State of Tennessee v. Jessica Kennedy

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

December 17, 2013 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JESSICA KENNEDY

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Monroe County

No. 11058 Walter C. Kurtz, Senior Judge

No. E2013-00260-CCA-R3-CD - Filed July 30, 2014

The Defendant, Jessica Kennedy, was convicted by a Monroe County Criminal Court jury

of facilitation of felony murder, a Class A felony, facilitation of aggravated robbery, a Class

C felony, facilitation of burning personal property, a Class A misdemeanor, and facilitation

of abuse of a corpse, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-202, 39-13-402, 39-14-

303, 13-17-312, 39-11-402, 39-11-403 (2010). The trial court sentenced the Defendant as

a Range I, standard offender to concurrent sentences of twenty-two years for facilitation of

felony murder, five years for facilitation of aggravated robbery, eleven months, twenty-nine

days for facilitation of burning personal property, and eleven months, twenty-nine days for

facilitation of abuse of a corpse. On appeal, she contends that (1) the evidence is insufficient

to support her convictions, (2) the trial court erred by denying her motion for a judgment of

acquittal, (3) the trial court erred by denying her motion to suppress, (4) the trial court erred

by failing to grant a mistrial related to the testimony of Tennessee Bureau of Investigation

(TBI) Special Agent Barry Brakebill, (5) the trial court erred by permitting the State to call

witnesses not listed on the indictment, (6) the trial court erred by making improper statements

related to her recorded police interview and by failing to grant a mistrial, (7) the trial court

erred by limiting the testimony of a psychologist, (8) the trial court erred by denying her ex

parte motion for funds to secure an expert, (9) the trial court erred by overruling her motions

to dismiss and to disqualify the prosecutor and the district attorney general’s office, and (10)

the trial court erred by misapplying mitigating and enhancement factors during sentencing.

We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Criminal Court Affirmed

J OSEPH M. T IPTON, P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which N ORMA M CG EE O GLE

and R OGER A. P AGE, JJ., joined.

John E. Eldridge, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jessica Kennedy.

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Kyle Hixson, Assistant Attorney

General; Steven Bebb, District Attorney General; and James H. Stutts and Steve Morgan,

Assistant District Attorneys General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

This case relates to the shooting death of Jim Miller, who was shot, his body placed

in the trunk of his car, and his car set on fire.

Suppression Hearing

At the suppression hearing, TBI Special Agent Danny Fay testified that he was a

licensed polygraph examiner and that he witnessed two of the Defendant’s interviews. He

said that on October 25, 2010, she told him that she might be pregnant and that he deemed

her medically unfit to undergo a polygraph examination. He said that on November 10, the

Defendant was not pregnant, initially consented to a polygraph examination, and ultimately

changed her mind. He said the Defendant asked to return to her cell and to speak with

Detective Brannon. Agent Fay permitted her to speak with Detective Brannon. Agent Fay

said that when the Defendant was leaving the room to return to her cell, she said that she had

been involved in a homicide. He said he was present during the interview but denied creating

a report. He said Special Agent Brakebill and Detective Brannon were present but was

unsure if Agent Melton and the prosecutor were present.

Michael Trabeler testified that he was a law student and worked for defense counsel.

He said that at counsel’s direction, he researched the media reports related to this case. He

said that on July 22, 2010, the Knoxville News Sentinel published a story quoting District

Attorney General Steven Bebb, which stated that the victim had been “shot in the back of the

head, two in the front.” Mr. Trabeler said that based on the articles and the online comment

section, he concluded that multiple rumors circulated in the local community about who

could have killed the victim. He said that on July 19, the News Sentinel published an article

stating, “Investigators are tight lipped, rumors are flying, the community is shocked by the

discovery . . . of a body.” Likewise, on July 24, the News Sentinel published an article

quoting Jim Anderson, “You hear everything but the ham frying, every kind of story and

some of them you just know . . . can’t be true.” Mr. Trabeler said that in the comment

section on the News Sentinel’s website on July 22, people commented that the victim’s death

was a Dixie Mafia “hit” and that the Ku Klux Klan was involved.

Mr. Trabeler testified that the News Sentinel reported on July 20, 2010, Kenny Hope

was being investigated. He said the comment section of the online article showed

-2-

discussions that the police were involved in the victim’s death and that Mr. Hope took care

of the sheriff’s business. He said that on July 21, the comments showed that some people

believed the victim’s death was a political assassination. He recalled an article reporting that

Ronnie Helton was being investigated and that threats were made against a TBI witness. On

January 7, 2011, one comment on the News Sentinel website stated, “Jim Miller’s family

doubts slaying inquiry.” Mr. Trabeler said that “some reliable sources” told him the victim’s

brothers had been in and out of jail for “dealing,” although the sources did not know if the

victim had been involved. He said that after November 2010, the articles stopped until the

Defendant was indicted. He said that the News Sentinel published seventeen articles

between July 2010 and January 2011 and that he found others from the Monroe County Buzz,

WBIR.com, and WATE.com.

On cross-examination, Mr. Trabeler testified that as an undergraduate student at the

University of Tennessee, he took more than ten journalism classes and worked for the

Tennessee Journalist, an online School of Journalism publication. He agreed he found about

thirty-one articles related to the victim’s death. He said that he found twenty-four articles

dated before November 10, 2010. He agreed the volume of articles was not unusual given

that the victim was found burned in the trunk of his car and was a public figure. He agreed

that he could not determine who submitted online comments or if the comments came from

Monroe County residents. He said, though, the victim’s daughter submitted numerous

comments.

Retired TBI Special Agent Barry Brakebill testified that he interviewed the Defendant

on November 10, 2010, at the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office. He said Doug Brannon,

Danny Fay, and the prosecutor were also present. He advised her of her Miranda rights and

said she did not ask for an attorney or “indicate” that she did not understand her rights. The

Defendant signed a waiver of rights form. He said the Defendant did not state that she had

a medical condition that would prevent her from understanding the form.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that his investigation began with Tiffany Sullivan.

He learned that Ms. Sullivan and the Defendant were arrested on unrelated charges, that Ms.

Sullivan called a family member expressing a desire to get out of jail, and that Ms. Sullivan

said during the call that she knew information about the victim’s killing. He talked to Ms.

Sullivan, who said the Defendant told her where the killing occurred. He denied Ms.

Sullivan was afraid of the Defendant but said Ms. Sullivan feared law enforcement generally.

Ms. Sullivan agreed to wear a recording device but showed the device to the Defendant.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that he interviewed the Defendant on July 26, 2010,

at a local restaurant and said the Defendant provided handwritten notes about Boonie Stokes

-3-

and Brandon Steel,1 which resulted in their arrests on unrelated charges. He agreed Mr. Steel

and Mr. Stokes probably knew the Defendant provided information resulting in their arrests.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that after the Defendant provided her notes, he

searched for guns, took photographs, and canvassed a neighborhood based on where the

Defendant said the killing occurred. He said that around October 13, 2010, he received a

telephone call from Detective Brannon, who said the Defendant wanted to talk to them. He

was unable to attend the interview, but Detective Brannon spoke to the Defendant. Detective

Brannon told him that the Defendant placed herself at the scene at the time of the killing and

said she helped place the victim inside the trunk. Special Agent Brakebill asked Agent Josh

Melton to obtain a written statement from the Defendant.

Regarding the November 3 or 4, 2010 interview, Special Agent Brakebill testified that

he took the Defendant to the crime scene, which was video recorded. He agreed he repeated

what he thought the Defendant previously stated regarding the murder. He agreed her

statement at the scene was different from what she told TBI Agent Melton and from her

October 13 statement. He agreed that each time the Defendant was interviewed, her story

changed, that she divulged additional information, and that she placed different people at the

scene. He said he took the Defendant to a location in which she thought the gun was buried.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that he did not prepare the written summary of the

Defendant’s November 10, 2010 interview. He said that a recording was made every time

the police talked to the Defendant, except their conversation at the local restaurant. He said

TBI policy was not to record interviews and agreed he did not expect Agent Melton recorded

their conversation. He agreed the Defendant wanted to move from the visitation booth but

denied telling her that he would move her if she told him what he wanted to hear.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that he did not recall if he read the Defendant her

Miranda rights during the July 26, 2010 interview. The November 10, 2010 statement was

played for the trial court. Special Agent Brakebill testified that the Defendant was in police

custody and that she asked if he placed the hold on her. He agreed he did not read the

Defendant her Miranda rights, although she discussed methamphetamine and marijuana. He

agreed Monroe County Sheriff Bivens was in the room, although he was not seen in the

recording. He agreed he wanted the Defendant to know she could tell him if a law

enforcement officer was involved in the killing. He agreed that the Defendant and Mr. Steel

were in a relationship at the time of the interview and that the Defendant said she feared Mr.

Steel, although she returned to Mr. Steel after she was released from custody. He agreed the

1

The record shows the spelling as “Brandon Steele” and “Brandon Steel.” We have used the

spelling provided at the trial, “Brandon Steel.”

-4-

Defendant said she feared Mr. Stokes. He learned the Defendant, Mr. Steel, and Mr. Stokes

were confined to the Monroe County Jail and said he told the Defendant that he could keep

her safe before asking her where the murder occurred.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that he investigated the Defendant’s claim that the

killing occurred at the yellow house but denied that the area was examined for forensic

evidence. He said Sweetwater Police Officer John Scruggs went to the location before the

interview and found the house. He agreed he asked the Defendant about the motive for the

killing. He agreed that the Defendant implicated Sheriff Bivens and former officer Mike

Morgan in the killing and that he did not question the Defendant further about her statement.

He agreed Mr. Morgan participated in the early stage of the investigation. He agreed that he

said to the Defendant, “We’ve heard rumors that [the victim] had sex with some girl” and

that she provided the name of someone she thought could have been involved with the

victim. He agreed the Defendant said Mr. Stokes stated, “You should have seen the look in

his eyes when I pulled the trigger.” He did not recall if he heard the same information from

others.

Special Agent Brakebill identified his notes from the October 13, 2010 interview.

Because of poor audio quality, the recording of the October 13 interview was received as an

exhibit but not played for the trial court. The court stated that before it reached a decision

on the motion, it would listen to each recording. Special Agent Brakebill agreed he did not

read the Defendant her Miranda rights because they were not required and said the

Defendant was only a witness to overhearing Mr. Steel’s and his friends’ statements when

he initially talked to her. He knew she was under arrest but said the arrest was for unrelated

offenses. He did not ask if the Defendant had an attorney. He agreed the Defendant said

that she overheard Mr. Stokes, Mr. Steel, Alex Lance, and Travis Nipper talking about the

killing and that she overheard Ms. Sullivan talking about the murder when they were

confined in the Monroe County Jail. He said the Defendant heard that the murder occurred

on Creek Road behind Mr. Stokes’s farm. He agreed the Defendant said that the victim paid

and permitted Ms. Sanchez to stay at his trailer in exchange for sex. He agreed Ms. Sanchez

told the Defendant this information.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that after the Defendant was released from custody,

she provided him with contact information and said she was staying with Robert Johnson,

who he learned was “a local source of information.” He said officers talked to him if they

wanted to know what was going on in the community.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that on November 4, 2010, he took the Defendant

to the yellow house and that a re-enactment was recorded. He agreed that the Defendant

consistently denied knowing the victim and that Mr. Steel was not mentioned in this

-5-

interview. He agreed the Defendant identified “Shadetree” as being involved in the shooting

and said Shadetree was interviewed by the police. He said the Defendant stated that no cars

were there, that Shadetree and Ronnie Johnson took the victim’s car to Mr. Stokes’s house,

that she and Mr. Stokes walked to Mr. Stokes’s house, and that they “spent some time

shaking dope.” He agreed the Defendant claimed Mr. Stokes told her, “Don’t be another

loose end.” Special Agent Brakebill agreed he told the Defendant to “try to point us in the

right direction” and said he believed the Defendant’s version “to some extent.” He said he

did not tell the Defendant that the police had performed polygraph examinations on people

whom the Defendant identified as being involved in the killing and that those people did not

show signs of deception.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that in the November 4, 2010 recording, the

Defendant said she had been read her rights. He said the Defendant was read her rights each

time she was questioned as a suspect. He said that by the November 4 statement, he

concluded she was at least an accessory to the murder.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that on November 10, 2010, the Defendant provided

a version of events that differed from her November 4 statement. He agreed that in her

November 10 statement, the Defendant stated that “it was going to be a robbery,” which was

planned by Mr. Steel. He agreed that she did not mention Shadetree and Mr. Johnson in this

statement and that she said Mr. Steel provided her a .38 caliber revolver. He agreed the

Defendant stated that she had never met or had sexual relations with the victim. He said the

Defendant helped put the victim into the trunk of the car. He agreed she said Shawn Corn

picked her up because “they” left her at the scene. He agreed TBI Agent Fay, the prosecutor,

and Detective Brannon were present for the November 10 interview. He said that in one

interview, the Defendant said that Mr. Steel placed a gun to her head and told her to shoot

the victim.

Upon examination by the trial court, Special Agent Brakebill testified that the

Defendant was not a suspect until after November 3, 2010. He said he received a telephone

call from Detective Brannon and told him to talk to the Defendant in his absence. Detective

Brannon told him that the Defendant knew about the shooting, was present during the killing,

and helped place the victim’s body inside the trunk of the car. He agreed that between July

and November 3, the Defendant was in and out of confinement on unrelated charges and a

violation of probation warrant.

Ellen Wilburn testified that she worked as a correction officer at the Monroe County

Sheriff’s Office from August 2008 to January 2012. She said that the Defendant had been

confined to the Monroe County Jail since October 29, 2010, and that the Defendant was

placed in C Hold, a visitation holding cell in the main hallway of the jail. The inmate

-6-

movement records only documented the Defendant’s placement at the jail from November

3, 2011 to September 27, 2012, and she could not explain why records were missing.

Officer Wilburn testified that the visitation booth in which the Defendant was held

was “five by six,” had a partition wall in the center and two stools but no running water or

a toilet. She thought the Defendant was housed in the visitation booth for about two weeks.

Based on the jail records, she said that on November 3, the Defendant was in C Hold, a

visitation booth, that she was moved to A Hold, another visitation booth, on November 5, and

that later on November 5, the Defendant was moved to “the drunk tank.” She said the

records showed that on November 9, the Defendant was returned to C Hold, a visitation

booth, and later returned to the drunk tank. Although the records did not show how long the

Defendant was in the drunk tank, she was moved to the general population on November 10.

She agreed the records showed that from November 3 to November 10, the Defendant was

in isolation.

Officer Wilburn testified that Mr. Steel was an inmate when she worked at the jail and

that he was confined to the jail from October 29 to November 10. She agreed she escorted

the Defendant down the hallway where Mr. Steel was housed. She said that Mr. Steel beat

on the door and screamed at the Defendant that she “had better keep her mouth shut,” that

“he was going to hurt her,” and that “there [were] people who were watching her.” She said

she only heard rumors about what Mr. Steel told the Defendant to keep her mouth shut. She

said the threats were continuous until he was transferred to another facility in October 2011.

She agreed Mr. Steel cursed the Defendant and said the Defendant told her that she did not

feel safe at the jail. She said Mr. Steel knew he was in jail because of the Defendant. Ms.

Wilburn reported her concerns to her superiors but was told not to move the Defendant. She

said she heard other inmates say that the Defendant “was having problems.”

Officer Wilburn testified that the Defendant told her she was afraid someone was

going to kill her and hurt her family. She denied telling the sheriff about the Defendant’s

fears. She said that when the Defendant returned from the police interviews, she was always

crying and upset.

On cross-examination, Officer Wilburn testified that the Defendant said she was

afraid of Mr. Steel. She agreed the Defendant and Mr. Steel lived together. She agreed Mr.

Steel was in jail on drug-related charges and a probation violation. When asked if Mr.

Steel’s “harassment” of the Defendant occurred before November 10, 2010, she said Mr.

Steel would have harassed her “anytime he had an opportunity” because his cell was adjacent

to her holding cell. She denied that inmates’ yelling was unusual. She did not know when

Mr. Steel arrived at the jail.

-7-

Officer Wilburn testified that in October 2010, the jail could house about twenty-six

to twenty-eight female inmates. She denied that female inmate overcrowding prevented the

Defendant from being removed from the visitation booth. She never saw the Defendant

sleeping, which was unusual because most inmates slept during the day. She said the officer

moving an inmate was responsible for logging an inmate’s movements.

Upon examination by the trial court, Officer Wilburn said the Defendant was placed

in the visitation booth because she had an “administrative hold, a detective hold.” She said

the hold required the Defendant to be separated from other inmates. She thought Mr. Steel

was in the main jail until September, October, or November 2011. She said that after Mr.

Steel was moved from the main jail, the problems ended.

On redirect examination, Ms. Wilburn testified that she recalled an incident when Mr.

Steel broke out of his cell and ran into the Defendant’s cell. She said she did not recall the

details of how Mr. Steel entered her cell but said he was removed from it. She said the

incident occurred after November 10, 2010.

TBI Agent Jason Legg testified that on November 29, 2010, he interviewed the

Defendant at the Meigs County Sheriff’s Office and that the video recording of the interview

was forwarded to Special Agent Brakebill. He said that although he discussed the recording

with the prosecutor the morning of the suppression hearing, the prosecutor did not ask for

the recording. The recording was received as an exhibit.

Monroe County Sheriff’s Detective Conway Mason testified that he participated in

some of the Defendant’s interviews, although he did not recall the dates and did not take

notes. He said his purpose was to be a witness to the interview. He said he was responsible

for bringing the Defendant to the sheriff’s office on one occasion. He said he and Mr.

Morgan picked up the Defendant from her stepfather’s house one evening and thought Mr.

Morgan called the Defendant before they picked her up. He said he did not get out of the

police truck when they arrived at the house. He did not know what, if anything, Mr. Morgan

said to the Defendant before they entered the truck. He did not recall taking the Defendant

home after she was interviewed or Mr. Morgan’s telling the Defendant that she was in a lot

of trouble. He said they had a casual conversation during the drive to the sheriff’s office.

He recalled being present for two of the Defendant’s interviews. He did not recall if Walt

Hunt or Travis Jones was present during the interview.

Detective Mason testified that he participated in the re-enactment at the yellow house.

He did not recall who drove the Defendant to the scene. He said Mr. Morgan was the captain

of the detectives who might oversee or assist in an investigation. He said the district

attorney’s office requested the TBI lead the investigation rather than Mr. Morgan, although

-8-

he denied knowing the reason for the request. He said Mr. Morgan left the sheriff’s office

around December 2011 or January 2012.

Monroe County Sheriff’s Captain Travis Jones testified that he participated in the

November 3, 2010 interview and that Detective Brannon and Correction Officer Teresa Fleek

were also present. He said that he took notes during the interview, that the notes were in the

case file, and that Detective Brannon led the interview. When asked about his notes, he said

“Kenny” referred to Mr. Hope. He said the Defendant stated that Mr. Nipper “rode and got

stung with Kenny Hope.” He agreed the Defendant stated that Mr. Johnson told her that Mr.

Hope was mad at the victim. He said that by that time, Mr. Hope had been cleared of any

involvement in the killing. He did not recall being present during an October interview but

said he would not dispute the recording. He denied that it was unusual to obtain ten

statements from a suspect, although he had never interviewed a suspect ten times. He said

he provided Detective Brannon his notes and summary of the interview. He denied knowing

anything about the re-enactment. Upon examination by the trial court, Captain Jones testified

that he did not recall who initiated the November 3 interview but said that Detective Brannon

asked him to join the interview.

TBI Agent Josh Melton testified that he interviewed the Defendant on November 4,

2010, and that he went to the yellow house earlier that day. He recalled taking the Defendant

to a barn where she thought the gun was placed. He denied finding the gun or taking notes.

He did not know who owned the property. He said that after they left the property, he

interviewed the Defendant and presented his file to counsel. He said Sheriff Bivens was

present during the interview. He said he asked the Sheriff not to record the interview

because he believed it made people nervous and because he normally did not record

interviews. He took notes and provided the signed narrative of the interview to counsel.

Agent Melton testified that the Defendant provided different accounts of the murder

during the re-enactment and her November 4 interview. He agreed that during the re-

enactment, the Defendant said she was on the porch of the yellow house, saw the victim

arrive, and saw Mr. Stokes and Mr. Corn sneak up behind and shoot him.

Walt Hunt testified that in July 2010, he was an investigator for the district attorney

general’s office. He said that he was involved in the investigation and that his notes were

submitted to the TBI’s “main unit file.” He said he participated in two of the Defendant’s

interviews, although he did not recall the dates. He denied taking notes during the

interviews. He said the prosecutor, Detective Brannon, Special Agent Brakebill, and Sheriff

Bivens were also present during the interviews in which he participated. Although he said

he had interviewed suspects ten times, it was not the general rule. When asked, “[T]he more

-9-

you interview[,] the less reliable” a statement is, he said, anecdotal evidence might show a

relationship but that he could not prove or disprove it.

Monroe County Sheriff Bill Bivens testified that he knew the victim vaguely but did

not know him personally. Sheriff Bivens denied taking any notes during his participation in

the investigation. He did not know whether the Defendant was told her interviews were

recorded. He agreed that Mr. Morgan participated initially in the investigation and that he

was probably present during the early interviews. He said he asked District Attorney General

Bebb for assistance in the investigation but denied the request was motivated because some

of his officers were implicated in the killing. He said the TBI cleared Mr. Hope of

involvement. He recalled the Defendant said she heard that he and Mr. Morgan were

involved. He said that Mr. Morgan was never interviewed and that he did not see a reason

to interview him.

Sheriff Bivens testified that the Defendant’s jail movement records before November

3 should exist. He agreed that counsel requested the Defendant be transferred to another jail

and said that he refused to move her because his office had done nothing wrong. He was

worried about giving the impression that his office was guilty of wrongdoing. He knew Mr.

Steel was in the jail and of his relationship with the Defendant. He denied knowing she was

afraid of Mr. Steel but said she told him she was afraid of Mr. Steel. He reviewed the jail

records and said the Defendant was placed in a visitation booth from November 3 to

November 10. He agreed the visitation booths did not have running water, a toilet, or a bed.

He said the jail was overcrowded, and it was common for inmates to sleep on mats. He

agreed the Defendant was a person of interest after October 29, 2010.

Upon examination by the trial court, Sheriff Bivens testified that he did not know why

the Defendant was housed in a visitation booth from the end of October to November 10.

He denied a detective hold would explain the Defendant’s housing in a visitation booth. He

said that the hallway was monitored by video camera, that officers checked on the inmates

every thirty minutes, and that the inmates were given water and allowed to use a restroom.

When asked if the Defendant would have been permitted to leave the cell for exercise, he

said jail staff would know.

Monroe County Sheriff’s Lieutenant Josh Woods testified that he possessed the

Defendant’s jail records. He agreed the Defendant did not receive any visitors in 2010 and

received her first visitor on February 9, 2011. He said that although the Defendant’s

telephone calls were recorded, he did not have a log showing with whom she spoke. He said

no record was compiled showing when a detective might take an inmate out of the jail. He

said the Defendant’s jail movement records showed that the first entry was on November 3,

2010, when the Defendant was placed in a visitation booth. He said it was possible the

-10-

information for October 29 through November 3 was entered incorrectly. He agreed the

records showed that on November 5, a notation was entered stating that the TBI wanted her

separated from other inmates. The Defendant’s visitation records were received as an

exhibit.

Monroe County Sheriff’s Detective Douglas Brannon testified that his first contact

with the Defendant was her July 26 or 27, 2010 interview. He provided all his notes and

materials from the investigation to Special Agent Brakebill. He denied secretly recording

the Defendant and said the camera was in plain view. He said he did not take notes during

the interview. He agreed some of his conversations with the Defendant were not recorded

but said those conversations were “casual.”

Detective Brannon testified that he talked to Ms. Sullivan in October 2010 but that he

was not involved in Ms. Sullivan’s wearing an electronic recording device. He denied

participating in the July 30 or 31 interview, a recording of which was received as an exhibit.

He agreed the Defendant said Ms. Sullivan and Mr. Nipper took her to the woods at Mr.

Stokes’s house and told her where the victim was killed. He agreed the Defendant said that

Ms. Sullivan was scared because “important people” were involved and that Ms. Sullivan

said Mr. Morgan and Sheriff Bivens were involved. He said the Defendant did not want to

be around Mr. Morgan. He agreed the Defendant said Mr. Stokes and Mr. Nipper were hired

by Mr. Morgan and Sheriff Bivens. He agreed the Defendant said Ms. Sullivan heard Mr.

Stokes say, “You should have seen the look in his eye when I shot him.” He agreed the

Defendant expressed fear of Mr. Steel several times.

Detective Brannon testified that at the time of the killing, rumors implicated many

people in the killing. He said they investigated Mr. Hope’s involvement and determined that

he was incorrectly accused of saying, “I shot him and burned him like the pig he was.” He

said someone named Toffer was implicated in the killing. He said eleven interviews were

not unusual and noted the Defendant volunteered or requested to talk to law enforcement

numerous times. He agreed the Defendant called him Doug and said he wanted her to be

comfortable talking to him. He said that the Defendant mentioned Mr. Corn’s involvement

first and that the Defendant changed her story numerous times regarding Mr. Corn.

Detective Brannon testified that he led the November 1, 2010 interview, that the

Defendant mentioned Mr. Hope and Frankie Howell, and that the Defendant denied shooting

the victim and said she was “geeked out,” causing the days to run together. He agreed the

Defendant stated that she thought Mr. Stokes killed the victim and that Mr. Stokes “rode up

on it.” He agreed the Defendant named Mr. Stokes, Becky Vires, Mr. Hope, and Mr. Howell

and said Mr. Steel mentioned seeing Mr. Stokes, Mr. Nipper, and Mr. Lance on the road near

the burn site.

-11-

Detective Brannon testified that he next interviewed the Defendant on November 3,

2010. The video recording, the detective’s notes, and the summary were received as exhibits.

He agreed that in the November 3 interview the Defendant implicated Mr. Stokes, Mr.

Johnson, and Shadetree in the murder and identified Mr. Stokes as the shooter. He agreed

the Defendant told multiple stories regarding the murder but said she consistently placed

herself and Mr. Stokes at the scene. He said the Defendant’s statements regarding Mr.

Steel’s presence at the scene varied.

Detective Brannon testified that he and FBI Agent Clay Anderson spoke to the

Defendant on January 6, 2011, and that the interview was not recorded. His notes were

received as an exhibit. When asked whether the Defendant received Miranda warnings on

July 26, July 30 or 31, October 13, October 25, and November 1, 2010, he said that if no

warnings were given, it was because the Defendant initiated the conversation and because

at the time, she was an “informational witness,” not a suspect. He did not recall if he told the

Defendant that she was not required to talk to the police. He said that Mr. Johnson was Mr.

Steel’s uncle. He denied knowing the Defendant was held in isolation at the jail and said the

interview rooms were located across the street from the jail. He said the jail staff took the

Defendant to and from the jail.

Detective Brannon testified that he knew Mr. Stokes and Mr. Steel were in the local

jail on unrelated charges when the Defendant was there and that the Defendant provided

information leading to their arrests. He agreed the charges were related to Mr. Stokes’s

having sexual relations with a fourteen-year-old girl and to Mr. Steel’s manufacturing

methamphetamine. He denied having knowledge of Mr. Steel’s threatening the Defendant

and agreed the Defendant said she was scared of Mr. Steel at times. He said they had a love-

hate relationship.

Detective Brannon testified that he investigated cases involving Todd Sweet and John

Edward Dawson but denied knowing if the cases were dismissed because of “misdeeds” of

Monroe County Sheriff’s detectives. He agreed he worked with Patrick Henry, who was

accused of impersonating an attorney to Mr. Sweet. When asked if he participated in the

meeting with Mr. Henry and Mr. Sweet, he said he met the defendant but did not participate

in the “illusion.” He agreed he saw the false stationery prepared for the illusion but said he

saw it after the fact. He agreed, though, he impersonated a member of the mob and purported

to be Mr. Sweet’s contact in the mob organization.

Detective Brannon identified a document describing a list of things that occurred

during the first few hours of the investigation. He said the document did not have TBI or

Monroe County Sheriff’s Office letterhead and denied seeing it before counsel provided it.

-12-

He denied that the Defendant appeared intoxicated during the interviews when she was not

in custody but said it was possible she was intoxicated.

Detective Brannon testified that he concluded that the Defendant always provided “a

kernel of truth” about the victim’s killing and about unrelated matters. He denied, though,

that the Defendant told the police what they wanted to hear. He agreed that at times, she

provided information freely and at others, she argued with the officers. He agreed the

Defendant was interviewed numerous times and said his goal was to determine the truth.

Upon examination by the trial court, Detective Brannon testified that the Defendant

returned to custody late in October because of a probation violation. He denied knowing the

Defendant was housed in isolation and said he usually did not enter the jail to talk to

suspects. He said his interviews were conducted across the street. He agreed a detective

hold was placed on the Defendant and explained the hold was to prevent the Defendant from

talking to other inmates but denied requesting she be held in isolation. He said, too, the hold

was instituted because of the Defendant’s pending Meigs County charges.

On cross-examination, Detective Brannon testified that the Defendant was booked

into the Monroe County Jail on October 29, 2010, at 4:27 p.m. He said the booking sheet

showed that the Defendant was charged with failure to appear and stated, “Do not release -

Meigs County.” He said she was later transferred to Meigs County before she was indicted

for the victim’s murder. He said Mr. Hope was investigated and cleared of involvement. He

agreed the Defendant said she heard Mr. Hope made statements about how he shot the victim

in the chest. He said the autopsy showed the victim was shot in the head. He agreed he

thought the Defendant’s statement about Mr. Hope was false. He said Adam Toffer was

investigated because the Defendant said Mr. Toffer met the victim in the parking lot at the

Dinner Bell, stuffed the victim in the trunk of the car, and drove away. He said it was alleged

Mr. Toffer stabbed the victim and cut up his body before setting it on fire. He said the

allegation was unsupported by the investigation. He denied telling the Defendant that he

could help with her pending charges, threatening her with new charges if she failed to

cooperate, or threatening to interfere with her bond.

On redirect examination, Detective Brannon testified that he spoke to Jim Plemmons

during the investigation. He denied Mr. Plemmons told him that he heard Mr. Hope confess

to shooting the victim three times in the head. He said he interviewed Brenda Stakely but

denied she told him that Mr. Hope confessed to shooting the victim execution style. After

reviewing notes, he stated that Mr. Plemmons said Mr. Hope confessed to “[a] general

execution type and then put him in the trunk and burned him like the pig he was.” He agreed

Ms. Stakely provided the same information.

-13-

TBI Agent Jason Legg was recalled by the defense and testified that he interviewed

the Defendant at the Meigs County Jail. He said that although he did not take notes, he

provided a copy of the recording to Special Agent Brakebill. He said he thought the

interview occurred on November 29, 2010. The recording was played for the court. He said

his supervisor told him to interview the Defendant, which occurred in his office at the Meigs

County Sheriff’s Office. He said it was his idea to tell the Defendant that he did not think

she killed the victim and that she did not have the gumption to kill the victim. He said the

man who entered his office was Detective Scotty Wiggins, who had a rapport with the

Defendant. He said he thought the Defendant told the truth during this interview but thought

the statement was self-serving.

Trial

At the trial, TBI Special Agent Barry Brakebill testified that on July 17, 2010, he

responded to the crime scene to assist the “State Bomb and Arson Division.” He saw a car

burned beyond recognition. He said that the officers extinguished the flames and that the car

was moved to the Monroe County Sheriff’s Department. He said that the victim was found

inside the car and that he attempted to determine who last had contact with him.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that about one week after the victim was found, he

received a telephone call from a Sweetwater Police detective, who said Tiffany Sullivan and

the Defendant were in police custody on unrelated charges and had information related to the

victim’s death. He learned from Ms. Sullivan that several people who were involved in the

victim’s death came to the Defendant’s house, a few hundred yards from the scene, and that

the Defendant overheard them talking about the killing. He testified consistently with his

suppression hearing testimony regarding Ms. Sullivan’s wearing a recording device.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that the Defendant resolved her unrelated charges,

was released from custody, and spoke to him numerous times about the victim’s death. On

one occasion, the Defendant contacted him and provided him two pages of notes. He said

the Defendant was not a suspect at that time. He said the Defendant was arrested again on

unrelated charges in October or November 2010 and asked to speak with him and Monroe

County Sheriff’s Detective Doug Brannon. He testified consistently with his suppression

hearing testimony regarding his inability to attend the interview, Detective Brannon’s

interviewing the Defendant, and the Defendant’s placing her herself at the murder scene and

helping place the victim’s body in his car by bending his legs. He said the Defendant was

interviewed again the following day by TBI Agent Josh Melton.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that at some point after Agent Melton interviewed

the Defendant, the Defendant was transferred to the Meigs County Jail, that the Defendant

-14-

talked to other inmates about the victim’s killing, and that the inmates reported the

information to the correction officers. He said the correction officers contacted local TBI

Agent Jason Legg, who interviewed the Defendant at the jail some time after November 10,

2010. He agreed that during these interviews, the Defendant identified numerous people who

were involved in the victim’s killing. He interviewed the people the Defendant identified

and verified any potential alibis. He agreed that the investigation of the victim’s death was

still an open case and that nobody had been charged with murder.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that the last police interview in which he participated

occurred on November 10, 2010. He said that this interview occurred after the Defendant

placed herself at the scene, that the Defendant was a suspect by that time, and that the

interview was recorded. He said the Defendant was advised of her rights, was provided

drinks, snacks, and bathroom breaks, and did not request an attorney. He agreed the

Defendant “implicate[d] herself more fully in the robbery and the homicide.” The video-

recorded November 10 statement was played for the jury.

In the recording, the Defendant was advised of her rights after being provided a drink

and candy. The Defendant admitted to shooting the victim and said Mr. Steel planned to rob

the victim. She denied robbing the victim and said she did not know if anything was taken.

She said Mr. Steel was about $130 short on their monthly rent. She said Mr. Steel provided

her the .38 caliber revolver used in the killing. The special agent told her the victim was shot

three times in the head. She said she was scared.

When confronted with her previous statement to TBI Agent Josh Melton in which the

Defendant stated that someone else was the shooter, she admitted she was untruthful. She

said she weighed about 135 pounds at that time and agreed the victim was a big man. She

said that she helped place the victim’s legs inside the trunk. She agreed she had consistently

stated that she helped place the victim’s legs inside the car. She said that after the victim was

killed, “they” left her at the scene and that “Shawn” returned for her.

The Defendant said that when she helped put the victim’s feet inside the car, Mr. Steel

and Mr. Corn helped place the victim’s upper body in the trunk. She said that after the victim

was shot, she had blood on her face and clothes, which were later burned. Special Agent

Brakebill mentioned that the Defendant called Mr. Steel’s uncle, Robert, and told him that

Robert knew the gun’s location. She said Mr. Steel buried the gun near a barn.

The Defendant stated that Mr. Corn knew she was going with Mr. Steel to the location

where the killing occurred and that Mr. Steel was going to rob a man while there. She said

Mr. Steel mentioned the robbery earlier that day. She said Mr. Steel did not like Mr. Corn

-15-

because she had an affair with Mr. Corn. She began to cry and said she did not know how

to leave Mr. Steel.

The Defendant said that just before the killing occurred, the victim saw Mr. Steel. She

said Mr. Steel got mad at her, although she did not know why. She said that Mr. Steel gave

her the .38 caliber revolver, that he threatened her with a .32 or .45 caliber pistol, and that

he wanted her to kill the victim. She mentioned Mr. Steel shot at her previously with a .22

caliber gun. She said that Mr. Steel stood behind her and that the victim told her she did not

have to do this. She said “Garrett” was there, but she did not know where.

After being reminded of a previous statement, she recalled the victim wore “slacks”

and a ring. She said the victim touched her face and said, “You’re a pretty young thing.”

She said Mr. Steel was not within hearing distance. She said the victim knew to come to that

location because Mr. Steel and Michael Garrett arranged it. She identified several people

from photographs and cried when shown a photograph of Mr. Corn.

The special agent mentioned that in a previous statement the Defendant falsely said

Mr. Stokes made a phone call to someone who she thought was the victim and said he had

Becky [inaudible]’s “new young little meat.” She said she first heard Becky’s name from

Mr. Steel. She was shown a photograph of Becky but did not recognize her. When asked

if she had important information, she said that she did not know, that she played her “own

part,” and that she had to serve time for her part.

On cross-examination, Special Agent Brakebill testified that in the recording the

Defendant said Mr. Steel was present during the killing, that Mr. Steel provided the gun and

that the killing occurred at the yellow house. He agreed he told the Defendant that the victim

was shot three times but said the Defendant already knew the number of times the victim was

shot. He agreed the Defendant denied knowing about the victim’s rings, and he said one of

the victim’s rings was missing when his body was found. He agreed that the victim wore his

watch at the time of his death and that any cash in the victim’s wallet burned during the fire.

He agreed the Defendant said she was left at the scene and sent a text message to Mr. Corn

requesting he pick her up. He said that the Defendant did not leave with anyone who was

at the scene and that Mr. Corn picked up the Defendant. He agreed that Mr. Corn took his

own life sometime later, although he did not know when, and said the Defendant believed

Mr. Steel was involved in Mr. Corn’s death. He agreed that the Defendant said Mr. Steel put

a gun to her head, gave her a .38 caliber revolver, and told her to shoot the victim.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that Ms. Sullivan wore the recording device on July

26, 2010, and the recording was played for the jury. In the recording, the police officers told

Ms. Sullivan to ask the Defendant where the Defendant hid the gun. The officers wanted Ms.

-16-

Sullivan to take the Defendant aside and ask if she told the police if a gun was still out there,

and if so, where it was. The police told her to ask if the Defendant was present during the

killing and why the victim was killed. Ms. Sullivan said the Defendant mentioned previously

a .38 or .380 handgun, and Ms. Sullivan was told that the Defendant hid the gun. The

detective said he only wanted to ensure the Defendant was not involved in the killing.

In the recording, Ms. Sullivan said, “Listen,” which was followed by static. Ms.

Sullivan said she wondered how the killing occurred and asked what the Defendant told the

police. The Defendant said she told the police the truth as she knew it. The Defendant said

that she told the police about the yellow house in the woods and that the victim’s car was

down the road from her and Mr. Steel’s house. She said that on the morning of the shooting,

“Travis” brought “him” back home around 10:00 a.m. because Conway Mason was “down

the road.” Ms. Sullivan asked if the Defendant knew where the gun was, and the Defendant

said that she knew the gun’s location “indirectly” and that she was not “putting herself out

there” anymore than she already had. The Defendant said it made her sick that she and Ms.

Sullivan were in jail, although they did not commit the murder. The Defendant mentioned

that the police were going to drop the hold on her but had not yet dropped it.

Ms. Sullivan asked the Defendant what she told the police. The Defendant said she

told the police that Mr. Steel disappeared for three nights and that after the third night,

“Travis” brought Mr. Steel home around 10:00 a.m. She said that Mr. Steel had taken the

“.38 black metal” gun from the couch and returned with a different gun. She said Mr. Stokes

buried the gun. She said Mr. Steel told her that he was on a four-wheeler. The Defendant

expressed anger with Mr. Steel for getting her involved. She said that Mr. Steel obtained a

new tire and rim for his Mercury Marquis when he was gone for the three days. She thought

Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes “did it.” She said that when Mr. Steel returned home, he took a

shower, took some shells for his gun, and left.

The Defendant stated that she could give the police enough information to justify

taking Mr. Steel into custody and holding him until the police determined what occurred.

She discussed the abuse she suffered from Mr. Steel and said she had had enough of it. Ms.

Sullivan said she did not know the victim was “the Jim” with whom “Kristen” stayed. The

Defendant said she just “put it together.” The Defendant said she never met “Jim.” Ms.

Sullivan said she wondered if Jim was looking for Kristen and found out too much. The

Defendant said Jim paid Kristen’s rent but was married to another woman.

Ms. Sullivan pressed the Defendant about the gun’s location, and the Defendant said

she did not know the gun’s specific location. She said that one of the guns was “put up at

the house” but that she was not going to provide the police all the information and remain

in confinement.

-17-

Ms. Sullivan said she feared Mr. Stokes, and the Defendant said she thought Mr. Steel

and Mr. Stokes killed the victim. She said Mr. Stokes had a conscience because she heard

him talking in his sleep and having nightmares after the killing. She did not think Mr. Nipper

was involved directly. Ms. Sullivan asked if she had seen Kristen, and the Defendant denied

seeing her for some time. She said that Mr. Steel had an affair with Kristen when the

Defendant and Mr. Steel were together and that she threw a soda can at Mr. Steel’s head.

Ms. Sullivan asked if the Defendant had anything to do with the killing, and the

Defendant denied any involvement. The Defendant said she was “locked in that . . . house”

just like she was “locked in this . . . cell.” They discussed “Marty” dying at a party, and the

Defendant said she did not know how he died or how his death related to Mr. Steel, Mr.

Stokes, Mr. Nipper, Kristen, and the victim. She said she thought that Mr. Steel knew she

was getting ready to leave and had some money saved, that Mr. Steel wanted to find Kristen,

and that Kristen did not want a relationship with Mr. Steel because she had the victim, who

gave her anything she wanted. She thought Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes “made it happen.” The

Defendant said that the victim must have truly cared for Kristen, although she slept with

other people.

The Defendant said that if the police wanted to know the whereabouts of the gun, they

would have to help her. She said that she knew one gun was at the house and that she knew

the general location of the other. She said she thought “they” shot the victim in the head

once on the first night, left him sitting outside the second night until they could determine

what to do, and put him in the car and set it on fire the third night. She said someone came

to her house looking for Mr. Steel when he was gone, waited a couple hours, and left when

Mr. Steel did not return. The Defendant said that she wanted to help the police but that she

had to look out for herself and her three children.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that he placed no value in the Defendant’s

comments. He said that minutes after the recording ended, the Defendant was brought into

an interview room, and the police obtained a search warrant for Mr. Steel and the

Defendant’s house. He agreed that the Defendant wanted to provide information regarding

the victim’s killing in exchange for her release, that she said Mr. Steel had a gun, and that

he obtained a search warrant based on her information. He said a gun was found at the

house.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that the district attorney general’s office asked him

to participate in the investigation but denied that he was asked to participate because a

member of the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office was involved in the killing. He agreed,

though, that Lieutenant Kenny Hope was implicated in the early stage of the investigation

but said the information was unverifiable.

-18-

Special Agent Brakebill testified that the Defendant contacted him and provided text

messages sent to her from Mr. Stokes, which were used in part to obtain an arrest warrant for

Mr. Stokes on a sex-related offense. He said the Defendant may have stated that she was

abused sexually as a child.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that his first interview of the Defendant occurred on

July 25, 2010, and the video-recorded interview was played for the jury. In the recording,

the Defendant said she knew he wanted to talk about “Jim Miller.” She expressed fear of Mr.

Steel. Special Agent Brakebill asked the Defendant to tell him the truth about the victim’s

death, and she asked, “What are you going to do for me?” He asked what she wanted, and

the Defendant wanted to go home, get her belongings, and leave Mr. Steel. She wanted him

to remove the hold, and he said he would if she cooperated. She said Mr. Steel cheated on

her with a fourteen-year-old girl, shot at her, and beat her.

When asked about the victim’s death, the Defendant said the killing occurred near the

yellow house she shared with Mr. Steel. She said Mr. Steel disappeared for three days and

when he returned home, he told her “they found him burning.” She said Mr. Steel took his

.38 caliber handgun before he left home “in case something happened.” She said that Mr.

Steel and Mr. Nipper returned home around 10:00 a.m., that Mr. Steel saw “Conway” down

the road, and that Mr. Steel thought Conway was going to search their house for

methamphetamine manufacturing materials. She said that Mr. Steel had a gun when he

returned home but that it was not the .38 caliber he took from the home three days previously.

She said that Mr. Steel said they needed to bury the .38 caliber he took from the home

because Mr. Stokes had done “something” but that he did not go into details. She said that

Mr. Steel asked for shells and that she gave him all the shells. She said Mr. Steel was

convicted previously of shooting his stepmother and “a Mexican.” She said Mr. Stokes was

previously convicted of rape and murder.

When asked if she knew where the gun was buried, the Defendant said she knew the

“general whereabouts of the direction they went” when they left to bury it but denied seeing

them bury it. She said she overheard Mr. Stokes and Mr. Steel talking about where they were

going to bury the gun and about the victim. She said Mr. Stokes shot and set the victim’s

body on fire.

The Defendant said Mr. Stokes drove a white Ford truck. She thought they buried the

gun in the same place Mr. Stokes buried jewelry he took from the woman he raped and killed

years previously. She said Mr. Stokes gave her a piece of jewelry after he was released from

prison, although she denied having a sexual relationship with him. She said Mr. Stokes

attempted to convince her to leave Mr. Steel. Although she could not provide details, she

thought the killing had to do with money, Mr. Morgan, and Mr. Hope. When asked if Mr.

-19-

Stokes said he killed the victim, she said he told her, “You should have seen the look in his

eyes when I pulled the trigger.” She said Mr. Steel and Mr. Nipper were present during the

killing. She said she overheard Mr. Stokes and Mr. Steel when she was outside feeding her

roosters.

The Defendant discussed Mr. Steel’s drug use, which included methamphetamine and

pills. She admitted periodic methamphetamine use. She denied knowing the motive for the

killing but said she heard Mr. Steel say he owed the victim “a bunch of money.” Special

Agent Brakebill told the Defendant he heard rumors that the victim was having sexual

relations with a woman and that the victim was killed over jealously. The Defendant asked

Sheriff Bivens, who was in the interview room, if he knew Kristen Roberts. She said that

“there had been a whole lot of talk about her and Mike Morgan” and that Ms. Roberts could

have been the girl sleeping with the victim.

The Defendant told Special Agent Brakebill that he could search the house she shared

with Mr. Steel and said he would find methamphetamine manufacturing products. She knew

one of Mr. Steel’s guns was in the house. She did not know where the .38 caliber handgun

and the twelve-gauge shotgun were. She thought they might have been at Mr. Steel’s uncle’s

house. She agreed she did not know if Mr. Steel was involved in the killing.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that the Defendant cried during the interview and

told him she wanted to go home, get her belongings, and leave Mr. Steel, who beat her

routinely. He agreed the Defendant was afraid of Mr. Stokes. He said he arrested Mr. Stokes

and “sent him to prison.” He agreed that he asked the Defendant if Mr. Stokes had a reason

to kill the victim and that the Defendant said “it had to do with Mike Morgan, had to do with

money.” He agreed he did not investigate the Defendant’s statement. He denied, though,

changing the subject each time the Defendant mentioned Mr. Morgan. He agreed the

Defendant also mentioned Ms. Roberts and Jennifer Hamilton. He agreed he told the

Defendant he heard rumors that the victim was engaged in extramarital affairs.

Special Agent Brakebill identified a map of a portion of Monroe County and

identified the location of the yellow house where the killing occurred and the location where

the victim’s body and car were found. He agreed the name Ellington was mentioned during

the investigation but did not know if anyone investigated the name.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that he completed the investigative reports each time

the Defendant was interviewed. He agreed the Defendant’s next interview was July 30,

2010, after she was released from custody. He said the Defendant requested the meeting, and

the video-recorded interview was played for the jury. In the recording, the Defendant stated

-20-

that Mr. Steel’s uncle, R.L., showed her where the victim was burned and that she had been

there previously with Mr. Stokes and “Shadetree.” She said she had never met the victim.

In the recording, the Defendant stated that when she and Ms. Sullivan were in custody

together, Ms. Sullivan told her Mr. Stokes took Ms. Sullivan to the woods behind his house,

identified the area where “they” killed the victim, and showed her where the victim’s body

was set on fire. She said Mr. Stokes told Ms. Sullivan this information to scare her. She said

Mr. Stokes had been arrested four times since the murder but was not in confinement. The

Defendant began to cry and said she did not want to go back to a cell.

A detective told her that Ms. Sullivan claimed the Defendant told Ms. Sullivan about

where the killing occurred and where the victim’s body was set on fire. The Defendant said

Ms. Sullivan was scared and knew more about the killing than the Defendant. She said Ms.

Sullivan told her about the recording device as soon as Ms. Sullivan entered the cell. She

said Ms. Sullivan was afraid of Mr. Morgan, although the Defendant did not know if Mr.

Morgan was involved. She said Ms. Sullivan stated that Mr. Nipper told Mr. Stokes “to do

it” but did not know why. She said she and Ms. Sullivan were separated before Ms. Sullivan

could explain. She asked them not to put her back in confinement just for her to find out the

reason.

When asked about the piece of jewelry Mr. Stokes gave her, the Defendant removed

a ring from her finger and gave it to the detectives. She said that after Special Agent

Brakebill asked about it during their last conversation, she looked for it because she thought

the detectives would want it.

The Defendant said the gun Mr. Steel took from their house was a black .38 caliber

revolver. She recalled one incident in September when Mr. Steel shot at Mr. Stokes inside

their previous house. She said Mr. Stokes bought the gun from Mr. Steel for about $100.

She said she did not know how Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes got from the shooting location to

where the victim’s body was set on fire.

The Defendant said that Mr. Stokes mentioned to her that he was accused of having

a conversation with Mr. Nipper when Mr. Stokes and Mr. Nipper were inside one of the “out

buildings” where she and Mr. Steel lived. She said Mr. Stokes accused her of telling the

police that Mr. Stokes and Mr. Nipper had the conversation. She told Mr. Stokes that “he

was crazy” and that she did not know Mr. Stokes and Mr. Nipper had ever met. She said she

first learned about the alleged conversation when Mr. Stokes mentioned it. She said it was

as though Ms. Sullivan was telling the Defendant what occurred but telling Mr. Nipper the

information was coming from the Defendant. She said that the day she and Ms. Sullivan

were arrested was possibly the day Mr. Stokes and Mr. Nipper had the conversation. She

-21-

said that she had known Mr. Stokes for about three years, that Mr. Stokes had a soft spot in

his heart for her, and that Mr. Stokes had falsely told Mr. Steel she was unfaithful. She said

Mr. Stokes caused relationship problems for her because he wanted to date her.

The Defendant denied talking to Mr. Nipper and said Ms. Sullivan told her Mr. Stokes

told Ms. Sullivan that she should have seen the look in the victim’s eyes when he shot the

victim. She denied she was present when the statement was made. She said the information

she was providing came from her “being on the streets.”

The Defendant said Mr. Stokes and Mr. Nipper came home around 10:00 a.m. the day

the victim’s body was found. She said the “word” was that Mr. Stokes and Mr. Steel killed

the victim because they were hired by Mr. Morgan and Sheriff Bivens. She speculated that

it was possible Mr. Stokes and the victim “had business together.”

The Defendant said that Mr. Steel took a .38 caliber gun from their house and that

three days later when he returned, he had a different .38 caliber gun. When asked if she

thought all revolvers were .38 calibers, she said Mr. Steel told her the guns were .38 calibers.

She said that after Mr. Steel returned home, he smoked “a joint,” left the house, and ran out

the side gate of their property. She said Mr. Steel was wearing camouflage pants that

morning. She denied seeing Mr. Steel recently but said he sent her a text message. She said

the police were not going to find Mr. Stokes because he was scared.

When asked if she knew why they left the victim’s body where it was found, she said

she did not know if Mr. Nipper told Ms. Sullivan. She said she did not know the extent of

Ms. Sullivan’s knowledge because they were separated when they were in jail.

The Defendant said that several months before the murder, Mr. Stokes and she were

driving around, that Mr. Stokes drove to the area were the victim’s body was burned, and that

they threw out tires from the back of the truck. When asked why she stayed with Mr. Steel

when he physically abused her, she said that she could not help that she loved him. She

admitted telling Mr. Stokes that he would be sorry, although she was afraid of him. She

recalled an incident when Mr. Stokes kissed her and said she became angry. She said she and

Mr. Stokes had a “love-hate relationship.” She said Mr. Stokes had “street smarts.”

The Defendant denied that Mr. Steel would talk to them about the victim’s death and

said that he would rather go to prison or have someone else go to prison than admit what he

did. When asked if she could find out Mr. Steel’s involvement, she said she believed he was

directly involved. She denied involvement in the killing.

-22-

When the special agent confronted her with rumors that Sheriff Bivens and Mr.

Morgan were involved in the killing, the Defendant said she did not believe Sheriff Bivens

was involved. She stated that she learned about the murder from Ms. Sullivan and that she

thought Ms. Sullivan was too smart to have been involved in the killing. She said she

received a text message from Mr. Stokes mentioning “Trav,” from which she concluded that

Mr. Stokes and Mr. Nipper knew each other. She said only Mr. Nipper’s friends called him

Trav. She said Mr. Nipper had a blue F-150.

The Defendant said that Mr. Steel’s clothes were bloody when he returned home after

three days. She did not know if the camouflage pants he wore were still at their house. She

said the blood was on his clothes from his chest down. She denied Mr. Steel’s hands were

bloody and denied seeing blood on Mr. Stokes. She gave the detectives permission to return

to her house.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that at the July 30 interview, the Defendant provided

her handwritten notes, which were received as an exhibit. Special Agent Brakebill read a

portion of the notes, which stated that Mr. Nipper had abused Ms. Sullivan but that Ms.

Sullivan was the only person arrested on domestic-related charges. Mr. Nipper was later

arrested three times, and Mr. Nipper became angry with Ms. Sullivan. The notes stated that

Mr. Nipper

took [Ms. Sullivan] to Head Creek and showed her the woods behind Boonie

Stokes’ house and told her that’s where he had taken Jim Miller. . . .

[A]ccording to Travis, Boonie Stokes then shot him in the head, standing by

his . . . trunk. . . . [Mr. Nipper] took her to his home and drove her . . . to [the]

location Jim Miller’s car was discovered burning. He then told her that’s

where they burnt Jim Miller and the car. He told her that he was telling her

this to warn her.

In the notes, the Defendant stated that Ms. Sullivan was not safe in any correctional facility

“controlled by” Sheriff Bivens, Mr. Morgan, or their families. The Defendant stated that the

house, pond, and wooded areas at Head of Creek needed searching because this was Mr.

Stokes’s “safe place,” although Mr. Stokes’s friend “Shadetree” probably helped Mr. Stokes

leave the state. The Defendant stated that Mr. Stokes’s girlfriend’s mother’s property needed

searching.

Special Agent Brakebill testified consistently with his suppression hearing testimony

regarding allegations that Mr. Hope claimed to have killed the victim and the victim’s wife

receiving a telephone call from an unknown man threatening to kill the victim. He stated that

the Defendant and Mr. Steel had a four-year relationship, that the Defendant was afraid of

-23-

Mr. Steel, and that he did not believe the Defendant was prevented from leaving Mr. Steel.

When presented with his testimony from a pretrial hearing, he agreed he testified previously

that the Defendant said Mr. Steel told her continuously that he could “get” to her.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that at the time of the killing, Mr. Morgan was the

captain of detectives for the sheriff’s office but denied that the Defendant said Mr. Morgan

was involved in the killing. He said the Defendant stated that Mr. Morgan “was sleeping

with some people.” When presented with his testimony from a pretrial hearing, he agreed

he testified previously that the Defendant said “the sheriff and Mike Morgan” were involved

in the killing. When asked at the trial if he investigated Sheriff Bivens and Mr. Morgan, he

said no information implicated them in the killing.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that Ms. Sullivan told him her information came

from the Defendant, although the Defendant identified Ms. Sullivan as her information

source. When presented with a portion of his investigative report, he agreed the report

showed that Ms. Sullivan told Detective Scruggs she learned about the killing from Gene

Ellington, Mr. Nipper, and others. He agreed the report showed that Ms. Sullivan said Mr.

Ellington told her and Mr. Nipper that the victim was shot in the head and burned. He agreed

he did not interview Mr. Ellington and said he did not know if another investigator

interviewed him. He agreed he was the primary custodian of the file and said he did not

know if he received a report from another officer regarding Mr. Ellington.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that the Defendant was next interviewed on October

13, 2010, and that the interview was video recorded, which was played for the jury. In the

recording, the Defendant said she was sober and no longer using drugs. The Defendant

stated that she was pregnant and that Mr. Steel attempted to run over her with a car the

previous day. She said that Jill Coker was her sister-in-law’s sister and that Jackie Kennedy

was Ms. Coker’s sister. Special Agent Brakebill told the Defendant that Ms. Sullivan said

the Defendant provided Ms. Sullivan’s information regarding the murder. Regarding Sunday

morning after the murder, she agreed that she was at home with Mr. Steel and that Mr. Lance,

Mr. Stokes, and Mr. Nipper came to their house just after daylight in a Toyota truck. She

said the men went to one of the outbuildings and talked. She agreed she went to feed her

roosters and overheard them talking. She said that at the time, she was “geeked out of [her]

mind” and that the sequence of events was cloudy. Special Agent Brakebill “refresh[ed] her

memory” by stating “should have seen the look in his eyes,” and she completed his statement

by saying, “When I pulled the trigger.”

The Defendant stated that the murder supposedly occurred behind Mr. Stokes’s

property and that she learned Ms. Sanchez was present during the killing. She said that the

victim paid Ms. Sanchez for sex. She said Ms. Sanchez was at Mr. Stokes’s property earlier

-24-

the day of the shooting and left Mr. Stokes’s property with “Yankee” in his red Chevy Astro

van between 8:00 and 10:00 a.m. She said that when they returned, Mr. Nipper, Mr. Steel,

and Mr. Stokes arrived.

The Defendant stated that she overheard Mr. Steel, Mr. Lance, and Mr. Stokes talking

near one of the outbuildings and that when they were talking, Mr. Nipper was “messing with”

one of the dead chickens. On Saturday, Mr. Steel and Mr. Garrett were with her when she

was cleaning the house. She agreed Mr. Steel could not have been involved in the murder

but said she thought he knew something about it. She said she last spoke with Mr. Steel the

previous day. She said she learned the other information about the killing from Ms. Sullivan

when they were in jail together.

The Defendant stated that she knew who Ms. Coker was but did not know her well.

She said she had never seen the victim until his photograph was in the newspaper after the

murder. She said that Ms. Sanchez told her that she had sexual relations with the victim in

exchange for money and that the victim allowed women to stay at his house in exchange for

sex.

The Defendant was shown a photograph of Tabitha Atkins and told the detectives

where she lived. She denied the photograph was of Ms. Coker. She agreed Ms. Sullivan told

her that the murder occurred behind Mr. Stokes’s house. She said that the day after the

murder, she overheard Mr. Stokes say to Mr. Lance and Mr. Steel that they should have seen

the look in the victim’s eyes when he pulled the trigger. She said Ms. Sullivan showed her

the wire almost immediately because Ms. Sullivan did not want all the information coming

out when Ms. Sullivan was in jail.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that he was on a “fishing expedition” during the

October 13, 2010 interview. He identified the voice of the unseen person as Detective

Brannon. He agreed that the Defendant said she was intoxicated during the interview in late

July but that he did not think she appeared intoxicated during the October 13 interview.

Although he denied the Defendant’s demeanor was “chummy” with him and Detective

Brannon, he agreed the Defendant helped herself to a drink from the refrigerator and

admitted making methamphetamine. He denied reading the Defendant her Miranda rights

and said that he was not investigating drug-related offenses and that the Defendant was not

in police custody at that time. He said the only purpose was to determine who killed the

victim. He agreed the Defendant mentioned Mr. Morgan.

Special Agent Brakebill testified that on November 10, 2010, the Defendant was in

police custody again and that he interviewed her. He took the Defendant to the yellow house

and agreed a recording was made when they were there. He agreed TBI Agent Melton

-25-

interviewed the Defendant the same day and prepared a typed statement based on the

Defendant’s remarks, which the Defendant signed. He agreed that although he was unsure

of the dates, the Defendant was later incarcerated at the Meigs County Jail in late November

and made statements regarding the victim’s death to TBI Agent Legg. He agreed that Agent

Legg’s interview was video recorded but that he did not provide it to the other investigating

officers or the prosecutor. He did not know what happened to the recording.

Knox County Medical Examiner Christopher Lochmuller, an expert in forensic

pathology, testified that he performed the victim’s autopsy and that the cause of death was

multiple gunshot wounds to the head. He said the victim was shot in the left and right sides

of the forehead and the back of the head. He said the victim’s body was burned fully, and

he consulted Dr. Murray Marks, a forensic anthropologist, to identify the victim. The

autopsy report was received as an exhibit.

Dr. Lochmuller testified that no gunpowder stippling or soot were found surrounding

the gunshot wounds and concluded that the gun used to inflict the wounds was not placed on

the skin. He could not determine the distance between the victim and gun. He recovered one

small “missile” fragment, two medium missile fragments, and five large missile fragments.

He found a laceration to the right side of the victim’s forehead and concluded it was caused

by blunt force trauma.

On cross-examination, Dr. Lochmuller testified that the car trunk was extremely hot

and caused severe damage to the body. He agreed that if the victim possessed any money,

it probably would have burned in the fire, unless it was somehow protected from the heat.

He said the victim was found face down inside the trunk of the victim’s car and agreed he

could not determine which gunshot wound was inflicted first. He said that although he

expected some blood spatter caused by the gunshot wounds, he concluded the amount of

spatter would have been less because no exit wounds were found. He said that a pack of

gum, a ring, and a watch were found on the victim during his examination and that he gave

those items to the police.

On redirect examination, Dr. Lochmuller testified that the laceration to the victim’s

forehead was inflicted before the victim died. Upon examination by the trial court, he stated

that “several” unfired bullets and empty shell casings were found in the trunk near the

victim’s body. He agreed that he did not know if the unfired bullets and empty shell casings

were related to the victim’s killing or were inside the trunk when the victim was placed there.

Madisonville Police Officer Greg Tallent testified that he worked at the Monroe

County Sheriff’s Department at the time of the victim’s death. He said that on July 17, 2010,

he was the first officer to arrive at the scene. He said he responded to an unrelated matter

-26-

and saw smoke coming from a car fully engulfed in flames and that the car was parked

nearby at an old dairy farm. He said that he requested the fire department, that firefighters

extinguished the fire, and that the victim’s body was found inside the trunk.

On cross-examination, Officer Tallent testified that he found the car around 8:00 p.m.

and stayed at the scene until 3:00 a.m. He secured the scene after the victim was found and

denied moving the victim’s body.

TBI Forensic Technician Susan Clark testified that two “cans” of evidence were

submitted to the TBI laboratory for analysis on July 21, 2010, and that the evidence was

related to police suspect Brandon Steel. She said that although evidence analyzed might be

related to one suspect, the same evidence might be used against another suspect as long as

the evidence was analyzed for the same case number.

TBI Forensic Technician Laura Hodge testified that on July 16, 2010, she was

assigned to the microanalysis unit where she performed fire debris and gunshot residue

analyses. She said she analyzed the two cans of evidence, which contained ash, debris, and

charred clothes. She concluded that the substances inside the cans contained the “presence

of an evaporated gasoline range product.” She said that the product was gasoline, not diesel

or paint thinner. Her report was received as an exhibit.

TBI Forensic Technician Steve Scott testified that he worked in the firearms

identification unit and that he analyzed the bullets and bullet fragments recovered during the

victim’s autopsy. He concluded that two of the bullet fragments were consistent with a .38

caliber Smith & Wesson or .357 Magnum. He said that although he could not conclusively

exclude a nine-millimeter handgun, it was rare for a nine-millimeter to use the type of lead

bullets recovered from the victim’s body. He said the lead bullets were consistent with a

revolver. He concluded that three bullets were fired from the same gun. He said that the

fragments submitted for analysis were small and damaged and that he was unable to match

the fragments. He said the markings on the bullets and fragments caused by firing the gun

were rounded and large, indicating the gun was older. His report was received as an exhibit.

On cross-examination, Mr. Scott testified that two of the bullets and one of the bullet

fragments were fired from the same gun. He agreed that a gun belonging to the victim was

submitted for analysis, that he fired the gun, and that he compared the bullet to the bullets

and fragments recovered during the victim’s autopsy. He concluded that the bullet from the

victim’s gun and the bullets recovered from the victim’s body did not match.

Mr. Scott testified that firearms consistent with a .38 caliber class included a .38

Smith & Wesson, a .38 Special, and a .357 Magnum. He said a .380 caliber was a semi-

-27-

automatic handgun. He said that although it was possible for a .380 caliber handgun to use

a lead bullet like those recovered from the victim’s body, in his twenty-six years of

experience, he had only seen one lead .380 caliber bullet. He said most .380 caliber

handguns used copper-jacketed bullets.

State Fire Marshal Daniel Foster testified that he and Special Agent Gary Elliot

investigated the fire. He said that they went to the scene and obtained general information.

He said that he was also a K-9 officer and that he brought his dog, who was trained in

detecting ignitable liquid accelerants. He said the dog was trained and certified in detection

by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. The dog responded to the trunk and

backseat areas of the car and the ground near the rear of the car, indicating the presence of

gasoline. He collected debris samples from the backseat and the trunk for analysis. He

identified a photograph of the trunk of the car and identified the location of the victim’s

body.

On cross-examination, Agent Foster testified that bullets were found inside the car and

that bullets exploded in a fire. He identified an evidence release form showing that on

January 20, 2012, his office released to the Monroe County Sheriff’s Department one watch

and two rings belonging to the victim.

State Fire Marshal Don Cogan, an expert fire investigator, testified that he worked in

the Bomb and Arson Division and assisted Agents Foster and Elliot in the investigation. He

arrived at the scene at 10:30 a.m. on July 18, 2010. He said that Agent Foster led the K-9

investigation and collected evidence and that Agent Cogan wrote the origin and cause report.

He said the rear of the car and the trunk had intense discoloration, or burn patterns, indicating

the presence of a long, hot fire. The trunk and the rear of the car were stripped of paint,

primer, wax, and sealant, and only the metal frame of the car remained. The fire burned the

entire car but burned the hottest and longest at the rear and backseat areas. No signs of an

external mechanical failure were found.

Agent Cogan testified that heavy oxidation was found in the trunk and backseat areas

of the car, which indicated the presence of a hot fire that eliminated the oxygen and water

molecules causing rapid rust. He concluded that although the entire car became engulfed in

flames, two distinct fires began and later merged. One fire began in the trunk, and the other

on the backseat. He concluded that the car was set on fire deliberately. He found keys and

a reserve deputy badge inside the car. A copy of his report was received as an exhibit.

Monroe County Sheriff Bill Bivens testified that he saw the victim at a local restaurant

a few weeks before the killing and that the victim drove a “police-type” Crown Victoria with

a Sheriff’s Association medallion on the front license plate. He responded to the scene on

-28-

July 17, 2010, and when he walked to the front of the car, he saw a partial license plate in the

ash and debris with a Sheriff’s Association medallion. He gave the partial license plate

number to dispatch and asked dispatch to determine if the numbers matched any portion of

the license plate registered to the victim’s car. Dispatch matched the partial license plate

number to the victim’s car.

On cross-examination, Sheriff Bivens testified that he participated in some of the

Defendant’s police interviews, although he could not recall which interviews. He recalled

one occasion when then-Officer Morgan picked up the Defendant from her stepfather’s pool

and drove her to the police station. Although he did not recall the Defendant’s refusing to

talk when Mr. Morgan was in the room, he said the Defendant did not like Mr. Morgan.

Sheriff Bivens testified consistently with his suppression hearing testimony regarding

the Defendant’s confinement in the visitation booth at the Monroe County Jail. Photographs

of the booth were received as an exhibit. He denied hearing the Defendant state during the

police interviews that she did not want to return to the “cage.”

Sheriff Bivens testified that after he realized the victim was Mr. Miller, he called the

district attorney general to request an investigator and the TBI. He agreed he knew Mr. Hunt,

who was an investigator for the district attorney general’s office. He said he “may have”

wanted the TBI to lead the investigation because someone from his department was

implicated in the killing. He said he “was in the middle of an election as well[.]” He agreed

that defense counsel asked him to move the Defendant to another jail because of concerns

related to members of his staff and that he denied the request because his office had done

nothing wrong.

On redirect examination, Sheriff Bivens testified that at the time of the killing, the

Monroe County Sheriff’s Office did not have certified arson investigators. He said his

conversation with counsel related to moving the Defendant to another jail occurred in 2012,

although he did not recall when. He believed the Defendant was safe in his jail. On recross-

examination, he stated that the jail contained more inmates than it was certified to house and

that some inmates slept on the floor. He agreed there were more than twice as many female

inmates than available beds.

Monroe County Sheriff’s Detective Douglas Brannon testified that although he was

introduced to the victim once, he did not know the victim. He said that a Loudon County

Sheriff’s Department badge was found in the car and that he learned the victim was an

auxiliary officer with the Loudon County Sheriff’s Office. He said that he arrived at the

scene at 9:00 or 10:00 p.m. on July 17, 2010. He said that although the fire was

extinguished, he felt heat and saw smoke coming from the car. He identified photographs

-29-

of the scene. He learned a couple weeks after the victim was found that the location where

the car was found was not the scene of the killing. He said the murder scene was the yellow

house a few miles away. He stated that he and other officers took the Defendant to the

yellow house and that the Defendant said the yellow house was where the killing occurred.

Detective Brannon testified that although he did not interview the Defendant in the

first weeks after the killing, he participated in some of the Defendant’s interviews. He

recalled that during the November 10, 2010 interview, the Defendant said the victim was shot

with a .38 caliber revolver with a cracked handle and that she provided this information

before the firearm analysis was completed. The Defendant also stated that she helped place

the victim’s legs inside the trunk and that she pushed down the victim’s feet. He said that

about 200 people were interviewed during the investigation and that no one was omitted

intentionally.

On cross-examination, Detective Brannon testified that although he learned the yellow

house was the murder scene, he could not recall if that information came from the Defendant

or Ms. Sullivan. After having his memory refreshed, he said Mr. Ellington told the

Defendant about the murder and where the yellow house was located. Although he did not

interview Mr. Ellington, he did not know if another officer interviewed him. He agreed,

though, that he had seen nothing in the police file showing Mr. Ellington was interviewed.

Detective Brannon testified that the context in which the Defendant mentioned the .38

caliber revolver was that Mr. Steel had a .38 caliber revolver, not that a .38 caliber was used

to kill the victim. He said the Defendant also mentioned Mr. Steel had a .380 caliber

handgun inside their home, which was analyzed by the TBI and excluded as the murder

weapon.

Detective Brannon testified that the Defendant was in police custody on November

1, 2010, and was interviewed. The video-recorded police interview was played for the jury.

In the recording, the Defendant was upset and said, “This should not be happening to me.”

She was asked if she had talked to “Robert” since she had been in police custody, and she

said she had. She said Mr. Johnson knew where the gun was buried. She said she, Mr.

Johnson, and her brother Jeffery talked about the gun previously. She said Mr. Johnson did

not show her where the gun was buried, and she did not know how he knew its location. She

said she did not ask Mr. Johnson any questions because she did not want to know. She said

that she was tired of dealing with the victim’s murder and that she had been truthful.

The Defendant said that one night she, Jeffrey, and Mr. Johnson sat on the porch,

smoked “a joint,” and talked. She said Mr. Johnson told her that he had talked to someone

who knew where the gun was buried. She began to cry and said that she did not mind

-30-

helping the detective but that he “had to do his part” to get her out of jail on the simple

possession charge. The detective asked her to tell him “everything,” and she responded,

“How is that going to help me?”

The Defendant denied involvement in the victim’s death. She said that Mr. Johnson

told her Mr. Hope, Frankie Long, and Ms. Vires were going out “that night” and that Ms.

Vires “wanted out” but they would not let her out. The Defendant denied that it was she who

wanted out. She said that Mr. Johnson told her Mr. Hope was bragging that he shot the

victim twice in the chest and once in the head. She said Mr. Johnson told her “they”

borrowed a van, which she thought belonged to “Sherry.”

The Defendant stated that she did not know how Ms. Vires knew Mr. Hope and Mr.

Long and that the Defendant only had second-hand information. The detective read the

Defendant her Miranda rights, and she agreed to talk without counsel. She signed the waiver

of rights form.

The detective told the Defendant that he believed she was used and abused and placed

in a situation in which she did not want to be. When asked where she was when the killing

occurred, she said that she was cleaning her house, that someone dropped off Robert, and that

Mr. Lance, Mr. Nipper, and Mr. Stokes arrived. She said Mr. Lance, Mr. Nipper, and Mr.

Stokes walked to one of the outbuildings looking for a fuse for Mr. Nipper’s car because Ms.

Sullivan had removed it. She said she did not know what was going on at that time. She said

she received text messages from several family members asking if they were okay because

they had been “cookin’ dope.” Her sister saw the police and thought the police were coming

to arrest the Defendant and Mr. Steel because of the drugs. The Defendant said it turned out

that the police found the victim’s car. She said Mr. Steel left to look for a missing rooster

but did not recall when he left.

The Defendant stated that she believed Mr. Stokes, Mr. Lance, and Mr. Nipper killed

the victim and that Mr. Steel “knew something,” although she did not know the extent of his

knowledge or involvement. She said Mr. Steel left to find a missing rooster on Mr. Stokes’s

property, and she believed Mr. Steel “rode up on it” because it was hours before he returned.

She said Mr. Steel and Mr. Garrett passed a red Chevy Astro van on their way to Mr.

Stokes’s house.

When pressed by the detective about her being present during the killing, the

Defendant stated that she only heard about the killing. She said she did not know what

happened. She said that Mr. Stokes and Ms. Vires had a sexual relationship. The detective

said the story about Mr. Stokes and Ms. Vires “didn’t cut it.” The Defendant said she

thought Mr. Long and Mr. Hope killed the victim. She said Mr. Long threatened her but

-31-

minutes later she denied Mr. Long threatened her. She did not know the extent of Mr.

Long’s involvement and said Mr. Hope killed the victim. She denied knowing where the

killing occurred.

The Defendant said that she knew Mr. Hope and Mr. Long picked up Ms. Vires, that

somehow the victim ended up with them, and that Mr. Hope shot him. She did not know

what gun was used. When asked what time she woke Sunday morning, she said she did not

go to bed Saturday night. She said Mr. Nipper and Mr. Steel were “fighting chickens” inside

the house on Saturday. She thought that Mr. Steel and Mr. Garrett left and were gone most

of the day and that Mr. Steel returned without Mr. Garrett. She said that Mr. Steel obtained

a new tire for his Marquis when he was gone and told the Defendant he got a flat tire. She

said Mr. Steel left again and returned around 4:00 a.m. Sunday. She agreed that Mr. Steel

was gone most of Saturday and said that she thought “they” would hurt her. She knew Mr.

Steel would hurt her.

The Defendant said she was not present when the shooting occurred. She said that

she did not know the details but that Mr. Johnson knew the details. She said Mr. Steel was

“too stupid” to be scared and did not think he could be caught. She said Mr. Steel would not

hesitate to shoot Ms. Sullivan. The detective told the Defendant a rumor existed that Mr.

Hope was mad at the victim. He asked the Defendant if Mr. Hope did something to the

victim, and she responded, “If Kenny did . . . I don’t know.” She said her information was

from other people and denied being involved. She said Ms. Vires was “the bait” and denied

knowing the victim. When asked what Mr. Steel got out of killing the victim, she said

gratification.

The detective said Mr. Steel told them that the Defendant was present during the

shooting and knew what occurred. She said she did not know the victim and did not know

what happened. She said Mr. Johnson knew what happened because he was like a son to Mr.

Steel. She offered to wear an electronic recording device and talk to Mr. Johnson.

When asked how “they” burned the victim and his car, she said she assumed they used

gasoline or some type of fuel. She said she was not given the details. When asked where

they got the gas, she said probably from the gas tank. She said Mr. Steel threatened her and

told her “not to f--- with it.” She said they only cared about themselves. When asked what

benefit they received for killing the victim, she said they got paid, although she did not know

the amount. She did not know how they got the victim to Mr. Stokes’s house. She said the

guns were buried and told them to ask Mr. Johnson where.

The Defendant said that she had known Mr. Steel for three years, that he had

“something up his sleeve,” and that someone was going to get hurt. She denied that the

-32-

victim deserved “what he got.” She said that Mr. Steel and “the Mexican or the Guatemalan”

did “something” with the .380 about one year previously but that she did not know what. A

detective unseen from the corner of the room told the Defendant that she was going to be

charged with conspiracy to commit murder and that her friends would not protect her when

they were interviewed. The detective noted he had heard during this interview twelve

different versions of who was involved. She said she had told the truth, and minutes later she

said that if Mr. Johnson buried the gun, he buried it near the sawed-off gun Mr. Steel

previously buried near a barn.

Detective Brannon testified that the Defendant was placed in police custody on July

25, 2010, and that a forty-eight-hour hold was requested by Clint Brookshire. He agreed Mr.

Morgan brought the Defendant to the local jail. Although he denied the Defendant said she

feared Mr. Morgan, he agreed the Defendant said she did not like Mr. Morgan. He agreed

the Defendant refused to talk if Mr. Morgan was in the interview room. He said the

Defendant was released from custody but returned to police custody on October 29, 2010.

Detective Brannon testified that during the November 1, 2010 interview, the

Defendant stated she did not want “anything to do with this.” He agreed he told the

Defendant, “You have been used. You have been abused. You’ve been put on a spot. These

guys used you and they’re out strutting like a rooster. It’s time to turn the tables.” He said

the Defendant told many different stories and thought the Defendant could not “keep them

straight.” He agreed the Defendant claimed at one time that Mr. Stokes and Mr. Steel killed

the victim because they were hired by Mr. Morgan and Sheriff Bivens. He agreed he told the

Defendant her story was “bulls---.” He said that Mr. Corn was mentioned at the end of the

interview and that the Defendant became emotional each time Mr. Corn was mentioned.

Detective Brannon testified that two gold rings with diamonds and a watch were

recovered from the victim’s car. He did not know if the victim wore a third ring. He agreed

that if a robbery occurred, the rings and watch were not taken, although they were valuable.

He identified a photograph of the Defendant’s cell phone, which she provided to Special

Agent Brakebill voluntarily. The photograph showed a text message dated July 29 at 1:35

p.m. from Mr. Stokes, which stated, “You may suddenly disappear if you stay here.” Another

message from Mr. Stokes on July 29 at 1:59 p.m. stated that

I know you understand. I got to go find her for real, try to save myself. If you

ever listen to anything I’ve said, go on a short vacation, let me deal with this

– deal with this s--- here. I can protect you if you let me. I’ll be that way

tonight sometime if all goes right. I’m saving you a load. LOL. You may be

right about it all and everyone, but I will never tell on myself or the part I

played in it. I save myself first.

-33-

Detective Brannon testified that on November 3, 2010, the Defendant provided her

handwritten notes about the night of the killing, which were received as an exhibit. The

Defendant’s notes stated,

[She] and Bran got in a fight. He left with Garret. Boonie showed up

with Shadetree. They were in a van. Ronnie was in the van also. [She]

noticed when [she] got in, Boonie argued with [her] bout [sic] [illegible] w[ith]

them at first said they had somethin[g] to do. [She] was scared to death to be

home when Bran got back. Boonie saw that. We rode out to Boonie[’]s -

[she] sat in the van smokin[g] a foil when he got there . . . parked behind his

trailer. Shadetree, Boonie, and Ronnie had gotten out the van - could hear

them in bits & pieces talkin[g] asking Shadetree when “he would be there.”

Bran & Garrett pulled up - [she] got in the floorboard - stayed ther[e] til

Boonie [said] he was gone - that he had wanted to know if Boonie had his gray

rooster & Boonie gave him a wheel. Shadetree hollered for Boonie said “he

was almost there.” Boonie told me to stay in the van that they were goin[g]

back to the house he was watchin[g] for “Bo” - he would be back in a few - he

had “loose strings to tie up.”

[She] sat there w[ith] a strap-to-head geek lite on smok[ing] a foil &

decided [she] wanted to take a shot - so [she] got [her] shot ready - got blood

pulled back & then heard guy yell “God, No.” 3-4 gunshots followed scared

[her] so bad [she] bent the needle in [her] arm - still have the perm. bruise.

[She] was so scared. [She] sat ther[e] waiting geeked pickin[g] [her]

fingernail polish. Boonie out of nowhere - blood spattered on his face & hands

got in the van. Ronnie was wit[h] him - Boonie said “we gotta get rid of her” -

Don’t know where Shadetree was - Boonie told Ronnie they’d drop [her] off

at home & pick up T-Bone. T-Bone is what we call Travis Nipper. Boonie

took [her] home - and told [her] “don’t be another loose string.” Ronnie

winked at [her] and smiled - [She] got out the van [a little] while later. Trav

dropped Tiff off - when he came back he was in Black Toyota & had Alex &

Boonie with him.

The Defendant’s November 3 interview was video recorded, and although a small

portion of the three-hour interview was played for the jury, a narrative of the recording was

provided to the jury in the interest of time. The narrative stated that the Defendant requested

to speak with Detective Brannon. The Defendant asked for help but was promised no help,

and she acknowledged she understood. After the Defendant was read her Miranda rights,

the detective read the Defendant’s handwritten notes and reviewed the notes with her. After

-34-

reviewing the notes, the Defendant stated that Mr. Stokes had a gun and brought it to her

house to hide it.

The Defendant described what she saw rather than what she heard the night of the

shooting. She said she saw a “‘fat man’ with sandy hair” at the yellow house. She said she

saw the “diamond sparkling.” The Defendant said she, Mr. Stokes, Mr. Johnson, and

Shadetree left Mr. Stokes’s house and walked through the woods to the yellow house. She

said she heard someone say “he is coming.” She said that she entered the yellow house, that

she used the bathroom, and that when she left the house, she saw the “fat guy” parked toward

the woods. She said she sat down on the steps and saw from a distance Mr. Stokes, Mr.

Johnson, and Shadetree talking to the fat man at the rear of the fat guy’s car. She said the

men talked for about ten minutes, although she could not hear what was said. She said that

their voices became louder and that Mr. Stokes asked, “Why are you doing this?” She said

the fat man, who had leaned into the trunk of his car, turned to Mr. Stokes and said, “What

did you expect me to do?” She said that Mr. Stokes pulled out a gun and that she heard Mr.

Stokes “cock it” as the fat man said, “[O]h god no.” She said that the fat man fell and that

she heard two or three more gunshots. She said that she was “freaking out” and that

Shadetree said “something about having to do something with the girl.” The Defendant was

the only female present. She heard Mr. Stokes say that she would not talk to the police.

The Defendant admitted helping place the victim’s body inside the trunk of the car

and said the victim was “too big to fit otherwise.” She described Mr. Stokes’s retrieving two

fuel cans from the porch and said she carried one of them. She said that Mr. Johnson and

Shadetree drove to Mr. Stokes’s house in the victim’s car after the victim was placed inside

the trunk. She said they smoked methamphetamine and placed the fuel cans in the trunk with

the victim’s body. She said she and Mr. Stokes left in the van, and Shadetree and Mr.

Johnson left in the victim’s car. She said Mr. Stokes took her home and Shadetree and Mr.

Johnson took the car to where it was found by the police.

The Defendant described Mr. Stokes’s handgun as blue or gray with a wooden grip

and having a cylinder. The Defendant recalled that Mr. Stokes had the gun for a while and

that she had seen it previously. She recalled that Mr. Steel had a .380 caliber pistol. She said

Mr. Stokes’s gun was “like the cowboy gun.”

The Defendant denied meeting the victim and determined who the victim was when

his photograph was in the newspaper after the shooting. She said the victim’s car was the

same type of car as Mr. Steel’s car, except Mr. Steel’s car was brown and the victim’s car

was black. She said Mr. Steel drove a Grand Marquis. The Defendant said that “they”

manufactured methamphetamine at the yellow house, that she and Mr. Stokes had sex inside

the house previously, and that Mr. Stokes cared for the yellow house, which “Bo” owned.

-35-

Detective Brannon testified that the Defendant’s handwritten notes were different

from the November 3 recorded statement. He agreed that although the Defendant said Mr.

Steel was involved in the killing, she did not mention Mr. Steel in the recorded interview.

He agreed Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes were in police custody on November 3 because of

information the Defendant provided. He said the Defendant told the police that Mr. Steel had

a gun in their house, and during the search, methamphetamine products were found inside

the home. He agreed Mr. Steel would have known the reason for his incarceration and said

that if Mr. Steel communicated with the Defendant when they were both in police custody,

the communications would have been mean. He said that he knew the Defendant and Mr.

Steel communicated when they were in jail and that there was an incident involving the

Defendant and another inmate removing a brick from the wall, although he did not know if

Mr. Steel was involved.

Detective Brannon testified that he was not surprised that the Defendant did not

mention Mr. Steel during the November 3 interview and that the Defendant mentioned

different people each time she was interviewed. He said it did not occur to him that Mr. Steel

threatened the Defendant and that the Defendant did not mention Mr. Steel because she

feared him. He agreed that he asked the Defendant why her handwritten notes were

incomplete and that the Defendant said she was scared. He said that sometime after Agent

Melton interviewed the Defendant on November 3, he and Special Agent Brakebill took the

Defendant to the yellow house and that the Defendant re-enacted what occurred.

Detective Brannon testified that the Defendant was interviewed on November 4, 2010,

and the video-recorded interview was played for the jury. The recording was a “re-

enactment” of the shooting at the yellow house and was narrated by Special Agent Brakebill

as told by the Defendant. The Defendant said she left the house and sat at the end of the

porch. She saw from a distance four people, including the victim, standing at the rear of a

car with the trunk open. She said Mr. Johnson, Mr. Stokes, and Shadetree stood with the

victim. She said that the men were talking, became loud, and that the victim turned around

to get something from his trunk. She heard the victim say, “Oh God, no,” followed by three

gunshots. She said the victim began to fall, and she turned her head, covered her eyes, and

screamed.

The Defendant denied walking to the victim’s car. She said that the men put the

victim inside the trunk of the car and that they had “a hard time.” She said she walked home

through the woods from Mr. Stokes’s house, which was about 100 or 200 yards. She said

that Mr. Stokes and Shadetree each grabbed a gasoline container and that Mr. Stokes grabbed

her by her shirt and pulled her toward the victim’s car. She said she and Mr. Stokes walked

through the woods. She said that after she and Mr. Stokes arrived at his house, Shadetree

drove the victim’s car with Mr. Johnson inside to Mr. Stokes’s house. She said they entered

-36-

Mr. Stokes’s house and “got high.” She said they left the house, and Shadetree drove the

victim’s car with Mr. Johnson inside. She said she and Mr. Stokes followed Shadetree and

Mr. Johnson in a “maroonish-purple” van and drove to the location where the victim’s car

was found. She said, though, Mr. Stokes drove her home first. She said Mr. Stokes told her

not to “be another loose end he had to tie up” and apologized for getting her involved in the

killing. She said Mr. Steel was out looking for his gray rooster when the killing occurred.

She admitted using the house to manufacture methamphetamine. She said that Mr. Stokes

returned to her house over an hour later. She was afraid Mr. Steel would be upset with her.

The Defendant admitted telling various versions of how the killing occurred and

agreed she attempted to point the police “in the right direction.” When asked if she wanted

to say anything to the victim’s family, she said, “I didn’t know. I didn’t know.” She agreed

she had been read her Miranda rights “millions of times” and had waived those rights. She

admitted asking to speak to the police and agreed the police had not harassed her. She said

she knew how it felt because “Shawn was dead, too.”

In a second segment in the recording, the Defendant and two police officers drove to

Mr. Stokes’s house. She said that she and Mr. Stokes walked to the house after the shooting

and that Shadetree and Mr. Johnson drove to the house in the victim’s car. She said that

“they” put the gasoline cans on the end of the porch, entered the home, and “smoked dope.”

She said that they left the house, that they put the gasoline cans in the trunk of the victim’s

car, and that she saw a human hand inside the trunk. She assumed it was the victim’s hand.

She said that Shadetree and Mr. Johnson left in the victim’s car and that she and Mr. Stokes

followed them in the maroon van. The Defendant and the two officers followed the route she

and Mr. Stokes and Shadetree and Mr. Johnson took that night. She denied that she and Mr.

Stokes talked during the drive. She said Mr. Stokes took her home, and Shadetree and Mr.

Johnson turned on another gravel driveway.

Detective Brannon testified that the victim was about 6'1" and stout and that the

Defendant referred to him as the fat man. He agreed that the Defendant admitted being at

the scene, that she was scared, that she was sorry for the victim, and that she implicated Mr.

Corn in the killing.

Detective Brannon testified that on November 4, 2010, the Defendant also was

interviewed by Agent Melton. Although the statement was not recorded, a written statement

was signed by the Defendant and received as an exhibit. In the written statement, the

Defendant stated that she was advised of her rights and agreed to answer questions regarding

the victim’s death. She stated that Mr. Stokes came by her house with Mr. Corn, whom she

had been dating. Mr. Stokes told her that he needed her help, and she said she agreed to help.

She said that she left with Mr. Stokes and Mr. Corn in a maroon-colored Ford Taurus, that

-37-

they went to Mr. Stokes’s house, and that after they arrived, Mr. Stokes said he needed the

Defendant to “play the role for him.” She said Mr. Stokes told her that he was going to use

her to lure a man to the yellow house and that she was going to pose as one of Ms. Vires’s

prostitutes. Mr. Stokes told her that “while posing as a prostitute he was going to place [her]

in the yellow house” and that she only had “to look the role.” She denied knowing what was

going to happen to the man being lured to the yellow house but assumed Mr. Stokes and Mr.

Corn were going to rob him.

The Defendant stated that after they arrived at Mr. Stokes’s house, they “hung out”

and consumed methamphetamine while waiting for the man to arrive. She said Mr. Stokes

called someone mid-day and told the person he had a new girl who was “fresh meat.” The

Defendant said she was the new girl. She said Mr. Stokes used someone else’s cell phone,

although she did not know whose. She said they left Mr. Stokes’s house and walked to the

yellow house and that Mr. Stokes told her to go into the house. She said Mr. Stokes told her

to turn on the television in order for the man to see light inside the house and to think

someone was waiting for him. She said she knew Mr. Stokes possessed a gun because he

always carried a gun, although she did not see the gun that day.

The Defendant stated that she saw a car arrive, that she left the house and walked to

the porch, and that she and the man walked toward each other. She said that as the man

walked toward her, Mr. Stokes and Mr. Corn came from the woods. She said the man said

she was a “pretty young thing” and touched her face. She said she saw a large diamond ring

on his finger. She said Mr. Stokes pulled out a gun and cocked it, and the man turned and

said, “God, no!” She said Mr. Stokes immediately shot the man three or four times. She said

she “stepped out of the way as the shots were fired.”

The Defendant stated that after the victim was dead, Mr. Stokes and Mr. Corn began

to carry his body to the victim’s car and that Mr. Corn yelled for her to help load the victim’s

body into the victim’s car. She admitted helping them load the victim’s body into the car and

folding his “legs back to get them into the trunk.” She said that after the victim’s body was

placed in the trunk, the men agreed to meet at “the place.” She did not know what that meant

but said she knew “from the conversation . . . that Shawn and Boonie had already worked out

the details.” She said that she and Mr. Corn walked through the woods to Mr. Stokes’s house

to meet the car Mr. Stokes was driving. She said Mr. Stokes was going to drive the victim’s

car. She said she and Mr. Corn entered Mr. Corn’s car and drove to meet Mr. Stokes. She

said that before Mr. Stokes arrived on foot, she saw smoke from a distance and assumed that

it was the victim’s car and that Mr. Stokes used the fuel cans from the porch to set the fire.

The Defendant stated that she and the men drove Mr. Stokes home and that Mr. Corn

drove her home. She said that Mr. Steel was not home when Mr. Stokes picked her up and

-38-

was not home when Mr. Corn dropped her off. She said that later that day, Mr. Stokes, Mr.

Lance, Mr. Nipper, and Ms. Sullivan came to her house. She said she overhead Mr. Stokes

tell Mr. Lance and Mr. Nipper, “[Y]ou should have seen the look in his eyes when I pulled

the trigger.” She said the men were outside near a metal outbuilding. She said that Mr.

Stokes had a .38 caliber revolver, which she saw previously and assumed it was used to kill

the victim, and that he jumped over the back gate and went into a field. She thought Mr.

Stokes was disposing of the gun. She said that sometime afterward, Mr. Johnson told her

that he buried the gun near a barn.

The Defendant stated that if she helped lure the victim, she would receive three boxes

of pseudoephedrine for methamphetamine manufacturing but that she did not receive it. She

denied seeing Mr. Stokes or Mr. Corn take money from the victim but thought Mr. Stokes

took money because Mr. Stokes had money after the killing. She said that Mr. Stokes only

had money from selling the methamphetamine she made and that Mr. Stokes should not have

had as much money as he had at the time. She said Mr. Stokes purchased an expensive “set

of heads” for his car.

The Defendant stated that she thought Mr. Stokes involved Mr. Corn because the

Defendant was in love with Mr. Corn and would participate if Mr. Corn participated. She

said that she and Mr. Corn discussed going to the police but that Mr. Corn was found

“hanging from a tree.” She believed Mr. Stokes was involved in Mr. Corn’s death.

The Defendant denied seeing the victim before the shooting and said she learned the

victim’s identity later. She said it was her fault the victim and Mr. Corn were dead. She

apologized for telling partially false statements previously, which implicated people who

were not involved. She said she lied to protect Mr. Corn’s reputation.

Detective Brannon testified that he learned witnesses heard gunshots at 3:00 or 3:30

p.m. and that the victim’s car was found burning around 8:00 p.m. He agreed he investigated

possible motives for the killing and said one possible motive was an angry husband or

boyfriend. He agreed that Mr. Hope was employed at the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office

and that Mr. Hope stated he had killed the victim. He said that the victim and his wife had

been separated for some time when the victim was killed and that the police investigated with

whom the victim might have been involved romantically. He said that although the victim’s

wife received a threatening telephone call before the killing, the police could not identify the

caller. He agreed he investigated whether someone was hired to kill the victim, although he

denied the facts suggested a “hit man” was involved. He agreed the police also investigated

robbery as a possible motive, which was the accepted theory. He agreed the Defendant did

not admit being present during the killing, shooting the victim, mentioning being the bait, or

-39-

a robbery until she had been placed in the visitation booth for several days after returning to

police custody on October 29, 2010.

Detective Brannon testified that he obtained the victim’s cell phone records from July

17, 2010, and that the records did not show that a call to Mr. Stokes was received or placed.

He agreed this contradicted the Defendant’s statement that Mr. Stokes called the victim and

used the Defendant as bait. He agreed a suspect could confess falsely if he or she felt scared

and helpless or were threatened. He agreed he did not interview Sheriff Bivens or Mr.

Morgan, who worked overseas at the time of the trial. He said that during the November 29,

2010 interview, the Defendant claimed that Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes killed the victim, that

Mr. Steel forced her to be a witness to the murder, and that she thought Mr. Steel was going

to kill her. He agreed the Defendant was no longer confined to the visitation booth at the

time she made this statement.

On redirect examination, Detective Brannon testified that when the Defendant was

in police custody, the Defendant was treated the same as all inmates, was fed at the same

time, provided water, and permitted to use the restroom. He thought that it was significant

the Defendant mentioned seeing the victim wearing the two rings because the police had not

mentioned the rings to her.

Detective Brannon testified that by early November the Defendant stated that Mr.

Steel and Mr. Corn were not involved in the killing but that the Defendant implicated them

again when Agent Legg interviewed the Defendant in late November. He agreed that the

Defendant’s cell phone contained photographs of Mr. Steel, although she claimed she feared

him. He read a July 29, 2010 text message from Mr. Stokes found on the telephone the

Defendant provided to the police. It stated, “Boonie, not a threat, Angel, I’m just saying, if

Trav is the way you say, then you might want to consider leaving for a while. I would never

hurt you. I just want you to be careful, that’s all.” He read a second message from Mr.

Stokes on the same day, which stated, “Are you sure you know the truth? Are you sure you

know what you think you know? Whose phone is that really?”

On recross-examination, Detective Brannon testified that Ms. Sullivan identified Mr.

Hope as the person who shot the victim and “Gene” as the person who “cleaned up” by

burning the victim’s body. He agreed the photograph of Mr. Steel on the Defendant’s cell

phone was contained in a received text message. He said that Mr. Morgan processed the cell

phone after the Defendant provided it to Special Agent Brakebill.

Rebecca Keller testified that she called the police after she learned the victim was

killed and that she told Detective Brannon she heard three gunshots on July 17, 2010,

between 3:00 and 5:00 p.m. She said there was about a one-minute pause between the first

-40-

and second shots and that the second and third shots were back-to-back. She said that about

thirty minutes later, she saw a black Crown Victoria and a silver and burgundy van drive by

her house when she and her family were getting ready to leave. She knew a third car drove

by but only saw the dust from the gravel road. She said the Crown Victoria looked like an

unmarked police car. She said that Mr. Stokes lived about 500 yards from her house.

Duane Bowling testified that the victim was his cousin and that they spoke often. He

said that they had breakfast on July 17, 2010, and that he last spoke to the victim around 1:00

p.m. when the victim called to discuss purchasing cattle. The victim did not tell him what

he was doing or where he was, but the victim stated that he “ran into something” and needed

to take care of it.

Monroe County Administrator of Elections James Brown testified that he knew the

victim for twenty years and that he saw the victim at the Election Commission office at 1:00

p.m. on July 17, 2010. He said that the county was holding early voting that day. He said

that the victim carried cash in his money clip and that he saw the victim pay for pizza with

cash from the money clip around lunchtime.

Paul Cain, Jr., testified that he had known the Defendant for over one year, that he had

known Mr. Steel all of Mr. Steel’s life, and that he rented his house from the victim for about

seven years. He said that in July 2010, he built a barn on Mr. Steel’s property and that Mr.

Steel still owed him $40. He said that after he learned of the victim’s death, he went to “the

7 til 11” where he saw the Defendant and Mr. Steel. He said Mr. Steel asked if he heard

about the victim’s death and stated, “I didn’t have anything to do with it, because I don’t

even know the man.” He said Mr. Steel offered to pay the $40 if Mr. Cain came by his

house. He followed Mr. Steel home, and Mr. Steel paid him.

Mr. Cain testified that when he was at the Defendant and Mr. Steel’s house, the

Defendant asked him to install some new windows. The Defendant told Mr. Cain that she

had the money to pay him for his work and showed him “a decent wad of money.”

On cross-examination, Mr. Cain testified that the police interviewed him when he was

in police custody for having a methamphetamine laboratory on his property. He denied being

a convicted felon and said the drug-related charges were dismissed. He denied knowing how

much money the Defendant had but said it was not thousands of dollars. He said the money

was rolled up, not in a money clip. He was first interviewed by the police in July 2010.

Sweetwater Police Detective John Scruggs testified for the Defendant that he

participated in the early stage of the investigation. He identified his notes from July 25,

2010, and said he received a telephone call from Sweetwater Police Sergeant John Brewster,

-41-

who told him Ms. Sullivan had been arrested for violating her probation and claimed to have

information regarding the killing. He interviewed Ms. Sullivan, who did not mention the

Defendant. He agreed that Ms. Sullivan said her source was Mr. Ellington, that she told him

the murder occurred at a yellow house, and that he had Ms. Sullivan show him the location.

He said his interview and trip to the yellow house were recorded. He agreed Ms. Sullivan

was scared but did not recall the person she feared. Ms. Sullivan provided him with Mr.

Ellington’s address and telephone number, but he said he did not interview Mr. Ellington.

Detective Scruggs testified that Ms. Sullivan mentioned in her July 25 statement that

a firearm was missing from the Monroe County Sheriff’s Department. He submitted his

notes to Special Agent Brakebill or Detective Brannon and thought someone would

investigate Ms. Sullivan’s statement. On cross-examination, he stated that he and Ms.

Sullivan walked around the property surrounding the yellow house and that he looked for

evidence related to the killing but found none.

Monroe County Sheriff’s Chief Jailer Pat Wilson testified that the Defendant was

booked at the jail on July 25, 2010, that she was released on July 26, and that she was booked

again on October 29. He said he did not have the Defendant’s “cell movement” records

before November 3. He said the records showed that the Defendant was housed in a female

cell until November 3, at which time she was moved to a visitation booth for administrative

reasons. He said that if an inmate were not moved between cells, no transfer record would

exist. He agreed cell 6 was near the men’s cells and was separated by two walls and one

hallway.

On cross-examination, Mr. Wilson testified that the Defendant was transferred to

Meigs County on November 22, 2010, and that the Defendant returned on January 5, 2011.

He identified the visitation booths and said that they were used three days per week as

visitation cells for inmates to talk to their family and friends and that four days per week they

were used as holding cells. He said that on visitation days, inmates housed in the visitation

booths were moved to another cell. He said the visitation booth was 69½" by 37", which was

enough space for an inmate of average height to lie on the floor to sleep. He said the

Defendant was provided a mat for sleeping, three meals per day, water, access to a toilet, and

access to a shower three times per week.

On redirect examination, Mr. Wilson testified that the Defendant’s cell movement

records were not detailed and did not show each time the Defendant was moved from a

visitation booth to the hallway or another cell. He agreed that if the correction officer

moving the Defendant failed to make an entry, he would have no way to know when and

where the Defendant was moved.

-42-

Brandon Steel testified that he was confined in the Monroe County Jail and that he and

the Defendant communicated inside the jail. He denied threatening her and telling her to

“keep her mouth shut.” He said she walked the halls saying that she loved him. He denied

threatening her father if she refused to “take this murder charge.”

Mr. Steel testified that he was arrested on July 10, 2010, after the police found a gun

and methamphetamine inside his home and that he was a convicted felon. He admitted the

drugs were his but said the gun belonged to the Defendant. He agreed he learned that the

Defendant provided the police information that led to his arrest but denied he was mad at her.

Mr. Steel testified that his relationship with the Defendant did not become “nasty” and

denied that he shot at her, although he admitted shooting at the floor. He denied stabbing,

beating, and holding the Defendant hostage. He said their relationship ended before the

killing. He agreed the Defendant began dating Mr. Corn but denied threatening Mr. Corn.

He denied placing the Defendant in the trunk of his car on July 17, 2010, and denied killing

the victim.

On cross-examination, Mr. Steel testified that he had a motorcycle accident in July

2010 before the victim’s death. He described the injuries to his leg and said he could barely

walk in July 2010. He said that at the time of the killing, he was dating Rachel Graves, who

was present when the police searched his house. He agreed he and the Defendant wrote

letters to each other when they were in the local jail.

Monroe County Sheriff’s Investigator Conway Mason testified consistently with his

suppression hearing testimony regarding his participation in the investigation. On cross-

examination, he stated that he knew Mr. Nipper from a traffic stop one week before the

killing. He said that evidence was seized from Mr. Nipper’s car during the stop, that Mr.

Nipper was charged with weapon- and drug-related charges, that the evidence was placed in

the evidence room, and that the trial court later dismissed the charges. He agreed the seized

evidence remained in the police evidence room.

Walter Hunt testified that he worked part time for the Bradley County Sheriff’s Office

and that in July 2010, he worked as an investigator for the district attorney general. He said

he participated in two of the Defendant’s interviews, although he could not recall the dates.

He recalled one of the interviews began around 10:00 or 11:00 p.m. after the Defendant was

picked up from her parents’ house. He identified his notes. He said the law enforcement

agencies decided that the TBI would lead the investigation because of “previous history”

between the “the family” and Sheriff Bivens and other members of the sheriff’s office,

including Mr. Morgan and Mr. Hope. On cross-examination, he stated that he participated

-43-

in Mr. Hope’s police interview and that he verified Mr. Hope’s whereabouts on the day of

the killing.

Wallace “Boonie” Stokes, Jr., testified that he lived in the yellow house. He said he

and Mr. Steel were former friends. He denied participating in the killing. He denied sending

text messages to the Defendant and said he had never possessed a cell phone in his name.

He said he had never sent anyone a text message. On cross-examination, he stated that he

met the Defendant through Mr. Steel, that he and the Defendant had an affair before the

victim’s death, and that they met at the yellow house where the victim was killed.

Ellen Wilburn testified that in 2010, she was a corrections officer at the Monroe

County Sheriff’s Office and that she recalled the Defendant’s arriving in late October 2010.

She testified consistently with her suppression hearing testimony regarding the conditions

of the Defendant’s confinement. She said that during the time the Defendant was confined

at the jail from October 29, 2010, until she was transferred to Meigs County, Mr. Steel and

Mr. Stokes were incarcerated at the jail. She knew the Defendant and Mr. Steel

communicated when there. She said it was difficult to move the Defendant without Mr. Steel

“screaming and yelling and kicking on the door” of his cell. She said that although she could

not recall everything Mr. Steel yelled, she recalled Mr. Steel’s telling the Defendant to “keep

her mouth s. . . to shut up,” which he understood as a threat. She said that although she did

not hear Mr. Steel make additional threats, other inmates reported Mr. Steel’s threats.

Officer Wilburn testified that she was responsible for placing the Defendant in the

holding cell after each interview. She recalled the Defendant was either quiet or upset after

each interview. She testified consistently with her suppression hearing testimony regarding

her concern for the Defendant’s safety.

On cross-examination, Officer Wilburn testified that she worked the day shift from

6:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m. in November 2010. She agreed the Defendant might have been

interviewed outside her shift. She said it was not uncommon for inmates to be housed in the

visitation booths due to jail overcrowding. On redirect examination, she stated that the

Defendant was housed in the visitation booth longer than any other inmate.

The defense played several excerpts from the Defendant’s November 3, 2010 video-

recorded interview. In the recording, she stated that she heard gunshots and that the man fell.

She said she “freaked out.” The recording shows that the Defendant became upset and cried.

She said the gun used was buried behind “Sherry’s” house near a barn. She said the man was

big and Caucasian and had sandy blonde hair. She said “they” were hiding in the tree line

of the woods when the victim arrived. She said the victim’s car was dark colored. She said

she saw the victim turn and lean into his trunk and heard the victim say, “Oh, God no,”

-44-

followed by gunshots. She denied the victim arrived with another person. She said the

maroon van was parked at Mr. Stokes’s house. She said the victim did not say anything to

her. She said the victim and the men talked for about ten minutes. She drew a diagram of

the area where the killing occurred. She said the victim was standing near his car when he

was shot.

The Defendant said that she was inside the house when the victim arrived and that she

left the house and sat on the porch. She said that the victim, Mr. Stokes, and Mr. Steel

talked, that their voices became loud, and that she heard gunshots. She denied knowing what

the men talked about and speculated it might have been about “dope.” She said the trunk of

the victim’s car was open, and the victim turned and leaned into it. She said “they” shot the

victim, who fell to the ground.

The Defendant stated that she walked to Mr. Stokes’s house after the killing and that

the victim’s car was driven to Mr. Stokes’s house. The Defendant was permitted to smoke

a cigarette. She said that “they” took her home and that Mr. Steel was not home when she

arrived. The Defendant spoke very low and became inaudible. Special Agent Brakebill

showed her a semi-automatic gun, and she said the gun was different. She said the gun was

round, and the officers showed her a photograph of a revolver. She said the gun was bluish

gray.

The Defendant said she saw the victim’s hand in the trunk of the car and then spoke

low and became inaudible. She said they had difficulty putting the victim inside the trunk

of the car because he was a big man. She described the position of the victim’s body inside

the trunk and said they had to fold the victim’s body to get him inside. She said she and Mr.

Stokes carried gas cans from the yellow house to Mr. Stokes’s house.

Robert Hope testified that he worked at Heil Trailer International but had been a

Monroe County Sheriff’s captain in July 2010. He said that he knew the victim from his

work with the sheriff’s office and that he gave the victim a speeding ticket about three

months before the killing. He denied the ticket created contention between them but said the

victim “thought he was above the law,” ran blue lights inside his car, and carried a badge.

He said the victim had no reason to make his car look like an unmarked police car.

Mr. Hope testified that he recalled going to Jim Plemons’s home with Doug and

Brenda Stakely sometime after the victim was killed. He said they discussed the victim’s

death. He said he told them that the investigation was “all political” and that he did not

understand why he was questioned about the killing. He denied telling Mr. Plemons and Ms.

Stakely that he killed the victim.

-45-

On cross-examination, Mr. Hope testified that during his interview, he told the police

where he was at the time of the killing. He said he gave the police receipts from the stores

he visited, which was confirmed by store video cameras. He said he went to his brother-in-

law’s house later that night, although no one interviewed his brother-in-law.

Brenda Stakely testified that she knew Mr. Hope and Mr. Plemons but that she did not

know the victim. She said that sometime after the victim was killed, she, her husband, and

Mr. Hope went to Mr. Plemons’s house. She said Mr. Hope started drinking and became

intoxicated. She said Mr. Hope told her, Mr. Plemons, and Mr. Plemons’s wife four or five

times that he hated the victim and Doug Watson and that he killed the victim, put his body

in the trunk, and burned the victim “like the pig he was.”

On cross-examination, Ms. Stakely testified that her husband “passed out drunk” three

or four hours before Mr. Hope admitted killing the victim and that Mr. Hope continued

drinking during that time. She agreed that Mr. Hope made these statements about one month

after the killing and that the facts surrounding the killing were public knowledge by that time.

She denied drinking.

Jim Plemons testified that he knew Mr. Hope and Ms. Stakely and that sometime after

the killing, Mr. Hope and Ms. Stakely came to his house. He said that Mr. Hope was

drinking and became intoxicated. He said that they were talking about the murder and that

Mr. Hope “blurted out” twice that he killed “the pig . . . and stuck him in the trunk of his car

and burned him.” Mr. Plemons denied drinking that night. On cross-examination, he stated

that the Stakelys and Mr. Hope arrived between 8:00 and 9:00 p.m. and that Mr. Hope made

the statement about an hour later.

Dr. Kathryn Smith testified that she performed a psychological evaluation on the

Defendant and that she met with the Defendant on October 21, 2011, November 18, 2011,

and May 17, 2012. She learned that the Defendant suffered childhood abuse and received

previous psychological treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, bipolar

disorder, and schizophrenia. She confirmed the information provided by the Defendant

through various records and noted the Defendant under reported the amount of “adversity she

experienced throughout her life.” She said the Child Protective Services (CPS) records were

about 5" thick and showed a history of sexual and physical abuse, a history of neglect, and

the Defendant’s stepfather’s brother was convicted of aggravated sexual battery against the

then-five-year-old Defendant. She said the Defendant’s stepfather was convicted of

assaulting the then-seven-year-old Defendant. She said that when the Defendant was

fourteen years old, her uncle was convicted of sexually assaulting her and her siblings and

that the uncle was serving 101 years in an Indiana prison.

-46-

Dr. Smith testified that the Defendant moved frequently as a child, that the moves

“seemed to be . . . an attempt to evade” CPS, and that many of the homes were uninhabitable.

She said the Defendant was removed from the home frequently and later returned. She said

that the Defendant’s first psychiatric hospitalization was at age eight for “disturbed

psychology.” She said that at age seven, the Defendant’s stepfather beat her with a stick for

urinating on the floor, that he chased her with a knife and cut her hand, and that he attempted

to make her smoke marijuana. She said that from age seven, alcohol and drugs were

available to her inside the home.

Dr. Smith testified that she performed several tests on the Defendant, that her full-

scale IQ was ninety, and that a full-scale score of ninety to 110 was “normal.” She

performed two structured clinical interviews. She administered the Hare Psychopathy

Checklist Screening test to determine if the Defendant had antisocial characteristics, the

Wechsler Memory Scale test to determine if she had difficulties with memory, and a test of

memory malingering. Regarding post-traumatic stress, she provided the Defendant with a

life events checklist, which gave the Defendant the opportunity to describe her traumatic

experiences. She said another clinician administered the structured interview for post-

traumatic stress.

Dr. Smith testified that she concluded that the Defendant had post-traumatic stress

disorder, severe major depression with psychotic features, and dysthymic disorder, which was

a “low grade” form of episodic and chronic depression. She said that the trauma the

Defendant experienced as a result of the sexual assaults and physical abuse led to the post-

traumatic stress disorder diagnosis and that the Defendant lived in a chronic state of anxiety.

She said that the hospitalization records from when the Defendant was institutionalized at

age eight confirmed the trauma and showed that the Defendant had severe major depression,

post-traumatic stress disorder, and emergent borderline personality traits. The records also

showed that the Defendant had nightmares, had disassociated, was depressed, was suicidal,

and had thoughts of harming others. She concluded that the Defendant self-medicated to

“alter [her] mood and . . . mind” because the drug use began after the psychological disorders

were present. She noted the Defendant stated that methamphetamine made her emotionless.

She said that the Defendant’s violent and abusive relationship with Mr. Steel caused her

additional trauma associated with post-traumatic stress and noted that he beat, shot at, and

tried to cut her.

Dr. Smith testified that regarding the Defendant’s major depressive disorder with

psychotic features, the Defendant had a “better off dead” attitude and displayed symptoms

of major depression. The Defendant reported hearing voices since she was age eight. She

denied the Defendant had schizophrenia and said the Defendant’s mind was affected by

depression and had altered sensory experiences. She said the hallucinations ended if the

-47-

depression ended. She said regarding dysthymic disorder that the Defendant had periods of

irritability, pessimism, a gloomy outlook, and self-loathing. She concluded the dysthymic

disorder presented first and that the first major depression occurred when the Defendant was

age eight. She said the Defendant was previously diagnosed with major depression at ages

fourteen and twenty-three and received treatment.

Dr. Smith concluded that the Defendant had methamphetamine and marijuana

dependence. The Defendant used methamphetamine and marijuana several times daily from

age twenty-one, when her first marriage ended, to the time of her incarceration. She

concluded that the Defendant had borderline personality disorder and depressive personality

disorder. Regarding borderline personality disorder, she said it developed because of a poor

childhood environment with instability, unreliability, chaos, and abuse. She said, though,

that borderline personality disorder was not diagnosable in children but that it manifested in

adults who had unstable relationships and strong fears of abandonment. She said that the

Defendant’s “flip flop” in her relationship with Mr. Steel was indicative of borderline

personality disorder because patients with the disorder fluctuated between idolizing and

loathing loved ones. She said chronic emptiness associated with borderline personality

disorder made a patient vulnerable to drug use, self-mutilation, and suicide. Regarding

depressive personality disorder, she said that although the Defendant displayed

characteristics of the disorder, it was an “experimental disorder” that needed further research

and was not fully endorsed. She said it was similar to dysthymic disorder.

When asked if the Defendant’s psychological disorders affected her ability to exercise

“reasonable judgment” during interviews by persons in a position of authority, Dr. Smith

testified that the Defendant’s disorders made her thought processes “much less efficient.”

She said it was difficult to think when chronically anxious, depressed, and detoxifying from

methamphetamine, all of which occurred when the Defendant was taken into custody. She

reviewed the Defendant’s recorded police interviews from early November. She agreed that

the Defendant said she was threatened when in the Monroe County Jail and said that the

Defendant processed the threats differently from someone who had never been a victim of

the types of trauma the Defendant suffered. She said the Defendant did not perceive the

threats as idle and noted that the Defendant knew “bad people do bad things to people who

don’t have power.” She said that the Defendant’s ability to think was limited and that she

was without “higher order cognitive functioning involving planning and consideration of

consequences.”

Dr. Smith testified that given her diagnoses, the Defendant’s being confined in the

visitation booth and in isolation would have had “an even greater detrimental effect.” She

concluded the psychological disorders compromised the Defendant’s ability to plan, judge,

and consider consequences before being confined in the visitation booth. She said long-term

-48-

confinement in the visitation booth would have caused the Defendant’s level of distress to

increase, and over time, fatigue would have further affected her ability to think, plan, and

reason. She said that the Defendant’s history had not shown her help was available and that

the Defendant would not have thought to ask for help. She concluded that because of the

Defendant’s history of abuse, the Defendant was more vulnerable to do or say what someone

wanted her to do or say. She said the Defendant had survived and determined how to adapt

in situations where someone had power over her, meaning she learned to determine what

people wanted to hear and to satisfy someone with power over her.

On cross-examination, Dr. Smith testified that her three sessions with the Defendant

spanned more than four hours, five hours, and three hours respectively. She agreed her

diagnosis regarding drug use was based on the Defendant’s self-reported information and

life-long medical records. She agreed that her evaluation occurred after the Defendant had

been in police custody for one year and that the Defendant’s statements to the police occurred

one year before her evaluation. She denied interviewing or attempting to interview Mr. Steel

and said her conclusion that the Defendant and Mr. Steel’s relationship was violent and

abusive was based on the Defendant’s self-reported information and an interview of the

Defendant’s former father-in-law, Joe Strugill, who confirmed that Mr. Steel beat her.

Dr. Smith testified that she had not studied the “reactions of incarcerated persons”

regarding confinement. She said the cumulative effect of excessive police interviews had

a “piling on” effect. She said stressful experiences were more stressful when they occurred

over an extended period of time. She agreed that during the police interviews, the Defendant

asked the officers what they could do for her and when she could get out of jail.

On redirect examination, Dr. Smith testified that the time she spent with the Defendant

equaled the number of hours of recorded police interviews and that “the equation” would

change if additional police interviews occurred that were not recorded. She said the

Defendant under reported information due to repression of painful, repetitive trauma. She

said this was unusual because in most forensic evaluations, people told her every bad thing

that ever occurred because the result of the evaluation was supposed to help them get out of

trouble. She said the Defendant’s taking a soft drink and asking for tobacco products was

a type of reward for her talking to the police.

TBI Agent Jason Legg testified that he interviewed the Defendant on November 29,

2010, when she was in the Meigs County Jail. The recording of the interview was received

as an exhibit and played for the jury. In the recording, he told the Defendant that he did not

think she killed the victim, and she said, “Crazy people do crazy things.” When asked why

she wanted to “take the wrap” for something she did not do, she responded that she had three

kids and had already lost one person in her life. She said she was at home at the time of the

-49-

killing, heard sirens, and thought the police were coming to arrest them for making drugs.

She said she wanted her kids to live.

The Defendant said she told Special Agent Brakebill that the victim was shot three

times with a gun provided by Mr. Steel but that she did not know the gun’s location. She

said she told the police this version because “they” would hurt her children if she did not.

She did not want to be the person who placed “them” at the scene. She said Mr. Steel

mentioned owing the victim money, denied meeting the victim, and said “she never laid

eyes” on the victim until his photograph was in the newspaper after the killing. She denied

killing the victim and said she was not a cold-blooded killer.

When asked why she confessed, she said “they” were going to hurt her children,

although she refused to identify who “they” were. When asked to prove her children were

at risk, she said, “Well, Shawn is dead.” Agent Legg told her Mr. Corn killed himself, but

she did not believe he committed suicide. When asked why her children were in danger, she

said, “Because I know Brandon.” She said Mr. Steel played “a big part” in the victim’s

death. She said she was willing to spend the rest of her life in prison for something she did

not do to protect her children. She said Mr. Steel previously stabbed her and shot at her. She

denied knowing how the victim was killed. She said she would “like to get it off her chest,”

but she did not want to remain in jail. She said she was not going to help the police when

they would not help her with the simple possession charge. She said she was tired of helping

the police and wanted to be with her children.

The Defendant said the police had two people in jail who were involved with the

killing but that the police refused to do something about it. She identified Mr. Steel and Mr.

Stokes as the two men. She said that the police were going to let Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes

“walk” and that her children “were out there.” She said Mr. Stokes was cold. She said she

was waiting for the police to put the pieces together because she did not want to “put it out

there.” She denied that she was “holding back” information to benefit herself. She agreed

she lied in her previous interviews but said Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes were hired “to do a

job.” She said they were paid by two people. She said that the police might “get” Mr. Steel

and Mr. Stokes but asked about the people who hired them. She said she was scared and told

the police to figure it out. Agent Legg said that if Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes killed the victim,

they acted alone and committed a robbery.

The Defendant said Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes picked her up from her house on the

night of the killing, that they were driving the “purple-ish” van, that they went to the yellow

house behind Mr. Stokes’s house, that Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes each had a gun, and that one

of them shot the victim in the head. She said that she came out the sliding glass door, that

she heard the victim say, “It didn’t have to go this way,” and that she heard three gunshots.

-50-

She said Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes loaded the victim’s body into the victim’s car. She said

Mr. Steel drove the victim’s car to where it was found, and Mr. Stokes drove the van and

picked up Mr. Steel. She said that they left her in the woods, that she called Mr. Corn to pick

her up, and that Mr. Corn picked her up. She said Mr. Corn’s body was found on the

victim’s property.

The Defendant stated that the police put her in the drunk tank with Mr. Steel on one

side of her cell and Mr. Stokes on the other side and that they sent her threatening messages

through the walls. She did not know why they brought her the night of the killing and said

it was not the first time Mr. Steel had a gun and told her to leave with him. She said she

“freaked out” when the victim was killed. She did not know if Mr. Steel and Mr. Stokes took

anything from the victim’s car because they left her at Bo Coe’s house, where the killing

occurred. She said Mr. Steel threatened to kill Mr. Corn previously.

The Defendant stated that at one point, Mr. Steel said Mr. Morgan was involved in

the victim’s killing, although she did not ask any questions. She said Mr. Morgan, whom she

disliked, picked her up from her parents’ house once and stressed during the drive that the

Defendant was in a lot of danger.

The Defendant told Agent Legg that it was not unusual for both Mr. Stokes and Mr.

Steel to have guns. She said one had a .38 and the other had a .380. She said she found out

later from the TBI that the victim was shot with a .38 caliber. She said she saw the victim’s

knees buckle and turned her head. She said the victim was standing by the victim’s car door.

She said Mr. Stokes and Mr. Steel each had guns pointed at the victim but did not know

which one fired the gun. She drew a diagram of where the victim stood at the car and where

she stood on the porch. She said that gas cans were on the porch and that Mr. Steel put them

in the trunk of the victim’s car. She said the cans had been there before that day because they

were used to “cook dope.” She said she showed the police where Mr. Steel buried the

twelve-gauge shotgun he used to shoot his mother and told the police the two possible

locations of the .38 caliber pistol. She denied receiving money as a result of the victim’s

death and said they left her in the woods.

The Defendant stated that she next saw Mr. Steel two weeks later and that she did not

recall when she next saw Mr. Stokes. Agent Legg told the Defendant that the victim’s

weakness was women, and the Defendant said she had figured that out since she had been

under investigation. She said she was accused of luring the victim to the yellow house to

have sex with him for money and denied being a prostitute. She denied knowing why Mr.

Steel made her go that night. She said Special Agent Brakebill knew Mr. Steel and Mr.

Stokes were involved but could not prove it.

-51-

When asked what Mr. Steel said to her when he picked her up, the Defendant said he

told her that she was coming with him. She said that she replied, “Bulls---,” and that he

pulled out a gun. She did not know what kind of gun it was or if it was a revolver or semi-

automatic gun because her focus was whether he was going to hurt her. She said she knew

the difference between a semi-automatic handgun and a revolver.

The Defendant denied talking to the victim on the telephone on the day of the shooting

or at any time. She did not know who the victim was when he left his car that day. She said

she knew “Kenny” was the victim’s brother but did not know him well. She said that when

she was in jail, she talked to a woman named Miranda, who said the victim’s brother Kenny

“contracted the hit” on the victim. She said, though, she did not know if Miranda’s statement

was true.

Agent Legg testified that he told the Defendant the interview was being recorded and

denied that he read the Defendant her Miranda rights. He agreed the Defendant provided her

and Mr. Corn’s cell phone numbers but did not know if the information was investigated.

Upon this evidence, the jury convicted the Defendant of facilitation of felony murder,

facilitation of aggravated robbery, facilitation of burning personal property, and facilitation

of abuse of a corpse. This appeal followed.

I & II

The Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support her convictions

in that it failed to show that she substantially assisted in the commission of the robbery. In

a related issue, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred by denying her motion for

a judgment of acquittal or a new trial pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 29.

Regarding each issue, she argues that her November 10, 2010 statement was the only

statement offered as substantive evidence and was the only statement that should have been

considered for purposes of sufficiency of the evidence and her motion for a judgment of

acquittal. The State agrees that the only question regarding the sufficiency of the evidence

is whether the Defendant knowingly furnished substantial assistance in the robbery and

argues the evidence is sufficient in this regard. The State disagrees that the Defendant’s

November 10 statement was the only statement offered as substantive evidence. We

conclude that the Defendant is not entitled to relief.

On appellate review of a denial of a motion for a judgment of acquittal, we apply the

same standard as a question of the sufficiency of the evidence. See, e.g., State v. Brewer, 945

S.W.2d 803, 805 n.2 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997). O u r s t a n d ar d o f r e v i e w w h e n t h e

sufficiency of the evidence is questioned on appeal is “whether, after viewing the evidence

-52-

in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the

essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S.

307, 319 (1979). We do not reweigh the evidence but presume that the trier of fact has

resolved all conflicts in the testimony and drawn all reasonable inferences from the evidence

in favor of the State. See State v. Sheffield, 676 S.W.2d 542, 547 (Tenn. 1984); State v.

Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832, 835 (Tenn. 1978). Questions about witness credibility are

resolved by the jury. See State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651, 659 (Tenn. 1997). “‘A crime may

be established by direct evidence, circumstantial evidence, or a combination of the two.’”

State v. Sutton, 166 S.W.3d 686, 691 (Tenn. 2005) (quoting State v. Hall, 976 S.W.2d 121,

140 (Tenn. 1998)).

Circumstantial evidence alone may be sufficient to support a conviction. State v.

Richmond, 7 S.W.3d 90, 91 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999); State v. Buttrey, 756 S.W.2d 718, 721

(Tenn. Crim. App. 1988). The standard of proof is the same, whether the evidence is direct

or circumstantial. State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370, 379 (Tenn. 2011). Likewise, appellate

review of the convicting evidence “‘is the same whether the conviction is based upon direct

or circumstantial evidence.’” Id. (quoting State v. Hanson, 279 S.W.3d 265, 275 (Tenn.

2009)).

Regarding the Defendant’s police statement, the record shows that the State offered

her November 10, 2010 statement in its case-in-chief. The remaining statements were

offered by the Defendant on cross-examination of the State’s witnesses or in her case-in-

chief. The statement most notably at issue is the Defendant’s November 3 statement in

which she detailed her acting as bait to lure the victim to the scene and her carrying gas cans

after the killing. She argues that the statements she offered were “solely for the purpose of

impeaching her November 10, 2010 statement” and were not substantive evidence.

The record shows that before the trial, the Defendant sought admission of all her

statements to the police on the basis that they were relevant and admissible under Tennessee

Rules of Evidence 106, 401 and 402. She further argued that her November 26, 2010 and

January 13, 2011 statements qualified as a state of mind exception to the hearsay rule. The

trial court granted the Defendant’s motion to present all of the Defendant’s statements

pursuant to the rule of completeness in Tennessee Rule of Evidence 106 and to permit the

jury to consider the “context and circumstances in which the [November 10, 2010] statement

was given.” The court also stated, “Many of the statements [were] not being admitted for the

truth of the matter asserted, and therefore those statements [were] non hearsay.” The court

did not specify the statements to which it was refer

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.