August 16



SOUTH CAROLINA:

S.C. Man Details Missing Woman's Killing


In Spartanburg, a man accused of killing a woman who has been missing for
more than a year said he threw a hot iron at her during an argument about
money, then buried her body in the woods.

In a jailhouse interview, Christopher Hampton told the Herald-Journal of
Spartanburg that he panicked after the iron struck 24-year-old Tamika
Huston in the head, killing her.

Hampton, 25, said he drove around with the body for hours before burying
it. "The whole time I was hoping she would wake up," Hampton said Monday.

"I didn't want to tell anybody because I didn't want people to think I was
a killer. I ain't a killer. ... I don't want people to think bad of me."

Hampton, who said he had not yet seen a lawyer, was charged Friday with
murder. Within hours he confessed and led authorities to remains they
believe are Huston's.

Authorities hoped to have a positive identification of the remains later
this week.

Spartanburg County prosecutor Trey Gowdy would not comment on whether
Hampton's information matches statements he provided authorities, who say
the slaying occurred in May 2004.

(source: Associated Press)






ALABAMA:

Appeals could last for years for Fayette murderer


When deputies manacled Devin Moore and led him from the Fayette County
Courtroom, it ended 4 grueling weeks of jury selection and trial. But that
may be only the beginning.

A Fayette County Jury recommended the death penalty for Moore, and few
people expect Circuit Judge James Moore to buck that recommendation at the
Sept. 30 sentencing. Yet no one expects Devin Moore's execution to come
swiftly. The defendant has 42 days to appeal, and the judge will appoint a
lawyer to handle the appeal. Appeals could go on for years on a variety of
grounds.

On Cable News Network Monday, Defense Attorney Jim Standridge said he felt
Judge Moore erred in disallowing testimony about video games. Meanwhile, a
Miami attorney representing victim's family members in a lawsuit against
video game manufacturers criticized Standridge for not producing expert
witnesses who could testify about the effects of video games.

"Jim, bless his heart, is just not up to speed," said attorney Jack
Thompson. "There is linkage, and there is hard science to prove it."

Standridge said he is aware of research.

"Thompson is right; there's all kinds of stuff out there," Standridge
said. "It's just not generally accepted."

That, he said, is the standard he must meet in a criminal trial.

Standridge said he never tried to prove that video games caused Moore to
gun down Fayette police officers Arnold Strickland and James Crump and
dispatcher Ace Mealer on June 7, 2003.

"We were never attempting to prove that video games in and of themselves
cause aggression or violence and certainly not this offense," Standridge
said. "We were trying to prove that Devin Moore had PTSD [post-traumatic
stress disorder] and at times, he goes into a dissociative state. When he
is a dissociative state, he will default to the scripts, which he has in
him."

Standridge wanted jurors to hear that people in a hyper-fearful state
revert back to behavior that they've repeated over and over again. In
Moore's case, the repetitive behavior was playing the video game "Grand
Theft Auto, Sin City" edition.

Jennings Bryant, former director of the Institute for Communications
Research at the University of Alabama, took part in a three-year study on
video games and how they produce an altered cognitive state. He
co-authored a book "Playing Video Games: Motives Responses and
Consequences." He says his research confirms Standridge's premise.

"That's exactly what the dominant behavior will be," Bryant said.

Bryant agreed with Thompson that large amounts of research affirm that
playing violent video games and viewing violent media leads to increased
aggression and violence.

"There is a small but significant correlation between playing video games
and aggression," Bryant said. "It's not a massive effect, and it's not one
that you can count on happening every time. But it's one that happens from
time to time."

Studies sponsored by reputable social and medical science organizations,
including the American Medical Association, support the link, Bryant said.

However, Judge Moore framed the issue narrowly. He said testimony must
relate specifically to people with PTSD in a dissociative state reverting
to scripted behavior. Within that narrow definition, Bryant agreed that
there is no conclusive research.

"The judge was absolutely correct in framing the issue as he did," said
District Attorney Chris McCool. "You have to tailor it to the facts in the
case."

The facts in this case relate specifically to people with PTSD in a
dissociative state, McCool said.

Bryant is a social scientist, not a psychologist or psychiatrist. He can
testify to effects on larger populations, but he can't testify to effects
on any one individual. In essence, Bryant agreed that he could not testify
with certainty that video games had any specific effect on Moore. He could
testify that the behavior was possible or even likely in people in Moore's
situation.

"You still can't say that the game was the sole factor." Bryant said. "You
can say that one of the things that could have caused this young man to
lose control could have been playing video games."

People become so engrossed in the video games that they become the
character that they're controlling. It affects both their moral and social
judgment, he said.

Bryant compared the altered state to athletes who turn in performances
that appear well beyond the capabilities of their normal talents. A
basketball player on a hot shooting streak might say he became completely
unaware of the crowd and the basket looked 6 feet wide, Bryant said.

Standridge added that people reverting to repetitive, learned behavior is
well documented. That's why pilots train in video simulators.

"That's what it's all about," Standridge said. "When people become
hyper-fearful, they can default to those scripts and rise above them."

McCool said he doesn't think jurors would have believed the video game
evidence.

"It didn't concern me in that I was worried about the jury buying it,"
McCool said. "I thought they could see through it."

Even if the defense had shown that video games affected Moore, he doesn't
believe it would have mattered.

"All it would have done was teach a killer to kill better," McCool said.
"We could have handled it if it had come in."

Standridge didn't believe referring to the video game evidence in his
opening statement was a mistake. He was unable to present it, and McCool
used it against him in his closing argument.

Thompson admitted that his task in the civil case is different from
Standridge's.

"We don't have to show in our case that these games affect someone with
PTSD," Thompson said. "All we have to do is show an across-the-board
effect of increased violence and the fact that Moore was one of them.

Attorneys for Take 2 Interactive, the makers of "Grand Theft Auto Sin
City" edition, could not be reached for comment.

The video game testimony isn't the only avenue for appeal. Every defense
objection that the judge overruled, every bench conference that didn't go
the defense's way could become grounds for appeal, Standridge said. There
could literally be hundreds of points that could be scrutinized on appeal,
he said.

Change of venue is among the stronger arguments for appeal, Standridge
said. He filed for change of venue, and Judge Moore moved the trial to
Lauderdale County, an area out of the Birmingham media market with a
similar racial makeup to Fayette County. The defense stipulated that the
judge take those 2 points into consideration.

However, Judge Moore later realized that Lamar County fit those criteria,
and since it is in his circuit, he moved the case there. Seeing little
difference between Lamar and Fayette counties, the defense withdrew its
change of venue motion. But Standridge preferred to try the case in
Lauderdale County.

Despite what he considers an error on the judge's part, Standridge praised
the judge and said he treated the defense very fairly. Standridge said the
jury was attentive and probably did its best to be fair considering the
crime's impact on the community.

The jury in the case was all white. Moore is black. In the "Batson" case,
the Supreme Court ruled that prosecutors couldn't strike minority jurors
because of their race. Prosecutors use "race-neutral" reasons to striking.
Standridge wanted black jurors.

"We, of course, wanted people who could relate to Devin and his background
and problems," he said.

Prosecutors had race-neutral reasons for striking all 16 blacks in the
jury pool. Yet the specter of an all-white jury trying a black man will
almost certainly be raised as an issue to consider on appeal.

Another possible avenue for appeal would be the testimony of technicians
who observed the victims' autopsies. Their qualifications to testify could
be questioned. The Alabama Department of Forensic Sciences pathologist who
performed the autopsy took medical retirement because he suffers from
depression, his supervisor John McDuffie testified.

During the trial, Moore showed almost no emotion. He sat at the defense
table and didn't make eye contact with anyone. Moore was following his
attorneys' instructions.

"We were very cautious to try to insulate him throughout the trial,"
Standridge said. "You've got to remember that we're dealing with someone
with a serious mental illness."

Standridge said Moore has marks on his body from the beatings witnesses
said Moore's father gave Moore. But he said the marks are old and not
horrible looking. That's why he didn't show jurors photos of Moore's
injuries.

Standridge said he believed in his case, but he did not delude himself
about Moore's chances.

"Any reasonable person would understand that it's an uphill struggle," he
said.

When the judge read the jury's recommendation for death, Moore showed
little emotion. But Standridge patted him comfortingly on his back. At
that point, he has little left that he can tell his client.

"That we did all that we could do," Standridge said. "If you can say that
and mean it, then you can live with yourself."

(source: The Tuscaloosa News)






INDIANA:

DNA evidence won't appear in murder case----Decision means jury won't hear
defense attorney's criticism of lab


Marion County prosecutors on Monday chose not to present DNA evidence in
the trial of a murder suspect, blocking a defense attorney's attempt to
discredit the county crime lab.

"We don't need it," Deputy Prosecutor John Keiffner said. "These witnesses
(crime lab workers) need to be over there addressing the backlog of cases,
not sitting around waiting to testify."

In court documents, defense lawyer Sarah Nagy is accusing Forensic Service
Agency officials of perjury and incompetence.

"Basic credibility questions cloud any scientific integrity of the lab,"
Nagy wrote in court documents. "This lab should be permanently shut down."

Scandal rocked the lab in July 2003 when Marion County Prosecutor Carl
Brizzi ordered retesting of 64 DNA matches performed by a discredited
analyst who was accused of skipping steps in the testing process and
tampering with lab equipment. That analyst, Kuppareddi Balamurugan,
resigned in August 2002.

Private labs have completed retesting his work and confirmed his findings.

Prosecutors' decision to withhold the DNA evidence means the jury hearing
murder suspect Chad McKinney's case will not hear Nagy's accusations
involving the crime lab.

Nagy says she has proof of new problems at the lab, including suggestions
that a DNA analyst lied about his credentials.

McKinney, 29, is charged in the shooting death of Mark Anthony Laurenzo,
36, on Dec. 19, 2003, in a mobile home in the 3100 block of Nightsong
Drive.

Laurenzo was under the influence of the hallucinogenic drug LSD, according
to testimony Monday. Witness Connie Bruno said Laurenzo was flailing his
arms and claiming to be God.

McKinney and Laurenzo fought, according to testimony. McKinney left
briefly then returned with a .25-caliber handgun. Laurenzo died from a
single gunshot wound to the head.

McKinney also suffered a wound to his hand, which prosecutors say was
caused when the bullet exited Laurenzo's skull.

Keiffner said he didn't need DNA evidence to make his case. 2 witnesses
were present when McKinney shot Laurenzo to death, he said.

"This is a case of how culpable the defendant is," Keiffner said. "We're
not going to let her (Nagy) turn this case into a smear of the crime lab."

Forensic Services Agency Director Mike Medler defended the lab's work.
"There's nothing to smear that I'm aware," said Medler, who took over the
lab Feb. 21.

Nagy is questioning the credentials of Khalid Lodhi, a DNA analyst at the
lab who has testified that he was a doctor of philosophy when he actually
held a doctor of science degree.

Lodhi could not be reached, but Medler said Lodhi did not intend to
mislead anyone. The distinction between the 2 advanced degrees is subtle,
Medler said, and Lodhi was simply trying to make it easy for jurors to
understand.

Medler said Lodhi meets all the standards of a DNA analyst, and his
credentials are sound.

(source: Indianapolis Star)




Reply via email to