ORIGINAL FILED IN SEP IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, TEXAS THE STATE OF TEXAS VS. RODNEY REED 21ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Transcription

1 CAUSE NO. 0 /$ THE STATE OF TEXAS VS. RODNEY REED X X X X X IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF BASTROP COUNTY, TEXAS ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT REPORTER'S RECORD JURY TRIAL GUILT/INNOCENCE PHASE MAY, AFTERNOON SESSION VOLUME OF ORIGINAL FILED IN COURT ('II: "'OI~II~J(l.l.".,.,0=-ALS SEP Troy G. bennet\, Jr., Clerk

2 ,,' On the th day of May, ~ the above entitled and numbered cause came on for hearing before said Honorable Court, Harold R. Towslee, Judge Presiding, and the following proceedings were had: Volume of GUILT/INNOCENCE PHASE (PAGES THROUGH )

3 APPEARANCES: For the State Mr. Charles Penick District Attorney, Bastrop County 0 Pecan Street Bastrop, Texas 0 SBOT #000 () - Mr. Forrest Sanderson Assistant District Attorney 0 Pecan Street Bastrop, Texas 0 SBOT #00 () - Ms. Lisa Tanner Assistant Attorney General P. O. Box Austin, Texas - SBOT #00 () -0 For the Defendant Mr. Calvin Garvie Attorney at Law N. Bell St., P. O. Box Bellville, Texas SBOT#000 (0) - Ms. Lydia Clay-Jackson Attorney at Law 00 N. San Jacinto Conroe, Texas 0 SBOT #00 (0) 0-

4 CHRONOLOGICAL INDEX WITNESS APPEARANCES AFTERNOON SESSION JUDGE'S QUESTIONING OF INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ (OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF JURY) JIMMY LEWIS FENNELL (CONTINUED) CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. SANDERSON RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. SANDERSON RECESS L. R. (ROCKY) WARDLOW DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. TANNER VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. TANNER CONTINUED A RECESS WAS TAKEN DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. TANNER CONTINUED VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. TANNER CONTINUED CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON PAGE.

5 RECESS CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON CONTINUED VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION BY MS. TANNER CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON CONTINUED REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. TANNER RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON (OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF JURY) COURT ADJOURNED FOR THE DAY COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 0

6

7 - Large Photo / -a mall Photo / - Brown Planner / D- Photo D- Photo D- Photo D- Photo D- Photo

8 (Day, Afternoon Session, May, ; Cause Number 0, Reed. ) the State of Texas versus Rodney (Outside the presence of the jury. ) THE COURT: Is your name Vasquez. INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir. THE COURT: And your first name. INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: John. THE COURT: Sir, you've been helping the defense in this case by interviewing some witnesses, as I it. understand INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir. I.. THE COURT: I think I've approved bills for you to be paid, right? INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir. THE COURT: The prosecution I'

9 indicated that there was a complaint, maybe, about how you've been approaching some of the witnesses, and I just wanted to make sure that you're not misrepresenting something to these prospective witnesses, et cetera. INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: No, sir. THE COURT: I can't remember the specific allegations. MS. TANNER: There was an allegation by a witness that Mr. Vasquez contacted them on numerous occasions after they -- because they did not want to talk to him, both in person and by phone, and he actually indicated to the witness that - actually this was a witness's mother, that the witness had warrants out for her arrest and would be arrested if she wouldn't cooperate with him. THE COURT: Okay. You understand, do you not, sir, that witnesses have a right to choose whether or not they want to talk to you? INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir, I sure do.

10 THE COURT: And do you make that known to them? INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir. THE COURT: I don't want to know who you've been talking to but I do not want you to misrepresent any facts, such as outstanding warrants to a get them to talk to you. person in order to Okay? INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir. THE COURT: You understand that, don't you? INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir. THE COURT: Do you want to cover anything else with this gentleman? MS. TANNER: I just would like the witnesses' wishes to be respected, if they don't want to talk to him, so be it. THE COURT: and you will agree with that, won't you, sir? INVESTIGATOR VASQUEZ: sir. THE COURT: Okay, that's as

11 far as I want to go with this. Thank you, sir. I'm not going to hinder your investigation other than to say if they don't want to talk to you, to. please don't force them the record, we MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Judge, on would like to assert that these allegations are so founded that no names been given. have THE COURT: Well, we could develop it further if you want to get names the record. in MS. TANNER: I can do that if you want to, it's up the Court. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Judge, what we've been having is a lot of allegations brought to our attention by the State's attorneys concerning witnesses, and we've been asking for names and they won't give them to us. THE COURT: Do you want to tell us who the party was that made the complaint? MS. TANNER: the mother of Jodie Uden.

12 THE COURT: Jodie Uden? MS. TANNER: Jodie Uden, U-D-E-N. THE COURT: Okay. Do you have any other questions about it, comments? or MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you Mr. Vasquez. MR. SANDERSON: Judge, there is something else before the jury comes back. THE COURT: Okay, go ahead. MR. SANDERSON: Ona different subject altogether. We would like, just verbally, a motion in limine to prevent defense counsel from bringing up the fact that the witness that's about to be cross-examined, at one point, invoked his right to counsel. like that's is totally inappropriate. We feel If this defendant were on trial, that, of course, would not be something that we could even talk about, and we don't feel like the defense should be able to talk about it at this point

13 either. THE COURT: Do you intend to ask him that question? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Most assuredly, Judge; and he's not on trial so that's why we can ask him. THE COURT: And I think it's relevant. I'm going to let the defense ask those questions. I believe in broad cross-examination, and I'm going to allow it. Are you ready for the jury then? MR. SANDERSON: sir. THE COURT: Okay. We're ready for them. (Whereupon the Jury returned to the courtroom and the following proceedings were had open Court.) THE COURT: Please be seated, thank you very much. Mr. Fennell, please have a seat back up in the witness stand.

14 CROSS EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Mr. Fennell, my name is Lydia Clay-Jackson, and you and I have not spoken before today, have.we? No, Okay. You were informed, though, that the defense team would liked to have spoken with you, is that correct? Yes. And you chose not to do that? All right. For the last three years you have been a law enforcement officer, is that correct? Law enforcement officers have special training to become certified, is that correct? And you are certified? Would you please tell me what training you have had for your certification as a enforcement officer? law Basic peace officers school.

15 I And basic peace officers school is how long? It varies on when you go, whether it's day or night class. How long did you go? Six months. Because you went to night school? Okay. And you went to night school because you were with the Bastrop Sheriff's Department? Okay. So while you were working at the jail with the Bastrop Sheriff's Department you were furthering your law enforcement education going through certification training, is that correct? And you went through certification training, did you not, at Georgetown, go? or where did you Here in Bastrop. Here in Bastrop. And who gives that certification training? CAPCO. CAPCO?

16 What is that an acronym for? Capital Area Planning Counsel Organization. And who sponsors that? It's just a group of counties that sponsor it. This six-month training that you went to, how many nights a week would you go? It varied, on different topics. On an average, how many nights a week did you go? Four. Four nights a week? For how long a period of time each night, on an average? Approximately during the whole duration of school. How many nights a week? Four nights. Four nights a week, and how long a period of time -- how many hours each night? From approximately :00 p.m. to :00 p.m., four hours. So approximately about hours a week you would be in school?

17 ,'.; And you did this for six months? What are the -- they are some of the basic courses that you took for investigation, correct? Report writing, is that correct? Court presentation? The penal code? You had to know what the laws were that you were about to enforce, right? Did you have special training on the intoxilyzer? No, Have you hadf since you've been a certified law enforcement officer, have you had special training in the intoxilyzer? No, You do know what it is, correct?

18 As a -- did you have special training in crime scene technique? No, 'Oka y. Did you have a course in crime scene technique? We just had basic crime scene, that's it. And the basic crime scene, were your instructors certified law enforcement officers? And were they also employed in the various particular law enforcement agencies, some sheriff's department, some law enforcement? You -- in the course that you took for crime scene investigation, do you recall who your instructor was? No, ma'am, I don't. Do you recall some of the techniques that - have you had -- let me back up. Sorry about that. Have you had an opportunity in your three years, or rather two and a half years, as a certified law enforcement officer to employ some of those techniques?

19 No, So you have never investigated a crime scene since you've been a No major crimes, no. patrol officer? Have you investigated, say, felonies and below? second-degree So you have employed some of those investigative techniques, have you not? That is correct, yes. And you've employed some crime scene techniques, too, have you not? Very little. But you have employed them? You had a course concerning interviewing, correct? A brief course on how to interview? No, You didn't have a brief course on how to interview? Not that I know of. Not that you can remember? No, All right. Did you have a course on how to approach suspects?

20 In several aspects, yes. In several aspects, okay. Did you have a course on how to talk with suspects? Yes. And as we've said, you had a course on courtroom presentation? Yes. How to present yourself in the courtroom? And some of the things they talked about were the way that you spoke to the jury, right? Yes. Okay. And the way that you spoke to defense attorneys, right? Yes. Okay. And the way that you spoke to the prosecution, correct? Okay. You have had to testify, have you not, a couple of times since you've been an officer with the Giddings Police Department, correct? is that Just basic traffic court. Well, that's still -- traffic codes are penal laws, aren't they?

21 No, ma'am, they're just traffic laws. Just traffic laws, okay. But you did testify? And you had a course in offense report writing, didn't you?, I Okay. And in this course that you took for offense writing, they talked to you about detail, did they not? Yes. This was a standard course, correct? There was nothing particularly different about your evening courses than, say, someone who is going through another sheriff's department academy as a rookie police officer, correct? No, that's not correct. It could be different, based on the instructor. But it is a standard course? it's an overview of everything. Right. And you've had -- do you belong to any police officer associations? No, Okay.. Have you ever spoken with fellow police officers outside of, say, this tri-county

22 area? Okay. Did you talk with them about their training also? To some extent, yes. Especially when you were a new officer and you were meeting other officers in the other counties you talked about the trials and tribulations of going to school in other counties? Not necessarily. You didn't talk about how glad you were that that was over with and you're finally out here serving? No. You didn't talk about that? No. Okay. In this course that you took concerning offense report writing, did you -- do you recall who your instructor was? I don't recall. You do recall, though, that your instructor talked with you about the importance of the offense report? Yes.

23 And the reason that the offense report was important was because it gave you an understanding of the events close to the time of the inciderit, isn't that correct? And it was also important because sometimes in criminal investigations one had to refer back to those reports, isn't that correct? One had to refer back to those reports to refresh their memory, isn't that correct? Or assist fellow officers in the investigation of whatever the particular incident that offense report was written for, correct? Okay. offense report, your instructor informed you that the more detailed the report the better the report, isn't that correct? Yes. When you were in class concerning the And the more detailed the report, the better the report, the more able you are to be a help to people who are trying to find out facts about the case, isn't that correct?

24 When did you complete your training at the academy? September of. When you were in this class concerning offense reports, your instructors talked to you about the importance of putting detail of time into your report, isn't that 'correct? Because sometimes you can look at an offense report and it's like a Yes. jigsaw puzzle, correct? And each part of this puzzle is very important, so you'll be able to present the whole picture to whomever has to -- whether it be a judge or a jury, isn't that correct? And part of this puzzle would be time, the timeframe everything happened, correct? Yes. isn't that You have -- one of the things that they say about lawyers is that we have no common sense because it was taken out of us at law school. The fact that you were taught about details

25 and time, did you use that in your -- did that translate into your daily affairs? Not necessarily. So you didn't become real aware of what time was or when something happened? No, But you were able to do that when you put on your uniform and got in your patrol car? I.. Not necessarily. So that part of the lesson you didn't learn very well, is that what you're saying? It just applies to different agencies. Our agency, they want an approximate time, they don't want the exact time, because there is no exact time. Okay. So given this generality, do they give you a timeframe that your agency says is an acceptable generality about time? Not necessarily. They don't say if you can get within an hour or if you can get within two hours or three hours then it's okay? They don't regulate it. They don't regulate it. So some of the things that you learned at the academy you didn't

26 have to transfer over to your daily career as, a Giddings police officer? That's correct. Now, you said you had a course in investigative techniques, is that correct? Okay. Do you recall who the instructor was in that class? No, I do not recall. One of the things they taught you in that course was to, one, look at the general view of the scene when you come upon it, is that correct, when you're investigating an offense? I'm not sure. We really didn't touch on that. You didn't touch on that? What aspects of investigation did you-all touch on, officer? Just basic contact, basic When you say "contact," what do you mean? Making contact with suspects, Mirandizing, and such as that, that just a deal with. patrol officer would When you took your basic investigative! i' technique course, you said that they taught you about how to make contact with the suspect?

27 And how to perform the Miranda, is that correct? Okay. Okay. Okay. Just for someone that hasn't been around for the last years, can you tell the jury what the Miranda warnings are? Tell them exactly what they are or what they are supposed to do. Tell them exactly what they are, sir. Exactly what they are is they give the rights to the accused as to they have the right to a lawyer, they have the right to remain silent and such. Now, you don't just give those rights to people who have been accused, do you? Not necessarily. Those rights are also given to someone just suspected of an offense, isn't that correct? And those are important rights, aren't they? And they teach you in class they are important rights, correct?

28 And they also teach you that every citizen has those rights, isn't that correct? And when you are suspected of an offense or you have been accused of an offense that those rights are verbalized, isn't that right? Yes. Since you have been with the Giddings Police Department, have you had many awards? No, Have you had any awards? No, Have you been favorably cited as a good patrol officer? No, You stated on direct examination that you felt as if the officers in Bastrop County were trying to get you suspended, is that correct? What specific things to your knowledge happened to cause you to come conclusion? to that The Chief of Police told me. And were you ever suspended? I

29 Excuse me? Were you ever suspended? No, At this point in your career with Giddings, do you have take-home privileges with your vehicle? At this point, yes. At the time in, this time in, you did not have those privileges, did you? No, You had a partner, a car partner I would say, in by the name correct? of David Hall, is that Not necessarily a car partner. He just lived the closest out of the officers. So you-all didn't share the car? Every now and then, but basically we worked too close a constantly. shift to be using the same car, Were you and David Hall friends? Pretty much, yes. And are you yet friends? Yes. Okay. Were you informed by your Chief of Police as to what you were supposed to be

30 0 suspended for? No, ma'am, I was not. Were you informed -- what steps did you take after you were informed that Bastrop was looking to have you suspended? I didn't take any. You didn't contact the police chief in Bastrop or the sheriff's office? No, Even though you worked for the sheriff's department, you didn't contact the sheriff? No, He would have nothing to do with it. You didn't contact the chief of police in Bastrop? No, Is there a procedure in the Giddings Police Department, Officer, whereby a citizen who feels wronged by an officer can complain? Do you know if there is a corresponding procedure in the Bastrop Police Department? As far as I know, there is in every department. Okay. Did you not feel that having somebody

31 try to get you suspended was a Not necessarily. wrong to you? So you didn't think it was contact the police chief? that important to Well, the police chief would not have anything to do with it, actually. And you didn't think it was important to. contact the sheriff's department? The sheriff's department didn't have anything to do with it either. You were saying there were officers that were trying to get you suspended? The Texas Rangers. The Texas Rangers. else? Did you contact anyone No, And when was I'm not sure. this supposed to have happened? The chief never advised me. Okay. When did the chief advise you that they were trying to get you suspended? He advised me shortly after Mr. Reed was arrested. So that would have been sometime in March of?

32 You said that your relationship with Stacey was good? Yes. You would not in any description call it a controlling relationship would you? No, You would call it an equal partnership, is that right? Y,es, And you had an open relationship, is that right? I'.

33 : And you understood that from her recounting of her position, is that right? And the people that she worked with. She supervised how many people in this managerial position? I'm not sure. Do you know whether or not she did supervise people in this position? I'm not sure. Did you and Stacey do a lot of things with her fellow HEB employees? No, Did you-a~l do a couple of things with her HEB fellow employees? No, Was there any socializing whatsoever with fellow HEB employees? Only at church functions. Did you-all continue going to church in Bastrop, or did you start going to church in Giddings? Giddings. And there were Bastrop HEB employees who lived in Giddings? No, Smithville.

34 Smithville? Yes. Okay. We've got a triangle here now. You-all went to church in Giddings, is that correct? Yes. And you're saying that the times you socialized with the HEB employees was when you-all were going to church in Smithville? Yes -- no, correction. We were going to church in Bastrop, and they were going in Smithville. The churches got together a lot. Okay. And do you recall the names of the HEB employees that you-all socialized with in the church? No, ma'am, I do not. Have you kept in contact with any of these people? No. 'You gave Stacey her engagement ring you said either in December or January, correct? is that No, ma'am, that's when I asked her. I gave it to her after that, sometime after that. Do you remember when it was? No, ma'am, I sure don't.

35 When you bought the engagement ring, Officer, did you buy the full engagement ring wedding set or did you just buy the engagement ring? The full set. The full set. And you still have that se~, is that correct?, I ;j.:' When -- and you said that she would not wear those rings to work, is that right? the rings she would not wear to work, correct. So when you gave a description to Ranger Wardlow concerning what she may have been wearing, what she would have had with her, when you put engagement ring in there, it was just absent-mindedness, is that correct? That's correct. And you did give Ranger Wardlow a description of what you thought she would have with her, right? What she would be wearing? No, ma'am, I don't think it was Ranger Wardlow that I did it. Who do you think it was? I believe it was Chief Duncan. You spoke to a lot of officers, didn't you?

36 And, in fact, on April the th, you received a Miranda warning, didn't you? And you volunteered to go in and give a blood and hair and saliva sample, did you not? And you did that willingly? And you spoke with at least -- well, let's talk about which officers you talked with. You spoke with a representative, a law enforcement representative, of the Texas Rangers, is that correct? And that was Rocky Wardlow, is that right? And you spoke with a law enforcement officer from the Bastrop Sheriff's Department, that correct? Two. isn't Two of them. And that was Officer Ed Selmala, is that correct? No, ma'am, that is Bastrop Police Department. It would be Investigator Barton, is that

37 correct? Okay. And you spoke with Detective Board, is that right? That's the Bastrop Police Department. And you did speak with Officer Selmala, correct? Yes. Okay. You spoke with a lieutenant in the Department of Public Safety, correct? No. You didn't speak to a Lieutenant Moore with the Department of Public Safety? Lieutenant? Moore? No, Not that I recall. This would have been probably in December of? I don't recall a Lieutenant Moore. Did you speak with a law enforcement officer by the name of Pat Carmack? Not that I know of. Back in October of '? Not that I recall. Getting back to the fact that you were and

38 still are a trained police officer, you didn't make a written notation of the events of April nd, rd, and th, did you? Just for your own purposes, did you? No, And, in fact, you didn't make a written statement in this particular case at all, did you? No, You weren't asked to make a statement, were you? Just verbal. A verbal statement? But nothing reduced to writing and then signed? No. Were you asked -- were you ever able to talk with the officers -- let me back up. me How many times did you contact ~- let back up again. Who did you think was the lead investigator or lead officer in your fiancee's death? The one that handled most of the stuff or

39 talked to us most of the time was Campos. Lieutenant And as a trained police officer, would you then assume that he was this particular case? Not necessarily. the lead officer in Okay. Did you make any assumption as to who the lead police officer was in this case? Okay. And who did you assume to be the lead officer? The highest ranking official, the Texas Ranger. Okay.. Was there ever an occasion, Officer, when you contacted Ranger Wardlow to ask him about the progress in this case? ma'am, several times. And were you given information about the progress in this case? Not necessarily. Were you given any information? Not necessarily. When you say "not necessarily," does that mean that you were or you were not given information about this case?

40 0 They didn't give me any information besides who they needed to contact or question. So they were telling you who they were going to contact and question? Yes. So they gave you some information? Yes. Were you also aware -- you were also aware that Crystal, Stacey's sister, had retained the services of a private investigator in this case, were you not? Yes. Okay. You contacted -- and do you recall that private investigator's name? No, ma'am, I sure don't. Do you recall that private investigator trying to get in touch with you? No, You don't recall him ever trying to get in touch with you? No, When did you try to get in touch with that investigator? I never did. Was -- did you contact Lieutenant Campos

41 concerning the investigation of your fiancee's death? On numerous occasions? And did he give you information? No, He gave you no information whatsoever? No information at all. Did you contact Lieutenant Barton or Board? Sergeant Barton or Board? Right. I didn't contact Sergeant Board but Sergeant Barton, yes, I contacted him a couple of times. And did they give you information -- did he give you information? Basically, Barton was usually the one that asked me the questions to some other stuff that might be going on, if I knew of anybody else. Are you saying stuff that might have been going on in connection with this investigation? if I had enemies or such.

42 And did you have any enemies? Not that I know of. Prior to working with the Bastrop Sheriff's Department, where did you work? Numerous places. Prior to working with the Bastrop Sheriff's Department, Where did I Yes. sir, where did you work? work prior to? I worked for Westland Retirement Home in Georgetown. And what did you do with them? Maintenance. And before the retirement home? I worked security. With what company? The Probe Security Company out of Houston. Say it again, please? Probe Security out of Houston. How long did you work with them? I'm not sure. I don't recall. When did you' work with them? I don't recall, Were you a teenager when you worked with them? No,

43 Were you in your early s when you worked for them? I was around, yes. What year were you? That would have to have been in early ', somewhere in there. Prior to Probe Security, where did you work? Another security company in Houston. Do you recall the name of that security company? Greater Houston. Greater Houston Security Company? Now, were these security positions on site premises or was it patrol or what type of - On site premises. Were they for buildings or were they for office buildings or were they for apartment complexes? Mostly shopping centers. Shopping centers. And was this nighttime security -- Or daytime security? Nighttime.

44 Nighttime security. right? You grew up in Plainview, is that No, Where. did you grow up? Georgetown. And you graduated from Georgetown? Did you play football? No, Did you play any sports? Baseball. Baseball. When -- what caused you to decide to go into law enforcement in Bastrop? I had some friends that worked there, and I had been interested in law enforcement all my life. Which friends introduced you to the Bastrop Sheriff's Department? I don't recall the last names. It was two gentlemen that I had worked with prior. And these were friends of yours? Yes. But you can't remember what their names are?

45 It's been a long time since I've talked to them. And you started there three years ago? You have been in law enforcement for three years? No, ma'am, longer than three years. How long have you been a law enforcement officer? I have been a police officer for almost three years. I was in law enforcement prior -- I was in Bastrop County prior to having my peace officer's license. So the two and a half years that you've been with Giddings and the six months that you were with Bastrop, you were with Bastrop before then. Is that what you're saying? Okay. How much longer? Approximately six more months. Three and a half years you have been in law enforcement? Yes. In your close relationship with Stacey, during the period of time that you-all were together you gave her gifts, did you not? Yes.

46 You gave her gifts at birthdays and Christmas and special occasions? Yes. Valentine? Yes. Do you recall what her favorite perfume was? No, ma'am, I don't. Did she wear perfume everyday? No, Did she wear it to go to work? Sometimes she did. And as a law enforcement officer who was in love with a -year-old and who had to drive back and -- this -year-old had to drive back and forth from Giddings to Bastrop, you took it upon yourself to instruct her in safety techriiques, did you not? Okay. And those were driving safety techniques, correct? And one of the things that you instructed her to do was to not leave the car if the car should break down, isn't that correct?

47 The other thing -- what other types ~f things did you instruct her on as far as her safety? Locking the doors, not to s~op in dark areas and such. And to the best of your knowledge she followed your instructions?

48 No, And it's your testimony that you rarely ever drove the Tempo, is that right? That's correct. \ And when you drove the Tempo, you used Mrs. Stites's key, is that right? You wouldn't use Stacey's keys? No, Do you know whether or not HEB has name tags for their employees? ma'am, they do. And do you know how many name tags they issue to the individual parties? They do~'t necessarily issue them, the employee has to pay for them. And how much were they? I don't recall. Do you recall how many name tags Stacey had? I know at least two. And where would she generally have these name tags? On her red work shirt. She kept them on her work shirt? She kept one there, and I don't know where she

49 kept the other one. All right. During the year that you and Stacey were going together and engaged, you ever quarrel? did r - - We argued, just like anybody. And sometimes did those arguments ever become public? No. So they were never public arguments? No, Do you recall how many wedding dates, the dates for the wedding, set? that you and Stacey I believe two. One was in March and the other was in May, is I that right? What was the reason of postponing the March date? I II, While getting ready for the wedding we found out that we didn't have enough time to prepare everything for the wedding that we wanted. So an extra two months would give you that time?

50 0 And when Stacey started working at HEB, do you recall whether or not there was a conversation concerning HEB's need to have, emergency, a contact number? in case of an Not that I know of. Would you assume that Stacey would have given, if there was that type of situation where HEB needed in case of an emergency a contact number, would you assume because of your close relationship that you and Stacey had that she would give your number as the person to contact or her mother's? No, You would assume she would give her mother's? Okay. And why is that? Because at the time she began working there, I lived in Lake Bastrop Acres and they lived in Bastrop. Wasn't there a time that you moved in with Stacey and her mother in Bastrop before you moved there? It was a couple of weeks before I moved. \. i! So you stayed with them for a before you moved to Giddings? couple of weeks

51 There were only two sets of keys to your truck, is that correct? ma'am, that's correct. And that was the set that you had that you kept with you and the set that Stacey kept with her, is that right? I.. As a certified police officer, is it a policy it is a policy, as a matter of fact, of the Giddings Police Department to have stun guns, is that correct? Excuse me? The Giddings Police Department has stun guns, do they not? No, They don't have stun guns? No, Okay. On the evening of the nd, when you returned from work, actually it was afternoon, you gave Ms. Stites back her car keys, is that right? I don't recall having her keys. You don't recall having them. You were scheduled -- were you i.

52 scheduled for court testimony or a appearance on April the rd? No. court Stacey had a clutch purse with her that she kept her driver's license in, did she not? And she took that with her when she was in the truck because she was driving and she needed her driver's license, correct? (Defendant's Exhibits Nos.,,,, and were marked for identification purposes.) (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) I'm showing you Defense Exhibits through. Will you take a close look at these, please? (Witness complies.) Do you recognize these? Do you recognize them to be the inside of a vehicle? And are the contents in these pictures

53 familiar to you? Personally familiar to you? Do you mean all the contents of the picture inside there? Correct. Yes. It basically all looks familiar. Did you have an athletic bag that you kept your baseball equipment in? No. How did you maintain your baseball equipment? The team equipment? Your personal equipment, I guess it would be? I just left it lying about. Your personal equipment would be a glove, is that right? Yes. Did you have a mask? ma'am, I believe I did. A catcher's mask? What other baseball equipment did you have? I don't recall. Do you not play baseball any longer? I still coach every now and then, yes.

54 When did you cease coaching -- I mean, when did you cease playing baseball? Cease playing baseball? sir. Right after I got out of college. I'm sorry, I really didn't make myself clear. In your position as a coach, you did have your own catcher's mask, is that right? It was actually just an umpire mask. Umpire mask? Yes. And you had your glove? Yes. Do you still have your glove? I do. Do you still play sometimes with that glove? Yes. Do you still use the umpire mask? No. What happened to the umpire mask? I gave it to the league. Was it part -- when did you give it to the league? Last year. I show you Defense Exhibit. Do you

55 recognize this? Yes. Is it something you have personal knowledge of? Okay. Would it be correct to say, Officer, that you kept a lot of your baseball equipment in a plastic bag? it was just a plastic bag. A blue and green plastic -- blue and yellow plastic bag? And there were other things in that plastic bag, too, were there not? I don't recall what all was in there. Okay. But you would keep your mask in that plastic bag, correct? Yes. But generally your glove would be kept behind your seat in the car, is that right? Just wherever I put it that day. Do you know a Pat Duncan, Officer? The name does not ring a bell. So you don't know who she is, is that correct? I don't recall that name.

56 Okay. You never remember Stacey telling you about David Lawhon, is that right? That's correct. And not necessarily that she didn't, you just don't remember her telling you, is that right? That's correct. Did officers from the Bastrop Sheriff's Departm~nt or the Bastrop City Police Department or the Texas Rangers ever ask to search your apartment? No, To whom did you sell the truck to on -- the truck was released to you -- your pickup was released to you on the th of April. Who did you sell it to? It went straight to the dealership from the DPS. And that went back to Covert, is that who it went back to? No, it went back to Bob Gold Chevrolet. One more time? Bob Gold Chevrolet. Was it on a trade-in? I used it on a trade-in. Okay. And not being from this area, Bob Gold

57 is in Austin? Or where is it? Giddings. Giddings. Okay. So the last time you saw that truck was on the rd of April, is that right? ma'am, that's correct. So you didn't pick it up from DPS and drive it to Bob Gold? No. When were the contents of the truck released to you, Officer? I'm not sure. Were they released to you before or after the truck was released? If I recall, probably, I believe, after the truck was released. And what did you get from the contents of the truck? from it? Did you get everything that you wanted As in -- All the personal effects that you perhaps wanted, because your baseball glove was in the truck, was it not? Yes. And you catcher's mitt was in the truck, was

58 it not? Yes. Effects like that. Did you get all the effects like that that you wanted? That I know of. When you were asked to go to the wrecker yard where the truck was temporarily being stored while processed to DPS, do you recall opening giving the keys to the officer and having the officer open the doors? I gave the keys to the officer. I don't remember if he opened the door or not. Do you recall -- so then you don't recall physically looking into the car with the doors open -- the truck with the doors open? I take that back, he had to open the driver's side door. It was just the driver's side door that you recall being opened? That I recall. That you recall? You're not saying that was the only door that was opened, recall? you're just saying that is all you

59 ma'am, that's correct. Do you recall the officer doing anything within the truck to aid you in looking and observing what was going on in the truck? No, ma'am, no one ever passed the door. One more time, I'm sorry. No No No, one ever passed the door. one ever passed the door? When you say no one ever passed the door - oh, you mean no one ever got into the truck? ma'am, that's correct. Do you recall in this particular model truck, there is a console, is there not? Correct. And there is a console that has a top that goes on it, isn't that right? And you have to release that top with a inside the truck, is that right? Yes. latch Do you recall looking inside that console? No, ma'am, I don't recall looking inside. Do you recall ever telling somebody that you were banned from Bastrop?

60 0 No, You don't recall that? No, Is it possible that you may though? No. No? have said that, Not that I know of. You had specific reasons as to why you did not contact the private investigator that Stacey's sister hired, did you not? I had no specific reason, no. You weren't interested in what he was developing? Crystal kept me informed on everything. And how often did you talk to Crystal? Quite often. Once a Yes. week at least? Was there a period of time when you gave Crystal instructions as to what to do as far as having the private investigator investigate certain people? Not that I know of. Specifically, was there a law enforcement

61 officer that you told Crystal that her private!. investigator needed to investigate? Not that I remember. When you saw the truck at the wrecker yard, did you assume foul play? I assumed foul play before that. Before that? You said that when you were -- when Stacey's mother called you that morning to inform you that Stacey had not made it to work yet, you walked out of your house putting on your clothes, is that correct, putting on your shirt? ma'am, that is correct. But your shoes and socks were already on? Yes. But do you have an estimate, Officer, about how long it took you to get partially clothed and get to the door from the time Stacey's mom called you? No, ma'am, I don't have an estimate. Okay. Would you think it would have probably been no more than five minutes? A lot less than that.

62 A lot less than that. And the reason that you said you went to the Bastrop Sheriff's Department was because you used to work with them and you knew the people there at the Bastrop Sheriff's Department, right? That is correct. Versus going to Bastrop City where you had not worked and people you didn't know, correct? Correct. Your checkbook -- was your checkbook returned to you? No, That checkbook has never been found, is that right? That's correct. And, again, there was no search warrant, or request to search your home, was there, made by any law enfocement agency? No. And you were only at the wrecking yard for about fifteen minutes? I don't even know if I was there that long. Did you leave the keys to the truck with the With the investigator.

63 With the investigator? So you've never seen those -- you took your house keys, though, you just took those keys off and gave it to them? I just took the one key off. You said you were instructed to return back to home and stay at home. Who instructed you to stay at home? Basically, Chief Duncan. So he was at the wrecker yard with you-all? No, he was at the PD. He just advised me to go ahead and go home and wait. And did you wait upstairs in your apartment or did you wait downstairs? Downstairs. Let's talk a little bit about the interview the interviews that you said you had with Lieutenant Campos and Sergeant Barton and Ranger Wardlow. When did these interviews become abusive? Abusive as in language? Correct. From day one. And when did you suspect they were playing what you termed to be bad cop/good cop? Basically all the time.

64 .. Even when you voluntarily gave samples of your blood, and your hair and your saliva, they were doing the bad cop/good cop thing? To some extent, yes. When you say "to some extent," what do you mean? They wouldn't do it all the time. Would you give the jury an example of a time when they were playing -- when you thought they were playing good cop/bad cop? For instance, the day after they would ask sexually-oriented questions, one officer would get rude and obnoxious and start yelling and everything and the other officer would calm him down and take him outside and everything. Then they would come back in the room and then the other officer that calmed him down would want me to speak to him so that it put me on the side of him for him to be more understanding and everything, and that's how they worked it. And you remember that incident, don't you? I remember every incident, yes. Okay. Which officer played the good cop? As I recall, Barton, Sergeant Barton.

65 And which officer played the bad cop? Lieutenant Campos. When these two gentlemen interviewed you, did they always do that? Did they always assume did Sergeant Barton always assume the good cop role and Sergeant Campos the bad cop? No. They switched off? And you remember other occasions, correct? Other than this particular time when there was a sexual orientation towards the conversation, what other time was there? There was another time when they called me in for a second time for questioning about some stuff, you know, like some yearbooks and stuff like that, or if she knew so and so. And they would ask you to come down to the police station and talk to them about it? They never came over to your home and talked with you about it or anything? No, And during this yearbook incident, who played the good cop and who played the bad cop?

66 I believe it was reversed at that time. What role was Lieutenant Campos playing as the good cop? What was he playing? He was just being more sympathetic towards everything. Did you ever call them on it, Officer? No, But you knew what was going on all the time? Sometimes it was hard to understand what was going on. Why was that? The emotions. Would you describe yourself as an emotional person? Sometimes. At sometimes? Did Ranger Wardlow ever participate in these instance that you describe as good cop/bad cop? Not that I recall. It was just Sergeant Barton and Lieutenant Campos? Yes. You said there was a lot of yelling going on in these confrontations sometimes? Yes. i,- \

67 Were you in an interrogation room or were you in one of their offices? Office. In an office? So they didn't take you to an interrogation room, did they? I don't believe at the time that they had an interrogation room. It was open. And these were the offices without the windows, is that right? With just a desk and file cabinet and a couple of chairs? Were there any other techniques, investigative techniques that you realized were being used on you? Not necessarily. That was the only one I could pick up on besides the emotion role. The emotion role? where they get my emotions real high and try to drop them down re~l low again, try to like -- they try to crack somebody or try to get them to go ahead and confess or something like that. And how -- describe to the jury what an

68 ,. emotional role is? They will get you all excited and everything and start getting you pumped up and everything and then they'll drop down and ask you a quick question, "Just go ahead and tell us." Something of that sort. A person that's not thinking will go ahead and -- or a person that's not consciously thinking about it will go ahead and pop off with something that will lead them to a did occur. suspicion that something really And what kinds of things did you detect that they were trying to bring your emotions up on? What kinds of things did they use? Just the whole incident itself, or blaming me or such. They just flat came on out and blamed you for it? ma'am~ They blamed you or they accused you? Which

69 say that we ~nderstand what's going on, go ahead and tell us, we instead of capital. can get you first-degree Such as that. Now, in your career as a law enforcement officer, have you seen this technique used on other people who have been accus~d or suspected of offenses? I have since then, yes. And have you ever participated in any of those this technique? And it's your testimony that you don't recall ever speaking with a Lieutenant Moore or a law enforcement agent by the name of Carmack, is that right? That's correct. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Pass the witness. REDIRECT EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MR. SANDERSON: Jimmy, just a few questions. Are you sure, with regard to your checkbook, that it was in the truck that night, or might you have lost it somewhere else?

70 0 sir, I'm positive it was in my truck. That's where it stayed. You were asked repeatedly about a David Lawhon. Do you know who David Lawhon is? Other than publicity on prior stuff, no, sir. All right. But you're aware of the prior stuff, the prior publicity, right? Yes. And what are you aware of through the publicity? That he committed a murder here in Bastrop county. And was convicted of that murder? sir. Now, had your fiancee, Stacey, have mentioned the fact that she knew David Lawhon, would that have been something you would remember? Most likely, yes. How close, in your opinion, from your observations, was Stacey and her mother, Carol? Very close. Was there any other things that you can recall missing from the pickup truck beside your checkbook? i I.

71 I I I That's all I can recall. with regard -- let me back up and ask it another way. What was Stacey's habit when going to work about where she would put her r, red HEB shirt? It just depends. If she was running late or something, she might not have put it on, but, you know, usually -- usually she didn't put it on because it would be hot going up there, and when she got there she would put it on. Okay. And if she didn't put it on but carried it with her, do you know where in the cab of the truck she would put it? No, sir. You were asked a lot of questions about your studies in the academy, and you understand what an offense report is from your studies in the academy, is that right? ;., sir. Have you ever had occasion to write an offense report since you've been working as a officer? patrol sir, numerous times. Did anybody at the academy ever teach you that if you were a suspect in a crime that you're

72 supposed to write an offense report? No, sir. It sounds kind of silly, doesn't it? sir. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Go ahead. (BY MR. SANDERSON) How many times, approximately, have you testified in court? I would say at least a hundred or so. And you've talked about traffic court? Who sir, traffic court only. is the judge of the traffic court that you testified in? A municipal judge. Is that person a lawyer? No, sir. Does that person sit up on a big bench? sir. Is it normally the case that there is a of twelve people hearing -- jury No, What sir. are those cases like? It's just the officer, the defendant, the city attorney and the judge, municipal judge.

73 And by municipal cases, are you talking about speeding? sir. And how long, approximately, would you be on the witness stand testifying in a case? speeding Five to ten minutes. And that happens real frequently, does it not? Here recently it hasn't. Whenever you were being interrogated by Rocky Wardlow or by John Barton or by Lieutenant Campos, given the fact that you were still in the grieving process, how did it make you feel? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: I'm sorry, I didn't understand the question. MR. SANDERSON: I said, THE COURT: It's overruled. You may answer it, sir. The emotions were -- I still knew as a police officer what th~y were doing, but the

74 emotions, you know, were like It was really hard, you know, to' think that someone would actually think that I did it when I didn't, and so forth. Jimmy, what has been the hardest thing for you? Losing Stacey -- Your Honor. to object to the State's attorney going into the area as to how Mr. Fennell feels, as one, it violates a motion in limine, for one; and, two, it's not relevant to the issues and the facts of this particular case, the way he felt about this. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Judge, may we approach? THE COURT: it was hard. Objection, (Whereupon a brief discussion was held off the record.) MS. CLAY-JACKSON: THE COURT: sustain the relevancy objection. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: I'm going to I'm going Thank you, Your Honor. (BY MR. FENNELL) Jimmy, you were asked about!.

75 whether or not you had given back Carol's keys on the afternoon or late evening -- I'm sorry, late afternoon or early evening of the nd of April,? r' Yes. Did you ever have Carol's keys at that point in time? I. I don't think I could have, because Carol would have them to drive her car somewhere if she had an emergency of some sort. Do you recall needing her keys on that day? No, sir. Do you recall having driven her car on that date? No, sir. If you needed to drive her car, if you had some occasion and your truck wasn't available, would you have had to go to her to get those keys? Yes. MR. SANDERSON: I'll pass the witness. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No further questions of this witness. THE COURT: Sir, you may step

76 down. MR. SANDERSON: Just one moment. (BY MR. SANDERSON) What was Stacey's habit, with regard to --' if you know -- with regard to whether or not she would take her purse with her credit cards and that sort of thing with her to work? I don't think she ever carried a purse. She just had a little wallet thing with the driver's license and such in it. All right. Yes. Would that have cash in it? Would it have credit cards in it? Yes. Would it have anything else in it that you're aware of? Could have numerous things in it. In terms of size of this object, how big is it?- Approximately about that long, in width (indicating). and about that And do you know what she would do with it when she got to work? In other words, would she lock it up?

77 \,. It was would stay in the truck. Okay. MR. SANDERSON: Pass the witness. RECROSS EXAMINATION. QUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Officer, what you just described, do people generally call those things organizers? I guess that's what they call them. I usually call them just like a wallet of some sort. Did it have pages to write on? No, MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Pass the witness. QUESTIONS BY MR. SANDERSON: FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION And did you ever open it up to see what all was inside? Not necessarily. Okay. All right. MR. SANDERSON: Pass the witness. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Nothing

78 further. THE COURT: sir, you may step down. That will be all, (Whereupon the witness was excused from the stand.) THE COURT: break, about ten minutes. Let's take a seated. Sergeant Wardlow. (At this time a recess was taken. ) (Whereupon the Jury returned to the courtroom and the following proceedings were had open Court.) THE COURT: Please be Thank you very much. Your next witness? MS. TANNER: The State calls THE COURT: Let me swear you in before you testify, then please be seated.

79 L. R. (ROCKY) WARDLOW, the witness; after having first been duly sworn, assumed the witness stand and testified upon his oath as follows: DIRECT EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MS. TANNER: Would you state your name for the jury, please, sir. L. R. Wardlow. THE COURT: And will you pull that microphone down so we can all hear you, sir. Go ahead. (BY MS. TANNER) And for the benefit of the I. court reporter, will you spell your last name? W-A-R-D-L-O-W. And are you a resident of Bastrop County? And how are you employed? With the Texas Rangers. And the Texas Ranger is a portion of what? The Department of Public Safety. How long have you been employed by the Department of Public Safety? Eighteen years. And how long have you been a Texas Ranger?

80 0 Approximately six years. And how does -- well, let me back up and ask you this. Where are you stationed as a Ranger? In Bastrop.,,- Do you cover all of Bastrop County or additional counties? Additional counties. What counties do you also cover? I'm primarily responsible for Bastrop and Lee County at the present time. And how does one become a Ranger? A minimum requirement is eight years in law enforcement and the last two years have to be with DPS. And you indicated that you had been with DPS for years? that's correct. Were you in law enforcement before you went to work for DPS? No, And before you became a Ranger, what did you do with DPS? I was a highway patrol sergeant, or supervisor.

81 And where were you stationed in that regard? In Bastrop. Has your entire time with the Department of Public Safety been in Bastrop or elsewhere? Elsewhere. Where else? I was originally stationed in Shamrock, Texas, and then I was transferred to Granbury and promoted to highway patrol sergeant and went \. to Corpus Christi and then transferred here. And can you tell the jury your educational background and training in law enforcement? I studied in college some law classes and, of course, we have a basic recruit school. Throughout the years I've been to numerous schools dealing with all aspects of law enforcement. Okay. And, generally speaking, what is the duty of a Ranger in a particular county? We do criminal investigation. And what jurisdiction do you have over criminal investigations in the county? We have a state-wide jurisdiction. And how do you get involved, or does any Ranger get involved in any particular

82 investigation? Well, primarily we're called upon by the local police departments or sheriff's office in serious felony investigations. Occasionally we're assigned investigations from the Colonel or Senior Ranger Captain. Do you do a lot of investigation of public officials and law enforcement officials that would be a little too much of a conflict of interest for local law enforcement? Yes. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, leading. THE COURT: I'll overrule it. (BY MS. TANNER) I'm sorry, you can answer the question. we handle sensitive investigations. Were you involved in the investigation in the murder of Stacey Stites? And which agencies were involved in that particular investigation? The Bastrop Police Department and Sheriff's office.

83 ' Why were both agencies involved instead of just one of them? Initially the vehicle had been found in the City of Bastrop. The Bastrop Police Department initiated the investigation of a missing person. Later the body was discovered outside the city in the county, which is in the sheriff's jurisdiction. And how did you get involved in that particular investigation? The police department originally called me that morning and asked for our assistance. Is it common for the Rangers to be involved in a multi-jurisdictional case like this? Yes. And when you are involved in a multi-jurisdictional case, can you tell us whether or not the Rangers kind of run interference between the different agencies? We essentially coordinate the effort between the various agencies that may be involved. Okay. Now, you indicated you were called by the Bastrop Police Department in this particular case?

84 And at the time -- do you recall about what time it was that you were called? It seemed like it was around eight o'clock or :0 when I initially was contacted. :00 a.m. or p.m.? m. And was that on April rd of? And at the time you initially became involved in the case, was the young lady, Stacey Stites, was she already known to be deceased or was she only missing? She was missing at that time. Okay. And do you know why it is that you were called in? To assist in the investigation to find her. Did you or other officers you were working with call in another aspect of the Department of Public Safety? ma'am, I eventually did. And which part of DPS did you call? Initially I called the aircraft section to assist with searching the area by air, specifically, one of our helicopters. And, subsequently, after the body was discovered,

85 we contacted our crime lab. And where is the crime lab located that you contacted? It's in Austin. And why did you contact the crime lab as opposed to having local law enforcement handle the processing of the scene and that sort of thing? Because of the difference in where the vehicle was found in one place and the body was found in another place, we just felt like it would be better handled by the crime lab, who has a mobile lab to come process the scene. Is that their specialty? Okay. Now, on the morning of April rd of, did you go to the truck that you were called about? And when you first went out and saw this truck, where was it located? It was located here in Bastrop. I believe it was Bas-co Towing that had taken the truck in. And was it your understanding that that was the place the truck had been found, or it had

86 been moved already? No, ma'am, they told me the truck had been found in another location. Did you examine the inside of the truck when you got to Bas-co? I didn't physically get into the truck, no, When you were at Bas-co, did the truck get opened up? Okay, and how was it that the truck was opened up? I mean, who did that, and how did you get it open? I opened the door from the outside. Prior to that, was the truck locked? Before you opened it? I mean, did you have to unlock it? No, ma'am, not when I opened it. And you indicated that you arrived on the scene there at Bas-co subsequent to some other people? That's correct. Okay. When the truck was opened up, did you have an opportunity to look inside of it and around it and that sort of thing?

87 Did you see anything in or around the truck that appeared to you to be significant? MS: CLAY-JACKSON: I'm sorry, I didn't understand the last part of that. MS. TANNER: "Did you see anything that appeared to be significant?" MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, leading. THE COURT: It's overruled. You may answer it? I saw one tennis shoe on the floorboard. I saw one earring in the floorboard. I recall a spot on the back glass of the truck. (BY MS. TANNER) What kind of a spot on the back glass of the truck was it? It was a smeared looking spot. I couldn't tell you exactly what it was. Okay. Could you -- what kind of a substance did it appear to be? It seemed to be something maybe greasy, or a sticky type substance. And you said that was on the back glass? Do you recall if that was on the back glass on

88 the driver's side or the passenger side? It would have been closer to the passenger side. Did you see anything in the truck other than the shoe and the earring, specifically on the floorboard area that appeared to be significant? There was a thick sticky-looking substance that maybe was on the carpet, between the passenger and the driver's side. And did that -- what did that appear to be, or could you tell? I couldn't tell what that was. Okay. Having been in law enforcement for years, when you went out there that morning and you saw that truck, based on everything that you saw, did you suspect that foul play was involved? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, leading. THE COURT: It's overruled. You may answer it, sir. After conferring with the police chief as to the things that they found -- MS. CLAY-JACKSON: c.

89 Objection, Your Honor, narrative. THE COURT: It's non-responsive. It's a yes or no question. Did you suspect? Yes. (BY MS. TANNER) Now, at that time, that morning, did DPS fully process that truck, or did any of you fully process that truck or just kind of look in it? Later that day it was processed. Okay. And what did you do after you first went out to the truck, looked it over and got in your mind that there was probably foul play? You indicated that you called the aerial board -- the aerial department? Right, the aircraft section. And what did y'all do in that regard? In response to your earlier question, the truck was -- MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, narrative. THE COURT: Just answer the question. What did you do in that regard? (BY MS. TANNER) Which earlier question was I about to ask?

90 0 About when the truck was processed. When was the truck fully processed? The following day. Okay. It was not processed fully on April the rd of? Right. I canjt remember from one question to the next. You said there was an aerial search? Okay. Were you involved in the aerial search? Were you in the helicopter looking? Did you-all have any luck or find anything of significance as far as the aerial search? No, While you were on the aerial search, did the complexion of the case change? ma'am, it did. Okay, and how was that? We had received a radio transmission to meet at a location off. Okay. Was that in Bastrop County? Was it within the city limits of Bastrop,

91 however? No, So where did you-all land the helicopter, then? Adjacent to, near the fire station. And are there any other small county roads located in close proximity to that particular location where you landed? And which would that be? County road would be the closest. And does that have a particular name that it's 'called? And what is that? Bluebonnet Road, I believe. And when you-all landed there near the fire station, did you walk to Bluebonnet Circle, or were you picked up by someone? I was met there by Chief Duncan. And then what did you do? Drove down County Road. And, ultimately, did you arrive at the place where the young lady's body was located?

92 When you got there to that location, was the DPS crime scene team there? No, Okay. What had been done when you arrived? The immediate area had been taped off with crime scene tape by the sheriff's department. And do you recall who it was with the sheriff's department that had done that? No, And when you say "the immediate area," was that a particularly large area that had been roped off or not? I wouldn't say it was particularly large, no, Did it go across the street and onto the other side? So it blocked the street off? Okay. And when that area was roped off, or cordoned off, by the sheriff's department, you-all go in there or did you stay outside the roped off area? did No, ma'am,.i did not go inside at that time. And the location that you saw -- well, let me i.

93 back up and ask you this. Ultimately, at some point you did go inside the crime scene line and observe the body, correct? And who was the body of? Stacey Stites. And is the place where she was located in Bastrop County, Texas? How long were you-all out there before the crime scene team got there? I was there approximately two hours. Before they finally arrived? And during the time before they arrived, was anything placed over the body of the victim? And what was that? Some type of a green blanket. And who did that -- well, let me back up and ask you this. occurred? Were you present when that Who did that? Officer Barton and Campos.

94 And they are with which agency? At the time they were with the Bastrop County Sheriff's office. Now at the time that was placed over the body of the victim, had any of her clothing been removed or anything like that? No, And where did that blanket come from? I believe it came out of the back of Sergeant Barton's vehicle. And what was the purpose for putting the blanket over her body? To restrict the vision of it. And were there -- was the media present at that time while you were waiting on t~e scene team? crime they were. And in what means -- what mode of transportation did they get there? They were in vehicles and also helicopter. And there was a news helicopter there? Okay. Was it hovering over the place where the young lady was lying? It passed over several times.

95 Now, did you remain at the crime scene the entire time that the DPS crime lab was there? And other than being summoned in and looking at the body, did you have anything to do with anything that was taking place out there? No, ma'am, I conferred with the crime scene,. team. Did you pretty much let them do their thing? Okay. Now, you indicated that the truck in question was processed the next day? When I say "processed," we mean looked at for evidence and things? That's correct. Where was that located at? Where did that take place? That took place in Austin, there at the DPS facility. Okay. And is that in a laboratory or a shop or what? At the auto shop. And does DPS have an auto shop designed for that sort of thing?

96 Were you present during the entire processing of the truck? ma'am, I was. Did you observe the DPS lab personnel to look inside the truck and collect numerous pieces of evidence? Do you recall who all was present from the laboratory at the time the truck was processed? I would have to refer to my report. Okay, you can do that. That would have been Will Young, Gene Lawrence, Terri Sandiford, Javier Flores and Mike Holly. Okay. And then yourself as well? MS. TANNER: May I approach the witness? THE COURT: (BY MS. TANNER) Let me show what's been marked State's Exhibits Number a, a, a,, "I a, a, a, a, a, 0a, a and a. If you will take a look at these. Do each of

97 I these photos fairly and accurately depict what the truck looked like on April the th of, as you observed it? MS. TANNER: The State would offer State's Exhibits a through a and a. (State's Exhibits Nos. a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, 0a, a, and a were offered into evidence.) question, Your Honor. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: One THE COURT: Go ahead. VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Ranger, you said you were present when these pictures were taken, is that correct? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No objection. THE COURT: They are all

98 admitted. (State's Exhibits Nos. a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, 0a, a, and a were admitted into evidence.) DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) QUESTIONS BY MS. TANNER: I show you what has previously been marked as State's Exhibits through and. If you will flip through these, each one of these is just simply a blow-up of the photographs that I just showed you. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: We will stipulate. MS. TANNER: You will? Okay. We would offer into evidence State's ~ through and. (State's Exhibits Nos.,,,,,,,, 0, and were offered into evidence.) i

99 MS. CLAY~JACKSON: No objection. THE COURT: They are all admitted.,,. (State's Exhibits Nos.,,,,,,,, 0, and were admitted into evidence.) (BY MS. TANNER) If you will come down here with me, Ranger Wardlow. I think it's easier to do it right here. If you'll show the jury on State's Exhibits Number, is that the inside of the cab of that truck? Okay. And is that how it appeared on April the th of? Yes MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Ms. Tanner, I think it would probably be a little bit easier for the people in the back to use the easel. MS. TANNER: Okay. You bet. Can y'all in the back see okay?

100 0 (BY MS. TANNER) State's Exhibit Number, does that reflect how day? the truck looked that And there are several items of paper evidence there on the seat of State's -- as is reflected in State's Exhibit. Were those out on the truck when it was originally seen? Did you-all try to maintain exactly how that truck looked from the day before? I want you to turn your attention to the passenger floorboard of the truck, is there anything significant in there? The tennis shoe is visible there. Is there anything else visible in the floorboard area of that truck that appears to be significant? You can slightly see the substance here on the center hump, between the passenger and driver's seat that I referred to. What it is is unknown to me. THE COURT: We're having a hard time hearing your answers because your

101 back is to us. MS. TANNER: "What it is, is unknown to me," he said. It was unknown to me. (BY MS. TANNER) Okay. Let me show you State's Exhibit Number. Was the seats this particular truck, 'when you-all saw it both on the rd and the th, in a rather unusual position? in MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, leading. THE COURT: It's overruled. The seat was in a position where the seat was reclined. The seatbelt was hooked as you see it. (BY MS. TANNER) And then the passenger seat, was that all the way forward or was it back as well? It was in the same position you see it there. And the seatbelt, the bottom portion, the lap portion, did that appear to have been sat on or did it appear to be up? It had a bow, a downward bow in it as if it had been sat on. Okay. And State's Exhibit Number also

102 reflects, sort of in the crease of the driver's seat, an item. What was that? That is a green-colored, blue-green colored part of a drinking glass, plastic, I believe. And was that wedged in there as you saw it there on the rd as well? Okay. State's Exhibit Number, is that pretty much the same view but shows the relationship between the two seats? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Excuse me, did you call that State's Exhibit? MS. TANNER: It's number, thank you. (BY MS. TANNER) State's Exhibit Number. What does State's Exhibit depict? This is the driver's door in,an open position. There's another portion of the plastic drinking cup that's fallen into this door pocket along the door. And was that piece of green plastic cup also in the door pocket when you-all first saw the truck on April rd?

103 I show you what has been marked State's Exhibit and ask if you can tell the jury what that depicts? This is the -- this would be the passenger door, and this is the passenger floorboard; I don't recall what this piece of paper was; tennis shoe; this was a back brace; and a her baseball cap; and here, again, the substance which is unknown to me. Okay. And the back brace, was that taken into evidence as well? Underneath the back brace did you-all find any other piece of evidence that appeared to be significant, or in close proximity to the back brace? There was an earring on the floorboard. Let me show you what's been marked State's Exhibit 0 and ask if you can identify what that reflects? ma'am, this is a single earring. And next to the single earring is an area of something, what does that appear to be? This again is the unknown substance. And what is -- sort of up at the top corner,

104 the black item on State's Exhibit Number 0, what is the item in the top corner? It appeared that this substance had run over onto this back brace. So this item up here is just a back brace? portion of the Okay. And could you see some of this substance on the back brace? Okay. It appeared to be one continuing flow? And in that regard, let me show you State's Exhibit Number and ask you, is this again the same substance that you talked about a moment ago? ma'am, this is the center hump of the truck. This would be the gearshift, the center console, driver's seat on this side, passenger seat on this side and a small cup holder or tray between the two seats. Okay. So the back brace would have been over here to the right-hand side? Yes. And you had indicated that the substance had

105 bled onto the back brace? It had run over onto it. Okay. Did you have an opportunity to look at any evidence, if any, that was in the back of the truck -- or in the extended cab portion of the truck? And what kind of things were in the extended cab of the truck? Baseball, softball type stuff, a glove. I recall an HEB shirt back there, a knife of some type, tennis shoes, that type of thing. I show you what has been marked State's Exhibit Number, and see what that depicts? This is the -- the rear portion of the extended cab of the truck, is here on this side. the driver's seat Does this exhibit, State's Exhibit, reflect sort of the reclined position of the driver's seat? And you indicated that there was a knife. Is that reflected in this picture? I believe that's right here. (Indicting in Exhibit).

106 And this red shirt here that's reflected in this photograph, what kind of shirt is that? I believe that was the HEB work shirt - Okay. -- worn by the employees. And State's Exhibit Number is a different prospective of that? And in State's Exhibit, what is reflected over here underneath the console? This is a brown, I guess you'd call it a. weekly or a monthly organizer type thing. Okay. And is that one of those things that has addresses and credit cards and licenses and things like that in it? Okay. And was that collected? ma'am, it was. Did you-all actually use that organizer to help you in your investigation? ma'am, I did. In what manner? Names, phone numbers, addresses, we used that quite often to refer back with cross-reference and information.

107 THE COURT: What was the last part of that. having ~ THE COURT REPORTER: I'm real hard time hearing you. Cross-referencing names and numbers during the investigation as we came across them. (BY MS. TANNER) And did you have an opportunity to look in the back of the truck again? I show you State's Exhibit Number and ask you what that depicts? This is the rear bed of the pickup truck. Now, by the way, you had indicated that you saw some sort of a greasy smudge up on the window, is that correct? You have had an opportunity during the pendency of this case to view all the photographs of this truck, correct? Has that greasy smudge been able to be captured in any of the photographs of the back glass of the truck? Not that I've really seen, no,

108 Have you looked for it? Okay. Now, are these the items that were in the back of the truck when you-all found them on April rd of ', as well as the th? Did you also open up this -- or just kind of dump this bag out to show what all was in it? I show you State's Exhibit Number and ask you what that depicts? These were the contents of that particular bag. Everything in here except for the fishing poll off to the side here and the small -- is that a steer rope? Some kind of a small blue rope, not very long. And all these items were inside of that bag? That's correct. Okay. And what kind of stuff was this that was in the bag? Softball, baseball type things, sporting equipment. Okay. You can have a seat. Now, when you-all were there at the t-.

109 lab on April the th of, did you make any efforts to try and figure out what may have happened? And in that regard, did you and the others, as well as Karen Blakley, do anything physical to try and figure out what may have happened? ma'am, we did. What was it that you-all did? The driver's seat, as you saw in the photographs, was in a reclined position, with the seatbelt still fastened. We tried different ways to see if it was possible to pull a person from the vehicle with the seatbelt and shoulder harness strapped. Okay. And you said you tried different ways. What do you mean by that? Pulling from the feet outward, out the door, and also lifting, using the shoulders and pulling. When you did that, did you do it just with the shoulder harness over the person or with both the shoulder harness and the lap belt over the person? We did it both ways.

110 And on occasions, or in both ways that you did it, both with the shoulder harness over the person and the lap belt and shoulder harness, how hard was it -- well, let me back up and ask you this. Who did you do it to? We chose Karen Blakley. For what reason? Because her height was the nearest to Stacey Stites's height. And were they pretty close in weight as well? We felt they were as close as could be. And when you did it both ways, with the lap belt engaged and sitting on top of the lap belt, how hard was truck? it to get her out of the pulling feet first was a whole lot easier than what I thought. It was very easy to actually remove somebody from the car that way. It was easy to also lift and pull from the shoulders, but it was a little more difficult than the other method. But it was still doable? Now, through the course of this investigation, were you primarily the lead investigator..

111 between the three agencies? Okay. And did you work hand in hand with the Bastrop County Sheriff's Department and Bastrop Police Department? Who were the primary investigators for each of those agencies? With the police department would have been David Board, at that time, and with the sheriff's office John Barton and David Campos. Did Barton and Campos pretty much work side by side? While you were investigating this case, what was your primary angle? The primary angle would be focusing on somebody that knew her. Why is that? Statistically, most homicides that occur, perpetrator is known to the victim. the Okay. Not all, however; right? Not all. And is that a pretty standard way to start a homicide investigation is to look at the

112 people that the victim knows? And what kind of people did you-all talk to and interview and run down as a result of this angle of your investigation? We talked to friends, family, co-workers, associates, just starting with a circle and working our way out. small inner Did you talk to ex-boyfriends? Classmates from high school? Former co-workers as well as current co-workers? Do you have any idea, numerically, how many people associated with Stacey Stites, that you, as well as the other investigators, together, talked to? Altogether it would probably be -- I would have to say hundreds. Hundreds of people? Yeah. Okay. And how long did that continue, where you were constantly talking to people that

113 Stacey knew? The investigation went on for approximately a year. And during that year that this investigation went on, and through the course of it, did you find anybody that said she had been associating with the defendant? I'm sorry? Did you find anyone who to this defendant? Not at all. linked her in any way Okay. Now, at some point you learned that Stacey had been sexually assaulted, correct? Okay. And how soon did you learn that fact? It was around midnight the day we the body. discovered And who notified you of that particular thing? Karen Blakley called me at home that night~ What was the significance of the presence of semen in your investigation? I felt like from what I saw at the crime scene that it was the "smoking gun," so to speak. In your mind, why was it the smoking gun? The things that I saw indicated sexual

114 assault, that was confirmed, and the fact that the motive would have been to eliminate the witness. And in that vein, did you feel like if you could identify the person who left the semen, what would be the result of that? Then we would find the person that killed her. Okay. Because of that, when you were investigating this case for almost a year, whenever you developed a do? suspect, what did you The first thing we did is ask to draw a sample of blood and hair. And why did you ask for blood samples of any potential suspects? The DNA would either eliminate them or indicate that they were involved in it. And when you asked people for blood samples, would they agree? I I., And if they agreed, what did you do? We would draw a sample of blood and submit it to the DPS lab. And when you say you would draw a sample of blood, would you, if it was somebody you were

115 handling, would you actually view the taking of the blood and then carry it to the DPS yourself? Sometimes we would, or others officers would take, it. The list was very long so we would have to look at specific individuals to get a specific answer to that. And did you, yourself, obtain blood from some of the suspects and take it to the DPS? And did you, in order to help yourself because the numbers were so large, make a list MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, leading. MS. TANNER: I'm laying a predicate. THE COURT: Okay. (BY MS. TANNER) Can you tell us whether or not you made a blood from? list of the people you obtained And could you tell the jury who list? The entire list? is on that The people that you were involved in the

116 obtaining of blood and/or the taking of blood to the DPS? That would have been Greg Corner. Okay. Let me stop you and ask you, did you observe the taking of blood from Greg Corner? I did. And did you actually take the blood to DPS? No, I did not. And do you know who or are you aware of who took the blood to DPS? Sergeant Barton. Okay. Who else? will Barton. And did you observe the blood being taken from him? ma'am, I did. And did you yourself take that sample to DPS? ( I I ma'am, I did. Okay. Who else? David Lawhon. And did you observe the blood being drawn from David Lawhon? I did. And did you, yourself, take it to DPS? I did.

117 Who else? Charles King. Same question, did you observe it and take it? Charles King and Jerry Ormand both I viewed and delivered to the lab. Okay. Who else? Jose Coronado, I believe that particular individual was viewed by Sergeant Barton. But I delivered the blood to the lab. Who else? Monty Kellum and Carl Lloyd were two that I actually viewed and also delivered to the lab. Who else? Jeremiah Smith, George Branham and John J. Conwell, I picked up their blood samples from Sergeant Barton and delivered those to the lab. Okay. And who else? Also Wanna Hammett and Glen Pierce. And what did you do with those? I picked those up I'm sorry, Sergeant Barton took those to the lab. Okay. Did you observe the blood being drawn in those cases? No,

118 Okay. Who else did you observe and/or take to the lab? Warren Hartgrove, I observed that and took it to the lab. Also Ed Selmala. And you observed and took that to the lab? Yes. And any others? David Hall, I observed that one, Sergeant Barton actually submitted it. So I have calculated at least individuals that you were involved in, is that correct? Okay. And when you say you submitted it to the lab, you actually carried it yourself and handed it over to the folks that handled that sort of evidence, correct? Okay. How long before there was an arrest in this case? Approximately a year. In the meantime, you indicated that you-all investigated numerous suspects? During the time, the interim of that year, were there any rewards put out?

119 ma'am, there was. And what kind of reward was put out? I know that HEB Corporation had posted, I believe, a $0,000 reward. Would it be fair to say that you-all got numerous tips and leads in people calling with either real or believed information? When y'all got those, what did you do? We checked and followed each and everyone of them out as far as we possibly could. And during the pendency of this case before there was an arrest, did you receive information even that there were people who were bragging about having done it, having committed this murder? And when you get that kind of information, did you try to make a case on those people? ma'am, we did. Did you obtain samples of their blood? And did you -- were you able to make a case on anyone that said they had done it? No,

120 , I, Did you even in the course of this investigation have one individual confess to you that he had done it? And did you try to make a case on that person? ma'am, we did. Did you take his blood? ma'am, we did. And on any of the suspects that verbally told you or anyone else that they committed this offense, were you able to corroborate anything that they said sufficient to get them tied to this murder? No, ma'am, not at all. Okay. By the way, you have been in law enforcement for years, based on your knowledge and experience are false confessions or bragging that you did something that you didn't do, is that particularly uncommon? Not particularly, no, What generally causes that sort of thing? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, the witness is not qualified to give such an answer. THE COURT: I tend to agree.

121 I sustain the objection. (BY MS.' TANNER) You indicated it's not that uncommon? No, When Stacey Stites was killed, did you in law enforcement, or any of the other law enforcement people, did y'all have any preconceived notions in your mind about who you wanted to be responsible for this offense, who you ultimately wanted to make a case on? No, ma~am. When each tip came in, did you treat it like maybe it was really the one? Eventually individual who oh, and by the way, the actually told you that he did it, what was Will Barton. his name? And the young man who allegedly might have bragged about it, his name is that right? was Bryan Haines, And did you also receive information that David Lawhon had bragged about having done this?

122 And you took blood from each of the those three people? Did you, with these various suspects, did you restrict your investigation to just getting blood, or did you also try to make a case on them independent of that? We tried, independently, other ways. Eventually, did you receive information that led you to look at the defendant as a ma'am, I did. suspect? When was it that you received information that in your mind put him on the suspect list? I would say it was late February or early March. Of which year?,. And in that vein, did you then contact the Department of Public Safety? ma'am, I did. What was your purpose for contacting the Department of Public Safety? To check and see if a known sample was on file.

123 A known sample of the defendant? And did you make a determination that there was a known sample on file? And in that regard, what did you request DPS to do? anything? Or did you request them to do ma'am, I requested the forensic section to compare the two DNA samples. When you say the "two DNA samples," you wanted them to compare what to what? The Stacey Stites evidence to the suspect. And when you said "Stacey Stites evidence," you're talking about the semen, right? Okay. Did you receive any results -- without going into them, of that testing? did you receive any results I did. And do you recall when it was that you received results of that testing? It would have been early March. Of?

124 Upon getting those results did you draft a search warrant to obtain the defendant's blood? ma'am, I did. And although you drafted it, who was the affiant on that or the person who executed it? Sergeant Barton. actually Along with obtaining the blood of the defendant, did you later, quite a bit later, obtain blood from the defendant's father and his brothers? ma'am, I did. And at whose request was that? Through the DPS lab. Okay. And what was the authority you used to get that? Search warrants. And did you obtain blood from all of the brothers of the defendant? No, ma'am, I did not. Why not? Three we obtained the blood from and the other two brothers we excluded from other methods. Other methods such as they weren't in the

125 jurisdiction at the time of the murder? That's correct. Okay. Now during the course of your investigation, it's no secret that Jimmy Fennell was a suspect, correct? And you invest -- let me just back up and ask you this. Were you at that -- the primary investigator looking at Jimmy Fennell? And were you looking to make a case on him if you could? Did you treat Jimmy Fennell any better than the other suspects, in your opinion, because he was a police officer? Not at all. Did you treat him any worse? Perhaps so. And by that you mean what? Probably was a little harder on him during the interviews. And tell me about the interviews. hard were you on him? I mean, how I was verbally harsh with him.

126 Did you yell at him? A little bit. Did you call him names? Did you-all use -- and I know you hate to hear these kind of terms because laypeople use them, did you-all use good cop/bad cop techniques and psychology on him and things like that? I tried every technique I could think of. And you're pretty well-trained in techniques in talking to suspects, I take it? Okay. You, as with the other suspects, did you try and make a case on Jimmy independent of what the blood came back to exclude him with regard to the DNA? Were you able to? Were you able to make a case against Jimmy? No, What was the sticking point -- well, let me back up and ask you this. Jimmy was by all accounts the last person that saw Stacey

127 alive, obviously other than whoever killed her, correct? What was the sticking point for you with regard to trying to tie Jimmy to any involvement whatsoever in Stacey's death? Logistically speaking, it was not possible. And in that vein, did you try and think of and investigate alternate methods that Jimmy could have gotten transportation to have committed this offense? ma'am, we examined the taxicab records, I went to the Giddings Police Department and examined their vehicle mileage on all of their cars, that sort of thing. And that was in an effort to try to find some way that Jimmy could have done this? And were you able in any way to find anything of that nature? No, Okay. And you have already indicated that you were not able either to make any kind of a case at all against David Lawhon or any of the other suspects as well, correct?

128 That's correct. Ranger Wardlow, based on your knowledge and experience, what is the toughest kind of homicide case to break? A random killing. Through the course of your investigation, did you develop or did you investigate the route that Stacey Stites must have taken on her way to work the morning of April rd of? MS. TANNER: May I approach the witness? THE COURT: Sure. (BY MS. TANNER) I show you what has been marked State's Exhibit. Is this a map of that portion of the City of Bastrop? And on State's Exhibit Number is there an area traced in red? Okay. And is that area traced in red consistent with the route your investigation revealed Stacey Stites would have taken to work on April rd of? Our best educated guess was this would be the

129 most probable route she would have driven. And are there places along that route where there are railroad tracks, stop signs, stoplights and things like that? And specifically with regard to Chestnut Street, are there those things throughout? And what places on State's Exhibit Number and a, if you know, are those sort of things located? The four-way stop here at and, the railroad crossing would be another possible. Let me ask you, I'm going to hand you a red sticker that's marked "four-way stop" and would you put that on the spot you're referring to? (Witness complies.) And you indicated railroad crossings as well? Will you show us, again, with a red dot that was labeled "railroad crossing" where you're talking about in that regard? (Witness complies.) And are there any stoplights, as well, along that route?

130 ma'am, there's also a stoplight, I believe, it's either at Jefferson or Pecan, don't recall. I One of those? Okay. By the way, do you know where the Rodeo Inn is in Bastrop? And is that location of the Rodeo Inn, is that located here on State's Exhibit Number a? and I'm going to give you another red dot and ask you if you can put on there where the location of the Rodeo Inn is? (Witness marks and complies.) And that is well past the stop sign at Chestnut or? and MS. TANNER: I pass the witness. THE COURT: We'll take a short break, about ten minutes or so. won't be very long. It

131 (At this time a recess was taken.). (Whereupon the Jury returned to the courtroom and the following proceedings were had open Court.) MS. TANNER: May I ask him a couple more questions before we start? I'm sorry. We get away and I forget. DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) QUESTIONS BY MS. TANNER: Ranger Wardlow, you indicated that at the scene inside the truck you found an address book and a thing? daily planner and that sort of Okay. And when that was found, what was done with it? Initially we checked it for any trace evidence and dusted it for prints. And then what? Then I kept it in my possession.

132 And why did you keep it in your possession? As I stated earlier, we would refer back to that cross-referencing names and telephone numbers, that sort of thing. I'm going to show you what has been marked as State's Exhibit and ask if you can identify this item? And what is State's Exhibit Number? This is the brown planner. And it's the same one that was taken out of the truck on April the th,, that you had with you? MS. TANNER: The State would offer State's Exhibit Number. (State's Exhibit No. was offered into evidence.) MS. CLAY-JACKSON:. May I take the witness on voir dire? THE COURT:

133 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Ranger, you have had State's in your possession since when? Since the date we took it out of the truck. Was it in the possession of anybody else before it was in your possession? No, MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No objection. THE COURT: State's Exhibit Number is admitted. (State~s Exhibit No. was admitted into evidence.) DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) QUESTIONS BY MS. TANNER: Through the course of this investigation, you have been very familiar with the contents of State's Exhibit? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: I'm sorry, I did not hear the question, MS. TANNER: I'm sorry. (BY MS. TANNER) Through the course of this

134 investigation have you become extremely familiar with the contents of State's Exhibit? ma'am, I have. Is there anywhere -- are there a number of addresses and phone numbers and things like that? Are there any references whatsoever in State's Exhibit to either this defendant or to David Lawhon? No, MS. TANNER: No further questions. THE COURT: Go ahead. CROSS EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Ranger, in your years of experience in law enforcement you have had occasion to write many offense reports, have you not? In fact, you went -- did you go to DPS academy --

135 -- when you first started off? And that academy had a course in offense report writing, correct? And there is nothing to -- and you have in your last years spoken to many fellow officers, have you not? And you have had some occasions to talk about your academy training with these officers, have you not? Other than DPS probably having a higher standard than some other law enforcement academies, the training, the curriculum is about the same, isn't that correct? I don't know about the other agencies. Would you not assume that other academies would have courses in offense report writing? I would assume so. Would you not assume that other good academies would have courses in investigative techniques? I would assume so.

136 Would you not assume that other good academies would have courses in interrogation? I would assume so. In your years of experience in law enforcement, have you had occasion to go to national association meetings? I'm sorry, I didn't understand the question. In your years of law enforcement, have you had occasion to go to national meetings of law enforcement officers? I still don't understand -- national meetings? You know what national means? Okay. Have you ever been to a meeting where there have been law enforcement officers from other states? Have you had occasion to go to national law enforcement meetings? In that light, yes, ma'am, I have. When you are at these national meetings, are the law enforcement techniques used in particular states, in some are they discussed? of these meetings

137 I don't recall. What type of meetings have you been to on a national scope? I don't recall on a national -- what you call a national level. I don't recall going to a national meeting. When you have gone to meetings where other members of law enforcement in other states have been in attendance, what type of meetings were those? They were various types. For instance? The Traffic Institute, dealing with traffic law. And where was In Illinois. the Traffic Institute? Okay. And what was the title of that institute? What is the full title of that institute? National Traffic Institute. When you go to this National Traffic Institute and there are other members of the other states -- law enforcement from other states present, do you-all discuss the different traffic law techniques in your states?

138 No, At the time I was in traffic law enforcement when I attended that. investigation was not an option. Criminal Did you not discuss the traffic techniques in your individual states? Were there occasions when you compared in this National Traffic Institute, compared Texas's reputation with the other states? I don't know that we compared reputation, no, Did you just personally compare what Texas does -- MS. TANNER: Excuse me, Your Honor, I'm going to object to the relevance of what Texas laws have to do with other states' traffic laws and the comparison of them. THE COURT: Where are we going? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: We are trying to get an assessment as to the law enforcement ability in Texas as compared to everybody else. THE COURT: Go ahead, I'll let you go a little further.

139 (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) Let's see if I can help you cut to the chase. Are law enforcement agencies, state law enforcement agencies, ranked by a national body? Not that I'm aware of. You have obtained a rank of sergeant in the Texas Rangers, is that correct? That's correct. When did you obtain the rank of sergeant? In 0 -- actually, it was. In the academy that you attended, the DPS academy that you attended, whose ranking you don't know -- MS. TANNER: Object to that characterization, Your Honor. Side bar. THE COURT: I agree. Rephrase it. Start over. (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) In the DPS academy, you took a course in report writing, did you not? Yes. And you're instructor informed you that it was important to write good offense reports, is that right? I don't recall, but I'm sure he did.

140 0 Your instructor informed you that it was important to put details into your report, is that correct? That's correct. That details were important, correct? Correct. That details were important because they were going to be used by either you or a fellow officer in the investigation of the offense, is that right? I would assume so. I don't recall specifically what he said. In your years of experience you have found that details are important because they are used by you or your fellow officers in the investigation of cases, isn't that correct? Details being important to both the person who is writing them and people who are going to read them later on, and need to be written in such a way that one can go back and retrace their steps, the officer who is writing the report can go back and retrace their steps up to that point, isn't that right?

141 And in this particular case where you said you were the lead officer in the investigation, and you were the lead officer in the investigation by virtue of the fact that you were a Texas Ranger, is that correct? I'm not sure I understand your question. You stated that you were the lead officer in the Stacey Stites investigation, is that correct? Correct. And you were the lead officer by virtue of the fact that you're a Texas Ranger? By virtue of the fact that I jurisdiction. have state-wide Well, there are no other law enforcement agencies with state-wide jurisdiction, correct? That's correct. Okay. And the only law enforcement agency that's involved in this investigation that had state-wide jurisdiction was right? That's correct. the Texas Rangers, So you were lead officer because you were a Texas Ranger?

142 Correct. You had occasion then to write a report, correct? And in your report, Ranger, you number your paragraphs, don't you? You you? number your paragraphs sequentially, don't Did you bring your report to court today? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: May I see it? MS. TANNER: She's received a copy of that pursuant to discovery, Your Honor. THE COURT: She may want to compare it. MS. TANNER: And I ask that any notes or work product be removed from that. Anything that's not the report. THE COURT: She's just asking for the report. MS. TANNER: Okay.

143 . (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) Did you in the course of preparing to testify today, any other notes? did you review No, Have you reviewed any other notes since you started preparing your report for this case? No, You have not reviewed any other notes? Not that I can recall, no, When is the last time, Ranger, that you made an entry into your report? The report that I'm now looking at that you brought to court? I don't know, I would have to look at it. (Witness reviews report.) The th of March,. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: For record clarification, Judge, we have not received the entire report. Judge, may we approach? THE COURT: Sure. (Whereupon a brief discussion was held off the record.) THE COURT: I'm going to ask

144 you to step out for a short break while I take care of this matter. too comfortable. Don't go too far or get (Whereupon the Jury was escorted from the courtroom and the following proceedings were had outside the presence and hearing of the jury.) THE COURT: Okay, the jury is out now. Ma'am, go ahead. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Because Ms. Tanner made a point to say that we received copies of Ranger Wardlow's report, I need to put on the record that, in fact, we have not received every single page of Ranger Wardlow's report. More specifically, what defense counsel has received, with date stamps, we did not receive with Ranger Wardlow's paragraphs, and he has his paragraphs numbered as he testified to, numbered sequentially, we did not receive paragraphs starting from the end of forward to. And at this time because that

145 is new information, and the additional paragraphs in his supplement, I'm asking for a time to read the report, those paragraphs. THE COURT: Do you want to comment on that? MS. TANNER: Your Honor, I don't have my discovery submission in front of me. I have what I provided to defense because I provided the whole report sequentially by each page, and I remember doublechecking each page through page, which is as much as I have. And I do recall before I provided it to them that I made sure each number which is represented at the top was provided. THE COURT: Well, I believe defense counsel has a right to review the entire report before she cross-examines him. Take your time to do that, and let me know when you're ready. Will it take you long, do you think? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: It shouldn't, Judge. THE COURT: If we could finish, we could do more with him today. It's not going to take you that long, is it?

146 MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No. THE COURT: Take a break. I'll let you know when we're ready. (At this time a recess was taken. ) MS. TANNER: Judge for purposes of the record, counsel for the defense is right. There is a few -- and I don't recall what paragraphs they hadn't received. I went back and checked my date-stamped copies of the DPS report, and I had inadvertently left some out. It turns out that when I reprinted it out it prints page numbers but it can leave out paragraphs, according to the Ranger, and I didn't count paragraphs, I counted the pages. So that was my fault, and if you will tell us what paragraphs, we'll get you copies of them. It was in there, I just messed up on that copy. to look it over? THE COURT: Have you had time MS. CLAY-JACKSON: We have, Your Honor.

147 THE COURT: Are you ready for the jury? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: We are, Your Honor. (Whereupon the Jury returned to the courtroom and the following proceedings were had open Court.) THE COURT: Please be seated. Thank you. Go ahead. CROSS-EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) QUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Ranger, in preparation for today's testimony, the only document that you reviewed was in your offense report, is that correct? that In compiling your offense report, you take and because you were the lead investigator in this multi-jurisdictional investigation, you had occasion to review the offense reports of your fellow team members, is that correct?

148 And, in fact, in some occasions you made note of what your fellow team members had discovered in their investigation and placed it in your offense report, correct? is that not A main component of an offense report is that the contents be reliable, is that not correct? You said yes? And the reliability is necessary because, one, an officer generally testifies by his offense report, isn't that correct? And to testify truthfully you need to have confidence in what you put in your offense report, is that not correct? And nothing about this case and your offense report is contrary to what we it? just said, is Not that I'm aware of. Okay. You are confident of what you have in your offense report?

149 Your testimony that by virtue of the fact that Jimmy Fennell was a law enforcement officer you treated him differently than you did the other suspect, is that correct? I treated him no differently. Did you not say that you were more harsh with him in the interrogations? I said perhaps I was more harsh. And it's your testimony that you participated in what was characterized as the good cop/bad cop interrogation, is that correct? And you did participate? In that area, yes, Did you also provide Jimmy Fennell the names of the people that you were investigating? No, Was there ever an occasion that you can recall Jimmy Fennell calling you up and asking you who you were investigating? No, Was there ever an occasion when you can recall Jimmy Fennell ever calling you up and asking you the progress on the case?

150 0 No, During the first couple of weeks of the investigation, would it be a fair characterization to say that you and the other team members were communicating on a basis in regard to this case? daily You were updating one another on your progress or lack of progress or leads that you were following, correct? In your offense report you have the format, as most other Rangers do, where you start off with a synopsis and then you go through the details of how you come is that correct? up with the synopsis, And you number each one of those details on a sequential basis? And in that other Rangers have this same format, it would be a safe assumption to say that this is how you were taught at the academy, is that correct?

151 Okay. As the lead investigator, you were present at the crime scene analysis, when the crime scene was being analyzed, were you not? By the lab team? By the lab team. And that -- the only crime scene -- well, let me go back here. Did you ever have occasion, Ranger, to go to the high school parking lot where the vehicle was found? -- where the car was Okay. And were you at that parking lot before the car was -- truck, I'm sorry, before the truck was transported to the wrecking company? No, So you went to the parking lot after the car after the truck had been transported, is that correct? You did not develop any other evidence on your visit to that parking lot, did you? No, When you were at the wrecker yard with the truck, it's your testimony that you let

152 yourself into the truck, is that correct? opened the door? You And to your knowledge, to your recollection, the door was not locked? The doors were not locked on the truck, is that correct? At that time? At that time that you let yourself in? I would have to look at my report. I don't recall. Please do. (Witness complies and reviews report.) The truck was locked. Okay. And you have just given us an example of why detail is important in offense report writing, is that correct? So you can truthfully testify to what happened? Correct.. Okay. Did you ever have an occasion to engage the ignition in this truck at the wrecker yard site? I'm not sure what you mean engaged. You turned the car on?

153 I turned the switch on. You turned the switch on. And it ignited and combusted and the truck started, correct? No, ma'am, I did not start the ignition. You just did the ACC on it? No, ma'am, I turned it to the "on" position. Okay. And this particular truck has on and - how is the ignition enumerated? It has an "off" switch, accessory "on" and then a "start." So you moved it past accessory to the on position? I went from off to an on position. Okay. And that's how you were able to determine that the lights worked on the car? And it's your testimony that there was only a little more than an eighth of a the car, between an eighth and a tank of gas in the car? tank of gas in fourth of a That's correct. Did you notice whether or not there was on the outside of the truck there was any caked debris, such as hard-caked dirt or mud or anything on the car?

154 The following day I noted that. As the lead investigator the following day you were at the DPS That's correct. lab, is that correct? Did you ask the lab technician there to take a sample of the hard-caked substance? I did. Okay. And the reason that you asked them to take a sample of that hard-caked substance was perhaps to determine where the car had been? That's correct. And to the best of your knowledge, was that analysis ever conducted? Analysis? Of the hard-caked substance? There was never an analysis to compare to. Did -- it's your testimony that there was never an analysis of the hard-caked substance on the outside of the car, is that correct? Not that I'm aware of. When you were at the crime scene where Ms. Stites's body was found, did you instruct the criminalist there to take any dirt samples? I don't recall. And in that it's not in your report, it

155 probably did not happen, is that correct? I would think not, no, Would it not have been -- how helpful would it have been in your investigation for an analysis to be made of the hard-caked substance on the truck, which did appear to be some type of dirt, did it not? Okay. The analysis of the hard-caked substance on the truck, when compared to the surface dirt at the site of where Stacey Stites's body was found? I'm not sure I understand the question. There could be an analysis, could there not have, between the hard-caked substance that was found on the truck and the dirt, the road dirt, that was at the scene where Stacey Stites's body was found? Perhaps. But since it was never done, we will never know, is that correct? MS. TANNER: Objection. Calls for speculation. He indicated he doesn't know whether it was done or not. THE COURT: I'll overrule it.

156 He's on cross, go ahead. (MS. CLAY-JACKSON) We'll never know, will we? I don't know what the lab did with the substance they took off the truck. And you never ordered the substance to be taken from the site where the body was found? I don't recall. Your investigation revealed that there was a person who had -- there was a newspaper delivery person who had driven by that site where Stacey Stites's body was found about :00 o'clock that morning, is that correct? That's correct. And that person reported to you-all -- MS. TANNER: Objection to anything anyone would have reported as being hearsay. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: I'll rephrase it. (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) Your investigation revealed that at four o'clock MS. TANNER: Objection. It's the same thing. It's back door hearsay. By necessity the question she is asking calls for a hearsay answer or an answer that's based

157 on hearsay. THE COURT: I'll overrule it. Go ahead and ask the question. (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) Your investigation revealed that at four o'clock Stacey Stites's body was not at that location, is that correct? That's correct. You have been involved in another murder of a female, a young female, where an earring was missing, have you not? MS. TANNER: Judge, I'm going to object to any testimony about any other murder of someone else as being irrelevant to the facts of this particular case. THE COURT: How does it relate to this case? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Judge, may we approach? THE COURT: Sure. (Whereupon a brief discussion was held off the record.)

158 THE COURT: I'm going to overrule the objection, go ahead and ask the question, (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) There was a murder in the area, some two weeks after Stacey Stites, that also involved an earring, did it not? The Mary Ann Arldt murder? Okay. And in that murder the person who confessed to it, David Lawhon, in your investigation revealed that he knew Mary Ann Arldt, isn't that correct? That's correct. THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, I didn't hear. (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) Your investigation of David Lawhon revealed that he knew Mary Ann Arldt prior to the murder, That's correct. isn't that correct? Your investigation into Stacey Stites's case revealed that David Lawhon and Stacey Stites knew ~ach other? MS. TANNER: Your Honor, I'm going to object to that. It's calling for hearsay. The State needs to have the right to

159 cross-examine anyone who would make this allegation, and that's the basis for the hearsay rule, and therefore any evidence of this regard is hearsay that we are entitled to have the person here, whoever they may be, cross-examine them. and THE COURT: The question was does your investigation reveal that? MS. TANNER: And by necessity -- well, may I take the witness on voir dire? THE COURT: Briefly. VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MS. TANNER: Do you have any personal knowledge in what you saw yourself eye-to-eye of Stacey Stites being involved with anyone? Did you ever see her in the whole wide world before she died? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Objection, Your Honor, voir dire question. that's an irrelevant MS. TANNER: I'm going to his personal knowledge. THE COURT: I'm going to let

160 you ask that question. MS. TANNER: Thank you, Your Honor. No, (BY MS. TANNER) So you would have no personal ( knowledge whatsoever about anything that Stacey Stites mayor may not have done before her death, correct? Correct. SO any knowledge that you would have about her associations or her friends or whoever would come from the mouths of other people, right? That's correct. MS. TANNER: And that by necessity would be hearsay, and the whole reason for hearsay is so that we cross-examine. can THE COURT: I'll sustain the objection. CROSS-EXAMINATION (CONTINUED) OUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: In that regard, do you have personal knowledge what transpired between Jimmy Fennell and Stacey Stites?

161 No, MS. CLAY-JACKSON: May we approach? THE COURT: Yes. (Whereupon a brief discussion was held off the record at the bench.) MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Judge, we have to be able to ask him about his investigation and what he determined from hi$ investigation. That is not hearsay. We just went through a whole direct examination talking about what his investigation revealed, and it's not personal knowledge. It's personal knowledge through his investigation. THE COURT: It's what people told him. MS. TANNER: Your Honor, it's exactly what people told him. THE COURT: I believe it's a good hearsay objection. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Everything in his investigation i$ what people

162 told him. THE COURT: Not everything, and there weren't objections to it. I think you have made a good record of it, and I sustained the objection. (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) Ranger, did you speak to a Christine Gardner? ma'am, I did. And when you spoke to a Christine Gardner, she gave you a statement, did she not? ma'am, she did. Okay. You checked out the facts of that statement, did you not? ma'am, I did. And you determined them to be true, did you not? No, ma'am, I did not. You determined them not to be true? That's correct. When did Jimmy Fennell become a suspect in this case? I would say immediately. Was there a search warrant issued to search his home? No,

163 In this particular case, how many search warrants were issued to search someone's home? Just one. And that was to Rodney Reed's home, is that correct? That's correct. And that was almost a year after the incident, is that correct? That's correct. And the search warrant to Rodney Reed's home, there was no evidence of the Stacey Stites incident found in his home, correct? That's correct. isn't that Along with the blood samples you took from the -- all these men that you listed for counsel, they weren't all Stacey Stites's ex-boyfriends were they? No, Okay. But some were? Some were. Okay. You took not only blood samples, you took hair samples, That's correct. is that correct? And you also took saliva samples, isn't that

164 correct? That's correct. You have had an opportunity to review all of the analysis results of these samples, you not? have Did you take fingerprints or have all these people submit fingerprints to you also? Some we did. Did you take fingerprints from Rodney Reed? ma'am, we did. The name tag that is seen -- there was a name tag seen at the scene where Stacey Stites's body was found, is that correct? i And that name tag was found placed in the crook of her leg, is that correct? It was in the crook of her leg. The name tag was not visible until after - unless you pulled the legs apart, is that correct? That's correct. State's Exhibit Number a, the name tag is not present in that scene, is it -- in the photograph, is it?

165 No, I show you a, the leg as compared to a. a is that where the leg has not been moved, a is where the leg has been moved and the name tag has been revealed, is that correct? That's correct. You had, in conjunction with Karen Blakley, this particular name did you not? tag marked for evidence, Gathered for evidence rather? And that name tag -- and you had that name tag printed, is that correct? That's correct. Did that name tag -- and that print on that name tag was Stacey Stites's, was it not? I don't recall, specifically. There were two name tags, were there not, that your investigation revealed? One that was found near the scene and one that was in the visor of the driver's side of the pickup truck, is that correct? That's correct.

166 One of them was printed and the other was not, isn't that correct? I don't recall. Was the second earring ever found? No, ma'am, not that I'm aware of. Was the dumpster ever searched, the dumpster that was there at the site, at the high school? Was that dumpster ever searched for the earring? Which dumpster are you referring to? There was one dumpster at the site of the high school at the time the pickup was found? The sheriff's office, I believe it was, informed me that they had searched a dumpster at the high school. And then to your knowledge that dumpster that search did not reveal any further evidence in the Stacey Stites case, is that correct? Not that I'm aware of. In that you were the lead investigator in this particular incident, did you also instruct the DPS Crime Lab in what evidence you wanted to be analyzed? I spoke with them about that.

167 The final decision whether the evidence was to be analyzed -- whether the analysis was made or not was up to the DPS lab, is that correct? Is that what you're saying? That would have been specifically my call. I relied on their input. You accompanied the body to the -- were you present at the autopsy? No, ma'am, I was not. Did you designate someone to be present at the autopsy? I did not, no, And as the lead investigator, you didn't designate anybody to be present at the autopsy? At that particular time, the sheriff's office was working the homicide. When did the Rangers become lead investigators? Probably within a few days. A few days of the autopsy or a few days of the incident? Of You the incident. testified as to what you considered to be the route that Stacey Stites took to Bastrop.

168 That information was garnered through Jimmy Fennell, was it not? Because you had no personal knowledge of how she would get back and forth from Giddings to Bastrop, did you? No, The information about what was missing from the inside -- what was misplaced or out of place or different about the pickup, that information was garnered from Jimmy Fennell, was You it not? had no independent recollection or knowledge of what would have been in that vehicle, did you? No, You had no independent recollection of what that cab would have looked like before you saw it on the afternoon of the rd, That's correct. did you? Everything you know about the inside of that cab came from Jimmy Fennell, is that correct? Everything that is alleged to have been

169 missing or misplaced came isn't that correct? from Jimmy Fennell, I'm sorry, I didn't hear the question. Your knowledge about what was missing or misplaced from the inside of that pickup came from Jimmy Fennell, did it not? Most of it, yes, In the course of your investigation, when you're out in the field, you don't have your computer out there with you, do you? At times, yes, So you have a laptop out there with you? And you write up your offense report notes right out there at the scene? Occasionally, yes, Are there occasions where you handwrite notes? Occasionally. In this particular case, did you handwrite any notes? During the investigation? sir. And do you refer back to those notes? Once I -- I don't have those notes at this

170 0 time. The question is, Ranger, do you refer back to the notes when you write your report? When I write the report, yes, When do you destroy the notes? After running the report. You said after running it or after writing it? Writing the report. After writing the report you destroy the notes that you just used to compile the report, is that correct? Correct. How soon after you write the report do you ' destroy the notes? Usually at the time that I type the report. And you said that you did investigate a relationship or alleged relationship between Stacey Stites and David Lawhon? But you could not confirm that relationship? That's correct. And simply because you could not confirm it does not mean that it did not exist, isn't that correct? That would be correct.

171 You said that you were investigating a Barton concerning this particular incident? I'm sorry, who? A Will Barton? Will Barton? And he provided you samples, is that correct? Blood, hair, saliva? Okay. Did you have an occasion to speak with a Gordon Moore in this investigation? He's a lieutenant with DPS, is he not? And you had an occasion to speak with Mr. Moore concerning his interrogation of Jimmy Fennell, did you not? That's correct. MS. TANNER: Judge, may we approach? THE COURT: Sure. (Whereupon a brief discussion was held off the record.)

172 (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) So Lieutenant Moore did speak with Jimmy Fennell, correct? That's correct. Do you have knowledge of how long that conversation or that interrogation was? MS. TANNER: Objection, calls for speculation. He wasn't present. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: I asked if he had knowledge. THE COURT: Overruled. Do you know? I don't recall the specific time. (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) Were you there during the interrogation? Was No, it less than an hour? Was it more than an hour? Less than two hours? I don't recall the specifics. But it was more than an hour? Your investigation revealed that Jimmy Fennell was supposed to take Stacey Stites to work

173 that morning, did it not? It revealed what? That jimmy Fennell was supposed to take Stacey Stites to work on the morning of the rd? It revealed that that had been discussed, yes, And that those plans obviously changed? From Jimmy Fennell's accounting to you? Fennell accounted to you that those plans changed? Jimmy You have no personal knowledge that those plans changed, do you? No, You made a comparison, did you not, of Mary Ann Arldt's murder and Stacey Stites's murder, did you not? A comparison? A comparison of the characteristics? And you found very similar characteristics of both murders; did you not? In fact, they were so significant you put them

174 into your report, did you not? You state that when you -- as an officer, when you swear to an affidavit for a search warrant or an arrest warrant, you're swearing about personal knowledge that you have, correct? is that That's correct. To whom did you speak to regarding Jimmy Fennell's presence or lack of presence on the early morning hours of the rd, hours of the nd? late night I'm not sure I understand your question. Did you speak to friends of Jimmy Fennell concerning his whereabouts on the late night hours of April the nd or early morning hours of April the rd? We spoke to a number of people about that issue. About Jimmy Fennell's presence? When you say presence Where he was? Yes. You spoke to a number of people? I can recall two or three, yes,

175 Okay. Who are they? Carol Stites, David Hall, in particular. David Hall is the fellow officer? That's correct. Okay. And they were not able to give you any information about where he was, correct? is that Carol Stites provided some information. Information that she supposed he was upstairs? Right. In his apartment? That's correct. And David Hall did not give you any information, is that correct? That's correct. On a, do you recognize that? And you recognize that as the belt -- piece of the belt found at the scene where Stacey Stites's body was located, is that correct? That's correct. And the belt as it's noted here, half on and half off the roadway? That's correct. And when you follow that belt, toward the

176 thicket, it leads you to a white blouse, does it not, to the best of your recollection? There was a white T-shirt, I believe. And then past that white T-shirt Stacey Stites's body was discovered, is that correct? That's correct. So from the roadway you look at the belt and I I,. then you go to the white T-shirt and then you go to the body, is that correct? That's correct. Was Ed Selmala involved in the investigation of this offense? Initially, yes, MR. GARVIE: May we approach, Judge? THE COURT: Sure. (Whereupon a brief discussion was held off the record.) (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) It was Detective Campos who caused the pickup to be moved to the wrecker yard, is that correct? I don't recall specifically who it was. That was before I arrived.

177 You personally spoke with David Lawhon concerning Stacey Stites, did you not? Other officers, as well, spoke with David Lawhon concerning Stacey Stites, is that correct? I don't have any personal knowledge of that. No one other than you was in the interview room with David Lawhon when Stacey Stites was discussed? Not that I After -- recall. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: We need to approach the bench one more time. (Whereupon a brief discussion was held off the record.) (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) After Gordon Moore interviewed Jimmy Fennell, you spoke with him? With who? Jimmy Fennell? And he invoked his right to an attorney. MS. TANNER: Objection, Your

178 Honor, that is not permissible questioning with regard to Jimmy or anyone else. THE COURT: It's overruled. Go ahead, sir, you may answer the question. he did. (BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON) That was in December of, was it not? I believe that's correct. And after he did that, you did not then issue a search warrant for his residence? No, Because you had not issued a search warrant prior to that either, had you? No, Did you speak with Jimmy Fennell any more after that incident in December of? I spoke with him afterwards, yes, Did you speak to him between -- did you speak to him concerning Stacey Stites's murder between January of and March of? I did. Did he have his attorney with him at that time? No, Ranger, you have no personal knowledge, or

179 your investigation has no personal knowledge as to the whereabouts of Jimmy Fennell on the evening or early night hours -- late night hours of the st -- the nd and early morning hours of the rd, do you? That's correct. You do recall seeing a packet, empty packet, of Big Red gum not? in the cab of the truck, do you That's correct. Do you recall whether or not you instructed or requested the criminalist to print that Big Red gum packet? I don't recall, specifically. Ranger, has it been your experience in your -year career with law enforcement let me back that up a little bit. Have you had few or many occasions to have items of evidence tested for fingerprints in your career? I would say many. In those many occasions where you have had items tested for fingerprints, were the results of those tests, the fingerprint tests, instrumental in helping you solve the offense? In some they were, yes,

180 0 In your experience, is it an important tool of law enforcement to have items of evidence fingerprinted and tested? So in your experience when you have the opportunity to have items of evidence fingerprinted you have found that it has been, as you have said, in some cases beneficial? Correct. In some cases it has excluded people, is that correct, as suspects? And in other cases it has developed other suspects for you, isn't that correct? That would be true also. So fingerprinting is not just an idle law enforcement tool, is that correct? I'm not sure I understand the question. It's not an optional tool of law enforcement, is it? It's optional, yes, But if you really want to start ruling out some people or suspects, you use fingerprints sometimes, is that correct? That would be one method, yes,

181 And it's your recollection that you can't remember whether or not there was -- that you instructed the crime lab to fingerprint the Big Red gum packet? That's true, I don't recall whether I did that or not. And your notes don't reflect, either, whether you asked Jimmy Fennell if he chewed Big Red gum, did you? No, And your notes don't reflect, either, if Stacey Stites chewed Big Red gum it? either, does No, When you -- in State's Exhibit Number, you stated that you have had this in your possession since it was taken from the car on the rd, is that correct? That's correct. Did you go through and photograph all the - I'm sorry, did you determine -- there were photographs in this, is that correct? That's correct. And you determined who the photographs belonged to?

182 Some of them, yes, And the other photographs you were not able to determine who they belonged to? I don't recall. We may have determined all of them, I don't recall. I thought your testimony to Ms. Tanner was that you knew this book back and forth? I have been through it many times, yes, You do not know every photograph in here? I don't specifically remember every photograph that's in it. There was another book of friends and close associates that was provided to you by Ms. Stites's mother, is that correct? That's correct. And you used that book also to develop further leads, is that correct? That's correct. Is it a fair recounting of the facts to say ~O that you spoke with everyone or you instructed one of the other members of your team to speak to at least everyone in ~hese two books? And in your years of experience, have you ever had a situation where close relatives of,

183 say, a deceased was unaware of a secret life of the decedent? I'm not sure. Can you rephrase the question? Have you had an investigation -- have you ever been involved in an investigation where the relatives of the deceased were unaware of the deceased -- some life? aspect of the decedent's MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Pass the witness. REDIRECT QUESTIONS BY MS. TANNER: EXAMINATION Ranger, I have a few follow-up ques~ions for you. With regard to the Mary Ann Arldt case, the other murder that occurred in Bastrop County, that was in Elgin, correct? That was That was in Elgin, was it not? She was from Elgin. And you indicated on your cross-examination that there were several similarities between the two offenses?

184 And were there also dissimilarities? ma'am, there were. And in that regard counsel asked you if there was an earring that was missing, correct? That's correct. Was an earring turned over to you-all when you were investigating this offense? If you don't have personal knowledge, that's fine. Which offense? The Arldt case. Was an earring actually turned over to you? to the district attorney's office, I believe. And who was it that turned that earring over to them? I don't recall. Okay. And that earring that was turned over to the DA's office was correct? the missing earring, In which case? In the Arldt case-- again, I'm sorry. You indicated that you actually, face to face, talked with David Lawhon with regard to this

185 case, not the Arldt case? That's correct. Was there anything in that other address book that would indicate to you in any way that Stacey had any relationship at all with this defendant or with David Lawhon? No, Were you ever able to confirm any kind of relationship between David Lawhon and Stacey Stites? No, Okay. Now, how many times, approximately, did all of you who were investigating this talk with Jimmy Fennell before he invoked his rights? Do you have an idea how many times y'all interrogated him? I would say four or five. And you've already testified that many of those interrogations were very adversarial, were they not? That interrogation in December of, that was was an extremely adversarial interrogation, it not?

186 As a police officer, when a person invokes their right to counsel, what happens? I mean, what's the requirement of the police if a person invokes their right to counsel? We no longer talk to them. We terminate the interview. You have to stop? That's correct. That's it. No more talking to them about the offense, correct? That's correct. And Jimmy Fennell only invoked his after four or five very adversarial interviews? I wouldn't say they were all adversarial. Okay. After four or five interviews? That's correct. And any police officer, that is one of the most basic things in training that you learn is when somebody invokes their right to counsel you leave them alone? That's correct. You indicated in response to counsel's questions on cross-examination that you couldn't account for Jimmy's whereabouts on the early morning hours of April rd,,

187 correct? That's correct. Were you able in any way to dispute his rendition of his whereabouts on that day? No, Did you try to? By the way, what is required in order to get a search warrant? Probable cause. And by probable cause, what do you have to do once you have probable cause? I mean, can you just go search somebody, or are there procedural steps you've got to go through? There are procedural steps of preparing the affidavit explaining what the probable cause is, and show that to a warrant. judge to sign the And so only a judge can issue a search warrant? That's correct. And a what? search warrant can only be issued on Probable cause? Correct. What is the standard for arresting somebody?

188 Is it also probable cause? If you'd have had probable cause to arrest any of the suspects before April of, you have done so? would Can you tell us whether or not if you didn't.. have probable cause to arrest them, do you think you had probable cause to get a search warrant on them? Possibly. But you had no probable cause whatsoever to arrest anybody before April of '? That's correct. Okay. With regard to the truck, when you saw it, both on the rd and th of April of, there were a number of items on the floorboard, were there not? And in your experience, if you open a door and there are items on the floorboard, fallout? can things Did you have any way of knowing, whatsoever, whether the piece of belt that was on the

189 ground fell out or was put out? there any way to know that? I mean, is No, Okay. You indicated in response to counsel's questions that you took fingerprints from some of the suspects but not all of them. -- what delineated that? What was Some of the suspects had prior criminal history and their prints may have already been on file with the Department. weren't. Others perhaps Okay. So that was the determining factor? Okay. And you indicated in response to counsel's questions that fingerprints can make a big deal in a case, right? They can. And in every case that you have submitted evidence to be fingerprinted, have you gotten fingerprints? No, Is it as easy as it looks like on TV? No, Okay. Is it helpful to your investigation as a law enforcement officer if you find a

190 0 person's print in their own home or in their own car or in their own office or something like that? Does that help you in any way? It doesn't generally tell you a lot. You not? would expect to find them there, would you And do you know whether or not you can date fingerprints? only last for a I mean, do you know if they short period of time or if they can last for a very long period of time? That I Okay. don't know. During the course of an investigation, if you sent in evidence to a lab for fingerprinting and you determined that there were no prints on the evidence, would that exclude your suspect, the fact that there were no prints? Would that tell you that your suspect couldn't be the one? No, Okay. When you went out to Bluebonnet Circle on April the rd of and you were out there for a number of hours, was that roadway muddy at all? No,

191 You indicated that even subsequent to Jimmy telling you he didn't want to be interrogated by you guys any more that you still talked to him on some occasions? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: I'm sorry. (BY MS. TANNER) After Jimmy said he didn't want to talk to you any more, you still talked to him on some occasions, correct? That's correct. And were there times when Jimmy would give you names of associates and people that they knew and that sort of thing? After December? after December. No, Okay. Did he at any point in time when you talked about that prior to December? I only recall talking to him maybe twice. You indicated that although the truck had been moved from the high school by the time you came on the scene, you actually went out to that high school area, correct? That's correct. And did you-all do searches of the area

192 surrounding that truck? Did you do one, or did you do more than one? Numerous. Numerous searches? And what were you searching for? The items that we did not recover. Which were what? Specifically, the keys to the vehicle, the one earring, the portion of the belt, and also the rest of the green plastic cup. And when you're referring to the portion of the belt, what are you referring to? The victim's belt. What portion? Oh, what portion, I'm sorry. I believe it was the buckle end. MS. TANNER: May I approach the witness? THE COURT: (BY MS. TANNER) I show you what has been marked -- I show you what has been admitted into evidence as State's Exhibit Number and ask you if you can identify what that item is?

193 What is that? THE COURT REPORTER: Just a moment. (Pause in proceedings.) (BY MS. TANNER) And what is State's Exhibit? It's the belt. That was found out by Stacey's body? That's correct. And if you look at State's Exhibit Number, is there some sort of break on each end? So when you were talking about looking for a portion of the belt, you-all concluded there was some other portion that was still missing? MS. TANNER: No further questions. MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No further questions. Subject to recall. THE COURT: I'm going to send you home now. It's after :0, a little after :0, and ask you to come back in the morning

194 at nine o'clock. I remind you of the instructions I've given to, you. You know the instructions I'm referring to. Please obey them. See you in the morning at nine o'clock. (Whereupon the Jury was escorted from the courtroom and the following proceedings were had outside the presence and hearing of the jury.) THE COURT: We need to put a couple of things on the record. I promised the defense counsel an opportunity to make bill of exceptions in regard to Officer Moore's interrogation of Jimmy Fennell, and now would be the time to do that. a Let me put this on the record as well, and that is, it's almost impossible for the court reporter to take down bench conferences in this courtroom so I have been telling the lawyers as they approach the bench that the conferences are not on the record, and if you want them on the record I will

195 excuse the jury and we'll make a record. As a matter of fact, that happened one time, but any time the lawyers approach the bench and want a record of that bench conference, just tell me that, and I'll send the jury out of the room and we will make a record of it. But that has been the understanding from the get-go, right? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: That's correct. MR. GARVIE: sir. MS. TANNER: Yes. THE COURT: Now, do you want to question him about this interrogation by Officer Moore? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: sir, we do. RECROSS EXAMINATION QUESTIONS BY MS. CLAY-JACKSON: Ranger, Jimmy Fennell had an interview with Lieutenant Gordon Moore, That's correct. is that correct? Gordon Moore is a lieutenant with the Department of Public Safety, is that correct?

196 That's correct. His primary function -- or one of his functions or duties is that of polygraph examiner, is that correct? That's correct. And in his function as a polygraph examiner he had occasion at your instance to interview Jimmy Fennell, is that correct? That's correct. And that interview lasted more than an hour, is that correct? The best I can recall, yes, And your recollection after that interview of an hour plus time was that Lieutenant Moore gave you his assessment as to his investigation, is that correct? That's correct. And his investigation meaning the polygraph he conducted upon Jimmy Fennell, is that right? That's correct. That investigation and you were informed by Lieutenant Moore that Jimmy Fennell's answers revealed a deception, is that correct? That's correct. A deception in the area of "did you kill

197 Stacey Stites?" I don't recall. Did you not get a I did. copy of his report later? You just have not reviewed it? That's correct. Are you also aware that Jimmy Fennell had another polygraph exam in Bastrop County? Was I aware of it? sir. Were you present during that interrogation? No, Has Lieutenant Moore provided his services as a polygraph examiner for you on other cases you have been involved in? He has. And have you relied upon his polygraph investigation to further your investigation in some of those other c~ses? I have, yes. Okay. And further your investigation either means to conclude this person to eliminate this person as a suspect or to seek other types of information concerning this person,

198 is that correct? That's correct. There was nothing in this particular case that caused you to deviate from what you had done with the information that Lieutenant Gordon - Lieutenant Moore has provided you in the past? I'm sorry, could you ask the question again? Lieutenant Moore's information to you in this particular case, you had no reason to believe that it was any different from other information he provided you in other cases, did you? That's correct. So when Lieutenant Moore told you that -- and I think you will find that in your paragraph, page? Paragraph what? One of those we don't have --. Have you found it? Your investigation did reveal that Jimmy Fennell was deceptive in relevant questions, is that correct? No, Reported the second finding on the part of

199 Fennell relating to relevant questions. investigation didn't reveal that? Your No, ma'am, that would have been Gordon Moore's. Gordon Moore's investigation? Correct. Was Gordon Moore not a part of your investigation? Yes. So the information you had to develop your offense report, that you have been testifying to, revealed that Fennell was deceptive in relevant questions, is that correct? I was informed by Gordon Moore that he was deceptive on relevant questions. Okay. And you put that in your offense report? As part of your investigation? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No further questions. THE COURT: I understand you wanted to offer this before the jury, this testimony? Does the State object?

200 0 i! MS. TANNER: Of course we object, Your Honor. That's all polygraph, and that's all utterly inadmissible. This entire line of questioning is inadmissible. THE COURT: Any. other comments for the record? MS. CLAY-JACKSON: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: I'm going to sustain the objection. It will stand as a bill of exceptions for the defense. Let's go home and come back in the morning at nine o'clock. (At this time a recess was taken until nine o'clock, Wednesday, May,.)

201 f l I STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF BASTROP I, Carolee Murray, Official Court Reporter in and for the st Judicial District Court of Bastrop County, State of Texas, and Notary Public for the State of Texas, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing contains a true and correct transcription of all the proceedings (of all proceedings directed by counsel to be included in the Statement of Facts, as the case may be), in the above styled and numbered cause, all of which occurred in open Court or in chambers and were reported by me. I further certify that this transcription of the record of the proceedings truly and correctly reflects the exhibits, if any, offered by the respective parties. August,. Taxable Court Cost: WITNESS my hand this the th day of Carolee Murray Official Court Reporter th Judicial District Certification No. Expiration Date -- P.O. Box Brenham, Texas (0) -00