I just wanted to put another post on here today. This is the second one today. My mother and I went to visit my brother today. He is doing well. He says thanks to all the people who have sent him cards and letters being so supportive. He is doing well. He thanks God everyday for his health. He worries about his kids. Especially little BW. He is 7 and he is the one that told Stacy Long point blank that the 'boys' were touching his butt, boobies, and willie. And the sheriff, his current investigator Christy Cole, DFCS, or no one else in that county cares. Even his own mother. She was sitting in on his interview with Stacy Long and she ignored it as well. My brother prays for him daily as he is still in the care of one of the boys on a regular basis. Please pray for little BW.
I am going to post the interviews. All of them if I have the energy. They are all with my brother's children and JH. So five total. And, I also have the tapes of these interviews in my possession. With many copies.
Today my brother asked me to say this. And I know it will come as no surprise to anyone. He truly believed in our justice system. He truly believed Mr. Levitt when he told him it would all be nothing. The investigator, Jennifer Cooley, and Len Gregor knew more than they ever said they knew. They held out information that would have proven what my brother was saying was true. He has a hard time getting past the fact that these people are supposed to be helping people, not ruining their lives. And that is what they do everyday. He said he and Tonya are not the only victims to these people and their wicked ways. There are many. Most of them do not have the money to go out and pay what it takes to fight these cases. These ADA's and investigators know this. It is such a sad thing. I just don't understand, and neither does my brother how in America this can actually happen and it does everyday. He blames the system in Dade, Co. He blames Len Gregor, Christina Cook Connelly Graham, Jennifer Cooley and the crooked system they work for. They took one statement made by a mad teenager and made up lies for the witnesses to say and made it look like my brother is a child molester and he is NOT!! He never did any of the things he was accused of. But as I continue my blogging, I think you will see.
I will be putting interviews and also names of people who are adults. I will only use initials for the children who are still underage. This is all a matter of public record. Enjoy the next few blogs, because they are about to get interesting. And thanks again for your kind words and keep praying for my brother.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Saturday, June 12, 2010
More of Stacy Long's testimony.
I know it has been a few days since I have been able to get on here. I have been soooo busy!! I have 3 kids and 2 grand kids. I have an 18 yr. old son with kidney stones in both kidneys and one lodged in urethra. Eek!! We are getting him fixed, I think, I hope. OK enough about that and more about the subject. I am going to continue today with more of Stacy Long's testimony at the original trial. It is Mr. Levitt doing the questioning and Stacy Long answering. After just a couple more posts with original transcripts I will move to the motion hearing transcripts and Amy Morton's testimony and affidavits. Here is more from Stacy Long.
Q: Now, it looks like when I went through the transcript of this that about Page 30 of the interview with JH, do you have a copy?
A: I do not.
Q: I'll approach and maybe -
MR. GREGOR: You want to utilize yours, Mr. Levitt?
MR. LEVITT: I'll be glad to.
(By Mr. Levitt)
Q: Let me show you.
A: Okay
Q: And it looks like you sort of switch subjects and go into things that are alleged to have happened in Georgia.
A: I switch subjects the whole time we're talking about what's happened so I'm not sure I'm following you there.
Q: Well, look and see if you don't all of the sudden start talking about what happened on the interstate of Georgia.
A: Prior to what you have highlighted, is that what you are talking about?
Q: Yes, ma'am.
A: Prior to what you have highlighted we're talking about Mr. Wade talking about the size of JH's penis and measuring it with a measuring tape and commenting how Mr. Wade telling JH he is smaller than him. And then I ask, anything else at all, JH, that you can think of that I should know about, anything that you want me to know about, anything you really don't want me to know but you want to tell me anyway, and that's common for that to happen. He says, not a thing. Do you have any questions. No. So then I ask about the incident on the interstate, so that - I mean, I don't see how that's really switching gears, but I think I'm clarifying.
Q: And what I'm asking you is is that when - do you have any notes about when the detective asked you questions?
A: No, there is no way I could keep notes on that and everything else, too.
Q: So it's possible that's questions the detective was having you ask JH?
A: That's very possible, yes.
Q: Well, then it's not you doing the interview it's her doing the interview; isn't it?
A: It's me on the tape.
Q: Well, of course it's you on the tape but it's you on the tape being told what to ask by a detective?
A: We utilize the ear piece to clarify some things in case something is unclear. Sometimes there are things I need to ask more of, because I'm not a detective and I don't know what they need all the time so they'll inform me of that. The best way I can describe to you, the jury, is I act as a filter and law enforcement , DFACS, they have a role in everything. They need certain information and we have a child anywhere from old enough to talk to eighteen so they need information and they let me know that and then I ask the child in a way that's on their level. So I describe myself as a filter. So if that's - I don't see how that is doing their job.
Q: Well, especially with JH you were actually asking the questions, weren't you, almost the whole interview you were asking questions. And children, by the way, are suggestible when an adult asks a question to agreeing with them?
A: No. That's always brought up. And the thing about suggestibility is yes, children are suggestible under certain circumstance.
Q: Here let me ask you on Page 24 I think you said, he was making you do this. Now, you're not asking a question when you said that are you? You're making a statement.
A: Well, I mean, the thing is is you can ask questions and grammatically it may not look like a question on the transcript but it can still be a question.
Q: I mean, I don't have the transcript, I don't know. I'll have to look at that.
There was a short redirect by "The Man", Len Gregor after this, and just said basically that if she can't remember things at 39 yrs old then how could a child remember everything. And Mr. Levitt made another objection that was overruled, as usual! Stacy Long was dismissed from the stand. She is named in Tonya Craft's lawsuit.
Q: Now, it looks like when I went through the transcript of this that about Page 30 of the interview with JH, do you have a copy?
A: I do not.
Q: I'll approach and maybe -
MR. GREGOR: You want to utilize yours, Mr. Levitt?
MR. LEVITT: I'll be glad to.
(By Mr. Levitt)
Q: Let me show you.
A: Okay
Q: And it looks like you sort of switch subjects and go into things that are alleged to have happened in Georgia.
A: I switch subjects the whole time we're talking about what's happened so I'm not sure I'm following you there.
Q: Well, look and see if you don't all of the sudden start talking about what happened on the interstate of Georgia.
A: Prior to what you have highlighted, is that what you are talking about?
Q: Yes, ma'am.
A: Prior to what you have highlighted we're talking about Mr. Wade talking about the size of JH's penis and measuring it with a measuring tape and commenting how Mr. Wade telling JH he is smaller than him. And then I ask, anything else at all, JH, that you can think of that I should know about, anything that you want me to know about, anything you really don't want me to know but you want to tell me anyway, and that's common for that to happen. He says, not a thing. Do you have any questions. No. So then I ask about the incident on the interstate, so that - I mean, I don't see how that's really switching gears, but I think I'm clarifying.
Q: And what I'm asking you is is that when - do you have any notes about when the detective asked you questions?
A: No, there is no way I could keep notes on that and everything else, too.
Q: So it's possible that's questions the detective was having you ask JH?
A: That's very possible, yes.
Q: Well, then it's not you doing the interview it's her doing the interview; isn't it?
A: It's me on the tape.
Q: Well, of course it's you on the tape but it's you on the tape being told what to ask by a detective?
A: We utilize the ear piece to clarify some things in case something is unclear. Sometimes there are things I need to ask more of, because I'm not a detective and I don't know what they need all the time so they'll inform me of that. The best way I can describe to you, the jury, is I act as a filter and law enforcement , DFACS, they have a role in everything. They need certain information and we have a child anywhere from old enough to talk to eighteen so they need information and they let me know that and then I ask the child in a way that's on their level. So I describe myself as a filter. So if that's - I don't see how that is doing their job.
Q: Well, especially with JH you were actually asking the questions, weren't you, almost the whole interview you were asking questions. And children, by the way, are suggestible when an adult asks a question to agreeing with them?
A: No. That's always brought up. And the thing about suggestibility is yes, children are suggestible under certain circumstance.
Q: Here let me ask you on Page 24 I think you said, he was making you do this. Now, you're not asking a question when you said that are you? You're making a statement.
A: Well, I mean, the thing is is you can ask questions and grammatically it may not look like a question on the transcript but it can still be a question.
Q: I mean, I don't have the transcript, I don't know. I'll have to look at that.
There was a short redirect by "The Man", Len Gregor after this, and just said basically that if she can't remember things at 39 yrs old then how could a child remember everything. And Mr. Levitt made another objection that was overruled, as usual! Stacy Long was dismissed from the stand. She is named in Tonya Craft's lawsuit.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
More of Stacy Long
Q But you didn't try to have him explain how it happenend in- it would have to have been after December 29th of 2005, wouldn't it, if he was twelve years old?
A Yes, I guess we can assume that.
Q Okay. Now, with regard to the first interview I guess- well, the first interview you did with him he said nothing had happened?
A Okay. Are we talking about AW?
Q AW, yes.
A Okay. Yes, the first interview AW did not disclose, he was not very happy even at the time.
Q AW denied any inappropriate allegations on that date?
A That is correct.
Q BW (Brad's oldest daughter) denied any inappropriate behavior that she witnessed between her and JH in her interview?
A That's correct.
Q Okay. Now let's go back to the first interview with JH, I guess the only interview?
A Yes.
Q At that time I think you had been a, what you described as a forensic interviewer, for two years and two months?
A In 2006? I started doing forensic interviews in 2002, so that would be four years.
Q I thought you told me that you did it, February 2004 you became a forensic interviewer?
A No, I came back to the CAC in Ft. Oglethorpe in February 2004.
Q Okay. As a forensic interviewer?
A Only. I had worked there previously.
Q But not full time as an interviewer?
A I'm still not full time.
Q And do you have- you said you don't have- is there a degree in forensic interviewing?
A Not that I am aware of.
Q And do you follow a protocol when you do a forensic interview?
A There is a semi-structured model that Cornerhouse teaches, so we follow that when necessary. And just the guidelines of doing a forensic interview.
Q And does that include wearing an ear piece with a detective?
A That can be different for a lot of different centers. We utilize that method. Cornerhouse actually has a phone that rings in the middle of the interview if the detective or case worker has question that interrupts-
Q This is supposed to be an independent interview; isn't it?
A What does that mean?
Q You're supposed to be as an interviewer finding out, you're not supposed to be doing work as a police are you?
A I'm not
Q Okay. Well, when you're wearing an ear piece and things are suggested to you you're not?
A No. That's doing an interview.
Q What I'm asking you is is that when- do you have any notes about when the detective asked you questions?
A No, there's no way I could keep notes on that and everything else, too.
Q So, it's possible that's questions the detective was having you ask?
A That's very possible.
Q Well, then it's not you doing the interview it's her(the detective) doing the interview; isn't it?
A It's me on the tape
I will continue from here on the next blog. Stacy Long is going to say whatever she needs to say to get this conviction for Mr. Gregor.
A Yes, I guess we can assume that.
Q Okay. Now, with regard to the first interview I guess- well, the first interview you did with him he said nothing had happened?
A Okay. Are we talking about AW?
Q AW, yes.
A Okay. Yes, the first interview AW did not disclose, he was not very happy even at the time.
Q AW denied any inappropriate allegations on that date?
A That is correct.
Q BW (Brad's oldest daughter) denied any inappropriate behavior that she witnessed between her and JH in her interview?
A That's correct.
Q Okay. Now let's go back to the first interview with JH, I guess the only interview?
A Yes.
Q At that time I think you had been a, what you described as a forensic interviewer, for two years and two months?
A In 2006? I started doing forensic interviews in 2002, so that would be four years.
Q I thought you told me that you did it, February 2004 you became a forensic interviewer?
A No, I came back to the CAC in Ft. Oglethorpe in February 2004.
Q Okay. As a forensic interviewer?
A Only. I had worked there previously.
Q But not full time as an interviewer?
A I'm still not full time.
Q And do you have- you said you don't have- is there a degree in forensic interviewing?
A Not that I am aware of.
Q And do you follow a protocol when you do a forensic interview?
A There is a semi-structured model that Cornerhouse teaches, so we follow that when necessary. And just the guidelines of doing a forensic interview.
Q And does that include wearing an ear piece with a detective?
A That can be different for a lot of different centers. We utilize that method. Cornerhouse actually has a phone that rings in the middle of the interview if the detective or case worker has question that interrupts-
Q This is supposed to be an independent interview; isn't it?
A What does that mean?
Q You're supposed to be as an interviewer finding out, you're not supposed to be doing work as a police are you?
A I'm not
Q Okay. Well, when you're wearing an ear piece and things are suggested to you you're not?
A No. That's doing an interview.
Q What I'm asking you is is that when- do you have any notes about when the detective asked you questions?
A No, there's no way I could keep notes on that and everything else, too.
Q So, it's possible that's questions the detective was having you ask?
A That's very possible.
Q Well, then it's not you doing the interview it's her(the detective) doing the interview; isn't it?
A It's me on the tape
I will continue from here on the next blog. Stacy Long is going to say whatever she needs to say to get this conviction for Mr. Gregor.
More.........
I am not going to continue with the Q&A's with the witnesses. They answered every question that they were asked, no matter who was asking it, differently. None of JH's brothers or sisters told the same thing twice. But apparently the jury did not hear this. There was a lot of chitter chatter outside the courtroom at every break. No one seemed to care. There were even some words exchanged in the bathroom by one of the state's witnesses and one of our family members. No one seemed to care.
We re-entered the courtroom after a 10 minute break and when the judge came back in she then asked, "who in this courtroom is taking notes?" I raised my hand because I was taking notes. I had my child's spiral notebook with his scribblings on the first few pages. I just flipped until I found a sheet with nothing on it and started writing. I was not the only one in the courtroom taking notes either. She(judge Connelly Graham) then had the bailiff take my notebook from me and give it to her. She started looking through it, first seeing my five year old's artwork, then getting to my notes. I kinda said as she was thumbing through it 'it's my child's notebook, and those are...' she then snapped back at me very rude and said "Did I ask you to speak?" I thought, Oh my god, why did she act so ugly? I hadn't seen anything yet. As she read my 1/4 of a page notes, she then called me, the attorneys, my brother, and the court reporter into chambers. When we got in there she let me have it with both barrels. She cursed at me in the worst way. I will not quote some of the words she used. But I will say one of the things she told me was if I took notes in her courtroom again, she would put my ass in jail. It was the most horrible thing that has ever happened to me. She also said that the county did not have the money to re-try this case. It was appalling.
This whole thing was a circus from start to finish. I am going to do some of the testimony with Mr. Levitt cross examining Stacy Long. It is interesting.
Q Ms Long, there is a lot of reasons a person might delay reporting something form what you've testified to, is that right?
A Reporting or disclosing?
Q Or disclosing-
A Well, yes both actually.
Q And some of those could be that, A, they're now making something up or they've been coached or they've been pressured or they want to please another parent, those are also some reasons that a person might delay reporting?
A Possibly.
Q Okay. And you've got no way to know with him what it was?
A With him being AW or JH or-
Q AW. You couldn't read his mind could you?
A No, I don't have those powers.
Q Now, you already had information on that day, and that was when now?
A Are you referring to the second interview, sir?
Q Yes, the second. I've got, is it April 18th?
A 2007, yes.
Q So a couple of months ago?
A Yes.
Q And you already knew basically what he was going to disclose before you did the interview didn't you?
A No. What he's going to disclose, no.
Q You hadn't talked to any officers about it?
A Yeah, I get some information and a lot of times the information could be AW has come forward, I mean, this is just an example, AW has come forward and said some things and before he didn't disclose.
Q And I take it that on this particular occasion you found out his age, he was, I guess his date of birth was 122993; is that correct?
A That's what I have recorded.
Q And then in 2005 he would have been twelve?
A Yes.
Q All right, And he said that this incident in Alabama occurred when he was was twelve years old; is that correct?
A If that's what was on the tape.
Q Isn't that what it said on the tape? You asked him how old he was when it happened and he said twelve. Do we need to replay it?
A If you want to you could I guess. If that's what it said I'm sure.
Q Well did you make any note of that?
A It's on the tape, I don't have to transcribe that myself.
Q Well, do you disagree with what is on the tape?
A No, I'm not disagreeing.
Q Okay. Did you ask after he said that, say look AW, Brad Wade didn't even see JH or have him stay the night in December of 2005?
A Quite honestly we don't or I don't take a lot of weight in exact dates and all that stuff and carve it in any kind of concrete because I can't give you exact and I'm thirty years old.
Q Well, and some people who are a lot younger could give you that couldn't they?
A It's definitely possible that they could.
Q And you say you start off general and then you narrow the focus?
A That's what we try to do.
We re-entered the courtroom after a 10 minute break and when the judge came back in she then asked, "who in this courtroom is taking notes?" I raised my hand because I was taking notes. I had my child's spiral notebook with his scribblings on the first few pages. I just flipped until I found a sheet with nothing on it and started writing. I was not the only one in the courtroom taking notes either. She(judge Connelly Graham) then had the bailiff take my notebook from me and give it to her. She started looking through it, first seeing my five year old's artwork, then getting to my notes. I kinda said as she was thumbing through it 'it's my child's notebook, and those are...' she then snapped back at me very rude and said "Did I ask you to speak?" I thought, Oh my god, why did she act so ugly? I hadn't seen anything yet. As she read my 1/4 of a page notes, she then called me, the attorneys, my brother, and the court reporter into chambers. When we got in there she let me have it with both barrels. She cursed at me in the worst way. I will not quote some of the words she used. But I will say one of the things she told me was if I took notes in her courtroom again, she would put my ass in jail. It was the most horrible thing that has ever happened to me. She also said that the county did not have the money to re-try this case. It was appalling.
This whole thing was a circus from start to finish. I am going to do some of the testimony with Mr. Levitt cross examining Stacy Long. It is interesting.
Q Ms Long, there is a lot of reasons a person might delay reporting something form what you've testified to, is that right?
A Reporting or disclosing?
Q Or disclosing-
A Well, yes both actually.
Q And some of those could be that, A, they're now making something up or they've been coached or they've been pressured or they want to please another parent, those are also some reasons that a person might delay reporting?
A Possibly.
Q Okay. And you've got no way to know with him what it was?
A With him being AW or JH or-
Q AW. You couldn't read his mind could you?
A No, I don't have those powers.
Q Now, you already had information on that day, and that was when now?
A Are you referring to the second interview, sir?
Q Yes, the second. I've got, is it April 18th?
A 2007, yes.
Q So a couple of months ago?
A Yes.
Q And you already knew basically what he was going to disclose before you did the interview didn't you?
A No. What he's going to disclose, no.
Q You hadn't talked to any officers about it?
A Yeah, I get some information and a lot of times the information could be AW has come forward, I mean, this is just an example, AW has come forward and said some things and before he didn't disclose.
Q And I take it that on this particular occasion you found out his age, he was, I guess his date of birth was 122993; is that correct?
A That's what I have recorded.
Q And then in 2005 he would have been twelve?
A Yes.
Q All right, And he said that this incident in Alabama occurred when he was was twelve years old; is that correct?
A If that's what was on the tape.
Q Isn't that what it said on the tape? You asked him how old he was when it happened and he said twelve. Do we need to replay it?
A If you want to you could I guess. If that's what it said I'm sure.
Q Well did you make any note of that?
A It's on the tape, I don't have to transcribe that myself.
Q Well, do you disagree with what is on the tape?
A No, I'm not disagreeing.
Q Okay. Did you ask after he said that, say look AW, Brad Wade didn't even see JH or have him stay the night in December of 2005?
A Quite honestly we don't or I don't take a lot of weight in exact dates and all that stuff and carve it in any kind of concrete because I can't give you exact and I'm thirty years old.
Q Well, and some people who are a lot younger could give you that couldn't they?
A It's definitely possible that they could.
Q And you say you start off general and then you narrow the focus?
A That's what we try to do.
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Continuing with original trial transcripts
In the last post I put some actual lines from the original trial transcript. I was trying to show how our attorney had no clue what was coming at him. And unfortunately he did not ask. He just waited to see what the witnesses said on the stand and looked back at a deposition that was taken from 4 of the states witnesses 2 weeks prior to the trial. He was kinda blindsided and didn't know enough about the Georgia law to fight it. So unfortunate for us. Each and every witness Mr. Gregor called testified to things that happened in Alabama. And these things were such as, 'I saw Brad wrestling in the floor with JH and he touched his privates.' And one of them said he saw Brad rubbing JH's back. First, he said it was Brad rubbing his shoulders, then a few sentences later, it was his lower back. So which is it? Aren't these witnesses supposed to be telling the truth. None of the witnesses ever saw anything other than things like that. Which is not child molestation.
Our witnesses and Brad were going to testify to the fact that JH and AW showered together and were actually caught doing things with each other that were highly inappropriate. Touching each other and such. Brad's oldest child (we will call her BW) was interviewed by Stacy Long at the CAC, she told Ms. Long during her interview that 'the boys' took showers together all the time. 'The boys' were 14 and 12. Now if you have any son's, you would know that this is unusual for boys that age to do that. Or, at least it would be for my son's. So Mr. Levitt pretty much knew they took showers together because Brad told them. And his wife (now ex) testified to the fact that she would send Brad upstairs to get them out of the bathroom together. But with the application of the RSS, none of this could be told to the jury. Along with the interviews that AW's mother ( we will call her CD) gave to investigators when they came to talk to her.
Here is some of the testimony from JH. I will write it word for word from transcripts.
Questions by Mr. Levitt and answers by JH. This is about 1/4 of the way into his testimony, the beginning of being all the questions about his siblings. Establishing who is full brothers and sisters and who is half brothers and sisters.
Q Mr. H, you took an oath earlier today to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, remember that?
A Yes, sir.
Q When you gave your deposition back on April 27th of this year, that's about 2 weeks ago?
A Okay.
Q You don't disagree with that do you, about two weeks ago?
A Somewhere. I just remember it was Friday.
Q And you gave, again you were under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
A Yes, sir
Q Okay. And again, on that occasion I wasn't there and Mr. Gregor wasn't there were we?
A Right.
Q Your sister RW ( Brad's ex, his older sister) lawyer was there?
A Right
Q The court reporter was there?
A Yeah
Q That's the lady like this that takes down the proceedings. And your- Mr. Wade's lawyer, Sherry Dobbins, was there?
A Right,
Q Mr. Wade was not there?
A Right
Q And your mother was present for at least part of the deposition while you were testifying?
A Right.
Q Okay. And did you tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth on that occasion when you were sworn to?
A Yes, sir.
Q And so if I go back and I look at the testimony that you gave today and the testimony you gave that day it should be the same?
A Yes, sir.
Q And there shouldn't be any differences about any of these instances?
A No, sir.
Q Okay. And was your memory better two weeks ago than it is today about what happened in say 2005 or has it gotten better in the last couple of weeks?
A Sorry? I heard it, I just didn't understand.
Q Do you remember things better the closer they are to when they happen?
A Closer they are-
Q For instance, if something happened three weeks ago did you remember it better three weeks ago or do you remember it better today?
A Well, it just depends.
Q Okay. Now, in addition to the two times you've testified to under oath, if I understand-
A This is the second time.
Q Pardon?
A I said this is the second time under oath.
Q Right. In addition to the two times that you've testified to under oath you also gave a statement or talked about this on Easter Sunday to Eric? ( Eric is his older half brother)
A Part of it.
Q Okay. Well, I was going to ask you, you didn't tell him all of it, you just told him part of it?
A Yeah, I told him that one part.
Q Okay. Then you gave a statement, if I understand, to, did you say-did you give a statement to Eric and Christy(another half sister) the next morning? I'm not clear on that?
A I don't remember what they asked me, but did I give them a statement?
Q When you talked about this matter, whatever detail?
A They just asked me questions. I honestly don't remember what they asked me.
Q Okay. And then you gave- go ahead, you going to say something?
A Okay. They asked me like, I remember Christy did ask me he didn't like stick his penis up my butt or anything like that.
Q Then you gave a statement- did you give a statement to the detective and the lady from, I think you called her Stacy Long?
A Yeah.
Q And did you give the same statement to them?
A I told the child advocacy everything.
Q Okay. So everything that is in that statement should be in what you've told us today and in the deposition?
A Yeah.
Q Okay. And you're sure about that?
A Except for one or two things that I remembered the other day.
I am going to stop there for today. My husband and son are about to kill me. It is a beautiful hot day here in Chattanooga today and they want me to come on and do something with them. I will post more of this testimony later. I am trying to show what kind of testimony the actual VICTIM gave. It is amazing how he gets all twisted up.
Our witnesses and Brad were going to testify to the fact that JH and AW showered together and were actually caught doing things with each other that were highly inappropriate. Touching each other and such. Brad's oldest child (we will call her BW) was interviewed by Stacy Long at the CAC, she told Ms. Long during her interview that 'the boys' took showers together all the time. 'The boys' were 14 and 12. Now if you have any son's, you would know that this is unusual for boys that age to do that. Or, at least it would be for my son's. So Mr. Levitt pretty much knew they took showers together because Brad told them. And his wife (now ex) testified to the fact that she would send Brad upstairs to get them out of the bathroom together. But with the application of the RSS, none of this could be told to the jury. Along with the interviews that AW's mother ( we will call her CD) gave to investigators when they came to talk to her.
Here is some of the testimony from JH. I will write it word for word from transcripts.
Questions by Mr. Levitt and answers by JH. This is about 1/4 of the way into his testimony, the beginning of being all the questions about his siblings. Establishing who is full brothers and sisters and who is half brothers and sisters.
Q Mr. H, you took an oath earlier today to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, remember that?
A Yes, sir.
Q When you gave your deposition back on April 27th of this year, that's about 2 weeks ago?
A Okay.
Q You don't disagree with that do you, about two weeks ago?
A Somewhere. I just remember it was Friday.
Q And you gave, again you were under oath to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
A Yes, sir
Q Okay. And again, on that occasion I wasn't there and Mr. Gregor wasn't there were we?
A Right.
Q Your sister RW ( Brad's ex, his older sister) lawyer was there?
A Right
Q The court reporter was there?
A Yeah
Q That's the lady like this that takes down the proceedings. And your- Mr. Wade's lawyer, Sherry Dobbins, was there?
A Right,
Q Mr. Wade was not there?
A Right
Q And your mother was present for at least part of the deposition while you were testifying?
A Right.
Q Okay. And did you tell the whole truth, nothing but the truth on that occasion when you were sworn to?
A Yes, sir.
Q And so if I go back and I look at the testimony that you gave today and the testimony you gave that day it should be the same?
A Yes, sir.
Q And there shouldn't be any differences about any of these instances?
A No, sir.
Q Okay. And was your memory better two weeks ago than it is today about what happened in say 2005 or has it gotten better in the last couple of weeks?
A Sorry? I heard it, I just didn't understand.
Q Do you remember things better the closer they are to when they happen?
A Closer they are-
Q For instance, if something happened three weeks ago did you remember it better three weeks ago or do you remember it better today?
A Well, it just depends.
Q Okay. Now, in addition to the two times you've testified to under oath, if I understand-
A This is the second time.
Q Pardon?
A I said this is the second time under oath.
Q Right. In addition to the two times that you've testified to under oath you also gave a statement or talked about this on Easter Sunday to Eric? ( Eric is his older half brother)
A Part of it.
Q Okay. Well, I was going to ask you, you didn't tell him all of it, you just told him part of it?
A Yeah, I told him that one part.
Q Okay. Then you gave a statement, if I understand, to, did you say-did you give a statement to Eric and Christy(another half sister) the next morning? I'm not clear on that?
A I don't remember what they asked me, but did I give them a statement?
Q When you talked about this matter, whatever detail?
A They just asked me questions. I honestly don't remember what they asked me.
Q Okay. And then you gave- go ahead, you going to say something?
A Okay. They asked me like, I remember Christy did ask me he didn't like stick his penis up my butt or anything like that.
Q Then you gave a statement- did you give a statement to the detective and the lady from, I think you called her Stacy Long?
A Yeah.
Q And did you give the same statement to them?
A I told the child advocacy everything.
Q Okay. So everything that is in that statement should be in what you've told us today and in the deposition?
A Yeah.
Q Okay. And you're sure about that?
A Except for one or two things that I remembered the other day.
I am going to stop there for today. My husband and son are about to kill me. It is a beautiful hot day here in Chattanooga today and they want me to come on and do something with them. I will post more of this testimony later. I am trying to show what kind of testimony the actual VICTIM gave. It is amazing how he gets all twisted up.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Trial transcript details
I am first going to say that I don't know exactly what I can and cannot post. Most of the paperwork has the minor children's names somewhere in it. So I must be careful. I am, however, going to give some initials for some people. I think that will make it easier to read. In this blog, I am going to quote some of the original trial transcript as to possibly answer some questions about our attorney. Ok here we go.
Before the trial ever started, the attorney's only went into the judge's chambers. Still don't know exactly what was said. Our attorney told us it was about motions. The judge was about to begin and a member of the other side was causing some issues. It had to do with my nephew, my brother's oldest son, I'm gonna call him AW. His STEP-GRANDDAD was causing the issue. You have to understand that at this time AW had not seen or talked to his dad in over a year. He was very bitter. But the step-grandad wanted to be present in the courtroom while AW testified. And only him. He finally got his way and was allowed to do just that. For 'moral' support they said. And after AW testified, the step-grandad spent the rest of the day at the trial sitting right outside the courtroom with one of the jurors husband. They obviously were friends.
Judge said Motion in Limine. Gregor first motion related to step-grandad being in the courtroom and that had already been decided on. So we move on. Gregor then moved for preliminary ruling at this point in time regarding the Rape Shield Statute. (which I will from here on out refer to as, RSS) Official Code of Georgia Annotated Section 24-2-3. Mr. Gregor then referred to one of our witnesses. Pg. 13 line 19 of transcript. I quote "she indicated to us that would lend itself to her testimony might involve claims that our victim engaged in some sort of sexual behavior with another child. (the other child was AW) Now, the RSS absolutely prohibits that sort of evidence coming in." Gregor then says " I always put this into play in these cases but it is up to the court in limine." I am now going to type this as it appears in transcript. Starting at the next paragraph. Next was the judge.
THE COURT: It requires notice and a hearing doesn't it?
MR GREGOR: It does Your Honor, The hearing to pierce the RSS And there's no notice in this particular case.
THE COURT: All right. Mr Levitt? (our atty)
MR LEVITT: Judge the only thing is my client is charged with in Georgia is 4 counts that supposedly happened on the interstate that only he and the accuser (gonna call him JH) were party to. I'm not aware of any RSS issue with regards to those. I think in looking over Georgia law I don't know collateral items he's going to go into. For instance, he may try to claim that stuff happened in Alabama in a shower and I thing both JH and AW were present. I don't know what-again, I don't know what his proof is and I understand the RSS but I guess it sort of depends on I don't know what the Court is going to let in or not let in.
THE COURT: Well, if he hasn't filed any similar transaction notice I don't imagine he's going to be talking about anything in Alabama. Would I not be correct Mr. Gregor?
MR GREGOR: Well, Your Honor, we do intend on talking about Alabama because it relates specifically to this victim.
THE COURT: You're talking about incidents that occurred in Alabama between this defendant and JH?
MR GREGOR: Yes, Your Honor
MR LEVITT: Judge, I don't know what proof this is that they think-there's only, as far as I know, my client and JH were in the vehicle in Dade County, that's all I know.
THE COURT: Well-
MR LEVITT: And again, that's my problem is I don't know where, you know, I don't know what kind of proof they're going to try to get in so I don't know how to respond without knowing what they're going to try to get in.
THE COURT: Well, let's- we're getting ahead of ourselves. First, talking about the RSS. It does not appear to be- you're stating that you don't- there's been no notice of any evidence that would be admissible by the defense?
MR GREGOR: There has not. And in informal discussions with Mr. Levitt I haven't gotten that indication. However, our investigator talked to one witness on Mr. Levitt's and the defendant's witness list who gave that indication to us that she expected, and quite frankly to our investigator she even said, well, that's about enough, I've talked about that enough, I'll just have my say on the stand. What I was concerned about is during that conversation with this particular witness she raised these issues that JH, our victim, has been engaged or she believes might have been engaged in some sort of sexual contact with another child and that's what I'm talking about the rape shield protecting my victim from any allegations that he somehow is engaged in sexual activity with someone else. (JH the victim is 16 at this point).
THE COURT: All right. Do you have a written motion on this motion in limine?
MR GREGOR: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Absent a written notice your intent to cross the rape shield law nothing will be admitted. And I suggest you talk to witnesses very carefully because I'm not going to tolerate them interjecting something into this trial anymore than I'm going to tolerate 'step-granddad's bad behavior that is not legally admissible in the trial. So I would suggest that everyone after opening statement bone up on the rape shield law, make sure in Georgia that you know exactly what I'm saying.
MR LEVITT: Judge, if they could just tell me what it is- I think he may be confusing some witnesses is what I'm saying.
THE COURT: I don't want to pre-try this case, I just want to try it.
More of the transcript tomorrow!!!!
Before the trial ever started, the attorney's only went into the judge's chambers. Still don't know exactly what was said. Our attorney told us it was about motions. The judge was about to begin and a member of the other side was causing some issues. It had to do with my nephew, my brother's oldest son, I'm gonna call him AW. His STEP-GRANDDAD was causing the issue. You have to understand that at this time AW had not seen or talked to his dad in over a year. He was very bitter. But the step-grandad wanted to be present in the courtroom while AW testified. And only him. He finally got his way and was allowed to do just that. For 'moral' support they said. And after AW testified, the step-grandad spent the rest of the day at the trial sitting right outside the courtroom with one of the jurors husband. They obviously were friends.
Judge said Motion in Limine. Gregor first motion related to step-grandad being in the courtroom and that had already been decided on. So we move on. Gregor then moved for preliminary ruling at this point in time regarding the Rape Shield Statute. (which I will from here on out refer to as, RSS) Official Code of Georgia Annotated Section 24-2-3. Mr. Gregor then referred to one of our witnesses. Pg. 13 line 19 of transcript. I quote "she indicated to us that would lend itself to her testimony might involve claims that our victim engaged in some sort of sexual behavior with another child. (the other child was AW) Now, the RSS absolutely prohibits that sort of evidence coming in." Gregor then says " I always put this into play in these cases but it is up to the court in limine." I am now going to type this as it appears in transcript. Starting at the next paragraph. Next was the judge.
THE COURT: It requires notice and a hearing doesn't it?
MR GREGOR: It does Your Honor, The hearing to pierce the RSS And there's no notice in this particular case.
THE COURT: All right. Mr Levitt? (our atty)
MR LEVITT: Judge the only thing is my client is charged with in Georgia is 4 counts that supposedly happened on the interstate that only he and the accuser (gonna call him JH) were party to. I'm not aware of any RSS issue with regards to those. I think in looking over Georgia law I don't know collateral items he's going to go into. For instance, he may try to claim that stuff happened in Alabama in a shower and I thing both JH and AW were present. I don't know what-again, I don't know what his proof is and I understand the RSS but I guess it sort of depends on I don't know what the Court is going to let in or not let in.
THE COURT: Well, if he hasn't filed any similar transaction notice I don't imagine he's going to be talking about anything in Alabama. Would I not be correct Mr. Gregor?
MR GREGOR: Well, Your Honor, we do intend on talking about Alabama because it relates specifically to this victim.
THE COURT: You're talking about incidents that occurred in Alabama between this defendant and JH?
MR GREGOR: Yes, Your Honor
MR LEVITT: Judge, I don't know what proof this is that they think-there's only, as far as I know, my client and JH were in the vehicle in Dade County, that's all I know.
THE COURT: Well-
MR LEVITT: And again, that's my problem is I don't know where, you know, I don't know what kind of proof they're going to try to get in so I don't know how to respond without knowing what they're going to try to get in.
THE COURT: Well, let's- we're getting ahead of ourselves. First, talking about the RSS. It does not appear to be- you're stating that you don't- there's been no notice of any evidence that would be admissible by the defense?
MR GREGOR: There has not. And in informal discussions with Mr. Levitt I haven't gotten that indication. However, our investigator talked to one witness on Mr. Levitt's and the defendant's witness list who gave that indication to us that she expected, and quite frankly to our investigator she even said, well, that's about enough, I've talked about that enough, I'll just have my say on the stand. What I was concerned about is during that conversation with this particular witness she raised these issues that JH, our victim, has been engaged or she believes might have been engaged in some sort of sexual contact with another child and that's what I'm talking about the rape shield protecting my victim from any allegations that he somehow is engaged in sexual activity with someone else. (JH the victim is 16 at this point).
THE COURT: All right. Do you have a written motion on this motion in limine?
MR GREGOR: No, Your Honor.
THE COURT: All right. Absent a written notice your intent to cross the rape shield law nothing will be admitted. And I suggest you talk to witnesses very carefully because I'm not going to tolerate them interjecting something into this trial anymore than I'm going to tolerate 'step-granddad's bad behavior that is not legally admissible in the trial. So I would suggest that everyone after opening statement bone up on the rape shield law, make sure in Georgia that you know exactly what I'm saying.
MR LEVITT: Judge, if they could just tell me what it is- I think he may be confusing some witnesses is what I'm saying.
THE COURT: I don't want to pre-try this case, I just want to try it.
More of the transcript tomorrow!!!!
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
The choosing of the attorney
For those of you who are not aware, hiring a lawyer is the single most important thing you can do when you have been charged with a crime. You have to know the good ones from the bad. And that is not easy. I don't know how many attorneys Tonya Craft went through before she decided on her team. I know there were a few. We knew no defense attorneys. We then got a name from a relative who knew more about such things than we did, and after just one conversation with him, we hired him. We had no idea what we were doing. Unfortunately we were not very smart about this. That was our biggest mistake. In the first and all meetings with him, he simply said "This is no big deal" "They don't have anything." "This is a no brain er." That is exactly what he said to us.
You see, he never even checked to see what all they did have. He didn't know about Brad's youngest child because he never even looked at the taped interviews with the children. He did have one expert look at one of the tapes. The expert then asked him, "where are the rest of the tapes?" "There have to be more." But our attorney just told him he didn't know. This expert was not put on the stand in Brad's defense. Our attorney didn't have one expert witness. Not one. According to his testimony at the appeal hearing, he didn't even look in the file the state had. He just simply let Mr. Gregor give him all the info. And 'the man' only gave him what he wanted him to have. Although, our attorney could have asked for anything from Gregor's file, he did not. We found this out after we hired our appeal attorney. Way too late.
Our lawyer had never tried a case like this, ever. He was only licensed in Georgia for a couple of months when he took our case and said it would be no big deal. And it seemed that way to us, until Mr. Gregor started applying statutes that were not applicable by law. To make this part of the story a little shorter, I will just say, that after the trial our attorney opened another office in Dade Co. and is now practicing there as well. Kinda makes you say....hmmmm.......doesn't it? We have wondered whose side he was really on from the beginning. Then its time for the trial. What a joke this was. And let me just say, that I wanted to contact the media, but OUR LAWYER told us that would be the biggest mistake we could make. So here we go, to court.
You see, he never even checked to see what all they did have. He didn't know about Brad's youngest child because he never even looked at the taped interviews with the children. He did have one expert look at one of the tapes. The expert then asked him, "where are the rest of the tapes?" "There have to be more." But our attorney just told him he didn't know. This expert was not put on the stand in Brad's defense. Our attorney didn't have one expert witness. Not one. According to his testimony at the appeal hearing, he didn't even look in the file the state had. He just simply let Mr. Gregor give him all the info. And 'the man' only gave him what he wanted him to have. Although, our attorney could have asked for anything from Gregor's file, he did not. We found this out after we hired our appeal attorney. Way too late.
Our lawyer had never tried a case like this, ever. He was only licensed in Georgia for a couple of months when he took our case and said it would be no big deal. And it seemed that way to us, until Mr. Gregor started applying statutes that were not applicable by law. To make this part of the story a little shorter, I will just say, that after the trial our attorney opened another office in Dade Co. and is now practicing there as well. Kinda makes you say....hmmmm.......doesn't it? We have wondered whose side he was really on from the beginning. Then its time for the trial. What a joke this was. And let me just say, that I wanted to contact the media, but OUR LAWYER told us that would be the biggest mistake we could make. So here we go, to court.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
