Latest / Brian Thomas / Steve Goodin - Hinton Trial

Transcript

Steve Goodin - Hinton Trial · Brian Thomas

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: KRC Detox Station. Hey, 1955 KRC Detox Station.
• 0:05
  Speaker 2: I'm E.
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: Friday. Welcome back. Resident 55 KRC legal expert, because I
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: do not qualify, from the law firm of Porter Wright.
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: Steve Gooden, good to have you back on the show,
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: my friend.
• 0:15
  Speaker 2: Hey, good to be here.
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: And you've been following this Rodney Hinton Jr. case. He,
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: of course, is on trial for murdering Hamilton County Sheriff
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: Deputy Larry Henderson and Hinton saw a video of his
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: son being killed by police officers because his son was
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: brandishing a firearm and fleeing. I think most of my
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: listening audience knows the details on that, but after watching
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: a videotape of the incident, the officer camera tape, he
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: obviously was a little distraught, and he left and then
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: ultimately decided he was going to run over Hamilton County
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: Sheriff's Deputy Larry Henderson, who literally had no connection whatsoever
• 0:50
  Speaker 1: with the activity that led to his son's death. Now,
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: with that in mind, let me start with He charged
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: with murder, but the judge, Judge Jody Lubbers, yesterday entertained
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: a motion by Clyde Bennett, the lawyer for the defendant,
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: seeking to include reckless homicide charges. And after thinking about
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: that for a while, she went ahead and said, okay, yeah,
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: we're going to allow the jurors to be able to
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: consider reckless homicide a step down from the original charge.
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: What does this mean in your mind, Steve Gooden?
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: Well, it's a bad sign for the prosecution. You know,
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: this is one of these cases that a lot of
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: folks thought, you know, just couldn't be lost. You know,
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: there's eyewitness systems striking Deputy Henderson. There's no question he
• 1:33
  Speaker 2: struck Deputy Henderson. I mean, he admits it. I mean,
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: it happened. You know, it was just one of these
• 1:38
  Speaker 2: facts that cannot be gotten around. But what his defense
• 1:43
  Speaker 2: team has done a really good job of doing is,
• 1:45
  Speaker 2: is laying out the fact that this Mr. Hinton had pre-existing,
• 1:50
  Speaker 2: serious pre-existing mental health problems. His family members have come in.
• 1:54
  Speaker 2: He had been hospitalized before. He had medicated before for
• 1:59
  Speaker 2: severe bipolar disorder, was not on those medications at the time.
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: And they have basically entered into evidence this idea that
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: Hinton was really trying to kill himself because he also,
• 2:12
  Speaker 2: at the same time, he struck Hinton struck a pole,
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: a light pole. And I know it's all bizarre to me,
• 2:21
  Speaker 2: but they're doing a pretty good job of muddying the waters.
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: Well, suicidal ideation has nothing to do with knowing the
• 2:28
  Speaker 1: difference from right or wrong.
• 2:31
  Speaker 2: No, absolutely.
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: Nor does having a mental health problem, pre-existing or otherwise.
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: The question in an insanity plea is, You could not
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: discern the difference between right and wrong at the time
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: you committed the heinous act of running over Camelton County
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: Sheriff's Deputy Larry Henderson. I mean, they have all the experts.
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: You got video camera footage of him. You had the
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: accident reconstruction expert talking about how he went from zero
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: to plus 50 in about a second or two, I mean,
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: or four or five seconds. He adjusted the direction of
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: his car on the fly to make sure he was
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: aiming at the sheriff's deputy. And they even have a
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: psychiatrist testimony that he admitted out loud that he really
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: kind of did that. I mean, I know I had
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: to turn a little bit to hit him, Hinton said.
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: That says he was aware and engaged in, sounds to
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: me like a specific action in order to bring about
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: the result that happened.
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: Well, look, I agree with you. I wouldn't struggle with
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: this at all. I thought this was murder from the beginning.
• 3:31
  Speaker 2: Like I said, I didn't know Larry Henderson well, but
• 3:33
  Speaker 2: I did know him, and I'm absolutely sick and disgusted
• 3:37
  Speaker 2: as to where this seems to be going. But I
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: can tell you that I've watched big, big chunks of
• 3:44
  Speaker 2: the trial that are being live streamed, you know, spoken
• 3:47
  Speaker 2: to some of the attorneys involved. And just what seems
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: to be playing out in that room is that they have,
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: is that his defense team has really sort of muddied
• 3:58
  Speaker 2: the waters as to whether or not his mental health
• 4:01
  Speaker 2: situation was so severe. He couldn't, do anything in there
• 4:04
  Speaker 2: and I don't think they've got enough evidence to get
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: a true not guilty by reason of insanity but they
• 4:10
  Speaker 2: have done a good job it seems of creating some
• 4:15
  Speaker 2: sympathy for him and the prosecution's case has been very
• 4:18
  Speaker 2: slow and scattered it took them four days to get
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: the accident reconstructionist into the record which is something they
• 4:24
  Speaker 2: should have done right away because that was their best
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: evidence the black box in the vehicle clearly shows a
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: last minute swerve which indicates some awareness of what he
• 4:35
  Speaker 2: was doing. And the idea that he was actually trying
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: to kill himself by hitting a telephone pole or a
• 4:40
  Speaker 2: light pole is absurd. But they do have, they had
• 4:44
  Speaker 2: an eyewitness to that effect that said, look, he seemed
• 4:46
  Speaker 2: to be trying to go at the pole more than
• 4:49
  Speaker 2: anything else, even though the black box does show a
• 4:53
  Speaker 2: last minute swerve, as you noted. So I think what
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: they're trying to do is to create enough sympathy so
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: that there might be a compromise between, you know, I
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: don't think there's anyone on the jury that wants to
• 5:04
  Speaker 2: totally let him go. I doubt most of the jury's
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: buying this not guilty by reason of insanity defense. So
• 5:10
  Speaker 2: the idea is to give a jury that might be
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: deadlocked or have a couple holdouts this middle ground. And
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: I think reckless homicide here would be a real travesty
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: if that's where it goes. But it just, it feels
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: that way to.
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: Me, unfortunately. The mental element here, moving it away from
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: whether he knew right or wrong, the mens rea element
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: with a murder is an intentional murder. He planned it.
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: He wanted to do it. It was a specific target.
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: He knew everything about it. But insofar as reckless homicide,
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: that's sort of an inadvertent death, isn't it? There was
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: no intent to kill somebody?
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: That's exactly right. In order for the jury to get
• 5:48
  Speaker 2: to this reckless homicide idea, they have to buy that
• 5:50
  Speaker 2: he had this suicidal ideation. was trying to hit the
• 5:54
  Speaker 2: pole and just basically killed Deputy Anderson incidentally. You know,
• 6:00
  Speaker 2: I don't think that's what happened. I don't think that's
• 6:02
  Speaker 2: what the evidence shows happened. But, you know, really it
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: feels like to me the strategy from the defense all
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: along was to get one or two jurors. They weren't
• 6:11
  Speaker 2: looking for an acquittal. They were looking for a hung
• 6:14
  Speaker 2: jury or to lay enough of an evidence, like lay
• 6:18
  Speaker 2: enough of a factual predicate to convince the judge to
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: put in some sort of lesser charge So this, it
• 6:24
  Speaker 2: looks like, was their strategy all along. We'll see if
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: they buy it. I mean, it could very well be
• 6:28
  Speaker 2: that the jurors just turn around and go back and say, look,
• 6:32
  Speaker 2: we're going to go with the accident reconstruction testimony and
• 6:37
  Speaker 2: what the psychologist said, because it seems to me that
• 6:41
  Speaker 2: Hinton almost basically admitted it to the psychologist who reviewed
• 6:45
  Speaker 2: him from the state. But he also, his psychologist, I
• 6:48
  Speaker 2: watched most of her testimony, And she did a really, really,
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: I disagree with it, but a very compelling job of
• 6:55
  Speaker 2: laying out just basically, for lack of a better term,
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: that Mr. Hinton was crazier than we knew and crazier
• 7:03
  Speaker 2: than it seemed and had like a longer and more
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: detailed and more severe mental health history than would have
• 7:09
  Speaker 2: been reported elsewhere. And I also, and I don't want
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: to just sit here and beat on the prosecution, but
• 7:14
  Speaker 2: I did that for many years down there. And I've
• 7:16
  Speaker 2: tried these NGRI cases. They're very hard to do. Yeah.
• 7:19
  Speaker 2: And what the reports I'm getting is that the jurors
• 7:22
  Speaker 2: were really, you know, obviously could be obviously seen being
• 7:27
  Speaker 2: bored and lost by the state's case. And I get
• 7:30
  Speaker 2: a part of that is just a function of how
• 7:32
  Speaker 2: these cases have to be put on. They're kind of
• 7:35
  Speaker 2: strange in that you have to lay a detailed factual
• 7:38
  Speaker 2: predicate by the prosecution about what happened and then wait
• 7:43
  Speaker 2: for the defense to actually put on evidence about mental state.
• 7:47
  Speaker 2: And then you come back and rebut that. It's what's
• 7:49
  Speaker 2: called an affirmative defense. So you're in a weird place
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: as it is. But the bottom line is it took
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: the prosecution four days of jury selection, opening statements, and
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: trial before they put the first evidence into the record
• 8:05
  Speaker 2: about intent. And there's concern among some of the other
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: folks I know who have been observing this that they
• 8:13
  Speaker 2: might have kind of lost the jury in the process.
• 8:16
  Speaker 2: I think you've got to come out strong and fast.
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: first impressions matter here. And it feels as though there
• 8:24
  Speaker 2: were moments where it was kind of meandering. And I
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: would also note this eyewitness who raised the issue about
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: whether or not he was actually trying to drive into
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: the pole and kill himself. That was a state witness.
• 8:36
  Speaker 2: I mean, that was not something the defense put on.
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: That was a witness for the prosecution who got twisted
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: up and said that and who put all that out
• 8:45
  Speaker 2: on cross-examination. So, You know, if this ends up as
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: a reckless homicide, I think there's going to be a
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: lot of questions in that prosecutor's office about how we
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: got here.
• 8:55
  Speaker 1: Steve Gooden from Porter Wright, when do you expect them
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: to begin deliberations, if you had to guess?
• 9:01
  Speaker 2: Probably not until next week. I mean, I just heard
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: from what the judge kind of announced is there's probably
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: another full half day, at least today, of psychiatric testimony.
• 9:12
  Speaker 2: I would note that there are two psychologists testifying for
• 9:16
  Speaker 2: the state. There was an independent examiner as well that
• 9:19
  Speaker 2: the court appointed. We don't know what she's going to
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: say yet, but the fact that the prosecution is calling
• 9:24
  Speaker 2: her and not the defense indicates that they also found that.
• 9:29
  Speaker 2: So this may change over the course of today, but
• 9:32
  Speaker 2: we would anticipate closing arguments later this afternoon or Monday,
• 9:35
  Speaker 2: and I wouldn't imagine the jury really starts delivering seriously
• 9:38
  Speaker 2: until Tuesday of next week.
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: Steve Gooden, cannot thank you enough for your thoughtful analysis
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: and joining the program late this morning. It was a
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: pleasure to have you on. I'll look forward to talking
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: with you again, hopefully about this in the very near future.
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: Steve Gooden, Porter Rights, where you find him and his team,
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: and they are outstanding lawyers. Steve, take care and thank you.