212
O'clock in the morning.
And be made a phone call to
Mrs. Lowe and talked to Mrs. Lowe and to the
defendant, who on this day, as the day before, was
over in Talladega visiting with her sister.
Remember the day before they exchanged the gun, she
was still over there.
We are going to prove to you
he told her, "I need some more money." She said,
"I'll meet you in Huntsville." Told him where to
meet her. And at around
noon that day she is back
in Huntsville, she is back in a mall, a shopping
center there called The Heart -- excuse me --
Parkway City Mall. we are going to prove to you
that night there were calls made by James White
from a motel in Huntsville, Alabama, to Peggy Lowe.
We are going to prove to you the next day James
White was taken by this defendant from the Parkway
city Mall at around 2:30 and taken to Dr.
Wilson's
house, where he was to lay in wait there until Dr.
Wilson came in and attacked him. Well, the plan
went off, he was taken there.
Something happened,
Dr. Wilson was late, he should be there in maybe 30
minutes, but be wasn't.
Time passed by. 3 o'clock,
3:30, 4 o'clock. And finally, James White is going
to tell you that after a couple of hours of waiting
Page 213
Dr. Wilson came home, that they were face to face,
that he broke into an affray. James White is going
to tell you that he accepts the responsibility for
Dr. Wilson's death and that he went there for the
express purpose of killing him.
Now, the plan was that
James White was
going to walk away from 2700 Boulder Circle, which
is kind of over on a hillside, or maybe you might
say Mountainside, in Huntsville, by walking through
the neighbor's back yard, skirting the back yards
to get back to the main thoroughfare. Well, he
panicked, he got scared, he decided, you know,
that's not a good idea. If somebody sees me in
their back yard in this neighborhood of doctors and
lawyers and engineers, they may call the police.
So he stayed in the house, and at about
that afternoon this defendant came back to the
house, probably unplanned as far as meeting James
again, and James is still there. He is supposed to
be gone. So he gets in the car with her, crawls
under some clothes in the back seat of her BMW that
she had bought that afternoon, on hangers, plastic-
covered clothes, for the trip, I suppose, the next
day. And he was whisked away.
Page 214
Well , James gets taken
to within a mile
or so of where his truck is parked. He walks to his
truck, gets in his truck and drives back to
Vincent, Alabama, where he lives, stopping on the
way to call his brother and let his brother know he
is coming home, he will be late. Buying beer,
bought some beer. And
a couple of days later the
police, following a lead, are in Shelby County and
talking to James. And
James breaks down after some
questioning, and begins to tell little bits and
pieces of his story. And he is not very
honest in
the beginning. I guess he doesn't know whether
he
is caught or not.
By bits and pieces, he begins to
tell the story. He is
taken to jail in Huntsville,
and then about a week later this defendant is
arrested.
Now, James
White, I expect, is going to
testify in this case and talk to you all . You may
like him, probably not.
You may feel sorry for him,
maybe not. But he is
going to testify. We are
going to present evidence that we think you will
believe corroborates or, that is, suggests
that, at
least in part, about some important things
that
James White is telling the truth.
Page 215
James
White was given a deal, a "deal."
Before I got into the case, I guess last summer
sometime, when there was another District Attorney
over in Madison County, who since has gone out of
office, he was given a deal, and I'm sure that will
be a part of the case. We will ask James to explain
to us his understanding of that to you all . But I
believe the evidence will be that he was allowed or
will be allowed to plead guilty to murder, not
capital murder, but murder, be sentenced to life in
prison, not life without the possibility of parole,
but life, in exchange for testimony, providing
evidence in this case, all of which has to be
corroborated by independent evidence. In other
words, his deal was not just to make up a story, but
to tell Investigator Brantley and the people with
the DA's office in Huntsville, before I ever got
involved, facts that could be proven outside of
James White's statement.
And if he doesn't do
that, if he fails to offer evidence that can be
corroborated, then he doesn't have a deal, then he
will be prosecuted for capital murder.
I didn't make the
deal. I'm stuck with
it. Do I like it? I
don't know, doesn't really
Page 216
matter whether I like it or not. The deal is, as I
understand it, Mr. White has to tell the truth. If
I can prove that he lies about something,
Mr. White
is in a lot of trouble, more than he is now.
You all are going to have
a lot of
witnesses in the next couple of days, many, many
witnesses. Some of
them, a few of them, probably
will be long witnesses, others will be short and
brief, maybe just a few questions.
This case, in my case
that I'm going to
present to you all, is not going to be given to you
as a portrait all nicely painted and finished and
paneled and framed and ready to be given to you.
It's not one of those I can do like that. This case
is going to be given to you a piece at a time , piece
at a time, a little bit at a time, because I want to
convince you in this case, and I want the evidence
to prove to you in this case, the guilt of this
woman, not just on what James white says but on
evidence outside of that, and based upon what we
know about this woman herself. For instance, that
she stands to gain, it will be proven in this case,
that Dr. Jack Wilson's estate, she was the primary
beneficiary, if you will, the primary heir in his
Page 217
estate. A gentleman is
going to come from a bank to
tell you what his estate was valued at, but I
believe the evidence is going to be that her share
would have been something like $4,000,000 with him
dead. You see? All of
it, not part of it. So we
are going to try -- I'm going to try, as best I can,
to put these witnesses on and keep this thing
moving in an orderly fashion for you all, and
hopefully make sense to you.
If I do anything during
the trial that
offends anyone or annoys anyone, I'm sorry, I'm
doing the best I can.
I'm in a strange courtroom
and living out of a motel , just like you all are
doing, and doing the best I can being down here with
what I got. But I look
forward to getting this
evidence before you and I look forward to not
telling the story but showing you the story from
the witness stand and by exhibits that are going to
come in. And I see
from the serious expression on
your faces that you know this is serious business.
And I thank you in advance for your attention and
the consideration which I know you are going to
give this case. Thank you.
THE COURT: voir dire by the defendant
--
Page 218
I mean, opening statement.
(Whereupon, Mr. Cook addressed the
jury
in opening statements on behalf of the defendant as
follows:)
MR. COOK: May it please Your Honor,
Judge Younger, Mr. Fry, members of the prosecution,
ladies and gentlemen of the jury.
I'm glad to see at least. one or two
about
my age. I'm not going to tell you anything about my
childhood, and I'm not going to give you any '
stories about movies, and I'm not going to give you
any Latin expressions. My opening statement is
going to be probably shorter than Mr. Fry's. I
don't feel that it is necessary for me to inform
this jury of its responsibility, because I feel
like that you already know what your duties and
your responsibilities are.
This case and every case in the hall
of
justice -- and this is a hall of justice --
ultimately will not be decided upon what either I
or Jack Drake or Mr. Hooper or Mr. Sandlin says, it
will be decided upon what this jury finds the truth
to be from the witnesses who are sworn and testify
in this case. I want
to tell you just a little bit
Page 219
about our side of the case. Mrs. Wilson has entered
a plea of not guilty in this case. And let me say
to this jury at the outset, that it is her
contention and our contention that she is in fact
not guilty. We expect the evidence in this case to
show that she did not enter into an agreement, a
conspiracy or a complicity or whatever you wish to
call it, to kill her husband, Jack Wilson. She
pleads not guilty and we say to you that she is not
guilty, not by virtue of some technicality, not by
virtue of some legal loophole, but by virtue of the
fact that it is the truth.
Betty Wilson, as she sits
here at the
council table, will not at any time, nor will Mr.
Drake or any of us , indicate or have this jury to
believe that she is sainted; she has her faults.
Don't we all. Se. has
admitted voluntarily that she
has had affairs, and for that she is to be
congratulated, but that is not what she is charged
with in this case.
The evidence will show
that their
marriage was not a marriage such as I have or such
as many of you have.
It was not, indeed, what I
would describe as a conventional one. The evidence
Page 220
will show that Betty and
Jack Wilson married in, I
believe, July of 1978, that each of then prior to
that marriage had three children of their own by a
prior marriage. Betty
has three children, Trey,
Bo, and Dink. Fine
young sons who are grown, 27,
25, 23. And she has
two grandchildren. Dr. Wilson,
on the other hand, had an adopted son, Kenneth
Perry. Two sons of his
own, Scott and Steve.
The evidence will show in
this case that
Betty Wilson was an alcoholic for a number of
years. The evidence
will show that she has been
cold sober for the last six years and has
religiously attended and participated in Alcoholics
Anonymous meetings and other drug programs, almost
on a daily and a nightly basis.
My friend Mr. Fry tells
you about Betty's
twin sister, and they are twin sisters. Peggy Lowe
lives in Vincent, Alabama.
She is married to
Lowe. She is a
schoolteacher, she teaches the
first grade, still teaching the first grade. She
is married to her husband, Wayne Lowe, who is a
music director of the Baptist Church, the First
Baptist Church, and who also is a schoolteacher and
who also drives a school bus.
The evidence will
Page 221
show that their marriage is a very good one, it has
always been a good one, and that there has never
been any loveable or intimate relationship between
James White and Peggy Lowe.
And I might say that Mr.
Fry tells you
that Mr. White was not born with a silver spoon wit@
his mouth, neither were the twins. They were
raised in Gadsden, Alabama, where their father was
a policeman and their -mother was a textile worker.
A lot of us were not born with a silver spoon in our
mouth.
The evidence would show
in this case that
Mrs. Lowe and Betty Wilson, although different
lifestyles, that they both liked to help people,
particularly people who are homeless, people who
cannot help themselves, people who are down on
their luck, people who have a drinking problem or a
drug problems And the
evidence will be clear that
both of them have done that for many years.
The evidence will be in
this case, that
James White was not an employee of the school, but
has done some odd jobs for several of the
schoolteachers in the Vincent Elementary School.
He had built some shelves and he built some
Page 222
shelves, also, in the classroom of Peggy Lowe.
The evidence will show
that he did some
carpentry work for Wayne Lowe and Peggy Lowe at
their house, and was paid for it. The evidence will
show, if you will, please, that he poured a
driveway for Wayne Lowe's mother and was paid for
it.
The evidence will show
that in August,
when the State contends this relationship between
Peggy Lowe and James White commenced, the evidence
will show that at that very time that Wayne Lowe --
not Wayne Lowe, but that James White went to the VA
Hospital for one or two days with the complaint
that he was having visual hallucinations and
auditory ideations, that he was constantly hearing
voices and he didn't know what they were saying.
And then he left without proper medical treatment.
The evidence in this
case, the State's
case, in accordance with the plea agreement --
which I'm glad to hear Mr. Fry say -- I thought I
heard him say that he didn't know whether he
approved of it or not, because it is a strange
animal. And I'll tell
you that and you will see it
and hear about it later on in this case. And it's
Page 223
somewhat shocking, isn't it, Mr. Fry? But the
State's case is predicated upon the believability
of James D. White.
And let me tell you a
little bit -- just a
little bit, because I don't have time to give it all
to you, about the history of James D. White. And I
don't want to hear -- Mr. Fry has told you about
this story about, oh, he went to Vietnam and got
screwed up. He was
screwed up before he ever went
to Vietnam. I came
from the generation that went to
World War II. In fact,
I came back here to this
city and enrolled in a great university, five
months after the Japanese surrendered and two
months after I had landed in San Francisco. James
White was discharged from the Army of the United
States on account of character and behavior
disorders. His
behavior was not due to an
incapacity to become a satisfactory soldier, it was
due to the fact that he shirked his duties and
deserted his post.
And if everyone in my war had
deserted their post and shirked their duties, we
would have been speaking either Japanese or German.
He was convicted for
selling drugs. And
before being sentenced by a Judge., such as Judge
Page 224
Younger, fled from the jurisdiction and became a
fugitive, and had to be picked up in another state
and extradited back to this jurisdiction.
The evidence will show in
this case --
and you don't take it from me. As I said earlier,
you take it from what the witnesses say in the
witness box -- that he is now, that he was last
year, and he has been for the last 25 years, a
pathological liar, from whom no businessman or no
person on this jury, I suggest, would rely upon his
word in their most private affairs or in making
business judgments or, stated another way, he is
not someone that you would want to buy a used car
from.
It is most interesting
that the evidence
will show, and we will prove to you beyond any
peradventure of a doubt, that he not only lies
about things that are to his advantage and to his
benefit, but he lies even about unimportant things.
The evidence will show
that for the past
20 years or more, that he has been diagnosed
repeatedly as being psychotic, paranoid with
suicidal tendencies, which he has attempted from 12
to 14 times, that he has been continuously addicted
Page 225
to alcohol, to amphetamines, to organic -solvents,
to marijuana, to opiates taken intravenously, and
to LSD. And that the
only period of time in the
last 20 years in which he has been free from drugs
and substances is when he was in the penitentiary.
The evidence will show
that he has
engaged in sexually abusive behavior with his own
daughter while drunk.
The evidence will show that
he has been angry with and has, in fact, hated
females since his high school days.
The evidence will show,
according to his
very medical records and his own admission, that he
wrote a letter to his stepfather's wife asking her
to have sex with him.
And the evidence will show
that he stabbed a Marine with a fork, or so he says
in his history. Some
of the Marines that I knew, I
do not believe that he would have stabbed them.
He has a history of
blackouts, associated
with drinking and violent behavior. His medical
records will show that he has blamed all his
troubles on the Government, that he admits to
excessive violence and unexplainable violence while
drunk or on drugs.
That for over 20 years he has
been angered and bitter at the world, blaming his
Page 226
troubles on others.
And he says that he was
mysteriously
given an undesirable discharge, although in the
same breath he says in these medical records that
he pulled an M-16 on military personnel. H i s
medical records show that he is likely to fantasize
and daydream extensively, that he is rebellious,
resentful, non-conforming, he conflicts with
society and authority figures, and projects blame
and hostility. And, very importantly, that he may
chronically misinterpret the words and actions of
others.
This is only a little bit
about the
State's star witness. I can tell you what I know
about him. I have never seen him except on
television, where his own lawyer refers to him as
being "con-wise," whatever that may mean. We do
know that -- we do know that he has given seven
different statements that are recorded and which
were required to be given to counsel in this case
under the rules of this court. We also know and
believe, and the evidence would show, that he has
made many, many other statements that have not been
recorded or written up, but the statements that we
Page 227
know about and that the evidence will disclose, is
a statement that he gave on May 26th, one on May
27th, one on May 29th, one on 4 June, one on 24
June , and the other on 28 July , all in 1992.
I can say to this jury
with absolute
candor, that the proof in this case, coming from
the mouth of James White, will show that in each of
these statements that he has repeatedly and
repeatedly and repeatedly lied and contradicted
himself . Seven known stories or versions. All
different, all conflicting.
Many of which make
absolutely no sense at all.
And I predict to this
jury, as you sit in this box, that you will even
hear different stories today and tomorrow or
whenever he takes the stand, than you have in these
seven different versions.
And let me speak to two
of those now. And
I ask you and I know this jury will be attentive and
will remember the evidence, what I have said and
what Mr. Fry has said. Mr. Fry said -- and I only
heard this for the first time, because this is, not
in any of his statements - - that it was on
Wednesday, May the 20th -- May the 20th, Wednesday,
that he went to Logan Martin Dam and got a gun or a
Page 228
pistol or revolver from Peggy Lowe and Betty
Wilson. In the first place, he has not gotten a gun
or a pistol from Peggy Lowe or Betty Wilson, he
stole the gun out of the house. But in all of the
statements he has given, in every single one of
them -- and the evidence will show that -- he first
started off saying he definitely knew that he got
the pistol on May 12th, on Tuesday, May 12th. And,
again, then they found out that that was a bad date,
and ten days later they moved it to May the 19'th.
And it's been another Tuesday, and it's been May
the 19th, up until the present time, and I heard
today for the first time that it's Wednesday, May
the 20th. But when he takes the stand it might be
the 18th or the 21st, we will wait and see, but this
is from what Mr. Fry said the evidence would be.
He also -- Mr. Fry also said a moment
ago
that on May the 15th he came to Huntsville and cased
the house or cased the place where Dr. Wilson
worked, and then he went back to the state park in
Guntersville. That might be what he is going to
say, but that's not what he said thus far. It is
different and contradictory even to the seven
statements.
Page 229
I can tell you many other things, but I
think it best to tell you -- to let you hear it from
the witnesses, from our witnesses as well as Mr.
Fry's witnesses, and his witnesses go first. But I
ask you to listen carefully to Mr. White, and I know
that you will, observe him carefully, because in
order to return a conviction in this case, you have
got to believe everything that he says.
Ultimately this jury, as
any other jury
who sits in Tuscaloosa or my little town of
Summerville or New York or California or over in
Mr. Fry's county of Limestone, it's the same story,
it's the same America.
We are looking for the same
thing. You owe me
nothing, you owe Mr. Fry nothing,
you owe it all to the system, and although it may be
an inconvenience for you to be here, there is
nothing any more important than having sensible,
intelligent, upright men and women who stand ready
to meet the challenge of preserving probably one of
the finest things that many wars and the blood of
many Americans has institutionalized, and that's
the fact that in this great nation, and it is a
great country, you can't take away a second of a
person's liberty or a dollar of their money, except
Page 230
with the unanimous verdict of this jury. And
ultimately you are not responsible for the
consequences of your verdict, you are only
responsible for the truth of your verdict. I ask
you for no more. My
good friend, Jack Drake, that I
am delighted to be here with, and Mr. Hooper and Mr.
Sandlin, would not ask you for any more, nor expect
any less.
And I thank you for your
kindness and
attentiveness in listening to my short opening
remarks.
Thank you, Your Honor.
THE COURT: Ladies and
gentlemen, it's
about lunchtime. So we
will be recessing for
lunch. Please go into
the jury room at this time
while the bailiffs make arrangements to take you
to
lunch. Everybody
remain seated until the jury has
reached the jury room.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Court is in
recess until
p.m.
(Whereupon, proceedings were in recess at
11:50 a.m., until 1:07 p.m., at which time the
following occurred:)
Page 231
THE COURT: Mr. Pry, are you ready?
MR. FRY:
State is ready, your Honor.
THE COURT:
You gentlemen ready?
MR. DRAKE: Yes, Sir.
THE COURT:
Do you have some witnesses?
Are there any witnesses
in the courtroom? And, if
so, they need to be
sworn and put under the rule.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, we are
going to
invoke the rule, too.
THE COURT: Right. Are
there any
witnesses in the courtroom that are going to
testify? If so, all of
the witnesses that expect to
testify in this case, stand and raise your right
hand.
(Witnesses sworn.)
THE COURT: Okay.
Now, the rule is
invoked, which means that all of the witnesses have
to go outside and wait until you are called to
testify. With the -- I
understand that you
gentlemen probably have some exceptions that you
want to make?
MR. DRAKE: We don't have
any. Mr. Fry
said he wanted Mr. Brantley excepted from the rule,
and I don't know of any reason why he should be
Page 232
unless
MR. HOOPER: The only agreement we have
had, Judge, is Mr. Morgan and his wife and Doug
Martinson. That's
it. Everybody else is out.
THE COURT: All right.
Come around.
MR. HOOPER: Of course, Mr. Miller, when
his client is in here, we would expect him to be in
here.
THE COURT: Well, he is in the same
category as an officer of the court, as Mr. Morgan
and your law partners.
MR. HOOPER: But this is our agreement
between Mr. Pry and myself.
THE COURT: Okay. To exclude
MR. HOOPER: Those persons named
THE COURT: What about Mr. Miller?
MR. HOOPER: No, sir,
that's not --
MR. MILLER: Judge, I'm in
a little
unique situation, in that my client is additionally
and still remains charged with capital murder, and
in defense -- in his defense I think it behooves me,
in representation of him, to remain at least for
portions of the testimony that's to be given, other
than that given by him, and additionally, Your
Page 233
Honor, I know nothing about the case, anyway, that
I could testify to or know of no reason I would be
subpoenaed by the defense.
THE COURT: Well, what reason do you --
MR. HOOPER: Judge, we have got more than
one reason -- of course, he made many statements to
the television about his client and his client's
participation in the crime. We expect to examine
him on that. We expect
Mr. Miller also to repeat
THE COURT: I don't believe that's
necessarily admissible, Mr. Hooper.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, it may not --
THE COURT: You can't just gather someone
in and decide -- if so, everybody in the courtroom
would probably be subject to testifying.
MR. HOOPER: Mr. Miller, I assume, has
talked with his client. We expect to examine his
client on those conversations that Mr. Miller later
made public comment on, in addition, Mr. Miller was
on television stating about his client being con-
wise, to insinuate he would know how to work the
system. So we
certainly think that Roy is a bona
fide witness.
MR. DRAKE: He certainly participated in
Page 234
MR.
DRAKE: He certainly participated in
the preparation and approved the plea agreement,
which is going to be admitted into evidence.
THE COURT: Well, he is
going to be present
in the courtroom during that testimony, too. He will be
present in the courtroom during the testimony.
All right. Mr. Miller, go outside. The rest of you ladies and
gentlemen that are under the rule will have to go outside.
MR. FRY: Your Honor, we
would ask that
Investigator Brantley, who was the chief investigator and
representing the agency that made the case, be excused.
THE COURT: He is excluded
from the rule. And
the gentlemen that you had those -- that you had
the agreement concerning, are also excluded from
the rule. Okay.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, we
have also subpoenaed
Mr. Brantley ourselves.
THE COURT: He is excused
from the rule.
MR. HOOPER: We object.
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, you
may call your first
witness. Excuse me. We have got to have a jury, don't we.
Page 235
MR. FRY: I'll be happy
to, Judge.
THE COURT: It's been a
long day already.
MR. FRY: Yes , sir.
MR. COOK: From time to time I have a
hearing impediment in my left ear. If I find it
necessary, would the Court object if I put my chair
at the end of this table?
THE COURT: Not at all.
MR. COOK: Thank you, Your
Honor.
THE COURT: Bring the jury
out.
(Brief pause.)
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, your
first witness.
MR. FRY: Officer Dunnagan, Jimmy Dunnagan.
JIMMY DUNNAGAN
being first duly sworn, was examined and testified as
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. FRY:
Q State
who you are and what you do,
please, sir.
A My
name is Jimmy Dunnagan. I'm a police
officer with the City of Huntsville.
Q You may want to pull that mic up just a
Page 236
little bit to make sure the jury hears you. I can
barely hear you back here.
How long have you been with the City of
Huntsville?
A
Approximately six and a half years.
Q
What did you do for them?
A
I'm a uniform patrol officer.
Q
Is that what you have done the whole six
years you have been
with them?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Are you married?
A
No, sir.
Q
Are you from Huntsville?
A
No, sir.
Q
You from Tuscaloosa?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
You visiting folks while you are down
here?
A
Some, yes, sir.
Q
Trying to. Well, back in the
spring of
last year, that is, more particularly May of last
year, were you a Huntsville police officer then,
also?
A
Yes, sir.
Page 237
Q
Back more particularly on one Friday
night, on May 22nd of last year, were you working
then?
A
Yes, I was.
Q
What shift were you working; do you
recall?
A
I was working 2:30 to 10:30.
Q
2:30 in the afternoon?
A
Yes, sir,
Q Something
unusual happen that night?
A Yes,
sir.
Q
Did you get a call before going of f that
evening?
A
Yes, sir, I did.
Q
You would have gotten off at 10:30; is
that right?
A
Yes, sir.
Q Did
you get a call telling you to go over
to Boulder Circle?
A
Yes, I did.
Q When
did you get that call?
A It
was approximately
Q
9:30 at night?
A
Yes, sir.
Page 238
Q
And do you remember where you were when
you got the call?
A
Yes, sir, I was on Redstone Road near
Memorial Parkway.
Q
What did you do?
A
I proceeded immediately to the location
at 2700 Boulder Circle.
Q
Did you know why you were going over
there?
A
I was dispatched to a burglary in
progress, where the
victim was reportedly injured
inside.
Q
All right. How far was it, Jim, from
where you were on the
Parkway -- remember this jury
nay not be real familiar with Madison County o ,r the
Parkway How far was
it from where you were to the
address where you had to go?
A
Approximately eight miles.
Q
How long did it take you? When did you
get there?
A
It took me approximately
minutes to get there.
Q
And what part of Huntsville is that in,
directionwise, south, west, east?
Page 239
A
I'm sorry?
Q
What part of Huntsville is that in?
A
Redstone Road is in South Huntsville.
Q
All right.
A
Boulder Circle is in southeast
Huntsville.
Q
So you were going to southeast
Huntsville?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Where did you go to?
A
I went to 2700 Boulder Circle.
Q
What kind of neighborhood is
that?
A
It's a fairly exclusive neighborhood.
Q
By that, what do you mean?
A
Mostly doctors, lawyers, professional-
type people live in that area.
Q
Had you patrolled that area before or
been in that neighborhood before?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
All right. Was anyone with you or
were
you by yourself?
A
I patrol by myself.
Q
And when you arrived at the scene, was
anyone else there?
Page 240
A Yes, sir, Officer Wayne West and I
arrived at the scene approximately the same time.
Q
What did you all do when you got there?
A
We observed the front of the house,
checked for any type movement inside the house, and
we started approaching the house.
Q
I believe you testified you had been told
there could be a burglary in progress; is that
correct?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Based on that information, did you take
some kind of precautions?
A
Yes, sir. Officer West and myself both
pulled our firearms, and we had those available as
we approached the house.
We approached it with
caution. Officer West
came from the right side of
the house, I came from the left side of the house.
Q
What kind of house was that?
A
It was a two-story brick house.
Q
Big house?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
So you came from one side and Officer
West came from the other side?
A
Yes.
Page 241
Q
Did you see anybody else other than the
two of you?
A
There was HEMSI or the ambulance
personnel was out front.
I believe there was a
couple of neighbors out a ways away from the house.
Q
All right. A little ways away
from the
house, is that what you are saying?
A
Yes, sir, approximately two, three houses
down.
Q
Two or three houses down?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
So what did you do?
A
As we approached the house, I noticed the
light on in the garage downstairs. I advised
officer West. We went
in and checked the garage
area first and we located no one there. The door
leading from the garage to the upstairs area was
locked, so we come back around the front, and we
entered the front of the residence and made a room-
to-room search of the residence.
Q
Front door was opened?
A
Yes, sir, the front door was opened.
Q
Was it unlocked or was the door actually
ajar or open?
Page 242
A The door was actually opened
approximately b a I f
w a y
Q
All right. So the door was not
locked?
A
No, Sir.
Q
And you went in the front door?
A
Yes, Sir.
Q
After going in, I believe you said you
went from room to room.
What do you mean by that?
A
Because the call came out as a possible
burglary in progress, we were checking each room as
we went through to ensure that no one was there in
the residence or to locate anyone that was there.
Q
okay. Did you go into each room
of the
house?
A
Yes, Sir, we did.
Q
And how many stories does that house
have?
A
It has the basement level with the garage
and then two floors.
First floor ground level,
then a floor above that.
Q
So your testimony is either you or
officer West went into each room; is that right?
A
Yes, Sir.
Q
You weren't with him, I take it?
Page 243
A
We had visible contact with each other.
Q
Okay So did you work as a team,
more or
1ess?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Now, did you find someone in the house?
Did you find a body in the house?
A
Yes, sir, we found a body in the house.
Q
After you had made your search, did you
find any living people
in the house?
A
No, sir, we did not.
Q
Did you find an intruder?
A
Pardon?
Q
Did you find someone who didn't belong
there?
A
No, sir, we found no one other than Dr.
Wilson.
Q Where
was he found?
A He
was in the upstairs hallway, partially
in the hallway, partially in a bedroom door.
Q
Would that be on the second story of the
house or the third story from the ground?
A Yes, sir.
Q
If we call the basement the first story,
then that would have been the third story; is that
Page 244
right?
A
Yes , sir.
Q
Were you and Officer West together when
you discovered Dr.
Wilson?
A
Yes, sir. I was proceeding up the
stairwell just ahead
of Officer West, who was
covering me as I was
proceeding up.
Can you describe the way
you got to the
second story? Is
there stairs or --
A
There is a staircase that comes from the
first floor or the ground level to the top floor .
Q
All right. At what point in time going
up the stairs, if at all, were you able to see Dr.
Wilson?
A
I was approximately four to five steps
down from the top.
Q
How tall are you?
A
Five-eleven.
Q
So before you would have got to the top
of the stairs you
could see what?
A
I could see someone laying in the hallway
or on the floor.
Q
Now, at that time had you cleared the
third floor?
Page 245
A No. sir.
Q
So this is when you first go to the third
story, then; is that right?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
What did you and Officer West do?
A
We surveyed the top floor to see if there
was any movement up there.
We watched the subject
laying on the floor to see if there was any movement
there. We saw none, so
we finished clearing the
upstairs rooms by a room search of each room. We
then -- finding no one there, we advised the
ambulance personnel to come in and check the
subject.
Q
Okay. The ambulance people had
been
waiting outside during this time you cleared the
house; is that right?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Was anyone in the house other than you
and Officer West until you called for the ambulance
people?
A No.
sir.
Q Are
they paramedics or some kind of
rescue people?
A
Paramedics.
Page 246
Q Did they examine Dr. Wilson?
A
Yes, sir, they looked at him.
Q
Now, did you know Dr. Wilson?
A
No, sir, I did not.
Q
Was he identified to you as Dr. Jack
Wilson?
A
Not at that time, no, sir.
Q
Was he later on?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Did you learn that was who the gentleman
was?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Were the HEMSI -- which stands for what,
Huntsville Emergency Service?
A
Medical Service.
Q
Medical?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Were they able to do anything to help Dr.
Wilson?
A
No, sir, they were not.
Q
Would you describe the condition he was
in or his appearance as you saw it?
A
There was a head injury, there was
noticeable -- it appeared that his left arm had
Page 247
been broken, and there were like two puncture
wounds in his shirt that I could see.
Q
Was he dead?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Did you witness any kind of weapon or any
kind of instrument around or about Dr. Wilson's
body?
A
Yes, sir. There was a baseball bat
near
the body.
Q
Did you -- or what did you do after the
emergency people
arrived and began looking at Dr.
Wilson's body?
A
Once they advised that he was dead and
there was nothing they could do for him, officer
West and I directed them out of the house. I
notified dispatch that we needed a sergeant and
crime scene and homicide investigator to respond to
the area. Officer West
and I then secured the
house.
Q
And by that, what do you mean exactly?
A
We stood in front of that house to
prevent anyone from entering the residence or
leaving the residence.
Q
And how long did you perform those
Page 248
duties?
A I
was there for approximately two, two
and a half hours, I believe.
Q
All right. To prevent anyone
other than
authorized people from coming or going, is that
what you said?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Policemen?
A
Police investigators.
Q
Okay. And you notified the
homicide
unit?
A
I notified dispatch and had dispatch to
notify the shift sergeant, crime scene investigator
and homicide.
Q
All right. So in Huntsville,
then, do
you have two separate police departments, all part
of the police department, one that actually works a
homicide case as detectives and another agency that
actually works the scene?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
And they both were notified?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Did anyone do anything to move anything
that you saw or tamper with anything in the house
Page 249
from the time you arrived until after you had
established your security?
A
No, Sir.
Q
Did the medical people do anything; did
they try to move Dr. Wilson's body or did they try
to start an IV or do any kind of medical procedure
on him?
A
No, Sir.
Q
As far as you know, was he moved at all
from the time you saw him?
A
No, Sir, he was not moved.
Q
Jim, one last question. And I
have got
to ask you for the record, even though we are in
Tuscaloosa. Was his
body in Madison County,
Alabama?
A
Yes, Sir.
Q
2700 Boulder Circle is in Madison County?
A
2700 Boulder Circle, yes, Sir.
Q
And that's where you saw Dr. Wilson's
body?
A
Yes, Sir.
MR. FRY: I believe that is all. I'm sure
these gentlemen will have some questions for you.
MR. HOOPER: Officer, I
have just got a [few questions?]
Page 250
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR. HOOPER:
Q
When you arrived on the scene and after
you had gone through the house, I believe you
stated that you had instructed the HEMSI people to
come in; is that correct?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Where were you in the house when you told
them to come in?
A
I came out to the front door and motioned
for them to come in.
Q
Okay. Was there any other police
officer
inside the house besides yourself at that time?
A
Officer Wayne West.
Q
Where was he?
A
He came out with me.
Q
Okay. Did you accompany the
HEMSI people
back upstairs to where Dr. Wilson was?
A
Yes, sir, we did.
Q
Do you remember the HEMSI people or one
of the HEMSI paramedics, either kicking or tripping
on the ball bat?
A
I don't recall, no, sir, I don't.
Q
You are not saying it didn't happen, you
Page 251
Q
You are not saying it didn't happen, you
just don't recall it?
A
Yes, sir. I don't know if it
happened or
not. I didn't see it.
Q
Okay. Well, when you first got
there and
went upstairs, you saw
the position of the ball
bat, did you not?
A
I saw it, yes, sir.
Q
And where was the position of the ball
bat?
A
I don't know the exact -- I don't
remember the exact position. I knew it was near the body, but I was more
interested in checking the
house for other people.
Q
Okay. After you accompanied the
HEMSI
people upstairs, did you go back downstairs with
them?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Did you ever have any opportunity to go
back upstairs?
A
I went back upstairs one time when Sgt.
Giles responded to the location.
Q
Did you notice whether or not the
position of the ball bat had changed?
Page 252
A
No, sir, I didn't notice the position of
the ball bat.
Q
If you would, please, sir, did the HEMSI
people ever go -- actually go to the body and touch
it?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
They actually touched it?
A
Yes, sir, I believe so.
Q
Do you remember that?
A
I believe they did.
Q
You believe they did or they did?
A
I believe they did. I'm not sure.
Q
Okay. Around the body itself
there was a
pool of blood; is that correct?
A
I don't recall seeing a large pool.
There was blood around the body, yes, sir.
Q
Okay.
MR. HOOPER: Have you got the crime scene
photographs?
MR. FRY: Yeah.
(Brief pause.)
Q
officer, if you will, look at what's been
marked -- actually it's State's Exhibit P-1. Can
you identify that?
Page 253
A Yes,
sir.
Q
Is that the small pool of blood that you
saw, please, sir?
A
Yes, sir. As far as I can remember
it,
yes, sir.
Q
Pretty good size pool of blood, right?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
At the time you walked over there to the
body, did you step in
the blood or did you get in
the vicinity of the blood with your shoes?
A
I don't think so, no, sir, I don't.
Q
Do you recall the HEMSI ambulance
paramedic stepping in
the blood itself?
A I don’t
recall. It's possible. They
were more to the right of
him, facing this picture.
Q
Did you also see a palm print in the
blood?
A
Yes, sir, I saw a palm print.
Q
Where was the palm print?
A
I don't recall exactly where it was.
Q
But it was even visible to you at that
time; is that correct?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
All right. Officer, I think you
stated
Page 254
that you were about -- you were four to five steps
from the top; is that correct, when you saw the
blood?
A
Yes, sir, somewhere in that vicinity.
Q
And you have a good recollection of that;
is that correct?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Could you have even been further away,
maybe five or six steps away?
A
It's possible. I know when my
eye level
came -- when my eyes came level with the floor, I
could see someone laying there.
Q
You sure it was at least four to five
steps away or maybe more?
A
Maybe more, yes, sir.
Q
Officer, do you recall whether or not
there was a landing on that stairwell?
A
I believe there was. I'm not
positive
about that.
Q
Okay. officer, as you went up the
stairwell, how did you go up there? I assume you
didn't know whether or not there may still be an
intruder in the house, so you were taking some
measures to protect yourself?
Page 255
A
Yes, sir, I had my weapon drawn.
Q
Did you go up maybe with your side,
sideways up the stairwell or just --
A
Yes, sir. The stairwell sort of
curved
back to the left, and Officer West was down at the
bottom of the stairs as I started my assent,
covering in case somebody looked over. And I
walked at an angle so I could see the upstairs
hallway as I was going around.
Q
So you were making a determined effort to
try and see, as best you could, as to what was on
that other upper level; is that correct?
A
Yes , sir.
Q
If you would, officer Dunnagan, look at
Defendant's Exhibit 1.
Can you identify that?
A
Yes, sir. That appears to be the
house.
Q
Okay. Well, that's actually the
stairwell, is it not, not the house?
A
Yes, sir. I'm sorry, the
stairwell.
Q
Okay. And look on the back side of it,
please, sir. Again,
does that not depict the
stairwell area of the home?
A
Yes, sir.
Page 256
Q
Basically, the first and second floor; it
that correct?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
All right. If you would, please,
sir, on
one of the photographs -- right here, on the first
page, the second photograph, can you also note how
many steps are from the landing actually to the
second floor?
A
From the landing to the second floor
appear to be about three.
Q
Three steps. So actually you were
down
on -- you hadn't even gotten to the landing and you
could see the body; is that correct?
A
Yes, sir, somewhere in that area.
Q
Okay. officer, I would ask you,
if you
would, please, sir, mark about where on this first
flight of steps, where you were when you first
observed the body.
A
Based on the photographs and everything,
I was probably right here on this landing area,
right in here or maybe the step below.
Q
Well, you said four to five steps,
possibly more. So we
have got three here, there
would be four steps here, five and six. So just
Page 257
bracket where. you would have been.
A
I would say approximately the fourth step
down . The step before you get to the landing.
Q
All right. So you are not five or
six
steps ,you are four steps?
A
Yes, sir, it appears that way.
Q
You have a good recollection of that now?
A
Yes, sir, after looking at the
photographs it's come back a little bit.
Q
You hadn't seen the photograph prior to
today?
A
No, sir.
MR. HOOPER: We would offer Defendant's
Exhibit I.
THE COURT: Any objection?
MR. FRY: No objection.
THE COURT: Defendant's Exhibit I is
admitted.
Q
Officer, when you first got to the home,
did you pull up and stop in front of the house or
did you go in the driveway or where?
A
We pulled up approximately one
house
before you get to the residence.
Q
Okay. Did you see any lights on
in the
Page 258
house at that time?
A
Yes, sir, I did.
Q
What lights did you see on?
A
Appeared to be a hallway and a stairway
light.
Q
In fact, was that the only lights on in
the house?
A
There was also a light on in the garage
downstairs.
Q
So three lights; is that correct?
A
Yes, sir, and I believe there was one
small light in the kitchen that was left on.
Q
Did you go behind the house, that
is, to
the rear of the house?
A
We checked the rear, yes, sir.
Q
Okay. Did you have an occasion to
check
the yard that night?
A
No, sir.
Q
What was your furthest most point that
you went from the rear of the house?
A
Probably the corner of the house.
Q
Just the corner?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Did you discover any long hoses or any
Page 259
apparatus of that type laying about in the back
yard or in the front yard?
A
No, sir, I wasn't paying attention to
anything like that.
Q
Could have been there, you just don't
remember seeing them?
A
I wasn't looking for them, so I don't
remember.
MR. HOOPER: No further questions.
THE COURT: Any more questions, Mr. Fry?
MR. FRY: Your Honor, I have no further
questions. This is an
on-duty officer in
Huntsville and we would ask that he be excused. I'm
sure he could be re-called, if he is needed in
rebuttal or something.
MR. DRAKE: We don't have any problems
with that.
THE COURT: Mr. Dunnagan, you may be
excused. Next.
MR. FRY: We call Investigator Glen
Nunley.
GLEN NUNLEY
being first duly sworn, was examined and testified
as follows:
Page 260
DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. FRY:
Q
If you will , please tell the ladies and
gentlemen of the jury who you are and what you do,
please.
A
My name is Glen Nunley and I'm an
investigator with the Huntsville Police Department.
And my job pertains to the crime scene. That's
photographing, taking fingerprints, collecting
evidence.
Q
How long have you been in law
enforcement, Glen?
A
Over 13 years now.
Q
Have you always been with Huntsville?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Are you from Huntsville?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Married?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Kids?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Were you with the crime scene
investigation unit back in May of last year?
A
Yes, sir, I was.
Page 261
Q
Were you called sometime on the 22nd to a
home there in Huntsville to work a crime scene?
A Yes,
sir, I did.
Q What
was the nature of the work that you
did there?
A
Well, I arrived on the scene, Officer
Dunnagan and Officer West showed me through the
house and gave me a quick once-over of what they
had. I looked it over, I started taking
photographs, started drawing diagrams, and taken
later determined what we would be collecting as
evidence, and so on.
Q
Okay. Now, the house you are
referring
to, was that 2700 Boulder Circle?
A
Yes, it is.
Q
Let me show you two State's Exhibits
marked P-13 and P-14, and ask you if you can
identify those exhibits.
A
Okay. P-14 is a photograph I took
of the
residence when I first arrived that night. And P-
13 is a photograph showing the number on the
mailbox with the house in the background.
Q
Did you take these photographs?
A
I took the one of the front of the house.
Page 262
I didn't take the one of the mailbox,that was taken
while I was there. I
was doing the videotape when
they took that picture.
Q
But is that the house in the daytime, and
you took the picture at night?
A
Correct. Yes, sir.
MR. FRY: We move State's Exhibit P-13
and P-14 into evidence.
MR. HOOPER: No objection.
Q Now,
Glen, what kind of crime scene' was
it you all were processing when you got there?
A
It was a burglary in progress and there
was a -- the deceased person was still on the scene,
so a murder.
Q Is
that the way it was called in?
A
Yes, sir, I believe it was called a
burglary in progress.
Q
All right. Now, in working the
crime
scene, do you, as a part of what you do, make a
diagram of the place in which the apparent crime
occurred, that is, in this case, the house?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
Did you do that in this case?
A
Yes, sir.
Page 263
Q
You did that personally?
A
I did that with Investigator Hutchinson's
assistance.
Q
Okay. Well, did that include
making
measurements and going through the entire house
room by room?
A
Yes, it did.
Q
In this case did you get a floor plan or a
diagram of the house at some point?
A
We got that later to assist us in drawing
it out.
Q
Kind of helped, I guess?
A
Yes, Sir.
Q
Glen,, I'm going to move this around and,
if you can see it, fine; if not, you can get up, but
I want to make sure that the jury sees it.
MR. PRY: Your Honor,
if I may inquire or
if you will inquire as to if the last people down
there can see. Nod
your head if you can't. Can
everybody see that? Okay. Fine.
Q
I tell you what, Glen: We are going to
have to do like the weatherman and stand up, and
don't put yourself between this exhibit and our
jury here. Let's put
it where they can see it.
Page 264
MR. PRY: Can you see it, Mr. Cook?
MR. COOK: Certainly can. Thank you very
much.
Q
Tell me what this is, Glen.
A
That is the basement of the residence.
Q
All right. Did you make that
diagram?
A
Investigator Hutchinson and I both made
it, yes, sir.
Q
And does it -- what does it represent?
A
There was a bedroom in the basement, a TV
room in the basement, a laundry room, a large
closet, a bathroom, and two-car garage and a large
storage area.
Q
Does it accurately depict the layout of
that house as far as the rooms, stairwell, the
relationship of the rooms to one another?
A
Yes., Sir.
MR. HOOPER: Mr. Fry, we
have no
objection on the drawings that you have given us,
as far as the admissibility.
MR. FRY: Thank you.
Q
Is it to scale?
A
No, Sir, it's not.
Q
okay. But is it generally relative to
Page 265
the size of the rooms?
A Yes,
sir, it is.
Q
Was that a big house or a small
house?
A
A large house.
Q
A large house. okay. And did you go
through each room down in the basement, Glen?
A
Yes, sir, I did.
Q
What was the purpose of going from room
to room?
A
To search for any evidence of any kind of
crime, whether it was a burglary or whether there
was any blood downstairs or any other of the
victim's clothing -- just anything and everything.
Q
Did you take any fingerprints?
A
Yes, sir, I did.
Q
And did you take those fingerprints in
the downstairs?
A
Yes, sir, we did.
Q
Let me show you what I'm going to mark --
(Brief pause.)
Q
I show you what I have marked -- you can
have a seat, I think,
for just a minute, anyway --
as State's Exhibit P, as in papa, 15.
MR. COOK: What was the number, please?
Page 266
MR. FRY: P-15 or photo
15, Mr. Cook.
THE COURT: Where did you come up with that
letter?
MR. FRY: “P”
for photos, Your Honor.
There is going to be a batch of them, and instead of
having 200 exhibits.
And I have already got some already numbered, Your Honor.
Q Let me ask you to look at this photo, if you
will, Glen. Can you describe that?
A It’s the entrance to the garage from the
outside of the hours, looking towards the house.
Q did you take that photo?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q Does that represent the outside of the house
that have already described the basement
of?
A Yes, sire, from the outside looking towards.
Q Can you show the jury where this
garage – double garage door would be?
A Here were the double garage doors, right
here, and the picture was taken from this angel looking this
way.
MR. FRY: We offer this as State’s
Page 267
Exhibit P-15, Yours Honor.
THE
COURT: All right, admitted.
Q We are going to work from the ground up
here, Glen, from the basement up. This
is P-16, and
I ask you if you can identify this photograph.
A Yes, Sir.
It’s an area out behind the
house, from here looking this way.
Q All right.
Can I get you to do this:
Could you label on the diagram, make an “X” where
This P-17 would be, maybe an “X”, then put P-17 by
It.
(Witness
complies.)
Q I think maybe you have it on another
diagram. Put P-17.
A Yes, Sir.
Q So if you were looking from the back of the
house could you see this over there?
A Yes, sir.
MR.
FRY: Offer P-17 into evidence, Your
Honor.
Q Let
me show you what I have marked as P-
18.
A Okay.
This is essentially a shot of the
same area. There was a
swimming pool right here and
Page 268
this shot was taken from about here, looking in
this direction.
Q All right.
Look at all those, if you
will, Glen. This P-18,
is that the pool that’s in the back yard of 2700 Boulder?
A Yes, sire, it is.
Q All right.
(Brief pause.)
Q It’s
pretty much directly behind the
house?
A Yes,
sir. These are all in the back of
the house, from the floor above, this deck above
the pool, and then the outside around the back of
the pool.
Q Okay.
MR. FRY: Your Honor, we move P-18 into
evidence.
THE COURT: 18
is admitted.
Q All right.
Glen, let’s take the rest of
these in order. I have
marked this series of
exhibits P-19 through P-24.
If you will, take them
one at a time and show, using the diagram in the
photograph, where the photograph depicts on your
diagram of this ground floor of 2700
Page 269
Circle.
A This is on the floor above this floor.
Q All right.
Let’s hold that one out. I’m
sorry. Is that a deck?
A Yes, sir, a deck on the main floor.
Q Okay.
A And this shot here is a shot of the
stairway leading down from the deck and to a rock garden or
something in this area right over here.
That’s P-20. And this
is a shot of the rock garden,
in that area.
Q Would you write that? You need my pen
again, I guess.
A Yes, sir, I do.
Q Mark the photograph where the rock garden
is.
A It’s P-20 and P-21.
Q That will be fine.
A This is a shot of just the railing on the
back of the deck.
Q Would that have been one story up above
the pool or the ground level”
A This is up on the main floor level.
Q All right.
Page 270
A And
this is P-27. It’s another shot of
this area over here.
And P-24 is a shot of this
area, right over in this area.
Q Are there trees or wooded area there?
A It’s just forage.
Q All right.
A And P-20 is a shot of the stairway going
down to the rock garden.
MR. FRY: We move Exhibits P-20 through
P-24 into evidence, Your Honor.
MR. HOOPER:
Let me see 20 a minute.
(Brief pause.)
Q All right.
Did we cover the basement
floor, Glen? Did you
leave any rooms out? Did we
not talk about any rooms in the basement floor”
A Well, there is one bedroom, then a TV
room, and then a two-car garage and a laundry room
and a closet – or two closets.
Q And you say the garage is on the left-
hand side as we look at it?
A Yes, sir, the garages are right here, and
this is a bedroom, and this is a TV room, and there
was a sliding door or French doors here that went
out into the back area.
Page 271
[STRICKEN
FROM THE RECORD] . . . . it
was?
Q
Trey?
A Yes, sir.
Q Let's move up one floor.
MR. FRY:
By the way, Your
Honor, we move State's
Exhibit I, if
we haven't already, the diagram.
THE
COURT: Any objection?
MR. HOOPER: No, sir.
Judge. In fact, Jimmy, if you want to go
ahead and offer all your diagrams in, that would be fine.
MR. FRY: Great.
Let's do that.
(Brief pause.)
MR. FRY:
We offer into
evidence, then, Your Honor,
State's Exhibits 2,
3, and 4.
THE
COURT: Each are admitted, 2, 3, and 4 are admitted.
Q Let's stay on the second floor for a
minute, Glen. What does this diagram
describe?
A This is the main floor of the house, with
this being the front door and this being the deck above the pool which is in
the back yard.
Q And, again, you made this diagram?
Page
272
Q And, again, you
made this diagram?
A
Yes, sir.
Q
All of these we have here today, either
you or your partner have
produced for us for use in this trial?
A Yes,
sir.
Q So you actually had this drawn up from your
notes and observations?
A Yes,
sir.
Q Can you tell us from room to room what the
house was like on the second floor?
A Okay.
You enter the house from the front door, with Boulder Circle being right
here, the front door, it faced the dead end of Boulder Circle. There is a large foyer area, a sitting room
over here, had a couch and some chairs, a large dining room over here, the
kitchen here, and a library and a small bar right over here. And, of course, the foyer went all the way
through the house to the back deck, and then the stairway leading back
downstairs.
Q If you will, hand me that exhibit on the
rail that we had out of order a moment ago.
What exhibit is that?
Page 273
Q What
is P-19?
A Shows a picture of the deck right here,
taken from here.
Q Do you want to write "P-19" on
the deck?
A (Witness complies.)
Q So this exhibit, then, P-19, is the deck
which is really the ground floor or the second floor?
A Yes,
sir, the ground
floor.
Q Was there a deck off of the third floor?
A No,
sir, there was
not.
Q So
this is the
only deck?
A Yes,
sir.
MR. FRY: We offer
P-19 into evidence.
THE COURT:
19 is admitted.
Q Now, you and your partners worked this
second floor of the house, also?
A Yes,
sir, we did.
Q And what did you do on
the second floor?
A We
photographed all the
rooms, we
collected evidence from the second floor, and
we fingerprinted several items on several surfaces on the second floor.
Page
274
Q Let me ask you to look at this
photograph. Me are going to mark it P-25. What is that a
photograph of?
A That's a photograph
of the dining room.
Q And where is that located? A Right here.
Q Do you want to put what, "DR," dining room?
A (Witness complies.)
Q All right.
Thank you. Let me show you, then, what we
have marked as State's Exhibits P-26, P-25, and 28.
MR. HOOPER: Do you have a
27?
(Brief pause.)
Q 25, 26, 27, and 28. Now, can you
identify those
photographs.
Glen, with the
rooms of the house?
A Yes, sir, I can. This is a picture of a
broken dish or something that was in the
library. It's located in this corner of the library
up here.
MR.
HOOPER: Mr. Fry, could you have him give us the number.
A This is P-26.
Q Do you want to write it on the room as you
Page
275
go.
A This is another photograph of the
library, shooting from this area, shooting from
back this way, and it’s P-26, also. P-27 is a photograph of this sitting room up
here. And P-28 is in the dining room.
MR.
FRY: We
would move those into evidence. Your Honor, if
there is no objection.
THE
COURT:
26, 26, 27,
and 28 are admitted.
MR. HOOPER:
Mr. Fry, I don’t
believe you referred to 25.
MR. FRY:
25, 26, 27, and 28.
A Yes,
sir.
(Brief pause.)
Q
Let’s move
up to the
third floor there, Glen,
if you want
to change the
diagrams.
Glen,
can you explain for the jury what the layout was
of the upstairs
of the house.
A Okay. This was a foyer, the
stairway led up here and then
made a left-hand
turn until you were up
on the second floor of the house
here. And this is a large
bedroom over here, large
bathroom, and a closet. On this
side was two bedrooms and
Page 276
then a small bathroom in between those.
Q Do you know whose bedrooms those were?
A
Yes. This was Betty Wilson’s bedroom and this was Dr. Wilson's bedroom over here.
Q They were across the
hall from one another; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you know whose
bedroom the third bedroom was?
A It was a guest bedroom, sir.
Q Let me show you State's
Exhibits 29 through 34 and ask you to look at those, please,
sir.
MR. COOK: State's
Exhibits 29 through what?
MR. FRY: 34.
MR. COOK: Thank
you.
A State's Exhibit No. 29 and 30 are from the
guest bedroom.
Q 29 and 30?
A Yes, sir.
Q Let's write on there,
then, so we can
maybe match the
numbers with the rooms -- the rooms with the numbers on the back of the
pictures.
Page
277
Q Okay.
A And 31 is a picture
of the closet area here from the bathroom.
Q Whose bedroom was
that?
A
This was in Betty Wilson's bedroom.
32 is also in the spare bedroom.
33 is also in there.
Q Is that -
A And
34.
Q The room with the
double beds is the guest bedroom?
A Yes, sir.
MR. FRY: Do you want to
see these, Charlie?
(Brief pause.)
MR. FRY: I move State's Exhibits
31 --excuse me
-- 29 through
34 into evidence,
Your Honor. 29, 30,
31, 32, 33,
and 34.
THE COURT: 29
through 34 admitted.
Q Let me show you two more photographs of
rooms or at least furniture, and we will play stump Glen here, and see if you
can recall where this furniture is located.
If you can't, it’s all
right.
Page
278
A It looks like the furniture that was up on
the third floor, but I can't be for sure.
Q Did you make these photographs?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q Do you remember this furniture?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was it in the house?
A Yes, sir, it was.
MR. FRY: We move State's
Exhibits 35 and 36 into evidence.
MR. HOOPER: Judge,
for the --
let me look at it.
(Brief pause.)
MR. HOOPER: I don't have
any objection.
Q But this is furniture out of the house?
A Yes, sir.
MR. FRY: We move for these.
THE COURT: 35 and 36 admitted.
MR. FRY: Those are
all with a P.
Q Now, Glen, when you
got to the house, who all was there when you arrived?
A Officer Dunnagan and
Officer West and people from the ambulance service.
Q What were they doing?
Page 279
A They were waiting on
me to get there.
Q Did you go to the
location where Dr. Wilson's body was?
A Yes, sir, I did.
Q Where was that in the
house?
A Up on the third
floor, right at the entrance of the master bedroom upstairs.
Q Let me show you
State's Exhibit No. 37 and ask if you can identify the contents of this
photograph.
A Yes, sir, it's the
stairway leading up from the foyer, taken from here, shooting this direction.
Q We have got the third
floor there. Were those steps the steps
coming up?
A Going up to the third
floor, yes, sir.
Q That's No. 37. Let me show you, then, No. 38. And this is P-37 and P-38. I show you P-38 first. Can you tell us what that is?
A It's a picture of this landing area right
here.
Q Okay.
So there is a landing and a stair that turns and goes up; is that right?
A Yes, a landing there and you turn left
Page 280
and go back
upstairs.
Q Then, let me show you
P -- I think it's 37. What is that a
picture of?
A That's this shot,
shooting here.
Q Can you see this piece
of furniture in that picture?
A Yes, sir, you can.
Q This is a landing and
is the landing visible?
A At the top of this stairway.
Q At the top of the stairway?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you
make these photos
or were you there?
A I
made these photos.
Q Is this the condition
that the items on the stairway were found -- were they present there when you
made this photograph?
A Yes, sir, they were.
Q Is that the way the
things were? Had anything been
disturbed?
A No, sir. Everything was as is there when the police
officers arrived.
Q All right. I show you one more and I'll
Page 281
mark this as P-38,
photograph P-38, and ask if you can identify that and show the jury, if you
will, where this would be in the house plan.
A Okay.
It's on the floor beneath this one.
That's an area
going into the dining -- the library.
Q Okay.
A The foyer shot right
in front of the library.
Q Where do these stairs
go?
A This is a stairway
right here.
Q Does that stairwell
connect to this stairwell?
A That's the same one. Q Same one.
Okay.
A It's just
shot like over
here.
Q One is
looking directly up
and one is from
the side; is
that right?
A Yes, sir.
MR. FRY: We move State's
37, 38, and 39 into evidence. THE COURT:
Any objection?
MR. HOOPER: No, sir. THE
COURT: 37, 38, 39 admitted.
Page
282
Q I want you to hold onto one just a minute
there. Have a seat. Glen. What exhibit is that that you have in your
hand there?
A 37.
Q P-37. What is that a picture of?
A it’s a picture of the
stairway leading from the foyer on the main floor, leading up into the third
floor of the house.
Q And what are those
articles. Glen? Let me ask you
this: What did you see, what does 'that
picture depict as far as articles on that stairway?
A Well, there is a
woman's purse, and it appeared as if the contents of the purse were spilled out
on the stairway. There is a set of keys,
a wallet, some paper, and two clothing bags like from a department store.
Q Did they have clothes
in them?
A Yes, sir, they did.
MR. FRY: Move State's
Exhibit P-37 into evidence. Your Honor.
THE
COURT: I believe 37 is already in.
MR.
FRY: I'm sorry, it's already in.
Q Glen, what was the -- did you make an
examination of Dr. Wilson's body?
Page 283
A Yes,
sir.
Q Did you make some photographs? A Yes, sir, I did.
Q What were your
observations? What did you see? Can you describe his condition or his appearance
at the time you saw him?
A He was laying on his back, his hips were
sort of twisted to the right, his right arm was down at his side, his left arm
was extended out and up away from his torso.
And his head was turned .to the left.
And he was laying in the doorway, his feet were in the doorway to the
large bedroom, and most of his legs and his upper torso and his head was in the
foyer upstairs.
Q Let me show you what
has been previously marked as State's Exhibits P-l through P-12.
MR. FRY: Let me let Mr.
Hooper see these.
(Brief pause.)
MR. HOOPER: Judge,
I don't have
any objections to P-l
through 12.
Q Let
me show you
P-l through P-ll,
first.
MR. FRY: And we move
these into evidence, Your Honor.
Page 284
THE
COURT: 1 through 12 are admitted.
Q Let's begin with the one on top there, if
you will.
MR. FRY: Your Honor, these are graphic. We wish to
publish these to the jury and I want the jury to know these are gruesome
photographs. I don’t want to shock anyone
or alarm anyone.
Q If you will, describe
to the jury by using the photographs the injuries which you described a moment
ago in your testimony. Glen. You may want to stand up and hold the picture up
where they can see it.
A The doctor was laying
on his back, and you could see several injuries to the top of his head. You can tell that his left arm and his right
arm both have been broken in several places.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, I
object to the
officer describing as to what was broken. I don't believe he has laid a predicate for
the officer --
THE COURT:
Sustained.
Q Unless you saw
X-rays, Glen, just describe the injury, not what you thought the injury to be,
but what you, as a policeman, saw, not the diagnosis, but how it appeared.
Page 285
MR. HOOPER: Judge, the
pictures speak for themselves and are introduced.
MR. FRY: I'm asking him what he saw, and I'm asking him to use the photograph
to explain what he saw, if he can do that, but I'm asking him for what he saw,
not just what the picture showed.
THE COURT:
Proceed.
A He was laying on his
back. You could see several injuries to
his head, you could see that his arms were injured and you could see two cuts
on the shirt that he was wearing in the area of his abdomen, and blood was all
over the floor, he had a bruise or had a red mark on his neck.
Q You think it was a
bruise?
A Yes, sir.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, I
object to what he thought.
Q If you will, orient
the jury. Glen, as far as where Dr. Wilson's feet are and where his head is in
this picture. Whose room, in other
words, are his feet in?
A His feet were inside
this room here,
about where the
letter "B" is, and his head is where the letter "A"
is. And this is the master bedroom,
Page 286
this is Betty Wilson’s bedroom.
Q Let’s put
"BW" on there so that they can mark that as her bedroom.
A (Witness complies.)
Q All right. Is his bedroom across the hall, did you say?
A Yes, sir, right here.
Q Okay. All right.
Let's take the next
one. Glen. Again, orient us, if you will, as to the
picture. What room or what part of the
rooms 'are portrayed in that photograph?
A This is
another photograph of
the body, shooting from
this direction, looking
towards the body, and
it shows the
entrance into this
bedroom-and a small
piece of the
foyer here.
Q Hold it
up so they
all can see.
A (Witness complies.)
Q Where
would the door
facing be in
that photograph on the
diagram?
A The door facing that's behind his hip is
right there.
Q All right.
Which way would the rug be running, then, that's in that photograph?
A The rug runs this way.
Page 287
Q
Parallel with the stairs?
A Yes,
sir, along that aisle.
Q All right.
Let’s look at P No. 3, again. I ask you to orient and let the jury see
the photograph so they can orient the photograph with the diagram.
A This is a shot taken from here, looking in
this direction. So it's actually an
upside down photograph from this diagram.
Q Okay.
Let me ask you before we give it to the jury, where in that direction
would someone be coming from, coming up to the top of the stairwell.
A They would be here at
the north end of the house, walking towards the south.
Q Okay. And on this photograph, from which direction
would they be coming, the bottom?
A Yes, sir, they would be coming from the
bottom. This is the top of the landing, is
right here, and then you come to the top of the stairway right here and you
walk that way.
Q As you came up to the top of the stairs,
would there be a point in time that your head would be above the top of the
stairs? Is that what you would see as you
walked up the stairs?
Page 288
A Yes, sir.
As soon as you got to the top of the stairwell, that's where you would
be.
Q Looking down the rug
you would have seen Dr. Wilson?
A Yes, sir. Standing here, this photograph was made
shooting this direction.
Q Okay. This is photograph No. P-4. Again, if you
will, orient us as to where that photograph was taken from.
A Okay. This photograph was taken from the bedroom
here, shooting out into the foyer area there at the top of the stairway, just in
this doorway area.
Q Again, whose
bedroom is this
that Dr. Wilson's feet
are in?
A This is Betty
Wilson's bedroom that his feet are in, just inside the door, and then his body
extends out into the hallway.
Q All
right. I believe you have
got
something new in
this photograph. What's depicted in this photograph -- and this, for
the record, is P-6.
A All right. It shows a
bat that's sitting here in the hallway, a note, a broken watch, which
Page 289
is right
there. And then Dr. Wilson laying there.
Q All right.
Now, do you know if anyone moved the bat or did anything to the bat
while you were there?
A The police officer reported that's the way
it was when they got there and that's how it was when I got there.
Q Did you or anyone
else in your presence move it?
A No, sir.
Q Do you remember. Glen, in your best
judgment -- it may be difficult to tell in the photograph -- how far the bat
actually was from Dr. Wilson?
A I think it was about five feet.
Q I show you what has already been marked and
is in evidence as State's Exhibit P-5, and ask if you can describe what injury,
if any, you saw which is depicted in this photograph.
A The reason I took this photograph is
because it showed a
bruise on his neck and a button on his shirt had been broken.
Q All right.
You are talking
about this red chafing
look or --
Page 290
A Yes, sir, right there at the Adam's apple.
Q At the Adam's apple. And this is P-5. I show you what's been marked as State's
Exhibit No. P-7 and ask if you can describe that photograph or what you saw
depicted in that photograph? And, again, relate it to the diagram.
A Okay.
This is a wide-angle shot of Dr. Wilson's body laying there, and it
shows where his glasses are, his left arm extended there, him in the doorway
and the bat behind him and the note up there.
Q This photograph --
you say "glasses." Are you indicating the bottom –
A The bottom of his
hand.
Q -- of his hand?
A Yes, sir.
Q His outstretched
hand. Okay. The bat is back behind?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, Mr. Nunley, in
this photograph, P-7, can you tell us what this was on the bottom of --the
bottom of the baseboard or the inside of the door facing where Dr. Wilson's
body was?
Page 291
A That was a large
blood splatter.
Q
So
in this picture, this red substance here going up to here in the photograph,
that was blood?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, the photograph doesn't go all the way up
to the ceiling, obviously. Was there any
--did you observe any blood spattering above the height that is depicted here
in the photograph?
A Yes, sir, minute
amounts of blood were splattered on the wall up above that.
Q Is that some there?
A Yes, sir. It was just real small,
speckled. You can barely see
it in the
photograph.
Q P-8,
again, if you will, relate
what you saw as
depicted in that
photograph and relate
it to the diagram.
A Okay.
This is another shot, a wide-angle shot, that was taken from about here,
shooting in this direction, that shows Dr. Wilson’s body there in the doorway
and his body there in the hall.
Q P-IO.
Q P-IO
is a wide-angle shot
that was taken from right here, at the top of
the stair --
well,
Page 292
this is a rail at
the top of the stairs, shooting in this direction, and shows Dr. Wilson’s body
here, his feet extending into the bedroom.
Q I believe this is the last photograph of
Dr. Wilson. If you will, relate to what the
P-9 is, to the diagram, again. What's
depicted in this photograph?
A Okay.
That's -- it's Dr. Wilson's
body, again, taken from an angle so you can see
the blood splattered on the wall
there at the
door jamb.
Q Finally, this series of photographs, P-II,
would you describe what that depicts or show the jury where this would be on
the diagram.
A There was a small desk here
and appeared they did send
out invitations, and a chair sitting right
here, and Dr.
Wilson was directly
behind that. And you can also see the
clothing bag at the
top of
the stairway on -- near
the landing over there.
Q So this item you are
pointing to -- and, again, let's point so the jury can see the photograph, and
we will pass it around. But the item you
are pointing to is the clothing bag you testified to earlier?
Page 293
A Yes, sir.
That's in the stairway, and the landing is right there, and you turn and
come upstairs, and then that's where the note was and the bat and Dr. Wilson’s
body.
Q Was that clothing bag
clearly visible when it was photographed?
A Yes, sir.
Q You can have a seat.
(Brief pause.)
Q One last photograph,
taken, I think, in that series upstairs.
Can you identify that?
A it’s a battery charger
and a telephone that's in Dr. Wilson’s bedroom.
Q Was that in Dr.
Wilson’s bedroom?
A Yes, sir.
Q It's not outside,
it's actually inside? Show them where it is.
A Dr. Wilson's bed was
located right here between the two windows, and this is a small nightstand
right there by that window, and it shows the phone and the battery charger
there.
Q Okay. Was anything unusual, out of the ordinary,
about the battery charger or –
A The phone cord had
been cut.
Page 294
MR. HOOPER:
I object to "unusual" or
"out of the ordinary."
He would have to qualify him as being –
MR. FRY: Let me re-ask
it.
Q Did you notice
anything about the appearance or the condition of the cord, the electrical cord
to the answering machine or the charger?
A The telephone wire
had been cut.
Q The telephone wire
had been cut. All right.
MR. FRY: We offer this,
if I didn't before. Your Honor, P-12.
THE COURT: It’s already
been offered. MR. FRY: All right.
Thank you.
Q
Glen, as a part of
your crime scene
investigation, did
you prepare a video as a part of this case?
A Yes, sir, we did.
Q How did you do that?
A We came back during the daylight hours
and Investigator
Hutchinson and Investigator
Hamilton were
taking still photographs of property in the house, and then I was taking the
videotape of
Page 295
the house.
Q All right. Would you call that a walk-through of the
house?
A Yes, sir, it is. Around the house and then through it.
Q Around the house and
then through it?
A Yes, sir.
Q Is it all of the
house at 2700 Boulder Circle?
A Yes, sir.
Q Made of the back yard, too?
A Parts of the back yard, yes, sir.
Q At the time you took that video, had the
house been secured?
A It was still being secured by police officers
on the scene 24 hours a day.
Q 24 hours a day? A Yes.
Q Did you use a video camera
to shoot that? A
Yes, sir.
Q
Does that video depict the flow of one room to another in that house?
A Yes,
sir, it does.
Q
Did you walk from one room to another as
Page 296
you took it?
A
Yes,sir.
Q I'm marking this as State's Exhibit No.
5. See if you can identify that exhibit.
A Yes, sir.
It's got my handwriting. Says, "2700 Boulder Circle."
Q Does
that appear to
be the video
you shot?
A Yes, sir, it is.
Q Did you and I review that in my office a
couple of weeks ago?
A Yes, sir, last week.
MR.
FRY: Your Honor, we would like to offer
into evidence the video. We have got a
television available.
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, we have seen the video
and have no objection.
THE
COURT: Okay. Then the exhibit is
admitted and may be viewed,
but before we do that we will take a recess.
Ladies
and gentlemen, you may go into the
jury room.
(Whereupon,
proceedings were in recess at 2:25 p.m., until 2:45 p.m., at which time the
Page 297
following occurred:)
THE COURT: Mr. Fry, are you ready? MR. FRY: We are. Your Honor. THE COURT: You gentlemen ready? MR. DRAKE: Yes.
MR. COOK: Would Your
Honor mind if I walked over and looked?
THE COURT: Not at all.
MR. FRY: Your Honor, I believe we have moved this
exhibit in, I believe it’s been accepted.
We would ask -- and the defense has stipulated that Officer Nunley could
give a description of what room is being viewed on the television. We will ask him not to describe any evidence
or make any editorial comments, but rather to describe what is being seen as
far as rooms.
THE COURT: He may do so. CONTINUATION
OF DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. FRY:
Q Glen, you need to get where you can see and
also where the court reporter can hear you and the jury can hear you. Could you see back kind of on this side of
this gentleman here?
A Yes, sir.
Page 298
Q Can you see okay from
there?
A Yes, sir.
Q
All right. Now, this is the first
time I have ever seen this thing. Let’s
see what happens here.
(Whereupon, the videotape, State's
Exhibit 5, was
played to the Court and jury, and the following occurred:)
A Okay. This is shooting from Boulder Circle,
shooting towards the front of the house, and it’s sort of panning down to the
left side of the house, showing where the garage or driveway area is.
(Brief pause.)
A Then backing off there and just showing the
front of the house, again. And this is
just shooting off to the right to show the east side or the east lawn or east
yard of the house.
(Brief pause.)
A And this is just the
east side of the house, and it shows the rock -- part of that rock garden and
some flowers and stuff planted there.
(Brief pause.)
A
Again, the east
side of the
house and
Page 299
then panning back
towards the back side of the house. You
will be able to see that deck, and the pool is right behind those trees there.
And
this is the back of the house,
showing the deck
and the back doors. And that's the pool.
And that area there is the northwest part of the yard. And that's the rock garden off to the left,
again.
And that's the two-car garage and
shooting up,
showing the west side of the house, and that's the front part of the house over
there. And that's the pool area behind that white fence.
And this is walking into the front door of the house.
That shows the sitting room just inside the front door off to
the left.
(Brief pause.)
A Still the sitting
room. And that area there, that doorway
just past was the foyer area.
This is just inside the front door of the foyer there, that door
there on the left is the sitting room, again.
That's the stairway there behind those
Page 300
plants, that go
upstairs, there is a clock right there inside the front door, also.
(Brief pause.)
A And that's the foyer that goes through the
house and the stairway leading upstairs. Shows around to the right, the dining room
right there just inside the right side of the house.
(Brief pause.)
A And that's the front door.
(Brief pause.)
A And this is just the dining room. We are still in the dining room, just
shooting from a different direction. And
that's a doorway leading into the kitchen area.
This is walking
into the kitchen right here. That's the
doorway leading back out to the dining room right there. And that is all the cabinets and the
refrigerator in the kitchen. That
doorway there leads back out into the foyer.
There is a door right there to the left that goes down into the
basement. And that's the door that goes
out to the back.
You are walking out into that foyer now from the back side,
behind the kitchen. And that's
Page 301
shooting the foyer,
again, from the back of the
house looking
towards the front of the house. And then
back into the -- what's going to be the library there. And the bar is located over there in that
corner.
(Brief pause.)
A That broken dish that was in the library is
just now off to the left there. And this
is in the library, starting to look back out towards the
foyer.
(Brief pause.)
A That's the
bar, again. That's a
closer shot of the
bar area.
(Brief pause.)
A That area right there is
where that dish
was, the broken
dish.
This is out in the foyer, again, I believe, walking southbound
in the foyer.
There is a bathroom right there between the library and the
sitting room. The entrance is off the
foyer.
(Brief pause.)
A This is down in the
basement, in the TV room or the large den area. That
door there leads
Page 302
out into the back area where the swimming pool is.
(Brief pause.)
A That's a desk
there, that's in that TV
room or den area. And
that's a bathroom
downstairs.
(Brief pause.)
A That's the
hallway in the basement that
leads to the bedroom, the laundry room and the
closet, then off into the garage area.
That is looking into that bedroom
downstairs right there in front.
And this is the bedroom itself.
(Brief pause.)
A And that's back
out into the hall area of
the basement.
And that's a safe down in the bedroom.
That's a shotgun that's beside the bed in the
bedroom in the basement.
And that's a revolver
that was in the headboard of the basement --
headboard of the bed -- of the bed in the bedroom.
(Brief pause.)
A That's a shot of
the stairway that leads
from the basement back up toward the main floor of
the house.
Page 303
And that doorway there, it leads out to
the garage.
That's in the stairway going upstairs.
There is a laundry room downstairs, and
that's what we are looking through right there.
(Brief pause.)
A And there is a
closet right there, that's
in the basement, right before you get to the garage
area.
(Brief pause.)
A That's another
closet in the basement.
Now, this is the doorway that leads out
into the garage.
(Brief pause.)
A That was the
garage bay that's on the
front of the house, and that's shooting towards the
garage bay that's on the back side of the house.
(Brief pause.)
A And that's the
doorway leading from --
that was the doorway leading from the garage into
the house.
(Brief pause.)
Q This is back up
in the foyer, and these
are the stairs going up to the third floor of the
Page 304
house.
And that's the landing at
the top of the stairway, that first landing, and it turns to the left and you
go up to those other stairs to get to the third floor.
That's from the top of the
stairway shooting down into the foyer. That's the front
door of the house there.
And the sitting room there.
The bathroom there.
And that's the top of the
landing right
in this area right here.
That's the area Dr. Wilson was laying at right there.
(Brief
pause.)
A That's the doorway there leading into
Betty Wilson's bedroom. And
there is a closet back off to the left.
That's still upstairs in the
foyer, though. That's the area there that Dr. Wilson was laying and the door
leading into Betty Wilson's bedroom.
Again,
that's another shot of the area where Dr. Wilson was laying and shooting into
the doorway of Betty Wilson's bedroom.
Page 305
And that's that desk area
where they sent out invitations or whatever.
And that is looking out
towards the front of the house. That's
the doorway there that leads into the guest bedroom.
And that's the doorway that
leads into
Dr. Wilson's bedroom.
This is walking into Dr.
Wilson's
bedroom, there is a closet right
there, his bed there, and there is two closets right there on the left side of
the picture.
And
that's a shot of the table area where that phone was that had the phone cord
cut.
(Brief
pause.)
A That's just a shot of the two closets
there inside Dr. Wilson's bedroom.
And
that's a shot of the doorway going into Betty Wilson's bedroom.
(Brief pause.)
A That's sort of like -- it's got a
microwave and sink area there in the
bedroom.
(Brief pause.)
A That is a locker or a gun case.
(Brief
pause.)
Page 306
A Now, this is from her bedroom shooting back
into that bathroom area.
And then inside the
bathroom. There was another doorway that
led to a large closet. And this is a
shot inside the closet.
(Brief pause.)
A And that's a safe that was in the closet
upstairs.
That's shooting back out
into the bathroom from a closet.
And from the bathroom
shooting back into
Betty
Wilson's bedroom.
And
that's the doorway leading out into
the
foyer area where Dr. Wilson was found.
(Brief
pause.)
A And that's the doorway -- well, that's a
closet out in the foyer.
(Brief
pause.)
A And that's the doorway leading into the
guest
bedroom upstairs.
And that's from the bedroom shooting towards the door of the
bedroom, and then the closet right there.
And this is a shot inside
the closet.
Page 307
(Brief pause.)
A And this is the doorway that leads to the
bathroom between the guest bedroom and Dr. Wilson's bedroom.
And this is inside the
bathroom.
(Brief
pause.)
A And we are back to Dr. Wilson's bedroom
here.
And that's the end of the
tape.
MR. FRY: Judge, he is going to use it again, I think,
on cross, unless you want to move it.
THE COURT: Well, let's just leave it there, then.
Q Glen
MR. FRY: May I proceed, Your Honor?
Q Glen, let me ask you a few questions about
the video. Throughout there it appears
what looks like smudges on doors and door frames, like gun powder or some kind
of black paint or
something.
A Yes, sir, that's fingerprint powder.
Q And where in the video is that visible?
A It should be throughout the house.
Page 308
Q Does it look like a smudge?
A Just looks like dirt or ash or just a
dark area on the wall or
whatever powder was on.
Q Other than in the upstairs area where Dr.
Wilson's body was found, was any human blood found in the house?
A No, sir.
Q Was any evidence of a struggle or an
affray, that is, a fight, witnessed by you anywhere else in the house or
anywhere in the house?
A No, sir.
Q You have already been through, with the
jury, room by room, and now they have walked
through with the video. Did
you make an investigation to determine if in fact the house had been
burglarized, that is, had anything been taken?
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, I object, unless this man
has been in the house before and knows the contents of the house.
THE COURT: Sustained.
Q Well, did you receive any reports of a
burglary?
A No, sir.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, I object
again.
Page 309
THE COURT: Mr. Hooper, the evidence is already in of
such a report. Overruled.
A There was no report of a burglary, to my
knowledge.
Q Other than the call you got to go there?
A Yes , sir .
THE
COURT: Well, let me withdraw that,
then. It was the call I referred to, not
a report.
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Continue.
MR. FRY: Yes, sir.
Q Did you observe any furniture broken or
were there any drawers turned upside down that you saw going through the house,
Officer Nunley?
A No, sir, there were not.
Q In any room?
A No, sir.
Q Were there things of value in the house?
A Yes, sir.
Q What do you remember being there?
A There was silver, jewelry, fur coats,
TV's, VCR's.
Q When you say "silver," are you talking
about the kind of jingling money we used to have or
Page 310
are you talking about the
kind of silver that you make knives and forks out of?
A Knives and forks, tea sets, silver
serving sets, whatever.
Q Did you see that stuff?
A Yes, sir.
Q Where was it?
A It was in the dining room, the silverware
was.
Q How did it appear?
A Undisturbed.
Q How many safes did you see in that house?
A I saw two safes and some filing cabinets.
Q Did you see any evidence of any attempted
entry into the safes?
A No , sir .
Q Were there any pry marks?
A No, sir.
Q Did the safes seem to be disturbed?
A No, sir.
Q I believe when you went through the
video,
you said that there was a shotgun
downstairs; is that right?
A Yes, sir, that was in Trey's bedroom, in
Page 311
the basement bedroom.
Q Was there another weapon down there in
Trey's bedroom?
A Yes, sir, there was a revolver and a
knife that was in the
headboard of the bed in the bedroom.
Q All right. Where would the jury look for
that if they decide to view this video later on? Where would they see the gun
and the knife?
A After we went through the TV room, then
we went into the bedroom
downstairs in the
basement, it showed the bed
that was unmade, a dresser, there was a couch in there, there was a set of golf
clubs in there, looked like a boy's or young man's bedroom.
Q Let me refer you now to, I believe, what
you described as Dr. Wilson's bedroom.
Was there a heap of clothes on Dr. Wilson's bed?
A When I shot the video, yes, sir.
Q Do you know how those clothes got there?
A I put them there, sir.
Q And why were those clothes piled on the
bed?
A I took the clothes out of that first
Page 312
closet so I could fingerprint
the inside of that closet wall and the inside of that closet door.
Q Other than those clothes and other than,
I believe, a dish you
referred to as being broken downstairs in one of those nice rooms downstairs,
did you observe anything else out of the way or out of the ordinary about the
house?
A Well, the clothes --
MR. HOOPER: Judge, I object, again, to
"out
of the ordinary" unless this witness has ever been in the house and has
knowledge.
MR. FRY: Let me ask it again,
if I may. THE COURT: You may.
Q Did you see any destroyed property or any
evidence of recently broken furniture, to include drawers, desk, or any other
kind of furniture?
A No, sir, other than that broken dish in the
library.
Q Do you know who broke the dish in the
library?
A I don't know, sir.
Q Now, did you recover some items from the
house?
A Yes, sir, I did.
Page 313
Q Let me ask you to open this package, if you
will.
(Brief pause.)
Q Let me ask you to examine what I'm about to
mark as State's Exhibit No. 61 Officer Nunley.
A This is a bat that was upstairs on the
floor of the foyer.
MR. FRY: All right.
Is there any good place to stick this? On top. Would counsel object to us covering up where
it says, 113411 on top?
MR. DRAKE: Good place to put
it.
MR. FRY: Okay, State's
Exhibit No. 6.
Q And where did you find this bat, Officer
Nunley?
A That was upstairs in the foyer area,
about four or five feet
north of where Dr. Wilson's body was.
Q Is this the bat that was pictured in the
photograph, a couple of them, that we showed to the jury earlier?
A Yes, sir, it is.
Q At the time you saw the bat, was its
condition different in any way from the way you see it today?
Page 314
A No, sir, not really.
Q okay. What is this? Do you know what
this is? What this is?
A This is blood up here and there is some
dirt, and I can't tell
whether that's blood or dirt
there under the tape or not.
Q Okay. At the time you saw the bat on the
22nd of May, did it have blood on it?
A Yes, sir, it did.
Q Appeared to be fresh?
A Yes, sir.
Q So that would be different then from
today?
A Yes, sir, it is dried.
MR.
FRY: We move this into evidence.
MR. DRAKE: Which
exhibit?
MR.
FRY: No. 6.
MR. HOOPER: We don't have any objection. THE COURT: No. 6 is admitted.
MR. FRY: Your Honor, I would offer it
for inspection, but I'm not
going to put it on the rail. It will
fall off sure as the world. It might
wake some of us up if it did.
Q Did you remove other articles from the
Page 315
scene that night that became
a part of this investigation, Officer Nunley?
A Yes, sir, I did.
Q What other things did you remove, that
you recall?
A The toboggan, there were -- telephone, glasses,
several items.
Q Let me show you this package and, again, ask
you to go ahead and open it. It seems
to be sealed.
(Brief pause.)
MR.
HOOPER: What exhibit is that?
MR.
FRY: 7.
Q What are you looking at there?
A A ski mask, toboggan, face covering.
Q Is it marked?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you know who put that on there?
A Mr. Kilbourne and Roger Morrison from the
Department of Forensic Sciences.
Q Have you seen that mask before?
A Yes, sir.
Q When did you see it?
A On the night of the
-- that I received [something missing]
Page 316
Q Did you turn it over to the people at the
forensic lab or somebody in your department?
A I did, sir.
Q You did yourself?
A Yes, sir.
Q You gave that to them?
A Yes, sir.
Q You have just received it back in a
sealed container?
A Yes, sir.
Q With their initials on it, I believe; is
that right?
A Yes,
sir.
Q It's your testimony you removed this
State's Exhibit No. 7 from where in the house?
A That was on Dr. Wilson's bed.
Q On Dr. Wilson's bed. Now, at the time
you were there, were all
those clothes on his bed?
A No, sir.
That was -- that and I believe some of the batteries or a screwdriver or
something was on the bed.
Q Okay.
MR.
FRY: Move this into evidence as State's
Exhibit No. 7.
Page 317
State's Exhibit No. 7.
MR.
HOOPER: No objection.
THE COURT: 7 admitted.
Q Let's go back through just a few
photographs, Glen.
MR.
FRY: Just a few more of these, Your Honor, and we will be through with this
part of it.
I think these are easier to
look at than the video sometimes.
Q Let me let you look at State's Exhibit
No. P-40. Can you identify that photograph, Glen?
A That's a shot of the laundry room
downstairs in the basement, shooting from the laundry room door, shooting into
the laundry room.
Q Is that depicted in the video, also?
A Yes, sir, it is.
MR.
FRY: Move that into evidence,
State's
Exhibit No. P-40.
THE
COURT: 40 admitted.
MR. FRY: You want to see these, Charlie? MR. HOOPER:
Yeah.
(Brief pause.)
MR.
HOOPER: Judge, we don't have objection to 41 through 49.
Page 318
Q Let me let you authenticate these photos. Take
a minute, if you will, and look at each one of them. What I'll ask you after you have had a chance
to look at each of them is, did you either make
these photos or were they
made in your presence or do they depict what you saw as you worked the crime scene?
A You want me to explain them?
Q Look at all of them.
(Brief
pause.)
A Yes, sir, I made all those.
Q All right.
Beginning with P-43, will you describe for the jury what this picture
depicts?
A A pair of shoes and a wallet that was found
on the main floor of the residence, that's right at the entrance into the
library.
Q All right.
And to your recollection, is that visible in the distance in one of the
other photographs you took down the hallway?
A Yes, sir, I believe so.
Q I show you what's been marked as State's
Exhibit P-41. I ask if you can describe
the photograph in that exhibit.
A This is a photograph of the north bay of
Page 319
the garage.
There is a Mercedes, I believe, parked in that garage. That's probably -- I didn't take that
photograph, but I was there when it was taken.
Q All right. Was the Mercedes still in the
garage? Is this the same car you took
the video of ?
A Yes , sir.
Q Had it been moved, as far as you know?
A No, sir, it had not.
Q Do you know what model that is?
A No, sir.
Q This is Exhibit No. P-42.
A That's a photograph of a note to Trey
from Greg or Gary, that was left
on his dresser in the basement, in the bedroom in the basement.
Q So this note was where in the basement?
A On a dresser in Trey's bedroom.
Q Okay.
A That's in the basement.
Q A note addressed to Trey?
A Yes, sir.
Q P-44.
A This is a photograph from the laundry
room looking out into the
hallway and the stairway that goes back to where the back of the kitchen and
Page 320
back of the foyer are located.
Q P-45.
A That's a desk, top area of the desk
that's in the basement in the TV room or the
den area, whatever you want to call that room down there .
Q
Exhibit No. P-47.
A
That is Dr. Wilson's bed. On
the bed there was a smoke detector and
ski mask.
Q
You say the ski mask is on the bed?'
A Yes,
sir.
Q Where is it located on the bed?
A
Right at the foot of the bed.
Q
Is this the only dark object at the rail at the foot of the bed?
A
Yes, sir.
Q P-46.
A
This is the shot of -- it's in the bedroom in the basement, Trey's bedroom,
and it shows the dresser, the two filing cabinets and the safe and a piece of
the bed.
Q Okay.
Was the filing cabinet drawer pulled out like that when you arrived,
Glen?
A Yes, sir.
Page 321
Q So that was pulled out?
A That was just ajar there.
Q And what is that next to it, between the
filing cabinet and the bed?
A That's a safe there near the head of the
bed, between the bed and the filing cabinets.
Q Is this the bed you testified to earlier
that there was a gun and a knife in the headboard?
A Yes, sir.
Q Which was it, the left or right-hand side
of the bed; do you remember?
A That's -- the pistol and the knife was up
there on the right, the shotgun was at the left side of the bed. That's not in that picture.
Q Is there a door closed there?
A Yes, sir, the headboard opens up.
Q If you open-ed that headboard, what would
you see?
A A revolver and a hunting knife.
Q What was on the other side of the bed?
A On the other side of the bed, standing
beside the bed, was a shotgun.
Q Here is a picture I guess I should have
shown you first. P-49, what is that?
Page 322
A
Front door of the house, looking into it.
Q okay. Do you know whether or not the
door had been disturbed? Was
it closed before this picture was made or is this the way it was on the night
of Friday the 22nd?
A When I got there that's how the door was.
When officer Dunnagan and West got there, I don't know if it was open or
closed.
Q But
this photograph was made on Friday night, May the 22nd?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right.
The night that you worked the crime scene?
A Yes, sir.
Q The first night?
A Yes, sir.
Q Now, after having worked the crime
scene -- I think you actually
worked it a couple of times, didn't you?
A Yes, sir, we worked it for about four or
five days.
Q Why so long?
A We were trying to be very thorough. We fingerprinted, I think, every room in the
house.
Page 323
Then we went back with a search
warrant and collected some other evidence.
And we just wanted to make sure we didn't miss anything.
Q Were you able to obtain any fingerprints
inside the house itself that were useful to you in your investigation?
A We obtained several, what you call latent
lifts or print cards, from the house, but none of them were identified to be --
to the killer in this incident.
Q Was the ski mask that you identified
earlier, which has been admitted -- was it
submitted to forensic
sciences? I believe you said it was; is
that right?
A Yes, sir, it was.
Q What was the purpose of that?
A To check to see if there were any hairs
inside the ski mask and to find out who they
belonged to.
Q Did they do that?
A Yes, sir, they did.
Q Did they make a report or did they make a
discovery after having done that?
A Yes, sir, they did.
Page 324
Q Did they find a hair?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you know whose it was?
A It came back to James Dennison White.
Q The co-defendant in this case?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right. Speaking of Mr. White, after
having worked the crime scene for several days, did you at some point in time
go down to Shelby County?
A Yes, sir, I did.
Q That was in the course of this investigation?
A Yes, sir. we were running evidence to and
from Montgomery to be analyzed and we stopped off in Shelby County.
Q Why did you stop in Shelby County? What was
your purpose there?
A To search Mr. White's pickup truck.
Q The truck that was identified to you as
belonging to James Dennison White?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you search the truck?
A Yes, sir, we did.
Q Were some other folks with you?
Page 325
A Investigator Hamilton was with me.
Q Do you recall what all was removed from
the truck?
A Removed a library book, some other
miscellaneous papers and things and a glove.
Q Do you remember what day that was?
A I can look it up. I don't remember the exact date.
Q Well, do you remember the murder was on a
Friday?
A Yes, sir.
Q Was it the next week?
A The next week, yes.
Q I show you what I have marked as State's
Exhibit No. 8. 1 ask if you can
identify that this exhibit is.
A It's a library book that we got from
behind the seat of the pickup truck.
Q You got it?
A Yes, sir.
Q You and some other officers?
A Myself and Investigator Hamilton were
there. We photographed it and collected it as evidence.
Page 326
Q Made pictures of it, then you took it into
evidence; is that right?
A Yes, sir.
Q What did you do with it?
A We brought it back to Huntsville,
photographed it, and then it was eventually turned back over to Carol Curlee in
Montgomery to have it processed for fingerprints.
Q Was Carol Curlee able to identify any
fingerprints of any value to you in this investigation?
A No, sir, she wasn't.
Q You sure this is the book you got out of
James White's car?
A Yes, sir, out of his truck.
Q Excuse me, his vehicle.
MR.
FRY: Your Honor, we move State's Exhibit No. 8 into evidence.
THE
COURT: Any objection?
MR.
HOOPER: No objection.
MR. FRY: I need about two
minutes, if I may, Your Honor.
(Brief pause.)
MR. FRY: Judge, that is all
the
Page 327
questions I have of this
witness. Mr. Nunley, if
you can, answer whatever
questions they have.
THE COURT:
Cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY MR, HOOPER.:
Q Officer Nunley, what time did you arrive
on the scene?
A I got there at two minutes after 10:00
p.m. on the 22nd.
Q Sometime during the course of your stay,
did you ask for the Department of Forensic Science
to assist your
investigation?
A I didn't personally request it. It was Sgt. Colley that called them and had
them cone out.
Q Do you know John Kilbourne?
A Yes, sir.
Q Who is John Kilbourne?
A He is a member of the Department of
Forensic sciences that's in Huntsville.
Q Does he have a similar job as you, to
collect evidence?
A Yes,
sir.
Q Okay.
And he came there -- out there on a Saturday, I believe; is that correct?
Page 328
A Yes, sir.
Q Were you present?
A I think I was called back to the scene
and he was either there when I got there or he arrived
moments later.
Q Do you recall the -- I don't guess you were
in here earlier, but do you recall a palm print being in the blood on the floor
there by Dr. Wilson?
A No, sir.
Q You don't recall a palm print?
A No, sir.
Q So then you don't recall telling John
Kilbourne not to bother with examining
that palm print, then; is that correct?
A No, sir.
Q Do you recall being advised by one of the
uniformed officers that there was a
palm print in the blood by this doctor?
A No, sir.
Q Officer, if you would, find the photograph
that has the wallet in it.
MR.
FRY: It may be going around,
Charlie.
MR. HOOPER: Up here. Okay.
Page 329
Q I think you have identified that earlier.
It's State's Exhibit 43; is that correct?
A Yes , sir .
Q All right.
You took that, I guess, on or about the
23rd day of May; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Around midnight or so, I collected
it.
Q Did you inventory that wallet at that time?
A No, sir, I did not.
Q In fact, tell the jury when it was
inventoried, if it was.
A I turned it in as is to the Department of
Forensic science undisturbed.
Q So you never looked in it?
A No, sir.
Q Never looked to see if it even had a dime
in the wallet; right?
A Well, we made a look with like hemostats,
but we couldn't see anything.
Q You didn't make any record of that, did
you?
A No, sir.
Q Did you find -- do you recall Dr.
Page 330
Wilson's keys being found in
the Mercedes?
A I don't know whose keys they were. I think there were some keys in it.
Q And those keys were given to Trey Taylor;
is that correct?
A I don't know.
Q Do you recall whether or not an
automobile was released to
one of Mrs. Wilson's sons?
A over those four or five days?
Q Yes, sir.
A Yes, sir, there was.
Q Which automobile was it?
A I believe it was the BMW. I'm not sure.
Q Well, was it not the first automobile released was Dr. Wilson's?
A I didn't release it, sir.
Q You don't know?
A No, sir.
Q Did you examine the keys that were found in
the Mercedes?
A No, sir.
Q Can you tell me why you wouldn't?
A I didn't -- no, sir, I can't tell you, I
Page 331
Q All right
You were there Saturday, the 24th -- excuse me, that would be the 23rd?
A Yes, sir.
Q Were you there when the police dogs were
brought out?
A I was called back there, I think the dog
was there when I got there.
Q Were you there when the dog was given the
scent off this ski mask?
A Yes, sir.
Q And the dog trailed it, did he not?
A As far as I know, the dog didn’t find any
trail.
Q The dog didn't track?
A The dog was searching. I don't know if
the
dog found anything or not.
Q Okay.
Tell me, if you recall, where the dog went from the house.
A The back side of the house.
Q It never left the area of the house?
A Not while I was there, no, sir. Q
You don't have any knowledge about the
dog
trailing up to near Highway 431?
No,
sir.
Page 332
A No, sir.
Q This shotgun downstairs that you found,
officer, was it loaded?
A I didn't check it, sir.
Q How about the pistol?
A I believe the pistol was loaded. I don't
know why, but I think it was loaded.
Q You didn't make any notes or anything
with respect to weapons
being in the house and the condition of the weapons; is that correct?
A Other than there were weapons there.
Q But you didn't make any report with respect
as to whether or not they were loaded?
A No, sir.
Q Or whether or not they had or could be used?
A No, sir, I didn't check them.
Q Any particular reason you wouldn't check to
see if the shotgun was loaded?
A There wasn't anybody there that was going
to use it.
Q Well, you kept this house for how many
days?
A I believe it was five days. It may have
Page 333
been six.
Q Wasn't it about two weeks, please, sir?
A I don't recall it
being two weeks.
Q Okay.
A After I finished my part, that was up to Investigator
Brantley, and they released it whenever
they were through.
Q The house was still in your custody or in
your possession at the time Mr. White was arrested; is that correct?
A I believe so, yes, sir.
Q You knew the weapons were still in the
house; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q Didn't go back to ascertain the status of
those weapons, that is, whether or not they were loaded or could have been
used; is that correct?
A No, sir.
Q Do you recall any other weapons of any type
that were in the house?
A Other than kitchen knives?
Q Right.
A No, sir.
Q Do you recall a machete being in the
Page 334
foyer upstairs?
A No, sir.
(Brief pause.)
Q Officer Nunley, let me go back to the
wallet. Is it your testimony that you
didn't observe any money in the wallet?
A I didn't see any money in it, no, sir.
Q And you didn't make any report of that, did
you? It wouldn't be found in any of your reports; is that correct?
A No, sir.
Q And you have testified earlier about
whether or not there was anything of any value
taken from the house. You said, "No," is that correct?
A To my knowledge, no, sir.
Q Well, did you just assume Dr. Wilson went
around town broke?
A No, sir.
Q But you didn't find it worthy of making any
report that there was no money found in his wallet?
A After I released the wallet to the
Department of Forensic Science.
Page 335
Q Did you determine where Dr. Wilson
normally kept his wallet,
were you advised?
A No, sir.
Q If you would, look at what's been marked
as Defendant's Exhibit
6. 1 will ask you if you
recall seeing that upstairs
in the hallway, about
20 feet from where Dr.
Wilson was laying.
A That could have been, yes, sir.
Q Okay.
A That was up in the
upstairs foyer.
Q Yes, sir.
In fact, it was laying on top
of apiece of furniture
there; is that correct?
A A desk by that window.
Q Yes, sir.
A Yes, sir.
Q Okay.
Now, this wasn't -- I don't
believe you took any
photographs of this or
anything, did you?
A No, sir.
Q Okay.
Officer, did you attempt to fingerprint both the Mercedes and the BMW?
A We attempted to fingerprint the Mercedes
there on the scene. The BMW, by the time we got
down to the vehicles, I
think had already been
Page 336
released.
Q And you obtained -- got the BMW back at some
point in time; is that correct?
A I myself did not, sir.
Q Well , do you recall it ever coming back
into the possession of the police department?
A Yes, sir, I do.
Q In fact, Officer Nunley, were you advised by
Mrs. Wilson or her son that they had noticed some damage done to the rear trunk area by the rock?
A No, sir.
Q You don't recall that?
A No, sir.
Q Okay.
You don't recall the reason -- or. do you recall the police department
being informed by Mrs. Wilson that you should look at the car
again,
for some reason?
A When the BMW was retrieved from Mrs. Wilson,
it was turned over to the Department of Forensic Science, they were going to
process that.
Q Do you recall at some point in time Mrs.
Wilson advising the police department that there
was some damage done or they
noticed some damage to the rear of the car near the lock?
Page 337
A I wasn't informed of that, no, sir.
Q Did you do anything with respect to
examining the rear of the car to see if
there was any damage?
A No, sir, not of the BMW.
Q Officer, I would ask you to look at
what's been marked as Defendant's
Exhibit 2A, 2B, 2C, and 2D. Are those
photographs that were taken by the police department, appear to be?
A Is that 2D?
Q It's 2D.
A Okay.
Q A, B, C, D, and this would be E.
A They could have been taken by me. This was taken after I did the closets - I don't know if I took
that picture or somebody else took it.
Q Okay.
A Probably took those pictures.
Q If you would, look at this photograph
here, that's 2A, it has a ladder; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you try to make any determination as
to why this ladder was sitting up in the den?
A Dr. Wilson was reportedly trying to fix
Page 338
or change the battery in the
smoke detector, I believe.
Q And the smoke detector was found in the
bed; is that correct? Dr. Wilson's bed?
A The ladder was found down in the
basement, and the smoke detector was found up on
his bed in his bedroom on
the third floor.
(Brief
pause.)
Q Officer, I ask you to look at what's been
marked as Defendant's Exhibit 10 -
that's not 10. Excuse me. Exhibit 9,
does that appear to be the same -- or appear to be a smoke alarm that you had
found on the bed of Dr. Wilson?
A It could be.
Q okay. Similar in appearance; is that
correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q If you would, look at Defendant's Exhibit
10. At some point in time did you
recover a Diet Mountain Dew can from the -- Mrs. Wilson's black BMW?
A I believe so, yes, sir.
Q In fact, did you attempt to lift any
fingerprints off of that can?
Page 339
A It's been printed. I don't recall
whether one had been lifted
off of it or not.
Q Do you recall that you received any
results from Montgomery in which a fingerprint of Mrs. Wilson was lifted from a
Diet Mountain Dew can that you turned in?
A That would be Mrs. Curlee's -- it would
be in her report. I don't recall offhand.
Q Did you submit latent prints to Ms.
Curlee for identification?
A Yes.
Q Did you also submit prints taken from the
house or other places to compare to known prints to Mrs. Curlee?
A Yes, sir.
Q And
that was one of them, was it not?
A I don't recall. There were several.
Q All right.
Do you have those records
with you?
A No, Investigator Brantley or Mrs. Curlee
will have them.
Q Officer Nunley, Mr. Fry had asked you
earlier about different photographs depicting the front door. With respect to Dr. and Mrs. Wilson's
Page 340
house, was there any problem
with opening that
front door once it was
closed? What I am saying is: Did it stick?
A It was a tight fit in the door, yes, sir.
Q In fact, you had to pop the door to get it
opened, did you not?
A It took an extra amount of force to pop
that door, yes, sir. I don't know if you
would pop it or whether you just force it hard.
Q And the door would make a noise, would it not?
A Yes, sir.
Q The door in the garage that led from the
garage into the house, it was in a similar shape,
was it not, which would
stick and make a sound when you opened it?
A Whether it made a sound, yes, I'm sure it
would, but I didn't think that door had to be forced open or anything, no.
Q Do you recall whether or not when you
opened the door it would actually make a sound,
that
is, where a door stuck?
A I don't recall that. I remember the.
front
door being hard to open. I don't recall
the
Page 341
garage door being that hard
to open.
Q Officer Nunley, do you recall in the video
and also some of your photographs that you took with respect to Dr. Wilson's bedroom,
that there were two, I think, probably Queen Ann chairs, something of that
nature, sitting on one side of
the room?
A On the east wall, yes, sir.
Q Yes, sir.
Do you recall whether or not there was some written material in one of
those chairs?
A There may have been.
Q Do you recall whether or not you attempted
to look through that material or inventory that material that was in the chair?
A I myself didn't, no, sir.
Q Do you recall seeing anything in that chair
that was reflected as a note, a handwritten note, by Dr. Wilson?
A No, sir.
Q During the search of the house, did you
find any items in the house that would identify Dr. Wilson through the
military?
A I believe there were some photographs of
Page 342
him in uniform by an
airplane, but I don't remember any specific military type.
Q Do you recall looking under his sink in
his bathroom to find military ID's and things of that nature?
A No, sir.
Q You didn't look under there?
A I don't recall seeing it under there, no,
sir.
Q Did you inventory those items under there?
A No, sir.
Q Do you recall in the guest bedroom
looking
in the closet in there?
A Yes, sir.
Q All right.
Were there some items in there, children's items, costumes and hats,
that kind of thing?
A Some wigs.
Q Yes, sir.
A There was like a fake hand or something,
costume-type.
Q Do you recall seeing any military hats
that were in there?
Page 343
A There could have been. I mean, I don't recall offhand, no, sir.
Q All right.
So you don't remember looking for or seeing any notes written by Dr.
Wilson that were laying in the chair in his bedroom?
A I don't recall reading it or inventorying it.
Q Any that were dated in time?
A No, sir.
Q Do you recall looking in his bathroom on his
mirror to see -- do you recall any notes that were left stuck to his mirror?
A There could have been, but --
Q You didn't bother to read them?
A I wasn't the only one there, sir.
Q Well, I'm asking you.
A No, sir, I didn't.
Q Okay.
Officer Nunley, do you recall a blue pickup truck that belonged to Trey
Taylor
being
parked in the driveway?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you recall me coming to you and advising
you there was some damage done to the vehicle?
Page 344
A Yes, sir.
Q Apparently that hadn't been there, and
would you do something as far as including that in your investigation?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you do that?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you recall me having to carry the
truck down to the Department
of Forensic Science
for them to do it?
A No, sir.
Q You actually got the sampling?
A Yes, sir.
Q Okay.
Officer Nunley, one of the photographs that was introduced by Mr. Fry, No.
22, you may have to look at it. Let me
see if I can refresh your recollection.
It was actually a close-up of the railing in the rear of the yard. Do you recall that photograph?
A Yes, sir.
Q And I think it actually had a hair in it;
is that correct?
A Yes.
Q Anything significant about that?
Page 345
A I was told to take a picture of it. I don't
remember whether I took that picture or Investigator Hamilton took that
picture.
Q Was the reason to take the picture to
include the hair and you recovered the hair?
A I didn't collect it, no, sir.
Q okay.
You didn't recover or collect the hair; is that correct?
A I don't believe so, no, sir.
Q I believe you have stated, also, you photographed
the rear yard of the house; is that correct?
A Parts of it, yes, sir.
Q Okay. With respect to the -- I'm not sure
which -- if it's east or west, it may be north or south, but the driveway, the
apron at the
garage,
which side of the house would that be on?
A The driveway entered into the west side
of
the house.
Q West side.
All right. Did you have an
occasion to look of f the driveway to see -- to familiarize yourself with the
contour of the land or the property right there on the side of the driveway?
Page 346
A It appeared the land had been built up to
level off for the pool, and there was a big slope from the pool going down.
Q Are you familiar with the term, a
"mink slide”?
A No, sir.
Q Well , that's going to be a very steep and
slippery
A grade.
Q hill?
A Yes, sir.
Q Would that be a fair description of that?
A Yes, it was a steep grade.
Q And the other side, where you have
identified as a rock garden, is fairly flat; is
that
right?
A Or it led up, it sloped up.
Q Do you recall on that side of the house
that there was stones placed that formed
a path going to the rear of the property?
A On the east side of the house?
Q Yes, sir.
A Yes, sir.
Q There was a path; is that correct?
Page 347
A Yes, sir.
Q By placement of stones. officer, do you
recall in the video that you took, with respect to Mrs. Wilson's bedroom, that
portion that viewed the gun case?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you recall that?
A Yes, sir.
Q That gun case was opened, was it not?
A It was ajar, I don't think it was sitting
open.
Q It was open, was it not?
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you attempt to ascertain as to what
type of gun had been kept in that gun case?
A It was a pistol box, so I'm assuming a
pistol was kept in it.
Q Was there also not some ammunition in the
box that would also reveal as to what type of gun it may have been in there
with it?
A Yes, sir, it was a revolver or --
Q .38; is that right?
A More than likely, yes, sir.
Q Do you recall what type of ammunition was
Page 348
in the gun case?
A I believe we collected it. I'm not sure. (Brief pause.)
Q Officer, I'll let you look at a photograph
that's numbered 6A and B. Can you refresh
your recollection from that?
A Yes, sir, that's .38 special ammunition
that was in that gun -- pistol box, whatever you want to call it.
Q Are you familiar with the term "wad'
cutter'"
A Yes, sir.
Q What is a wad cutter?
A It's a f lat-nose bullet, it has no
rounded end or it's not hollow-pointed or anything like that.
Q Generally used for target practice; is
that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Q Leaves a nice crisp, round hole in the
target?
A Yes, sir.
Q And it's a fairly cheap round; is that
correct?
Page 349
A Yes, sir.
Q Did you at any time after this gun was
recovered from Mr. White, determine
what type of ammunition was in the gun?
A Yes, sir, I believe it's -- I don't
really recall. I gave it to Micky Wednesday, I returned it
to Micky.
Q It was .38 wad cutters, was it not?
A Yes, sir.
Q Same type of ammunition that was f6und in
this gun case?
A Yes, sir.
Q Glen, let me let you look at 6C and D or
A, B, C, and D, Defendant's
Exhibit 6. Does that fairly and
accurately depict what the gun case
would look like?
A Yes, sir.
I don't remember it being opened that much, because this definitely has
been moved.
Q Sure.
But that's what the gun case
looked like; is that correct?
A Yes, pistol box or gun case.
MR.
HOOPER: We would offer 6A, B, C, and D.
Page 350
MR. FRY: Can I see it, Charlie? I'm sure it's okay.
(Brief
pause.)
MR.
FRY: No objection.
THE
COURT: I thought you said 6. You
mean 2A?
MR.
HOOPER: 6A, B, C, and D, four
photographs under the number 6.
THE
COURT: 6A?
MR. HOOPER: 6A as in apple, and B as in Bible.
THE COURT: Talking about 6 as opposed to 2?
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: 6?
MR. HOOPER: Yeah.
THE COURT: Okay.
Q Micky, I believe you stated you processed
the BMW; is that correct? Fingerprinted -- I'm calling you Micky and it's Glen?
A Yes.
The BMW was still there in the garage.
Yes, sir, I think -- no, the-BMW was processed by Forensics, I believe.
Q Were you there when they processed the
Page 351
car?
A No, sir.
Q Did you observe the car after it was
processed?
A No, sir.
Q All right.
If you use -- you do fingerprinting, also; is that correct, or attempt
to find --
A Yes, sir.
Q Is it called latent prints?
A Yes , sir.
Q What kind of process do you have with
respect to trying to find a latent print, that is, a print left by somebody on
some object?
A There are several different methods. You can use plain powder, magnetic powder,
you can
use --
Q Let's stop with the powder. Okay.
Whether it be magnetic
powder or -- what did you
say?
A Just plain black powder.
Q All right.
The substance itself, it's
fairly
dirty, I assume, is it not?
A Yes, sir.
Page 352
Q And if that was used on the car, it
would fairly well make it impractical to
use, unless you wanted to get it all
over your clothes; is that not correct?
A It would depend on who was doing the
processing.
Q Well, why, is somebody neater than others?
A Yes, sir.
Q If you are going to -- I assume if you have
the car, if you are going to look for fingerprints, you are going to dust on
the inside; is that correct?
A Parts of it, yes, sir.
Q Yes, sir. And is there any reason -- any way that you necessarily would be able
to keep it from getting on the seats or the steering wheel or anyplace else
your hands would come in contact?
A You wouldn't necessarily do the steering
wheel because of the -- usually the texture of the steering wheel is going to
be too rough to process, anyway.
Q You say "usually." Does that mean
you wouldn't even bother to see if you could lift a
Page 353
print off of it?
A No, sir.
Q Plastic is a good object, is it not, to
retain a print?
A The smooth parts. A textured or pebbled surface, that the
steering wheels are usually made out of, is not.
Q Do you recall this steering wheel, what
type it had?
A I didn't process that one.
Q You looked at the vehicle, did you not?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you recall what it was?
A No, sir.
Q Well, if it was textured, that wouldn't
prevent you from trying to make some determination or at least fingerprinting,
would it not?
MR.
FRY: Your Honor, I object; he has
testified that he didn't print it and he wasn't there when it was printed. I don't see the relevance of asking him
these questions.
THE COURT: Mr. Hooper,
he testified he didn't, he did not process the car.
MR. HOOPER: Yes, sir.
Page 354
Q Officer, do you recall the car being
released back to the family?
A Yes , sir.
I didn't release it, Investigator Brantley did.
Q But you recall that?
A Yes, sir.
Q Certainly wouldn't be anything unusual to have
it cleaned up, have the fingerprint dust removed from the car if , in fact,
that was what was used to attempt to recover any fingerprints; is
that correct?
A We don't usually clean the things that we process, no, sir.
Q You
don't clean it up, correct?
A
Right.
Q So whoever you gave it back to, they can either ride in it or clean
it up; right?
A Usually, yes, sir.
Q Officer, how long have you been involved in
crime scene work?
A Eight years.
Q I had asked you earlier about plastic
with respect to its being a
good source for
retaining fingerprints; is
that correct?
Page 355
A Yes, sir, you did.
Q Did you not tell me that a smooth surface
would be a good object that would normally retain
or could retain a
fingerprint?
A It would depend on the method you are
trying to use, also.
Q Well, I'm talking about the object
itself , it would be
conclusive to -- for a person to leave a fingerprint on it; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
If it's smooth, yes.
Q Let's assume -- you have been to Kmart,
have you not?
A Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Mr. Hooper.
MR.
HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Before we go to Kmart, let's take
a recess.
MR. HOOPER: Judge, we just got a short visit.
THE
COURT: Ladies and gentlemen, we will
take. a recess. Please go into the jury room.
(Whereupon,
proceedings were in recess at 4:15 p.m., until 4:30 p.m., at which time the
witness, Glen Nunley, resumed the stand, and the
Page 356
following occurred:)
THE
COURT: Mr. Hooper?
MR.
HOOPER: Yes., sir.
THE
COURT: You may now go to Kmart.
MR.
HOOPER: I was at Kmart, Judge. I'm going to back up. We are going to go to Wal-Mart first.
CONTINUATION
OF CROSS-EXAMINATION
BY
MR. HOOPE
Q Officer Nunley, let me back up a little
bit. And for the benefit of the jury,
would you explain the difference, if there is, between an ink print and a
latent print.
A An ink print is when a technician
actually rolls ink or puts
ink on your hand and
rolls your hand across the paper
to leave an impression. A latent print
is a print that's invisible until you apply powder to it. If a latent
print could be there, apply
powder, then lift them from that surface.
Q With respect to surface, some surfaces
are better than others for
retaining a latent
print; is that correct?
A Yes, sir.
Page 357
Q And I think you have identified plastic
as being an excellent
surface for containing a latent print?
A I wouldn't say excellent. Depends on the
condition of the plastic, whether it's got
scratches or old plastic,
new plastic, and the method you use to try to raise the print off of the
plastic.
Q But they are all certainly capable of
holding a latent print; is that correct?
A Theoretically, yes.
Q Sure. Let's assume that you recover a
latent print. Is there any method to
determine the length of time that that print has been on that object?
A No, sir.
Q It could be on there a day or five years,
right?
A Yes, sir.
Q Do you recall sometime in July or August
obtaining or finding a plastic bag that Mr. White identified as hiding in the
woods near the Wilson home?
A I didn't collect that. Investigator
Page 358
Hutchinson and Investigator
Brantley recovered
that.
Q Do you recall whether or not any
fingerprints were recovered from the plastic bag?
A Not by me, no, sir.
Q Did you even attempt to fingerprint that
plastic bag?
A I didn't collect it.
Q Do you know if anybody did?
A Forensic -- it was turned in to Forensics
for processing. If you want to assume, I
assume they did.
Q All right. Can you tell me what items,
if any, the Huntsville
Police Department attempted to determine whether or not latent prints were on
those items that were identified as coming from or having been in contact with
Mr. White?
A There were several items in the house that
were collected. Several items collected,
several items that the Department of Forensic Sciences collected, we
fingerprinted several surfaces in the house, the walls, handrails, doors, door
facings, glasses in the bar area, the telephones, all over the house.
Page 359
Q Was there any property recovered from Mr.
White that was fingerprinted?
A The revolver.
Q Well, any property?
A Yes, sir, there was property recovered from
White that was processed for prints.
Q And what was that?
A A revolver was recovered by Investigator
Parker or Investigator Payne.
Q You mean they dusted the revolver for
prints?
A No, sir.
It was turned over to me and I processed it with Super Glue.
Q Did you obtain anything?
A Yes, sir.
Q Were those -- was the report issued on
that?
A They -- those prints -- Super Glue is a
different method. It raises the print, and
a white substance sort of cakes to the print., and about the only way you can
lift the print off that surface is to photograph it. So I photographed the print and then sent the
print down to Mrs. Curlee.
Q Okay.
Page 360
A And whether she wrote a report, that
would be her --
Q You never got a report back?
A I didn't.
Q Do you know if
Officer Brantley got a
report back?
A You will have to
ask him.
Q Do you know if a report was ever made
available to us, to the defendant?
A I don't know.
Q Okay.
With respect to Dr. Wilson's
bedroom, do you recall there
being a night stand on each side of his bed?
A Yes, sir, I would say there was one on
both sides of the bed.
Q Did you inventory the items that were
in J that -- in either night stand?
A No, sir.
Q Did you even examine the items that were
in
the night stand?
A Other than to fingerprint the facings of
the
night stand, no, sir.
MR. HOOPER: No further questions.
THE
COURT: Any more questions, Mr. Fry?
Page 361
MR. FRY: No, Your Honor, no
further questions. Again, Your Honor,
this officer is on duty in Huntsville.
We would ask he be excused
unless there is some reason
that he would like to stay at the defense expense in Tuscaloosa.
THE COURT: Mr. Hooper, do you know of
any reason why you would
need him further?
MR.
HOOPER: I don't know why he would stay at my expense, Judge. I don't know if we have got him
subpoenaed. If we do
THE
COURT: Mr. Hooper, you didn't answer my question.
MR.
HOOPER: Yes, sir.
THE
COURT: Do you know of any reason why Mr. Brantley can't be excused to go back
to work?
MR.
HOOPER: I don't have any reason
right now, Judge.
THE
COURT: Then he may be excused.
Mr. Brantley, you may be
excused. Thank you.
MR. NUNLEY: Nunley, sir.
THE COURT: Nunley. Mr. Brantley might want to be excused.
MR.
FRY: Your Honor, we call Dr. Embry,
Page 362