Latest / NO FILTER / Season 1_ Sidebar 4(M4A_128K)

Transcript

Season 1_ Sidebar 4(M4A_128K) · NO FILTER

• 0:11
  Speaker 1: Hi, and welcome to this week's Proof Sidebar. I'm here
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: this week with Jasina Davis and Kevin Fitzpatrick to discuss
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: episode six of our series on the cases of Lee,
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: Clark and Cane's story.
• 0:27
  Speaker 2: Hey guys, this Susan.
• 0:30
  Speaker 3: How you doing.
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: I'm good. I'm doing great. Actually, we just recently got
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: some news from Georgia. For those of you who listened
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: to season two of Undisclosed on the Joey Watkins case,
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: you'll know that he had a pending habeas petition before
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: the Walker County's Preier Court, where he was back in
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: twenty twenty sixteen held in prison. Last month he had
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: a hearing in that finally after COVID delayed everything, and
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: as of Monday, the trial court issued a ruling overturning
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: his conviction, and that's now pending the state's decision of
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: whether or not to appeal it. But it was a
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: fantastic step forward for his case. There was a strong ruling.
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: The court found in favor of Joey on all three
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: of the claims that were still pinning before him and
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: found constitutional violations on all three fronts. And now we
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: wait and see what the state decides to do if
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: they want to kill a Supreme Court or potentially if
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: they don't. At this stage, we just don't know.
• 1:30
  Speaker 3: I mean, it's pretty fantastic and it's huge news.
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: Right, It's a huge, huge step board. We have known
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: that Joey's legal claims were very, very strong for a
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: long time. Now the hearing proved that they were factually
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: strong as well. The witnesses and evidence were very compelling.
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: There was nothing that undermined any of his claims. The
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: state's witnesses in fact reinforced many of Joey's claims. And
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: now the trial courts agreed and found that because these
• 1:59
  Speaker 1: constitutions violations, his convictions should be thrown out.
• 2:02
  Speaker 2: And the interesting thing for just in relation to the
• 2:06
  Speaker 2: season of Proof, is that the Joey Watkins case is
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: also Rome Georgia Kayse.
• 2:11
  Speaker 1: It is from about four years after this case.
• 2:14
  Speaker 2: And many of the players are the same. I mean,
• 2:16
  Speaker 2: Dallas Battle figures perfectly in the Joey case. And Joey
• 2:20
  Speaker 2: introduced you to Lee Clark.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: Correct. Joey did not know either Lee Clark A Kine's
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: story before he went to prison, but in prison, they
• 2:27
  Speaker 1: were by chance at the same facilities. A few times
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: and became friends there. And it was Joey who first
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: told me about Lee Clark's case, or rather not first.
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: Joy's attorney Mack Sabernathy, who was also the attorney for
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: Lee Clark, told me about it at one point before
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: I believe I heard of Lee clark case or knew
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: what it was about. But then Joey told me about it,
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: introduced me to him, and that's how I learned about this.
• 2:53
  Speaker 2: So, yeah, we don't know about this story for season one.
• 2:55
  Speaker 2: Approve of that. Joey. The other interesting thing, the stories
• 2:58
  Speaker 2: have a lot in common.
• 3:00
  Speaker 1: Yeah, and Dallas Battle was one of the officers at
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: the scene in the Joey Walkins case. It was involves
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: a highway shooting. A teenage boy was driving home from
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: the community college down there and shot by another car,
• 3:13
  Speaker 1: ran off the road. His truck was off in the
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: woods on the side of the highway, and a big
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: issue in that case was the state's claim that Joey
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: could not possibly have recognized this truck when he drove
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: past it later that night. Now, Joey is a huge
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: car buff who knows everything about cars and talks about
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: cars the way some people remember people. He remembers everything
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: about vehicles, so to me, it's not shocking that he
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: would recognize an old classmates truck they saw on the
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: side of the road. But Dallas Battle's testimony was that
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: the way the truck was positioned, it was impossible to
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: see any identifying features and therefore Joey could not have
• 3:53
  Speaker 1: identified it as the truck of Isaac S. Dawkins. Now,
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: the photos of the crime scene again and my Clyde Collier,
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: who you heard about last episode of Proof, show that
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: these features that Joey identified would have been visible, contrary
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: to Dallas Battle's claims.
• 4:10
  Speaker 3: That's amazing, And how in the trial though the Jerry
• 4:13
  Speaker 3: would have seen these same photos, right.
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: They would have. Now the photos that were selected, who
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: knows if they were all the photos are just the
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: ones given to the defense attorneys. For instance, they have
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: the truck door open, so it is blocking the view
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: of the front of Isaac's truck, which Joey says has
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: the feature that was most identifying to him, the thing
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: he saw that made him go, oh, look that's Isaac's truck.
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: And because the door is open, the way the camera
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: is taking the photo, you can't actually see the front
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: of the truck and the claims that therefore no one
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: driving by to the front of the truck.
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: Same players, same old.
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: Same old, Floyd County. Now the prosecutor involved is different.
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: Tammy Colston was the prosecutor for the Joey Walkins case,
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: but she was not the one in court for Lee
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: Clark and kine Story's case.
• 5:00
  Speaker 3: For Lee Clark and Kane's story, it was Steve Cox. Yeah,
• 5:04
  Speaker 3: but same photographer.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: It's always the same photographer.
• 5:08
  Speaker 3: Now.
• 5:08
  Speaker 1: I will note that Wood County has moved away from
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: the system, so it is no longer true that their
• 5:14
  Speaker 1: crime their homicide photos are taken by a private photographer,
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: but for many decades that is how things were done
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: in the county.
• 5:22
  Speaker 3: Well, I think it's great news and about Joey's case
• 5:25
  Speaker 3: and the habeas. Will you keep us posted.
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: We will, and next week we hope to talk about
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: it in more depth. This week on Proof, in episode six,
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: we heard about some of the physical evidence in the case,
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: as well as what some of the jurors thought about
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: that evidence. As we talked about the start of the episode,
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: sometimes juries do things you'd never expect. You can't predict
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: what they're going to do. Once they get back there
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: in the liberation room, they're on their own. They can
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: do whatever they want, essentially, well within certain bounds, but
• 6:01
  Speaker 1: they can use whatever methods they want to assess the
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: evidence of the trial and come up with a conclusion.
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: Talking to some of the jurors was sort of shocking,
• 6:11
  Speaker 3: because you do get a little bit of an insight
• 6:14
  Speaker 3: on their thought process, what they remember, what they don't remember,
• 6:18
  Speaker 3: how much of the actual law or instructions they took
• 6:21
  Speaker 3: into consideration, and how much of it was just a
• 6:24
  Speaker 3: gut feeling for them. I think I was a little
• 6:26
  Speaker 3: bit surprised by that.
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: Ill I was surprised by the juror who thought that
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: it was evidence of murder that Brian Bowling had not
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: shot himself in the mouth. He seemed to think that
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: the only way play Russian Roulette was playing it with
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: the gun in your mouth, and therefore a shot to
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: the side of the head means this was not a
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: self inflicted wound.
• 6:44
  Speaker 2: And had anyone said that like in open court or
• 6:47
  Speaker 2: could have been said in the deliberations, you don't, but I.
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: Don't think so. I think that was just his own
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: personal beliefs that and how he assessed the evidence.
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: You know what I was impressed with is on one
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: of the little trips I made to Rome to join
• 7:01
  Speaker 2: you guys when you were out trying to find people,
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: is we spent a couple of days with you trying
• 7:07
  Speaker 2: to find a durer and I know that you were
• 7:10
  Speaker 2: both becoming frustrated because it was a POV that you
• 7:13
  Speaker 2: desperately wanted for this season to really understand how they
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: came to certain conclusions and what they were thinking. So
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: I think it's a great addition to the story to
• 7:24
  Speaker 2: have that POB because there was a time where that
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: was proving to be incredibly elusive.
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it took for the first I don't remember how
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: long we actually had a lot of bad luck trying
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: to find any jurors at all. Later we did manage
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: to talk to a few of them, but it took
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: at least a week I think, to send a to
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: find one that would talk to us about what they
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: were called from being on the jury.
• 7:46
  Speaker 3: Yeah, and there's still a few out there we'd like
• 7:48
  Speaker 3: to speak to. So if you happen to be listening,
• 7:51
  Speaker 3: reach out please. But yeah, I mean, it's such a
• 7:54
  Speaker 3: unique perspective, like Kevin said, it talking to the jurors
• 7:58
  Speaker 3: tells you what stood out to them, what pieces of
• 8:00
  Speaker 3: evidence really stood out to them, and why, and how
• 8:05
  Speaker 3: they came to the conclusion that they did. And so, yeah,
• 8:09
  Speaker 3: I was really thankful that the few who did agree
• 8:11
  Speaker 3: to talk to us agree to it.
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: And their conclusions are often different than other people because
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: they're not supposed to be following the press, right, they're
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: not supposed to be reading articles about it or talking
• 8:22
  Speaker 2: to people about it. So we often find with yours
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: that it's they have a very unique perspective because they're
• 8:31
  Speaker 2: not supposed to be influenced by outside media, and then
• 8:35
  Speaker 2: you find out what really rang true, because it's not
• 8:38
  Speaker 2: like they went home and watched the evening news about
• 8:40
  Speaker 2: it or ready about it.
• 8:43
  Speaker 1: I also thought it was interesting to hear from jurors
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: about how they assessed the people in this case aside
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: from the evidence, aside from when it's testimony, just as people,
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: what their thoughts were. And in this case, it does
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: seem that there were a lot of assumptions drawn about
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: Lee and Cain based on their perceived social status where
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: they're from their lifestyles. What's interesting, though, is that because
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: the defendants don't have to testify, although in this case
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: actually Kine ultimately did, but because their families aren't testifying,
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: most of the information in this case is not really
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: about Lee or Cain. It was about Brian Bowling and
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: his family, and talking to jurors, you can hear how
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: their assessments of Lee and Cain were often influenced by
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: their assessments of Brian.
• 9:31
  Speaker 2: Meaning that the Bowling family didn't have the greatest opinion
• 9:35
  Speaker 2: certainly of Lee at least, and that impacted their sort
• 9:41
  Speaker 2: of take on him.
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: Well, I'm thinking in particular of the juror who told
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: me that after seeing the state of Brian's bedroom she
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: drew a conclusion that Cain and Lee were not being
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: raised well and that they were never taught to learn
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: right from wrong. We're in reality, Lee had actually been
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: vocal that he felt it was wrong how Bryan's bedroom was,
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: and he very much had a sense that this was
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: not right, and yet for the jurors it was used
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: as evidence that he lack of moral compass.
• 10:14
  Speaker 3: I think that jurors said something about from the photos
• 10:18
  Speaker 3: and from the information she gathered throughout the trial, that
• 10:21
  Speaker 3: they came from what she called rough families or rough
• 10:25
  Speaker 3: environments and that children are often a product of their environments.
• 10:30
  Speaker 3: So for me, when I heard her say that, I
• 10:33
  Speaker 3: thought she took it to mean that this theory that
• 10:38
  Speaker 3: Kane and Lee killed Brian was conceivable given their backgrounds,
• 10:43
  Speaker 3: given their environment.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: And we also heard a lot this week about the pillow,
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: and we heard about our interview with Tommy Shifflett, Captain
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: Tommy Shiflett, he was the head of the investigative Division
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: for the Floyd County Police Department. That was one of
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: the more surprising interviews that I think we had just
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: and that just because of catch Shuffle's responses and his
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: assessment of the evidence, which was in many ways a
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: mirror image of our own. And coming away from that,
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: did you have any thoughts about this mysterious pillow and
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: what make explain the weird chain of custody?
• 11:14
  Speaker 3: I think I came away from talking to him more
• 11:16
  Speaker 3: confused than when we started, because, like you said, he
• 11:19
  Speaker 3: had all the same questions we had, like what do
• 11:23
  Speaker 3: you mean it was in my trunk? And how did
• 11:25
  Speaker 3: it get there? And how could I have not have
• 11:27
  Speaker 3: seen it? And you know, are you sure it's even
• 11:29
  Speaker 3: the same pillow? And those are all questions, and they're
• 11:32
  Speaker 3: all legitimate questions, but the fact that he was posing
• 11:35
  Speaker 3: those questions, like I think it says in the episode,
• 11:38
  Speaker 3: you know, I almost felt like he was making fun
• 11:39
  Speaker 3: of us, like we were oohing and aweing over something
• 11:44
  Speaker 3: that really isn't there. That's sort of what I came
• 11:49
  Speaker 3: away feeling after talking to him.
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: Put things lightly, this is not how evidence should work,
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: and it is crazy that we cannot even begin to
• 11:59
  Speaker 1: stop with any kind of certainty where it came from,
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: when it came from there, and how it got to
• 12:05
  Speaker 1: the police, and where it was for the time in between.
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: It should have meant that the pillow was not usable
• 12:13
  Speaker 1: thatvids at all, I believe, but right.
• 12:17
  Speaker 3: The pillow should have just been thrown out period. But
• 12:20
  Speaker 3: now comes the question of is it the pillow. We
• 12:23
  Speaker 3: see a pillow in some of the crime scene pillows
• 12:26
  Speaker 3: that matches the description, a blue couch pillow with blood
• 12:30
  Speaker 3: on it. Is this the same pillow that Kenna says
• 12:35
  Speaker 3: he found in a hole in the wall. Is it
• 12:38
  Speaker 3: the same pillow that Uncle Michael says he found under
• 12:41
  Speaker 3: the bed.
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: You know, what we know for sure is that the
• 12:45
  Speaker 1: pillow that was in the court courtroom, Like, the actual
• 12:48
  Speaker 1: physical pillow that was in the courtroom is the same
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: pillow as the one displayed in the photographs of Brian's bedroom.
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: There's a couple of witnesses you testified, the blood stains
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: on them are consistent, so buying extremely unlikely identical blood
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: splatter situation the pillow and the photos is the pillow
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: in the court which, according to the GBI, is a
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: pillow they tested for the press of gunpowder residue.
• 13:13
  Speaker 3: And the results came back negative. No gunpowder residue on
• 13:16
  Speaker 3: the pillow that they tested and the pillow that was
• 13:20
  Speaker 3: used as evidence during the trial. Even if there is
• 13:24
  Speaker 3: this second mysterious pillow with gunpowder and a hole through it,
• 13:30
  Speaker 3: it doesn't matter because you can't convict Kane and Lee
• 13:35
  Speaker 3: on a pillow that you can't see or produce.
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: Or have any information about where it came from or
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: what it is, or in trying to figure out how
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: tossess the evidence, Like, I've thought about this and I
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: just come up at a loss because this idea of
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: second pillow has sort of floated a few times, but
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: there's just nothing to go on. It's a hypothetical, theoretical
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: pillow that maybe could possibly have been a silencer, but
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: we don't know where it would have been or where
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: it was found or if it existed.
• 14:07
  Speaker 3: Right, It's really confusing. I think that there's a bite
• 14:12
  Speaker 3: in there from I believe it's Kenneth who is talking about,
• 14:15
  Speaker 3: you know, after we showed them the crime scene photos
• 14:18
  Speaker 3: and that the pillow was there when they took photos
• 14:22
  Speaker 3: that night, he said something about, well, maybe somebody came
• 14:26
  Speaker 3: back later, and then he says, and why they didn't
• 14:30
  Speaker 3: just take it? I don't know. And that's the other thing,
• 14:33
  Speaker 3: like if someone came back later to hide a pillow
• 14:37
  Speaker 3: or hide a second pillow, because everyone agrees that Cain
• 14:39
  Speaker 3: and Lee would not have had time to hide a
• 14:41
  Speaker 3: pillow that night, you know, in between the shooting and
• 14:46
  Speaker 3: when the family rushes in, there was no time to
• 14:48
  Speaker 3: hide a pillow in a hole behind a dresser. If
• 14:50
  Speaker 3: someone came back later to hide a pillow, why would
• 14:52
  Speaker 3: they hide it and not just take it.
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: It should also be noted that Brian's mother testifies a
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: trial that when she came into the bedroom, she saw
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: Kin with his hand behind a dresser, implying that he
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: was in the process of hiding the pillow when they
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: busted into the door, he came into the bedroom and
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: see what was going on. That is not supported by
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: other witnesses who were there. Kenneth is asked at one point,
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: was Kin's hand behind a dresser, and he says no,
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: although he describes him standing in that area roughly. But
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: he does not claim like Brand's mother does, who had
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: actually seen Caine reaching behind a dresser into this hole
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: in the wall. And given they have to move the
• 15:29
  Speaker 1: dresser to do it, it seems unlikely to me that
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: that could do what actually happened.
• 15:34
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's one of those things with the pillow,
• 15:37
  Speaker 2: nobody will ever know what happened, and in a weird way,
• 15:40
  Speaker 2: nobody will ever know how actually important it is. But
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: it just has a mythical status.
• 15:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah, end of the day, the pillow does not matter
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: to this case. It was not used as a silencer,
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: It was not part of a murder plot. Although the
• 15:53
  Speaker 1: jurors reached a different interpretation, I feel confident saying based
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: on the evidence that there is flat out no possibility
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: whatsoever this pillow matters to the case.
• 16:03
  Speaker 3: Well, the other thing we don't know, you know, like
• 16:05
  Speaker 3: the pillow and having a lot of questions that may
• 16:08
  Speaker 3: never be answered. We talk about in this latest episode
• 16:11
  Speaker 3: that we don't even know one hundred percent for certain
• 16:15
  Speaker 3: that it's the right gun they have, because the bullets
• 16:19
  Speaker 3: were lost and there was no ballistics done on the gun.
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: We do know that Dallas Battle says that the gun
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: appeared recently fired and then clarifies that it's because there
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: was an empty casing in it. But there are ways
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: you can tell if a gun has been fired. At
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: least it's been last cleaned, which is never even noted
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: or commented on. I mean, basically, we just don't have
• 16:39
  Speaker 1: any physical epons whatsoever, which is the baseline problem of
• 16:42
  Speaker 1: this whole case.
• 16:42
  Speaker 3: I guess it's not really disputed. I mean, Kine says
• 16:45
  Speaker 3: it's the gun, Brian shot himself with Kane says he
• 16:48
  Speaker 3: brought the gun. Dallas Battle says it looks like the
• 16:50
  Speaker 3: gun had been fired recently. I was just surprised that
• 16:53
  Speaker 3: there's actually no there's nothing to confirm that, nothing that
• 16:57
  Speaker 3: was presented in trial to confirm that it's actually the gun.
• 17:00
  Speaker 3: And how do you convict to people of murder when
• 17:03
  Speaker 3: you don't even know that you have the murder.
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: Weapon in a lot of ways. This is short Anger's case.
• 17:09
  Speaker 1: There's so much undetermined that everything's like in a state
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: of multiple forms. We don't know within the box. We
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: don't know whether it's theory A or theory B. All
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: possibilities still exist because they have nothing collapsed down due
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: to actually testing the evidence, and.
• 17:27
  Speaker 2: That in theory would be why they charge them both
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: with conspiracy, right, as opposed to seems like you have
• 17:34
  Speaker 2: to prove fewer facts.
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: It means you don't have to prove a completed crime. Yeah,
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: are that which one of them actually pulled the trigger?
• 17:41
  Speaker 3: And I guess it allows the jury room for interpretation
• 17:45
  Speaker 3: because now they could say, well, maybe there was a
• 17:48
  Speaker 3: second pillow, or maybe Lee had his own gun, or
• 17:51
  Speaker 3: maybe this, So you can fill in a lot of
• 17:53
  Speaker 3: those blanks. Whether or not you're supposed to, I don't know,
• 17:57
  Speaker 3: but I assume that's something that happened in in the
• 18:01
  Speaker 3: deliberation room.
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: I think the prosecutor in this case was spared from
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: ever having to put together a singular, coherent theory. There
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: was never a need for him to say, this is
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: actually what happened, as opposed to saying, here's a series
• 18:18
  Speaker 1: of possible variations. That may have possibly come to pass.
• 18:22
  Speaker 1: Any one of them is good enough to convict, and
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: we need not examine if any one of them's even possible.
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: But the conspiracy issue brings us to this week's listener questions.
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: We have one from Heather sky Mentor, who asks were
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: there any other unindied co conspirators? And no, in this case,
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: there was just Cane's story and Lee Clark charged with
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: the crime and then named in the indictment. But not
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: charged was Brian's girlfriend Caprice. There one thing I kind
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: of thought going into this case that I suspected, are
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: you assume there might have been others that were implicated
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: but not charged our beliefs to be involved, because again,
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: this is a gang murder theory. The gang was not
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: just supposed to be Brian, Lee and Kin. In fact,
• 19:06
  Speaker 1: there's at least four people involved in this crime. That's
• 19:09
  Speaker 1: supposedly the motive for the murder, the safe theft. So
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: I thought that perhaps the family and friends of victim
• 19:14
  Speaker 1: or the police thought that maybe there were other gang
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: members involved in the murder, and almost I was going
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: to say universally, but by and large that's not the case.
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: No one suspected the other supposed members of the gang
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: whatever were involved. No one thinks that there's other free birds.
• 19:33
  Speaker 1: Well that's not sure. There are some people who wonder
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: about other free birds quoe unquote. But the police don't
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: seem to seriously contemplate the possibility of other gang members
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: being involved in this, which is kind of crazy, given
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: that their first piece of evidence was the note in
• 19:47
  Speaker 1: Brian's casket that says narcs on it crossed out who
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: was from a boy that was not charged and according
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: to police, never even questioned about the case.
• 19:56
  Speaker 3: I mean, you could argue that they wanted to prosecute
• 20:00
  Speaker 3: or charge the people who they thought they had the
• 20:03
  Speaker 3: best case.
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: Again, that's what I assumed was going on, But from
• 20:07
  Speaker 1: what we can tell, that's actually they just literally did
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: not think that anyone else was involved. It wasn't a
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: question of lack of evidence other than the caprice. It's
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: that they literally did not think that anyone else was
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: involved in this, despite the theory being a gang revenge murder.
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: And if the gang revenge murder, you would have to
• 20:22
  Speaker 2: assume that at a minimum, they would interview anyone believed
• 20:26
  Speaker 2: to have been in this so called gang.
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah, especially the ones who would also have been quote
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: unquote knarcd on by Brian and this theory, but that,
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: according to police, did not happen. We also have a
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: question from rogue Nana who asked where is the window?
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: Are the blankets hanging over the window plywood? Is it
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: a huge window then? And she's talking about the photos
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: of the crime scene which you can see up at
• 20:49
  Speaker 1: our site, and there's two blankets, a blue one and
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: a green one hanging up on the wall of Brian's bedroom.
• 20:55
  Speaker 1: To clarify the bedroom window we're talking about, it's under
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: the green blanket. Only the blue ones just over a
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: piece of wall with holes in it, I believe. But
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: the plywood over the window is just on the right
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: half of those blankets, under the green blanket.
• 21:09
  Speaker 3: And you can see from the crime scene photos that
• 21:12
  Speaker 3: the board is up and the blanket is still over
• 21:14
  Speaker 3: the window. At the time the photos were taken, Kenneth
• 21:17
  Speaker 3: and Amanda recall running in and the board was down
• 21:21
  Speaker 3: the window was exposed, But like we mentioned in the episode,
• 21:25
  Speaker 3: no one remembers actually putting the board back up and
• 21:28
  Speaker 3: fixing the blankets over the window, So it's really hard
• 21:33
  Speaker 3: to reconcile the witness memories versus the crime scene photos.
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: Next week we're talking about the autopsy, or rather the
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: lack thereof as gnomes done in this case.
• 21:47
  Speaker 3: We'll also be talking to experts who have looked through
• 21:49
  Speaker 3: the file and the photos that we do have, who
• 21:52
  Speaker 3: will give us their opinions on the nature of the
• 21:56
  Speaker 3: wound and whether or not it was a close shot
• 21:59
  Speaker 3: or one further from a distance.
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: And that really will help people to understand what may
• 22:05
  Speaker 2: have happened that night and who may be responsible. Right,
• 22:07
  Speaker 2: I mean it's a close contact room, then Lee can't
• 22:11
  Speaker 2: really be involved in shoot it.
• 22:13
  Speaker 3: That's right.
• 22:19
  Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to this episode of Proof Sidebar, and
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: we're back on Monday with episode seven. If you have
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: any questions for future sideboard episodes, don't forget to send
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: them our way through email, Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram on
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: all social media where Proof Crime pod. You can also
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: find me on Twitter at the VF Melo two and
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: on Instagram at soosimp and you can now find Just
• 22:41
  Speaker 1: Send on Instagram too at just Send a Proof
• 23:00
  Speaker 3: As