Latest / Military Broadcast Radio | MBR Talk / Into the Weeds Podcast - Athena Tina Hogan Part 12 Still Searching for Answers

Transcript

Into the Weeds Podcast - Athena Tina Hogan Part 12 Still Searching for Answers · Military Broadcast Radio | MBR Talk

0:21
Hello, everybody. Hello, everybody, and welcome to
0:25
Into the Weeds podcast here on military broadcast radio.
0:28
I'm Amber. Thank you for joining me
0:31
Tonight. Laura is at karaoke and getting
0:34
her, she's getting her hair done and then going to karaoke.
0:37
So that's where she's at. And I have been gone for two
0:41
weeks and it's been, it feels like it's been forever.
0:47
I got braces. So that's been an interesting
0:51
experience. I have already.
0:54
Sorry. I'm trying to fix that.
0:57
Joel. We're having trouble with
0:59
TikTok. Just so you know, we're
1:03
streaming on Facebook 2 places, LinkedIn, two places on YouTube,
1:11
we're on X Roku, Fire TV, so and we're supposed to be on TikTok,
1:18
but for some reason TikTok, the connection doesn't always work
1:22
immediately and Joel has to come in and fix it.
1:25
So yeah. So last week I was at a funeral
1:31
for a Navy veteran. And so and then what else?
1:39
What else have I done? Oh, I went to Chillicothe on
1:42
Friday, not this Friday, but last Friday.
1:45
And that was a very interesting experience.
1:49
So, I mean, the whole experience was great.
1:53
We had a food visit. I brought Shelly a fat steak.
1:57
And what else did I bring her? Fried Pickles, cheeseburger
2:04
wontons. I went to Applebee's.
2:06
I was going to go to a better restaurant, but I couldn't find
2:14
what I wanted. So I actually had Shelly on the
2:17
phone and we were going through menus.
2:20
And So what else did I get her? I got her.
2:24
Oh, mashed potatoes, broccoli. Oh, a shrimp bowl.
2:31
No fried green tomatoes. I freaking love fried green
2:35
tomatoes. Good to see you, Kung Fu Panda.
2:37
Enjoy. And also a Blondie brownie.
2:43
Blondie brownie. Sorry.
2:46
And a bunch of pecans and dried fruit and but so that was a
2:52
great visit. But afterwards, after we left,
2:57
Shelly went into the back and she, she got, everybody got put
3:03
on institutional lockdown. And so I didn't hear, hear from
3:08
her for like 5 hours. She calls me back and, or she
3:13
calls me and she's like, hey, we've been on institutional
3:16
lockdown for five hours. And at that point, we didn't, we
3:21
still didn't know what had happened.
3:24
And so all 16 women in the visiting room, they were all
3:29
like secluded from everybody else and they were walked as a
3:33
group to their individual pods and everything.
3:36
And one of the women that's been there for like 8 years said she
3:40
had never seen anything like that before.
3:42
So we were all trying to figure out.
3:44
What the heck? Happened and oh and while Shelly
3:49
was in the visiting room with us, they went into Shelly's pod
3:54
to try and find her. And I have no idea what happened
3:58
exactly, but for some reason they went into her pod and
4:03
searched the whole thing trying to find her.
4:05
So yeah. But I guess what eventually
4:09
happened, or what we found out eventually happened, was that
4:14
some inmate went home and they did count wrong.
4:19
And so everybody got messed up and it was just a wild
4:24
experience that a lot of the women had never experienced
4:26
before. So yeah, that was, that was very
4:31
interesting 'cause I was searching, you know, trying to
4:33
figure out if somebody had snuck something in 'cause like they
4:37
didn't search the food or anything.
4:39
You know, so who knows what they could have gotten in, you know?
4:44
So anyways, enough about that. Yeah.
4:48
So. I can't think of, oh, Monday the
4:53
28th is Laura's birthday. And so we are going to Branson
4:59
and she's going to be 26 years old.
5:02
And so her and I are going to have a mother daughter adventure
5:06
in Branson. And I have no idea what we're
5:09
going to get up to, but if you see us in Branson, come say hi.
5:14
OK, so we are going to get into Athena Hogan Part 12 and last
5:21
week. Let me take.
5:22
This off real quick. Last week we stopped at or not
5:28
last week the last time we did Athena Hogan, we stopped on page
5:32
414 and we're just going to continue there and let me.
5:42
So the last time we left off it was page 414 with OSBI forensic
5:49
criminalist and G Reed still on the stand.
5:54
And Mr. Zelps, the defense was cross examining her about fiber
5:59
evidence, specifically her experiences identifying nylon
6:04
fibers. So we're going to pick up there
6:06
and I don't know how well I'm going to be able to read with
6:09
these braces on because I've tried it a couple of times and
6:13
it's pretty interesting. So I'm going to put my studio
6:16
over here and I'm going to bring these up.
6:22
OK. So we're starting on page 414
6:25
and it says we, there's an answer here.
6:29
It says we don't have as many fiber cases.
6:32
And then the question for Mr. Zelf says, OK, And they're a
6:36
little bit different, aren't they?
6:38
Yes, they are. OK.
6:40
How does a person such as you determine that it's Nylon 66?
6:44
Is there a picture book you go to and or?
6:48
No, I don't mean I'm not. I know it sounds humorous.
6:52
Is there a book somewhere you go to?
6:54
And, well, we have a number of sources like lawyers and
6:59
doctors, and we look in them and see if the characteristics are
7:03
there. Yeah, We have a number of
7:06
different sources. The literature has many
7:08
different sources of information on fibers.
7:11
I'm trying to find some of this literature.
7:15
OK. The first information we we ever
7:18
received on fibers that I recall was from DuPont.
7:22
Well, I got a story about DuPont, but that's for another
7:24
day. DuPont.
7:27
Published a book. Showing different cross
7:29
sections, different characteristics of fibers.
7:32
Do you recall maybe when that was published?
7:36
No, I know I received it when I was working on a case about 10
7:40
years ago. Yeah, I think Chillicothe is run
7:49
kind of like South Park, honestly.
7:53
OK. Do you recall maybe when that
7:57
was published? No, I know.
8:00
I received it when I was working on a case about 10 years ago.
8:04
OK, Now they don't publish it anymore.
8:07
It's published by someone else and I will have to give you the
8:10
title and information later. If I call you up there, surely,
8:16
will you give me any of the literature?
8:18
Yes, that you used to try to identify this as Nylon 66.
8:24
I'll give you some of it, some of it.
8:26
You know, I use it without really OK realizing I'm using it
8:31
in this. OK, you'll just give me that
8:34
literature. That's what we need.
8:37
Oh, yes, yes. OK, Be glad to.
8:40
Is there any leading or what you would consider a leading expert
8:44
in fiber identification or fiber analyzation, anybody that you
8:50
would think is probably on the cutting edge of this in the
8:53
country? Well, I know a man that always
8:58
starts out bad. Well, I know a man, maybe in the
9:01
world. Hope I don't have to go shopping
9:04
that far. I know a man who is very good at
9:07
it. I have a great deal of respect
9:08
for his work. I don't think he will be
9:10
available to you. What is his?
9:13
His name is Hall Deadman. He works for the FBI.
9:17
Hall might not unless he retires.
9:19
Where is Hall located? He's in the laboratory in
9:23
Washington, DC. Quantico, Virginia, Yes, I think
9:27
he's actually in the I don't know if he's at Quantico or
9:30
actually in Washington, DC. His name is last name is
9:35
Deadman. Dead man.
9:38
Yes, Sir. Great name for a forensic
9:41
chemist. Anybody else that you think is
9:44
pretty well re recognized? Mr. Tannery, Judge, he can get
9:50
that information later. It's irrelevant.
9:52
The court. No, he can.
9:54
I'm going to allow him a little bit of discovery here.
9:57
This is a rather rare area. If you have a couple of names,
10:00
you can supply him private people.
10:02
I know by Mr. Zopps, they can. The FBI has.
10:07
Rules. Down in Texas, some of those
10:09
Texas guys, they can testify for the defense too, Yeah, but I'm
10:14
not sure if any of them. Some of them, some hair experts.
10:17
There's John Wilson out of Kansas City, MO, and there are
10:21
some private labs down in Texas, but I don't know how much fiber
10:25
work any of those people have done.
10:28
Sorry, guys. I don't know where my dog sitter
10:30
is. All right, Would you assist me
10:34
in any way that you could? If I'm not sure what, the judge?
10:38
Sure, it's going to do with this case yet, but if he binds it
10:43
over and we're going to have a trial.
10:46
If I called you, you I could pick your brain, Sure.
10:50
See if I could find somebody that you wouldn't laugh about.
10:54
If I called as a witness, I would.
10:57
I would much rather you had a credible witness.
11:00
Yes. Oh, I like them too.
11:02
Now, how about the University of Oklahoma?
11:05
You know, they've got some people down there that do race
11:07
research and things. Uh huh.
11:11
I'm wondering, do you, is there anybody off the top of your head
11:16
that you might think would be doing some research and fibers
11:20
might know about these type of things?
11:23
I'm not familiar with any of them.
11:25
If they are, I have a feeling we, we have probably heard of
11:30
them if they were doing much of it.
11:33
OK. And I'm doing private analysis.
11:35
I can't think of anyone in Stillwater either.
11:38
OK. It's not a field don't have a
11:43
lot you're going to call have a lot of call for in private
11:49
industry or anything like that. I'm sure DuPont has some
11:52
chemists, but yeah, I don't know that you can.
11:57
I'm finding it weird that she's pushing back on getting an.
12:01
Expert like that that's. Really weird to me.
12:05
You would think that she would be willing to.
12:10
Have an expert opinion. And it seems like she's pushing
12:13
back on that. I don't know.
12:15
I just find it weird, man. I wish I could tell you guys the
12:19
story about DuPont. OK?
12:27
I don't think they'd call Mr. DuPont and find out.
12:29
OK. And tell me now exactly what
12:32
test you performed on those fibers.
12:35
OK. On I use the polarized
12:37
microscope. OK.
12:39
Is there a special kind that you say is better than others or if
12:42
somebody has a polarized microscope, it's you would say
12:46
that would be OK? Of course some of them are going
12:49
to be better grades than other, right?
12:52
The one we use is a Nikon. Nikon, yes, and we're happy with
12:56
it. OK, What else did you do to
12:58
them? OK, I determined the lobe index,
13:01
that is the width of the lobe in comparison to the width of the
13:04
fiber. OK, most of that work is done on
13:08
the. Pull scope, but it has a
13:11
measuring device on it, right? Right.
13:14
Then I did. Did you try to do every?
13:17
Did you try to do everything that you could with the pull
13:20
scope? In other words, you tried to
13:22
measure it. Everything that the scope will
13:24
do, you tried to do with the scope.
13:26
Everything, everything that I thought would be of any value,
13:30
OK, with nylon fibers. OK, I also did solubilities.
13:37
Now tell us about that. OK, what is that?
13:41
The main one? The main ones I did.
13:44
Well, solubility means it dissolves basically whether or
13:47
not it dissolves. OK, I use formic acid.
13:51
Now both types of nylon, Nylon 66 and six will dissolve in
13:56
formic acid. I also use 4.2 hydrochloric
14:00
hydrochloric acid. OK, now this distinguishes
14:06
between nylon 66, Nylon 6. Nylon 66 will not dissolve in
14:11
it, Nylon 6 will. OK, I then went back to my
14:14
comparison. Comparison scope, you want to do
14:19
a limited amount of solubility work simply because you need to
14:22
have some of the same sample left.
14:25
That's right. And especially in our case,
14:28
because we do not want it available for private experts.
14:31
So we try to. Oh.
14:34
Especially in our case because we do want it available for
14:38
private experts, so we try to use very small amounts and do
14:42
just the number that we need to narrow down our determination.
14:47
On the on the comparison scope, I did basically the same thing
14:51
that you would do with the hair. That is, I compared them side by
14:55
side. I went the length of the fiber,
14:57
I matched up colors, I matched up wear patterns, I matched up
15:01
Delu string. You did the standard.
15:04
Comparison. Yes.
15:06
What you use a what you use a comparison microscope for?
15:13
Yes, yes. And I compared them at most of
15:15
the time on course fibers like this.
15:18
The highest you need you need is to go is like 250.
15:23
You don't need to go as high as you do on hairs.
15:27
OK, Now any other tests? I pretty much other than those
15:30
tests, were there any other tests that you performed?
15:34
No, Sir. OK, I can't recall any.
15:38
Let me ask you this. I don't know how to say it is.
15:41
Color a relative. Thing well it is relative in a
15:45
way. That's why we're using the
15:47
comparison microscope so you can look at it side by side.
15:51
They a lot of literature has been written and they say the
15:54
naked eye is one of the best judges of variation in color
15:58
that's available. And if you're ever tired, or if
16:02
you've ever tried to match 2 shades of black or two shades of
16:06
red, you pretty sure that is. I'm.
16:09
Colorblind. So to me, things, you know, I'd
16:12
have a hard time saying what color it is and that's you rely
16:16
upon your eyes too. Yes.
16:18
Is it possible that another person looking at those same
16:21
items could come up with what they describe as a different
16:24
color? They might describe it
16:27
differently to say that they appear different colors if
16:30
there's a color. Well, I don't even think if
16:34
they're colorblind they would. Well, what I'm saying is, I
16:38
mean, is it they might not describe the color exactly the
16:42
way I have as an orangish red or a red, or they might say a
16:46
different word, right? Well, you and I would agree that
16:50
whatever color the known and whatever color the unknown is,
16:54
that's their color. I mean, whatever it is the human
17:00
factor is, I might call it white and you might call it off white.
17:05
That's what I'm getting. To OK stay golden like pony boy.
17:15
Yeah, just don't be as ornery. Well, the war is honorary.
17:21
Never mind. OK Is it OK?
17:28
Matt Dillon and that. Oh my Lord.
17:32
You know, Matt Dillon, I really. Had like, I don't know that it
17:38
was an obsession or anything like that or like a crush or
17:41
whatever, but I remember that movie that him and Christy
17:45
Mcnichol were in and for whatever reason, the two of them
17:50
were like cemented in my mind is like the epitome of cool.
17:55
I don't know. I don't know, yes.
18:02
I don't even remember what the name of that movie was.
18:06
OK, is it OK now? There Now, was there any
18:13
hesitance in your identification of color from the known or
18:16
unknown? That's really where I'm trying
18:18
to get to. Or did they look the same to
18:21
you? They look the same.
18:25
I had a crush on them. I had a crush on.
18:27
Sam Elliott for sure. OK, Yeah.
18:35
Sam Elliott in in mask. Yeah.
18:38
For whatever reason, that just set my little, I don't know how,
18:42
how, how old I was, but that set my little heart a pattern.
18:49
Yeah. Sam Elliott in the mask.
18:52
Little darlings. That's what it is.
18:54
Yes. Good joy.
18:56
Good joy. OK.
19:00
All right. Now, would you agree that Nylon
19:03
66 and Nylon 6 both have dyes in those fibers?
19:07
I mean that those fibers are dyed?
19:09
Yes. Could you tell us, please what
19:11
kind of dye was in them? No, I can't.
19:14
I didn't do analysis of the dye. OK.
19:17
Are you going to do 1? Are you going to try?
19:20
I wish. I know that you have a limited
19:23
source. Well, the limit.
19:25
Is actually on the equipment to do it.
19:28
OK, So if I got enough samples and then sent it up there to Du
19:32
Pont, they might be able to tell me whatever I wanted to know if
19:36
they would do it. If necessary, we may even go to
19:40
the FBI with it. OK, Good.
19:42
I'd like to. You all going to go to Quantico?
19:46
Call me. I want to go with you.
19:48
I'd like to go up there. I don't know if they'd let you.
19:52
They might let me in. My uncle's a senator.
19:57
Good old Mr. Zoltes. Now, how would a fellow find out
20:01
who made the unknown fiber? The best way would be to find
20:07
out who put it. I'd start with the known.
20:09
It's much easier to work from a known source than from an
20:13
unknown source. Yeah, Christy Mcnichol was
20:19
beautiful tomboy, but she was beautiful.
20:27
Pulling the senator uncle card. Yep, so many of those.
20:32
You know my cousin Shelley's cousin is the mayor of Joplin
20:42
where they bought it. Then go to the company they
20:44
bought it from. See where it's manufactured.
20:47
If they still know. You have to realize that
20:50
sometimes the fiber is made by company one company and the
20:54
carpet is made by another. OK, I have tracked some back
21:00
that way. It's extremely difficult.
21:03
Is there a National Carpet Institute or anybody like that?
21:06
Do you are you familiar with anybody?
21:10
Not that I'm aware of. We wish there was some kind of
21:13
just one place you could call and get the information.
21:17
OK, All right. Got what we need about carpet
21:20
now. Let's talk about Robert Taylor.
21:23
Did you did some analysis of items taken out of his car,
21:26
didn't you? Yes, Sir, I did.
21:29
And one thing that you did an analysis on was an item.
21:33
Let me ask you this. Number one paper bundle
21:36
containing hairs found in the right front floor.
21:40
OK. Uh huh.
21:42
Did you compare that to the unknown hair I have to the
21:46
unknown? Yes.
21:47
Excuse me. The unknown.
21:48
Excuse me? The known that came out of
21:51
Robert Taylor's vehicle, that was an unknown item.
21:56
Number one. That's an unknown to me.
21:58
OK, Well, it's unknown out of Robert Taylor's.
22:01
Excuse me. Right, let's get on the right.
22:05
I'll talk the way you do, OK? Yeah, exactly.
22:18
Uncle, Brother. Cousin.
22:19
Dad. Hillary.
22:21
Yeah, not a tree. It is Oklahoma.
22:26
So, oh, OK, let's see. Did it, did you do an analysis
22:39
with that, comparing it to the unknown off of the sheet or off
22:43
of the body? Well, you don't do that.
22:46
What you do is you compare an unknown to a known.
22:50
What I will do with it, I haven't done it yet.
22:53
Is compared that unknown with a hair from Athena Hogan.
22:57
Does that make sense? Sure, I'd like you to do that.
23:01
What I'm saying, though, is we have an unknown on the sheet.
23:06
Uh huh. We don't know whose that is.
23:11
No, it's theirs. It's theirs, at least a part of.
23:16
It's consistent with a head hair that you know about, right?
23:20
Yes. OK.
23:22
Doesn't mean that he's the only one that's walking around that
23:26
would have the same type of hair.
23:28
What I'm saying is if the unknown from Robert Taylor to
23:32
Robert Taylor's vehicle is consistent with the unknown hair
23:36
from the sheet where the body was, I could do that.
23:40
It's generally not the way we do it.
23:44
That would mean something. I know it.
23:46
I'm just asking. You haven't done that.
23:49
No, I haven't. You haven't compared those to
23:52
see if some way there's some link?
23:55
No. I still have a lot of hair work
23:57
to do. Hey, Cherokee girl.
24:02
OK, Now you did look item number 2 from Robert Taylor's vehicle.
24:07
What was that? OK, it was a paper bundle
24:11
containing scrapings of possible blood from the right front
24:14
floorboard. Did you do an analysis?
24:17
An analysis on that? Yes, Sir, I did.
24:20
And please tell us what your opinion of that was.
24:23
That is human blood. However, there was insufficient
24:27
for further tests. OK, it was very small.
24:33
It was human blood though, isn't it?
24:35
Yes, that means a human blood in that car, right?
24:41
Well, there was some human with some blood on it in that car,
24:45
Yes. And they said from the right
24:48
front floorboard. Is that what your information
24:51
also says? Yes, Sir.
24:54
And did you know in Robert Taylor's Volkswagen, the right
24:57
front seat had been removed? Drove it around like Ted Bundy
25:01
used it to drive his around. Drove it around like Ted Bundy
25:07
used to drive his around. Sorry, I don't drink pumpkin
25:12
spice, so no worries. Welcome to the carpet fiber
25:19
discussions. And now we're getting into Ted
25:22
Bundy again. Someone may have mentioned it to
25:25
me. They ever talk about Ted Bundy?
25:27
In this case, similarities about the car we've talked about so
25:32
much. OK, I can't really remember for
25:35
sure. OK, you found blood there now.
25:39
Was there another place that was there some more?
25:42
Let's see #19 the rear, the rear, the rear right wall panel.
25:48
OK, that was, would that have been on the inside of the
25:52
vehicle? I think it was.
25:54
All I saw was the panel. OK, but it looked like what's
25:59
inside your vehicle. OK, And that would be the right
26:03
rear. In other words, if there was no
26:06
front seat, that would still be on the OR no front passenger
26:10
seat. That's still on the same side,
26:12
right? Uh huh.
26:14
The panel wall might be, would that be, you think, close to the
26:18
floor or do you know? I don't know.
26:23
OK. I really don't.
26:25
You found blood there anyhow, didn't you?
26:27
There was a small smear. Yes, Sir, it was.
26:31
Was it also such small quantity that you could not identify?
26:35
I mean, couldn't do any a group further testing?
26:39
Yes, Sir, it was. So all that best we're able to
26:43
say is that it was human blood. It's human blood.
26:47
Have you, do you have a sample of Robert Taylor's head hair and
26:51
pubic hair? No, Sir, I do not.
26:55
Wow. They don't have a lot of things
26:57
at this preliminary hearing. Yes.
27:08
OK, Would you like to get your hands?
27:13
This is frustrating because nowadays, you know, of course
27:16
they could take that small sample of blood and totally, you
27:20
know, figure out who it was. I wonder if they have that still
27:32
OK. Would like to get your hands on
27:34
some. Yes, Sir, I would.
27:36
Me too. But he's not a defendant in this
27:38
case anymore. You understand that?
27:40
Yes, Sir. Thank you.
27:41
Miss Reed. Mr. Zelps, no further questions.
27:45
Mr. Tannery got a couple. Judge.
27:48
Redirect examination. I have to agree.
27:53
Sam is beautiful no matter where.
27:59
OK, by Mr. Tannery on the shirt, you remember it, the victim
28:05
shirt, I think you testified that you found quite a few
28:08
fibers on it. Where were they exactly located?
28:12
Some were located on the outside front of the shirt.
28:15
Some were actually up inside the front of the shirt.
28:19
OK. And when you say inside the
28:21
front where it's what portion of the bottom part?
28:27
It was the lower part of the front, but it it was like, well,
28:31
this is hypothetical, but I don't know how else to explain
28:34
it. It's almost like something was
28:36
rubbed up or pulled up and they were just inside the bottom
28:39
portion of the shirt. I think in your analysis on the
28:43
report, you made a determination of the nature that the fibers
28:47
would have gotten on that inside of the shirt.
28:52
Mr. Zelpes, I'm sorry, I don't understand the question.
28:54
The court. I don't think I did either.
28:58
Mr. Tannery OK, let me rephrase that by Mr. Tannery.
29:03
Did you, from the way that the were the fibers loose on the
29:07
inside of the shirt or were they ground in or what?
29:11
Well, that's real hard to say. They didn't just fall off when I
29:14
was working with it. They were caught well enough
29:17
that I could pull them off. They weren't just falling off
29:21
into my hand. In other words, they were caught
29:24
in the fabric of the shirt. Does that have any significance
29:28
at all to you in your analyzing of them, Mr. Zelps?
29:32
Now, Judge, now I'm going to object at this time, that would
29:36
be totally speculation. I mean, there's the court.
29:39
No overruled. If there is any significance to
29:42
that in her opinion, she can answer.
29:44
She's an expert. I would really hate to say I
29:48
think that's stretching my expertise a little bit.
29:52
You use more tests and a fiber analysis than you do in a hair
29:56
analysis, Is that correct? Yes, hopefully one day.
30:05
Well, it looks like it. You use more different kinds.
30:09
Actually in a fiber you have less in a way that you can see
30:13
microscopically. A fiber is fairly consistent all
30:16
the way through the fiber and the hair of course varies.
30:19
So it looks like a lot more different tests, but well, you
30:23
use two different types of microscopes.
30:25
Yes. Yes, compared to only one in one
30:28
of the other exams, right? Of course you haven't examined
30:33
every hair in the world. No, you've examined hair from
30:36
twins, have you not? Yes, Sir, I have.
30:40
Were you able to say there were consistent and could have come
30:44
from the same source on any you've ever examined?
30:48
I've been able to distinguish between all the identical twins
30:52
hairs I've looked at at this time, and I'm available for more
30:56
of them. Mr. Zelps, objection to
30:59
relevancy of this at this time, Your Honor, The Court.
31:02
Yeah, That's sustained. Mr. Tannery.
31:05
That's all I have. Mr. Zelps.
31:07
Judge, I do have one more. Question.
31:16
Let's see. Too many kids just gone, taken
31:19
out by weirders. Yeah, it's sick what people do,
31:23
especially to babies. Yeah, it is and the world is
31:27
nuts. I'm done with humans.
31:29
Joy. I think you've been done with
31:30
humans for a while. OK by Mr. Zelt re cross
31:38
examination and on item number 78 has brown paper sack
31:43
containing gun case from northeast bedroom.
31:46
Uh huh. You did analysis on that for
31:49
blood, did you not? Yes, I did.
31:53
Did you find any blood? No, I didn't.
31:56
OK, Mr. Zelps, that's all the questions I have the court.
31:59
Anything else? All right, Miss Reed, you're
32:02
excused. And we're going to pick up again
32:05
on the 7th of January at 1:30. And I'm sure you'll probably get
32:09
a subpoena, but even if you don't, you'll know to be back at
32:13
that time. Witness Reed.
32:15
OK. Thank you, Your Honor.
32:16
Mr. Zelps. Judge, I have another question.
32:19
Mr. Cook has one that he brought to my attention.
32:22
I'm sorry, by Mr. Zelps. Miss Reed.
32:25
Mr. Cook asked me a question to ask you and he said, you know,
32:30
these fibers are they're those little, they're those little
32:35
deals you see in the light sometimes, you know, the light
32:38
shining through the window and you see all that stuff in the
32:41
air and you think, Oh, my God, I'm breathing that.
32:45
Oh, no, no, no, they're bigger than that.
32:48
They're bigger than that. Yeah.
32:50
Do they float around in the air, though?
32:52
I mean, can I be picking up fibers right now?
32:56
If I stood the here, kick this stuff around?
32:59
Well, you would on your shoes and on your pant leg.
33:03
OK. I don't think they're going to
33:05
be floating in the air unless you have a pretty big win.
33:09
OK. That's what we wanted to know.
33:12
The Court. There's been a lot of wind in
33:14
here today. Your excuse.
33:18
OK. Witness Reed.
33:20
Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Zeltz, Thank you.
33:23
And I'll give you a ring and see what we can do.
33:26
The court. Do you have any other witnesses,
33:28
Mr. Tannery? No.
33:30
The court. All right.
33:31
Mr. Zeltz. Judge, Excuse me.
33:34
I don't. I don't know if Mr. Tannery is
33:37
going to rest or not. The court, if he's if he's going
33:41
to rest, then I'll either take your arguments this afternoon or
33:45
I'll let you do some research if you want do it that way.
33:49
It's up to you. Mr. Zelps.
33:52
Judge, the court. First of all, are you going to
33:55
rest or Mr. Tannery was planning on it.
33:59
Mr. Tannery, I was planning on it.
34:01
The court. All right, Mr. Zelps.
34:06
Judge, I'm serious because about my demurmur, and if the court
34:12
was to find in my direction, it would mean that my client
34:15
wouldn't have to sit in the pokey any longer.
34:19
OK. At this time, Your Honor, I
34:23
would. The court.
34:24
OK, Here's what we'll do. Mr. Zelps.
34:27
Yes, Sir. The court.
34:29
The state's going to rest, I assume.
34:31
And Mr. Zelps, I know you have to be somewhere, don't you?
34:36
The court, if you want to just the attorneys want to come back
34:39
on the 9th of December at 1:30 and present me with some
34:43
argument. Mr. Zelps, 9th of December,
34:47
December. OK, The court, That's next
34:50
Tuesday. Mr. Zelps Yes, Sir.
34:53
The court at 1:30. And then you are correct.
34:56
If indeed the court does not feel that the evidence is
34:59
sufficient at that time, then the case would be dismissed and
35:03
your your client would be discharged.
35:06
But the state's the state's arrested.
35:08
Is that is that correct or you're going to Mr. Tannery?
35:13
Yes, we're Mr. Zelps. Yes, Sir.
35:15
I'd like if you could docket this.
35:17
I have some cases I want the court to review the court.
35:22
All right, Mr. Zelps, concerning circumstantial evidence, the
35:27
court OK, then, there being no further evidence by the state
35:32
and defense counsel desiring some time to gather his
35:35
authorities for argument on a demurmur, Court will be in
35:40
recess until December 9th at 1:30, and the attorney should
35:44
appear at that time and ready to present any kind of arguments or
35:48
authorities in regard to the demurmur.
35:52
Yes, Sir. Mr. Zelps.
35:54
Judge, do you have one other matter?
35:56
Would the court entertain a motion for bond in this case of
36:01
any sort? The court?
36:03
Absolutely not. Mr. Zelps, Thank you, Your
36:06
Honor. The Court.
36:08
Anything else at this time, Mr. Tannery?
36:11
Judge, there's only one thing that bothers me.
36:14
Of course, I know that I'd argue at this point in time, but Mr.
36:18
Zelps is going to be given time to look up things.
36:21
I don't know what he's going to be looking up to try to locate
36:25
and argue against. So Mr. Selves, oh, Judge, can I
36:29
do this? The court?
36:31
Well, I, I, I can anticipate what the argument will be and I
36:36
believe I'm familiar with the case law already.
36:39
But if you feel like you need time to respond, then I don't
36:43
have any problem. Mr. Tannery at the time that he
36:46
brings the court, Right. Mr. Tannery that if there's
36:51
something that I'm not expecting, I would like to
36:54
reserve time. The court, I think there's
36:57
there's several Mr. Zelps Dick I'm the court, several cases in
37:02
that area. We probably should all review
37:04
and be ready to argue. Mr. Zelps Dick, I'll be happy to
37:09
show you those. Set a date before the hearing.
37:11
The case I'm going to rely on the court, the court's going to
37:15
retain custody of these exhibits that have been admitted and any
37:19
other exhibits that have been talked about but not admitted
37:22
needed need to be returned to the party who offered them.
37:27
The court will be in recess then in this matter until December
37:31
9th at 1:30. Mr. Tannery, you say you're
37:35
keeping all the evidence? The court.
37:37
Yes, close the record upon proceedings had On this date
37:41
were concluded. Upon reconvening on December
37:44
9th, 1986, the following proceedings were had to wit.
37:50
I'm going to look at. The OK, yeah, he's got great
37:57
hair. But your honor, he's guilty.
38:01
I know that's what it sounds like.
38:05
You know, I don't know. I don't know.
38:07
I still. I'm still leaning towards Ronnie
38:16
Miller junior. I don't know.
38:21
OK, The court, all right. This is a continuation of the
38:25
preliminary hearing in CRF86587, The State of Oklahoma versus
38:32
Harvey Lee Templeton. The appearances are the same as
38:35
when we adjourned. Accepting, accepting.
38:38
Mr. Jerry cued now appears with Mr. Cook and Mr. Zelps for the
38:44
defendant. The State rested at the council
38:47
of the hearing on the 5th of December and the court reserved
38:50
this time for the murder for the demurmur by the defendant and
38:56
Mr. Zelps. If you're ready also, Mr.
38:59
Schulte, if you want to sit up here where you can observe this
39:03
better or communicate with Mr. Tannery, you're welcome to do
39:06
that. Mister Schulte.
39:08
I thank you, Your Honor, but I may have to leave in a few
39:11
minutes. The court.
39:12
All right. State.
39:13
Ready, Mr. Tannery? Yes, Your Honor.
39:16
The court defendant. Ready, Mr. Zelps?
39:19
Yes, Your Honor. The court.
39:21
All right, Go ahead, Mr. Zelps. Your Honor, at this time comes
39:26
the defendant Harvey Lee Templeton and demures to state's
39:30
evidence. Specifically, the defendant
39:32
would demure to the specific points that follow.
39:36
This case is entirely based on circumstantial evidence.
39:39
The best that we have here in any way to indicate anything
39:42
that's out of the ordinary would be the the testimony of Anne
39:46
Reed. As I recall the testimony as
39:49
well, I'm sure as the court does.
39:51
Her testimony was to my question, can you tell us that
39:54
those fibers, carpet fibers came out of Harvey, Harvey
39:59
Templeton's house and she said no.
40:02
As to the hair, the same or similar type of question was
40:05
asked. Can you say that hair came off
40:07
his head? She said no.
40:10
Then in addition to that, Your Honor, to the question asked,
40:13
assuming that the hair is Harvey's or assuming that the
40:16
fiber can come out of Harvey's for the purposes of argument out
40:20
of his home, Can you tell us when that was, when that was
40:24
placed, when when it came out of the home, when it was removed
40:28
And she said no. Well, in addition to that, Your
40:32
Honor, there's an there's evidence before the court that
40:35
the defendant's daughter, stepdaughter Kay were
40:38
girlfriends with the deceased, played together, very close
40:41
friends, had spent the night. Now taking all those things into
40:46
taking all those things together.
40:48
In addition, the other the other evidence is, Your Honor, that a
40:52
statement made by the defendant that the little girl had come by
40:55
his house at approximately 530 inside the house and he didn't
41:00
buy any candy and she left just like a bunch of other people in
41:03
the neighborhood. She had been there that day.
41:06
What, if anything, does that prove?
41:09
State the case of the State of Oklahoma versus Weese spelled
41:15
WEESE 625, Page 2DA118 stands for the proposition.
41:25
Essentially, the facts were as follows.
41:29
It is a preliminary hearing case where the defendant in that case
41:33
demurred to the state's evidence based upon the proposition that
41:37
conviction on circumstantial evidence cannot be sustained and
41:41
proof does not exclude every other reasonable hypothesis
41:46
except that of guilt and a proof mounting only to strong
41:50
suspicion or mere probability. It's insufficient.
42:02
In other words, if the state relies totally upon
42:05
circumstantial evidence, all that evidence must point towards
42:09
guilt. If there's any reasonable
42:11
hypothesis to explain away the circumstantial evidence that
42:14
cannot ever even be submitted to a jury.
42:18
It's the defendant's position in here, your Honor, that that's
42:22
exactly what they have. The Wiese case, the judge, the
42:26
magistrate sustained the demure, which was ruled 6D to the
42:32
District Court level. The District Judge agreed with
42:35
the magistrate and the state at the time appealed it to the
42:39
court. Criminal appeals.
42:41
This this has been shepardized and this is the current status
42:46
of the law that a magistrate at this level has the authority to
42:50
to sustain a demure based upon the circumstantial evidence
42:55
argument and your honor I have that case for the court's
42:58
review. I in addition, I have Brown
43:02
versus state of Oklahoma, which sets out the proposition for
43:05
circumstantial evidence. In other words, it has to point
43:09
towards guilt and nothing else. It's narcotics cases, but
43:13
proposition still good have a long.
43:16
Line of. Case cases of those Mcgahn, GA,
43:22
excuse me, MAGANN versus state, that's six O 1 page 2D123, Brown
43:31
versus state that's 181 page 2D475 and so on and so forth.
43:40
I don't know if that's. Page my bad and I have.
43:43
Those for the courts to review also, Your Honor.
43:46
The Court. All right, Mr. Zelps.
43:48
So we would demur to the evidence.
43:51
It's just not there, Your Honor. The Court.
43:54
OK. Mr. Cook or Mr. Cude, is there
43:57
anything you want to, Mr. Cude? I have nothing.
44:00
The court address, Mr. Cook? Nothing, Your Honor.
44:04
The Court. All right, Mr. Tannery.
44:07
Mr. Tannery? Yes, Your Honor, uniform jury
44:11
instructions which were adopted in 1981 have been changed
44:15
basically by case law and we have some judges ignoring that
44:19
at this time and some not. The uniform jury instruction on
44:23
the proposition that Mister Zelps just discussed in this
44:29
very courthouse by at least two or three District Court judges
44:33
is not even used anymore because of 1984 cases that have come out
44:38
in effect changing the language that use that was used in the
44:42
Weezy case. And I'm referring to Dodson
44:45
versus state. January of 1984 case and round.
44:49
State versus rounds versus state, which is a February 1984
44:55
case. The court did you say rounds,
44:58
Mr. Tannery Rounds. The court ROUNDS, Mr. Tannery?
45:04
Ricky Rounds, the court ROUNDS Mr. Tannery.
45:11
Yes, the court, OK Mr. Tannery. Basically in the Dodson case and
45:17
in the Rounds case, what the Court of Criminal Appeals in
45:21
Oklahoma has now said is that a criminal case may be proved by
45:25
circumstantial evidence, and any reasonable inference drawn
45:29
therefrom has the same probative effect as direct testimony.
45:34
And it says, furthermore, such inferences need not exclude
45:38
every hypothesis or negate any possibility other than guilt.
45:43
And according to, of course, the uniform jury instructions, that
45:47
is the wording basically that we have the reason that the Weese
45:50
case said that, it says it's because the state proved lack or
45:56
did not prove the corpus delecti, In other words, that a
46:00
crime had occurred beyond to a probable cause level and was
46:05
using circumstantial evidence to attempt to do that.
46:08
In this case, of course, we don't have that situation.
46:12
We have the corpus dilecti, which is the fact that there was
46:16
a death and it was a homicide. There is proof not by
46:19
circumstantial but by direct evidence.
46:22
So the state is not relying upon every element of the offense in
46:26
this particular case to be proved by circumstantial
46:29
evidence. And while circumstantial
46:32
evidence may or may not be applicable in a trial before a
46:35
jury, that's something that of course could be raised and it
46:39
argued in the instruction stage after a case is submitted to a
46:42
jury. I feel certainly that we're not
46:46
at the stage at this point in a preliminary hearing, according
46:49
to the recent case authorities, in effect changing the standard
46:53
in a circumstantial evidence instruction at trial that we
46:57
should rely upon Weezy opinion anymore.
46:59
In fact I feel. That it's been.
47:02
Overruled by these recent court, Court of Criminal Appeals cases.
47:07
And we feel that, yes, there is circumstantial evidence, too,
47:11
that will be used against the defendant, but the state is not
47:14
going to rely upon entirely circumstantial evidence to prove
47:17
every element of the crime in this case.
47:20
I'll provide copies of those cases for the court to read if
47:24
it desires. The court.
47:27
Yes, I'd like to see those. Make sure of that.
47:30
Mister Zelps, Your Honor, if I may briefly excuse me.
47:35
The court. Yeah.
47:37
Are you through or? Yeah, Are you through, Mr.
47:41
Tannery? Now I'm finished the court.
47:43
All right, Mr. Zelps, may I? The court.
47:46
Let me see your Mr. Tannery. We need to get one additional
47:50
page for you on that. The court.
47:52
All right, go ahead, Mr. Zelps. Your honor, if I may briefly
47:57
respond, Mr. Tannery talks about direct evidence in this case.
48:00
The only direct evidence there is was a death and it was by
48:04
homicide. Total circumstantial evidence is
48:08
connecting my client and that's all there is.
48:10
In addition, Your Honor, there had been some talk and it was in
48:14
the media about the Wayne Williams case in Atlanta.
48:18
I definitely didn't expect this to get into that famous case
48:23
where there was only fiber evidence used for conviction.
48:27
In that case, Your Honor, the state relied heavily upon and
48:31
the appeal cases that I have read reviewed relied heavily
48:34
upon the fact that Wayne Williams had no prior contact of
48:38
the victim. They convicted him on here.
48:42
The little girl was in and out of his house, admittedly as a
48:46
playmate of the daughter. Your Honor, that doesn't prove
48:49
anything. This case, there's not one piece
48:52
of evidence before you saying that Harvey Temple didn't did
48:55
anything. And so in response to that, Your
48:58
Honor, I disagree with Mr. Tannery about these those cases.
49:02
I think those reading of the I think I think close reading of
49:07
those will correct that situation.
49:10
Your Honor, that's really all I have the court.
49:13
All right, let me take a few minutes off the record to review
49:16
the authorities submitted by Council.
49:19
Mr. Tannery, Judge, I'll give you one of them right now, but
49:23
one of my cases is incomplete and I'll have it completed in a
49:26
moment. The court.
49:28
All right, We'll be off the record for a few minutes.
49:31
A short time later, the following proceedings were had,
49:34
to wit, the court. Anything else you gentlemen want
49:37
to say, Mr. Tannery? Not by the State, Mr. Zelps, not
49:42
by the defendant, Your Honor. The court.
49:44
All right. The courts reviewed these cases
49:47
and in my opinion, the none of these cases changed.
49:51
The the law. And the burden at preliminary
49:54
hearing, it is a probable case burden.
49:57
The court is aware that I do have the authority to dismiss
50:01
the the charge if I do not believe probable cause to be
50:05
shown. The this case literally hangs by
50:09
a thread, but with the testimony of Anne Reed, it is my opinion
50:13
that the State has shown sufficient evidence to withstand
50:16
the demur of the defendant. The existence of the fibers, the
50:21
existence of the pubic hair, the existence of a head, a head, the
50:27
existence of a head, hair which are consistent with those of the
50:31
defendant, together with the other testimony in this case
50:34
indicates to me that there is sufficient probable cause for
50:38
this case to go forward. And then demure of the defendant
50:42
is overruled. Is there anything else at this
50:45
time by the defendant? Mr. Zelps.
50:48
Your Honor, I we're we're set for the 9th of December at 1:30.
50:53
Is that correct? Is it the 9th?
50:57
The court. Well, that Mister Tannery.
50:59
January. Mr. Zelps.
51:01
January 7th. Mr. Cook, 7th, 8th and 9th.
51:06
Mr. Zelps. OK, that's when we're set.
51:08
The court. 7th at 1:30. And Mr. Zelps.
51:12
OK, The court until we finish. Mr. Zelps.
51:15
All right, the court. And this is yours also, Mr.
51:21
Zelps. Mr. Zelps.
51:22
Thank you, Your Honor. The court.
51:24
She'll need to get the names off of those.
51:27
Anything else by the defendant, Mr. Zalps?
51:29
No, Your Honor, the court. Anything else by the state, Mr.
51:33
Tannery? No, Your Honor, the court.
51:35
All right, The courts adjourned in this matter until January the
51:39
7th at 1:30. close the record. OK, so, and this is just the
51:47
court reporter saying that she took all these notes.
51:54
So I went all the way to Lawton, OK, to get this on a whim, I, I
51:59
went to the courthouse and asked.
52:02
So that's what we have for tonight.
52:07
I have uploaded more stuff into the Google Drive.
52:13
We have now the testimony of Robert Taylor for the actual
52:17
trial, the testimony for Harvey Templeton for the actual trial,
52:23
and then other witness testimony for the trial.
52:26
So the next time we come back and cover Athena, we will get
52:31
into the actual trial. This was the preliminary
52:34
hearing, so we're going to do a bunch more reading.
52:37
But I thank you all for sticking with me and let me bring this
52:42
back in front of me. So I thank you guys for sticking
52:49
with me and hanging out with me. I know it's been a lot of
52:54
reading, a lot of listening, and I know I'm not the best reader,
52:57
but I'm trying and you guys are helping me by allowing me to
53:04
listening and allowing me to work on my reading skills and
53:08
other things that were so needing to be worked on after
53:14
being in bed for 6 1/2 years. So thank you, Joy so much.
53:19
And I thank you everybody that watches on MBR as well, because
53:24
I know you guys are used to military content and with me you
53:29
get true crime and weird gypsy roast stuff.
53:32
So I thank you for hanging in and I did upload I think 14
53:38
Nicholas go to John audio calls today.
53:42
I. Started at like 7 something
53:43
this. Morning and right before we went
53:47
live. Like literally like 10 seconds
53:50
before we went live. I posted the last one for today,
53:54
so I am going to actually go and rest because I have been working
53:59
all day. So I hope that everybody has a
54:03
wonderful day and whenever you're seeing this, I hope that
54:06
you're blessed and please go out and do something good to change
54:10
the world for the better. Bye everybody.
54:15
Hi, I'm Beaker with Military Broadcast Radio TV.
54:19
We're your virtual MWR bringing veterans radio, podcasts,
54:23
gaming, animation, 3D printing and a community that never
54:28
leaves you behind. Download our Roku or mobile app
54:31
today.