# Appendix — Milton v. Wainwright > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386414_0045%3A1 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1972 - **Citation:** 407 U.S. 371 ## Text 4 a) cht . / ; le | - - | \e \ 7 pao tugmspnp, - 10 19PAQ) 24B(F * pays) pratnon) vio sujuyodde tapsg ae [voddy Jo od1ON 8; ores 04 nqunexo 8U poly (sounjoa a) qd wit MND ons, o% . ,. o $ s ; Hurpooporg “ \e a J OPWOYTPAI) 8, YAN ‘VOSN ‘Pre. “osuodsod or une, 4 vue Os em. JOO _ oye 4 - 7, f 5 we a¢ D: STATES hak i CouRT ° SovuTHERN: District oF FLorma’ QO In tHe Us Ws - ° .,. Persons in Sigte Custody Georce Wituiam Mittox, No. 64891 ] -Fill name and prison tiumber (if any): -of Petitioner” em a" eae : et yy oe ANo.669-705-Civ-CP a vst ° i. 7 - Lovie L.: WainwrRicHT ~- \ | :) Name of Respondent . 7 . . « J. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABE As. conrty~ | ‘[Filed, June 11, 2:34 PM °69, Joserit I+ Bocanr, Clerk} ' [Filing Ree In Forma sone dali J. I. Booart, Glerk) xstrverio NS, “(Read Carefully—Must be filed in Tripticate) In erder for this petition to receive consideratic © District Court; it shall be,in writing (legibly handwkitt typewritten), signed by the petitioner and’ verifiec (seta. rized), and it shall set forth in concise form the angwers to each applicable question. If necessary, petitioner play finish his artiswer to a particular question on_the reverse side of | the page or add an additional blank page. Petitjoner shall. — make it-clear to, which question any such continued ahswer refers. 7 Since every. petition for habeas. corpus, must be sworn 1 to under oath, any false statement of, material fact therein — may servé as the basis of prosecution and conviction. for perjury.. Petitioners should therefore exercise care ‘to ~ assure that all answers are true and correct. If the petition i is taken'‘in forma pauperis, it shall include an: affdavit (attached at the back of this form): setting forth inforfnation which establishes that spetitioher will be -: unable to pay ‘the fees and costs of the habeas corpus pro- ceedings. When the petition is completed, the original and both copies. shall'be mailed to: Clerk; U nited States District a) a e . a? a. , ° * a ey. ; » : : Ce 6 . techs Southern Thine of: ‘Florida, PO. ies 669, Miami, Florida. 1. Place of detention:” ‘Wlande ‘State Prison, Raiforg, Florida. - 2° Name and location of court w hich imposed. idles , ——- Cireuit: Court of ‘Record; Dade County, Florida. = & ‘The indictment mimber or numbers (if known) upon : which anil the offense or offanses for which sentence | “ “Was imposed : - : (&) indictment No. 1904-11 felony niurder .. . . (D> oaontenninntnen Sage ee enn See ponaet anes | te) Se sen eee, aan 3 . The date upon which sentence was imposed, and the. terms of the sentenee: (a) December 12th, 1958. Term of life imprisonment Bie eanecter Saas sap td won -------H--5-- — (¢) slater antes a, eben es bnene tein ee en 5. Check w hether a finding of guilty w as made . (a) after a plea of. enilty. — _(b) after a plea of not guilty v-. q oe (ce) after a plea of iiolo. contendere | - 6. If you were found guilty after a plea of not guilty, “F - cheek w hether fhat. finding was made by “ s 7 . ? (a) ajury / . ~ (b).a judge without a jury | 7. Did you appeal from the judgment of ponviction« or the : . Imposition of sentence? Yes ; 8. If you answered“‘ves”’ to (7), list .. (a) the name -of each. court to which you appealed: i. -District Court of Appeal,. Third District" ii. Supreme Court of Flor ida ee et ee ee . (b) the result in each such court to which you ap- pealed: _ Appeal dismissed without opinion Petition For Certiorari denied’ without opinion ~y Wile saweeen punpnwe ieee seta ole e et eee ley ; (c) as date of each such result : . i. .*June'28,1960 ~~ | . AG . ih November 29,1960 — ae a tte eregt--as--------22 ~~ 28 gan coer ee * « _ 12. Prior to this petition for you filed Ww ith respect to, this . ap (d) if kiown, citations of. any written opinion or orders enteted pursuant: to such results: ‘. i. Milton vs. State, 121 Fla. App. So. 496 (1960) il + Milton | vs. ‘State, 125 Fla. So. 880. (1960) | i, - acai eae cian es sore cen een cep reac acacia oe not so appealing: (a) . . . we _(b) , | (¢) , 10. State concisely the: grounds on which you base your al- -legation that 3 you are Being held-in custody unlaw fully : (a). Custody is unlawful because the same is based’ upon a judgment and sentence which was founded in part npon a confession which was inadmissible in evidence, because of being: ‘‘involuntary”’ - \ y . If you answered: “no’’ to @, state your reasons for . e (b) Petitioner was denied his. Fourteenth Amendment | _ Tight to Procedural Due Procéss of Law, and to .. receive, a’ fair trial when the said confession was admitted into evidence over the iP cialis objec- tion of defense counsel. ' 9 (e) a . “1, ‘State concisely and in the same price tie facts: which support each of the grounds set out in (10): fa) The allegations and Federal Constitutional Claims ° for relief are based conclusively upon the State. Court Transcript. The arguments _ predented in’ connection. with each of these allegations are’ set forth in a memorandum of law attached hereto. (b) ee Te a. {e). ; - _conviction 4 Veron, * (a) any petition i ina State of Florida court. under the | provisions of Criminal procedure Rule 1 of the Florida Supreme , Court? YES (b) any petitions in State or Federal courts for habeas corpus? : :-YES . (c) any petitions in the United States Supréme Court ‘for certiorari other than petitions, ifwany, already specified in (3¥2 NO ; OC (d) any. other petitions, motions or applications i in this : or any other court? NO 4 If you answered ‘*yes’ ’ to any part of (12), list w vith respect to each petition, ‘motion or application . 1G. (a) -the specific nature thereof; ~ i... Motion Under. Provisions of Criminal Pro- cedure Rule One. "Appeal, from thé order accuse the mule One’ .Motion. | , . Petition For Writ of Habeas Corpus. a Sora ep ireh heathens SS eect eget re oie eee pees (b) the name » and locatioa of the court in which each © was filed: . ‘L. f pecan pcgh than anna dean nnee heres nse nemnestnnnns Hi. Cireuit Court of Record, Dade County, Florida. ° District Court of Appeal, Third Dist. Mian, “Fla. 6 Supreme Court of. Florida, Tallahassee (c) the 1d disposition thereof: ° - a. + Motion Under C riminal peocecure Rule One, - denied - Appeal was dicnisea without written opinion af - Petition For Habeas Corpus, denied without . opinion - oe | ne ee eee ene ener (ee tcenene wee ccose oun (d) the date of each such disposition : “i July 12th, 1965, case No. 1904-H ii. January 15th, 1966, case: No. 45:812 ill. March 3rd, 1966, ¢ case No, 35; 173 | AV, | Ses - For THe Fier Circurt - No. 25612. - ‘GrokGE W. ee 7 “ji versus oo | “ Lour L. Warnwricut, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Appellee, © ~ | >. 1 A A ppeal -from ‘the United States District Court for the Sask Southern District of Florida. - (June 5, 1968.) Before- Brown, Chief Judge, Wwsom, Circuit Judge. id and Brewster, District- Judge. - : ~ Brown, Curer JUDGE: Appellant, who, is presently serv- ing a life. sentence imposed on December 12, 1958, for murder, seeks ‘habeas relief froni that conviction and sen- ‘tence. The Federal District Judge, without holding an evidentiary hearing. but on the basis of the State Court transcript, denied the relief sought. Appellant. here con- tends that his conviction was constitutionally void because an.oral confession as a matter of law was not voluntary and, '. in-any event,.it was introduced against him at trial without - proper procedural safeguards being taken to determine . $ 12, ? “ 4 mol fo a ; : ’ a - s ° » . a “o ° a . . dae . . ° F; , . - . 3 - e . . . ° . a bd oF : ee ee) . e ] = . 7 . . eee: defendant’ s ‘constitutional right at some stage in the proceedings to object to the use of. the’ “e." cae Pea | ae ; Sty | A ee teed ag : ; confession and to hie a afr hearing anit a réliable determination, on the. issue’ of vofuntariness, “- determination. uninfluenced by the trath-or issctgie of the confession.’ cos ; . } 4 a He F € “*The transcript of the record's in ‘this case e establishes that the trial judge heard testimony out of the pres- ’ ence of the jury,. including direct and eross examina- tion of the state’s witness “aiid téstimorty by petitioner himself; prior to making his: finding that. the onal -eonfession was voluntary. This testimony and finding comprises twenty-eight pages of the transcribed record. The procedure “afforded to detitioner at his trial in 1959 whs declared: by the Supreme Court in Jackson v.. - Denno, supra, to be the desirable practice for the de- - termination of admissibility of -confessions by state ~~ courts in cases-subsequent to: the 1964 Denno decision : ,.. *It js both practical and desirable that in cases . _'to be tried hereafter ‘a proper determination of voluntarifiess be made. prior to the-admission of.’ - - tl confession to the jury w hich is. adjudicating ~ ‘gull t orinnocenét. * * “Petitioner was giv en the beriefit of s ch a prior deterinination in. 1959. Nor did the effort té ‘comply with all requirements, of: due process.stop at that point. . ‘ When the jury was recalled,-and the’state’s witness allowed to’ testify as to the oral confession, defense counsel * was allowed to conduct an “exhaustive cross examination of this witness’ comprising some thirty- five pages of the reéord. Further, at’the conclusion of dosing arguments, the court charged the jury that they should’ determine whether the confession was. freély and. voluntarily made by, the’ petitioner and that if they did not determine, the confession to be voluntary they should exchide such involuntary statement from . their consideration of petitionér’s guilt.or innocence, but-eyen if voluntary it should be received and con- sidered ‘with great caution’, particularly if made after _ ‘the petitioner was incaxgerated and under arrest. The jury was. further charged that in making their deter- mination -. the. crepence to Pepgiven | to, such confession ; m .. >. ; 5 x ic os . é ‘ cee: | ~ - ee ee AON SINT ~ « Pe a ins Pee ak, lau) Nan e all ot the cireumst Ices surrounding its niteeanee ‘including the motives which may ‘have operated on the | petitioner and including: the harmony or inconsistency in itself or ith other “eyidence i in the case shouldtbe ‘fairly and fully’ considered. “Tt is difficut ‘to imagine how this trial judize boul _ have been more zealeus in his. effort to follow accepta: ‘ "+ ble procédure in’ maki y his determination that the’ , #3 - confession was admissifde Ss eyidenee of: petitioner's. +. guilt ard in charging the jury .in a fashion most likely to give petitioner every benefit of any reasonable doubt. 4 | ‘*Not-only did the trial Sudge¥Follow acceptable. pro- " - . ° .- eedure in- making his determination of the voluntary . . character of. the. confession. before admitting it into ——i—-—--~-.-____evidence before the Jury, but the record subckantiates his finding. In Daris-v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737, F412 (1966), the Supreme ‘Court spoke of the duty, » of a federal court in a colfateral proceeding wherein the question ‘ascii a confession. was involuntarily ° ; given is raised, ~~ . 3 4 . . ss £3 °°. to examine “the entire record and nek s an in- - c - dependent determination, of the ultimate issue of -, "es voluntariness.’ "oy : ‘. “The Supreme Court anplaaieed that aiweuce the se eS requirement of Miranda’v. Arizona, 384U.S. 436 (1966). er: that a defendant be advised of his right to-counsel and given certain warnitigs at the outset of. interrogation . was declared nonretroactive by Johnson v. New Jersey,- * 384 GS. 719. (1966), - = 66 6bhis | does not - affect the duty of . courts to - . Meg, *--~-“consider claims-that a statement was taken under — os attorney to be cautious about making any statements concerning his.crime. -He was neither a minor nor retarded nor physieally abused: in any manner, as: was the defendant in Reck v. Pate, 367 US. 433 (1961). It ig true that petitioner was deceived by police ° ‘officers into falsely placing confidence in his cellmate. But he was acquainted with this supposed fellow- prisoner for no more than forty-six hours. This is far . - from the situation in Spano v. People of. the State of New York, 360 U.S. 317 (1959). In that case the de-- ‘Yendant was confronted at 3:00 A.M., after eight hours - of interrogation during which his repeated ve | ‘for an attorney v were denied, by a policeman Who had » Bra aig ae Ge. cae » GE PRIA. SEE eR BE i I RD NY CR, -18 been his life-long ‘friend. He had previously confe Ssed ‘L to this supposed friend bys telephone and’ the officer managed at that late hour to falsely convince’ .the ex. |. -hausted defendant that. his call had endangered the _ officer’s job and that the welfare of the officer’s wife, three children, and* unborn fourth child depended on the defendant’s repetition of his confession. . This case - bears no resemblancé to those facts. ‘‘Here the petitioner freely chose to trust a man’ ‘whom he had known for a matter of hours, Nor, in- deed, are the facts of this case similar tothe deception | employed by the police i in Leyra v. Denno, 374 US. 556 (1954). In that case’ the defendant had been subjected to days of ivtensive police. questioning and was suffer. ing from an acutely painful sinus attack. In response +}. to his request for. medical attention for his sinus. con- -ditiom, he was told that’a ‘Dr. Helfend’ would give him medical relief. Dr. Helfend was in reality a psy- ‘chiatrist who managed after lengthy questioning and , encouraging the defendant to unburden his soul, to |" elicit from him a confession. In this case the pretended cellmate did not offer medical or spirual aid to peti- ° -tioner or subject.him to an ov er-powering barrage of . ‘questions. Indeed, he very carefully refrained from - seeming overanxious to secure information from peti: ~-tioner in the effort not to.arouse BuapieIoN concerning his motives. ' “In Massigh v. U nitéed States, 377 -U.S. 201 £1984), Stas Pair al the. Supreme Court wrote a cogent opinion denouncing . the use in evidence of incriminating statements delib- erately elicited by government agents after an accused | had been indicted but in the absence of his retained} counsel, as an‘abuse of the prisoner’s right to counsel } embodied in the Sixth Amendment to the Federal Con- * stitution. But the facts in Massiah differ significantly } from this case. In Massiah, government agents in- - stalled a radio transmitter in the car of the defendant. who was under indictment ona federal narcotics charge | but was free on bail. The use of statements by: accused ‘obtained through this device was condemned as a Vit @lation of his rm to counsel.' There is a compelling me OY SS ‘AY, difference: between a man tulicing to someone he frusts, completely ‘unaware that third parties are able to hear his conversation, and one who voluntarily, albeit fool- ishly, chooses to confide in a man whom. he knows seareely at all. a “Despite the recent-trend of decisions indicating -that:state officials will be held to an-ever stricter stand- ard in their interrogation of persons accused of crime, it is apparent that “the methods utilized in the effort to.arrive at truth in the investigation of the crime of: which petitioner stands convicted comported fully with the requirements of due pe ‘‘Therefore it is ‘ORDERED and Apsvu DGED that: Petitioner’ S petition for writ of habeas corpus be and the same is nereP ys , denied. | “Dose And ORDERED at Miami, Fistida’ this 15th ‘day of September, 1967. Charles B. Fulton, Chief - Judge.’’ - “ ey, i - [26] Nox, we are assembled here for the purpose of con- ducting the evidentiary -hearing previously ordered; but before we do that, Ikwant counsel for both sides to stand. and ‘Agree or disagree with each other or with the Court that the Court has narrated at this hearing the history of this proceeding, and the one that preceded it in this. Court and has ‘made accurate reference to the various _orders-and other matters that are involved. Couns el for the petitioner, is that so? | ‘Mr. if®ar: Your Honor, I think that vour Honor’ s state- ment is correct. , ? THE Court: Mr. McCrary? | Mr. McCrary: So stipulated, sir. * ¢ Tue Court: Is there anything that has been omitted that is sequential ‘with respect to the prenens posture ° of this matter in this Court? [27] Mr. Lazar: Not fram the petitioner— Mr. McCrary: I don’t know if it is important your Honor, but I don’t recall you saying that the petitioner did file a Motion of some kind with this court to get an Inter- locutory Appeal. . ing, may IT be permitted to make a brief statement to the | »-Court? . | “dicted on July 1, 1958 ard that on July in the cell with they petit: oRer, and secured from the peti- al bal ° . ; : . . . : - : . - ° . . r 7 . t = ART ETA OAL ELIT. at PN ARS RODS AES LOS ELLEN 0 LEAP IEEE. Loh SE ELE Ra NCB CPE BG TEE BO Se BRO a ee im : ° : p . 7 . : 7 ° - . : . 20) — “= THe Covcrt: This Order recites that. I didn’ t say clini because he Order that hi is been dictated recites that. Now, gentlemen, you may proceed. , Mr. Lazar: Be aes we proceed with an evidentiary hear- THe Cover: Of course, | Mr. Lazir: Your Benge as the Fifth Cireuit* ‘has recog. nized, the facts-in the mahr in this case, are not very mich in dispute. It is unis puted that the Petitioner was in. } Pret ourt: Tnthe State Court. Mr. Lavan: In the State Court, and that on July. 18 of | ‘that same vear, the State entered. upon, as the Fifth Circuit has rn nontioned, ascheme- whereby a police officer was placed tion er cértam ner nadie statements which were then admitted into P28}. evidence as an oral confession at the petitioner ‘s trialiy the State Court. J Now, With respect to-—— : ° 2 7 | Trre CocRT: Mi ay Tint errupt you right there? | Mr. Lazar: Yes, sir. | | Tie Court: To read ene ‘aragraph from the opinion of me Court of Appeal, to see if vou are in total agree,” ment owith at, with that Court's cf adi ne of the facts or the ! tote of the record. chat parceraph reads as folloas : +) “Tie foets from. fle State Court tra nseript dire not .et this freture very mineh dis; puted. Appellant was rested and indieted for minrder. At this time Appel- LV lant whe refaaped commseh Ao scheme was set up in e owhieha pol ce offieendiscuised as a prisoner was placed Ina two-man cell x ith: Anrellant, for about two days - but Appellant was not informed. of the officer’s true identity. The officer questioned Appellant about his -erime and obtained from him the eral confession of the murder of his Wife that was introduced against Appellant at trial.’ | a [29] Mr. Lazar: The pati oner would agree. with those facts and that those facts are undisputed, sir. THe Court: Does the State of Florida agree with. tat Ly, ~* oY “ 21 Mr. eee Yes, sir. Mr. Lazar: It is on the basis of those undisputed facts that—w ith respect to the merits of this claim, the petitioner would agree at this juncture to rely upon the record. es- tablished’ in the State trial court; and upon that record, your Honor, I believe that I have compiled a series of cases which conclusiyely: show that at the present time the peti- tione ris being held nnlaw fully in the Raiford State Prison,. contrary to his Constitutional Right and that -this Court shoul grant the Writ, Petition for same. Some of the eases that I will cite to your Honor, with the Court's permission, occurred either so ‘close to: the - Court's opinion in 1967, or after that’ opinion, that it is quite possible, with due respect to the Court that those opinions Were not considered by. the Court in its Order. ~ Tbe lie ‘ve that if I would be permitted to argue the peti-— oner’s case, on the undisputed [30]-evidence and facts, as weno stipulated, that these cases will conclusively show that the petitioner is now wrongfully being held. in the prison. Tiit Covrr: In connection with what you have just said, I refer again ‘to that portion of the opinion of the Court of Appeals, which was read just a moment ago and which, among other things said, and I quote— “The facts fromi the State Court transeript are not’ at this juncture very much disputed.’ *Now, do I understand from your statement that they are not at all disputed? - Mr. Lazar: Your Honor, I think. that at thé State trial it was disputed that the confession elicited Was not a truth-— ful confession, but the question of truth or falsity of the confession plays no part in this hearing. Tre Covurr: That is not what the Judge meant, the Chief. Judge, when he wrote this Opinion. ‘He says that ‘‘The facts from the State Court transcript ; are not at this juncture ‘very much disputed.”’ In other words, it is agreed that the transcript correctly and completely relates all of the [31] facts that went, into the dispute in the State Court. Do you agree with that? Mr. Lazar: We agree here with respect to this claim. Tue Court: Are you now stating that there are no dis- puted facts that you u know of that are salient to the resolu- 22..* tion: of this petition for a Writ of Hidbeas Corpus in this ‘Court? | -Mr. Lazar: Your Honor, I have read the record four * - times. I, have discussed. it with the petitioner. I-de. not “know of any other -matevial facts that could Be brought out =~ at an evidentiary hearing. L. _' THe Court: Sinéed differently, having: revit the reeord 7 “four times, and having devoted yourself to preparation f[ for this hearing, you know of no facts that can be developed — here today that are not already in ‘that record; is that what you are say ing? . Mr. Lazar: Not tomy knowledge. i. believe that the facts already in the record- conclusively indicate that the peti-' - ‘tioner’s rights have -been violated, contrary to the Consti-. tution ; THe Court: What you are saying is that if we stayed here all day with live-witnesses, you know of no facts that ‘could be dev eloped, that are nor, already present in this* record; isthat correct?) ) [32] Mr. Lazar: I have not talked with the State’ S only. witness. The only witness, in my estimation that would be material would be Mr. Lankford, w ho testified at the Biate trial. _ "I believe that w hat’ he said at the State trial sould be stated differently, but I am not sure that anything could be added to what he’ sid at the State trial. ’ ~ THE, @purt: .Then, to go back-to. the statement which you’made a moment ago, you know of no issue of any kind,. fact or law, that exists at this time, except the voluntariness of that confession and its. admissibility in‘ the trial at the State Court; is that correct? "Mr. Lazar:- It is in part, your Honor. I would not state | : that the question goes only to voluntariness. I think that there may be a semantic difference, but I think that: the United States Supreme Court, in the Massiah ease, has distinguished incriminating statements under the -circurn- stances in this case and Massiah from those which are, in - } fact, involuntary. -I think that the Massiah case stands for the proposition | ‘ that statements obtained after indictment, without the aid e 23:: ~ of counsel are obtained [33]. contrary to the Fifth and Sixth Amendments ° ‘and, the Fourteenth Amendment. Tue Court: All right. | To ‘state it another way, it is your position: today that this case is in a posture to ‘be. resolved solely upon the law | - question of the validity of that confession? hs oe Me Lazar: With respect to the merits of the claim, that js correct, Judge. . Deere ee tes — Tue Courts: Do you agree with that, Counsel for the” State? , : Mr... McCrary: Your Honor, ‘the State is of the opinion - that— With’ complete. candor,’ with ‘the. Court, the State _ doesn’t believe that there ean be ‘‘anything gained’’ from an evidentiary hearing or nothing new could be brought out in this hearing that is not already in the record. Twill represent to the Court that the State’s witness, Mr, Lankford—his testimony today will be the same testi- mony that he gave at the trial court on the State level and it will not vary, and I have already discussed this with © opposing counsel, that his testimony-is going to be identi- eal, maybe not w ord for word, but. that the general context — would be the same and the questions that I w ould propose “to [384] ask him would be the same questions that were askéd — at the trial court to establish the voluntarinesS or the involuntariness of the confession made by the Petitioner, | the defendant at that level. ae | . So, Iam of the opinion that—not I am of the opinion— the State is of the opinion that the question to be decided here is really a question on the: law, of applicable cases _ applied to the facts that we already have in the record. _ Mr. Lazar: If I may make ‘this one reflection, your - Honor, that the only possible difference that I can foresee is that my cross examination of ‘Mr. Lankford, although perhaps not brmging out -any additional material facts, “May, with respect to the voluntariness issue, if the Court reaches that issue—and I don’t believe that is necessary— but my cross examination of Mr. Lankford, perhaps, could ‘Testate some of the points that were made at the State trial. ‘Tue Court: I am going to, of course, give you a full Opportunity to state all of these cases ana to argue them, . ze : . , * ~ ; , . . : - c . : e 5 ‘ a : “ ‘ — 2 eens DOC LE Ps OAs RESALE ALE POET ae PAR, ED wr 27 eal t ae . 24 me ‘but what Iam trying to décide at this moment is what(if * . anything, can.be accomplished by calling.this witness to ~ the witness stand for a direct and cross examination. [35] Is he available? . Mr. McCrary: Yes, your Toner. Tue Court: Mr, Lazar; do-you want him called? |. - Mr. Lazar: Your Honor, we will rely on the record of the State Court. A THE Court: Entirely ? —*. oh ae Mr. Lazar: Yes, sir. mee | PA THE Cotrt > Now, you know that this man is av ailable and ready to testify, of course? . 7 | -Mr. Lazar: PLCSSIP.:> -*.. js Mr. McCrary: The State’s positioni is that we ean intro. duce ‘nothing more than what is in’ the record, and _ his ‘testimony would be essentially the same as it was im the : record i inthe State Cqurt. . _ ~. However, the State is prepared to pat him on, if neces. _ sary, your Honur. Tie Court: In other words, counsel for both sides agree that at this evidentiary hearifig, neither oLsthem know of | anything that can. be adduced that would add anything to . the already existing State Court record;.is that correct? ae , Mr. McC rary: Your Honor, I say that with absolute | candor. ° THe Court: And you do, too, Mr. Lazat? Le Mr. JuaZar: That’s correct. o . —‘Uxrrep. States District’ Court’, Sovrnery: District oF FLORIDA ; . GEORGE: Lig ILLIAM Mi TON, . se Petitioner, ee 1. %- t=) | No. 69-705-Civ-CF Lours L. WaiNwricut, . OPINION te Director, Division of Corrections, ° State: of Florida, . = + Respondent. ee 4 [File 4, Nov. 6, 1969, Josepu I. Bocart, Clerk.) Beginning i in June of 195 57 George William Milton told frie nds he was going with a girl named Minnie Lee Claybon “who had a steady job and gave him money. He didn’t like ‘her, he said, because she was ugly, and he’d rather not be seen on the streets@with her, but he liked her money. George was a boxer. He was going to be.a champion, he said, another Joe Lewis. He had the build for it, “at 6 feet . 2 inches, and 185 pounds. All he. needed’ was Minnie’s - ‘money so he could buy equipment and finish traiming. In March of 1958 George and Minnie rented an apartment together in- Miami. George asked the landlord if he knew of a good insurance company. During Marchand April of tHat_y ear George took out three life insurance policies on_ Minnie, with a combined value of $8,500, payable in the event of accidental death. .George didn’t have much money. In faet at one point he had to hock some clothes for $2.00, -but he kept those insurance premiums paid. During those same two months George repeatedly contacted: his girl- friend, Lucille Williams, telling her ‘he would soon be com- ing into a lot of. money “and would meet her in New York, - where they would be married. Late in A ar narine of May 31, 1958, George bought a cheap, eight-year old ear. The back doors were equipped with safety: devices which could be used to seal them from the outside so that children couldn’t get out. George and ‘Minnie had no: children, although Minnie was several months. pregnant. Sometime that night George secured o 29 | ; ee ' . - 2 . eemeeis a ee PR ANE a mares nes Aca: \ . rte TTF : S 2 : . ie PRC oO . - . : : : . . . ‘ od . _.the officer was being held on investigation of a murder charge. The officer remained in the cell with Milton one ‘night, the following day, and part of a second day. During that.time Milton was not told of his cellmate’s connection with the police force: Under iistructions from his superi- . _ ors, the officer questioned Milton as opportunities presented _ themselvé és in.an effort to elicit from him evidence concern- } ing the crime. The testimony of this police officer as to | ‘statements made to him by Milton during this period of’ - joint incarceration’ comprises thie oral confession which Milton charges was involuntary. : Milton argues that the oral confession was inadmissible because it wag obtained by coercive methods and, thérefore, involuntarily given. This allegation was exhaustiv ely heard . and determined adversely to Milton by the trial’ judge at this original trigl. Under.28 U. S.C. § 2254 this determination is presumed cotrect. The opportunity afforded Milton at his trial to estabXsh the alleged involuntary eharacter of the confession comported* fully with ‘the most,recent de- © }, cisions outlining the\yequirements ‘of due. process. sy 3 : In Jackson v. Denno 378 U.S. 368, 376-77. (1964), the U nited States Supreme Court emiphasized :. ’ the defendant? s sage Sepa right at some stage in, _ the proceedings to object to the use of dhe confession _and to have a fair hearing : airda reliable detérmination* on the issue_of : voluntariness, adetermination unin- + . fluenced by the truth or a thte confession. The transcript of the record in this case establishes that ©. _the trial judge'heard testimony out of. the presen of the > jury, ineluding direct and cross examination of the Statg’s | witness and testimony by Milton, prior to: finding that the»... | oral confession was voluntary. This testimony and finding © i comprises twenty-eight pages-of the transcribed record. ' This procedure afforded ta Milton at his trial in 1958 was: declared by the Supreme Court in Jackson v. Denno, supra, to be the desirable ractice for the determination of ad- tmissibility,of confessions by State Courts in cases subse- } quent ‘to/the 1964 Denno decision. Milton was given the | benefit of sucha prior determination in. 1958. Nor did the effort-to-comply with all ee of due — stop “| M ~ — . pe ® os : 4 c 29° at-that, point. When the jury was recalled, and Langford allowed to testify. as to the oral confession, defense counsel was allowed to conduct an exhaustive cross exaniination* comprising some thirty-five pages of the record. At th conclusion Qf -closing arguments, the Court charged t ‘jury that they should determine whether the confession was freely and voluntarily made by Milton and that if they did not determine the confession to be voluntary they should exclude such.involuntary statement from their considera- tion of Milton’s guilt or innocence, but even if voluntary it should be received: and. considered ‘‘with great caution,” particularly if made after Milton was incarcerated and under arrest. The jury was further charged that in making their determination of the credence to be given to such | confession all of ‘the circumstances surrounding its uttér- ance, including the motives-which may have operated’ on “Milton and including the harmony or inconsistency in itself _ or With other evidence in the case should be ‘fairly and fully’* considered. eo ‘ e a ‘It is difficult to imagine how this trial judge could’have | _been more zealous in his effort to follow acceptable proce-. dure in making his determination that the confession was admissible as evidence of Milton’s guilt and in charging the jury in a fashion most likely to give Milton every bene- ‘fitofany reasonable doubt. © oe . + Not only did the trial judge follow acceptable procedure ‘in making his determination. of the voluntary character of . the confession before admitting it into evidence but the - tecord substantiates his finding. In Davis. v. North Caro- _ hina, 884 U.S. 737, 741-42 (1966), the Supreme Court spoke of the duty of :a federal court--in.a collateral proceeding — Wherein the question whether a confession was involuntarily givtnis raised, | , to examine the entire record and make an independent a e * we . : % . . determination of the ultimate issue’ of voluntariness. - - . The Supreme Court: emphasized that although the require- ‘Ment of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966) that a defendant be “advised of his right to counsel. and. given | certain’ warnings at the outset of intetrogation was de- ; “ \ a — ; te . ; 4 a “ " , us ’ . : : “ . . . : (= . . . re a ‘overbear the defendant’s will to resist, thus constituting -eoercion. Townsend v. Sain, 372 U.S. 293 (1963) ; Ly nian ‘v. State of Illinois, 372 U.S. 528 (1963); Rogers v. Rieh. 7 his own folly. This case was tried six years before the if induced by officers or their agents from an accused after Court has declared Messiah retroactive, and this Court stating new priticiples of law, it merely restated principles : ee as : . 3 P : a 30 elared nonretroactive by Johnson v. New Jersey, 384 US. ' 719 (1966), this does not affect the duty of courts to consider elaims ‘that a statement was taken under cireumstances which ° violate the standards of voluntariness which had begun to evolve long prior to our decisions in Miranda and | Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (1964). 2 3 4 It thus becomes the duty of this Court to determine what } those standards of yoluntariness. were and whether thet were met in this case. The.test of admissibility of con- fessions as voluntary has been variously stated, but the requirement basically is that a confession must be the product of rational intellect and free will rather than being induced by conduct of state officials which might tend to mond, 365 U.S. 534 (1961). | : Despite assiduous efforts by counsel’ appointed to repre. sent Milton in this- proceeding, this Court is simply not | persuaded that Milton’s confession was anything but. . “freely and voluntarily given’’ as those words were inter. _ preted in 1958. Milton was a big, strapping heavyweight who- bragged of his prowess as a boxer. He was twenty- three, young and strong. Although possessing orily a sixth grade education, he could read and- write. Langford didn’t pressure him; in fact, the officer carefully refrained from | seeming over'anxious to secure information from Milton in the effort not to arouse suspi¢ion concerning his motives. It is true. that Milten was deceived by police officers into [ foolishly placing confidence in his cellmate. But this was Supreme Court indicated in Messiah v. United States, 31 U.S. 201 (1964), that confessions are involuntary per s }. his indictment while he is without assistance of counsel. No will not be the first to do’so. Counsel for Milton argues that } Messiah was not declared ‘retroactive because ‘far from. SS ees ee EEE i 7 . . ‘31. derived from Powell ve. Alabome. 287 U s. 45 (1939). How-. ever, the Powell case dealt with the Sixth Amendment right to appointment of counsel i in a capital case, a situation far . different from this case. Milton knew. w hat he was doing. He wasn’t intimidated by ‘the police, because he. didn’t even know his cellmate was a policeman. He had a lawyer -who had told him not to make any statements concerning | ‘his e ease, but he chose not to follow that advice. aan ' There has been mucli new case law since 1958 dealing with the voluntariness of incriminating -statements given by de- fendants. But the “Dade County Police Department was » confronted with a case in 1958 which it had to deal with as best it could under the law as.it stood in 1958. The police: would have been derelict in their duty had they failed ‘to utilize every available means to discover. the truth ‘of the . case. The crime was committed late at night, with no eve . witnesses. Milton planned it that. way and bragged to Langford that his was the perfect crime, without eye wit- nesses. The State songht its evidence as best it could. Disguising a policeman asa prisoner may not appeal to ‘delicate senses, but neither does murder. And the deception * practiced upon Milton was a time-tested tool of police - investigation which, at least :prior to Messiah, supra was _.acceptable to the Céurts. Young v.U mica ‘States, 107 F. 2d 489 (5 Cir. 1939). Finally, it should be pointed out ‘that even.if the trial judge had’ excluded this oral confessiori, the jury would still have had the benefit of an earlier tape recorded con- ° fession by -Milton, which was played twice at the ‘trial, once but of the hearing of the jury,. and subsequently in, - evidence. This confession was given several: weeks prior to the oral confession in the jail cell. Milton was warned of his applicable Constitutional rights before he made ‘the Tecorded confession. Although Milton argued -at his trial that this earlier confession was also involuntary,-he has: not pressed that claim in this habeas corpus proceeding. After a careful consideration of the facts of this claim " and the applieable casé law, this Court is led to the i inescapa- ble conclusion that Milton’s confession was freely and voluntarily given. Thereupon, it i 1S. 39 - : a OrpeRED and Ange DGED > that this petition be and ‘ite same is hereby. denied.’ Doxe and Orperep at Miami, Florida, this 6 day of Nov ember, 1969. , | ° /s/ Chafles B. Fulton Chief aa - ce: Mr..Grorce-Wittrm Mitos ~*~. Bruce E. Lazar, Esa. (Atty. for Pane Jesse J. McCrary, Jr., Ese., Assistant - Attorney General (Atty. for Respondent) aa bed ‘ . : by Unitep States. District Court SOUTHERN: ‘District OF FLORIDA _ * be. ‘GeorcE WILLIAM MILTON, — Petitioner, — No. 69-705-Civ-CF Loyre L. Watxwaisnt, Director © . ORDER Division of Correction, : State of Florida, Respondent. (Filed, Dec.-23, 11:55 AM,. *69, Josern I. Bocarr, Clerk] - The. two-volume Circuit Court record transer ipt ap- pended to this Order was delivered to this Court as an exhibit to the State’s response to this habeas corpus peti- tion. The case has now been resolved and‘a notice of ap- ‘peal has*been filed. In order that the record in the Court . of Appeals may be complete,itis ORDERED that the Clerk of: this Court shall file this tran- script with the records of this cause: . Doxe and OrpEeRED -at Miami, Florida, this 22 day of December, (1969. | ae - /s/ Charles -B. Fulton Chief Judge 7 ee: Du BBIN, SCHIFF, BERKMAN & Dussry : JESSE J. McCrary, JR. cial Attry. Gen. ¢ 33 IN THE ‘Usirep States Court or APPEALS Ss FOR THE FiftH Circvir > . No. 29064 Summary Calendar GEORGE Wittas Mintox, ar . Petitioner- Appellant, versus Lovie L. W AIN WRIGHT, Director, | Responde nt- Appellee. . —_————$——__—___1+—__ . prc from the U nited States District Court for the. Sauthern District of Florida ’ (June 23, 1970) Before BEL, Arxswortn and GopBoL D, Circuit Judges. ’ . Per CURIAM: George William Milton appeals pro se from the District Court’s denial of his petition fora writ of habeas corpus.. Milton is presently in the custody of the State of Florida under a sentence of life imprisonment. This sentence was imposed upon Milton’s conviction in 1958 for the murder of his ‘wife. We- conclude that the 34 . | : ® ) — s —=_- ~ : . : - . _ ; ° "35 habeas corpus petition was rightly de nied and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the Distriet Court.- This is the second time that.Milton has appealed to this Court frem a denial of habeas corpus relief. Previously, we affirmed the denial on the ground that-Milton had failed to exhaust-available state remedies. Mon v. Wainw right,. 5 Cir., 1968, 396 F. 2d 214. In accorilance with our decision, Milton moved the state court that had sentenced him to vacate the Judgme nt-of conviction under Flas R. Crim. P. 1.850. He was denied this relief without a hearing. ' Subse- quently, the Florida Supreme Court.denied leave to. aia his habeas corpus petition on the ground that it was a successive ‘similar «petition. We reree’ with the District Court that Milton has exlausted the state remedies availa- ble to him and, therefore, consider ‘the merits of Milton’ s claim. Milton, and an evidentiary hearing was scheduled on’ the merits of the petitioner’s contention that his oral confession to a police agent dixguised as a fellow prisoner had been In the court below, a lawyer was. appointed to represent _ involuntarily given. At the hearing, however, both peti-. . tioner and respondent agreed that further testimoriy Was unnecessary and that. the issues presented should be de- cided on the basis of the testimony adduced in the state | ‘trial court. After hearing argument from both sides, the District Court found that Milton’s confession had not heels - obtained in violation of the f fedéral constitutional standards applicable at the time of-his trial and when his conviction | became final. The District Court’s ovinion is’ reported. Milton v. Wainwright, S. D. Fla., 1969, 306 F. Supp. 929. Having carefully r reviewed the*record, we conclude that the District Court's findings may not be set aside as clearly erroneous. The District Court has comprehensively dealt With the issues preserited i in this case, and we affirm on the basis. of its opinion. We ‘add, however, the issue Whether the rule of Massiah-v. United States, 7 U.S. 201, 84 S. Ct. 1199 (1964), 3 is applicable to Milton’ s “confession = 1We have concluded on the merits that this case is of the character that does not justify oral argument. Therefore, we have directed the Clerk to’ place the.case on the Summary Calendar and to notify = parties of this action in 'n writing. 5 Cir: R..18. : . . 36." _is controlled by our decision in Lyles v. Beto, 5 Cir., 1966, 363 F.2d 503, which refused to apply Massiah retroactively. Accord, United States ex rel. Long v. Pate, 7 Cir., 1969, 418 -F. 2d 1028; United States ex rel. Allison v. New Jersey, 3 Cir., 1969, 418 F.2d 332. + - = AFFIRMED. “| | . i + Unitep States Court or APPEALS .For THE Firtu Ciecurr ‘Oetober Term, 1969 * ~ _ oe No. 29064 - Summary Calendar D. C. Docket No. civ, " 69-705-CF GEORGE Wins Mrirox, 7 _ 7 = = Petitioner. Appellant, ely versus - “oe ‘Louvre L. Warnwaicut, Director, Division of © Corrections, State of, Florida, Respondent- Appellée, 4 Appeal Hom the United States. District Count for. ‘the Southern District of Florida. Before-Bett, AINsworTH and Gopsotp, Circuit Judges.. J UDGMENT | This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of the record from the United ‘States District Court for ‘the - Southern District of Florida, and was taken under sub- ‘mission by the Court upon the’ record and briefs on file, pursuant to rule 18; ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, It is now here _ ordered and,adjudged. by this Court that the judgment of the said District Court in this cause be, and the same is _hereby, affirmed. oF og : Issued as Mandate: . * a - : a - ; June 23, 1970 © 37 Pe IN THE tt . Uy NITED Srares Count or APPEALS «©, * ; For tHe Firru Crecuir’ = ‘No. 29064 ° re ae Summary Calendar ; * \ , . : & y . ‘ . _ Ne ‘ 7 whys eine Appellant, : aN a versus. aa : \ Lovie L. Watxwricut, Director,” \ \. Division of- Corrections, State of Florida, Nout | pres sia abi A ppelley. Appeal fram the United States District Court for the \Southern District of Florida . «. Y - \. \ (July, 16, 1970) poe, 7+. fA In Petiriox FOR REHEARING’ | | Before Bett; Ars: SWORTH ‘and Gopsoui b, C ircuit Judges. ‘ Pge CormmM: Ne ‘ae Ir Is:Orveren that the petition f for rehearing filed in ihe |. above entitléd and numbered cause: be and the same is >, hereby denied. “\ ; / . ¢ § / . ~~ * , -— s 38 . £F * , Ix THE Cirevit Court oF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRcUIT Tue State oF FLonma — ' Georce Wiriu1aM MIETON, - ¢ IN. AND FOR Rape County, Fioripa. Sprinc TERM, 1958. ° ) ‘i - vs. . -Indigtment for first: de. ree murder also known as GEORGE ey eee Mirtox, .” , Defendant. Is THE NaME vaxp By ‘THE AvrHoriry ‘OF THE State OF /; Buompa: e- | ae The-Grand Jurors of The State of Florida, duly called, . -impaneled and sworn to inquire and true presentment make in and for the body of the County of Dade, upon their oaths, present that on the Ist day of June, 1958, within the County of Dade, State of Florida, George William Milton, ‘also. known as George Milton, unlawfully and feloniously and from a premeditated design to’ effect the death of - vne Minnie Claybon,.also known as Minnie Milton, did kill and murder’ the said Minnie Claybon, also known as’ Minnie * Milton, by drowning her; that is to say, the said George “William Milton, also known. as George Milton, from a. _ premeditated design to effect the death of the said Minnie. _ Claybon, also known‘as Minnie Milton, drove or caused to: be driven.an automobile in which the seid Minnie Clay bon, also knowri as Minnie Milton, was then and there an oc- cupant into a large body of water, to-wit: the Miami River, thereby causing the said Minnie Claybon, also known as Minnie Milton, to drown, -a further. and. more particular - description thereof being to the Grarid Jurors unknow contrary to the form of the statute in such cases mad de provided, to the evil example ofall others. eafod offending and. Against the ‘peace and ‘dignity of State of Florida. a /3/ Richard E. Ger'stein ' Ricwarp. E. Gersrern> State Attorney 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida. _ 39 St pln av . ‘ = . = y » / . ‘ . . Loy oS f a or cor . oe ay es ’ . ‘ yee - Ay : « . : eyes Ugh. | : a eS Bef Ly ve SPRING: Tens, 1958 No. 1904 Ho - a . ~~ ; ” \" ‘ j ee ENN Boxgn. In Th Great Court of the Eleventh J adicial oe eae we oe 4 Circuit in and: for Dade County, Florida. .. —p. \ hha 7 es | é Bot ay Cantis” Tite Stare or. FLomips ros, . "as ‘Assvep Aa ics an rei VS =: _ as . : oS ae 7 7275 a8. ( ~ yi . , ; ts 8 : ; . Ne a GEoKtE W TLLIAM | Miro, also. known’ as So ee A ae =o GORGE: Ala. TON, ? ee ahs en ) K “ARRAIGNED. ~~ i> . Def endant, * w’* “Bes Ola? 38 salty 2 . ie ." 7 _—— 7 4 - ‘ ‘ . EN, ca dar Not ‘Gent “hs eS . : : : + : 4 ** i : Ps R P . ‘ > a e 2 ° a : e 3 . . C : ». ” we . . LS - . oo ¢ . , . e - e a ” ‘ , - ¢ *e e 2 e \ : ‘ ; i « Pn « ® . & | « 1-8 ° . d a a ee .,! »f 8 |. ’ Pas et: \ . pen ax ss ‘\ se ts ine . > a ° : . “se ‘* ot, j ‘ e we, : re” o ’ S a s ; » ae .7 : « ® @we . . . al ” . « 7 : e es . . ‘ ‘ 4 7 . . ‘’ fs : as tt ‘ ‘ te - ree RB es * of ° . 5 s ; . . es » mee Fs oe vee “~~ Seas = } . ay ‘ > o . * we. : ‘ a* : fs Se 28 F e 7 - . — bad . / wes / . oo . ei * ‘ al asa . . Ee 7 aie . * ioe X s > mae a ‘ ea “2 * - . Oo ages . oe ™ = Mos : j % . ” ? . . et ae 5, Hy ‘ — = “0 : 0. eae ar ~ : ‘ ~ x » res : 7 “ . : : 4 ‘ : ‘ \ ‘ . cna . me: oa . - i. ; i m on ss Jes. ; 40 2 oe . ayy . 22%) ARCHIE Laxororp’ was lanea as a witness: on behalf: of the State; and ee ing. ‘been first duly~ aagrn, . Was examined and testified as | « — follows: ~ _ A ’ , . . os . Drktpct. EXAMINATION - - ' By Mr. Brock: | ° os .Q. Would you please state your full name? | A. Archie Langford, Jr _. Q. With whom are you connected? | A.’ The City of Miami Police Department. - Q. With what division-are you now working? A. Lam now working with the nareotics bureau... A Were you connected ‘with. the police departnient i in- ot ‘tay of this year? ¢ 2. aN : (245). A, Twas. aha? gt 7 > om ~ Tue Covert: W hat bureau dit Fou say? _ Tue Wiryess; I.am now assigned to the City of Miami Narcoties Squad® 2s ; : Q. (By Mr. Block) W ere you with. the. Miami Police De- “partment as of July of this year? A. :-Twas.: : -Q. Did you have ‘océasion to see one. George Milton in “July of this year? . ACT did. Q. Where did you see ehim? ? y The county jail. Q. In. what connéction did you See him in the county jail? d ‘yi ‘ leas also plaged in the’same cell with him. . : t i ’ - AG along with, him that that was probably right: So I said “Tf I get out of jail, if there is someone you want me [: 253] | contact, you tell me.”’ “You? re not going.’’ ‘“‘T bet Arrington can get me out. He is samedcoe to get a person out on bond.’’ He said, ‘‘No. My lawyer told me not to sontadl anyone. _» Iam not to give anyone information. ’? He said, “The only _ thing I have to give is my name, address and age. He said don’t give any more information.” ‘I asked about the statements he said. ‘He said, sey lawyer told me to tell them that when I went down to the investigation, that I was forced to sign those statements, the dotted line, and then they added statements to it.’’ I said,*‘‘ Well, that might hold: up. That’s a good’ case.” So we begin to talk. He told me, he said, ‘‘Do you like movies?’’ I said, ‘‘ Yes.’’ “Nid you | see the picture ‘Sw ect Fragrance of Success’! T Said, ‘‘ No. “‘That’s the -picture you should have seen.’ I said, | ‘“Why?’’ He said, “That picture was about a perfect crime.’’ I. said, “Perfect erime? There is no. such thing - that I didn’t have’ enough education, and that I signed on . as a perfect:‘crime. There is somebody going to knov | about it.’’ _ I said, ‘‘I almost committed a perfect crime, but mI i cua ‘left a gun in the. trunk of .a car. ‘They found the - gun.’? So he said, ‘‘That’s the thing I got against yo: - [254] all. When you do something, you supposed to do it by: yourself. You don’t have anybody on it. I committed a_ perfect crime because I was the only one that kriow-exactly - ’ what happened. I am the only witness.” . . : He said, ‘‘My lawyer told me everything: was going tobe | okay when I get out of jail. I left a lot of. money.’ ¢ «Where you going-to get money from?”’ He said, ‘My! wife has‘insurance.’’ I said, ‘‘You are not going to get any | money. . That was accidental. *? He said, ‘‘When you take a policy out on a person— He says, ‘‘T don’t want to, talk about it any more.’ _ So he'laid up on his bunk. j So I begin to try to get him to tell me what ea 4 aa says, ‘Take out a policy!" = about water and dtowiting hurts. his head. . So ‘we e finally: : beat around the bush. It was one or two o’clock at night and we was talking and he begin to tell me that he had took out a policy on this female, and that-he made a check by someone and that they told him the policy he took out wasn’t any good because it was a. straight life. He had to take out an accidental policy to collect this amount of money. So he said that iateMon he took out a policy. Then we started discussing about cowboy: pictures. He . knows quite abit of movies. He said that he [255] enjoy ed. - cowboy movies, that’s what he does on his time off is go to _ the theater. We started discussing cowboys and different “movies where perfect crimes wére almost committed. And | he kept stressing to me that he had —— the perfect crime. , So I was discussing a movie ‘Whose a cowboy. almost , committed a perfect crime. Someone blundered the deal up and that is the reason—he said, ‘‘That’s.the reason I told you that whenever you do something, do it by yourself. I will be out of here i in a couple of months. My: lawyer told me that.’’ He said, ‘‘ My iia told me don’t sign anything, don’t ’ talk te anyone, just give your name and address and that’s . all I have to do.’ ‘And he said, ‘“When the deal go ms I will have a large sum of money.”’ I said, ‘‘Large sum of money?’’. He sia, “Ta.” “to J - said, ‘“You mean from the’insurance?’”’? He said, “Yes, I am going to buy a‘lot of nice clothes.”’ He started telling me that he was a boxer and was going back and start a boxing career: After. that we talked and discussed boxing. I never did any boxing but I played foot- _ ball: He didn’t know too much about football. So we went -from:that subject and we just started different things that happened i in the: outside world. — Then we started talking a little while Siti 1256] I went into the full details, telling how the crime I was supposed | to have committed was done. Then he broke down. He started ‘telling me how he knew he committed the perfect _ crime. I tried to explain to him that theré was no such : thing asaperfectcrime. ~. : * After I finally convinced him there was no such thing as ae. Perfect — he began to tell the his story. ‘He said that 48 c this night he hada car. I thing he had the car for about "a week or two weeks, but anyway he expressed that the car had been bought. : He had his ‘wife go somewhere with him, up to Hallandale, if Tam not ital Anyway, on the way back, they cameé around an area, Highway No. 27. “W hy did you come’ that way?’’ So he didn’ t say any more about that, because it looked like T°‘ was pushing him. ‘too fast. So I éarried him. back. ‘‘What was up at the Palins that night?’’? He said he told me that a Negro band was up at the Palms. He begin to tell me that he came around Highway 27 again.° He also. said he met someone, brt he never tell me “who he met. So ‘he said he brought the irl direct ly—no, he say he was trying to make up his mind what he was going to do. There was a- ' Jot of traffic in the street, and- he went home, 5th Avenue, “and ‘parked. the ear. She had drank some’ beer and was sleeping. So he told me that he went liome and parked the [257] ear. in front of liis door, and he w ent in and done something. He went inside to carry his wallet and her w allet, one of . ‘them he carried inside the house and came back out and told her to get in the back seat. .He then said he drove down . to 5th Street around. in the area of 3rd Avenue. Anyway, he wound up saying he.was down by the river. His first _intention was to go into the water and get out: He changed his’ mind as the car was rolling; he jumped out then and he - said some white. people came back and tried to assist him after it was over, after the car had ‘gone into the river. “Why didn’t vou go.into the ear?’’ He said, because he didn’t want to go in the-car. I asked what-did he have to- do when he went home. He said he carried her belongings ~ - home and. kept:the driver’s license.’ He said, ‘Just in case | the police got me, I could identify myself. Mid fe “**You had a plan of killing her?’ He laughed and said, ‘*T told you I had committed a perfect crime.’’ So I played along with him. I gave him some candy. When I went in the jail, I carried six ten-cent candy bars, and I gave him’ one ™ , of the candy bars. °° , - Every time I went out of the cell; he would steal one and ) eat it. Knowing he was — So we. began to discuss a fo a movies and I tried to make him tell me w ‘hat. the movie, ‘Sweet Fragranée of Success,’ ‘if there was a perfect ‘crime inthe movie. . : Then afterwards, later on in the day, T was contaeted by. my superior officers and remeved from theeell, + Mr. Brock: May JI inauiré as to certain things up nnitil, this point, ask him certain: questions? IT believe the witness’. hasforgotten something. . * — -. TueCover: Allright. 0 ~~. io . Q. (By Mr. Block) Did he. ate ny time tell you why he had, killed her? [259] A. He: said before’ Mr.- - SannsTROM : I obiéet to this, — This. is leading and suggestive and hasn¢t: got: anything: to do Q.°(By Mr. Block) The answer is Yes or no. Answer: ‘it. Tue Court: It is out of the presence of the jury. Lam not able to determine whether it should: be in the présence ” . of the jury or not. 2 (By Mr. Block) Did he tell y ou that he had killed her? A. Yes. . Po ' Q. Whatdid he say? % fa Ls A. He said he had been ee mm. ins quite a «hile and - things were kind of ‘tough for him, and he had been work- ing. He told me he had been working on-Miami Beach as a ‘bell boy or some - ani He was in need of money, said lie had contacted someone’s smother ' or. father, or someone. They told dane ‘You are.old enor igh'to make money of y our own.”’ : ° ; . r . ° ° ef : . : ¢ . : : . ; . . 4 aj . 7 ‘ . ; ~ . : 7 . : e e . « . . . 50 He aid th it’s how ‘him and someone else schemed: to § ge this young lady’s insurance. After he found out he had the wrong insurance he hai ‘to change the policy and get one that was accidental. ; Q. Did he at any time. tell you. if he did anything to his car? : A. We started talking together, whether bi had [26( raped a young lady or not. He dign't want me to be unde _ the impression that he Was a rape artist, so he began-t. explain to me that she was, pregnant and that was th, reason She was.in the r back of. the car w ithout any pants on ‘So I said, ‘Gee, v heard about they told” you atte ther” girl. 9 oY me dian’t rape that girl. She Was my wife: she -was abox _ three or four nonths pregnant, s something like.that.’’ Ther: was something - on the back, of. the car. I don’t know wha! kind of a latch. He knew the name of it. It was on the door as and you couldn’t opén it from the inside, some. kind of : safety latch that you use’ when you drive with children iz the ear. That’s w hen I asked: him mene he had the car. ee He said he had it approximately one wo¢k. He gave me the. a . _-correct day. It, wasn’t much more han a bikoa ‘or tw " _ 4 weiks, ie Set Q. Did he say. anything about any loeks on. the car, on the’ > uiatile of the car? A. He said that on the. ear r door’ was some Kind of system where’ when you drive with kids in the: baek of the car, they usually place it around in there, There i is a loek ther: that, you can only. unlock from the outside. And he sail, about her being i in \ the sai seat was the reqeen | she couldn’ , get out: - = \ > i ee he, tell you if. “- had done any thing to ‘the (261). oe oo / ; 4. A. Well, he explained: to me > first that a knew that th . door was locked, and they had it fixed. There was.a specia} reason for putting her i in the hack—so she couldn’t get out. Q...When were you released from the cell? oe A. That Sunday following. 3 eer e —Q. About twodays later?» : i eee *. A. Abonuttwodayslater. . °° «=. | { * Q. Did you at any time lay a hand on the defendant. threaten him in any way? ...- r’ A. I was put in 51 bh A. "NoSI didn’t, peer 4 be ee Mr. Bock: Would you like to examine? ar Cc ROSS wg INATION, By, Mr. Sa AN DSTROM : @ What time rere you: first -put into this él e cell July 18th, around 7 7,or 8 o’clock, Q. You didn’t talk about the case that night? \. I tried to’ hint ‘around to” him;-but he was kind of aie He wanted to talk about other things first, SO I didn’t put the pressure on ‘him at all. Q. “nsw er my question, — ‘The answer to my. anes tion is no? . A. No, I didn’t talk about the e ease at all. - [262]° Q: When did you first get, around to talking « about. SNA: That motte: a . 4 .-theecase? ° : Q. And how many times hady you endear or ed to talk with him about his case? tt Sega A, Two or three times. | Q. Two or three times pefore he ‘sted: talking ahout : hisease atall? . - : . -A. Right. — | Q. Did ‘he tell you he was represented by a lawyer? A. Right. : Q. He also: said that the lawyer told him not to talk to. anybody else? - : es - A. Not to talk about any investigation. lea Pe tate - Q. He said not to talk tb any body i in the. eel]? ga A. Right. . JQ. In spite of that, he told you all of this tarsi A. After I convinced him Twas i in jail for. murdet. : —Q. After he told you that his attorney. had told him not- * to tafk with any body i in his cell about his case, then he told _ you this anyway? A. No; he just didn’t come right out and tell me. , [263] Q. All right. ing | did he tell you what kind of a’ carhehad? ~~ - 1 A. No, he didn’t tell me. ‘4 Tue Covurt:’ You are going inte what he was told. ss - think you are challenging. his’ testimony. It is all on the - . 5 : id - ' * e %; me, officer? . ‘A. Twas told not to advi ‘ise him 0 Q: You particularly got arranged to ge b) in charge of the ss qahgerra array for you. to: e hiscell? : es ae : p [273] Tue Courr: Anything further? os 4a Mr, Sanpstrom: No. —- = BOY fries ts ce ie Pas ae ee ; nate Iyworom, a. pee was pocatiod a: asa witness on behalf. of the State, aud saree 2 been previously duly risen cs (was S aseramce: and Aestafied oS sabe as follows :° =e oe oe "Dmect Exisoxanion aes of : eo oe a — Q. Archie, Yr eiieve re the jury retired, you ‘were ii? us that you were placed in the celi-with George _ Milton on Friday evening,-July 18th; i is, that correct? eg _. A. That’s correct. — ue > -Q. Approsithately what time is it thai you, were placed ~ in the cell? : ere Appretiinetely 7 or r8 o’dlotk on J uly 18th. | . Q. Who was in the cell? .: as “A. George Milton,- = * ee ee - -Q. Anyone else % ae AR aie oa ~ - «But I didn’t. do-it, my friends did it.” He Say, “Listen, you killed a white man, I killed a colored person.”’. He said, “ They don’t investigate too many killings.of Negroes. . If you kill a ‘white man, a Chinese, the Chinese. committee, . they: have got a.lot‘of money. Plast are going tg o do some- ae ’ thing to you.”’ Be eg oe i He: said, Siape’ you kiled a’ Chinaman, ihe Chidiese” now committee will have something to do.’ I said, ‘I hayen’t were’ crazy, too.’’ ‘ He: said, ‘‘I am not crazy.’’ So I says, * Re appened ? : I heard about it: I heard you raped — > He saigy ‘*T didn’t:rape the girl.’* I say, “Why | ‘didn’t she-have clothes on?” She. didn’t have clothes on.”” _ da skirt and blouse?’ 1-said, ‘‘They told me she - n’t“have any pants on.’ He said, “She. was . that girl. - [281] prégnant, | she r.any pants.’’ I said, Yes. ”? So I began to talk abeut water. He™ ace that talking about: water makes hig héad hurt,-so I said | okay. He changed the conversation and went over to : ot about some movies. After a ‘while we began oe eo = - A, He —— a perfect ¢ crime. So he started talking bd o 2 : - . ° 4 ai ° - . Ye . . . = en eee 2 = = ee _ eT ee wee . - : ° y . : : : ‘ . = ‘ Saree at . : ? . > , a 2 aon ~ Mr: ih saan When. he filers’ to “after a while,” I think the predicate as to,the time should. be’ Iaid. - ‘Tue Covrt: Try to give us the time. . ~“e Wrrnzss: They vary. five to ten minutes bininee, J knew I didn’t have too much time in: the cell with him. I would go directly back into the same thing again: The conversations varied for about five or ten minutes, and I , knew that I didn’t -haye too much time in the cell with him. “I was tryjng to keep him as close to the subject as seteiile.- _So approximately 10 Iinutes/ after we discussed this ~ business about the water, we began to talk about a movie which he seen, by thé name of “Sweet Fragrance of Suc- cess,’’ He told me this movie had.a perfect crime, it was about a tine blero that had been gommitted. L:teld him + that I didn "t eve there was ‘such a thing asa perfect: ‘orima. | 3 He told me there was such a thing. aa perfect crime. , ~So we began ‘to discuss my:caSe. He tried to show me a points: where we could have. committed that crime without ne _ even [282] finding the gun‘in my car. I told him it wasn’t - mine. I told him how it was concealed and. who put it in— ~ that it) was concealed in the s e spare tine. ‘He said that. wasn’t ‘I said, “What abiout. you! You ‘are in n jail, vidi He told me . he committed a perfect crime. Q. What did he say? °o %. ¢ is " Sweet Erekrame ‘of Suecess,”” about. how in | ie there had been a. perfect crime committed. ‘*¥ don’t believe in ‘perfect crimes.’’ He said, ‘‘Yes. You : ‘ y, didn *t commit orie because you are going to burn, tod.’’ ' Then we started discussing about the guys ‘in. the next cell*this fellow wag to be shipped back to Alabama. So we: started discussing. and this fellow said that Milton and: I was, going to burn. ‘So Milton said, ‘‘I am not” going to | burn.’’ That carried en for maybe 10 or 15 minutes. Ap- | proximately ‘five-or'ten minutes later;'I considered theguy- - in the next-éell ‘about telling him soniething that he was — - erazy. Milton told me to do it, to do thats . e + Q.In discussing“this business abdut a* eautfenk: crime, did, | he tell you he had committed a “perfect crime? ° Mr. SANDSTROM : t _— to that. That is Teading saat suggestive. eo Tue Cotrt: That’ s leading. He testified about [283] : something i in that regard. | Wag Q.: (By Mr. Block) Did he tell you hate ia he had | committed a perfect crime?. : ‘Mr. Sanpsrgom: I object’ a it Z “ ‘ tee sc ‘ - * 3 ; ‘ . . . * é ? . ° o “ . ; oy - . . :° ? ae a ° . . ; 64 ‘ *; : : : : i . e ‘ eS + ‘ ae z ; — . [284]. it, that I hadn’t had much education and schooling, . a that I was foreed to do so.’” He said, ‘‘My lawyer told ; me don’t contact him, that: he: would contact me.’’ So I. said, ‘‘When I get outside, maybe I can ‘do something for’ | you. ” I tried to get him to explain exactly ’‘what happened. - * . .. | tile send, “Don’t talk about it.’”? He didn’t want to talk = * about it. He laid up on his ‘bunk for about 15 minutes. a was looking out of the cell: | : + That night LI was looking out of the cell, I was watching the Harlem Square lights. I said, “Rhere i is,a dance down . there at the Harlem Square.’’ | ee Q. Whére is the Harlem Square? - ee “A. At 10th Street and Northwest 2nd Suan: .Q. Could you see itfromthejail? - *- > yak ¥en can see approximately 15 to 20 feet of the build- . ing downward. From the. cell you can also see the neon lights,. as the neon arrow runs around the building. I also was pointing out' the different clubs. ) ‘Man, I remember the night, a few nights ago, I was up’ to the Palms.’” He started talking. | _ «That show was great.’ We talked about. that, and then - ... T went back to the subject with him. He then told me if I ‘| ©. had ever been to the Palms.” I told him the I had been to. re - the Palms. . ‘S\ fF night were you | there?” = 7 st ates ? [285] ‘*I was there ‘a couple of times with different -people.’’ So. T- said, ‘‘Are you a rape artist or not?’’ He said, ‘Iam not.”’ I said, “The reason — put 'me in here _ is they told me you was crazy.”’ - - -“T am not crazy.’’ He told.me, lie say, (OT will show * you something when. I get outside. I ant going to have a ' . lot of money.’’. He said, ‘‘I'am going to take up boxing. 7 -. Twas training to-be a boxer. ’?. And he ke get out, he was — going to get back and start boxing. With this money he — - was going to buy all the boxing equipment. He was going ~ to be another champion, ano:her Joe Louis. «| ' J don’t know too much about boxing, sieyeol? ” He _ said, ‘‘You can be a boxer.’? He sized my. —e up and everything. . No, ‘sir, I like to play football. Where are - you going to get the money ?”’ _ “From the insurance money. They i is going to cond off i" the money. “ i a le ee 65 p How i is ; the i insurance > compas going to give you money, * you’re in jail, man?’’ He said, ‘‘My wife was insured.”’ I said, ‘‘Well,; you are going to burn.’’ He say, ai com- eh mitted—I told you once that T committed a perfect crime.’ _ I said, “‘You committed a perfect crime? There i is no. such . - - thing as a perfect crime.’’ I said, ‘‘The: best you. éan dois ” buy off, somébody and win the case in| court by paying [286] somebody.”’ '“*My lawyer got everything: worked out. ‘My lawyer tive | what to say and what not to say, and what. to do when I go. into the court.”? - ; ‘‘When you go down to take the truth serum, you want ‘ to just refuse to take it. They can’t give it to you.’ - “How. are you going to.refuse?’’ He said, ‘‘My lawyer. told me I didn’t have to take it. I don’t have to say any- ’ thing, that he probably waquid win the case for me.”’ - I said, ‘‘I told the detective with the City that I wasn’t we going: io give the statement. because I wasn’t involved-in ~ .the murder: I, was just. with the fellow- when the deal - ‘ happened.’’ He said, “Just remember, don’t you. take the * . kill her, but I changed my mind and went to 5th Avenue™ | where I was ‘staying. I went into the house. | fi ‘You went inte the house? Where was she?’’ ry: ‘‘She: was in the car. ?? -T said, ‘‘What was she [290] doing?” ‘‘She was: sitting.” “So he said he came out of the house and got into, theear and told her to get i in the back. seat. Fs) ; ae ent eSB SSN NST a si Seb aS on GRP eget ine “RS TR A SOI Tn -..’» that would pay off. '- ~. Jumped out.’’ 67 . ‘*Why did you tell her that?”? — yee \ “I just told-her to get in-the back seat becanse she Was’ sleeping. I went.to the area where'I went befére, where I had planned to go before.’’: He said,.‘‘I rode around there. . 'I went in the area where I had planned to go before, but _ there was too much trafficin the area.” Cake | _ I said; ‘‘What do you mean, where you had planned to. go before?’’ He said, ‘‘Once before “I planned to: do. the same thing.” F dba: _ “You mean to tell me you You can’t plan a perfect crime. , eae? oy ot Saas. talpina Pas gi “*T planned it once’ before, but [ was told that the insur. - ance policy that I had would not pal off.”?> ~ ae * “What insurance policy did youhave?”’ . “Thad straight life.”’ te! anned a perfect crime? u would have to do it at ‘He then told me he went and got an accidental pokcy~ - I said, ‘‘Look here; why did you go into the house,..what did you get?’’ He said, ‘I took my wallet.’’.He didn’t say his wallet or her wallet. He had on his pants and [291] - he had the driver’s license in his pocket. I said, “‘For what? - You can’t commit Suicide with your driver’s’ license in it. They know who you are.” ©: or Beseyitte te 2 a. eb ee “‘T had the driver’s license in my pocket-just in case they - - Stopped me -on the way. I could identify myself.’? I said, i. ‘‘Oh, you planned that? That was pretty smart.’’-So we ‘* talked about what happened. He said he drove the car and. _ jumpedout. © a : a. . “Did you jump out?’? He said, ‘Yes.’ He said,. ‘‘T — Q. (By Mr. Block).I can’t hear you. oo sa A. He told me that he jumped out ofthe car while the car was either going downgrade or something—I don’t know which way—but he jumped out of the car.. He went: » into-the canal. He said ‘something about his shoulder. I' cut him off then and I started to try to carry him back, but _ he wasn’t—he didn’t want to go back. ee dohb ac Q. Did he tell you what happened when he jumped out. ofthecar? = . . e oP genoa _. A. He told me tHat she was in the back of the car while - the car was being driven by him, and: he didn’t tell me \ ‘ ° \ GPS wergey Son a ae ee ee Re ae % 2 she 4ommode—he was ‘the kind: of a fellow that if -yougthoved, he would wake ? ~ up—he would say, ‘‘How are you doing, Chief? Is every- thing okay?’’. Then'we would go ,into-a conversation. Q. ‘Did you evér wake him;up: for the sole purpose of -we were talking about etait ane at-hurt his head. [295] Q:-Did you talk to h "the ‘following day, Suudiay? _ A. I talked to him Sanday’ ofninig - Q. Did he tell you withing that you have not already, testified tet 1 a | a Mr. ay That calls for a coneléision. THE Court: Overruled. Q (By Mr.. Block) ‘You may answer the glen A. We talked about—we started talking about breakfast. | , 1 think they served on Sunday morning—I_ am not sure " what they served that Sunday morning—I think it was a cereal which was cornflakes with milk. I gave-him-my eorn-., - flakes and. I drunk the milk. I think they also’ gave us a. _ cup of coffee. I gave him'the coffee, and we:begin to talk. . about different things and different crimes that had been ‘committed out in the area. He told me that hgsknew a lot about different crimes ae “that had been committed out there. F —Q. Did he tell you anything else about the oleuiar -erime in aaa death of Minnie ‘Claybon, Minnie Milton? . A. Well; he told me that—~he kept stressing to me that ° » ®. : x a1 he had copieatiod a po crime, that. he was : ihe only witness, and when you go to Court, if there are no other ; witnesses, that your testimony would be the best testimony there is. I told him he didn’t onmatntt so a crime ai [296] because he was injail. - Mr. Sanpstrom: That’s about the fourth time he has brougut that up. That is repetitious._. Tue Court: Let’s don’t ask for repetitious answers. Q. (By Mr. Block) ‘When were you: Teleased from that cell, when were you taken out? . we I was released Sunday after dinner ‘Q.. At any time while you were in the cell with ‘George ae Milton, did you threaten him i in any way? A> I did not, ~Q. Did you offer. him any rewards or So cangor induce- 2 ments? = 7 Mr. SANDsTRoM : I abiek as calling fos a conslasion of © ‘this witness and imvades the province of the Court. and ~ _ jury. THE Court: ‘Grarnind. pene yeas or no. THE Witness: No, I did not. Af ~ Q. (By Mr. Block) Didhe at any time tell: you he had been say mistreated in any way? / A. He was going to tell the J udge he had on mistreated. Mr. SAnpsTROM : I object to it as not being ai aaa to the question. Tue Court: Motion to sitike will be ‘granted. You are ~ not to consider that as it is not Fompensivp ‘to the (297 rT: question asked. . ex 0 . ,Q. (By Mr: Block) Did vir at: nid time aoe him you ‘9° were a police officer? Lae +. A. I did not. : | ve Mr. Biock: You may inquire. Po Tue Court: Gentlemen, you can take a break, The : Court Reporter has got to put more paper in his machine. | (Thereupon. the jury retired from the courtroom, and - upon their return the following proceedings were had: ) Mr. Biocx: The State waives polling. | ; a eT ens as x og a, (ee - Mr. SaNDsTROM : The defendant ° waives polling. , THE Court: You may proceed. | Cross Exauticarion Sse , Ry By Mr. Sanpsrrom : ~~? How long have you been with the Miami Police De- @ partment? — piers Bs Aapwoviindtily two years. edt : Q. Approximately two years. How many: danas ‘hire 2 _» -you had occasion to.be locked up like that with poeeery | in: _ order to obtain a statement from him? : ‘A. Thisisthefirsttime. . __ fos? ae, - Q. That was the first time? - - ea cans Be : Q. And you were in are for sone many days?. A. No, he didn’t. Q. When did all this conversation happen? “When. did - it happen, this talk of the perfect crime business? , A. I began to. explain to him how keen we -had been operating —— Q. Answer my “question. Did that talk about this case occur before or after the perfect crime bit? ® [308] A. After. ie” Q. How tong afterwards? A. T couldn’t say right now any definite time on that. Q: The opening part of the’ perfect crime ‘story was that he had'seen a picture about a perfect crime or something? . A. To my knowledge he had told ‘me of a picture where - ‘a perfect crime had been committed. 38 . @ He had told.you about a spuature he had seen? A. That’s right. Q. This is what he told you “ lunchtime, — 11 and 1 o’clock? POOR meena A. No, the first time, ‘befoge lunch we was ‘Giscussing . | what I had done. Q. But I asked you about this perfect crime stuff. When - did he start to talk about it? You said between 11 and 1 o’clock? A. That’s right. | _ ,Q. When did he tell you he had committed this perfect | crime—before or-after that lunchtime?. | A. I would say right about the same time., The eonver- sation went that he had committed the perfect crime. Q“And ‘after he liad told you that, then he proceeded to | _tell you about it; is that it? . [309] A. He did not. It was a conversation that kept. reminding him of what had happened. He kept: mentioning it to - prove that he wasn’t in jail to stay. Q. When did this talk about your case and the Chinaman take place?: . A. I talked about that Friday night and Cen (311) morning. But that wasn’t true, was itt. eee 2, ' It was not. | But-you told. that to George, didn t you? I did. - Did you tell him with an intent for him to believe it? I told—I intended . BOE him to actually - ‘believe it. f ¥ herere, . aE ~ ie . ~ . a sn es . ~~ bs ~ : ; . : g0 — Q. And you. ‘tried ‘all you could to impress him that ‘it was the truth, that aa were charged with that erime? A, I did. Q. You didn’t use your correct name, did you? - A. My name is Archie. Langford. I used Archie ae = Q. You shartened your last name vane used 4 different name? _— . YU 7: Genero ee J, ----~~_Q. Now, when’ did you have es fore to. eat? a A. If Tam not. mistaken, the oatmeal was eaten. Saturday morning or either the cereal Saturday morning and oatmeal was Sunday morning. . -_Q. You are not sure about that? ; : A. I am sure both mornings he had both imeels. - Q. You: are not sure about it. That is the only [312] time you have ever been in jail? A. Right. | _= Q. Now, what did you eaves for supper meal Friday, . Saturday and: Sunday? : AL For. Frfday I can’t recall. For Saturd y. we. had | weiners, sauerkraut and mashed potatoes. Q. How about Sunday? A. Sunday we had one of those something like a soup, - ’. some beans and a lot of water. Q: That was the only time | you had: been in jail, but you can’t recall? | ) | A. I didn’t eat it.. I-rave it to iin: ————$$ aw ne Q. Now, did anybody come.to see e him at all d ring. ae time you W rere in there? A.-Only at night... One jailer he ‘knew—*‘ How |are you doing, Chief? Everything okay”? He said, ‘’Okay thing okay. +9| Eo iW ‘ould just come-on back and get in bed. Q.-Now, you. said something about he told you he had) _ this truth serum treatment; is that right? . ‘A. He told me, that’s right. a, —Q. That they : gave him truth serum, laid him. on the couch? - A. He was periniaiae to me how they give truth Q. Did he say: that. he was explaining the ‘truth _ serum because they gave it to him? . . A, He told me not to take it because they had mate him. take —- similar. Every- 7 : [313] 81 Q. He 2 told 3 you not to tals it because they. fovéid hie a to take it? A. He said they either forced hin to take it or he had to - take it. of it. Q. Did‘he tell you about when he had taken it?” | _ A. He told me he didn ’t want to talk about it, but for me not totakeit.. — Q. All during the time he was. _peding trial—waan’t he waiting for. a tnal?”—~—-- — Mr. Brock :. That i is duis of record. > UL ‘Mr. Sanpsrrom : Sure. He might have knowledge of all THE Court: He can testify: what Mitten told him. ba records will be the best evidence. — Q. (By Mr. Sandstrom) Was he pending trial then, from the information you obtained from him? A. Was he pending trial for information I obtained . from him? I don’t know. ~ Q. In your conversation with him, did he tell you’ any- thing about he was waiting for trial to come up or any: thing? A. His lawyer—he told me—he gave me some [314] in- formation he was waiting, how long he would Have to wert injail, oon Q. He told you how long he was going to ‘ai to stay in? “A. Yes.» “Q.. How long did he tél you he was? | A. The lawyer said not to get out on as Q. How long did he stay? A: He didn’t say. .He. gave me a long story to: explain to _ me exactly what was supposed to happen, . . Q. Did he also tell you that an indictment had already 7 been filed charging him w ith this? A. No, he-didn’t, Q. He didn’t mention anything about that? A. He did not. Q. Did he tell you that he had already told the officers exactly what he told you? ae A. He did. . Q. But he told you also that he had committed a perfect : erime and nobody knew anything about it? A. He didn ’t tell me, he told the officers that. o ¢ 3 ge Q. Did he tell you that he told the officers exactly what .« he told you of didn’t he tell you that? © A..He told me that he had committed a perfect crime and that he had confessed to it. [315] He told me he had confessed it to Detective Bush | in reference to the crime he committed. He was glad he had done it. - QQ. He said he had told Detective Bush? ‘A. Shepherd, Shepherd, I think it was—the. officer that’ , cleaned his clothes and had his underwear washed. ~~ Q. He was still calling this a perfect crime? ‘“ A. Well, he.didn’t say he had confesed to the crime of killing the pirl. ‘He said he had made statements in refer- - ence to the crime that he had confessed 1% ‘something he had done earlier. | | _ Q. That has no connection at all with this kind of case? A. I don’t know. _ Mr. Brock: I object to the statement of counsel as : to that. a Tare Court: I think it is one for a 1 conclusion, I will sustain the objection. |: .Q.. (By ‘Mr. Sandstrom) Now, “did he tell 36a that he had told the officers about this case hére—Deteetive Shep- _ herd or Detective Bush? . - A. He said-he had told the officers about it. He had also — made a confession in reference ‘to something that happened that night, but he didn’t go into details. What he told the : detective, he fold me. That is his. version of [316] what | happened. - Q. I say that what he told you, he told the detectives? A, No. & Q. As “4 matter of fact, he didn’t: tell 5 you he had told ¥ pte, a ‘he had been advised to say it was forced out; is that A. He said the lawyer told him to say that becan ise lie. _ gave voluntary statements the first time. — \ Ely anybody anything? ‘A. Hedid. Q. I see. But then you said that he said something: abo - ght? 5 ‘Q. He gave a voluntary statement? SNE: A. He was willing to get it off his chest. He was glad to. Q. Tell me the words. You changed it both. times -now. _ signed a statement but that additional words had been What was the way in which. he told you he made the state- ment? - A. He say, ‘‘T: was over to the City jail, over there, and I talked with the detective. That was a pretty nice white ' fellow.’’ : ee Q. What detective? Eo Cais: are Oe, . A. Detective Shepherd. He said he was\a pretty nice | white fellow, and he said, ‘‘He talked with me and I am glad I told him that confession I made,’’. .. a ; [317] He said, ‘I’m glad F told him the confession I made, but my lawyer told me to tell the judge that tlie statements and the confession that I signed, that I was forced to sign | probably bring it in anyway. He said; ‘‘My lawyer going to-+take care of that.’’ ? : | - .them.’’ He said that his lawyer told him that that informa- . _- tion could not be brought into cour So I said they would _ Q. He didn’t say who his lawyer wad) whefe he got this information from? A. He did not. . . | _Q. And did he say how the lawyer told: him to say this was forced out gf him? Paes oa A. He said the lawyer told him to.tell the judge that he added. He said more words had been added. Q. More words had been added? ' oa A. He didn’t have much education. He didn’t understand. .alotofwords. = ; - sey 2 ese 7 y anything about -he -had been well- . > Q. Now, did-he sa treated or mistreated, anything like fhat? ee : ' A. He explained to me that the detective that handled | ; the first time was a pretty nice guy and he had his. under- . ’ Wear and clothes cleaned and fixed up for him. Q. Did he tell you if anybody had mishandled him‘ or . « ~~ handled him roughly? [318] A. He told me he would tell ‘the judge he wes , mishandled. . nishandted, Q. I am asking you whether“he told you he had ‘been _A. He didn’t tell me they mistreated him at all Q. Of course, you didn’t record in any fashion any of this conversation that ‘purportedly occurred between you _ andhim? = — A. Idid not. ° ’ » , SK wes pees ae Sa Se oe | : eg -Q. Did you, attempt to bave him make any pra naer to ) you after. that date in the _—— of asiybody « so it bea be record ss .Mr. Brock; I don’t understand the question. tg ee, Ye ' Tue Court: Do you understand the ara as . THe Wirness: I ‘don’t. “ a . Q. (By Mr. Sandstrom) After this time that you were. | in the cell there with George milion, @ aa you ever tell him after that time—— “ 3 hy Tue Court: Tell who? ree, (By Mr. Sandstrom) Did you ever tell Georg’ Milton ° ~ to come and make a statement with you and the statement. could be taken down by a saree pe Réporter? ~ AG ie Q. You never did anything like that? A. I did not: : es [319] Q. There wernt any body else there dy Ww ieee what George Milton purportedly’ told yout A. 'N ot in the cell. -‘Q Pardon? Pee _A. There was no one in the oll. aes ae Q. Outside of the ‘cell, was there somebody standing there who co d.zeport exactly what occurred in there? A: No, there wasn’t, not to my knowledge. ie Q. You are the only one scone you know of anything : that he told you? ; A. Right; +’ ge ay Y And y ou didn’t take any notes of it?” 4 ee ; nee ipjail. AS en _Q. Xnd you never did that before? a x ever did that before. | , : ae ‘Q. Have you done it since? ? Sige iF Le ON A. Done what? “ t% Q. The same thing—going te the edll with esinabiiay op who was qccused of something and’ talk with. him like that, trying to get a statement out of him? . A. Ihave tried to get statements out af people bat I never went in the cell. | a . . Q. This is the only time that: that ever aimee: AL As to my seeking _— in reference. to a case, “no. . : (320) * I mean by getting i in 5 tas re with him.- CAR Gao ee e. * 64 i Frankly speaking, I have ideas in the nell with a pris- . oner, but I have pone there in as'a prisoner before.’ Q. You: have gone statement? © © A. Right. _Q. I mean, this same thing: you had-never Suns it hind 3 and have done it. since—going into the cell, disguising your - we and trying to talk with him? _A.*That’s right. , ~'Q. Now, during the time you were there, was s George sick — _. oranything? ' A. Tomy knowledge, no, nase: a mie Q. Speak up. é ii Pa Ga ode A. Tomy bnowiddee;‘a no. | Cee ete - Qe How long had he been oe do eid ‘. A. Iwas told by him that he asked to Bom -¢ell so he could be by himself. © * Q.-He asked to - put some place. -all by himself? A. Right, -— Q. I didn’t ask ae: Dia he tell how Tog he had been | | confined at t thattime? A. He told me how many days lie had in 1 jail. Q. How many days he had i in aiid many fa did he have in jail? . , [321] ‘A; Ican * recall. fas Hg ee ge Q. You don’t remember that either? : A. No. Q. Bo you remember asking him. anything about the OBE. ’ that he had on the evening-of May 31st? . : : A. Did I ask’hinf about the cart | Q. Yes. . A. After he told me about the car, I asked bite es ee “couldn ’t she get out. 5 } ‘+ Q. Did you ask him about the cart A. About which car? -Q. The description ofsthe. car that he had on the 31st. A. No, I did not. » 7 * Q. You didn t know. what make or model! . bie A. I still don“. : : ee ets on Q. You have never seen it? - Pee gee A. Never have. ‘Q. And did you notice ‘hat he was. wearing dating ¢ the: “Pane 0a, N were in -the .cell with George Milton? o. ere ‘before as ah officer to take a hat: Jsolation’ A. Idid. ae rm . 7 , Q. What did he have ont A. He had.on a pair of blue pants, or'gray. pants, a esat; which was hanging up on the window. The.pants seemed to me more like a suit. He had a regular Navy or Army tee . [322] shirt with shorts on. That’ s what he wore most of. the . ' timehewasinjail. ; Q. That was the only clothes he had on theret A. It was the only clothes. It’s similar to that blue coat. _A real dirty pair of blue pants hanging up to the screen. Q. How long did you talk to him Saturday night when , Youwerewithhim? | A. I think.we talked way up after midnight What time it was, I ecouldn’t exactly recall. ; -Q. Way after midnight... That would be the same as you didon Friday? \ \. A. No, he cut me of-short Friday night iwees I asked him what time they.c off. the lights, to try to “ the : . conversation. up. Q. Now, after he told y ecco this perfect erime} and “x. | told yqu that he had done this on Saeeeey afternoon; did . _ you try, to get out of that cell at that\time or did you have © particular orders t& remain there, to remain there until . Sunday? | a 2k / _ A. I was told not rm iniinnd sapien hak the person that put me in there. That was the only pice was to talk to. ' Q) Whowasthat? ~~. * an CN - A. Detective Shepherd. | i ~~ [323] Q. When did you contact him? Dot ie : _ |. A. Well, I did not contact him. He had me released Frog the jail where he met me at the desk. - a Q. ‘That was Sunday evening? a ‘A. Sunday evening. . - . Q. Were you going to be i in. there any particular length of time when youwentin? _.- A. No particular length of. time. “ Q.: It was just as, s long as: “it a for you ‘to get the state- ~ o ment fromhim?’ tes | ' A. It was nét. said that way. Q? What? -. | — - . he TE wasn’t said nuiee how long or how much nee! tion to receive. I was just to stay in. there until they devided to come, and release me, whether T had found out anything. ~~ i % ~ x ° : i ateiie * “ es aol ae aye any! me, Ae 97 Q. I see. Then they were going to take you out—if you - found ‘something, they would keep you. ont; if not, they would return you? Mr. Biocx: That is calling for a conclusion ® ‘Mr. Sanpstrom : If he so understood it. oe Ne4 Tue Court: I think ‘so. I will sustain the objection on that ground. ~ Ts | ~ Q. (By Mr. Sandstrom) Was there any kind of a plan as to how long you were to be in there? [324] " A. Not to my knowledge. Q. Did you volunteer for this or did they come and seek - you to send you in for this detail? _ A. I would like toexplain how it came to be." Q. Did you ask for the detail? . 7 | A. I was officially assigned to the City of Miami Narcotics. _ Squad during, before and. prior to this time. A eolored officer was suspended from the Homicide Bureau, and I was assigned to the Narcotics Bureau, so they were ‘seeking ‘Someone to take this officer’s place. The Narcotics Bureau is the office next to the Homicide. I was talking with a . few of the fellows around the building, so I was transferred - from the Narcotics Bureau to the Homicide Bureau because. of the work I had‘done previously; Mee ee Q. That is what you wanted to do? © - .. A. I didn’t want to be transferred, but ~— transferred me anyway. ‘. 7 est Q: About this detail, did you ask te be locked up or did . they order youto? ” - A. They didn’t order me; they didn’t ask me. They just say,.“‘Go and do it.’” They asked, ‘How would you like, © to work special detail for.us?’’ oe . ee Q. Did they explain the special detail to you?. _. A. They explained they wanted me to seek information from George Milton. [325] Q. What did you say? A. I said I would try it: Q. You would try it? — A. Yes, sir. . _ Q. Now, are you married? — oe 7 "Geee . Q. Do you have a family?. | a os . a A. Thave.. _ Q.,Do you live _— eo. ; 88 -* . Ai t i : + I do. Q. You were going to be away Wriday. Saturday, how- - ever long it took? : Mr. Buock: ‘This is immaterial, inectapetent and irrele- vant. eee Tue Court: What is. the purpose of that question, Counsel? _~ Mr. SANpsTROM : “All ition matters are aimed toward the: credibility of this witness.: ; Tue Court: I will sustain the Steen: to that —— | T can’t see the materiality of the question. Q. (By Mr. Sandstrom) Did they explain the detail to - you before you went into George Milton’s cell? A. Did they explain the detail I was to do? Q. They said they-had a special detail for you? A. .They explained the detail as to I was to receive infor: mation. They explained the detail, the description of the - person, and who the person was, and things I was: to do. Q. What were you to do? - A. I was not to let him know I was a police fice : ‘was not to take down any notes or anything to make him suspicious of the fact:that I was a police officer. Q. You were to do-what? | A. To go to the cell and talk with him aid stay with _ him antil they released me. a . Pe — Q. You agreed to that detail? ? A. I did.’ . | -Q. Now, you said he had mentioned to ‘you about Minnie being pregnant. Did he tell you: how Tong she had been . pregnant? . .. A. Our conversation went—he told me shé had been pregnant about three, four months, something like sae Three or four months? Right. ©. | Did he tell you how long he had been living with bert ; He did not. . : ; - 3 | Did he tell you haything about her? - No, hedidnot.. . . Did he tell you where he lived? [397] A. Did. he tell me w here he liv ed? —— Q. With Minnie, yes. A. Hedid.. | . @ ‘Where did he oa yout . ere aaa mererer ed) ° x 89 _ A. On 5th Avenue and 14th Street. at ' . Q. Did-he-tell you any house number or anything? AD As T can recall, we talked about the hotse that he lived in, but what he told me I can’t: recall. — ON Q: Did you also talk to him about what, kind of work ‘ George did? — ~~. _ * -# ; A. Idid. ee | Q. What did he tell you?.; - : ; 0 _ A. He said as a porter to some hotel on thé Beach. Q. : Did he tell you what hotel? A. He did, but Ican’t-recall. ~ | ve Q. You don’t recall. Did he say he was.a ‘porter or ‘dellboy? oe a ots A. Similar toa hellboy or porter. . Q. Do you remember which it was? A. Icannot. = . . “@. Do you remember if he told you how long he had lived in Miami?. . - | ms A. Iean’t recall. ~ Q. You don’t remember? : | s [328] A. ‘We just discussed how long he had been in ~~ Miami. 7 — . a . Q. How long he lived here? | rk ae .A. I can’t actually give you the time because T can’t recall whether he actually went. into telling me the time, the amount of time. 7 . . Q. Did he tell you how Jong he had lived with Minnie? A. He did not. a ; ‘a 2, * 4 Q. To whom have you talked about this case? ~ A. Who have I talked to about this case? . " Q. Yes. : ee te a A. I'talked to Detective Shepherd, and I talked to At- torney Block. | ~ pty ee , ; Q. Attorney whom? A. Block, = | |. _ Q. Block. How many times did you talk to him? > | A. I talked to him once, one time. I think I talked to. | » him: the first time. He was able to take a statement. | ~ Q. When you say ‘‘he,’’ you are talking about Shepherd? A. I am talking to Block. We came back later-and we discussed what ‘had happened in the cell, in front of - Detective Shepherd. .-_ . a . [329] Q. How long has that been? 9 A. Tean’t recall that. Q. How many times ‘did you talk to Detective Shepherd | about thecase? - A. I talked with him twice. Once I explained to him what happened while I was in the cell at the county jail. Q. When was the second time? . - A. In front of Attorney Block. Q. And those are the only times you have talked to these people, either of them? A. Well, I talked to them today. Q. Talkéd to them today, before you went ont A. Just around here, like you say, ‘‘Could he go get ‘some water? Make sure you be there at 9 o “clock. ” Q.: You didn’t discuss thecase? A. Actually;we diggs discuss the case. Q. Did you read Gir what you were going to testify to - When you came in to testify? A. No, because I was late. Q. Well, you said you went to Detective Shepherd. and’ . you gave him a report of it, and you gave a report to _ Mr. Bloek. Did either of them reduce that to ‘writing so you could look at it? A. I didn’t give a statement to Detective Shepherd. I - ‘only made verbal statements. I went to the State’s [330] Attorney’s office and made'a statement. in. front of him so he could have it recorded. - Q. Detective Shepherd wrote down anything you said? . _. A. Not to my knowledge. Q. You didn’t see him “ when you were talking , to him, did you? A. We were sitting at a "desk. If he was writing while - I was talking, writing what I was saying, I couldn’t actually . gay yes or no. Q. You don’t know whether he wrote anything. When you went to see Mr. Block, did they take a copy of your ° statement at that time? - A. They did. 'Q. Did. they take it down or take it on a recording? A. Hehadafemale. Ithinkshetookitdown. . . Q. Operatinga machine like that (indicating)? . A. She had a pad. Q. ‘Now, after she wrote it down, did a ever put it i in writing so you could look it over? _ - . Pee EE PD +» A. So I could come and look it over? No. Q. You never saw that statement since? —. . A.“No. | - a . ' Q. You have never refreshed your recollection at all? [331] A. Not to my knoWledge. pe tes _ Q. The only thing you are ‘basing your entire testimony - on is from the time that you were in that cell? . A. That’sright. © 7 Q. And ‘you haven’t been refreshed in alry way since? Mz. Biocx: He has gone over this three times already. This is repetitious... re Tue Covsrt: I think the last question is repetitious. Q. (By. Mr: Sandstrom) When did you first know you -were going-to be'a witness? ee ee * A. When did I first know I was going to be a witness? ‘Q. Yes. ae ' eo a . A. I received a subpoena, I think it was around Novem-_ ber—around the first of the month. - _ Pee we? Q. That is the first time you ‘knew you were going to be a witness in the case? “5 be . es A. Actually, the first. time I knew I was going to be a witness. © 8 , ee Se __ Mr. Sanpsrrom: That will be all at this ‘time. I would _ like him around so that he may be subject to a. recall. Mr. Biocx: No further questions from the State. ( Witness exeused.). [332] Thereupon— | | Wri Paur McCiure was called as a witness on behalf of the State, and having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: Direct EXAMINATION ‘By Mr. Buock: Q. ‘Will you please state your full name? . | A. William Paul McClure. ' | ‘ Q. And with whom are you connected? _ A. Miami Police Department, Homicide Section. Q. In what way? - ee Tue Court: I want-to hear this. tape secon - : - Mr. Biock: We have the. doctor here - and the re = recorder. oe ‘ | “3 “Tare JOURT: vt Mr, ohikent a a ‘Mr.“Biock: Yés,.sir.. Wan we éall the: detter so as. . not: oes: waste any time, or wou d:you rather hear the recorder . |: i 7 Tem Covrr: Do you Mare it here? Mr. Buocx: It is upstairs;, * - : 7a wait for the other: oss EXAM uso” » E oe By. Mr. Sarsineoir:é you question or intertogate thig.defendant? _ sion of June llth. -.. Q. You questioned him again thereafter ‘. : A. I questioned him the next day,.June 12th. him-on the: first day, on ‘the 5th; and then on the 11th ‘and \ane 1% oe ‘ished him for ahout—— : 2S 3 poten Q. That is 10.a.m.? - ee 8 aes “was. the Homicide Bureau office. :I went ont and got Dr. ocr: seatch his rooms. He smd it was as all va nee cine a en f. Q. Theroomathishouset. 2 j) +. ° AL Yes: the room at his neat Se Shae at ee Phat w was the 5th day of Jane? ey 3S dle That Was the 5th day of June. . ~ * a “On the’ Sits I ‘aii een out of al at 10 0 o'clock, and r st “A. Am: I questioned him for ite an ag wane or an hour anda. lialf, afid then he remained there at the: office. That : ~ Davis and* Detective Shepherd, and..we went to his room . ° ~ beeause I had‘asked him during that ‘questioning if I could ek ‘-Q. Then you went out and miadé a search of. his house?’ | 99 A. His billfold and’some jars that contained fluids and. _ a box of snuff. ~° || Si bine hc Fae EB ek _ Q. How: about insurance policies or anything like that? Q.. Now,’ you stated you observed Detective Holmes ques- ‘tioning this defendant, Tellus the time when you saw him questioning him. — ° ee is 5 en ae A. Well, that was only on June 11th. That was when I | arrived about 6:30. I went’ to the observation room first. I listened to.Holmes’ talking to. him, and they were talking about. boxing. George was telling him that’ he aspired to: _be*a boxer at one time earlier in his career, and that he . wanted to,be a boxer still... ray [345] That was the trend of the conversation there. ! Q. I didn’t ask you. the trend. You say you saw Detec- tive Holes questioning. How long did he question him?. A. That was only about three or four Tainutes at that. time. Wa ee we a ache oe, Je Q. That you observed? He was already in the process of questioning when you first noticed him? _ A. That’s.correet. Ss 7 1 OR 2 Q. Did you observe Detective Halmes questioning him on. — . . any other occasion? emer ee Se ie A. Yes. After that I-went in.and I talked to him for half _. an hotr. We went.to eat. When we came‘back it was about 8:30, and Holmes questioned. him ‘from about 8:30- until — pretty nearly until—until. 10:30. We sent for the stenog- - rapher at about 10:30. So that would be from about, 8:30 | until 10 or-10:30. Q. And did you’see him questioning this defendant on’ any other occasion? That is, Detective Holmes? ; A. Not Holmes. : Q: Let’s go over to Shepherd. Did you have occasion to “see Shepherd? -: . wm. A ‘T! at is the only time T hear - A. Yes, on June 6th, the day following what was my first contact with him. vt ces oS on Q. You saw Detective Shepherd? : __.A.-I was again in the observation room when I° [346] listened to Detective Shepherd question the defendant. Q.. Is that the only ‘occasion you had to observe Detective Shepherd questioning him? ‘. 7 vee d him questioning bim. | et ek Be 100 ~Q. I don’t mean if you heard. Did you have oceasion to - observe them in any other way with your senses? A. I-don’t believe so. I’know that Shepherd had him in his company-in the hallway a couple of day s. I didn’t know where they were going. Q. Since this. qu stioning by Detective Holmes was al- ready in progress . the 11th, you do not know how long it had been before that A. ‘No. Q. Now, do you know what cell he was s kept. in at the City jail? | A. No, I was never back in ‘the cell block so I don’t know _ where he was kept. _Q. You never went to see what cell he might have been: in? A. No. ; Q. Do you know baw cee he had been i in 1 custody at the . oy time you took these statements? _A. Not of my.own know ledge. I have referred to peporia. ian I eduld, only say — I know by Sai at [347] reports, _Q. On the Ist day of June, he was in soy: wasn’t he? A. Yes. ' .Q. Then this statement came ging on the 11th of J une, and he was still in ountenty, ‘wasn’t he? - A. Yes. | | a Q. You said you advised hint he was under arrest? A. -Yes, sir. ; : Q. What did you advise him he was under arrest for? A. I had the arrest report in my hand at that time.. I _ told him he. was under. arrest for investigation of man- \ slaughter. \ & Manslaughter. ts that a féliny or misdemeanor? Mr. Biock : ‘That i is ac tied for a —— a legal con- clusion. - ' THe Court: astained. ae af Q.¢ (By Mr. Sandstrom) Did you have the occasion to arrest him for any other thing? A. Inever‘arrested him, period. . . Q. Did you have the occasion to take hin: toa “Magistrate! A. No. i, - me 101. Q. You never did that? a ms [348] A. I testified in the Magistrate’s Court. I was sent for initiating the action. . . °.. | Q. I sée. Yow had the report, and then you read from. that. You told him he was under arrest. for investigation. Did you determine from that Yeport, when he came into custody initially . “so , . Mr. Brock; I am going to‘object to any report that is not in evidence. SO i Mr. Sanpstrom : This is their predicate. He advised hint of certain things from a report. I want to know. a _Tue Court: He said he was under arrest for investiga- tion of manslaughter. I never heard of such a charge. . Mr. Sanpstrou:-I asked him if he observed from that réport how long he had been in ‘custody, upon that pars, ticular arrest. . A ° . ; THe Court: Do you know that? ‘ - Tue Wiryess: I @on’t uecall. I would haye to. guess if I were going to answer at all.: 7 . . Q. (By Mr. Sandstrom) Until the 11th of Tune, he re- mained under arrest for that same charge? | A. Yes. a Q. It wasn’t changed in any way? . _ A. IT don’t know if the warrant had been issued. ‘It wasn’t my case.’ I wasn’t ‘aware of whether or not a [349] ‘Warrant was issued during the interim—from the 5th to the 11th. : - ar | ~ Q. You don’t know whether or not a warrant’ then Was _. issued for this defendant? A.. No, I don’t: > Q. You don’t know when lie was taken into custody by virtue of that warrant? | A. No,I don’t. __ a He was interrogated u ‘under the influence of sodium amytal., — os Bee » Q. For how long? ae See Raa . . A. I’d say, roughly about 45 minutes. ‘ oe : “Q. And at that. time he didn’t admit or confess ‘to com- Milton, did he? trad poe ho are ‘ [375] A: No, sir. : iga, = * ot —Q., Did you‘return s hie to his cell? a we, A. We. returned him to the cell. oy . oe oS | . Did you notice what cell he was occupying? Ata: - Q. You don’t know w hat cell he was int A. I requested that he -be placed .in a “ell “a himself and also to be observed periédically by. the guards. Q. In the cell by himself. I see. . What kind of a door does that have? Has that got a flat. plate — barred door? —-o——_ e ° . eo. - A! to ae . ae . 113 i i ‘The doen that I kngw: that are up ides are the ones . “that are ‘solid steel all except fora small opening. - - . Q. Where is that opening located ?. 7 | ts i Up.about head height. a. ne ea . _Q. Say about five feet, six feet, about. that? = 7 - A. About five and a half feet. a - Q. What kind of an opening, about hear large? ea _A. That is about fiye inches square, I would: say. Q. Is that glass over it or nite open? - A. Itis open. °° ° : | | _ Q. This cell that he was slacks in, diges it eve. some _ windows: i in it or does it not have windows? . sA. I don’t know. which one he was ‘Placed. i sp. [376] Q. You didn’t pay attentién? © A. I didn’t take him back: - a ee . *.Q. But you had requested that he be placed’ in 1, the cell . _ by. himself ? nk : * A. Yee, eit: : acs (Q. When did you sheiiek that? ? : * A. When I brought him up to the jail. °. Q. When did you bring him-up to the jail? - . A. After. the,serum had been administered. | . That was on what date—the ard?. y .A. That was June 3rd. Q. Then on the 4th of J une, I believe you said: you in- | terrogated him a. A. Yes, sir.” jerinesh Q. Where Bus that?. ‘ ‘s . * a . ‘ P r *, Pag ee | pr ‘A. Inthe Bureau of Identification. mares Q: What time of the day or night was that? _ A. That was at‘1:15.p.m., yntil 2:30 p.m. " - Q. Was it the daytime or ices oo A. Daytime. ind Q. And do-you know if anybody sé interrogated him : in the ae -Q. You —_ t know about that at all? - eo. : | [377] Q. Nov ow, ake next ios you saw + hita was on the 11th, _ . [believe’ you said? | | 7 A. Yes, sir. - °- ° oe -Q. You didn’t see him at all between those dates? A. No. “io - 4% ? Wiphe es sre op eee a : ae eee ee * pile 2 ; er 3 rae le ee a = : o : 5 is - 3 3 . _wirtye of awarrant! | ae | ‘A. ‘No, sR. Sg see ie -Q.: At the time you questioned him on the 3rd; 4th, aid the -11th, do you know if.there was: then a warrant in existence calling for his arrest upon this offense; that is the charge, . yay rr * similar thereto? , A. No, sir: pt Nae bee ; ~-Q You don’t t gw if there was a warrant in existence? A. No.- [882] -Q. Did you sake any effort. to bined how Jong. . the had been incarcerated ‘before tas —— him on. the 3rd?- : "A. No, sir. .. s . ~ Q. Did you make. any effort to determine hae long he ' had heen" inearcerated by: the’ time 7 — him on. ine 11th. . : | -A. No, sir. ; ; Q. Did you.ever learn that the. warrant was, in fact, issued for his arrest? ree arse | a No, sir. Se est se: aoe ‘ sg ce Oo Se - . aD PN TBS Bee rea eM NS TEN siieose a : . = oe sa hae ‘Ss Do Yor know wheat he was , transferted out | of the : eo City jail? _ ~A. No, sir. '-Q, Do you know hes transfetred him out? A. No, sir. * G. How. long, all told, did you speak with him i rogatehimonthe'Ilth? = ee oot A. We talked from about 4: 38 abe sjust general conversation a i é ey. is, ™%. ee aed . $e formally interrogated-him regarding , the death “ of Minnie : Claybon. ° |. ce What happened after 90 ‘lock? ~~ A.. He confessed about 9:0 "clock. That’ is when the te periog -was taken up by his confession. / * [383] Q..It eouldn’t have been #0 0 ‘clock? ‘ : A: No, sir:; “#.- oe aan Q. It was 9. Who ras in charge of hits hale or does any- . body, become i in charge of any vase? A. The - eases dre ®penerally assigned. In the. case. -of homicide, it is given to a- uae ivystigator but he will call in assistants if it is necessa | Q. Who Jwas assigned to Ge ge Milton’ s case, if you _: know?. “A. Iwas under ‘the assumption that it was Charlie: -. :.. Shepherd. Me = George on the 11th. -. Q.-When on the 11th. did” McClure noninent you to: do this? Lee: N | A: We hed Wee together earlier i in the ° diay. Q. About what time? - ee Ae ; _A. About,3:30,40’clock? = ° Ct are oe aN RT Se eras nN ¥ Q. Isee. Did he call y you in—Uharlie Shepherd? - ' A. Yes, he did, ~~ Q..On each 6f the occasions that you. interrogated him’ | A. Noton the 11th. aor : : 2 Q. That one you did vost ?- ' A. Detective McClure questioned. him. I interviewed ‘Q. Did McClure. say he-would be Biers too? ‘had to go home and said he would be back.’ . : . : » ‘ ; 8S ate eh - _ : ¢ eet gee crm masineiens " of} ° . ~ x [384]:" A. We were discussing the case in general. He- asked me “if I’ would interview: George. I said, ““Yes.’’ He’ Q. At that time you believed this was Charlie Shepherd's : . ease? > ; * ‘ Je apc — Bones - " a a Ae H - . : 4 . 4 ° ~ Re ms yd nny, a ¢ Q. Well, did McClure say it or did George say: it to him! | : : weeks eee. *. Ze f v4 : 7 *. ra ‘5 zg : on el : sais= & ye e me a A. He h d. been. working I mee he: had been bias . onit. - "ee - it will be good for you?” -- long times we have been pears rom —— it wil | be better for you’? Boe : hear@by the Court. It is repetitious.. a do it reser Nig Be Q. Did MeClure say was one of his cases, thin one soe ] Q: Now, you ‘were present ‘thru the entire taking of ~2 the tape and the statement. itself, -weren n't yout oer \ A Yessir. “ie -Q. Now, ‘during that time, a any time did mel say orion like, “It? s better Tor you it you tell- thie ruth.” eo ‘A. Yes, sir.* -- Feu! % Q. That statement Was pede: Bia an body es im his ' a ge. hope was to téllthé truth? __ : ; . | -°.. A. That might have deen said sothewhéeres, ae Q. Did anybody tell‘him that_his. aprenien in elie - the'truth would be good forhim? —— - . A: I don’t know if those are the exact w vords. : 3 Q. But the same connotation? =~ 4 ' A. Same connotation. _ YY ahs BS "(3857 Q. Did anybody ell bith it woul go easier on him in.court if he were ‘toconfess? A. Inever made that statement. : . Q. I didn’t’ say did you make the statement. ¥ asked ie you were present through thattime. A. It. might have been made. ¥ don’t know, sir. ” . -Q. Can you say it was or can you say it. wasn't? ~ A. Icouldn’t say either way. _ Q. And did anybody tell him anything shoul “Now, when we take your formal statement, don’t say anything 2 _about these long times—this ‘questioning of 794, bem + " ee ih See Viunts an dpa B ARENVANE IE is ‘an _ A. Detective McClure made a statement to ‘that effect be. a ‘cause George asked us—he felt bad because he had volun j teered out the confession. It was necessary for us to tell | . Mae, as.afavor to him, because he requested it. 4 y Did Mac say, ‘*George, don ’t mention- anything about these | ; “Mr. Brocg! All this i is on the ioe and has already beet : Tue Court: Overruled. - {By Mr. Nisiaahaewe that saidt: ee Pelt TEE Or AL MeClure siid -he would comply." wi h Geor ge ’s [3867 Z wish that théconfession would— 7 “O Answer- my question., first. Did. Me Ture. say that? = p TF > \. Would. you "repent it, please? a Did lie say , George, don’t mentjon aly thing about’ **the long times we’ are ssieitltinics cy bad “It: er be ‘better fe you.* ee cal. He said ‘sémething in a general sense. I ‘couldn't ae swe that that was the exaet words. -' Q.“ Would you say. that that is the connotation of what. Parr “dhe said? hed ha 5 hee ee »: ) SS Tae Se Te That i is EO for an opinion. “Mr. Saxpstrom: He heard him. If he has no concihcins: - ce : e a » I just want to- know if that is as close as” “he could colle. ° - a 3 (By. ‘Mr. Sandst¥om) Could you tell me what: the’ ‘words were, to the best of your “recollection that Shepherd» sad to you, in the nature of w hat-T just asked yout Patras s , x ‘YoumeanMeClure? ©”, see anata Mereae es Ge ‘Qs Ven. fa a os A.‘He said ‘in. essence; that ‘he was zoing. to take | fhis- is = ee | statement. in- -aceordance with what he desired to show | ieoge he had volunteered the confession. It was. not necessary for” -_ us to talk to him. ae Q. Now, did Shéphera—I mean. MeChure, iif your (3871... # » presence jt before this stateguent was taken, say, **We'll _ ’ start Tight from the beginning. We will ongn ‘the door: You + say ‘Hello,’ and we will start’ from. there’*? MeClure also” ” i ‘said that, didu’t het: ae et are .A. Abeut fliree and a half years. | Q. And during the time that: ‘youshave been i in the Miami ‘Police Department? how many occasions have you had to - interrogate persons? - ‘A. I do it eight hours a ‘day, six days a ‘week! Q. That is. your: particular, business, to interrogate?’ AL That’s.all I dv. - . - rials. Q. Take statements and iiterrogatet or ie - .. Al Yes, sir. . _«Q. Prior to thé time you ea George’ S, for how ines a. . period of time did you do that?” * A. About three and a half years, . Sy ~ .Q. About three cand a half years. ‘Did you detérmine whether or. fot George had ever been in the hangs, of ‘the law enforeement officers to me initerrogated? - . A. No. . Q. Now, did George appear Vv igotous ind ready to answ er these questions or was he extremely reluctant? o A: He was r@uctant to answer some questions‘and bthers, | he was quite talkative Q@. As a matter of fact, did y "Ou: attempt for.that hour and. a half, from 4:30 until 6 o’clock, or an approximate time © in: that area, to ‘wet a ‘statement from him—or 5 o ’clock to’ - 6:30-3td obtain a statement from him? A. No. ; [389] Q. He réfused throughout that time?” A. Now , : ~.Q. The first tint™ie gave } you any kind of a statementor’ admission’ or anything. i in any nfanner of. form or kind of _ guilt with regard to. this charge that we are here upor _ ~ today Was ‘the llth of June, isn’t that true? Q. Prior. to that time, he had note’ es 2 ‘A. That ‘is the first time, the first time I was presen Q: BY the way,’how. nae have 3 you, beer with the Miami | . Police Department? : nth BE. | : | Da a tia eRe ken a¢ when a statement was being made in regard to this case. Q. The ‘first time he made any confession or admission - i or statement with regard to the ‘accusation . in this: case! A. In my presence. “June? ; A. No, sir. Q.. "Wat there any ine abealiniateceid when yau took the : a oa graph test on the 4th of JuneQ | A. No,sir. t e a. oe .Q.: There Was that one occasion? .- A. I assumed that he had "been confined, yes, sit. Mr. Sanpstrom: I think that. is all I will require. Mr. Buock : Nothing further from the State. . “Mr SaNpsTROM: What is your size physically ; how tall are you? What do you w eigh? / . Tae W ITNEss : Six, two 0 ; £00 pounds. ¥ (Witness excused.) (391), oN Zl Grorce MixTon,. the Defendant. herein, °w as called’ ea ‘a eines on. his | own _ behalf, and having been previously duly sworn, was. ex- amined and testified furthemas follow: St a . Direct EXAMINATION. By Mr. SANDSTROM ¢ ‘Q. State your name. -— = « ( vf Q. Was oe drug administered, on the. nih of if 7 . ad ‘ 2: “ ° . . ° ad . e . *. e . . sc . . . P . . 7 . « - . - : . . e : _f > . : Z - ° * * tal e od “ _ " bebiee Milton: es 7 Q. ‘After the 31st of May of this year, aia yon" come into” custody? 1 . hae came into the wasted on the 1st day of June, “That. is when I came into custody by the police. _ Q. Now, where were you taken when you were in custody? oA. OW ell, Iwas t take to thegail house. . _ % AR tg ee ME here was.that, do you know? : Ts . * A. Well, it’s here in Miami. - . Q. Was that County jail or the City jail” : ee A. It was a City jail. | 7+ * sari Q. Now, what kind of avell were you in? A. I was in an tsolated cell all by myself. . Q, Now, deseribe tha it cell, about how large is it? AL Well, the cell, it’s about possibly, maybe, [892] three - OF four feet long, and maybe, possibly, three feet w ide. | eee.” ee mean it was shorter than you are?» ‘\ A. W ell, ~about—rote_lty about. three feet. wide or’ four feet Bide, and it’s s rGighly no more than six feet long.. I.would give a good imagination of it beeause I was there — Q. Ave there any furnishings i in there? . A. Well, there’s an iron ‘bunk for you to lay ‘on and. there’s a commode that you can use. There’s a place that ° you can take your hand and drink water. . Q. Now. are there any windows in there? ~~) AL No, there vas NO W indows Ww hatsoever. You couldn't seearythirg. | Q: How about: the gor’ W hat kind of a _ door is that? Describe it, please. A. The door Was a metal door. It was ial anal tt hada litile, spo sibly-cbout en opening along. about your eyes. where you could see out. of there. But that all depends’ whether th v left the little slide door up. It’s in the mittdle of the door, in the metal cfoor, It’s a slide’ door. Now, vou can only sec out of there if they slide out the peephole, or you éan’t see whi itsoe ver. You are in the dark. That’sall.: ro QW bon did vou get your light from? | 393]. A. It’s alight in there when they tury it on. 3Q. Is theré a bulb i in there or just a place Ww here it shines through? a oo A. The bulb itself isa container, a little el: iss cage ls : the. J bulb itself, cee | es 123 © Q. You can + get to » the bulb? 4. No. : + Q. How long did you stay in that eel in the City: jail?. cA. I Was there for 16 days. So. Neg , Q. At the City m , \. Iw: is db the C ity jail for 16 days. > *.: Q. And weré'you in that same cell all'the while? "A. I Was in the ; same jsolate d cell’all-the time Iw as there. Q. Now, how many ‘persons questioned you, do you recall? A. af can’ t call directly, but Twas interrogated, long: hours ° almost ever Vv day. @ Do, vou remember’ anybody Who interrogated you? A. Well, I remember Mr. W arren Holmes especially ; I remember him. : ~ “ Q. Who else?> A.- Mr. MeClure, | oe ee QQ. Who alse? . [894] A: 1 remember Mr. Charlie Shepherd. I remember -him° . Q. Was there anvone elsee , A. There was at one, time—there were some more police- - men in the room when they were swearing at me and jump- ing down my throat calling me all kinds of names.- _ Q. When wes the first time you were acini aa from : the time you got in that jail *. é A.W ell, I came in the jail on—well, the first ‘time, I Was interrogated was, [ believe it was on.June: ord. That > vas the time that I really remember, bit: I was interrogated all along. But I remember June 3rd. I also. remember June th, and—like T said, [ was interrogated a number of times. I just can’t remember. I do remember one yp Cepecaly L re- member the 11th day of June. Q. Don't get t ahead’ of me, now. How about during the period from’ the 3rd to the 11th? Were you interrogated every day or were there skips? Tell us about. that. A. Well, sometime they would interrogate me every day. j wouldn’t see aalybody that day. The next day, they would start interrogating me all over again, asking me questions. Qa. W ere you ever taken before. a judge daring the time you were in the C ity jail? - A. No,-not for. ié. days. I was invsolitary [395 ] confine- ment in an isolated cell by inyself for 16 days. QQ. Did they ev er show you any kind of a w arrant! ? ro ws be * “«. ° a o* . . os : . : ° et Z . : > . - e : as - * . % “ - . a - 124 A. No, they never showed me anything. As a matter of fact, they never told me anything about it except they just kept asking me questions. I tried to answer them, tell | them the best that I could. | (. Now, calling your atte [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386414_0045%3A1. Public record. Not legal advice.