625
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
3 CHARLOTTE DIVISION
4
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
5 )
)
6 vs. ) File No. 3:97CR23-P
)
7 AQUILIA MARCIVICCI BARNETTE, )
)
8 Defendant. )
)
9
10
11 Transcript of proceedings before the Honorable
12 ROBERT D. POTTER, Senior United States District Court Judge,
13 before Scott A. Huseby, Official Court Reporter and Notary
14 Public, on the 27th day of January, 1998.
15 APPEARANCES:
16 For the United States:
17 ROBERT J. CONRAD, JR.
THOMAS G. WALKER
18 Assistant United States Attorneys
227 West Trade Street, Suite 1700
19 Charlotte, North Carolina 28204
20 On Behalf of the Defendant:
21 GEORGE V. LAUGHRUN, Esq.
Suite 602
22 301 South McDowell Street
Charlotte, North Carolina 28204
23
24
25
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
626
1 APPEARANCES: (Continued)
PAUL J. WILLIAMS, Esq.
2 Suite 801
301 South McDowell Street
3 Charlotte, North Carolina 28204
4
5 ---
6
7 THE COURT: All right, my law clerk tells me that --
8 MR. WILLIAMS: The defendant is not here, Your Honor.
9 THE COURT: Do you want to bring something up, do you
10 need your client here for this?
11 MR. LAUGHRUN: Not for this, Judge, I don't believe.
12 THE COURT: I understand the marshals are running
13 behind, so go ahead, what is it you want to bring up?
14 MR. WILLIAMS: Judge, very briefly, we neglected during
15 the jury instruction conference to request that the Court give
16 the jury a definition of the word "spouse," and that definition
17 be that it means husband and wife. That's the request.
18 THE COURT: As a spouse, though, that's the way the
19 statute reads?
20 MR. WILLIAMS: As a spouse. And we ask that you give
21 the jury an instruction that the word "spouse" means husband or
22 wife.
23 THE COURT: That's going to confuse them, I think. As I
24 understand it, we have some legislative history on this thing.
25 The purpose of it was to keep roommates from being in this
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
627
1 position. That's the way the statute reads, and that's the way
2 we are going to do it, exactly like it reads.
3 MR. WILLIAMS: I didn't want to argue it with the Court,
4 I just wanted to make that request respectfully.
5 THE COURT: All right, thank you, sir, appreciate that.
6 Now, we didn't say anything about time last night. I
7 think an hour apiece would be ample for both sides, more than
8 ample.
9 MR. WALKER: Yes, Your Honor.
10 THE COURT: Okay. One other thing, Ms. Grier, one of
11 the jurors as I understand it, if I'm telling this wrong, let me
12 know, says that she baby-sat for one of the policemen's
13 daughters, but she doesn't remember the name of the daughter or
14 never had anything to do with the policeman in five years, is
15 that right?
16 THE CLERK: Yes, it was in church years ago.
17 THE COURT: I just wanted to let you all know. I don't
18 even know who it was.
19 MR. WILLIAMS: What did you say?
20 THE COURT: One of the policemen -- one of the jurors,
21 number 7, said that she baby-sat with one of the policemen's
22 daughters who was a -- was he a witness here, Sammy?
23 THE CLERK: Yes.
24 THE COURT: But that she has not seen him, doesn't even
25 know his name, in five years, she just remembers sitting with
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
628
1 one of the policemen's daughters.
2 MR. LAUGHRUN: No objection from us.
3 THE COURT: All right, thank you. Anything else?
4 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, the only thing, we have got our
5 exhibits ready to proffer to the jury this morning. If I could
6 go ahead and give them to the marshal, I'll be happy to do that
7 so when they come in, if he wants to -- or I can give them to
8 them at that time, whatever is Your Honor's preference. We
9 moved admission of these Friday afternoon late.
10 Also, Judge, we've been given the government's proffer
11 based on our discussion yesterday. I'm not sure, Your Honor has
12 probably read it. Maybe while the jury is out, we can discuss
13 that if that's acceptable to the government.
14 THE COURT: Okay. Anything else?
15 MR. CONRAD: No, sir.
16 THE COURT: Okay, ready for the jury?
17 MR. CONRAD: Yes, sir.
18 THE COURT: Okay, call the jury.
19 (The jury returned to the courtroom.)
20 THE COURT: Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I hope
21 you enjoyed your day off. I'm glad it wasn't like this
22 yesterday. I hope none of you got too wet today.
23 First of all, I'm going to ask you, of course, it's been
24 since Friday since you were here, has anybody seen, heard or
25 read anything about this case or talked to anybody about the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
629
1 case, or has anybody tried to talk to them about the case?
2 (Jurors shake heads.)
3 THE COURT: Nobody has had any communication of any kind
4 with anybody about this case, is that my understanding?
5 (Jurors shake heads.)
6 THE COURT: Thank you very much. All right,
7 Mr. Laughrun.
8 MR. LAUGHRUN: Thank you, Judge Potter. Your Honor, the
9 defendant would offer at this time previously identified
10 exhibits, and for the record, they are numbers 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8,
11 10, 11, 12, 18, 23, 25, 24, 26 --
12 THE COURT: I had 16.
13 MR. LAUGHRUN: I have got 16 here, too, Judge Potter.
14 THE COURT: You say you do have 16?
15 MR. LAUGHRUN: I do have 16.
16 THE COURT: Okay, 16?
17 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir.
18 THE COURT: 24?
19 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir.
20 THE COURT: You want to offer those now?
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: If I may present those to the marshal to
22 pass to the jury.
23 THE COURT: Anything else from the defendant?
24 MR. LAUGHRUN: No, sir, the defense rests.
25 THE COURT: The defendant rests. Any rebuttal from the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
630
1 government?
2 MR. CONRAD: No, sir.
3 THE COURT: The government has rested, correct?
4 MR. CONRAD: Yes, sir.
5 THE COURT: Thank you. At this time, members of the
6 jury, we will have the final arguments. Now, I want you to
7 recall what I said to begin with, that the attorneys' statements
8 are not evidence. The only evidence you will consider in this
9 matter is the testimony you have heard and the exhibits which
10 have been admitted into evidence. However, listen closely to
11 these statements by the attorneys because it will help you in
12 your deliberations to tie together the pieces of information and
13 the evidence that came in during the trial. Just do not
14 consider their statements to be evidence.
15 I think that's about all, are you ready? By the way,
16 the government, of course, has the burden of proof, and
17 therefore, has the opening and closing arguments and statements
18 in this case. Mr. Walker?
19 MR. WALKER: Thank you, Your Honor.
20 (Pause.)
21 Members of the jury, if I could get you to remember one
22 thing that I hope that you will take back with you into the jury
23 room as you begin your deliberations in this case, it is that
24 justice does not get done on its own, justice does not get done
25 on its own. It takes a commitment, I submit to you, it takes a
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
631
1 commitment from you to find the truth. Justice requires of you
2 that you do your duty, and I am asking you today to do justice
3 in this case.
4 It has been said on many occasions that all crimes, even
5 the smallest, the most insignificant of crimes, speak for,
6 request, ask for justice, even the smallest crimes ask for
7 justice. But I submit to you that the crime of murder is
8 different. You see, the crime of murder doesn't simply ask for
9 justice or request justice, the crime of murder cries out for
10 justice. And the reason the crime of murder cries out for
11 justice is because it cries out from the grave. And in this
12 case, there are two graves, and in this case, there are two
13 voices. They are the voices of Donnie Allen and the voices --
14 the voice of Robin Williams. And they cry out to you, and I
15 submit that their voices are louder and clearer than my voice,
16 their voices ask you for justice.
17 I cannot recreate in this case, really recreate in this
18 case the horror and the pain that this defendant has caused.
19 Mr. Conrad and I can call witnesses. We can put them on the
20 witness stand. They can be sworn. They can tell you the
21 truth. They can tell you what they saw. They can tell you what
22 they heard. But in the stillness of this place, in the
23 sacredness of this room, really, can you see the defendant and
24 what he did? What I'm asking you not to see him as he appears
25 to you today. No, I'm asking you to see him as Donnie Allen saw
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
632
1 him. I'm asking to you see him as Robin Williams saw him.
2 I believe the Judge is going to instruct you on the law
3 in this case, and if Judge Potter tells you something, you can
4 be sure that you have to follow it and that it will be the law,
5 but with your permission I am going to go through each count,
6 briefly, of the indictment and summarize what I believe to be
7 the overwhelming evidence of guilt as to each and every single
8 charge in the indictment against this defendant.
9 Count 1 charges the defendant with interstate domestic
10 violence. For you the jury to find the defendant guilty of that
11 offense, you have to find that at the time of the offense
12 alleged in the indictment, meaning at the time of the fire
13 bombing, that the defendant and Robin Williams were or had been
14 intimate partners, were or had been intimate partners. The
15 Judge will tell that you the definition of intimate partner
16 includes a person who cohabits or has cohabited with the
17 abuser. There is no question in this case that these two people
18 at the beginning of this relationship, at least Robin Williams
19 was, in love, and she wanted to start her life outside of her
20 home with the defendant. And they moved in together, there is
21 no question about that, you should have no doubt about that
22 issue in this case.
23 The government has also proven to you that at the time
24 the defendant left Charlotte and drove to Roanoke to commit that
25 fire bombing, that at the time he did that, he had the intent to
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
633
1 kill Robin Williams. Well, how do you know that? Because each
2 of you have common sense, and remember when Benjamin Greene was
3 testifying and he said that Robin was on the phone and that he
4 kept hearing her on the phone. And then you remember what
5 Mrs. Williams told you about how he would call her. And then
6 remember what the defendant's statement was through Steve
7 Austin. He said he heard a voice on the other end of the line
8 and he heard a man's voice in Robin Williams' apartment. I
9 submit to you when he heard Bennie Greene's voice in Robin's
10 apartment, the fuse was lit, and at that point he had the intent
11 to kill her. And my, what a method he used, what a method he
12 used.
13 It is obvious from the fire bombing that she experienced
14 serious bodily injury. You have seen those autopsy photographs,
15 and I want to show you this one of her arm. This, ladies and
16 gentlemen, I submit to you is serious bodily injury, and you
17 should have no question of the defendant's guilt in Count 1 of
18 the indictment.
19 Count 2 charges the defendant with the use and carrying
20 of a firearm during the commission of that fire bombing
21 incident. If you find the defendant is guilty of Count 1, and
22 if you find that during the commission of Count 1 that he used a
23 firearm, then he is also guilty of Count 2. And pay close
24 attention to what the Judge is going to tell you about the
25 definition of a firearm. It not only includes this shotgun over
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
634
1 here, this sawed-off murder weapon shotgun that the defendant
2 later used, but the definition of a firearm also includes any
3 destructive device. And a destructive device is described as
4 any incendiary, bomb, grenade, rocket, missile, mine or device
5 similar to any of these devices. Remember what the expert from
6 Roanoke told you? That a Molotov of cocktail is a destructive
7 device, and the Judge is going to tell you that a destructive
8 device is a firearm. And so when the defendant went and bombed
9 Robin Williams' apartment, he had a firearm with him, that
10 Molotov cocktail, and he is also guilty of Count 2.
11 Count 3 charges the defendant with use of fire or
12 explosives to commit a felony. The evidence in this case is
13 overwhelming that the method this defendant chose to try the
14 kill Robin Williams was fire. You think about that when you go
15 back to deliberate in this case. That was the method he first
16 chose to kill Robin Williams was fire. He is guilty of Count
17 3.
18 Count 4 charges the defendant with false statement to a
19 firearms dealer. The government has to prove to you three
20 things: that the defendant made a false statement while
21 acquiring a firearm from a licensed dealer. Mr. Freshour from
22 the pawn shop and the documents we introduced from the pawn shop
23 show you that the pawn shop is a licensed firearms dealer. The
24 government also has to prove to you that the defendant made a
25 statement to that firearms dealer that he knew to be false. And
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
635
1 thirdly, that the statement was intended or was likely to
2 deceive Mr. Freshour about a material fact which would affect
3 the legality of the sale to the defendant. There is no question
4 about that. This defendant lied about his identity, this
5 defendant lied about his felony status, this defendant lied
6 about being a fugitive from justice at the time he bought those
7 two shotguns. And Mr. Freshour told you that if he had known
8 that, he would not have sold the firearm to the defendant.
9 There is no question about the defendant's guilt to Count 4.
10 Count 5 charges the defendant with making a firearm, and
11 the Judge is going to instruct you that the term making or made
12 a firearm includes the altering of the firearm by sawing off the
13 barrel. Mr. Freshour told you that at the time he sold this
14 weapon to the defendant, it was not sawed off. So the sawing
15 off of that barrel to the length that Mr. Nordoff, the gun
16 expert, told you about is the altering, the illegal altering of
17 that firearm. There is no question of the defendant's guilt to
18 that charge.
19 Count 6 charges the defendant with possession of a
20 firearm by a convicted felon. By stipulation, you know that the
21 defendant is a convicted felon. No civil rights had been
22 restored for him to legally possess this firearm. And on the
23 date in question when he killed Donnie Allen and he killed Robin
24 Williams, he was possessing that firearm illegally as a
25 convicted felon.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
636
1 Count 7 is the carjacking count. The government has to
2 prove to you four things in Count 7, and I believe the Judge
3 will tell you the government has to prove that the defendant
4 intentionally took from Donnie Allen his Prelude, a motor
5 vehicle, that the motor vehicle had been transported in
6 interstate or foreign commerce, that the defendant did so by
7 means of force and violence and intimidation, and that the
8 defendant intended to cause death or serious bodily harm. There
9 is no question of the intent, the defendant's intent to take
10 Donnie Allen's car. That's been proven beyond any doubt.
11 There is no question concerning where that motor vehicle
12 was manufactured. We know it was manufactured outside of the
13 State of North Carolina, and at some time during in that car's
14 history, we don't have to prove when, but by virtue of the fact
15 that it was made somewhere else, by virtue of that fact alone,
16 at some point that car had to have travelled through interstate
17 or foreign commerce to get to North Carolina. We have proven
18 that point beyond any doubt.
19 Did the defendant take that vehicle by means of force
20 and violence and intimidation? Did he do so intending to cause
21 death or serious bodily harm? You betcha he did. His goal was
22 to kill so that he could kill again. He is guilty of Count 7.
23 Count 8 charges again the defendant with the use of a
24 firearm during a crime of violence resulting in death. If you
25 find that the defendant committed and is guilty of Count 7, the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
637
1 carjacking count, and you find that he used this firearm, this
2 shotgun during the commission of that offense, then he is also
3 guilty of Count 8 and the government must also prove to you that
4 such murder was committed without legal justification, with
5 malice aforethought and with premeditation. The Judge will tell
6 you that malice aforethought means to either kill another person
7 deliberately and intentionally or to act with callous and wanton
8 disregard for human life. The government does not have to prove
9 to you that the defendant hated or felt ill will towards Donnie
10 Allen. That is malice in the common sense of the word, but that
11 is not malice in the legal sense of the word.
12 I submit to you that what the defendant did in this
13 case, ordering Donnie Allen out at gunpoint, marching him across
14 the road into the woods to a concrete drainage ditch area, and
15 firing three shots at him from a distance of less than from me
16 to the front row of the jury is malice, it's intentional, it's
17 premeditated, cold-blooded murder.
18 After the defendant took Donnie Allen's car, he knew
19 that car to be stolen and he took it into a different state. By
20 virtue of that, he is guilty of Count 9 in the indictment.
21 Briefly let me summarize for you Counts 10 and 11.
22 Count 10 is also an interstate domestic violence count, and the
23 government has to prove that at the time that he killed Robin
24 Williams, that the defendant and Williams were or had been
25 intimate partners. And again, listen to the Judge's definition
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
638
1 of what constitutes an intimate partner. The evidence in the
2 case is overwhelming that they were intimate partners.
3 Mrs. Williams told you about how much Robin loved the defendant,
4 and I submit to you that they moved in together because they
5 were intimate partners. They began their lives together. They
6 cohabited together for almost a year. That evidence is clear in
7 this case.
8 At the time the defendant killed Donnie Allen and drove
9 Donnie Allen's car into Virginia, did he have the intent as he
10 went from North Carolina to Virginia to kill Robin Williams?
11 Absolutely, he did. That was his plan. That's why he packed
12 this gym bag and those tools of death and went out and waited at
13 that intersection, so that he could kill and then kill again.
14 Lastly, the government has charged in Count 11 that the
15 defendant used a firearm during the commission of Count 10. In
16 other words, if you find that when he committed Count 10 that he
17 used this firearm that I'm pointing to, then he is also guilty
18 of Count 11, and that he did so with premeditation and with
19 malice aforethought. That evidence should be clear to you from
20 the definition of malice.
21 I submit to you, ladies and gentlemen, that the fire
22 bombing incident only whetted this defendant's appetite for
23 blood. It only increased his intent to cause the death of Robin
24 Williams. I cannot on behalf of the United States of America
25 tell you exactly what Donnie Allen was thinking that night. I
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
639
1 can't do it. We can guess pretty closely probably. He had met
2 this girl at Coyote Joe's. Perhaps he was in a good mood. He
3 was going home, minding his own business. There was work to be
4 done the next day. There was a wedding to attend the next day.
5 He did not think, however, could not have known what thing
6 awaited him at the intersection of Morris Field Drive and Billy
7 Graham Parkway.
8 The randomness of this killing. I can't tell you
9 exactly what he thought as he stopped for that red light and
10 this defendant, this defendant approached him with that
11 sawed-off shotgun, ordered him out of car. What did he think at
12 that moment? Please don't kill me. Marched him down into those
13 woods like he was some kind of animal, this flashlight taped to
14 the barrel of that gun. What did he think about? We know what
15 the defendant didn't think about. He didn't care. He didn't
16 care. He didn't care. He could care less.
17 See, this case is not about a girl in Roanoke, it is,
18 but it is about so much more about that. This case is about
19 control, and the defendant when he doesn't get his way. You
20 think about that when you go into the jury room. This is a
21 defendant who will kill to get what he wants. What were Robin
22 Williams' last thoughts? She was awakened that morning. She
23 came down the steps. Mrs. Williams was already downstairs. She
24 said, what is it, mama, what is it? Mrs. Williams turned to her
25 daughter, her only daughter, and said, I don't know, baby, it
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
640
1 must be Mark, it must be Mark. What do I do, mama, what do I
2 do? I don't know, baby, just run, just run. And this
3 defendant, this so-called remorseful defendant, having travelled
4 three hours to Roanoke, three hours to Roanoke, Virginia, killed
5 again, killed again, reloaded after he killed Donnie Allen,
6 after he pumped those three shots into Donnie Allen's body.
7 These pictures tell so much about that awful killing of
8 Donnie Allen. Didn't have to kill Donnie Allen, didn't have to
9 kill him. Cold-blooded murder. Then he hunted down Robin
10 Williams. She fled her house, she fell, she stumbled, she got
11 up, she fell, she stumbled, she is running, she is in hysterics,
12 begging for her life. The defendant didn't care. This
13 so-called remorseful defendant didn't care, killed her, killed
14 her in front of her own mother.
15 You know, the reason I submit to you that he returned
16 this shotgun, the first shotgun, remember he didn't tell anybody
17 about that, didn't tell any investigator about that. The reason
18 he returned that shotgun is because that shotgun is a pump
19 shotgun, and there is no way you can tape a flashlight the way
20 he taped it to this gun on this pump shotgun, you can't do it.
21 But this defendant, when asked about the gun in this statement,
22 this statement, this so-called confession, isn't worth the paper
23 it's written on, said to Investigator Rice, I bought the shotgun
24 for protection of the house because we didn't have any
25 protection, and if you ever know anything about the house here
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
641
1 in Charlotte we stayed in has been broken into numerous times,
2 I've been shot in that house that had varmits and snakes around
3 the house, that's the reason I bought the gun. Looked right at
4 Investigator Rice and lied through his teeth.
5 After he committed the murder, he goes into a different
6 state. He goes into the State of Tennessee, where he steals a
7 license plate. Why does he do that? To avoid law enforcement,
8 that's why he does that. Why did he have extra shells with
9 him? I submit to you because he was ready to do battle if he
10 got stopped along the way. That's what the evidence shows in
11 this case. This is the defendant who reduced Donnie Allen to
12 this (indicating). This is the defendant who reduced Robin
13 Williams to this (indicating). He is guilty as the day is long
14 of each and every count in the indictment.
15 A wise man once said a long time ago that all that is
16 necessary for evil to flourish is for good men and women to do
17 nothing. I'm asking you today to do something, to do justice in
18 this case, to see this case for what it is, to see this
19 defendant for who he really is and what he did, and to find the
20 defendant guilty of every count in the indictment. Thank you.
21 THE COURT: All right, Mr. Laughrun or Mr. Williams.
22 MR. LAUGHRUN: How do you follow something like that?
23 How do you stand up here before 12 people and follow that
24 closing argument? That's tough, and whatever I say is
25 inadequate and I apologize for that. Paul Williams said
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
642
1 something to you last Wednesday when he got up here at this very
2 podium, shaking just like I am right now because this is tough,
3 and he said, this is a domestic tragedy, and it is, and it was,
4 and it will be a domestic tragedy until we are no longer on this
5 earth. And he said it was a triangle of tragedy that Donnie
6 Allen unfortunately got swept up in, and what Paul said last
7 week is true and you have seen it played out last Wednesday,
8 Thursday and Friday. And the saddest part of all is that it
9 didn't have to happen.
10 That tragedy, triangle of tragedy was compounded by the
11 negligence of mine and your police department. That's not an
12 excuse, folks, for what happened, that's not an explanation or a
13 reason, but you need to know, as Paul Harvey says, the rest of
14 the story. And the rest of the story is that you've got in your
15 hands now an exhibit that says Mark's house doesn't exist. They
16 came there 25 times before this incident.
17 Now, does that excuse the conduct? Absolutely not, and
18 we we're offering any excuses for you. Thomas Walker said a few
19 minutes ago that Judge Potter is going to tell you what the law
20 is, and he's the authority, he's the senior judge in this
21 district. And he is going to tell you what the law is, not what
22 I say it is, what Paul Williams, what Thomas Walker, what Bob
23 Conrad says it is, and he's going to tell that you burden of
24 proving this case sits at this table. They have the burden of
25 proof throughout this case. It's the highest burden in the free
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
643
1 world, beyond a reasonable doubt. And why that's important,
2 members of the jury, is you have got to look at all of the
3 evidence in the bill of indictment and decide does it fit or
4 does it not. And you can't let your emotions and the tragedy
5 and the loss that these folks suffer every day, you can't let
6 that fill in any blanks in some of the counts that are there.
7 You heard 42 government witnesses. The strongest
8 witness you heard for the United States sits beside Paul
9 Williams right now. Thomas Williams threw the confession up and
10 said, it's not worth the paper it's printed on. Then, folks,
11 why did they go through two complete statements of the
12 defendant? He was truthful, he was detailed, he was accurate,
13 and everything he told the government in that statement of any
14 consequence is borne out in this semicircle right there. He
15 gave them details that for the last two and a half days, the
16 government went back and corroborated details.
17 So saying that paper is not worth its weight or not
18 printed, listen to the evidence, remember those statements. And
19 everything he told Tony Rice, everything he told J.M. Sanders,
20 the government has taken great pains to go through and verify
21 and document and research and catalogue, and it's all in
22 evidence here, what Mark Barnette told these officers.
23 Paul Williams said last week, he said, you know, we are
24 not going to contest much of the government's evidence, and we
25 didn't, very few objections you've heard. How many times did
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
644
1 Mr. Williams and I stand up and say, no questions, Your Honor,
2 no questions. Our job, folks, is to defend as Paul said, but
3 it's not to play a shell game with you, it's not to disguise
4 things, it's not to use mirrors and say what's black is white
5 and what's white is black. That's not our job. Our job is to
6 show you what happened from our point of view, and we have, and
7 we have tried to in the last two and a half days.
8 You know, last Wednesday morning Sammy Grier stood and
9 swore you in as a juror, and she said basically your duty is to
10 try the issues fairly and impartially. And all 16 of you could
11 have gotten out of jury duty if you wanted to, you could have
12 said the right buzz words or the right phrase not to be here.
13 It's an inconvenience on you, it's taken away from your personal
14 time and your professional time, it's costing you income, and
15 you are doing your duty by being here.
16 Now, part of that duty is to participate as Paul said on
17 Wednesday in the process, listen to all of the evidence, decide
18 what weight, if any, you think it deserves and not to decide
19 this case on sympathy, hatred, ill will, malice, spite, revenge,
20 because if you decide it on sympathy for the Allen and Williams
21 families, don't leave the jury box, you vote right here. But
22 you can't do that. His Honor is going to tell you you can't do
23 that, because that's not part of the process that everybody in
24 the courtroom is going through. It's not about sympathy, it's
25 not about empathy, the natural, heartfelt empathy for the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
645
1 victims' families, and if you don't have that, you are not
2 human. And you can't, just don't leave the box if you decide it
3 on that issue.
4 You know, without Mark's statements, it's a tougher case
5 for the government. He has helped him get over that -- most of
6 the hurdle, not all of it. And as Paul told you, we are not
7 going to contest all of the evidence, some of the evidence you
8 need to hear about, some of the discrepancies in the evidence.
9 Let's talk about this intimate partner definition. Let me give
10 you the complete definition His Honor is going to tell you.
11 He's going to tell you that an intimate partner is a spouse,
12 which doesn't apply here, a former spouse, which doesn't apply
13 here, a person who shares a child with the abuser, which doesn't
14 apply here, and a person who cohabits or has cohabited with the
15 abuser as a spouse.
16 You know what spouse means, wedlock, husband and wife.
17 There is no evidence of that in this case, folks, and why is
18 that important? It's important because Counts 1 and 10 that
19 Mr. Walker went over require that you as a jury, the standard of
20 proof we talked about, beyond a reasonable doubt, the highest
21 burden there is in the free world, find unanimously that they
22 meet that definition, and folks, they don't. And you can't
23 climb the reasonable doubt ladder and say, well, he shouldn't
24 have done it, no question. The victim's family has suffered
25 tragic losses, no question, the evidence is 100 percent to
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
646
1 that. You can't leapfrog Counts 1 and 10 and say, well, it may
2 not meet the legal definition, but I think he ought to be guilty
3 of that. You can't do that, folks. You are violating your duty
4 as a juror if you do that. Don't do that.
5 20 days before the fire incident, Mark had come back to
6 Charlotte. 52 days later, the homicide took place. The
7 intimate spouse counts don't apply, folks, the intimate partner
8 counts don't apply because the Congress has not seen fit to
9 define this incident. And you can't make that leapfrog and say,
10 well, they should have. You have got to follow the law as Judge
11 Potter gives it to you, whether you like it or not. And it
12 takes courage to walk out of that jury room and say those two
13 counts don't apply, and they don't.
14 In Counts 8 and 11, the government has alleged
15 willfully, deliberately, maliciously, premeditation with
16 deliberation committed two homicides. Listen to what Judge
17 Potter tells you about premeditation and deliberation. Quote, a
18 killing is premeditated when it is the result of planning or
19 deliberation. Amount of time depends on the circumstances and
20 the person. You must consider all of the facts and
21 circumstances.
22 Now, if there was so much premeditation and deliberation
23 in Mark Barnette's mind, ask yourself the following: Why in the
24 world did he buy a firearm that could be traced? Sure, he used
25 a false name, but he had the serial number. Why didn't he have
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
647
1 an escape plan? The evidence was that after Robin's homicide,
2 he drove to Tennessee and you heard what happened there. Why
3 didn't he wear a mask? All of this planning and premeditation
4 the government's alleged, why did he come back to Charlotte,
5 North Carolina, go to his mom's house, have the police or FBI
6 call and say, come get him, he is here. If he's got all of this
7 planning and premeditation, they couldn't find him as a result
8 of the fire bombing, and there is no evidence that they would
9 have found him without him coming to turn himself in. Then why
10 did he give such detailed statements to the police if he has got
11 this master plan? Why did he not only tell them and draw a
12 diagram where Mr. Allen's body was? But he took them there.
13 Does that sound like someone who's thinking through everything,
14 premeditating, deliberating? And folks, you cannot fill in the
15 gaps of that with emotion, with sympathy, with sorrow to a sage,
16 you can't do that, because the law says you can't and you
17 violate your oath as a juror if you do. The emotions can't play
18 any part in your deliberations.
19 Now, Mark said some statements to Investigator Tony Rice
20 on June 26th, why did you shoot her, talking about Robin, and he
21 said, I'm still trying to find that out, I wanted to die, I
22 wanted to kill myself and I wanted her to be with me, just one
23 part of me, I was mad, throughout out our relationship, we'd
24 been together for two years and I had a lot of questions I
25 wanted to know, I don't know why. He told Mike Sanders about
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
648
1 Donnie Allen, I don't know how many times I shot him, I was
2 scared, I didn't mean to hurt him, I knew he was hurt.
3 Premeditation and deliberation, it's not there, folks, and
4 again, you can't make the leap of faith the government wants you
5 to because of this triangle of tragedy Paul Williams talked
6 about better than I last Thursday and played out for you.
7 Two weeks ago, you told us you could all be fair. We
8 take you at your word for that. You were chosen out of 300
9 people, 16 of you. If you violate your oath, folks, I'm not
10 going to know about it, the government won't know about it, Mark
11 won't know about it, Judge Potter won't know about it, but you
12 will, you will. And your duty is not to rush to judgment, your
13 duty is to look and say, did my government meet all of the
14 elements beyond a reasonable doubt in this case, and nowhere on
15 those elements are you going to hear compassion, sorrow,
16 empathy, revenge, hatred, spite, bias, prejudice. Those aren't
17 in the instructions at all, except for the Judge to tell you
18 that you can't base your verdict on that.
19 Do what you think is fair in this case. Do what you
20 think is right as your duty as a juror, and you will have done
21 your job in this case. Thank you.
22 THE COURT: Mr. Walker, any rebuttal?
23 MR. WALKER: Thank you, Your Honor.
24 I have been shot in the house that had varmits and
25 snakes around the house, that's the reason I bought that gun.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
649
1 That's a truthful, detailed statement. Later on in that same
2 interview, Investigator Rice asked the defendant, why the month
3 not talking to each other, talking about the month when she was
4 in the burn unit in Charlottesville, Virginia undergoing skin
5 grafts. At the same time she was going through that, the
6 defendant was in an interview room with Investigator Rice
7 lying. Why the month not talking to each other? I can't call
8 her, I don't have any money, I have to get a calling card to
9 call her and I don't have any money, I didn't have any money.
10 That's why he -- that's not why he didn't call her. He didn't
11 call her because she is in hospital, that's why he didn't call
12 her. Is that a truthful statement, a detailed statement?
13 Mr. Laughrun, he has got to argue something, and he
14 said, the government had to have the defendant's statement. No,
15 we didn't, no, we didn't. There were eyewitnesses in Roanoke to
16 this murder, to that tragedy. They testified in this case. We
17 put on expert ballistic evidence that this gun was used to kill
18 Robin Williams and used to kill Donnie Allen. The expert told
19 you that the shells found at both murder scenes were fired from
20 this very gun, and we have put into evidence the evidence of the
21 defendant's fingerprint on Donnie Allen's Honda Prelude. So we
22 didn't need any statement, the statement is in evidence for you
23 to see and you need to look at what he said.
24 Mr. Williams stands up on opening statement and says,
25 this is a domestic tragedy. Mr. Laughrun stands up during part
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
650
1 of his closing argument and says, this is a domestic triangle
2 tragedy, but then on the other hand argues to you, well, it's
3 not really a domestic case because they weren't married, they
4 weren't spouses. The Judge is going to tell you that they
5 didn't have to be married. The Judge is going to tell you the
6 law in this case, and if there was something wrong with any of
7 the charges in the indictment, you wouldn't be hearing about
8 them.
9 MR. LAUGHRUN: Objection.
10 THE COURT: Overruled.
11 MR. WALKER: So you need to listen to what the Judge
12 tells you about the law in this case.
13 The last thing I want to say to you is this nonsense
14 about the defendant being at home waiting to be arrested. Do
15 you believe that? Is that why he meets Steve Austin across town
16 at McDonald's, if he is at home on West Boulevard but he meets
17 his best friend across town at McDonald's? He's at home waiting
18 to be arrested. That's not true, that's not what happened in
19 this case. Your common sense tells you that and the evidence
20 tells you that that's not what happened in this case.
21 We know that's true, because we know he was in Roanoke
22 during that period of time -- we know two things. One is he was
23 in Roanoke during that period of time stalking Robin, leaving
24 notes on her car. He sure wasn't at West Boulevard waiting for
25 the police to arrest him when that happened. And the second
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
651
1 thing that we know is that the defendant doesn't tell the truth
2 about where he was. Why the month not talking to her? Did he
3 tell Investigator Rice, well, I went to Roanoke, I tried to talk
4 to her, I left some notes on her car? No, because he doesn't
5 know what Investigator Rice knows, so he is hedging his bets at
6 that point. You need to think about these so-called
7 confessions.
8 There is no question in this case, there has never been
9 a case where the premeditation was more clear, where the
10 deliberation was more clear. Sure, there is always things that
11 a person could do, but that's not what the law is. He clearly
12 intended to kill whoever approached that traffic stop light. A
13 person doesn't take a travel bag with them and go to the trouble
14 of obtaining possession of these bolt cutters to cut the phone
15 lines, go to the trouble of obtaining possession of a crowbar,
16 go to the trouble of taping a flashlight onto the barrel of a
17 shotgun with a red lens unless he has the intent to kill, and
18 anybody who tells you anything different, you ought to question
19 what they have to say.
20 This case is about premeditation and deliberation,
21 overwhelming premeditation and deliberation. Listen to the
22 Judge as he tells you what the law is in this case, apply the
23 evidence as you heard it from the witness stand and through
24 these exhibits, and I am confident that you will do your duty
25 and find this defendant guilty as charged. Thank you.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
652
1 THE COURT: Members of the jury, before we start into
2 the jury instructions, we are going to give you a recess because
3 the jury instructions are rather long. And I know you don't
4 want to stop right in the middle of them, so let's go ahead and
5 take a recess at this time, please. Do not discuss the case
6 among yourselves, it's not over yet, don't talk about it, and
7 we'll come back out. Thank you.
8 (The jury left the courtroom.)
9 THE COURT: Gentlemen, I want to point out one thing
10 about this section of the statute which there's been so much
11 controversy about. Legislative history indicates at the
12 conclusion that domestic relationships in this area should be
13 broadly interpreted to include relationships between spouses,
14 former spouses, cohabitors, former cohabitors, partners or
15 former partners, and persons in a dating, courtship or intimate
16 relationship. Also Title 18, Section 921(A)(32) states the
17 term "intimate partner" means with respect to a person the
18 spouse of the person, a former spouse of the person, an
19 individual who is the parent of a child of the person, and an
20 individual who cohabits or has cohabited with the person. I
21 think that's where we stand.
22 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, that's not what you told us you
23 were going to instruct the jury on.
24 THE COURT: I know that, that's the reason I'm pointing
25 it out to you right you.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
653
1 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, I don't think it's fair for us now
2 to make an argument.
3 THE COURT: All right, sir. I'm going ahead and do what
4 I did before, but I just want to point out to you what is in the
5 statute. I didn't find out about it until this morning,
6 Mr. Laughrun.
7 MR. LAUGHRUN: Right. Judge, one thing, too, it appears
8 that juror number 8, Amanda Edwards, had our exhibits.
9 THE COURT: What happened to them?
10 MR. LAUGHRUN: She had them. I don't think the jury is
11 through looking at them.
12 THE COURT: She doesn't have them now, does she?
13 MR. LAUGHRUN: I don't know, Judge, I think they are
14 sitting back in chair number 8. Before you give them your
15 instructions, so they can listen to you, would you let them
16 finish looking at the exhibits? I don't think they've all
17 finished looking at our exhibits, and I know they need to listen
18 to Your Honor's instructions.
19 THE COURT: We can do that. That's going to take a
20 little while, though, Mr. Laughrun.
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: Well, I think they are already on number
22 8. I think they worked around. I think juror number 8, Amanda
23 Edwards, has them. And I guess until they finish that, because
24 they need to listen to Your Honor's instructions more so than my
25 argument or Mr. Walker's argument.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
654
1 THE COURT: All right, we'll recess, then, for 10:35.
2 (Brief recess.)
3 THE COURT: Call the jury.
4 (The jury returned to the courtroom.)
5 THE COURT: Do you gentlemen have something you wanted
6 to bring up?
7 MR. LAUGHRUN: Exhibits, Your Honor.
8 THE COURT: Pardon? Do you have anything you want to
9 bring up right now?
10 All right, members of the jury, you've heard all of the
11 evidence --
12 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, may we approach?
13 THE COURT: Yes, sir.
14 (Bench conference not recorded.)
15 THE COURT: Members of the jury, the attorney wanted you
16 to look at the exhibits before we go any further. I think some
17 of you have and some of you haven't.
18 (Pause.)
19 THE COURT: Has everybody seen them?
20 (No response.)
21 THE COURT: If you want these during your deliberations,
22 you'll have an opportunity to look at them. Go ahead and look
23 at them now.
24 (Pause while jury reviews exhibits.)
25 THE COURT: All right, I believe everyone has seen the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
655
1 exhibits we were concerned with. You have heard all of the
2 evidence in the case and final arguments. If any of you do not
3 hear me while I am going over these instructions, just raise
4 your hand. Sometimes I get going and I forget about the fact
5 that I'm talking to you. I feel like I'm hollering up here.
6 This courtroom is kind of big. I don't want you to think I'm
7 hollering at you, but at the same time you have to hear what
8 we're saying. I will talk as loud as I can as long as I can
9 remember to do it, but if I forget, if I'm looking at this,
10 raise your hand and say something.
11 All right, you've heard all of the evidence as I say in
12 the case and final arguments. It now becomes my duty to
13 instruct you on the rules of law you must follow and apply the
14 law in arriving at your decision.
15 In any jury trial there are, in effect, two judges. I'm
16 one of them and you are the other. I'm the judge of the law and
17 the jury is the judge of the facts. That's what your concern
18 with is the facts in the case. It's my duty to preside over the
19 trial and to determine what evidence is admissible under the
20 laws for your consideration. It is also my duty at the end of
21 the trial to instruct you on the law applicable in this case.
22 Now, you, as jurors, are judges of the facts, and in
23 determining what actually happened in this case, that is, in
24 reaching your decision as to the facts, it is your sworn duty to
25 follow the law I am now in the process of defining it to you.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
656
1 You must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You
2 have no right to disregard or give special attention to any one
3 instruction, or to question the wisdom or correctness of any
4 rule that I may state to you. That is, you must not substitute
5 or follow your own notion or opinion as to what the law is or
6 ought to be. It is your duty to apply the law as I give it to
7 you, regardless of the consequences.
8 By the same token, it is also your duty to base your
9 verdict solely upon the testimony and evidence in the case
10 without prejudice or sympathy. That was the promise you made
11 and the oath you took before being accepted by the parties as
12 jurors in this case. They have a right to expect nothing less.
13 The defendant has been charged by the government with
14 violations of federal criminal law. The indictment is simply
15 the description of the charges made by the government against
16 the defendant and is not evidence of guilt. The law presumes
17 every defendant innocent. The presumption of innocence means
18 that the defendant starts the trial with a clean slate. In
19 other words, I instruct you that the defendant is presumed by
20 you to be innocent throughout the deliberations until such time,
21 if ever, you as the jury are satisfied that the government has
22 proved the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Unless
23 you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
24 is guilty, presumption alone is sufficient to find the defendant
25 not guilty.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
657
1 The law does not require a defendant to prove his
2 innocence. The government has the burden of proving the
3 defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and if it fails to
4 do so, you must acquit the defendant.
5 While the government's burden of proof is a strict or
6 heavy burden, it is not necessary that the defendant's guilt be
7 proved beyond all possible doubt. It is only required that the
8 government's proof exclude any reasonable doubt concerning the
9 defendant's guilt.
10 Reasonable doubt means just what it says. It is a doubt
11 based upon reason and common sense. It is a -- its meaning is
12 no doubt self-evident an understood by you, and the Court will
13 not attempt to define that term further.
14 As I told you earlier, it is your duty to determine the
15 facts, and in so doing, you must consider only the evidence that
16 I have admitted into the case. You may not speculate on matters
17 not in evidence. The term "evidence" includes the sworn
18 testimony of the witnesses, any of the exhibits admitted into
19 the record, and any stipulations entered into by the parties.
20 Remember that any statements, objections or arguments
21 made by the lawyers are not evidence in the case. The function
22 of lawyers is to point out those things that are most
23 significant or most helpful to their side of the case, and in so
24 doing, to call your attention to certain facts or inferences
25 that might otherwise escape your notice. In the final analysis,
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
658
1 however, it is your own recollection and interpretation of the
2 evidence that controls in the case. What the lawyers say is not
3 binding upon you. Also, anything you have seen or heard outside
4 the courtroom is not evidence and must be entirely disregarded.
5 During the trial, I sustained objections to certain
6 questions and exhibits. You must disregard those questions and
7 exhibits entirely. Do not speculate as to what the witness
8 would have said if permitted to answer the question or as to the
9 contents of an exhibit. Also, certain testimony or other
10 evidence has been ordered stricken from the record and you have
11 been instructed to disregard that evidence. Do not consider any
12 evidence or other evidence which has been stricken in reaching
13 your decision, and your verdict must be based solely on the
14 legal admissible evidence and testimony.
15 Let me emphasize that a lawyer's question is not
16 evidence. At times, a lawyer may have incorporated into a
17 question a statement that assumes certain facts to be true and
18 asked the witness if the statement was true. If the witness
19 does not answer or denies the truth of the statement, and if
20 there is no evidence in the record proving that the assumed fact
21 is true, then you may not consider the fact simply because it is
22 contained in the lawyer's question. On the other hand, if the
23 witness an adopts or agrees to the assumed facts in his answer,
24 then the witness may be considered to have testified to the
25 facts assumed in the question and his testimony is evidence of
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
659
1 those facts.
2 Also, do not assume anything I may have said or done
3 during the trial that I have any opinion concerning any of the
4 issues in this case. Except for the instructions to you on the
5 law, you should disregard anything I may have said during the
6 trial in arriving at your own findings as to the facts.
7 Now, while you should consider only the evidence in the
8 case, you are permitted to draw such reasonable inferences from
9 the testimony and exhibits as you feel are justified in the
10 light of common experience. In other words, you may make
11 deductions and reach conclusions which reason and common sense
12 lead you to draw from the facts which have been established by
13 the testimony and evidence in the case.
14 You may consider either direct or circumstantial
15 evidence. Direct evidence is the testimony of one who asserts
16 actual knowledge of a fact such as an eyewitness.
17 Circumstantial evidence is a proof of chain of facts and
18 circumstances indicating either the guilt or innocence of the
19 defendant. You probably can't tell whether it's raining outside
20 or not with these blinds, but when you go outside, if the
21 streets are wet, it means it's been raining. That's
22 circumstantial evidence, simply put to you. The law makes no
23 distinction between the weight to be given to either direct or
24 circumstantial evidence. It requires only that you weigh all of
25 the evidence and be convinced of the defendant's guilt beyond a
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
660
1 reasonable doubt before he is convicted.
2 Now, I'm going to go over the indictment with you count
3 by count and instruct you as to the law as it applies to each
4 count. You will have a copy of the bill of indictment with you
5 when you go back into the jury room, so it will not be necessary
6 for you to try to memorize exactly how the charges are laid out
7 while I speak.
8 You will note in the indictment the charges of the
9 offense was committed on or about a specified date. The
10 government does not have to prove that a crime was committed on
11 that exact date, so long as the government proves beyond a
12 reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crime on a
13 date reasonably near the date stated in the indictment.
14 You are here to decide whether the government has proved
15 beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the
16 crime charged. The defendant is not on trial for any act,
17 conduct or offense not alleged in the indictment. Neither are
18 you concerned with the guilt of any other person or persons not
19 on trial as a defendant in this case.
20 Now, the first count, Count number 1, reads that on or
21 about the 30th day of April, 1996 in Mecklenburg County, in the
22 Western District of North Carolina and in the Western District
23 of Virginia, the defendant, Aquilia Marcivicci Barnette, and as
24 I did before, I'm not going to repeat that name every time, you
25 know the name by now, I'm just going to refer to him as the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
661
1 defendant, did travel across a state line, that is, did
2 transport himself from Charlotte, North Carolina to Roanoke,
3 Virginia with the intent to injure, harass and intimidate an
4 intimate partner, Robin Williams, and in the course and as a
5 result of such travel intentionally committed a crime of
6 violence, that is, did fire bomb Robin Williams' occupied
7 apartment and an automobile parked in her driveway causing
8 bodily injury to her.
9 When you were here before for the jury instructions, the
10 preliminary injury instructions, I did not give you the statute
11 numbers. I'm going to do that now because I'm going to refer to
12 them in the instructions. But again, you don't have to remember
13 these because you will have the indictment back in the jury room
14 with you. That's in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
15 Sections 2261(a)(1) and 2261(b).
16 Now, 2261(a)(1) reads in pertinent part as follows: A
17 person who travels across a state line with the intent to
18 injure, harass or intimidate that person's spouse or intimate
19 partner, and who in the course of and as a result of such travel
20 intentionally commits a crime of violence and therefore causes
21 bodily injury to such spouse or intimate partner violates Title
22 18, United States Code, Section 2261(a)(1).
23 Now, the essential elements which the government must
24 prove beyond a reasonable doubt in Count number 1 are: Number
25 one, that at the time alleged in the indictment, the defendant
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
662
1 and Robin Antoinette Williams were or had been intimate
2 partners; two, that the defendant traveled across a state line
3 with the intent to either injure, harass or intimidate Robin
4 Antoinette Williams; three, that during the course of and as a
5 result of the travel the defendant intentionally committed a
6 crime of violence; and four, thereby caused bodily injury to
7 Robin Antoinette Williams; and the defendant committed all such
8 acts knowingly, number 5, the defendant committed all such acts
9 knowingly and willfully.
10 Now, an "intimate partner" is described in the statute
11 or defined in the statute as including a spouse, a former
12 spouse, a person who shares a child in common with the abuser,
13 and a person who cohabits or has cohabited with the abuser as a
14 spouse.
15 Second element, the defendant traveled across a state
16 line, in this case from North Carolina to Virginia, with the
17 intent to either injure, harass or intimidate Robin Williams.
18 Those terms have their common, everyday meaning. In this case,
19 the government contends that the defendant crossed the state
20 line with the intent to injure his former intimate partner Robin
21 Williams. You must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the
22 defendant intended to injure Robin Williams at the time that he
23 across from North Carolina the Virginia.
24 Bodily injury means any act, except one done in
25 self-defense, that results in physical injury or sexual abuse.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
663
1 Moving on the second count, Count number 2, on or about
2 the 30th day of April, 1996 in Mecklenburg County, in the
3 Western District of North Carolina and in the Western District
4 of Virginia, the defendant knowingly used and carried a firearm,
5 that is, a destructive device consisting of a bottle filled with
6 flammable liquid during and in relation to a crime of violence
7 for which he may be prosecuted in a court of the United States,
8 that is, an act of interstate domestic violence, in violation of
9 Title 18, United States Code, Section 2261 as set forth in Count
10 number 1, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
11 924(c)(1).
12 Now, Section 924(c)(1) reads in pertinent part as
13 follows: that whoever, during and in relation to any crime of
14 violence for which he may be prosecuted in a court of the United
15 States, uses or carries a firearm, that shall be a violation of
16 the statute.
17 For you to find the defendant guilty of the offense set
18 forth in Count 2 of the indictment, the government must prove
19 the following essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
20 first, that the defendant committed the crime of interstate
21 domestic violence as charged in Count 1 of the indictment for
22 which he may be prosecuted in a court of the United States. I
23 instruct you that an act of interstate domestic violence is a
24 crime of violence. Number two, that the defendant knowingly
25 used or carried a firearm, that is a destructive device, during
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
664
1 and in relation to the defendant's commission of the crime
2 alleged in Count number 1 of the indictment.
3 You may find the defendant guilty of Count 2 if you find
4 him guilty as charged in Count 1, and that he knowingly used or
5 carried a firearm, that is a destructive device, in the
6 commission of that offense.
7 Now, the term "firearm" means any weapon that will or is
8 designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by
9 the action of explosive. The term "firearm" also includes the
10 frame or receiver of any such weapon, or any firearm muffler or
11 firearm silencer, or destructive device.
12 A destructive device is any explosive, incendiary, bomb,
13 grenade, rocket, missle, mine, or device similar to any of the
14 devices described in the preceding clauses.
15 A destructive device includes any incendiary device, be
16 it a military-type weapon or homemade incendiary product, or
17 components thereof, the function of which is to ignite and
18 destroy property. It must be similar to an explosive or
19 incendiary device -- incendiary bomb, grenade, missile or
20 firearm, but need not be identical.
21 Any device composed of a combustible material capable of
22 producing sufficient heat to destroy property of any kind and
23 having components designed to ignite that combustible material
24 is under the laws an incendiary device similar to a fire or
25 incendiary bomb.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
665
1 Crime of violence means an offense that is a felony or
2 has been -- excuse me, or has an element the use, attempted use
3 or threatened use of physical force against the person or
4 property of another, or that by its nature involves a
5 substantial risk that physical force against the person or
6 property of another may be used in the course of committing the
7 offense. I instruct you that traveling across state lines with
8 the intent to injure and then firebombing an occupied apartment
9 if found beyond a reasonable doubt constitutes a crime of
10 violence.
11 Use during -- use means some active employment of the
12 firearm by the defendant, a use that makes the firearm, that is
13 a destructive device, an operative factor in relation to the
14 crime of violence.
15 Carry should be given its ordinary meaning and includes
16 to transport the firearm, that is a destructive device, on or
17 about his person or within his reach or in a vehicle in such a
18 way as it becomes immediately available.
19 Now, moving on to Count number 3, on or about the 30th
20 day of April, 1996, in Mecklenburg County in the Western
21 District of North Carolina and the Western District of Virginia,
22 the defendant, Aquilia Marcivicci Barnette, knowingly used and
23 carried fire and explosive materials, to commit an act of
24 interstate domestic violence in violation of Title 18, United
25 States Code, Section 2261, a felony prosecutable in a court of
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
666
1 the United States, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
2 Section 844(h)(1). In other words, Count number 3 charges a
3 violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 844(h)(1).
4 That statute reads in pertinent part that whoever uses fire or
5 an explosive or carries an explosive during the commission of
6 any felony may be prosecuted in a court of the United States,
7 and that would be a violation of the statute.
8 Now, you may find the defendant guilty of the offense
9 charged in Count 3 of the indictment -- for you to find the
10 defendant guilty of the offense charged in Count number 3 of the
11 indictment, the government must prove each of the following
12 essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt: first, that the
13 defendant committed the crime of interstate domestic violence, a
14 felony prosecutable in a court of the United States; second,
15 that the defendant knowingly used fire and explosive materials
16 or carried an explosive in the commission of the crime alleged
17 in Count number 1 of the indictment.
18 Now, you may find the defendant guilty of Count 3 if you
19 find him guilty as charged in Count number 1, and that he
20 knowingly used fire and explosive materials or carried an
21 explosive in the commission of that offense.
22 County number 4, moving on to Count number 4 of the
23 indictment, that reads as follows: that on or about 21st day of
24 May, 1996, in Mecklenburg County in the Western District of
25 North Carolina, the defendant, in connection with his
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
667
1 acquisition of a firearm, a Winchester semiautomatic shotgun,
2 from Quik Pawn Shop, a licensed firearm dealer, knowingly made
3 false and fictitious statements which were likely to deceive
4 Quik Pawn Shop as to a fact material to the lawfulness of such
5 acquisition of said firearm by the defendant under chapter 44 of
6 Title 18, in that the defendant represented that he was Mario
7 Vonkeith Barnette and that he had not been convicted of a crime
8 punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, when
9 in fact, as the defendant then well knew, he was not Mario
10 Vonkeith Barnette and he had been so convicted. That's in
11 violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(a)(6) and
12 924.
13 Now, Section 922(a)(6) of Title 18 reads in pertinent
14 part as follows: It shall be unlawful for any person in
15 connection with the acquisition of any firearm from a licensed
16 dealer to make any false or fictitious oral or written statement
17 intended or likely to deceive such dealer with respect to any
18 fact material to the lawfulness of the sale of such firearm.
19 Now, in order to convict the defendant or find him
20 guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of that offense, the government
21 must prove each of the following essential elements beyond a
22 reasonable doubt: first, that the defendant made a false
23 statement while acquiring a firearm from a licensed dealer;
24 second, that the defendant knew the statement was false; and
25 third, that the defendant was intended -- that the statement was
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
668
1 intended or was likely to deceive about a material fact, that
2 is, one which would affect the legality of the sale to the
3 defendant.
4 A statement is "false or fictitious" if it was untrue
5 when made or was then known to be untrue by the person making
6 it.
7 A false statement is "likely to deceive" if the nature
8 of the statement, considering all of the surrounding
9 circumstances at the time that it is made, is such is that a
10 reasonable person of ordinary prudence would have been actually
11 deceived or misled.
12 Count number 5 of the indictment reads that between
13 May 21, 1996 and June 22, 1996, exact date unknown, in
14 Mecklenburg County within the Western District of North
15 Carolina, the defendant knowingly made a firearm, that is he did
16 saw off a portion of the barrel of a Winchester shotgun, without
17 complying with the provisions of the National Firearms Act
18 contained in Chapter 53 of Title 26 of the United States Code,
19 in violation of Title 26, United States Code, Sections 5821,
20 5822, 5861(f) and 5871.
21 Now, in order -- that statute reads as follows in
22 pertinent part, 5861(f), excuse me, Count 5, 5861(f) reads in
23 pertinent part as follows: that it shall be unlawful for any
24 person to make a firearm in violation of the provisions of this
25 chapter.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
669
1 Now, for you to find the defendant guilty of the offense
2 charged in Count 5, the government must prove each of the
3 following essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt: first,
4 that the defendant knowingly made a firearm as described in the
5 bill of indictment; second, that prior to making the firearm,
6 the defendant failed to obtain an approved application from the
7 Secretary of the Treasury or his delegate showing approval to
8 make and register the firearm as required in Title 18, Section
9 5822.
10 The term "make" includes manufacturing, other than one
11 qualified to engage in such business under Chapter 53 of Title
12 18, putting together, altering, any combination of these, or
13 otherwise producing a firearm.
14 The term "firearm" means any weapon that will or is
15 designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by
16 the action of an explosive. The term "firearm" also includes
17 the frame or receiver of any such weapon, or any firearm muffler
18 or firearm silencer, or destructive device.
19 Count number 6 reads that on or about the 22nd day of
20 June, 1996, in Mecklenburg County within the Western District of
21 North Carolina, the defendant, having been convicted of a crime
22 punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, to
23 wit, in case number 76063 on September 20, 1994 in Mecklenburg
24 County Superior Court of the crime of felonious restraint, did
25 knowingly possess a firearm, that is a Winchester semiautomatic
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
670
1 shotgun, which had been shipped and transported in interstate or
2 foreign commerce, in violation of Title 18, United States Code,
3 Section 922(g)(1) and Section 924.
4 Section 922(g)(1) in pertinent part reads as follows:
5 It shall be unlawful for any person who has been convicted in
6 any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
7 exceeding one year to knowingly ship or transport in interstate
8 or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any
9 firearm or ammunition, or to receive any firearm or ammunition
10 which had been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign
11 commerce.
12 Now, for the jury to find the defendant guilty of the
13 offense charged in Count 6 of the indictment, the government
14 must prove the following essential elements beyond a reasonable
15 doubt: first, that the defendant has been convicted in any
16 court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding
17 one year; second, that the conviction had not been expunged or
18 set aside, nor had the defendant had his civil rights restored;
19 third, that the defendant knowingly possessed the firearm
20 described in the indictment; and fourth, that such firearm had
21 been shipped in interstate or foreign commerce.
22 It is not necessary for the government to prove that the
23 defendant knew he was convicted, a convicted felon, or that he
24 knew the firearm had traveled in or affected commerce, nor is it
25 necessary to prove that the defendant knew he was prohibited
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
671
1 from possessing a firearm, rather ignorance of the law is not a
2 defense to this charge.
3 The phrase "crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
4 exceeding one year" generally means a crime which is a felony.
5 The phrase does not include any state offense classified by the
6 laws of that state as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of
7 imprisonment of two years or less and certain crimes concerning
8 the regulation of business practices.
9 I hereby instruct you that the crime of felonious
10 restraint is a crime in the State of North Carolina punishable
11 by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year as that phrase is
12 used in these instructions.
13 Now, the term "possess" means to exercise authority,
14 dominion or control over. Possession may be of two kinds,
15 actual possession and constructive possession. The person who
16 knowingly has direct physical control over a thing at a given
17 time is then in actual possession of it. A person who, although
18 not in actual possession, knowingly has both the power and the
19 intention at a given time to exercise dominion or control over a
20 thing, either directly or through another person or persons, is
21 then in constructive possession.
22 Possession may be sole or joint. If one person alone
23 has actual or constructive possession of a thing, possession is
24 sole. If two or more persons share actual or constructive
25 possession of a thing, possession is joint.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
672
1 You may find that the element of possession, as that
2 term is used in these instructions, is present if you find
3 beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant had actual or
4 constructive possession, either alone or jointly with others.
5 Interstate commerce means commerce or travel between one
6 state, territory or possession of the United States and another
7 state, territory or possession of the United States, including
8 the District of Columbia.
9 The government may meet its burden of proof on the
10 question of being in or affecting commerce and, quote, shipped
11 or transported in interstate commerce by move to you beyond a
12 reasonable doubt that the firearm identified in the indictment,
13 at any time during its existence, had traveled across a state
14 boundary line.
15 Moving on to Count number 7, it reads in the indictment
16 that on or about June 22, 1996, in Mecklenburg County within the
17 Western District of North Carolina, the defendant, with intent
18 to cause death or serious bodily harm, did knowingly, willfully
19 and unlawfully take by force, violence and intimidation, that
20 is, he shot to death and took from the person of Donald Lee
21 Allen a motor vehicle which had been shipped, transported and
22 received in interstate commerce, that is, a 1994 Honda Prelude
23 vehicle, the identification number is in there, we won't get
24 into that, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section
25 2119(3).
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
673
1 Now, that statute reads in pertinent part as follows,
2 that whoever, with the intent to cause death or serious bodily
3 harm takes a motor vehicle that has been transported, shipped or
4 received in interstate or foreign commerce from the person or
5 presence of another by force and violence or by intimidation has
6 violated this statute.
7 Now, for you to find the defendant guilty of the crime
8 charged in Count number 7 of the indictment, you must be
9 convinced that the government has proved each of the following
10 essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt: first, that the
11 defendant intentionally took from Donald Lee Allen the motor
12 vehicle described in the indictment; second, that the motor
13 vehicle had been transported in interstate or foreign commerce;
14 third, that the defendant did so by means of force and violence
15 and intimidation; and fourth, that the defendant intended to
16 cause the death or serious bodily harm.
17 Moving on to Count number 8, on or about the 22nd day of
18 June, 1996, in Mecklenburg County in the Western District of
19 North Carolina, the defendant knowingly used and carried a
20 firearm, that is, a sawed-off Winchester semiautomatic shotgun,
21 during and in relation to a crime of violence, for which he may
22 be prosecuted in a court of the United States, that is, the
23 carjacking set forth in Count 7 above, and in course of this
24 violation caused the death of Donald Lee Allen through the use
25 of a firearm, which killing is a murder as defined in Title 18,
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
674
1 United States Code, Section 1111, in that the defendant, with
2 malice aforethought, did unlawfully kill Donald Lee Allen by
3 shooting him with the firearm willfully, deliberately,
4 maliciously and with premeditation, in violation of Title 18,
5 United States Code, Section 924(c)(1) and (i)2(1).
6 Now, in order to convict -- that statute reads in
7 pertinent part as follows: that whoever, during and in relation
8 to any crime of violence for which he may be prosecuted in a
9 court of United States, uses or carries a firearm shall be in
10 violation of that statute.
11 And 924 -- let's see -- now, moving on to Count
12 number -- excuse me, Title 18, Section 924(j), included in Count
13 number 8, charges the defendant with violating Title 18, United
14 States Code, Section 924(c)(1)(2)(i) -- excuse me, 924(i)2(1),
15 which had been recodified as Title 18, United States Code,
16 Section 924(j)(1), and which reads in pertinent part as
17 follows: A person who, in the course of a violation of
18 subsection (c), causes the death of a person through the use of
19 a firearm, shall if the killing is a murder have violated this
20 statute.
21 Now, for you to find the defendant guilty of the offense
22 set forth in Count 8 of the indictment, the government must
23 prove the following essential elements beyond a reasonable
24 doubt: first, that the defendant committed the crime of
25 carjacking as charged in Count 7 or the indictment, for which he
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
675
1 may be prosecuted in a court of the United States. I instruct
2 you that an act of carjacking is a crime of violence; second,
3 that the defendant knowingly used and carried a firearm during
4 and in relation to the defendant's commission of the crime
5 alleged in Count 7 of the indictment; third, that in the course
6 of and using -- excuse me, that in the course of using and
7 carrying a firearm during and in relation to the defendant's
8 commission of the crime alleged in Count 7, he caused the death
9 of Donald Lee Allen by murdering him; and fourth, that such
10 murder was committed without legal justification, with malice
11 aforethought and with premeditation which includes
12 deliberation.
13 You may find the defendant guilty of Count 8 if you find
14 him guilty as charged in Count 7, and that he knowingly used a
15 carried a firearm in the commission of that offense and that he
16 caused the death of Donald Lee Allen by murdering him without
17 legal justification, with malice aforethought and with
18 premeditation, which includes deliberation.
19 To kill with malice aforethought means either to kill
20 another person deliberately and intentionally or to act with
21 callous and wanton disregard for human life. To find malice
22 aforethought, you need not be convinced that the defendant hated
23 or otherwise felt ill will toward the victim at the time.
24 In determining whether the killing was with malice
25 aforethought, you may consider the use of a weapon and the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
676
1 manner in which the death was caused.
2 Premeditation, a killing is premeditated when it is the
3 result of planning or deliberation. The amount of time needed
4 for premeditation of a killing depends on the person and the
5 circumstances. It must be long enough for the killer, after
6 forming the intent to kill, to be fully conscious of the
7 intent.
8 You should consider all of the facts and circumstances
9 preceding, surrounding and following the killing which tend to
10 shed light upon the condition of the defendant before and at the
11 time of the killing.
12 Moving on to Count number 9, on or about the 22nd day of
13 June, 1996, in Mecklenburg County within the Western District of
14 North Carolina, the defendant did unlawfully transport in
15 interstate a stolen motor vehicle, that is, a 1994 Honda Prelude
16 vehicle, identification number is in the indictment, from the
17 State of North Carolina to the Commonwealth of Virginia, knowing
18 the same to be stolen, in violation of Title 18, United States
19 Code, Section 2312.
20 Now, that statute reads in pertinent part as follows:
21 that whoever transports in interstate or foreign commerce a
22 motor vehicle, knowing the same to have stolen, shall be guilty
23 of an offense against the United States.
24 Now, for to you find the defendant guilty of this
25 offense charged in Count 9, you must be convinced that the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
677
1 government has proved each of the following essential elements
2 beyond a reasonable doubt: first, that the defendant
3 transported or caused to be transported in interstate commerce a
4 stolen motor vehicle; second, that at the time of such
5 transportation, the defendant knew the motor vehicle had been
6 stolen.
7 The word "stolen" as used in the indictment in this case
8 includes all wrongful and dishonest taking of motor vehicles
9 with the intent to deprive the owner, temporarily or
10 permanently, of the rights and benefits of ownership.
11 Count number 10, interstate domestic violence, that on
12 or about the 22nd day of June, 1996, in Mecklenburg County in
13 the Western District of North Carolina and in the Western
14 District of Virginia, the defendant did travel across a state
15 line, that is, did transport himself from Charlotte, North
16 Carolina to Roanoke, Virginia with the intent to injure, harass
17 and intimidate an intimate partner, Robin Williams, and in the
18 course and as a result of such travel intentionally committed a
19 crime of violence, that is, shot and killed Robin Williams
20 causing bodily injury and death to her, in violation of Title
21 18, United States Code, Sections 2261(a)(1) and 2261(b). The
22 reason I'm saying whether it's parenthesis, this is the man who
23 has to take it down and he doesn't know whether it's big A or
24 little A or such, so I'm trying to make it exactly as it is in
25 the indictment.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
678
1 All right, then, Title 18, Section 2261(a)(1) reads in
2 pertinent part as follows: A person who travels across a state
3 line with the intent to injure, harass or intimate that person's
4 spouse or an intimate partner, and who in the course of or as a
5 result of such travel intentionally commits a crime of violence
6 and therefore cause bodily injury to such spouse or intimate
7 partner violates Title -- I mean, Title 18, United States Code,
8 Section 2261(A)(1).
9 Now, for you to find the defendant guilty of interstate
10 domestic violence as charged in Count 1 of the indictment, you
11 must be convinced that the government has proved each of the
12 following essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt: first,
13 that at the time alleged in the indictment the defendant and
14 Robin Antoinette Williams were or had been intimate partners;
15 second, that the defendant traveled across a state line with the
16 intent to either injure, harass or intimidate Robin Antoinette
17 Williams; third, that during the course of, and as a result of
18 the travel, the defendant intentionally committed a crime of
19 violence; and fourth, thereby caused bodily injury to Robin
20 Antoinette Williams.
21 As I said before, an intimate partner includes a spouse,
22 a former spouse, a person who shares a child in common with the
23 abuser, and a person who cohabits or has cohabited with the
24 abuser as a spouse.
25 The second element is that the defendant traveled across
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
679
1 a state line, in this case North Carolina to Virginia, with the
2 intent to injure, harass or intimidate Robin Williams. These
3 terms have their common, everyday meaning. In this case, the
4 government contends that the defendant crossed the state line
5 when the intent to injure his former intimate partner, Robin
6 Williams. You must find beyond a reasonable doubt that the
7 defendant intended to injure Robin Williams at the time he
8 crossed from North Carolina to Virginia.
9 Bodily injury means any act, except one in self defense,
10 that results in physical injury or sexual abuse.
11 Moving on to Count number 11, Count number 11 of the
12 indictment charges the defendant with violating Title 18, United
13 States Code, Section 924(c)(1), which reads in pertinent part as
14 follows: that whoever, during and in relation to any crime of
15 violence for which he may be prosecuted in a court of the United
16 States, uses or carries a firearm shall be in violation of this
17 statute.
18 Count number 11 also charges the defendant with
19 violating Title 18, United States Code, Section 924(i)2(1) which
20 has been recodified as Title 18, United States Code, Section
21 924(j)(1), and which reads in pertinent part as follows: A
22 person who, in the course of a violation subsection (c), causes
23 the death of a person through the use of a firearm shall, if the
24 killing is a murder, have violated this statute.
25 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor?
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
680
1 THE COURT: Yes, sir?
2 MR. CONRAD: May I be heard at this point?
3 THE COURT: Yes, sir.
4 (Bench conference not recorded.)
5 THE COURT: Members of the jury, I referred in the
6 beginning there, or maybe I didn't, to Count number, it's Count
7 11 we're in. For you to find the defendant guilty of the
8 offense set forth in Count number 11 of the indictment which we
9 just had, the government must prove the following essential
10 elements beyond a reasonable doubt: first, that the defendant
11 committed an act of interstate domestic violence as charged in
12 Count 10 of the indictment, for which he may be prosecuted in a
13 court of the United States. I instruct you that an act of
14 interstate domestic violence is a crime of violence; second,
15 that the defendant knowingly used and carried a firearm during
16 and in relation to the defendant's commission of the crime
17 alleged in Count number 11 of -- Count number 10 of the
18 indictment; third, that the defendant -- excuse me, third, that
19 in the course of knowingly using and carrying a firearm during
20 and in relation to the defendant's commission of the crime
21 alleged in Count number 10, he caused the death of Robin
22 Antoinette Williams by murdering her;, and fourth, that such
23 murder was committed without legal justification, with malice
24 aforethought and with premeditation.
25 Now, you may find the defendant guilty of Count 11 if
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
681
1 you find him guilty as charged in Count number 10, and that he
2 used or carried a firearm in the commission of that offense and
3 that he caused the death of Robin Antoinette Williams by
4 murdering her without legal justification and with malice
5 aforethought and premeditation, which means deliberation.
6 I shall now define for you certain terms, other terms
7 used in the essential elements. You are to apply these
8 definitions as you consider the evidence. If I do not define
9 certain words, you will assign to them their ordinary, everyday
10 meanings.
11 Malice aforethought is defined, to kill with malice
12 aforethought means either to kill another person deliberately
13 and intentionally, or to act with callous and wanton disregard
14 for human life. To define malice aforethought, you need not be
15 convinced that the defendant hated or otherwise felt ill will
16 toward the victim at the time.
17 In determining whether the killing was with malice
18 aforethought, you may consider the use of a weapon and the
19 manner in which the death was caused.
20 Premeditation, a killing is premeditated when it is the
21 result of planning or deliberation. Again, the amount of time
22 needed for premeditation of a killing depends on the person and
23 the circumstances. It must be long enough for the killer, after
24 forming the intent to kill, to be fully conscious of the
25 intent.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
682
1 You should consider all of the facts and circumstances
2 preceding, surrounding and following the killing which tend to
3 shed lied upon the condition of the defendant before and at the
4 time of the killing.
5 The word "knowingly" as the term was used from time to
6 time in these instructions means that the act was done
7 voluntarily and intentionally, and not because of mistake or
8 accident.
9 Members of the jury, intent ordinarily may not be proved
10 directly, because there's no way of fathoming or scrutinizing
11 the operations of the human mind. But you may infer the
12 defendant's intent from the surrounding circumstances. You may
13 consider any statement made and done or omitted by the
14 defendant, and all other facts and circumstances in evidence
15 which indicate his state of mind.
16 You may consider it reasonable to draw the inference and
17 find that a person intends the natural and probable consequences
18 of acts knowingly done or knowingly admitted, but you are not
19 required to do so. As I have said, it is entirely up to you to
20 decide what facts you find from the evidence.
21 The world "willfully" as that term has been used in
22 certain crimes charged in the indictment refers to an act
23 committed by an accused voluntarily, with knowledge that it was
24 prohibited by law, and with the purpose of violating the law,
25 and not by mistake, accident or in good faith. An act is
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
683
1 done "willfully" if done voluntarily and intentionally, and with
2 specific intent to do something that the law forbids, that is to
3 say, with bad purpose either to disobey or disregard the law.
4 "Unlawfully," of course, simply means contrary to law.
5 To do an act unlawfully means knowingly to do something which is
6 contrary to law.
7 Members of the jury, you heard a great deal of evidence
8 from a number of witnesses. I remind you it is your job to
9 decide whether the government has proved the guilt of the
10 defendant beyond a reasonable doubt. In doing so, you must
11 consider all of the evidence. This does not mean, however, that
12 you must accept all of the evidence as true or accurate.
13 You are the sole judges of the credibility or
14 believability of each witness and the weight to be given to the
15 witness's testimony. An important part of your job will be
16 making judgments about the testimony of the witnesses who
17 testified in this case. You should decide whether you believe
18 all or any part of what each person had to say, and how
19 important that testimony was. In making that decision, I
20 suggest that you ask yourself a few questions: first, did the
21 person impress you as honest; second, did the witness have any
22 particular reason not to tell the truth; third, did the witness
23 have a personal interest in the outcome of the case; fourth, did
24 the witness have any relationship to either the government or
25 the defense; fifth, did the witness seem to have a good memory;
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
684
1 sixth, did the witness clearly see or hear the things about what
2 he or she testified; seven, did the witness have the opportunity
3 and ability to understand the questions clearly and answer them
4 directly; eight, did the witness's testimony differ from the
5 testimony of other witnesses?
6 These are a few considerations that will help you to
7 determine the accuracy of what each witness had to say.
8 Your job is to think about the testimony of each witness
9 you have heard and decide how much you believe of what each
10 witness had to say. In making up your mind and reaching a
11 verdict, do not make any decision simply because there were more
12 witnesses on one side than the other. Do not reach a conclusion
13 on a particular point just because there were more witnesses
14 testifying for one side on that point.
15 Now, you should keep in mind, of course, that a simple
16 mistake by a witness does not necessarily mean that a witness
17 was not telling the truth as he or she remembers it, because
18 people naturally tend to forget some things or remember other
19 things inaccurately. So if a witness has made a misstatement,
20 you need to consider whether that misstatement was simply an
21 innocent lapse of memory or intentional falsehood, and that may
22 depend on whether it has to do with an important fact or only an
23 unimportant detail.
24 In the final analysis, the jury may give the testimony
25 of a witness such weight or credibility, if any, as the jury in
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
685
1 its sole discretion may find appropriate.
2 The testimony of a witness may be discredited by showing
3 that a witness testified falsely concerning a material matter,
4 or by evidence that at some other time the witness has said or
5 done something or failed to say or do something, which is
6 inconsistent with the testimony the witness gave at this trial.
7 Earlier statements of a witness were not admitted into
8 evidence to prove the contents of those statements -- earlier
9 statements of a witness were not admitted into evidence to prove
10 that the contents of those statements are true. You may
11 consider the earlier statements only to determine whether you
12 think they are consistent or inconsistent with the trial
13 testimony of the witness and therefore whether they affect the
14 credibility of that witness.
15 If you believe that a witness has been discredited in
16 the matter, it is your exclusive right to give the testimony of
17 that witness whatever weight you think it deserves.
18 The defendant has elected not to testify in this case.
19 The Court instructs you that he has a Constitutional right not
20 to take the stand and testify and not to speak at all or offer
21 any evidence, the burden of proof being entirely upon the
22 government. You must draw no adverse inferences of any kind
23 from his exercise of his privilege not to testify. This is a
24 fundamental right, fundamental right in America's criminal law
25 and one which cannot be disregarded by the jury at its pleasure.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
686
1 When the government offers testimony or evidence that a
2 defendant made a statement or admission to someone after being
3 arrested, the jury should consider the evidence concerning such
4 a statement with caution and great care.
5 It is for to you decide, one, whether the defendant made
6 the statement, and two, if so, how much weight to give it. In
7 making those decisions, you should consider all of the evidence
8 about the statement, including the circumstances under which the
9 defendant may have made it.
10 Evidence that a defendant immediately fled or concealed
11 himself after committing a crime is a circumstance that, if
12 proven, can be considered by the jury as showing a consciousness
13 of guilt on the part of the defendant.
14 In your evaluation of this evidence of flight or
15 concealment, you may consider that there may be reasons, fully
16 consistent with innocence, that could cause a person to flee or
17 conceal himself.
18 Whether or not evidence of immediate flight or
19 concealment on the part of defendant causes the jury to find a
20 consciousness of guilt on his part and the significance, if any,
21 of that consciousness of guilt is entirely up to you as the sole
22 judges of the facts of this case.
23 During the trial, you heard the testimony or received
24 the stipulations of Thomas P. Simpson, a forensic scientist with
25 expertise in the area of accelerant and destructive device
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
687
1 analysis; Dr. David Oxley, a forensic pathologist; Dr. James
2 Michael Sullivan, a forensic pathologist; Nancy Kern, a
3 fingerprint analyst; and Todd J. Nordhoff, a firearms analyst.
4 Each of them has expressed opinions concerning their field of
5 expertise. If scientific, technical or other specialized
6 knowledge might assist the jury in determining the evidence or
7 in determining a fact in issue, a witness qualified by
8 knowledge, skill, experience training or education may testify
9 and state an opinion concerning such matters.
10 Merely because such a witness has expressed an opinion
11 does not mean, however, that you must accept that opinion. You
12 should judge such testimony like any other testimony. You may
13 accept it or reject it and give it as much weight as you think
14 it deserves, considering the witness's education and experience,
15 the soundness of the reasons for giving the opinion, and all
16 other evidence in the case.
17 Tape recordings of interviews have been received in
18 evidence and have been played for you. Typewritten transcripts
19 of those tape recorded conversation have been furnished to you
20 solely for your convenience in assisting you in following
21 conversations or in identifying the speakers.
22 The tapes themselves, however, are the evidence in the
23 case and the typewritten transcripts are not evidence. What you
24 hear on the tapes is the evidence. What you read in the
25 transcripts is not. If you perceive any variation between the
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
688
1 two, you will be guided solely by the tapes and not by the
2 transcripts.
3 Now, members of the jury, you have heard all of the
4 evidence and arguments of counsel for the government and for the
5 defendant. It's your duty to remember the evidence, whether it
6 has been called to your attention or not, and if your
7 recollection of the evidence differs from that of the United
8 States Attorney or of the defense attorney, you are to rely
9 solely on your recollection of the evidence in your
10 deliberations. I have not reviewed the contentions of the
11 government or the defendant, but it is your duty not only to
12 consider all of the evidence, but also to consider all of the
13 arguments, contentions and positions urged by the United States
14 Attorney and the defense counsel in their statements to you, and
15 any other contention that arises from the evidence, and to weigh
16 them all in the light of your common sense, and as best you can,
17 to determine the truth of this matter.
18 The law, as indeed it should, requires the presiding
19 judge to be impartial, and so you must not attempt to draw any
20 conclusion from any conduct on my part that I have any
21 particular view on this case, not from any ruling that I have
22 made, nor any inflection of my voice or expression on my face,
23 or any question I may have asked, or anything else that I may
24 have said or done during the trial, other than these
25 instructions.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
689
1 I instruct you that a verdict is not a verdict until all
2 12 jurors agree unanimously as to what your decision shall be.
3 You may not render a verdict by a majority vote.
4 The Court suggests that as soon as you reach the jury
5 room, before beginning deliberations, you select one of your
6 members to serve as the foreperson, whether a man or a woman.
7 The foreperson has the same vote as the rest of the jurors but
8 simply serves to preside over the discussions. Once you begin
9 deliberating, if you need to communicate with me, the foreperson
10 will send a written message by knocking -- we have a buzzer back
11 here, instead of knocking on the door, just press the buzzer and
12 hand it to the marshal and he will bring it to me. Do not, in
13 any event, if you come back into the courtroom for any purpose
14 other than to deliver your verdict, do not stand -- state how
15 you stand numerically as to your verdict. In other words, if
16 you are six to six or three to nine or whatever, do not tell us
17 that. We'll be interested only in the final, unanimous
18 verdict.
19 We have a verdict sheet which we will give to you
20 together with a copy of the indictment. It's simply a written
21 notice of the decision that you reach in this case. And as soon
22 as you've received a verdict as to the defendant on the charges
23 contained in the bill of indictment, you will return to the
24 courtroom and your foreperson will on request hand the verdict
25 sheet to the Clerk or to the marshal.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
690
1 During the trial, a number of items were received into
2 evidence as exhibits. You will not be taking these exhibits
3 into the jury room with you at the start, because I'm not sure
4 whether you'll need them or not, there are an awful lot of
5 exhibits. But if after you've begun your discussion of the case
6 you think it would be helpful to have any of the exhibit with
7 you in the jury room, just press the buzzer again and we will
8 ask the marshal and we will send that back to you.
9 Any verdict in the jury room whether guilty or not
10 guilty must be unanimous. In other words, to return a verdict
11 you must all agree. Your deliberations will be secret. You
12 will never have to explain your verdict to anyone.
13 It's your duty as jurors to discuss the case with one
14 another in an effort to reach agreement if you can do so. Each
15 you must decide the case for yourself, but only after full
16 consideration of the evidence with the other members of the
17 jury. While you are discussing the case, do not hesitate to
18 reexamine your own opinion and change your mind if you are
19 convinced that you were wrong. Do not give up your honest
20 beliefs solely because what others think may be different or
21 merely because to get the case over with. Remember in a very
22 real way, you are judges of the facts and your only interest is
23 to seek the truth in this matter.
24 Some of you may have taken some notes during the trial
25 and you may use those in your deliberations, but not as a
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
691
1 substitute for your recollection. You know, sometimes people
2 taking notes are not used to it, and something else goes over
3 their head that's being testified to. So I don't want you to
4 share your notes with other jurors. In other words, what you
5 have in the notes is not necessarily what actually transpired.
6 Each juror has to determine that from their own recollection, if
7 they took notes or didn't take notes. It's your recollection
8 that counts and not what somebody else has taken -- has said in
9 their notes.
10 Now, any time you have any questions about anything, as
11 I say, if you'll just press the buzzer and let us know and we
12 will try to answer your question if you write it on a piece of
13 paper with a yes or a no. If I have to bring you back into the
14 courtroom, as I say, do not tell you where you stand if you are
15 divided in any way. We will be glad to try to answer anything
16 we can, but you must understand that I am restricted by the law
17 in the instructions I have given to you. If you need me to go
18 over these instructions, any part of the instructions, just let
19 me know, we'll be glad to do that with you also.
20 Anything else, any objections?
21 MR. CONRAD: No, sir.
22 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir, we'll --
23 THE COURT: Pardon?
24 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir, we do.
25 THE COURT: I said any objections?
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
692
1 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir we do.
2 THE COURT: Okay. Well, I mean, do you want to come up
3 here, is it something that we have already discussed?
4 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir it is.
5 THE COURT: All right. In that case, we will let the
6 jury go on back there.
7 Members of the jury, Ms. Grier will give you a copy of
8 the indictment and a copy of the verdict form. And as I say, if
9 you want any of these exhibits, just let us know, we have a lot
10 of them. There are usually some -- most of them back there at
11 the same time, I mean at one time, but I think you can ask for
12 whatever exhibits you want, and whatever you want we will be
13 glad to send to you.
14 At this time, we will excuse the alternates. We
15 appreciate very much your having been here. It was necessary
16 for you to be here, because you never know when one of the other
17 jurors become ill or not be able to deliberate for some reason.
18 However, when it comes to deliberations, only the 12 jurors are
19 allowed to go back to the jury room for that purpose. So we
20 will excuse you at this time. We again thank you so much for
21 your time and service. You are permitted to stay if you wish to
22 stay as long as you want to. Thank you so much, and we'll
23 excuse you now, just the alternates.
24 (Alternate jurors leave the courtroom.)
25 (Bench conference with the Clerk and the Judge.)
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
693
1 THE COURT: By the way, anytime you want to eat lunch,
2 just let us know that if you're still deliberating. Anytime
3 you're ready to eat lunch, just press the buzzer. Don't just
4 walk out the door. We have to know when you're gone and have to
5 know when you come back, so just press the buzzer and we will
6 bring you in and dismiss you.
7 THE CLERK: They are gone, Judge.
8 THE COURT: All right, Ms. Grier will give you a copy of
9 the indictment and a verdict seat, and you can go back and start
10 your deliberations. Thank you so much for your time.
11 (The jury left the courtroom at 11:40 a.m. to begin
12 deliberations).
13 THE COURT: All right, I believe the government said
14 that they did not have any objections to the instructions as
15 given, is that correct?
16 MR. CONRAD: That's correct, Your Honor.
17 THE COURT: Anything from the defendant? I'll be glad
18 to hear from you now.
19 MR. LAUGHRUN: Thank you, Judge. Your Honor, pursuant
20 to Rule 30 of the Federal Rules of Procedure, we had a
21 conference with Your Honor yesterday. At that conference, we
22 objected to the instructions. Mr. Williams objected to the
23 term "malice" and asked Your Honor to strike the callous
24 disregard for human life section. Your Honor denied that
25 motion. We'd renew that at this time.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
694
1 We also asked Your Honor to submit a special jury
2 instruction on venue and jurisdiction for several of the counts
3 in the bill of indictment. Your Honor denied that. We'd again
4 renew that request. And this morning we asked you to define the
5 term "spouse" and Your Honor declined to do that also. We'd
6 renew our request for those instructions.
7 THE COURT: Thank you, sir, it's on the record. We will
8 just wait and see what happens.
9 (Awaiting verdict of the jury.)
10 (Note from the jury.)
11 THE COURT: They just want to go to lunch.
12 THE CLERK: Do you need the defendant?
13 THE COURT: No, I don't need the defendant.
14 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, you might want to bring the
15 defendant in. I think that's part of the process.
16 THE COURT: Going to lunch?
17 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir.
18 THE COURT: Okay, bring him in. Hold them up just a
19 minute.
20 MR. LAUGHRUN: I think he is just right around the
21 corner, Your Honor.
22 THE COURT: I hope he is. They may have taken him
23 downstairs.
24 (Pause.)
25 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, while we are waiting, are you
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
695
1 going to keep the jury together during lunch, are you going to
2 order them to stay together at lunch.
3 THE COURT: I can't very well do that. Some of them are
4 going to stay here, I imagine, with this weather outside.
5 MR. LAUGHRUN: It's been a while since I've appeared
6 before Your Honor in a trial. Do you usually give your
7 instruction about not discussing it at lunch?
8 THE COURT: Oh, yes. Can we make some arrangements so
9 we don't have to do this every time they want to go to lunch?
10 MR. LAUGHRUN: I thought, Judge, they kept him in the
11 little room down the hall.
12 THE COURT: I understand.
13 (Pause.)
14 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, he is downstairs, and with that,
15 if you want to bring them in and send them to lunch, we have no
16 objection to that.
17 THE COURT: Fine, bring the jury in.
18 (The jury returned to the courtroom.)
19 THE COURT: Appreciate your patience, I'm sorry we are
20 delayed a little bit. We have to gather the people up every
21 time y'all want something, so there may be some little delay.
22 Now, you want to go to lunch. How long do you want to
23 take, an hour, do you want to say 1:00 o'clock, is that enough
24 time, 1:00 o'clock?
25 (Jurors nod heads.)
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
696
1 THE COURT: I'll have to instruct you again, of course,
2 do not discuss the case among yourselves while you are out
3 because obviously all 12 of you are not going to be together, so
4 do not discuss it obviously with anyone outside the courtroom.
5 I don't know if there is anything in the news media about it,
6 but if there is, do not read anything about it or listen to any
7 radios or watch TV or anything else while you're out to lunch.
8 Now, 1:00 o'clock is all right with you?
9 (Jurors nod heads.)
10 THE COURT: Come back at 1:00 o'clock, if you can come
11 back into the courtroom because obviously all of you are not
12 going to be together. Some of you are probably going to stay
13 here, the weather is so bad. So I just want to be sure
14 everybody is here before you go back in and start your
15 deliberations. If one or two of you come in at one time, or
16 four or five of you, or even 11 of you, don't talk about the
17 case until all 12 of you are here and in the courtroom and we
18 tell you to go back and start your deliberations. Thank you so
19 much.
20 (The jury left the courtroom.)
21 THE COURT: Recess until 1:00 o'clock.
22 (Lunch recess.)
23 (The defendant not present.)
24 THE COURT: All right, you can go can back and start
25 your deliberations. Anything we can do for you, let us know.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
697
1 Just call for any exhibits you need, is the best way to do it.
2 THE CLERK: Leave those exhibits in the chair if you
3 have got any.
4 THE COURT: What exhibits?
5 THE CLERK: They had some, Judge, that were in the chair
6 and they've been in the chair.
7 THE COURT: Any objection to them taking back with them
8 the exhibits they had?
9 MR. CONRAD: No, Your Honor.
10 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, I'm not sure what they are.
11 THE COURT: All of you have some exhibits, do you, that
12 were handed to you during the trial?
13 JUROR: The transcript.
14 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, I believe those were held over
15 from Friday, and I thought we talked about maybe collecting
16 those unless they ask for them.
17 THE COURT: If y'all want anything, let me know and
18 we'll get if for you.
19 JUROR: They were on the chair when we came in this
20 morning.
21 THE CLERK: Just give those to me.
22 (The jury left the courtroom.)
23 THE COURT: For the record, the defendant was not here.
24 All we did was send them back to deliberate.
25 MR. LAUGHRUN: We have no objection to that, Judge. And
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
698
1 one thing, too, we had a bench conference before you instructed
2 the jury, about a 30-second conference, that we asked Your Honor
3 to let the jurors finish looking at the exhibits, and you said,
4 okay, that's fine, and did look at them do that. I think that
5 was all that was said at the bench conference.
6 THE COURT: Okay, fine. Anything else while we wait for
7 them, or do you want to --
8 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor, if you want to discuss the
9 victim impact --
10 THE COURT: Okay.
11 MR. CONRAD: -- proffer, we can do that.
12 THE COURT: Well, Mike, I left it on my desk back there.
13 MR. CONRAD: I request we do it in chambers or some
14 private --
15 THE COURT: Oh, you want to do it in chambers? Okay.
16 Do you want him?
17 MR. CONRAD: I don't think we need him.
18 (Discussion between attorneys for the government and
19 attorneys for the defendant.)
20 THE COURT: What do you say?
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, we don't have any problem waiving
22 it, we don't have any objection if Mr. Huseby is not there for
23 that. We can just tell Your Honor what we all -- what we decide
24 or don't decide or what you finally say is going to happen, if
25 that's fair with the government.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
699
1 MR. CONRAD: That's okay with me.
2 THE COURT: You want to do it out here, then?
3 MR. LAUGHRUN: No, sir. I said we have no objection to
4 doing it in your chambers without Mr. Huseby having to be here.
5 THE COURT: All right, fine. If y'all are ready, we
6 will go on back there now. Are y'all ready?
7 MR. CONRAD: Yes, sir.
8 THE COURT: How about the defendant, are y'all ready to
9 go back and talk about it?
10 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, upon further review, we probably
11 do need the court reporter.
12 THE COURT: Stay in the courtroom?
13 MR. LAUGHRUN: No, we'll do it in your office with the
14 court reporter.
15 THE COURT: Oh, okay. Come along, Scott.
16 (In-chambers conference with attorneys and the Court.)
17 THE COURT: Okay, are you all ready, what does the
18 government have to say?
19 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor, we filed a proffer which set
20 forth some case law starting with Payne v. Tennessee, and then
21 citing lower Federal and State Court cases in which victim
22 impact evidence was admitted. And the central tenet of --
23 THE COURT: First of all, you don't have the defendant
24 here. Now, you waive --
25 MR. LAUGHRUN: Fine, no objection.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
700
1 THE COURT: If he isn't, we are going back outside.
2 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir.
3 MR. CONRAD: The central tenet of that pleading was to
4 say that the -- that the focus on the word "emotional" is an
5 improper focus, that the focus should be on the federal rule of
6 evidence that says that the evidence should be excluded only if
7 its probative value is substantially or is un -- is outweighed
8 by unfair prejudice. And I indicated in that pleading that I
9 hope the evidence was prejudicial to the defendant, and I
10 wouldn't be offering it if it wasn't. The cases that I cited
11 was the lower federal and state court cases in the aftermath of
12 Payne, a laundry list of the different court cases in which
13 different types of victim impact evidence were properly
14 admitted.
15 And then at the end of the pleading, I set forth a
16 summary of the proffer as to each individual I intended to call
17 to prove the victim impact evidence that the statute allows me
18 to prove. Each of those things has been approved of in the
19 court cases following Payne v. Tennessee as I listed down in the
20 pleading. For example, certain photographs and videotapes, and
21 I cited cases where those have been affirmed in other cases,
22 certain testimony such as the reading of victim impact
23 statements and a poem that a family member had written in the
24 aftermath of a son or daughter's death. I would contend to Your
25 Honor that that is forceful evidence, that it's probative, and
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
701
1 should come before this jury who's got to decide this very
2 important decision between the capital punishment or life in
3 prison. It is emotional, but it's not unfairly prejudicial.
4 And so the summary that is contained at the end of the pleading
5 would be the evidence that the government would indicate to the
6 Court that it's ready to produce.
7 THE COURT: All right, what does the defendant say? Are
8 you through?
9 MR. CONRAD: Yes, sir.
10 MR. WILLIAMS: Let me make some initial observations,
11 Judge Potter, I don't have the statute in front of me, from
12 section 3592 --
13 THE LAW CLERK: I'll get it, 18 or 28.
14 MR. WILLIAMS: 18, the death statute.
15 MR. WALKER: 3592.
16 MR. CONRAD: 93C.
17 MR. LAUGHRUN: 3593, isn't it?
18 MR. WALKER: 3593 C.
19 MR. WILLIAMS: See if you can find it, but the point I
20 wanted to make Your Honor, that it's my understanding that this
21 evidence in accordance with Payne is supposed to be a reflection
22 on how the murders affected the victim himself and the victim's
23 families. And I would respectfully argue that on page 7, for
24 instance, of the proffer by the government, they talk about
25 under the first paragraph Shirley Allen, how much he has been
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
702
1 missed and how the church honored him with the purchases of
2 Bibles in his name, and how much he was missed at his best
3 friend's wedding in August of 1996, and the special thing they
4 did to honor him. So our argument on that paragraph would be
5 that that is a reflection of how the death of Donald Allen
6 affected other people other than the victim or the victim's
7 family. And it should be excluded under pain.
8 THE COURT: Let's do each one. What about that
9 Mr. Conrad?
10 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor, the mother is going to testify
11 to the effect of the loss of her son on her life, and certainly
12 to limit her from talking about that loss in the context of
13 their --
14 THE COURT: She'll say how much he was missed at his
15 breast friend's wedding or by the mother?
16 MR. CONRAD: By both, the mother is intimately involved
17 with her son's life which includes his relationship with
18 friends, and that loss coupled -- the wedding was a couple of
19 months after the killing, and she participated in that wedding
20 service without her son, the best friend of the groom being
21 there and it was -- it had a far-reaching effect on her.
22 MR. WILLIAMS: The statute Judge, 3593, says a victim
23 impact statement that identifies the victim of the offense and
24 the extent and scope of the injury and loss suffered by the
25 victim and the victim's family. It does say and any another
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
703
1 relevant information, period. We are simply saying this goes
2 beyond the scope of the statute and beyond the scope of Payne
3 and starts talking about people outside of the family were
4 affected by his death.
5 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor, that victim wasn't at that
6 wedding and that's certainly an impact on the victim and the
7 victim's family. When you are talking about putting on evidence
8 showing the personal characteristics and the uniqueness of the
9 victim, it's a twofold thing. You show the impact on the
10 family, but you also show particular identifying factors with
11 respect to the victim, and the victim was not at that wedding.
12 And we certainly are entitled to show the impact there.
13 MR. LAUGHRUN: If that were the case, Judge, you could
14 say if my brother or sister had any children who wouldn't be
15 present for their birth or wedding, you could bring in employers
16 to say that he was missed at work. I think the problem with
17 that part there is there's no limit to it. And I think Bob is
18 right, it is emotional testimony as it should be, but there is
19 some guidance in Payne too for a brief glimpse which is how
20 Payne is worded. I think Paul is right, you got to have some
21 sort of, I guess, limit on how far you can go.
22 MR. WILLIAMS: They are talking about the church here,
23 so you are talking about how this affected the members of the
24 church, they were the ones that went out and purchased the
25 Bibles, so that shows evidence of how his death affected them,
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
704
1 the church and what they did about it, not the family.
2 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor, I did cite the case on page 4
3 of State v. Byrum, that allowed four victim impact witnesses,
4 the teacher's assistants testified that the victim was a
5 wonderful teacher of emotional handicapped students and the
6 students were devastated to learn about the death, and that was
7 admitted, and it's of the type that is before the Court right
8 now.
9 THE COURT: How do you jive that with the statute?
10 MR. CONRAD: The statute talks about the impact on the
11 families but also the victim himself, Your Honor, and I think
12 under -- that's where it comes in. If you read Payne v.
13 Tennessee that's exactly what the Supreme Court says that the
14 jury needs to hear, the uniqueness of the particular individual
15 and his unique characteristics.
16 MR. LAUGHRUN: One thing Payne didn't do, it didn't give
17 any guidance. In fact Payne addressed and said that we refuse
18 to say what is and what is not admissible. So I think if you go
19 on the effect it's got for the victim's family, if that's the
20 case, you could be here a week putting on victim impact
21 evidence.
22 MR. CONRAD: That's exactly why I summarized what our
23 victim impact evidence was, and you can see exactly what we
24 intend to offer. We are not intending to offer evidence for a
25 week, that's a red herring. The evidence we intend to offer is
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
705
1 set forth in the summary.
2 MR. WILLIAMS: Just in this same paragraph, since we are
3 trying to take these one at a time, as I understand your -- the
4 last sentence, there is, she will show the jury a photographic
5 album of a few special pictures of Donnie and she will read a
6 poem that comforts her and --
7 THE COURT: That I think she is entitled to do.
8 MR. WILLIAMS: I just would, I think the defense would
9 request that we be allowed to see that.
10 MR. CONRAD: I will make that available.
11 THE COURT: Little hesitant about getting anybody
12 outside of the family because, in the first place, I don't think
13 it's going to make that much difference. In the second place, I
14 don't think it's allowed by the statute, so I'm going to
15 restrict it in this case.
16 MR. CONRAD: Judge, when a mother testifies about her
17 son and the impact the loss has had on her and who her son was,
18 she has got to be allowed to testify about her son in relation
19 to the world around him.
20 THE COURT: You can talk about the relations but not
21 talking about how he was missed by other people, that's another
22 matter. She can say we missed him, best friends wedding, but
23 let's don't talk about other people that missed him.
24 MR. CONRAD: There were things that were done at the
25 wedding that had an emotional impact on her because he was not
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
706
1 there. There was a candle lit in his honor, there were -- it
2 was -- he was supposed to be in the wedding, she attended the
3 wedding and he was not there.
4 THE COURT: She can testify how it affected her. When
5 you start getting into John Jones over here being affected by it
6 then that's another matter, just try to keep the thing on the
7 straight and narrow.
8 Now, it isn't going to make that much difference, I
9 don't think, I don't see how it could. If you get into what is
10 in the statute I think you are in pretty good shape. I just
11 have to tell you really when we get out there you have to object
12 and I'll have to consider it on each one.
13 MR. LAUGHRUN: We don't want to, we want to resolve it
14 if we can, because once it's said, it's said, you can't --
15 THE COURT: I understand that we are not going to be
16 able to stop that lady from saying things because witnesses are
17 going to blurt things out and testify, but I do think we ought
18 to restrict her to what the statute has in it which is the
19 family itself, I believe.
20 MR. WILLIAMS: I guess my concern is the issue of the
21 candle being lit for Donnie Allen. Again --
22 THE COURT: Effect on the mother though, because if I
23 were the father or mother there and there is a candle lit for
24 him, I know that effects the family. How it affected his best
25 friend is another matter. See what I'm driving at?
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
707
1 MR. CONRAD: I do, and I will curtail my presentation to
2 meet that.
3 MR. WILLIAMS: How about the church with the Bibles,
4 Judge?
5 THE COURT: Who is going to -- the church honored him
6 with the purchase of the Bibles. What has she got to say about
7 that?
8 MR. CONRAD: That they were members of the same church
9 and they were very involved in the church, and that the church
10 honored her son by purchasing Bibles in his name, and that
11 certainly had an effect.
12 THE COURT: How it affected her, right?
13 MR. CONRAD: Right.
14 THE COURT: There is a thin line there, I don't believe
15 Paul -- I believe that might be something that affected her, but
16 I want to -- how he was missed in his best friend's wedding,
17 that she missed him, not how friends were affected.
18 MR. WILLIAMS: Seems to me if the church is doing things
19 as a result of Donnie Allen's death, then it's, that's a result
20 of how his death affected the church members and how they
21 reacted to it. Now if she was present --
22 THE COURT: If she is present it affected her, it's a
23 thin line.
24 MR. WILLIAMS: It is a thin tough line.
25 THE COURT: We will play it be ear.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
708
1 MR. WILLIAMS: We have a three-minute video that we
2 would like to see.
3 MR. CONRAD: Fine.
4 THE COURT: While you are getting down -- --
5 MR. WILLIAMS: Middle of the page, page 7, Judge. They
6 are going to show a brief, less than three-minute video of
7 Donnie enjoying his family. And the Court should see that so
8 that you can review that.
9 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, I have a problem with them taking
10 out a life insurance policy, that's in Denise Allen's statement,
11 about him taking a life insurance policy.
12 MR. WILLIAMS: She is the sister?
13 MR. CONRAD: She as a special need child, and Donnie
14 took a life insurance policy out to care for that child, and
15 that's a direct impact on the sister of the murder victim.
16 MR. WILLIAMS: I have to agree with you, Bob, on that.
17 I have a special child, mentally handicapped child, and I have
18 to agree with him. I understand George's -- but in deference, I
19 think that would have -- I'm sorry, George.
20 MR. LAUGHRUN: No, no, I defer to you.
21 THE COURT: Okay.
22 MR. WILLIAMS: Family photographs and three-minute video
23 of Donnie, is that the same video Bob.
24 MR. CONRAD: I'm sorry, where are you?
25 MR. WILLIAMS: The first sentence of the last paragraph
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
709
1 on page 7.
2 MR. CONRAD: Yes, sir.
3 MR. WILLIAMS: Same photographs as referred to above.
4 Judge, could we go back on Bob Allen's testimony about
5 the donations in his name and the memorial playground installed
6 in his name?
7 THE COURT: Robert Allen.
8 MR. LAUGHRUN: Bob Allen, page 6, Judge.
9 THE COURT: Oh, I'm sorry.
10 MR. LAUGHRUN: At the bottom of the page.
11 THE COURT: Bob Allen.
12 MR. CONRAD: Again I will restrict that to the effect it
13 had on Mr. Allen.
14 MR. LAUGHRUN: Of course, the problem, and I appreciate
15 Bob's offer to do that, and if he says by the way the church
16 built a playground in that name and that affected me every time
17 I go to church, you get it in any way.
18 MR. CONRAD: That's why I think it's proper, if it's
19 offered to show the effect on Mr. Allen.
20 MR. LAUGHRUN: But if that's the test, Judge, you could
21 say how has this trial affected you. I mean, if that's the
22 standard, how it affected the victim's family --
23 THE COURT: Even the trial had an effect, you can see
24 that when they get on the stand.
25 MR. LAUGHRUN: But it says a brief glimpse, doesn't say
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
710
1 you go into what all happened in the 18 months since his death,
2 and I guess that's where we are coming from. They are entitled
3 to have a brief glimpse of his life and what effect. But they
4 can say every time I drive past Billy Graham and Morris Field I
5 think of Donnie, and I put the cross there.
6 THE COURT: Donations in his name and memorial installed
7 in his name at the church (reading from document.)
8 MR. WILLIAMS: Judge, I reiterate an objection on that,
9 with regard to the memorial playground. Again, I would
10 respectfully argue that that is a direct result of the church
11 members' reaction to his death, and that is how Donnie Allen's
12 death affected the church and the church members. They did
13 that, Bob Allen didn't do it.
14 Now, he may have seen it, but this seems to be sort of a
15 back doorway of getting that in. If you try to have Bob Allen
16 say, well, every time I go to church I see the playground and I
17 think of Donnie, but really the playground was the result of the
18 effect it had on -- his death had on the church. And again,
19 it's a fine line, and I have a problem with that, don't you?
20 MR. LAUGHRUN: (Nods head.)
21 THE COURT: What do you say about that?
22 MR. CONRAD: It's offered, and it says here the pride
23 and gratitude he felt. That the donations were made in his name
24 and a memorial playground installed in his name at the church,
25 that's a direct result of this loss of his son and who his son
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
711
1 was. I think if I restrict it to the effect of Mr. Allen --
2 THE COURT: See, as I say it's hard really to get, but
3 I'm going to -- if somebody was giving donations for my son who
4 had been killed, I would certainly be appreciative, and like he
5 says here, gratitude, and I think he is entitled put that in.
6 Nightmares, back over to page 7.
7 MR. CONRAD: I think we might be at page 8, Judge.
8 THE COURT: Anything on Denise?
9 MR. LAUGHRUN: I think you have heard us on that.
10 THE COURT: Pardon?
11 MR. LAUGHRUN: I think you have heard us.
12 MR. WILLIAMS: We are on page 8 now.
13 THE COURT: Page 8, Robert Williams.
14 MR. WILLIAMS: Again, under Bertha Williams, the defense
15 would respectfully object to, six lines down, where she starts
16 talking about the outpouring of love by coworkers and patients
17 including cards when she was at UVA, and the gift of a nurse's
18 coat signed by her coworkers after her death,.
19 We would argue again that's clearly a reaction by, as he
20 specified, coworkers and patients at UVA Burn Center as a result
21 of her death. These are people that worked with her during her
22 rehabilitation and reacted as a result of her death by doing
23 these things, that was how they were affected by her death, and
24 they were affected by her death to such an extent that they had
25 a gift of a nurse's coat that everybody and the coworkers signed
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
712
1 and gave to mama. That's clearly how her death affected those
2 people, not the family.
3 THE COURT: You don't think they can talk about how
4 proud and gratified she was, and that --
5 MR. LAUGHRUN: Again, that's other people's reaction.
6 THE COURT: But what was her reaction to these things.
7 MR. CONRAD: Judge, that mother held on to that coat and
8 it means everything in the world to her, and it just shows how
9 impacted, how much she was impacted.
10 THE COURT: What her reaction was to these things, not
11 somebody else's.
12 MR. WILLIAMS: All we can do is make the objection.
13 THE COURT: All I can do is rule on it, and I'm trying
14 to do the best I can.
15 MR. WILLIAMS: I understand, Judge. There is some
16 photographs of her daughter and a poem, I think we have the
17 poem, we received the poem in discovery, have not seen the
18 photographs.
19 MR. LAUGHRUN: The newspaper article.
20 MR. CONRAD: Both of them.
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes.
22 THE COURT: Nothing wrong with the poem she wrote for
23 her daughter?
24 MR. WILLIAMS: No, sir, nothing wrong with that.
25 THE COURT: Her son's difficulties.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
713
1 MR. WILLIAMS: That comes in.
2 THE COURT: I'll let the son testify about that.
3 MR. CONRAD: Okay.
4 THE COURT: Last church service with her daughter,
5 again, that's fine because she was with her and she remembered
6 her last church service, how she walked around her house.
7 Victim impact statements entitled, more about Robin,
8 somehow she can't go to the grave site, those are things that
9 are affecting her.
10 MR. WILLIAMS: We just request that we be given a copy
11 of the victim impact statement.
12 MR. CONRAD: Okay.
13 MR. WILLIAMS: And you should obviously, Judge,
14 Mr. Conrad will do that, let you review that.
15 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, we filed a motion the 22nd that
16 asked number one that you restrict, and obviously you overruled
17 our objection to that, but to give an instruction before this
18 testimony is offered about how they are to look at it, and I
19 have got it --
20 MR. WILLIAMS: Do you have a copy of it?
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: Thomas has it.
22 MR. WALKER: I saw a copy, I don't have it with me.
23 THE COURT: Talking about paragraph 10?
24 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir.
25 THE COURT: This court overruled that motion, counsel
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
714
1 requests that the jury be given a special and detailed
2 instruction as to limited use of victim impact evidence, that
3 the Court should -- this Court overrule this motion, counsel
4 would request that the jury be given a special and detailed jury
5 instruction as to the limited use of victim impact evidence such
6 as the instruction below --
7 (Interruption. Jury has a question.)
8 (In open court.)
9 THE COURT: The question is, from the jury, they want
10 the pawn application for the sale of firearm. I don't know what
11 exhibit that is. The defendant is not here, but I don't believe
12 we need him, do we?
13 THE CLERK: Do you need him?
14 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, it's Exhibits 18A and 18B.
15 THE COURT: 18A and 18B?
16 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir.
17 THE COURT: All right, the Clerk will take 18A and 18B
18 back to them.
19 As I say, the defendant is not here. I assume you waive
20 his being here for this.
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: No objection.
22 THE COURT: Thank you, sir. We'll put these notes all
23 in the file, the Court file.
24 MR. WILLIAMS: Your Honor, may I address the Court?
25 THE COURT: Yes, sir.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
715
1 MR. WILLIAMS: May we request that our client be kept
2 upstairs in the side room; in case something else happens and we
3 need him to be in the courtroom, we don't have to delay the
4 proceedings?
5 THE COURT: Where is he now, downstairs?
6 MR. WILLIAMS: I think they're keeping him downstairs.
7 THE COURT: All right, we'll get them to bring him up
8 here and keep him over here.
9 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor, the only question I have on
10 that is how solid are those walls between the jury deliberation
11 room and that -- are you planning on keeping him in this room
12 right behind here?
13 THE COURT: Oh, no, he'd be over here, over there. They
14 have a room over there for the prisoners.
15 MR. CONRAD: Okay.
16 THE COURT: All right, take that back to them, Sammy.
17 All right, everybody, let's go back to chambers.
18 (Attorneys and the Court returned to chambers for
19 continuation of conference.)
20 THE COURT: I think we were in the process of reading
21 the requested instruction by the defendants. The Court
22 overruled the motion they have, which is a motion in limine in
23 reference to the victim impact statement, victim impact
24 evidence.
25 All right, the instruction requested, prosecution
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
716
1 introduced what is known as victim impact evidence, victim
2 impact evidence is not the same as evidence under statutory
3 aggravating circumstances, introduction of victim impact
4 evidence does not relieve the government of its burden of proof
5 to beyond a reasonable doubt unanimously the existence of the
6 statutory aggravating circumstances. This evidence is simply
7 another method of informing you about the harm caused by the
8 crime in question. To the extent that you find that this
9 reflected on the defendant's culpability you may consider it but
10 you may not use it as a substitute for proof unanimously beyond
11 a reasonable doubt the existence of a statutory aggravating
12 circumstances.
13 MR. WALKER: Judge, we are going to object strenuously
14 to that because it certainly misleads the jury as to how they
15 may consider victim impact evidence. We are offering victim
16 impact evidence as a nonstatutory aggravating factor, and the
17 jury has a right to weigh that as a separate aggravating factor
18 and give it whatever weight they deem necessary. To tell them
19 to limit their use by the way that they want to use that
20 instruction, the government feels, would be improper.
21 THE COURT: Defense?
22 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, it's so emotional, I don't think
23 you can let it go without some sort of instruction to let them
24 know that they are not to be swayed by emotion, hatred, spite,
25 when they hear this testimony, because you are not going -- if
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
717
1 you are not affected by it something is wrong.
2 MR. WILLIAMS: We need some structure.
3 MR. CONRAD: Your Honor, the structure is the rule that
4 says that you keep it out if the probative force is outweighed
5 by the danger of unfair prejudice, that's the structure. And
6 when you let it in, it's not right to highlight it more than any
7 other factor. And to limit it in ways that other factors are
8 not limited, it comes in for whatever probative force it has
9 subject to the Court's ruling that the probative force was not
10 outweighed by unfair prejudice. It's not unfair to the jury to
11 weigh this along when the Court's other instructions, this
12 instruction just magnifies this one particular nonstatutory
13 aggravating factor the government has alleged out of proportion
14 to all of the other aggravating factors.
15 MR. WILLIAMS: But isn't there a definition given by the
16 Court and I think will be proffered by the government with
17 regard to other statutory and nonstatutory aggravating factors
18 to give the jury some narrowing and guidance with regard to
19 those factors, so if you don't do that with victim impact, if
20 you don't give them some instruction about it, then it's just a
21 wild brush fire.
22 MR. CONRAD: The instruction is the same for victim
23 impact as it is for any other aggravating factor.
24 MR. LAUGHRUN: You give limiting instructions all the
25 time, Judge, in the case in chief --
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
718
1 THE COURT: Not necessarily this one.
2 MR. LAUGHRUN: Right, but for example, hearsay, you
3 limit it subject to the government tying it in later on. You
4 got codefendants, limit it to one defendant, and not the other,
5 so there is precedent for it. The problem is that that evidence
6 is so, and I will use Bob's words, so prejudicial, it's also so
7 emotional, once the jury hears that it could all be over
8 easily. And I think there is a danger, you have to give them
9 some guidance as to how to do it or it's going to run amuck how
10 they consider it.
11 THE COURT: Well, let me see if I can figure out one,
12 this one -- I'm not going to give this one but I will figure out
13 one and submit it to both sides.
14 MR. WILLIAMS: All right, sir.
15 MR. LAUGHRUN: All right, sir.
16 THE COURT: Anything else.
17 MR. LAUGHRUN: Again, I guess maybe we can do this off
18 of the record.
19 (Off-the-record discussion.)
20 (Verdict from the jury at 2:45 p.m.)
21 THE COURT: Call the jury.
22 (The jury returned to the courtroom.)
23 THE COURT: Mr. Schudel, I believe you are the
24 foreperson?
25 JUROR: Yes, Your Honor.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
719
1 THE COURT: Has the jury reached a verdict?
2 JUROR: Yes, Your Honor.
3 THE COURT: Will you hand that to the marshal, please?
4 (Mr. Schudel hands verdict form to the marshal. The
5 marshal hands verdict form to the Court.)
6 THE COURT: Members of the jury, in the matter of United
7 States of America versus Aquilia Marcivicci Barnette, as to
8 Count 1, guilty; Count 2, guilty; Count 3, guilty; Count 4,
9 guilty; Count Number 5, guilty; Count 6, guilty; Count 7,
10 guilty; Count 8, guilty; Count 9, guilty; Count 10, guilty;
11 Count 11 guilty; is that your verdict so say you all?
12 (Jurors nod heads.)
13 THE COURT: Poll the jury?
14 MR. LAUGHRUN: Pursuant to Rule 31(d), yes, sir.
15 THE COURT: Pardon me?
16 MR. LAUGHRUN: Yes, sir, pursuant to Rule 31(d).
17 THE COURT: Thank you, sir. Sammy.
18 THE CLERK: Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, in the
19 case of 3:97CR23-P, USA versus Aquilia Marcivicci Barnette, you
20 have returned a verdict of guilty as to Count 1, Count 2, Count
21 3, Count 4, Count 5, Count 6, Count 7, Count 8, Count 9, Count
22 10, Count 11. Mr. Wallace, is that your verdict, is it still
23 your verdict?
24 JUROR: Yes, ma'am.
25 THE COURT: Mr. Politowicz, is that your verdict, is it
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
720
1 still your verdict?
2 JUROR: Yes, ma'am .
3 THE CLERK: Mr. Mattingly, is that your verdict, is it
4 still your verdict?
5 JUROR: Yes, ma'am.
6 THE CLERK: Mr. Owensby, is that your verdict, is it
7 still your verdict?
8 JUROR: Yes, ma'am.
9 THE CLERK: Ms. Stafford, is that your verdict, is it
10 still your verdict?
11 JUROR: Yes.
12 THE CLERK: Mr. Schudel, is that your verdict, is it
13 still your verdict?
14 JUROR: Yes, it is.
15 THE CLERK: Ms. Randazzo, is that your verdict, is it
16 still your verdict?
17 JUROR: Yes.
18 THE CLERK: Ms. Edwards, is that your verdict, is it
19 still your verdict?
20 JUROR: Yes.
21 THE CLERK: Ms. Simpson, is that your verdict, is it
22 still your verdict?
23 JUROR: Yes.
24 THE CLERK: Ms. Farris, is that your verdict, is it
25 still your verdict?
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
721
1 JUROR: Yes.
2 THE CLERK: Ms. Boyette, is that your verdict, is it
3 still your verdict?
4 JUROR: Yes.
5 THE CLERK: Ms. Wilson, is that your verdict, is it
6 still your verdict?
7 JUROR: Yes.
8 THE COURT: Thank you, members of the jury. Now, we
9 have, as you know, another phase of this trial. And we are
10 going to start that on Thursday afternoon at 2:00. I know you
11 all think we're taking a vacation. You're taking a vacation, I
12 guess, but we're not. There is an awful lot of work that all of
13 us have work to do in connection with this case between now and
14 then. So we will ask you to come back Thursday afternoon at
15 2:00 and we will proceed again as fast as we can with due
16 recognition of the seriousness of this matter. And I hope you
17 have a nice day tomorrow and Thursday morning and we'll see you
18 Thursday afternoon at 2:00, do you understand that.
19 (Jurors nod heads.)
20 THE COURT: Any reason why we should have them call back
21 between now and then?
22 THE CLERK: No, sir, they will be back.
23 THE COURT: I know that. I tell you, you have a number
24 to call, don't you?
25 JUROR: Yes.
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
722
1 THE COURT: Call that number say on Thursday morning
2 about 10:00, something like that. 99 percent sure that's the
3 time, but we don't want you coming back here unnecessarily.
4 Do not discuss the matter among yourselves anymore, it's
5 not over yet, do not discuss it with anyone outside of the
6 courtroom, do not read anything about the case, do not listen or
7 look at anything on TV, do not listen to anything on the radio,
8 have your minds completely clear of anything about the case
9 other than what you see and hear in this courtroom. See you
10 hopefully Thursday afternoon at 2:00. See you later and have a
11 nice day today.
12 (The jury left the courtroom.)
13 THE COURT: All right, now I will have the clerk to
14 unseal all of the psychiatric matters and we can make copies of
15 those.
16 MR. LAUGHRUN: We have to file a motion, Judge, and we
17 have got it ready to file as soon as Ms. Grier comes back,
18 reconfirming that so that we can get access. I don't think we
19 can do that until we file the motion.
20 THE COURT: All right, sir.
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: But we will file it as soon as Ms. Grier
22 comes back. Can we come back and pick them up tomorrow, Judge?
23 THE COURT: Yes, we ought to have them ready by then.
24 Will you unseal all of the psychiatric reports.
25 MS. HEALY: Every one of them?
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
723
1 THE COURT: Yes, all of them, neither one of them have
2 them have seen it.
3 MR. WILLIAMS: Judge, the question I have is, my
4 understanding is that you have not received the Butner complete
5 file, that that is not in the record, is that correct?
6 THE CLERK: That's correct.
7 MR. WILLIAMS: That complete file was sent to the
8 experts, but we have not had access to that, and since we are
9 getting ready to file Defendant's Confirmation Notice of Intent
10 to Introduce Mental Health Testimony at the penalty phase
11 pursuant to this Court's order, we now ask that we be allowed to
12 share or the experts share that information with us, that is the
13 Butner records.
14 THE COURT: All right, sir.
15 MR. WILLIAMS: As well as the unsealing of the reports
16 that are in the file.
17 THE COURT: I know of no way to get this to you except
18 makes copies of them. Of course, these copies will be kept by
19 everybody confidentially and used only for the purposes of
20 getting ready for the sentencing hearing.
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, I don't know if there is anything
22 that we are going to get a copy of.
23 THE COURT: Pardon?
24 MR. LAUGHRUN: I guess my concern is that if the
25 government is filing their reports and you got them, there is
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
724
1 some audio tapes made, we want copies of the audio tapes of the
2 conversation between their experts around our client,,
3 everything they did was audiotaped.
4 THE COURT: Do you have anything like that?
5 MR. CONRAD: My understanding is on both occasions when
6 they interviewed the defendant they did audiotape and they are
7 going to be in town tomorrow and make copies available of those.
8 THE COURT: All right. 2:00 on Thursday, gentlemen,
9 thank you so much. Do you have a motion you want to file?
10 MR. LAUGHRUN: Could we, and I know government wants to
11 go ahead and look at those reports as we do, can we set a time
12 that we can have everything tomorrow, by maybe noon tomorrow?
13 THE COURT: I hope you can have it by tomorrow, say
14 10:00, in case we can't get it finished this afternoon. Do you
15 think we can have it by then?
16 (Bench conference between Ms. Healy and the Court not recorded.)
17 THE COURT: I understand that we don't have all of these
18 things, that your own experts have kept them.
19 MR. LAUGHRUN: That's what I was talking about, Judge, I
20 don't think there is anything for us to get. The reason I say
21 that is Mr. Conrad was telling me that the government's experts
22 just finished up with Mr. Barnette a week ago Monday, so they
23 don't have a report yet, that's my understanding, and that's
24 what I was inquiring about when we might get that and audio
25 tapes and we can look at this during the day and a half that we
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
725
1 have got, because we filed ours under seal per your order and
2 they are in the file, all of our reports are under seal.
3 THE COURT: Reports are in the file?
4 MR. LAUGHRUN: Ours are.
5 THE COURT: But the government's are not?
6 MR. LAUGHRUN: So we don't have anything to look at
7 during this day and a half.
8 MR. CONRAD: Ours are not because as you might recall
9 the defendant refused to talk to our experts.
10 MR. WILLIAMS: Objection, that's not what happened.
11 THE COURT: Do you want to say something.
12 MR. WILLIAMS: I'm sorry, I just object to that
13 statement, did he did not refuse to talk.
14 MR. CONRAD: He refused to talk to them about the facts
15 of the case, yes, he did. And I learned that because of a
16 letter that Mr. Laughrun sent me. And when our experts came
17 back in and interviewed him last week, and are in the process of
18 putting that final report together, but there are audio tapes,
19 and they will be in town tomorrow and we will make them
20 available to defense counsel.
21 THE COURT: And do you have copies of your reports, is
22 that right, from your experts?
23 MR. WILLIAMS: Yes, sir.
24 MR. LAUGHRUN: We have our reports, yes, sir.
25 THE COURT: Let the government then have copies of those
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
726
1 is what I'm saying.
2 MR. LAUGHRUN: Well, they are in the file, that's the
3 purpose of them -- they get what is in court file is my
4 understanding.
5 MS. HEALY: Each expert for each side has Tyson's and Dr.
6 Johnson's report, correct? Raw test data? So why didn't they
7 give those to you? We don't have the raw test data, we don't
8 have either report, that's what I am saying, we don't have the
9 complete file.
10 MR. LAUGHRUN: Judge, we can get the Butner information
11 from our experts, that's no problem, but what we are after is
12 Dr. Grant and Dr. Duncan's report, the government's experts and
13 the audio tapes.
14 MR. CONRAD: And I --
15 THE COURT: Can you have those by tomorrow morning?
16 MR. CONRAD: When they fly into town, I'm not sure when
17 their plane is supposed to get here.
18 THE COURT: If there is any problem let us know so that
19 we can tell this jury not to bother to come back until Friday
20 morning.
21 MR. LAUGHRUN: I don't think it's going to be a problem
22 because if they call their experts, it's going to be in rebuttal
23 is my understanding so we will have plenty of time. We just
24 want to get it while we have this time to look at it if we can.
25 I don't think we are going to have to delay the jury, is that a
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
727
1 fair statement?
2 THE COURT: Well, just let me know if there is any
3 problem so we can --
4 MR. CONRAD: Do I understand the Court is going to
5 provide us copies of their expert reports?
6 THE COURT: They have to provide them to us first, but
7 we'll get them to you the, yes, sir.
8 MR. CONRAD: I think they have filed them with you.
9 THE COURT: They have filed them. Okay, it that case
10 you can have them. Recess until Thursday at 2:00.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
728
1
2
3
4
5
6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
8 CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
9
10
11
12
13 I, Scott A. Huseby, Official Reporter and Notary Public
14 certify that the foregoing transcript is a true and correct
15 transcript of my original stenographic notes transcribed under
16 my direction. This 28th day of January, 1998.
17
18
19 ____________________
SCOTT A. HUSEBY
20 NOTARY PUBLIC,
OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER,
21 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL
COURT REPORTER,
22 CERTIFIED COURT REPORTER.
23
24
25
Huseby, Inc. Court Reporting & Video
http://www.huseby.com
Back to the Aquilia Barnette page
Back to the Huseby, Inc. homepage